D&D 3rd Edition House RulesPost your house rules, custom classes, spells, feats and other stuff here. For D&D 3rd Edition and all older editions of D&D.
Out of the entire dnd 3.5 system, there's really one core mechanic that I don't like: the way attacks are handled. The entire system is just messy, and I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried making custom rules to reorganize things? Or do you think I'm just being silly? lol.
Calculating 4 different attacks for a fighter when he has an attack of 21/16/11/6 .... now, I haven't actually gotten a game to epic levels yet, but this is so absurd that I can understand why they took away iterative attacks in 4.0. Plus, why does this only happen when you're using weapons or unarmed attacks?
Then there's the way unarmed and natural attacks work. I can kind of understand saying that a monk fights differently from, let's say, a vampire. Even though they both generally use their fists, monks are thought to have various fancy kicks, elbows, and other attacks thrown in. However, things just get stupid when you have a character with both unarmed and natural attacks. Why Would a lizardman monk at high levels get +16/+16/+16/+11/+6 with his unarmed attacks, then get two random +11 claw attacks tacked on? Wouldn't a lizardman USE his claws as part of his main unarmed combat style? Heck, why does having claws magically let him get 2 extra attacks for free?
So yea, I'm wondering if any systems that fix at least one of these issues has been produced?
For the iterative attacks, there's the possiblity of mimicing how (I think) 4.0 works and eliminate them in favor of requiring feats to get them. However, the balance in 4.0 is completely different, so I don't think this would work. Feats are already rare enough in 3.5 after all.
As for the natural/unarmed attacks, I was thinking a possible fix would be replacing unarmed attacks with slam attacks mechanically, so that monks are basically people who take their race's best natural attacks (slams for humans, claws for lizardmen) and slowly enhances them over time. Of course, this would only work properly if iterative attacks were eliminated, otherwise you would either have to horribly nerf monks by taking away their iterative attacks...or you would make epic monsters scary by giving their primary natural attacks iterative attacks based on their BAB.
The problem of course is that if these changes weren't made carefully, the entire 3.5 system would have to be rebalanced...
Last edited by Matrixryu; 21st July 2009 at 09:56 PM..
I did the maths a while back for this. For enemies within the most likely range of targets (ie. those for which a roll between 6-15 is required to score a hit with the primary attack), this system gives an equivalent overall damage output.
Iterative attacks are gone. instead, each +5 of bab grants a single re-roll on one attack. Multiple re-rolls can be used on the same attack, but if one roll succeeds for a given weapon, you can't use any remaining re-rolls to make an additional attack with that weapon. Re-rolls must be assigned to a particular weapon before any rolls are made; you cannot roll an attack, check the result, then decide whether or not to use a re-roll with that attack based on the result.
Special cases:
The lizardman with 2 claw attacks, a sword attack, and class levels to provide a boosted bab gets to choose which of his claws or sword to assign his re-rolls to.
A monk (or any class with a flurry of blows type feature) has two unarmed strike attacks. Any re-rolls granted from a high bab can be assigned to either of those attacks freely. If a monk has a weapon and wishes to use flurry of blows, the extra attack is an unarmed strike, and he can choose whether to assign his re-rolls to the flurry attack or the weapon attack. The bonus attack from flurry of blows is never considered a "second weapon" for purposes of attack penalties or feats that relate to the two-weapon fighting style.
In the interests of un-gimping the monk, the attack penalties for low-level monks using flurry of blows are removed. Without this change, it would always be a statistically (and action-efficiency) inferior option to a simple attack.
Last edited by Ashtagon; 21st July 2009 at 11:17 PM..
I did the maths a while back for this. For enemies within the most likely range of targets (ie. those for which a roll between 6-15 is required to score a hit with the primary attack), this system gives an equivalent overall damage output.
Iterative attacks are gone. instead, each +5 of bab grants a single re-roll on one attack. Multiple re-rolls can be used on the same attack, but if one roll succeeds for a given weapon, you can't use any remaining re-rolls to make an additional attack with that weapon. Re-rolls must be assigned to a particular weapon before any rolls are made; you cannot roll an attack, check the result, then decide whether or not to use a re-roll with that attack based on the result.
Special cases:
The lizardman with 2 claw attacks, a sword attack, and class levels to provide a boosted bab gets to choose which of his claws or sword to assign his re-rolls to.
A monk (or any class with a flurry of blows type feature) has two unarmed strike attacks. Any re-rolls granted from a high bab can be assigned to either of those attacks freely. If a monk has a weapon and wishes to use flurry of blows, the extra attack is an unarmed strike, and he can choose whether to assign his re-rolls to the flurry attack or the weapon attack. The bonus attack from flurry of blows is never considered a "second weapon" for purposes of attack penalties or feats that relate to the two-weapon fighting style.
In the interests of un-gimping the monk, the attack penalties for low-level monks using flurry of blows are removed. Without this change, it would always be a statistically (and action-efficiency) inferior option to a simple attack.
That's a really interesting system, I don't think I would have thought of that. I guess it kinda makes enemies with really high armor easier to hit with your single strike, while at the same time not letting people decimate low armored foes as easily too.
Hmmm, I have a few questions. I'm assuming that with this system that feats which simply add a single extra attack like rapid shot and two weapon fighting work pretty much normally. Do you have to choose which of those extra attacks the reroll applies to(even though rapid shot is from the same weapon)?
Also, how do you handle things such as Manyshot, Greater Manyshot, and Whirlwind attack?
Then again...those might work just fine. Even if those feats allow multiple attacks, with this system a high level fighter could use power attack without fear since he would get those rerolls. Maybe it really does all balance out.
Hmmm, I think I'm going to have to mention this one to the more experienced players in my group and see what they think.
Well, I've seen an iterative attack fix. Iterative Attacks Instead of having many attacks made at different BAB Values, they all get the same BAB values. I believe the number of attacks may have been reduced to 2, and everyone had access to them. Then, as your BAB goes up, instead of the number of attacks increasing, the quantity of the to-hit penalty decreases.
I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of the natural weapons. I'd say that natural attack monsters have proficiencies to deal with them. They have improved unarmed attack, two weapon fighting, and an ambidex feat that makes both attacks have the same BAB bonus. For monsters with multiple arms, or that have a bite as their primary weapon, their other hands would work as off-hands. Each ambidex feat could be applied to one natural weapon, to remove it's "off hand" penalty.
I'd honestly give the monsters the option of an iterative attack with their primary hand, with the attack penalty.
The trick, is that whatever you decide to give them/however you change it, you need to balance the damage. A Two Weapon fighter with these rules should be doing on average, the same damage as the old one. The old one will miss on attacks much more often, but will have more attacks. A sword & Board fighter should do slightly less but have better defenses, etc.
Another thing to consider, is that Armor doesn't usually stop the main attack. damage climbs faster than AC, and eventually, the AC is there to stop the last few iterative attacks. So Armor would have to be tweaked for this to work properly.
I do think it's a good Idea though. You just have to balance the numbers.
Well, I've seen an iterative attack fix. Iterative Attacks Instead of having many attacks made at different BAB Values, they all get the same BAB values. I believe the number of attacks may have been reduced to 2, and everyone had access to them. Then, as your BAB goes up, instead of the number of attacks increasing, the quantity of the to-hit penalty decreases.
That seems like a pretty good system. You still get at least 2 attacks, and you don't have to keep re-rolling. If what the guy says about this making characters do more damage 90% of the time this way is true, then I might have to increase monster defense a little bit like you said. It also makes power attack worthwhile. I have a feeling that my group would probably go for this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylrae
I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of the natural weapons. I'd say that natural attack monsters have proficiencies to deal with them. They have improved unarmed attack, two weapon fighting, and an ambidex feat that makes both attacks have the same BAB bonus. For monsters with multiple arms, or that have a bite as their primary weapon, their other hands would work as off-hands. Each ambidex feat could be applied to one natural weapon, to remove it's "off hand" penalty.
I'd honestly give the monsters the option of an iterative attack with their primary hand, with the attack penalty.
Hmmmm, I think treating monsters as having that many feats might make things a little complex, but I really have been thinking about giving a creature's primary attack an extra swing so that their attacks work the same way, lol. I might just have to increase their CR or something.
Oh he said it increases damage 90% of the time, but only marginally. If you read the whole thread I believe he has a big math breakdown table somewhere around page 4. Maybe it was a spreadsheet attachment. Can't remember. The Damage is comparable though, except on the ones you almost never miss, and the ones you almost never hit. - in those cases you do less damage.
But Treating those monsters as though they have those extra feats explains the extra attacks, and doesnt give the PCs all sorts of free attacks at full BAB for playing monster races.
Now, If someone plays a Thri-Kreen (4 arms), then I'd say that they need to take 2 weapon fighting twice. once for the other side, and once for the other row. and then an ambidex feat to remove the penalty completely and remove off-hands.
If you're looking for other good rules changes, see the link in my signature, and see Project Phoenix. Kerrick has alot of really good house rules. And Some really good spell and class fixes. So Far it's website only, no downloadable copy, but I plan on helping him out with that in the next little bit, when he gets a chance to send me the document.
I Like alot of his changes, but there are a few I use from Pathfinder, and a bunch I came up with myself, such as how I handle Multiclass spellcasters, How I handle Saves and Multiclassing, some shuffling of base attribute uses, etc. If you have any questions on the rules I use feel free to drop me a line personally, you may find some of them of use to you. There are alot of them, and I've found they work well.
One thing to note about Wulf's iterative attacks is that he's not looking to eliminate them, speed up the game, or anything like that. All he's trying to do is make Iterative Attacks work in a consistent manner and have them performing at roughly the same level as they currently are.
If you happen to be looking to _drop_ iterative attacks (because you feel it'll help your game run faster for example), then an alternative is to simply add BaB to damage. At higher levels this seems like it might break down given the scaling of Hit Points, AC and so forth, but from my look-over, I doubt it's going to be a problem until you're over 12th level. Since I've yet to actually play in a game where characters actually were over 12th... *shrug* I can't say for certain.
That's a really interesting system, I don't think I would have thought of that. I guess it kinda makes enemies with really high armor easier to hit with your single strike, while at the same time not letting people decimate low armored foes as easily too.
Hmmm, I have a few questions. I'm assuming that with this system that feats which simply add a single extra attack like rapid shot and two weapon fighting work pretty much normally. Do you have to choose which of those extra attacks the reroll applies to(even though rapid shot is from the same weapon)?
Also, how do you handle things such as Manyshot, Greater Manyshot, and Whirlwind attack?
Then again...those might work just fine. Even if those feats allow multiple attacks, with this system a high level fighter could use power attack without fear since he would get those rerolls. Maybe it really does all balance out.
Hmmm, I think I'm going to have to mention this one to the more experienced players in my group and see what they think.
Rapid Shot - This is a flurry of blows type attack option. The same goes for anything that attempts to balance a -2 attack penalty with an extra attack in a full round action.
The monk's flurry of blows does not suffer the -2 attack penalty (as it is a core defining feature of the class). Flurry-type attacks from other weapons or feats (such as Rapid Shot) do take the -2 attack penalty normally assigned to them.
Two-Weapon Fighting - This follows standard rules for 2wf. Reroll attacks may be spent on either the primary or secondary weapon attack, but you must spend at least as many rerolls on the primary weapon attack as on your secondary weapon attack.
There is a feat chain which under raw allows iterative attacks with the secondary weapon. With this rules change, that feat chain grants reroll attacks to be spent on the secondary weapon only. This may as a consequence limit your choice of how you spend your main pool of rerolls.
Manyshot: This is a standard action, so iterative attacks wouldn't normally be applicable anyway.
Whirlwind Attack: Under RAW, iterative attacks are lost when using this ability anyway.
Power Attack: Note that the attack roll penalty would apply equally to all rerolls attacks made with the weapon the Power Attack is being used with. A smart player can finesse the exact penalty to still give a meaningful chance of hitting of course. Smarter players will pre-calculate the odds.
When I devised this system, my overall aim was to be able to tell the players to roll a fistful of d20s and pick the best one, rather than rolling his attacks one at a time. I was actually rather surprised when I ran the maths and found the average damage output was basically unchanged.
Last edited by Ashtagon; 22nd July 2009 at 10:52 AM..
One thing to note about Wulf's iterative attacks is that he's not looking to eliminate them, speed up the game, or anything like that. All he's trying to do is make Iterative Attacks work in a consistent manner and have them performing at roughly the same level as they currently are.
Yea, I'm looking to just make things more consistent as well, speeding the game up is just a nice side effect
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylrae
Oh he said it increases damage 90% of the time, but only marginally. If you read the whole thread I believe he has a big math breakdown table somewhere around page 4. Maybe it was a spreadsheet attachment. Can't remember. The Damage is comparable though, except on the ones you almost never miss, and the ones you almost never hit. - in those cases you do less damage.
But Treating those monsters as though they have those extra feats explains the extra attacks, and doesnt give the PCs all sorts of free attacks at full BAB for playing monster races.
Now, If someone plays a Thri-Kreen (4 arms), then I'd say that they need to take 2 weapon fighting twice. once for the other side, and once for the other row. and then an ambidex feat to remove the penalty completely and remove off-hands.
If you're looking for other good rules changes, see the link in my signature, and see Project Phoenix. Kerrick has alot of really good house rules. And Some really good spell and class fixes. So Far it's website only, no downloadable copy, but I plan on helping him out with that in the next little bit, when he gets a chance to send me the document.
I Like alot of his changes, but there are a few I use from Pathfinder, and a bunch I came up with myself, such as how I handle Multiclass spellcasters, How I handle Saves and Multiclassing, some shuffling of base attribute uses, etc. If you have any questions on the rules I use feel free to drop me a line personally, you may find some of them of use to you. There are alot of them, and I've found they work well.
Hmmm, I can possibly see doing that for a Thri-Keen. The only thing is, don't races which have multiple arms like that usually have a level adjustment? Wouldn't we need to rebalanced the level adjustments if those races suddenly required extra feats? (I think they currently have multiweapon fighting instead of two weapon fighting to use weapons on all their arms).
Plus, what about races where they just get claw and bite attacks? The problem with those is that they don't 'scale' and get more powerful when a normal character levels. This is actually a reason why I often wish the monk class worked with natural attacks, because a werebear or lizardman martial artist gets good at unarmed attacks but his natural attacks somehow never improve. I think a lot of people wouldn't take feats just to be able to use natural attacks if they know their character is going to make it to epic levels. Though, I suppose fancy enchanted claw and fang addons could solve those problems, it is just that those things don't exaclty drop off of random enemies very often
Yea....the entire natural attack system was designed for static monsters, not leveling characters. That's the problem with it.
Hmm, I'm going to have to take a look at that project phoenix thing
Honestly, I'd rule that monk attacks work with natural attacks. If they have a slam attack, then they can use the slam damage as the starting point, and go from there. If claws use the claw damage. If they Have claws though, The'd have the ability to do less damage (but bashing) from a knee or whatever, as any part of their flurry.
I'm using Kerrick's Monk (Project Phoenix) FYI, It's much better than the standard one, and less supernatural.
There's still the issue that its really hard to have armor keep up with attacks though, and being as you will no longer have your crappy BAB attacks at upper levels, Armor will likely be a bit less useful (and as such should end up getting higher somehow) ~ Maybe you could chenge the Dex Limits. I've been using Project Phoenix Limits, where instead of a Max, you take a dex penalty. (Maybe you could combine them together, so have a lower max than usual, and if their dex is higher than that, the armor gives them a dex penalty, instead of taking it away completely.)That'll result in armored characters having slightly higher AC.
Hmmm, yea...I've been pondering making a monk where instead of the current progression of increased unarmed damage the character gets 'improved natural attack' feats. You just treat humans as having slams(with a penalty until they get improved unarmed attack) and then you have a monk that works with anything, though the damage won't go up as smoothly.
Hah, I'll have to take a look at the project phoenix monk. I've messed with making a non supernatural monk as well. It was a 'martial artist' prestige class. He had a higher BAB increase rate, but fewer special ablities. Instead of +Wis to defense, he got +Con to defense. (in my campaign there's no easily avalable heavy armor, so I'm letting fighters ans such get a Con bonus to defense when they're wearing medium armor to make up for it).
Quote:
being as you will no longer have your crappy BAB attacks at upper levels, Armor will likely be a bit less useful (and as such should end up getting higher somehow) ~ Maybe you could chenge the Dex Limits. I've been using Project Phoenix Limits, where instead of a Max, you take a dex penalty. (Maybe you could combine them together, so have a lower max than usual, and if their dex is higher than that, the armor gives them a dex penalty, instead of taking it away completely.)That'll result in armored characters having slightly higher AC.
Ah, you're talking about the issue with armor keeping up with attacks when using the two attacks instead of iteritive attacks? Yea, I've been pondering that. Hmmm, well, there were two ideas I was thinking of. First, there's the idea that after every time you hit, your next attack takes a -1 or -2 attack penalty for the rest of your turn or round. I'm worried that might be a bit much though, and it means that people would have to roll one die at a time.
I think your dex penalty idea is pretty good too. I remember when I played epic assassins in NWN, I was getting my dex so high i couldn't even wear leather armor. Or maybe there could even be an epic feat which decreases the dex limit for wearing armor by 2 or 3? Unfortionately, this would only help characters with high Dex though, some fighters would focus only on Str. I guess in my campaign, Fighters can also work with Con because of that bonus I mentioned earlier XD
The other thing is that you could think of armor as protecting against characters who use things like two weapon fighting and creatures with a lot of natural attacks. Actually, I think in my campaign they'll be fighting more creatures than people, so the change to attacks won't affect how often they really get hit.
Last edited by Matrixryu; 22nd July 2009 at 06:47 PM..
Our games are usually City Adventures, so whatever rules apply to players tend to apply to their opponents as well, being as the majority of those opponents are NPCs.
I think the best way to address the solution, would be to lessen the Dex Penalties, possibly the way I mentioned, and then reassign the Armor Values. That, or have armor scale a little by HD. The second option may be a bit more difficult to implement though.
I'm not fond of your -1 or -2 option, since IMO part of the purpose of the revised iterative attack rules is that you get to roll both dice at the same time, using the same numbers.
As for the Natural Attack option on the Monk: Yeah Humans have slams, with pitiful damage, and they dont start with Improved Unarmed, or what it really is, is Natural Weapon Proficiency.
I think the best way to address the solution, would be to lessen the Dex Penalties, possibly the way I mentioned, and then reassign the Armor Values. That, or have armor scale a little by HD. The second option may be a bit more difficult to implement though.
The armor scaling by HD just reminded me of another solution. There are certain D&D variants where characters get an automatic armor bonus as they level up. Some give the armor bonus evenly to all classes, while in others (such as the 3.0 star wars rpg) each class had its own armor progression. This is usually used in rpgs where armor gives damage reduction instead of AC or low armor campains, but it could be applied here as well.
I'm not fond of your -1 or -2 option, since IMO part of the purpose of the revised iterative attack rules is that you get to roll both dice at the same time, using the same numbers.
I just found a house rule I came up with a while back.
Base Armor Class
Normally this is just 10. As I plan on running this campaign with low magic, and don't intend to have everyone in magic armor, I figure the character classes ACs should be a little higher.
The fraction would be what you add to the 10 at each level I think it might make AC too high at the upper levels, but it was a rule I came up with and never got to playtest. Since I'm posting it though, I may as well show the other ones that accompany it.
I Swapped the roles of Class and CON bonus in terms of Hit Points. HP/lv: By CON Bonus
05 + = d12
04 + = d10
03 + = d8
02 + = d6
01 - = d4
Character Classes will instead supply the Hit Point per level bonuses that by phb come from CON.
HP Bonus/lv: By Class HD
d12 = 4
d10 = 3
d08 = 2
d06 = 1
d04 = 0
Will Save
Will Save is determined by a character’s CHA Bonus, instead of Wisdom.
Base Attack Bonus
BAB: By STR & DEX Bonus (Higher bonus + 1/2 lower bonus) table may need tweaking after races are checked.
07+ = 10/8
06 = 9/8
05 = 8/8 (1)
04 = 7/8
03 = 6/8
02 = 5/8
01- = 4/8 (1/2)
Epic attack bonus applies at BAB20 now not level 20. This ensures that class order isn't more important than class levels.
Skill Points:
Classes give half the bonus listed + 1. Your base amount per level is your Int Modifier + your Wis Modifier. no X4, and Skill Costs work like in Pathfinder
Hit Points
At Level 1, Characters receive 9 + 1/2 Con Scor Hit Points
Other than the skill points, Hit Points and Dex to hit, these Ideas haven't seen play much.
Also, the driving force behind these was to make more variation between members of the same class, and increase the importance of attributes.
~But Back on Topic, a BAC Score might help with the armor that doesnt adequately climb.
And as for the UA Variant, it could work well, but those numbers are WAY too high. they make armor totally useless. Maybe if you cut those numbers in half (or less) it might work better. Plus, Those numbers will give much higher AC at low levels, and its the higher levels where the armor is deficient.
Hmmm, I think I did some similar things, except I'm avoiding fractions as much as possible, lol. Oh, some people in my group didn't like the idea of random hit dice, so I give them flat hp increases each level. A fighter gets +6hp instead of +d10 (the average number of hp rounded up basically).
But yea, back to the armor. The question would be, how often should the armor go up in a normal game? Once every 3 or 4 levels? You don't want it to go up at the same rate as BAB, since other things should be boosting armor as well.
Are you not planning to give your characters magic armor or anything? A +5 bonus on top of the usual armor by level 20 is a lot.
No its not. BAB increases every level, while AC is static and DEPENDS on enchantments, feats, etc. By level 20 (actually, a lot earlier) a fighter making an attack roll, isn't rolling to hit, he's rolling to see if he rolls a 1 on the d20 and misses. The discrepancy is such that the fighter can spend more than half his BAB on Power Attack or something else and is still relatively sure to hit on his first attack, and maybe even the second. Adding in a +4, +5 or +6 bonus to AC over 20 levels isn't even really going to solve the issue, but it will mitigate it somewhat.
In regard to the OP issue (fixing iterative...), the best thing I can think of is to do the Star Wars Sage rules for combat. Everyone gets 1 attack. If a creature has 2 claw attacks, he gets two claw attacks, otherwise, 1 attack. You need a feat (Double Attack, then Triple Attack) to be able to attack more than 1 time with the same weapon or Two Weapon Fighting to be able to attack with a weapon in each hand.
I think unarmed attacks should be treated as armed attacks. Natural attacks (claw and bite) should increase in damage for more powerful monsters to make them a challenge to higher level characters. Maybe 1 extra die of damage per 5HD. Or, the secondary attack (either the claws or the bite, tail slap, whatever) have a reduced penalty, maybe jumping from -5 to -2 by 6th level, and by 12th level, they get the Multiattack feat for free and that eliminates the -2 penalty for the secondary attack. If you reduce the attack penalty, the attack should hit more often so damage could remain unmodified.
I just kind of glossed over the previous dozen posts or so since they didn't seem to relate to the original point.
Hmm. Hey There Hawken. The Issue with just dropping it to one attack is that Starwars Saga has a whole system designed around everyone getting a single attack. Regular D&D doesnt assume that, so if you drop it down to a single attack, Fighters get less damage on average, and that damage will be even more swingy. that's the advantage of Wulf Ratbane's system, but I was talking about extending it to include natural attacks and how to explain the multiple attacks they grant. Then we covered how natural attacks shouls work with monks, FoB, and then We Were talking about How Armor is deficient (its connected, so its vaguely on topic).
Instead of a Base AC, I found this set of alternate rules (300 pages worth) and their armor system is an improvement. I'm copying it into a word doc for my own use, and then ill put it up here for you guys. the document is available for free, so its a non issue. Most of their info is all on this forum The Gaming Den :: Index. The Book I grabbed is Here: Joshua Middendorf's Projects - Frank and K's D&D Material (PDF). It's a huge game revision, and a total overhaul of alot of systems. I like alot of it, and I'll be incorporating a big chunk of it into my games, though not all of it.
No its not. BAB increases every level, while AC is static and DEPENDS on enchantments, feats, etc. By level 20 (actually, a lot earlier) a fighter making an attack roll, isn't rolling to hit, he's rolling to see if he rolls a 1 on the d20 and misses. The discrepancy is such that the fighter can spend more than half his BAB on Power Attack or something else and is still relatively sure to hit on his first attack, and maybe even the second. Adding in a +4, +5 or +6 bonus to AC over 20 levels isn't even really going to solve the issue, but it will mitigate it somewhat.
In regard to the OP issue (fixing iterative...), the best thing I can think of is to do the Star Wars Sage rules for combat. Everyone gets 1 attack. If a creature has 2 claw attacks, he gets two claw attacks, otherwise, 1 attack. You need a feat (Double Attack, then Triple Attack) to be able to attack more than 1 time with the same weapon or Two Weapon Fighting to be able to attack with a weapon in each hand.
I think unarmed attacks should be treated as armed attacks. Natural attacks (claw and bite) should increase in damage for more powerful monsters to make them a challenge to higher level characters. Maybe 1 extra die of damage per 5HD. Or, the secondary attack (either the claws or the bite, tail slap, whatever) have a reduced penalty, maybe jumping from -5 to -2 by 6th level, and by 12th level, they get the Multiattack feat for free and that eliminates the -2 penalty for the secondary attack. If you reduce the attack penalty, the attack should hit more often so damage could remain unmodified.
I just kind of glossed over the previous dozen posts or so since they didn't seem to relate to the original point.
Ahh, I see about the armor then. Yea, I haven't actually done a non-neverwinter nights game that has gotten up to that level yet, so I wasn't sure XD Hmmmm, maybe I'll increase a character's armor by 1 every five levels? Then again, would this make it too hard for creatures and non fighters to hit?
As for the natural attacks, I was working on a system for them last night that would enable characters with natural attacks to improve them without us having to change the way every single creature in the monster manuals worked. It is simple, if a creature's BAB from Character levels (and only character levels, not racial hit dice) is high enough that it would give him bonus attacks to his primary manufactured weapon, he can instead apply that to his primary natural weapon.
This allows creatures with enough class levels who use only natural weapons (say, werebear fighters in bear form) to benefit from the bonus attacks without having to get random unarmed attacks from monk levels. Heck, I've also come up with a system for increasing natural attack damage with monk levels, I'm going to have to post that after I finish checking it to see if people think it would work.
I had also been thinking about decreasing the secondary attack penalty for creatures instead of this like you said, but I was worried that for things like dragons that have 5-7 natural attacks that could get out of hand. Gaining a bonus attack with a single natural weapon is a bit easier to balance. I think.
Edit: Though, I guess I might still need to figure out some way for creatures to increase their natural attack damage without having to take monk levels, because just a bonus attack still might not let them catch to characters with real weapons. Hmmmm.
Now, let's see, the Star Wars Saga Edition. I had been thinking of basing things on that, but the problem is the Saga Edition was based around characters getting more bonus feats. Having to spend feats in 3.5 to get additional attacks would make things a bit too hard for certain classes I think. I've been leaning twords that Wulf system that Sylrae mentioned, though I've been hearing about Pathfinder and I want to find out about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylrae
Hmm. Hey There Hawken. The Issue with just dropping it to one attack is that Starwars Saga has a whole system designed around everyone getting a single attack. Regular D&D doesnt assume that, so if you drop it down to a single attack, Fighters get less damage on average, and that damage will be even more swingy. that's the advantage of Wulf Ratbane's system, but I was talking about extending it to include natural attacks and how to explain the multiple attacks they grant. Then we covered how natural attacks shouls work with monks, FoB, and then We Were talking about How Armor is deficient (its connected, so its vaguely on topic).
Instead of a Base AC, I found this set of alternate rules (300 pages worth) and their armor system is an improvement. I'm copying it into a word doc for my own use, and then ill put it up here for you guys. the document is available for free, so its a non issue. Most of their info is all on this forum The Gaming Den :: Index. The Book I grabbed is Here: Joshua Middendorf's Projects - Frank and K's D&D Material (PDF). It's a huge game revision, and a total overhaul of alot of systems. I like alot of it, and I'll be incorporating a big chunk of it into my games, though not all of it.
Well, after looking at that Armor page that you have I'm getting interested, lol. I'll have to take a look at the rest sometime too, though I worry when using things that totally overhall the game.
Last edited by Matrixryu; 23rd July 2009 at 04:36 PM..
Most of their info is all on this forum 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
