Fighting Offensively (Recklessly)

[Technik4]

New Combat Action (to parallel Fighting Defensively).

Fighting Offensively (Recklessly): You can choose to fight offensively when taking the attack action. If you do so, you take a -4 penalty to all attacks in a round to gain a +2 damage bonus for the same round.
Special: A character executing a charge gains +3 damage when fighting offensively instead of a +2 damage bonus.
Special: A character with the Improved Bull Rush feat gains +3 damage when fighting offensively instead of a +2 damage bonus. If that character is also charging the bonus rises to +4 damage.

Would you let your characters take this action in combat? It seems like an interesting way to let characters who are angry get some extra power behind their attacks, without having power attack (and its clearly not as good as power attack).

Technik

 

[Nifft]

The Charge action and a Barbarian's Rage ability are both "reckless", and they both lower the character's AC by -2.

Reckless Fighting should have an AC penalty instead of a to-hit penalty. In fact, perhaps it should be the exact parallel of Fighting Defensively: -4 AC, +2 Attack.

-- Nifft

 

[aurance]

In fact, perhaps it should be the exact parallel of Fighting Defensively: -4 AC, +2 Attack.

There's a feat exactly like that in Unapproachable East, called "Reckless Offensive". I don't see a problem with just making it a straight-up combat option with no feat required.

-A

 

[Knight-of-Roses]

Originally posted by aurance I don't see a problem with just making it a straight-up combat option with no feat required.

Agreed, if you are in a situation where you really need the extra damage and are willing to take the AC penalty. Go for it. Especially good for breaking down doors, unless somebody is waiting on the other side of course . . .

 

[seasong]

I'd go with penalizing AC, also. As it stands, a calculator is required to determine whether or not this will increase your average damage.

That, and if you have to roll a natural 20 to hit, you should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS take this option - you still have to roll a natural 20, so there's no downside. That's not very reckless, you know?

 

[seasong]

By the way, Technik4, I haven't told you how much you rock recently - I've been going through my old house rule threads where I discuss this or that idea of mine, and you're in every single one with a critique or helpful comment.

So thanks. You rock.

 

[Technik4]

*Blush* No prob Seasong, what can I say, I like a lot of your ideas. I do generally try and get on the house rule forum the most, helping (or at least giving my opinion) anyone posting things.

As for this combat option, it was meant to be a parallel between power attack -> ______ with expertise -> fighting defensively being the inspiration.

I of course can see where an AC penalty makes more sense. I also think I should restrict it to melee weapons. Unfortunately I don't have Unapproachable East (only FR book for 3e I dont have actually) so I didn't realize there was a feat similar to it (besides power attack of course).

As far as it always being useful against an AC 20, thats true to an extent. First of all, how do you *know* youre only going to hit on a 20, secondly even if you have seen through play that youre gonna need a 20, a "reckless" attack could lead you to be disarmed, sundered against, or tripped more easily, whereas an AC penalty would only make you easier to hit/grapple. Personally I think both are representative of a "reckless" action, but the most utility comes with using this in conjunction with a charge (the charge allows you to trade -2 attack for -2 AC, an interesting residue of this design).

Vs AC 20

Reckless Offensive: -4 Attack, +2 Damage
Reckless Offensive + Charge: -2 Attack, -2 AC, +3 Damage
(And having Improved Overun gives you an additional point of damage if you charge).


Both are useful. I think I need something else when using Reckless Offensive and not charging to deter using it whenever "you aren't going to hit anyway", which isn't the intention of the action (although as an aside, using Expertise + Fighting Defensively + Tumble Ranks is useful if you know you can get your AC high enough that the enemy will only be able to hit you on a 20, does this comparison change things?).

Thanks for the comments so far, and if someone wouldn't mind reprinting the feat from UE, I'd like to compare it.

Technik

 

[DreamChaser]

so what you're thinking is a lesser Power AttacK?

This seems less reckless and more aggressive.

DC

 

[Technik4]

Well it was originally called "Fighting Offensively" (and still may end up being called that). The idea is that you are trying to do more damage, and your swing is therefore more "reckless". For instance, you may swing right at your enemy's breastplate, knowing that it may end up deflecting your attack, but you are swinging with greater force than usual, hence more damage.

Other options are to base it on your Strength score (so the stronger you are, the more damaging your attack becomes) but I like it better simpler.

Technik

 

[seasong]

-4 to attack
+2 to hit

Rules of thumb for the PC munchkin:
1. NEVER use this if your damage roll averages 8+, unless you can only hit on a 20.
2. NEVER use this if you need a 16-18 to hit.
3. ALWAYS use this if you need a 20 to hit.
4. If the above does not apply to you (7 or less damage, and you either need a 2-15 to hit, or a 19 to hit), use the following chart. It should cover all of your options. If it says "N", that means NO DON'T USE THIS; if it says "Y", that means YES.

[color=skyblue]AVG     Need a ... to hit
DMG     2   3-4 5-6 7-8 9-11    12-13   14-15   16-18   19  20
1       Y   Y   Y   Y   Y       Y       Y       N       Y   Y
2       Y   Y   Y   Y   Y       Y       N       N       N   Y
3       Y   Y   Y   Y   Y       N       N       N       N   Y
4       Y   Y   Y   Y   N       N       N       N       N   Y
5       Y   Y   Y   N   N       N       N       N       N   Y
6       Y   Y   N   N   N       N       N       N       N   Y
7       Y   N   N   N   N       N       N       N       N   Y
8+      N   N   N   N   N       N       N       N       N   Y[/color]