Fighter attack: extra attacks vs extra damage

[dave2008]

I'm never been a big fan of the fighter having 4 attacks (8 w/ surge) and would like to offer my players an option to do more damage instead. For STR fighters I am think max. 2 attacks at 2x damage (4x with surge). Is there any reason not to allow this option. Seems like a simple option, is there any slam eissue I am missing?

 

[jodyjohnson]

I let classes with extra attack do either. It got shot down in the playtest but mostly as a preference, not for balance IMO.

I think it helps thrown weapons and crossbows be more viable without needing feats.

 

[Weathercock]

Well, it's a massive hit to Fighter's consistency. If you have a battlemaster, it'll gut a lot of his available utility in a turn. Additionally, you aren't always going to be fighting at level 20, and won't always have 4 attacks, meaning the 2* modifier wouldn't always work; It also doesn't take into account bonus action and reaction attacks, as well as attacks granted by buffs like Haste. It's also a massive hit to the Great Weapon Master feat, since it lowers the amount of opportunities you have in a turn to get a critical hit (also worth noting, it could also mean more wasted overkill damage).

Generally speaking, cutting down the number of attacks is strictly a nerf, and a heavy one at that, even if the damage doesn't supposedly change.

If you don't like the idea of attacking a lot of times, play a Barbarian or Paladin. Or hell, even a Rogue.

 

[dave2008]

Well, it's a massive hit to Fighter's consistency. If you have a battlemaster, it'll gut a lot of his available utility in a turn. Additionally, you aren't always going to be fighting at level 20, and won't always have 4 attacks, meaning the 2* modifier wouldn't always work; It also doesn't take into account bonus action and reaction attacks, as well as attacks granted by buffs like Haste. It's also a massive hit to the Great Weapon Master feat, since it lowers the amount of opportunities you have in a turn to get a critical hit (also worth noting, it could also mean more wasted overkill damage).

Generally speaking, cutting down the number of attacks is strictly a nerf, and a heavy one at that, even if the damage doesn't supposedly change.

If you don't like the idea of attacking a lot of times, play a Barbarian or Paladin. Or hell, even a Rogue.

Thanks for the input, those are good things to consider. i'm not interested in other classes, I'm a DM not a player anyway. So any suggestions for balancing it out? Here are my first thoughts:
2x damage instead of 2 attacks
2x damage + extra attack instead of 3 attacks
2x damage on 2 attacks instead of 4 attacks
Action surge always doubles damage (on top of any doubling of damage identified above)
No change to reactions and bonus actions
Maybe add more surges to increase damage in place of consistency?

 

[dave2008]

I let classes with extra attack do either. It got shot down in the playtest but mostly as a preference, not for balance IMO.

I think it helps thrown weapons and crossbows be more viable without needing feats.

Thank yo for the feedback. Glad to hear you have had success with it.

 

[the Jester]

If you're going to make action surge only double damage instead of an extra action, that's a HUGE nerf. As it is, a fighter can move in, attack and disengage; or dash in and attack; or even attack and cast a spell. Heck, he can also Dash and Disengage in the same round to sprint past all the lackeys and fight the BBEG next round.

 

[dave2008]

If you're going to make action surge only double damage instead of an extra action, that's a HUGE nerf. As it is, a fighter can move in, attack and disengage; or dash in and attack; or even attack and cast a spell. Heck, he can also Dash and Disengage in the same round to sprint past all the lackeys and fight the BBEG next round.

Another good point, thank you for posting. Any suggestions for making it more balanced. Maybe action surge is an option, 2x damage or grant another action? Is there a good way to compensate the lost flexibility if we get rid of the extra action complete? Maybe 2x damage and +4 AC while taking the move action on that turn?

 

[Celebrim]

The ability to make multiple attacks in a turn is how fighters make up for not making area of effect attacks. While a single damaging blow versus many smaller blows might be preferred (purely for speed of play) when engaging a single target, whenever you are facing a field of mooks of some sort, its much better to have the versatility of dividing up your damage among many targets.

If you get rid of multiple attacks, you'll need to add sweep and cleave type maneuvers that let the fighter with a single attack engage multiple enemies.

 

[dave2008]

The ability to make multiple attacks in a turn is how fighters make up for not making area of effect attacks. While a single damaging blow versus many smaller blows might be preferred (purely for speed of play) when engaging a single target, whenever you are facing a field of mooks of some sort, its much better to have the versatility of dividing up your damage among many targets.

If you get rid of multiple attacks, you'll need to add sweep and cleave type maneuvers that let the fighter with a single attack engage multiple enemies.

Good point and suggestion - I can add those. I believe there are recommendations for cleave in the DMG.

 

[Weathercock]

...i'm not interested in other classes...

Why aren't you/your player(s) interested in other classes, exactly? What you want is almost exactly what Barbarian and Paladin offer. You're skipping over classes that do exactly what you want to do. And it's not like Fighter is a class that's built around a lot of unique storytelling abilities either.