Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighter attack: extra attacks vs extra damage
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Xeviat" data-source="post: 6754979" data-attributes="member: 57494"><p>I very much supported scaling damage back in the day over scaling attacks. Firstly, scaling damage allows opportunity attacks to remain as threatening in the end game as they are in the beginning of the game. As it stands now, a fighter's opportunity attack (barring sentinel or other effects) hardly matters. Second, there's still ways to make scaling damage work for all the things people have been mentioning here.</p><p></p><p>Lets say instead of getting extra attacks, martial characters just got extra damage dice. Their damage would be reduced, because of not getting the multipliers again. Also, multi attacks flatten out damage expectations, because there's a lower chance of hitting 0 times and doing no damage. That's worth something.</p><p></p><p>The second can be addressed by adding in "on miss" effects, or possibly rerolls. The evoker gets damage on a successful save on their cantrips after all. That would functionally bring up average damage so the lost damage from issue one wouldn't be there, in the averages (the ceiling is still reduced, but the floor is raised).</p><p></p><p>Having scaling damage also leaves room for cool, universal mechanics. Lets say at level 5, fighter attacks go from [W]+Str/Dex to 2[W]+Str/Dex. Lets also say that combat maneuvers are changed so that you can give up 1[W] to add certain effects, like give up 1[W] for adding trip, disarm, or push. What if you could give up 1[W] to attack 2 targets, still allowing for AOE style multiattacks but spreading the damage around (you'll also deal more damage over all to two targets then you would to one target, just like the standard AoE paradigm).</p><p></p><p>And, you get a nice beefy opportunity attack.</p><p></p><p>Doing such modifications would take a lot of work in the system. I'm sad that they didn't go in this direction, as they were flirting with it in the playtest.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Xeviat, post: 6754979, member: 57494"] I very much supported scaling damage back in the day over scaling attacks. Firstly, scaling damage allows opportunity attacks to remain as threatening in the end game as they are in the beginning of the game. As it stands now, a fighter's opportunity attack (barring sentinel or other effects) hardly matters. Second, there's still ways to make scaling damage work for all the things people have been mentioning here. Lets say instead of getting extra attacks, martial characters just got extra damage dice. Their damage would be reduced, because of not getting the multipliers again. Also, multi attacks flatten out damage expectations, because there's a lower chance of hitting 0 times and doing no damage. That's worth something. The second can be addressed by adding in "on miss" effects, or possibly rerolls. The evoker gets damage on a successful save on their cantrips after all. That would functionally bring up average damage so the lost damage from issue one wouldn't be there, in the averages (the ceiling is still reduced, but the floor is raised). Having scaling damage also leaves room for cool, universal mechanics. Lets say at level 5, fighter attacks go from [W]+Str/Dex to 2[W]+Str/Dex. Lets also say that combat maneuvers are changed so that you can give up 1[W] to add certain effects, like give up 1[W] for adding trip, disarm, or push. What if you could give up 1[W] to attack 2 targets, still allowing for AOE style multiattacks but spreading the damage around (you'll also deal more damage over all to two targets then you would to one target, just like the standard AoE paradigm). And, you get a nice beefy opportunity attack. Doing such modifications would take a lot of work in the system. I'm sad that they didn't go in this direction, as they were flirting with it in the playtest. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighter attack: extra attacks vs extra damage
Top