Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Replace Martial Damage Bonus with Extra Attacks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6068782" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>I agree that rolling one more dice or two does not really slow the game down, unless each attack has a different bonus, that's where it slows down because even if the calculation is easy, the player naturally plays more carefully.</p><p></p><p>I am not very concerned about the motivations you mention, I would rather say that for me multiple attacks are a nice and totally understandable way of representing someone striking faster, either the same target or multiple ones.</p><p></p><p>Therefore, multiple attacks should be there in the game, but how to design them in order to (a) make them optional and (b) avoid problems related to bonus damage or special abilities, that may or may not apply to each and every attack depending on how they're written?</p><p></p><p>I think the idea was already there in a previous packet, but disguised as something else... How about having a maneuver (or feat, if wanting to allow it to non-fighters) that simply says: </p><p></p><p><strong>Multiple Attack</strong>: "When attacking with a weapon, you can split your damage to multiple targets equally (half between 2 targets, 1/3 between 3 targets and so on, rounding down). If you deal different types of damage simultaneously (such as slashing and fire from a flaming sword), split them separately. If you deal special effects (such as stunning), apply this to one target only."</p><p></p><p>This ability could then work in 2 ways:</p><p></p><p>#1 - It may require separate attack rolls for each target.</p><p>#2 - It may require only one attack roll, the result of which however is vs each target's AC.</p><p></p><p>If using option #2, it doesn't need any additional dice roll at all, and this would be OK for me.</p><p></p><p>There should definitely be some limits to how many targets you can split at maximum. Fixed or level-based, you can suggest <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6068782, member: 1465"] I agree that rolling one more dice or two does not really slow the game down, unless each attack has a different bonus, that's where it slows down because even if the calculation is easy, the player naturally plays more carefully. I am not very concerned about the motivations you mention, I would rather say that for me multiple attacks are a nice and totally understandable way of representing someone striking faster, either the same target or multiple ones. Therefore, multiple attacks should be there in the game, but how to design them in order to (a) make them optional and (b) avoid problems related to bonus damage or special abilities, that may or may not apply to each and every attack depending on how they're written? I think the idea was already there in a previous packet, but disguised as something else... How about having a maneuver (or feat, if wanting to allow it to non-fighters) that simply says: [B]Multiple Attack[/B]: "When attacking with a weapon, you can split your damage to multiple targets equally (half between 2 targets, 1/3 between 3 targets and so on, rounding down). If you deal different types of damage simultaneously (such as slashing and fire from a flaming sword), split them separately. If you deal special effects (such as stunning), apply this to one target only." This ability could then work in 2 ways: #1 - It may require separate attack rolls for each target. #2 - It may require only one attack roll, the result of which however is vs each target's AC. If using option #2, it doesn't need any additional dice roll at all, and this would be OK for me. There should definitely be some limits to how many targets you can split at maximum. Fixed or level-based, you can suggest :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Replace Martial Damage Bonus with Extra Attacks
Top