D&D 5E Do we really need so many classes with Extra Attack?

[Li Shenron]

Hm, so the goal here is to make the fighter a more attractive, distinctive class, with its own unique mechanical trick ("extra attacks")?

So what I'd recommend is rolling the damage from an extra attack into the other class's big mechanical tricks. So maybe the Barbarian's rage adds EVEN MORE damage, and the Rangers TWF perhaps deals MORE DAMAGE if both attacks hit.

How much damage is kind of an open question, since the maths weren't locked down when we saw the last playtest doc, but you could probably chuck a d6 or a d8 into that and be fine.

Sounds good!

 

[I'm A Banana]

Not even close. The math is about the same for a barbarian as for a great weapon fighter. If you want to use barbarian rage to substitute for the benefits of Extra Attack, rage needs to go from +2 damage at 4th level to +15 damage at 5th. If you prefer to do it with bonus damage dice, 3d8 would be about right.

So an extra attack is worth 13 points of damage? Doesn't sound right to me, but whatevs, it's just playtest maths.

 

[Dausuul]

So an extra attack is worth 13 points of damage? Doesn't sound right to me, but whatevs, it's just playtest maths.

It's not complicated. An extra attack is worth however much damage you would, on average, deal with that attack. For a typical barbarian, it looks like this:

Greatsword: 2d6 damage --> average 7 damage
18 Strength (after one ability increase): +4 damage
Rage Bonus: +2 damage

Total: 13 damage

As I said, the first Extra Attack is the equivalent of "attack for double damage." And that's doubling everything; base weapon damage, ability bonus, rage bonus. If your weapon is magical, double that too. If you give it to one class in isolation, it's brokenly powerful.

 

[keterys]

So an extra attack is worth 13 points of damage? Doesn't sound right to me, but whatevs, it's just playtest maths.

I've lost track of what's included in extra attacks nowadays, but if you have a barbarian doing, say, 1d12+7 (4 str, 2 rage, 1 enh) then the second attack would be another 13.5 damage on average.

I favored the bigger hits over time model instead of extra attacks personally; I don't think it's a viable option to try to split the difference by class cause it ends up looking a bit crazy. I think it's fine if you instead have whirlwind and cleave mechanics abounding alongside a reasonable damage progression, or if everyone just gets more attacks.

P.S. Part of the reason for the damage cantrip hate is the fact that they're still on the old "more dice as you level" theory when everyone else shifted to extra attacks.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's not complicated. An extra attack is worth however much damage you would, on average, deal with that attack.

Actually, it'd be worth about half that if hit rates were 50/50. Extra attacks aren't guaranteed to hit, after all. Different hit rates yield different values for that extra attack.

But, again, playtest maths. I'll let WotC figure out how much that's supposed to be worth in the end.

 

[Dausuul]

Actually, it'd be worth about half that if hit rates were 50/50. Extra attacks aren't guaranteed to hit, after all. Different hit rates yield different values for that extra attack.

No, they don't, because your attack with massive bonus damage isn't guaranteed to hit, either. Accuracy cancels out:

Two attacks averaging 13 damage with a 50% chance to hit = 13 x average of 1 hit = 13 damage per round
One attack averaging 26 damage with a 50% chance to hit = 26 x average of 0.5 hits = 13 damage per round

To put it another way: Twice as many attacks means twice the average number of hits means twice the damage, so however much damage you deal with one hit, double it. The barbarian averages 13 damage per hit, so that has to be doubled, which means adding 13.

Now, you could reduce the size of the damage bonus if you did something like granting advantage on the attack as well. I think the playtest aims at having around a 70% chance to hit on average; advantage turns 70% into 91%. In that case, you could cut the bonus damage to about +7, or 2d6. But then you aren't able to benefit from anything else that might give you advantage.

Or you could grant damage on a miss...

 

[Blackwarder]

Extra attacks are good, don't touch them.

Warder

 

[Sadras]

I am assuming you never took the "Come and get it" power for your fighter? Or the daily that auto-damages everybody that starts adjacent? The 4e fighter is the fighter that most closely resembles the casters in powers when comparing editions.

Anyway, I think multiple attacks and no area attacks is logical for the Fighter. Giving them AOE like in 4e makes them feel too much like a wizard.

I did take 'come and get it' so once a fight I do something. Big Whoop and its always the same move. It gets old after a while. And I'm not advocating for AOE, rather extra attacks.

 

[JasonZZ]

Not only do I think extra attacks should stay, I think that all "martial" classes (i.e. barbarian, paladin, ranger) should get the same number as fighters.

What do you give the fighter to keep up with said other martial+something classes, then?

 

[JasonZZ]

I did take 'come and get it' so once a fight I do something. Big Whoop and its always the same move. It gets old after a while. And I'm not advocating for AOE, rather extra attacks.

Did you not take the AOE encounter powers available to fighters? There aren't a huge number, but there are some.