D&D 5E Doing away with Extra Attack

CubicsRube · Jul 11, 2019

In Shadow of the Demon Lord, warriors gain the ability to have an extra attack OR add 1d6 to their damage.

Perhaps the second part could be used. I'd suggest a d10 (in line with their hit die and to make it more meaty) at level 5, 2d10 at level 11 and 3d10 at 20.

It means that the fighter can still add some serious hurt and can be dangerous almost all the time with almost any weapon, but takes away the sxcessive rolling. I'd still keep action surge if it was me, but it's not me, it's your game.

The same thing (+ hit die) can be added to other classes with extra attack features. So the barbarian gets a d12 at level 5 and thats it for the rest of the class progression. Paladin and ranger also get d10s.

Tony Vargas · Jul 12, 2019

Xeviat said:
Dealing less damage to one target in order to target multiple targets is how extra attack works now, and my scaling would be more favorable, so I think that would be a net gain.
...
I don't have my docs with me, but what I was looking at was something like a 5th level character is doing 2[w]+stat+class riders. There is a basic extra attack maneuver that reduces that by 1W, but now you can target two targets. It would be a net gain.

Yep, I could see that, it sounds pretty reasonable. At 5th, can do 2[W]+X to one target or 1[W]+X to two targets, for a net gain of X, if both attack

, by choosing a different 'maneuver.'
Meanwhile, at 5th, someone else may do 8d6 to one target, or 8d6 to all the targets that get w/in a 20' radius sphere... for a net gain of anything from 8d6 up to, oh, 400d6, very hypothetically, assuming targets in close formation on the ground, not swarming together in 3D. Save for 1/2.

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

For D&D.

Xeviat · Jul 12, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Yep, I could see that, it sounds pretty reasonable. At 5th, can do 2[W]+X to one target or 1[W]+X to two targets, for a net gain of X, if both attack , by choosing a different 'maneuver.'
Meanwhile, at 5th, someone else may do 8d6 to one target, or 8d6 to all the targets that get w/in a 20' radius sphere... for a net gain of anything from 8d6 up to, oh, 400d6, very hypothetically, assuming targets in close formation on the ground, not swarming together in 3D. Save for 1/2.

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

For D&D.

Hahaha ... Remember, the Wizard only has like 2 of those a day and area attacks can hit allies. Balancing casters and no casters is a separate issue.

5ekyu · Jul 12, 2019

"But, who would rebel against not getting multiple attacks on standard characters?"

As a rule, removing a distinctive festure with the promise of other distinctive features leave me cold. Its removing a given differentiation that seems fairly versatile and promising a lot of new stuff that's unseen and not itself assessable.

So, if you added the greatest stuff of all time then hey fantastic.

But if you added stuff along the general quality of the typical off the cuff "my way" redo I often see put out - then not so much.

But, when you mention TWF issues, it makes me cringe a tad since there us little consensus there and also there's no guarantee your new stuff wont make those subjective issues even worse for some.

So, my basic position is - go for it and whrn you have a system we can compare to the current model then ask again for who would object or not.

For me, I will take the bird in the hand over the flying vaporware pig in the poke.

Fanaelialae · Jul 12, 2019

Keep in mind that it would also make opportunity attacks more potent. That's both a pro and a con, but it needs to be taken into account. In the existing game, an opportunity attack is one extra attack. In this case, it's essentially a full turn worth of damage. (Unless you have opportunity attacks scale differently from regular attacks.) This would also apply to other granted attacks, such as Polearm Master and the Battlemaster maneuver that grants an extra attack.

Of course, the upside is that a high level fighter can ready an attack without losing most of their DPR.

The biggest difference is in the ability to attack multiple opponents, which is occasionally useful. Granted, if your maneuver system effectively adds that back in, then no loss.

5ekyu · Jul 12, 2019

Fanaelialae said:
Keep in mind that it would also make opportunity attacks more potent. That's both a pro and a con, but it needs to be taken into account. In the existing game, an opportunity attack is one extra attack. In this case, it's essentially a full turn worth of damage. (Unless you have opportunity attacks scale differently from regular attacks.) This would also apply to other granted attacks, such as Polearm Master and the Battlemaster maneuver that grants an extra attack.

Of course, the upside is that a high level fighter can ready an attack without losing most of their DPR.

The biggest difference is in the ability to attack multiple opponents, which is occasionally useful. Granted, if your maneuver system effectively adds that back in, then no loss.

This could be handled by the wording. If the extra new gimmicks to be named all had "on your turn" they would be much the same for AO as extra attack is now.

Xeviat · Jul 12, 2019

Fanaelialae said:
Keep in mind that it would also make opportunity attacks more potent. That's both a pro and a con, but it needs to be taken into account. In the existing game, an opportunity attack is one extra attack. In this case, it's essentially a full turn worth of damage. (Unless you have opportunity attacks scale differently from regular attacks.) This would also apply to other granted attacks, such as Polearm Master and the Battlemaster maneuver that grants an extra attack.

Of course, the upside is that a high level fighter can ready an attack without losing most of their DPR.

The biggest difference is in the ability to attack multiple opponents, which is occasionally useful. Granted, if your maneuver system effectively adds that back in, then no loss.

Considering the Rogue, and to a much lesser extent, the Paladin, already has their full damage on opportunity attacks, I'm not too concerned about buffing them. The fact that they become less and less scary is one of the reasons I want to do this change actually.

GameOgre · Jul 12, 2019

I like this idea a lot.

But it isnt a small change by any means. You would have to alter most of the game in order to do so.

Xeviat · Jul 12, 2019

GameOgre said:
I like this idea a lot.

But it isnt a small change by any means. You would have to alter most of the game in order to do so.

It would definitely be big. In the draft I have at home in my computer, it ends up giving a damage boost to barbarians, rangers, and paladins either at 11 or 17, and I don't know if they need one (I suspect they don't, I don't see everyone complaining about that). I'd also need to look at Hex, Hunter's Mark, Elemental Weapon, Arcane Weapon, and other spells like that, along with magic weapons in general.

Cap'n Kobold · Jul 12, 2019

Xeviat said:
Hahaha ... Remember, the Wizard only has like 2 of those a day and area attacks can hit allies. Balancing casters and no casters is a separate issue.

Assuming the adventuring day that the game is balanced around, a 5th level wizard can cast three Fireballs a day.

Fortuitously, that is the same number of Action Surges that the fighter will get, allowing us to balance them against each other. :devil:

Unless you're making concomitant changes in casters, changing the capabilities of non-casters is an ideal time to adjust the power of the change to bring them in line with casters - wherever you happen to think that line is.