Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 6874906">Possibly, but it wouldn't be that problematic.  Even if GishMonster was a Level 20 Fighter and an Ancient Red Dragon, GishMonster's Fighter levels would only be granting him an extra 5 attacks.  As a potentially what, CR 35+ creature that would give him 8 attacks on his turn.  That's a BIG NUMBER, but it's a bloody CR35+ GishMonster!  For Everyone Else(TM) that means: you and me the player, the best you're going to get is to be a high-level Fighter with lots of extra attacks, or a high-level Druid, with cool beast forms.  Assuming you get to at least level 6 as a Moon Druid so you can take on CR2 monsters who have two attacks, with ALL the rest of your levels as a Fighter you'd only get 2 Extra Attacks, which even if you stacked them, you would only get 4 attacks as a CR2 Saber-Toothed Tiger dealing +6 to hit with 1d6 of damage.  Ooooooo scary! /sarcasmSo even if you stack it, you're unlikely to end up with more attacks than a 16th-level Fighter.  Which is fine.  The Fighter should end up with more attacks than everyone else.  If you're Gishing though, expect the rules to go haywire.No.  Extra Attack feature grants you one additional attack.  You can choose what type of weapon you can attack with, so reasonably for a wild-shaped creature it would do exactly what it says it does: grant one additional attack.  So an Adult Red Dragon who is also a F11 would have 6 attacks, with any of their available attacks (claw/bite/tail, etc..).  I don't see that as a big deal.  I see that as simplicity.  Extra attacks does exactly what the name would suggest: grant additional attacks.  It's not multiplicative, it's linear.Again, Actions, types of actions IS complexity.  Just as molecule to atom to protons/neutrons/electrons to quarks goes from complex to least complex, so does Turn>Action/Move/Bonus/Free, the problem is that 5E stopped at the Atom and then when it realized there was more than just Helium, had to start detailing a dozen different types of Atoms, forgetting that Atoms are all made up of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons.  So instead of producing a simple system wherein you have X protons, Y neutrons and Z electrons to use as you choose on your turn, they produced the Periodic Table of Elements.  It is problematic because not all Elements (the options you can take for your Action) are equally valuable, but as they are all Atoms (Actions) they given equal regard on the Table.  This leads to false and trap choices that may be thematically fitting or fun, but are statistically inferior options and are especially inferior to certain classes who make better use of their Action than others.Eliminating the concept of the "Action" and denoting how much of any given thing you can do on your turn would be simpler, clearer, more uniform and less burdensome to classes that have typically borne the brunt of the negative impact D&D's complexity-creep over the years, in exactl. the same way freeing up movement has done/</blockquote>

Verification