You declare your intent to bear arms against Deas.
(prompt removed)raze deas

You must specify where to cleave.
(and again)raze deas

You must specify where to cleave.

raze deas rleg

You must specify LEFT HAND or RIGHT HAND, or do not specify any hand at all.

raze deas left hand

You must specify where to cleave.

I noticed the same thing an hour or two ago. Fun.

You know what else was funny? With cleave, you used to have to specify a hit location even against mobs. Now, you CANNOT specify a hit location, it has to be just 'cleave creature' in order to perform it (which I found irritating, but...).

BUT the strike from the cleave appears to randomly pick a limb to target on the creature anyway when you cleave, so sometimes you plunge a weapon through a rat's left arm or something. For things without body parts, this is really kind of bad, since it is a totally inaccurate depiction of what is happening.

I'm not sure I understand it all either...if cleave is a jab, why is it randomly picking a limb to pretend I had targetted? And why does it do this even though I can't target a limb if I try with cleave on a mob?

I'd say either:
1. The code should let me pick a location to cleave, and have that message fit the strike/death message of the mob (looks kind of cool to kill by plunging your sword into someone's chest). If no location is specified, then pick randomly or, even better, have a generic message
2. Leave the cleaving command how it is, and remove the reference to the body part being hit in the hit message.

Agreed!

And people were saying you couldn't cleave mobs..

woah, imagine fighting an octopus and trying to specify which arm to hit each time.
then what about the anenomies?!

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that even against creatures without visible anatomy, you still cleave through their arms and stuff. Haven't tested to be sure, been too busy OOC.

The odd thing is that cleave acts as a jab in the first place, which makes no sense, especially for an axelord.

A cleave is a heavy overhand swing with a bladed weapon. So it should deal 'swing' damage, not 'jab' damage. Not to mention that jabbing someone with a waraxe is difficult to imagine if even possible.

One would assume that an axe would be too heavy to simply thrust it forward quickly and pull it back. But that brings up a question for me. What difference does it make between swing and jab damage? Since nothing has a displayed health rate how could you determine the amount of damage? Is the difference in balance regain? Even at 54 I have noticed much of a difference between the two if any at all. Maybe I am just a moron like they keep telling me.

Oh, you can jab with axes. You just won't be plunging your blade through them and have them slide off it. You would jab the axehead into their skull and crush it or something.

1. Axe jabs deal 'cutting' damage, not 'blunt', so it's not that.

2. There is no difference between swings and jabs in terms of actual damage. They determine which afflictions your attack can do; you can only slice off an ear with a swing, for example, and can only puncture a lung with a jab.

I meant that jabbing was, in fact, possible with a waraxe. No, it wouldn't normally do cutting or poking damage, but would instead do bludgeoning damage. In Lusternia, all axes have hugely long spikes attached to their heads so they can impale things with them. Or something.