Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CovertOps" data-source="post: 4718543" data-attributes="member: 65152">To respond to this...basically everyone gets a 4e version of "full round attack" with every attack for only the cost of a standard action.  The "multiple attacks" are simply rolled right into the damage that the attack does.  Take for example the Rogue power "Sly Flourish" (or any other class at-will) which does 1[W] + Dex + Cha at 1st level and goes up to 2[W] + Dex + Cha at 21st level.  You also see this in encounter and daily powers as well.  Higher level powers (of the same type - encounter/daily - or at-wills at level 21) do more damage.  The full round attack action IMO was reduced to a single attack roll that just does more damage the higher level you are (at-wills) or the higher level power (encounter/daily) you use.This has 2 effects.  * First is that it reduces the amount of dice rolling you have to perform on your turn which in turn speeds play and keeps players on their toes (hey their turn might be any second now).  * Second it makes fights more mobile.  You no longer have to choose between standing still to get your full attack and moving around in combat if it's needed (everyone just gets one standard, move, and minor action per turn).  This effect makes combat more tactical (and some would argue more interesting).About wielding two weapons:  Everyone seems to be of the mindset (well engrained from 3e) that an extra weapon in your hand equals an extra attack.  Who is to say that this should ever have been the case?  In 1st edition when a combat round was a full minute long you still only got one attack roll in a full minute, but somewhere in the rules it said something about how you would attack/parry/counter many times in a single round, but the one roll you got represented the one clear open shot you got on your opponent.  Somehow over the years a lot of people seem to think that a weapon in your off hand granting an extra attack = realism when in reality it was just a game mechanic.About powers that grant two attack rolls: If you look at them closely you will find that they do less damage per attack than other powers of the same type (at-will / encounter / daily) at the same level.  Example of Ranger twin-strike:  If both swings hit it will do 2[W] damage.  If you hit with one of the other Ranger at-wills you'll do 1[W] + Str so with an 18 Str you're looking at 2d8 for 2 longsword hits or 1d8 + 4 for a total average difference of .5 damage (9 vs 8.5).IMO none of this makes 4e either more or less gamist, it just takes one game mechanic (multiple attacks) and replaces it with another game mechanic (more damage).  If you feel the need you can narrate the effect of any attack that does more damage (such as 2[W]) as multiple attacks.  As for realism...if this is really what you are after there are many other games out there where a single attack can kill your character dead in one swing, but just exactly how much fun is that for the player with a dead PC?  Frankly that is the whole reason that save or die type effects are gone (*mostly) from 4e.  I won't disagree with you that 4e is more gamist than some other game systems, but I won't agree that it is more (or less) gamist than any other edition of the game....just different.</blockquote>

Verification