An idea regarding Str in attack rolls...

[Starman]

The thread on why Str is used instead of Dex in attack rolls got me to thinking. One of the reasons listed for the use of Str was that it measured the ability to penetrate armor and do damage.

Currently damage=weapon damage roll+Str mod

What if it was changed to weapon damage roll +difference between target's AC and attack roll that hit. For example, if you have Str 16 (+3), are wielding a longsword (1d8), and you roll a total attack roll of 16 against an AC you do 1 (16-15) +1d8 points of damage.

This would mean Str is only counted once in attacking instead of twice (once to hit and once to damage). This also means that if you need a natural 20 to hit someone you would only roll your weapon's damage dice with no modifiers.

I'm not sure how to handle this with critical hits. Hmmm...I suppose, using the example above, you are attacking someone with AC 15. You roll 20 and then 18 to confirm. That is (20-15=5+18=23) 23 over the AC, so damage would be 23+2*1d8 (or 2d8 because a longsword has x2 for crits).

What do you think? It looks like critical hits would be much more deadly. Any suggestions or thoughts?

Starman

 

[TeeSeeJay]

Would you limit the bonus?

If I have an attack roll of 16 vs. an AC of 10, should I do 1d8+6 damage?

What if I don't have a STR bonus at all?

Edit: Nevermind, your critical hit example illustrates this. No cap on the damage bonus, regardless of STR.

 

[Starman]

Since the attack roll takes into acount your strength modifier there would be no penalty to your damage roll if you had a negative modifier.

I posted the idea as soon as it came to me, though, so I haven't had a chance to think of all the ramifications this might have.

Any other thoughts?

Starman

 

[Maximillian]

Aside from the obvious problem of extra math ( I know it's simple, but when it's four in the morning, and you're running that one last combat fueled only on Coffee and Doritos... it starts to matter), You do realize that BAB increases significantly faster than AC does, don't you? You're essentially giving fighters a portion of their BAB to be applied to their damage roll. I'm not saying that's necessarily bad (I've worried about combats at higher levels taking too long anyway), but you should know it's there.

Also, this makes Power Attack do absolutely nothing. I think the power attack feat is meant to give fighters some of their BAB to their damage rolls, as is, and that's why its an integral part of so many feats.

 

[Nifft]

For Criticals, I'd subtract the AC twice, not just once. Adding up to 20 extra points of damage is adding a lot of randomness to combat -- both for and, more likely, against players.

-- Nifft

 

[drnuncheon]

What if it was changed to weapon damage roll +difference between target's AC and attack roll that hit.

True strike becomes the first-level spell for combat.

J

 

[Starman]

For Criticals, I'd subtract the AC twice, not just once. Adding up to 20 extra points of damage is adding a lot of randomness to combat -- both for and, more likely, against players.

It could also be (original attack roll-AC+weapon damage)*crit modifer for the weapon. The threat roll would not add additional damage (on top of a successful crit).

True strike becomes the first-level spell for combat.

Yeah, it would have to be bumped up a few levels. 3rd level maybe?

Also, this makes Power Attack do absolutely nothing. I think the power attack feat is meant to give fighters some of their BAB to their damage rolls, as is, and that's why its an integral part of so many feats.

I don't know how I would handle this, though.

Starman

 

[Ravellion]

Go Weapon Finesse!

 

[Azlan]

but when it's four in the morning, and you're running that one last combat fueled only on Coffee and Doritos

Coffee and Doritos? Blech. What a maloderous combination. I'd hate to be sitting next to you, at four in the morning. I bet your girlfriend doesn't kiss you when you finally come to bed.