Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?

Tony Vargas · May 21, 2015

Madeiner said:
Yeah i reckon its still going faster than pathfinder.

Most likely - though, if you don't push past the 3.5 obsession with 'RAW,' it might not speed up that much.

Once your group is accustomed to taking off the cuff D&D rulings in stride instead of wrangling over the rules, you can enjoy the speed benefits (among other things) and 5e can be a lot of fun.

However, that's a change i would still like try, at least in theory, if only to see if it's feasible.

It's not an easy variant. Multiple attacks are key to the DPR power of the Fighter and fighter-like half-casters, and the Fighter has nothing else of note going for it. It'd almost be easier to do away with multiple attacks by doing away with the classes that depend on them. You'd have plenty of classes left.

GMMichael · May 21, 2015

Simple solution to all the extra attacks in 5e. First, eliminate them. Then, grant the fighter the ability to cast a cantrip for each attack eliminated. Then, call these cantrips "powers." Some "powers" can be more powerful, being usable only once per encounter, or per day...

Unwise · May 21, 2015

I get PCs to roll 1d20 per attack, all at once. Their damage is then multiplied by how many of those dice hit. They can of course split the damage evenly between enemies equal to the amount of hits they got. Rolling them all at once takes no time at all generally, don't bother asking if the 19 or 3 hit, just ask about the 11. Using the same damage roll for all hits speeds things up a lot.

Rune · May 21, 2015

It might speed things up slightly if you just have each character roll one attack die and apply it's results to each attack. This will produce a lot of all-or-nothing situations, where nothing hits or everything does (which hurts the Rogue and makes the Champion extra tasty with it's expanded crit range), but should pretty much keep average damage the same. If anything, I'd just give each player the option.

Sunseeker · May 21, 2015

Madeiner said:
I worked some more math and finally found the formula that would allow me to do this.
In doing that, i realized it's probably just as fast as having multiple attack, especially when i have to adjudicate all those things.
(Sneak attack came to mind, where the rogue is more interested in having at least one attack hit, then in anything else)

The formula, for whoever is interested from a purely academic standpoint, is easy:

Add N to an attack roll. For example, 5.
Note 2 different ACs for monster; The normal AC, and its AC + N (AC + 10 is easy to remember, if you use N=5)

Rewrite attacks on the sheet so that based on the amount of attacks you do with a single action, you deal different damage.
If you have two attacks, you do 1x damage on AC hit, and x2 amount on AC+10 hit.
If you have three attacks, you do 1.5x damage on AC hit, and x3 damage on AC+10 hit.
Etcetera.

However, all things considered (having reaction use different damage or modifier than an attack action, for example, monk styles, sneak attacks), i will stick with the normal system.
Still it was fun to try and calculate it

As someone who loves to play martials for their simplicity, adding in multiplicative fractional mathematics based on how much over a certain value over their AC I did would pretty much turn me off from the class.

FrogReaver · May 21, 2015

Madeiner said:
Hi there.

One of the main reasons im switching over to 5e from PF is to speed up combat, and iterative attacks are what are slowing PF down so much (one of my players can do up to 8 attacks per round...)

I see that even in 5e, higher level characters get two to four attacks per turn depending on conditions.
I'd love a simple, yet balanced, way to remove those extra attacks to speed up combat even more, while also keeping the same expected damage output.

Now, the easiest way would be ofc to roll just one d20 for however many attacks you have. You hit, you multiply your damage by the number of attacks you have. You miss, you miss everything.
This however results in PCs dealing either 0 damage or a wholelot of damage with no middle ground.

Is there a "nicer" solution (again, i want the simplest thing possible) that allows for a middle ground?
Maybe a simple equation that allows for no-damage; half damage; or full damage (half/ full damage intended relative to the amount you would do with all possible attacks)
I guess it should be mathematically possible, especially if you are going to use the same to-hit bonus and same damage for each of your attacks.

The key thing to remember is that extra attacks allow for more consistent damage and makes doing max and minimum damage unlikely.

Use a degrees of success concept for how many weapon dice you roll and how much mod you multiple by.

A rough draft of this concept would be something like:

Instead of gaining an extra attack you gain the ability to score 1 higher degrees of success. A degree of success works by allowing you to roll your weapon dice again and apply mod damage again as long as the attack roll excceds the DC by a value of 5.

So in this scenario you would if you had attack 10 and monster had AC 20 then you could hit and do normal damage on a 10 -14. You would hit and roll your weapon dice twice and apply your mod damage if you rolled 15+. Why? Because you exceeded the degree of success required for this.

Again this is a rough draft that can be analyzed a bit more to give very similiar results to the current system as is. (Not exact results, but similiar enough that you wouldn't have to worry about inbalance).

Mouseferatu · May 21, 2015

shidaku said:
As someone who loves to play martials for their simplicity, adding in multiplicative fractional mathematics based on how much over a certain value over their AC I did would pretty much turn me off from the class.

This. But also...

One of the reasons to play a fighter, one of the things that makes the experience different (at higher levels) than playing one of the other tank-types, is the multiple attacks. It doesn't matter if the math is the same, having three chances to hit feels different than hitting once for three times the damage.

If I play a fighter, one of the features of that experience is multiple attacks. I'd be seriously disappointed, and probably wouldn't play a fighter, in a campaign without them.

FrogReaver · May 21, 2015

Mouseferatu said:
This. But also...

One of the reasons to play a fighter, one of the things that makes the experience different (at higher levels) than playing one of the other tank-types, is the multiple attacks. It doesn't matter if the math is the same, having three chances to hit feels different than hitting once for three times the damage.

If I play a fighter, one of the features of that experience is multiple attacks. I'd be seriously disappointed, and probably wouldn't play a fighter, in a campaign without them.

You do realize multiple attacks would be replaced by something which would then be the feature of playing a fighter in the OP's campaign?

Mouseferatu · May 21, 2015

FrogReaver said:
You do realize multiple attacks would be replaced by something which would then be the feature of playing a fighter in the OP's campaign?

Yes, but he's looking for a feature that deals more damage with fewer attacks. Other classes have that. Other classes do not have the multiple (beyond two) attacks. It might be a perfectly good feature, but it's not what I'm personally looking for in a fighter. If his players are, great.

Li Shenron · May 21, 2015

Madeiner said:
Now, the easiest way would be ofc to roll just one d20 for however many attacks you have. You hit, you multiply your damage by the number of attacks you have. You miss, you miss everything.
This however results in PCs dealing either 0 damage or a wholelot of damage with no middle ground.

I would do exactly that, but instead of multiplying the damage you roll multiple dice. You still get approx the same sort of damage distribution "shape", except that 0 damage has a higher chance than before. If the minimum, the average, and the maximum are the same, I wouldn't worry about balance. But if you have some time to do the math, you can also check how much the variance changes.

Anyone figured out math to remove extra attacks?

Tony Vargas

Legend

GMMichael

Guide of Modos

Unwise

Adventurer

Rune

Once A Fool

Sunseeker

Guest

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog

Mouseferatu

Hero

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog

Mouseferatu

Hero

Li Shenron

Legend

Similar Threads