Iterative Attacks

Wulf Ratbane said:

[...]
Just dispense with the false suspense: Tell the PCs what the AC is.
The gain you get in a smooth running game far outstrips the benefits of "secret AC."

Click to expand...

Power Attack. Combat Expertise. And all other feats which rely on players choosing actions at the cost of attack penalty.

Wulf Ratbane said:

Two very quick comments, admittedly without a lot of thought behind them:

1) I have no problem with PCs being able to do things the monsters can't, and vice versa.

2) There are existing feats that are similar-- Superior Cleave (Oriental Adventures) lets you take a 5 foot step after you drop an opponent. I could certainly get behind a similar feat-- or, frankly, a blanket permission-- that allows a fighter to move after dropping an opponent, provided he has not moved yet. Basically, allow you to break up your full attack at any point, with one move, provided that such movement wouldn't otherwise provoke an AoO.

But not attack -move a bit - attack -move a bit more - attack, etc.

Click to expand...

There is a great feat in Arcana Evolved which allows to take a free move action several times a day. In other words, one can put everything into move and full attack, however, by default, full attack action eats move action.

Having played a character with this feat, I'd say that this is the best of both worlds. Your fighter gets a great boost, but you're not going to abuse it. Usually it just means that the round you charge (or move) is not wasted.

Wulf Ratbane said:

Hmm... The levels of success method breaks such a solution. Gantros, do you allow the attack multiplier if the combatant has moved?

And while I am thinking of it, do you do anything different with multiple attacks? (Claw/Claw/Bite routines and the like.)

Click to expand...

I am in favor of "single roll - multiple hits", HOWEVER, while it looks good on paper, it introduces greater swinginess of results. With multiple hits decided by a single roll and 3-4 rounds of combat, it's easy to totally miss the fun with 3-4 unlucky attack rolls while with 3-4 times three rolls (for a total of nine or twelve rolls) the average number of hits is more probable.

In other words, when foregoing multiple rolls in favor of a single roll, one would have to also forego d20 in favor of a more GURPS like test, with multiple dice heavily favoring certain average (for example: 4d6 - 3).

Regards,
Ruemere

ruemere said:

Power Attack. Combat Expertise. And all other feats which rely on players choosing actions at the cost of attack penalty.

Click to expand...

First, as I said, players will figure out the AC in just a couple of rounds.

Second, these feats are not balanced based on the secrecy, ie the possibility that the player might "choose wrong."

They are balanced against probable outcomes and the trade-off of one bonus for another.

EDIT: Thanks much for your comments on the other point-- in my haste to contradict you I forgot that I agreed with more of your post!

My main problem with Iterative attacks is that there are too many of them as the game progresses. I think it would be better to limit the number of iterative attacks that characters can have.

Perhaps cut the number of attacks in half. Therefore, barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers would only have two attacks at 20th level and the other classes would have either one or two depending on the "role" of the class.

I'd say that bards, druids, and sorcerers/wizards would only have one attack at 20th level while clerics, monks, and rogues would have two attacks at 20th level.

The progressions would remain the same but you simply remove the extra attacks. So, a 20th-level fighter would attack with +20/+15, a 20th-level monk would attack with +15/+10, and a 20th-level sorcerer would attack with +10.

Characters would be able to gain more iterative attacks through feats or unique prestige class abilities.

Just an idea...

Wulf Ratbane said:

First, as I said, players will figure out the AC in just a couple of rounds.

Click to expand...

Maybe the AC should be revealed after round 1?

DaveMage said:

Maybe the AC should be revealed after round 1?

Click to expand...

I think, if you have a rule about at what round in combat AC should be revealed...nah, I got nothin.

Nellisir said:

I think, if you have a rule about at what round in combat AC should be revealed...nah, I got nothin.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm with you there.

I didn't even mention the players who have the ACs for 90% of the monsters memorized anyway.

As far as I am concerned, the silliness of secret AC is written plain on the face of it, and so for folks who like it, it is basically a matter of faith. I am not particularly invested in convincing folks otherwise.

Your game will run faster without it.

Wulf Ratbane said:

First, as I said, players will figure out the AC in just a couple of rounds.

Click to expand...

It must the way I run games then. Most monsters in my games are customized and the circumstances often change influencing stuff like AC from round to round (swift action self-buffs [first introduced in Arcana Unearthed] or special combat actions are great for this).

Wulf Ratbane said:

Second, these feats are not balanced based on the secrecy, ie the possibility that the player might "choose wrong."
They are balanced against probable outcomes and the trade-off of one bonus for another.

Click to expand...

It's not really about secrecy. I do believe that it's advantageous to game atmosphere to keep players guessing, making assumptions or calculating stuff by themselves.
Another belief of mine is that openly revealing monster statistics resembles observing football match with players running around with numbers on their shirts while listening to expert's commentary - it's too artificial for my taste.

Wulf Ratbane said:

EDIT: Thanks much for your comments on the other point-- in my haste to contradict you I forgot that I agreed with more of your post!

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

Regards,
Ruemere

A method for faster resolution of multiple attacks occurred to me:

Dicepool

Determine success threshold level (AC - attack bonus).
Apply special [1] modifier (i.e. instead of 1st die receiveing +0, 2nd -5 and so on, just use some one uniform number) to success threshold level.
Count all d20 which score result equal or higher to threshold level as successes.
Reroll all success dice which also score threat range against the same threshold number for additional hits (number of additional hits: total all multipliers - number of attacks).
Roll damage once and multiply by number of hits.

Advantage: one single throw.
Disadvantage: you still get to use a lot of dice. You need to calculate that [1] special modifier somehow.

Regards,
Ruemere

ruemere said:

the circumstances often change influencing stuff like AC from round to round (swift action self-buffs [first introduced in Arcana Unearthed] or special combat actions are great for this).

Click to expand...

This is why I don't tell players my critter's AC. The AC keeps changing as cover, total defense, special abilities, concealment and other factors pop up and fall away.

I've come to hate that look on their faces when I tell them that their 38 does not hit the monster's AC this time. It's worse if I made the mistake of saying that it had an AC of 37.

It's not about the "secret AC", it's about limiting the expectations that will be disappointed.

I was thinking of a way of making combat more dynamic with multiple attacks for an E6 game, and there's a mechanic I was thinking of doing.

Each person can do three actions per round:

1 Swift action (or Immediate action if done out of turn)
1 Move action (for movement or a move equivalent action)
1 Standard action

Free actions stay the same (limited only by DM's discretion, useable outside your turn, etc).

Then, you can do the following with a swift action:

Aid Another once per round. This promotes teamwork, and isn't overpowered as long as it's a tactical choice and you have to give something up to do it.

Use to activate a charge (requires using a Standard action). Charge is changed to allow one move + attack as the swift & standard action. This means you can do a move equivalent (draw weapon, pick up an item, stand up, etc) and then still charge up to 30' (or one move, you know).

Make multiple attacks. I call it starting an "Assault". Make one attack as a standard action, and then spend a swift action to turn it into an assault and make your additional attacks.
Additional attacks are 1 from a second weapon, 1 from high BAB, 1 from Haste.

Use an immediate action to interupt (requires getting a feat). Can't do a full attack next round, but at least you could interupt that caster.
I've been debating making melee more powerful against casters by allowing an "interupt" action as an immediate action normally, and then allowing a feat to give you movement when doing this (so a Fighter with the feat could move and attack as an immediate action).

A number of feats allowing you to do something extra by burning a swift action.

A number of spells castable as a swift action (buff spells primarily).


I haven't actually playtested any of these ideas, as it's just something I've recently thought up.
Any thoughts?