Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Brom Blackforge" data-source="post: 5823389" data-attributes="member: 66019">I never had a problem with iterative attacks, but I can understand why some people complain about them. I suppose you could get essentially the same result by giving attack and damage bonuses instead of additional attacks.&nbsp;I don't have much experience examining the math behind the mechanics, but let's look at a 6th-level 3.x fighter. The base attack bonus at that level is +6, which translates to a 50% chance of hitting AC 17 (10 results of 20 possible) without factoring in Strength or other bonuses. The additional attack at +1 has a 25% chance of hitting the same AC. If I've figured this out right, that additional attack means that there is a 62.5% chance of hitting at least once. So the additional attack could be replaced by an attack bonus of, say, +3 without much change in the overall math. There'd have to be a corresponding damage bonus as well.&nbsp;The only thing lost in this scenario is the opportunity to direct the attacks at different targets.&nbsp;I apologize if I'm repeating something that somebody else already said. I didn't take the time to read the entire thread before posting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Brom Blackforge, post: 5823389, member: 66019"] I never had a problem with iterative attacks, but I can understand why some people complain about them. I suppose you could get essentially the same result by giving attack and damage bonuses instead of additional attacks. I don't have much experience examining the math behind the mechanics, but let's look at a 6th-level 3.x fighter. The base attack bonus at that level is +6, which translates to a 50% chance of hitting AC 17 (10 results of 20 possible) without factoring in Strength or other bonuses. The additional attack at +1 has a 25% chance of hitting the same AC. If I've figured this out right, that additional attack means that there is a 62.5% chance of hitting at least once. So the additional attack could be replaced by an attack bonus of, say, +3 without much change in the overall math. There'd have to be a corresponding damage bonus as well. The only thing lost in this scenario is the opportunity to direct the attacks at different targets. I apologize if I'm repeating something that somebody else already said. I didn't take the time to read the entire thread before posting. [/QUOTE]

Verification