D&D 5E Doing away with Extra Attack

[doctorbadwolf]

I can’t speak to new gamers, but I bet the sentiment against such a move would be strong with veteran D&D players. I know some who get annoyed with the lack of extra attacks in other systems.

It's not just veteran players. I never actually liked the system of DnD until 4e, I just liked the worlds and character concepts, and no one I knew played anything else that was the same kind of fantasy.

But even back in the day, I didn't like not being able to make a character who attacked more frequently than other characters, even if at a loss of damage per attack.

 

[Flamestrike]

If extra attack (and every iteration for fighters) instead added [+weapon dice] damage to melee weapon attacks you'd probably be roughly in the sweet spot.

Shift Extra attack to 17th level for Fighters and give them a new capstone.

You deal slightly less damage on average, but it removes the problems with GWF, Sharpshooter and smites (only useable now once per round - and with 1 attack missing due to the -5 sucks more) but things like reaction attacks hit a lot harder to make up for it (making Fighters stickier).

TWF instead adds the damage dice of the off hand weapon to your main hand weapon damage as a bonus action maybe?

Ballpark.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

If extra attack (and every iteration for fighters) instead added [+weapon dice] damage to melee weapon attacks you'd probably be roughly in the sweet spot.

Shift Extra attack to 17th level for Fighters and give them a new capstone.

You deal slightly less damage on average, but it removes the problems with GWF, Sharpshooter and smites (only useable now once per round - and with 1 attack missing due to the -5 sucks more) but things like reaction attacks hit a lot harder to make up for it (making Fighters stickier).

TWF instead adds the damage dice of the off hand weapon to your main hand weapon damage as a bonus action maybe?

Ballpark.

But wouldnt it be a little unfair for martial since cantrip auto-scale to 4dX? Your classes with only 1 extra attack would still be dealing 2dX + mod at level 17 when the casters will be slinging 4d10 firebolt.

I dont do math, maybe its still in favor of martial? When you factor things like Rage, Improved Smite and Hunter's Mark/HUnter's Multiattacks?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

If extra attack (and every iteration for fighters) instead added [+weapon dice] damage to melee weapon attacks you'd probably be roughly in the sweet spot.

Shift Extra attack to 17th level for Fighters and give them a new capstone.

You deal slightly less damage on average, but it removes the problems with GWF, Sharpshooter and smites (only useable now once per round - and with 1 attack missing due to the -5 sucks more) but things like reaction attacks hit a lot harder to make up for it (making Fighters stickier).

TWF instead adds the damage dice of the off hand weapon to your main hand weapon damage as a bonus action maybe?

Ballpark.

You would need much higher scaling than that to even approach the ballpark.

Remember that Extra Attack is not designed to keep up with casters when they are throwing cantrips. It is designed to exceed the damage (at the cost of utility) of casters over the course of the day including when they are throwing fireballs instead of cantrips.

Look at Rogues: They have inbuilt scaling that is several times higher than your suggestion, and they are considerably less combat-focused than Fighters are.
Adding a flat +d6 damage/level for fighters in exchange for Extra attack might be closer to a ballpark figure. (If not perhaps practical.)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Remember that Extra Attack is not designed to keep up with casters when they are throwing cantrips. It is designed to exceed the damage (at the cost of utility) of casters over the course of the day including when they are throwing fireballs instead of cantrips.

Approximately. The idea is that Extra Attack will be /better/ than cantrips, but not as good as spells, in terms of overall damage throughput (not exactly DPR, but close enough). So, in a long enough 'day' with long enough combats (in rounds), there will be enough rounds where the caster resorts to cantrips, that his overall contribution for the day comes down to - and eventually, if the day is even longer - falls behind, that of the Extra-Attacker.

Assuming an Extra Attacker who doesn't also cast spells, or have a limited-use resource like Rage or CS dice or Ki or whatever...

...so Prettymuch just the Champion.

 

[FrogReaver]

I like extra attacks. But there is a limit. I also hate being limited to a single non-scaling reaction attack off turn.

 

[TwoSix]

But wouldnt it be a little unfair for martial since cantrip auto-scale to 4dX? Your classes with only 1 extra attack would still be dealing 2dX + mod at level 17 when the casters will be slinging 4d10 firebolt.

I dont do math, maybe its still in favor of martial? When you factor things like Rage, Improved Smite and Hunter's Mark/HUnter's Multiattacks?

I'm not sure if they're still ahead, but they definitely lose a decent amount of damage. The paladins loses 1d8+stat at 11, and the barbarian loses 3+stat, and the fighter loses 2xstat. Making GWM/SS and smites be less valuable is probably a good thing from a game design perspective, but it's still a solid nerf to martial attacks.

You'd probably want to nerf cantrips, and especially Eldritch Blast in such a paradigm.

 

[Xeviat]

So, to make it clear, weapon attacks would scale like cantrips, AND the weapon classes would get class abilities at their extra attack points to keep their damage on par. Giving the fighter some extra to hit and damage makes it easy to keep them up with their damage. The paladin works out if you start giving them 1d8 radiant damage at 5th and again at 11th.

But, the talk about people feeling less willing to give up damage to do riders is something I'm hearing. I figured it would be that way a bit, but that's just to add spice. Dealing less damage to one target in order to target multiple targets is how extra attack works now, and my scaling would be more favorable, so I think that would be a net gain.

I don't have my docs with me, but what I was looking at was something like a 5th level character is doing 2[w]+stat+class riders. There is a basic extra attack maneuver that reduces that by 1W, but now you can target to targets. It would be a net gain.

Just, you wouldn't rain down multiple attacks against a single target. Magic items would need to be adjusted.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

So, to make it clear, weapon attacks would scale like cantrips...

This got me thinking of spells that have multiple attacks: Eldritch blast (at lvl 5 & higher), Magic Missile, Jim's Magic Missile, Scorching Ray. [MOVIE TRAILER VOICE]In a world where high level fighters only get 1 attack per round [/MOVIE TRAILER VOICE], would these spells also need to be transformed to match that paradigm?

 

[Xeviat]

This got me thinking of spells that have multiple attacks: Eldritch blast (at lvl 5 & higher), Magic Missile, Jim's Magic Missile, Scorching Ray. [MOVIE TRAILER VOICE]In a world where high level fighters only get 1 attack per round [/MOVIE TRAILER VOICE], would these spells also need to be transformed to match that paradigm?

Eldritch Blast definitely. Hex/Hunters mark may get changes and deal more dice at higher levels to compensate for the lost extra attacks. Not sure about Scorching Ray. Magic missile doesn't have attack rolls so I'd leave it as is. Not sure how Darkmagic's magic missile differs.