Base Attack Bonus Drop Off Problem Solved. Secrets Enclosed!

[Sravoff]

I have seen a few threads about increasing the attack bonus of multiple attacks. So I came up with this idea.

What if instead of hitting with less and less accuracy you hit with average accuracy?
And you could opt to attack less with more accuracy?
20th level character good bab:
+10/+10/+10/+10/+10
+13/+13/+12/+12
+17/+17/+16
+20/+20
+20(Standard Action)

19th level character good bab
+10/+09/+09/+09/+09
+12/+12/+11/+11
+16/+15/+15
+19/+19
+19(Standard Action)

Under these rules you add up the total bonus you get from all your attacks. Then you divide that number by the number of attacks you want. Then any left over bonus's are added to the first attack. If any are still left over add to second and so on.

Two Points:
First: No single attack may have more than you bab in the PHB in attack bonus. So the maximum you can get for a twentieth level fighter is 20. Then you can add all your str and what-not.
Second:I am unsure how this will affect low level characters. Perhaps it will not as the current rules don't.

What do you think? Comments welcome

-Sravoff

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It would make non-BAB attack bonuses and any damage bonuses considerably more powerful; the more non-BAB bonuses you have, the safer it is to split up your attacks, and the more attacks you can fire off, the more chances you have to apply bonus damage.

It also makes good BAB classes a lot more dangerous in combat, since they can adjust their number of attacks and attack bonuses based on the opposition.

Combined with Power Attack and Combat Expertise, this could considerably increase the power of melee combatants, especially Fighters.

 

[Sravoff]

Hmm... I hadn't thought of that. Without a changing it for non full bab classes that does brake it. Okay perhaps it is not such a wonderful secret. Though I think there is a way to even out all the atttacks for the round. Perhaps you can move up to half your bab in increments of 5?

at 20th level that would be a total of ten.

15/15/10/10

The progresssion for level 20 shoulsd be as follows. I have no idea why I had five attacks. Though I am not sure if this does go and balance's it. Never shouls the character have more than four attacks per round without special feats/class abilities.
+13/+13/+12/+12
+17/+17/+16
+20/+20
+20(Standard Action)

Thanks for comments.

-Sravoff

 

[Cheiromancer]

I think you want to limit the number of attacks by level. Otherwise a 1st level wizard can make 20 attacks at +0. [edit- you caught this while I was posting!}

If a 20th level fighter (20+15+10+5 = 50) makes 2 attacks, are they +20/+20 or +20/+20/+10? I.e. is the left over +10 "wasted" or does it get used to make another iterative attack? I'm guessing the former.

The variant seems to be a slight powerup for fighters, since they usually can get two attacks at their highest bonus. In some cases it works out to be equivalent to about a +2 bonus. Generally against the most difficult opponents, of course. Is this the effect you want?

[sblock] suppose an 18th level fighter has a target number of 33; attack bonus plus d20 roll has to be 33 or higher to hit the opponent.

Then in the standard system (+18/+13/+8) the figher has to roll 15 or higher on the first attack and a natural 20 on the other two. That's 8 possibilities. The variant fighter (+18/+18) has to roll 15 or higher on either roll; that's 12 possibilities. He'll hit 50% more often than a standard fighter. Give the first fighter a +2 bonus to attacks, and he needs a 13, 18 and 20; also 12. So in this case the variant is equivalent to a +2 bonus to attacks.

Suppose the target number is 30. Then the standard fighter has to roll a 12 on the first, a 17 on the second, and a 20 on the third. 14 possibilities. The variant fighter with two attacks (+18/+18) needs a 12 with both. 18 possibilities; still a little ahead. Also a +2 bonus.

Make the target number 27. Then the first fighter needs a 9, a 14 and a 19. 21 possibilities. The second fighter (with +18/+18) needs a 9 on each. 24 possiblities. A very narrow advantage. Now only a +1 bonus.

Try it with 24. Pretty easy, now. The first fighter needs a 6, an 11, and a 16. 30 possibilities. The second fighter needs a 6 and a 6. Also 30 possibilities. The first fighter has finally caught up. If the second fighter splits his attack 3 ways he gets +13/+13/+13, and needs 11s. That's also 30 possibilities.

At 21, the first fighter needs a 3, an 8, and a 13. 39 chances. The second fighter splits his attack 3 ways, and needs 8s. Also 39. Still caught up.[/sblock]

 

[Sravoff]

If a 20th level fighter (20+15+10+5 = 50) makes 2 attacks, are they +20/+20 or +20/+20/+10? I.e. is the left over +10 "wasted" or does it get used to make another iterative attack? I'm guessing the former.

Yes the left over ten is "wasted", this is to kepp all attacks at the same bonus. Now that I lok at it, all attacks should be even, with the extra bonus just being wasted. I think this system may also make it easier to implement a class based AC bonus since the attacks are slightly lower.

The variant seems to be a slight powerup for fighters, since they usually can get two attacks at their highest bonus. In some cases it works out to be equivalent to about a +2 bonus. Generally against the most difficult opponents, of course. Is this the effect you want?

yes it does, not sure what to do about it though, it does seem a bit unbalancing but I am not sure what to do about it. I kinda ran out of ideas.....

-Sravoff

 

[dvvega]

What you are attempting to do here is very similar to the way Rolemaster operates.

You have a total "attack" value, say +150. You then split this into multiple attacks and also defence (if I remember correctly).

However you are not forced to make it an even split, you can decide how much goes where. For off-hand fighting, the same concept applies, however you decide at the start of the attack if you're going to use your off-hand or not. d20 lets you attack once then decide if you're going to go full attack after that.

Ignoring off-hand weapons for now.

You could just add up all your BAB and divide them as you see fit with the following limitations:

1. an attack must have at least +1
2. to calculate your "attack pool" you add up all your BAB's at your current level
3. you may not gain an attack > that your BAB
4. For each attack = BAB, you must pay an extra 5 from your pool.

I would keep the 4 attack limit, however it doesn't really matter unless you're fighting very low AC creatures.

So the 20th level fighter has "attack pool" 50.

- he will ALWAYS get his single attack of +20 (as per normal)
- he can gain a maximum of 2 attacks at +20
- he can get 5 +10 attacks
- he could get 50 +1 attacks (which is obscene and he can mow down AC 16 creatures
- etc.

Now for off-hand weapons you could just use the d20 method and give it the BAB of the first attack then modify for off-hand use etc. It wouldn't change the normal system at all since a two-weapon fighter would get +20 for his off-hand attack if you use the normal system.

Now assuming the fighter has pretty standard modifiers to hit from strength and weapon (+15 I would hazard) then reducing the number of attacks for a higher bonus is going to cause a problem in game balance.

Now most creatures have a high AC for only one reason ... they don't have a gamut of other abilities.

An old red dragon (CR20) has an AC of 33. It has many more abilities than just its AC to rely on. But let us give him a shield spell AND mage armour ... that's an AC 44.

Assume rolls of 10 and the +15 modifiers

Normal Fighter: 45/40/35/30 (hits only once)
Split Fighter: 45/45 (hits twice)

There is a definate advantage to reducing your attacks to get better bonuses. In fact it doubles the effectiveness of the fighter. Which in turn would mean the Dragon's "balance" is thrown out of whack because it is estimated that the dragon should survive for at least 2 rounds (since the fighter can only hit once if using the standard rules).

I personally wouldn't allow this kind of thing in the long term. Yes you can gain extra attacks from Haste, Rapid Shot, and other feats that do just the same as splitting, but if you allow the splitting AND those feats, it gets even more out of whack.

I mentioned the multiple attacks of low BAB against low AC creatures already, but if you limit it to 4 attacks maximum it removes that situation.

D

 

[Sravoff]

Would be simpler to give all characters/monsters/npcs a +120 bonus to every attack roll. this also works with AC problems.

But yes I see how this is quite a problem for warrior type charcters. I was hoping when I made this the rules could some how be balanced enough that flavor would be the deciding factor and not have to change anything in any other books. Sadly that is not the case. So its either reconstruction for taste or bite bullets. In untested theory I liked the idea.......

-Sravoff

 

[TheYeti1775]

Actually for a game rule adjustment, it adds to the roleplaying side more than the mechanics side.
Think about it.
Biff the Fighter, is slugging it out with another fighter. Both have high AC's. Biff decides to throw it all into a few calculated thursts, rather than just wailing away. Remember the point of this is for accuracy not damage. So I think if you add a limitation of Power Attack not working with it. It becomes very viable.

Edit: It really makes your wetwork assassins the deadliest.

 

[Sravoff]

Hmm.. No power attack would make it a bit fairer. Though I am ot sure if its that fair yet. I t all comes down to luck. Wit more attacks you ahve better crit chances, with lower attacks you hit more often, does that balance it?

-Sravoff

 

[TheYeti1775]

So with these restrictions:
No Power Attack usuable with it.
-1d6 if used with a sneak attack, basically one less d6 worth of possible Sneak Attack Damage. This helps prevent over use by the Rogues among us, but not overly punish them unduely.
Added BAB can not exceed the Normal highest BAB. (i.e. A 6th level fighter can not drop his 2nd attack and get a +7 he still maxes out at +6.) He could however make both attacks at +4/+3.
Can not gain attacks from it. (2nd Level Fighter +2 BAB, CAN NOT go +1/+1).
--------------------------
I think I would make it unavailable to Barbarians, or anyone with out Martial Weapon Proficiency. As it would take some amount of training to apply this technique of fighting effectively. This is only a maybe if really overused, possible corrective action making it a feat (Fighter Bonus Listed).

Any other ideas. I think its a very interesting concept for a new fighting style. It's not how many times you swing the bat after all, it's how many times you hit that ball right.

With the above the line restrictions, it might just be balanced enough to have someone test it out in play.