Alternative Rules for Extra Attacks
- Thread starter airwalkrr
- Start date
I might do that.
I can't help but defend my argument though.
K-9 dogs are in fact trained, so they might indeed have obtained some form of armor proficiency on account thereof, and most other animals would reject armor they're not used to wearing. In the case of a Marilith I would also wonder if there is any +4 Studded Leather that fits a Marilith, without reduced efficiency of its defensive or offensive capabilities, but we can assume that there is some demonic armorsmith that can assist with that.
Maybe creatures above animal intelligence are indeed likely to figure out it doesn't have any drawbacks to wear armor without CP. But if a creature would do so you'd probably have to increase the CR since it will be a bigger challenge in combat. Just like it would be if we equipped it with a Belt of Strength to increase its damage or a Cloak of Charisma to increase its DCs.
Myth plausible.
Greenfield
Adventurer
I used to hear a lot of arguments about attacks per round, especially in 1st and 2nd Ed, when rounds were a minute long.
In every edition, a character is presumed to be swinging, thrusting, parrying and dodging more or less continuously when in melee. Most of these attempts are to keep your opponent off balance, to try and create an opportunity for yourself. Once per round you actually get such an opportunity, an opening in their defense that lets you get a shot at something other than their blade or shield.
When someone drops their guard to do something like cast a spell, drink a potion or turn and run, they're creating such an opportunity and handing it to you.
As you get better in melee, you find that you can slip a shot in through smaller and smaller openings in the opponent's defense.
When you think about melee combat this way, it's easy to see why subsequent attacks would have penalties, and why those penalties would mount. Your window of opportunity for 2nd, 3rd and 4th blows keeps getting progressively smaller.
In every edition, a character is presumed to be swinging, thrusting, parrying and dodging more or less continuously when in melee. Most of these attempts are to keep your opponent off balance, to try and create an opportunity for yourself. Once per round you actually get such an opportunity, an opening in their defense that lets you get a shot at something other than their blade or shield.
When someone drops their guard to do something like cast a spell, drink a potion or turn and run, they're creating such an opportunity and handing it to you.
As you get better in melee, you find that you can slip a shot in through smaller and smaller openings in the opponent's defense.
When you think about melee combat this way, it's easy to see why subsequent attacks would have penalties, and why those penalties would mount. Your window of opportunity for 2nd, 3rd and 4th blows keeps getting progressively smaller.
airwalkrr
Adventurer
Well I am not necessarily arguing my approach is more realistic. But I would argue it is better for faster, easier gameplay while approximating the same result.
Going full BaB without offsetting it in any way seems too powerful. How about this:
You get iterative attacks as normal (2 at +6 etc.), but they are at full BaB. However, you can only take them as long as they hit. So even if you had BaB +20 and your first attack missed, you couldn't take the rest (but you'd still have a move).
You could roll for all at once, but you'd still have to track which is which. So I'm not sure this would speed anything up, but it shouldn't slow down either. However, it would make even the fourth attack seem useful which the OP was about.
You get iterative attacks as normal (2 at +6 etc.), but they are at full BaB. However, you can only take them as long as they hit. So even if you had BaB +20 and your first attack missed, you couldn't take the rest (but you'd still have a move).
You could roll for all at once, but you'd still have to track which is which. So I'm not sure this would speed anything up, but it shouldn't slow down either. However, it would make even the fourth attack seem useful which the OP was about.
When adjusting the way you get extra attacks you also have to consider the effect this has on abilities and spells that normally give you extra attacks, like haste and flurry of blows.
If all attacks are normally at full BAB then having those effects grant you an attack at full BAB is less powerful than it otherwise would be.
In terms of extra attacks, what would it be like to see a Monk/Fighter with the Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting (EL), Rapid Shot (using shurikens) and Slashing Flurry (PH2) features, using his Flurry of Blows ability while under the effect of a haste spell. I should do some math to see at what level that is possible.
EDIT: Turns out to be at level 21 (Monk 11/Fighter 10), assuming the character has Dex 13 by level 8, Dex 15 by level 12, Dex 17 by level 14, Dex 19 by level 18 and Dex 25 by level 21. The resulting 13 attacks would be executed at +9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1/-1/-6/-6 (bonuses and penalties from the mentioned spell and feats included, but nothing else). The character would have 4 other feats options left.
If all attacks are normally at full BAB then having those effects grant you an attack at full BAB is less powerful than it otherwise would be.
In terms of extra attacks, what would it be like to see a Monk/Fighter with the Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting (EL), Rapid Shot (using shurikens) and Slashing Flurry (PH2) features, using his Flurry of Blows ability while under the effect of a haste spell. I should do some math to see at what level that is possible.
EDIT: Turns out to be at level 21 (Monk 11/Fighter 10), assuming the character has Dex 13 by level 8, Dex 15 by level 12, Dex 17 by level 14, Dex 19 by level 18 and Dex 25 by level 21. The resulting 13 attacks would be executed at +9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1/-1/-6/-6 (bonuses and penalties from the mentioned spell and feats included, but nothing else). The character would have 4 other feats options left.
Last edited:
kitcik
Adventurer
How about this - keep the current BAB computations, but you can sacrifice an extra attack to get an untyped attack bonus equal to the BAB of the sacrificed attack. If this attack hits, you get a damage bonus equal to the BAB of the sacrificed attack.
So, let's say you are +16/+11/+6/+1
You could instead make (and I am just picking one option of several) two attacks at +17 (+16 +1 --> sacrifice the +1 attack & +11 +6 --> sacrifice the +6 attack).
If the first attack hits, you get +1 damage.
If the second attack hits, you get +6 damage (because the attack you sacrificed for this was worth more --> bigger sacrifice, bigger bonus).
So, let's say you are +16/+11/+6/+1
You could instead make (and I am just picking one option of several) two attacks at +17 (+16 +1 --> sacrifice the +1 attack & +11 +6 --> sacrifice the +6 attack).
If the first attack hits, you get +1 damage.
If the second attack hits, you get +6 damage (because the attack you sacrificed for this was worth more --> bigger sacrifice, bigger bonus).
Greenfield
Adventurer
Following the long train that's gotten us here, we started with the complaint that attacks 3 and 4 for a high level fighter were essentially useless, as they only hit once in a great while.
The proposed solution of allowing all attacks at full BAB simplifies the dice related math, but while doing so it more than doubles the damage a fighter type can do in a round.
Now consider what you would have to do to the CR of a monster if you doubled their damage output per round.
That's what you're doing to the CR of the fighter, and it will affect the way you have to plan every encounter from then on. If you do the job right, then the battles end up lasting just as long, so you aren't really speeding play significantly. An encounter will still last just as long as it used to, and you substitute more simple dice rolls for half the number rolled with modifiers.
Net gain? In the negatives, if you ask me.
The proposed solution of allowing all attacks at full BAB simplifies the dice related math, but while doing so it more than doubles the damage a fighter type can do in a round.
Now consider what you would have to do to the CR of a monster if you doubled their damage output per round.
That's what you're doing to the CR of the fighter, and it will affect the way you have to plan every encounter from then on. If you do the job right, then the battles end up lasting just as long, so you aren't really speeding play significantly. An encounter will still last just as long as it used to, and you substitute more simple dice rolls for half the number rolled with modifiers.
Net gain? In the negatives, if you ask me.
Similar Threads
