D&D 4E "How to play 4E now"

[Branduil]

One problem with removing iterative attacks AND giving all classes AC defense: You'd have to add a LOT of damage to each attack to make up for the damage from the lost attacks.

For instance, let's assume we have a normal 3.5 fighter. He'll probably be able to hit the enemy about 100%(actually 95) of the time on the first attack, 75% on the second, then 50%, and 25%. For damage, if he has a greatsword, and 25 STR, he'll do, on average, 7(2d6)+10(Str bonus)+5(magic wepon)+7(2d6 special magic weapon abilities like flaming or freezing)+4(Greater Weapon Spec.)=33. Adding his iterative attacks, he should do about 2.45 his average damage on each of his full attacks. That's an average of 80.85 damage each round.

If you remove iterative attacks, and make it less likely for the fighter to hit the enemy, so his first(and only) attack hits 75% of the time, even if you give him half his level in damage bonus, that's still just 43x0.75= 32.25 average damage each round. It will take a lot longer to defeat some enemies this way.

Also, changes like this really favor the Rogue since he would likely be using Spring Attack for one attack each round anyway.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

Defenses:

Fortitude = 10 + Class Bonus + Level + Con Bonus + Magical Bonus + Miscellaneous Bonus (Armor)

Reflex = 10 + Class Bonus + Level + Dex Bonus + Magical Bonus + Miscellaneous Bonus (Shield)

Will = 10 + Class Bonus + Level + Wis Bonus + Magical Bonus + Miscellaneous Bonus

Class Bonuses:
Fighter +2 Fort, +1 Reflex
Cleric +2 Will, +1 Fort
Ranger +2 Reflex, +1 Will
Warlord +1 Fort/Reflex/Will
Rogue +1 Fort/Reflex/Will
Paladin +1 Will, +2 Fort
Wizard +2 Will, +1 Reflex
Sorcerer/Warlock +1 Will, +2 Reflex

Damage Bonus to all attacks equal 1/2 BAB or MAB

 

[Plane Sailing]

I prefer Morrus' version-- +1d6 instead of the iterative attack. This retains that "big bump" sense of accomplishment.

I prefer the smoother gradation - the bump is purely an artifact of the choices made with multiple attacks at that point and it makes an arbitrarily huge difference between a 5th and a 6th level fighter. I hope they ditch it for something smoother.

I look forward to seeing weapon differentiation largely on the basis of the tricks that people can learn with specific weapons, rather than innate stuff inherent to the weapon. Personal preference.

 

[Plane Sailing]

One problem with removing iterative attacks AND giving all classes AC defense: You'd have to add a LOT of damage to each attack to make up for the damage from the lost attacks.

They did the maths for Star Wars and were happy enough with it. I think that adding half level to all attacks is a pretty good equivalent (especially if you allow double attack and triple attack feats as described above, which are good for mook clearing - the equivalent of landing that third and fourth attack in iterative attacks, since they rarely hit equivalent foes anyway)

 

[Branduil]

They did the maths for Star Wars and were happy enough with it. I think that adding half level to all attacks is a pretty good equivalent (especially if you allow double attack and triple attack feats as described above, which are good for mook clearing - the equivalent of landing that third and fourth attack in iterative attacks, since they rarely hit equivalent foes anyway)

Well I'm sure it does work in Star Wars, and probably 4e too. I'm just saying that if you use it in 3.5, you'll have to account for the fact that it will probably take much longer to kill certain foes.

 

[nightspaladin]

Did some math on a 20th level fighter with a longsword versus a balor. just picked balor out of my head as the typical super villian

AC 35

Fighter in 3.5
25 strength +8
+5 Sword +5
Greater Weapon Focus +2
+20 Bab +20

total of +35 to hit

so the attacks are 35/30/25/20

Assuming average rolls, in this case we will say he rolls a 10 every roll, the first 3 attacks hit. Damage is as follows 1d8 +5 +8 +4(weapon specialization) for 1d8 +17. Average per hit of around 23. So for these 3 hits assume he inflicts 69 points of damage

Now let's look at the saga fighter.

Same to hit numbers a total of +35

With the triple attack feat he gets 3 attacks at -10 to all, so they go to +25/+25/+25. assuming he gets 10 on each roll as before, he also hits three times. Look at the damage change though

1d8 Long Sword
+5 Magic
+8 Strength
+10 Level damage
+4 Weapon Spec

He does 1d8 +27 a swing, for an average of 33 a shot. He hits for 99 in this volley.

30 Extra points on an average volley. That's not that shabby and these quick characters are by no means optimized for maximum output.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I prefer the smoother gradation - the bump is purely an artifact of the choices made with multiple attacks at that point and it makes an arbitrarily huge difference between a 5th and a 6th level fighter. I hope they ditch it for something smoother.

I look forward to seeing weapon differentiation largely on the basis of the tricks that people can learn with specific weapons, rather than innate stuff inherent to the weapon. Personal preference.

I considered replacing extra attacks with attack rerolls. You may reroll once per attack after the 1st, but must keep the reroll result. (Similar to many Saga skill abilities)
I am not sure how balanced this would be compared to the current rules..

 

[Baby Samurai]

-Withdraw is a move action.

-Charge is a standard action.

-No 5 ft. step.

-No critical confirmation rolls (automatically critical on a natural 20).

-Half character level as bonus to damage.

-No iterative attacks (replaced with feats such as Double Attack, Triple Attack, Cleave, Whirlwind Attack etc).

-Saves become Defences = 10 + half CL + class bonus (fighter +2 to Fort, Bard +2 to Ref and Will etc) + ability modifier.

-AC = 10 + half CL + Dex + armour + shield (no amulets of natural armour or rings of deflection)

-2 x Str bonus when wielding a weapon 2-handed.

-1 x Str on damage with off-hand.

-Buff spells last only the encounter.

-Concealment -2 to hit.

-Total concealment -5 to hit.

-Any -4 modifier (shooting into melee, large size grapple bonus, Mobility AC bonus ect) is -5.

-Casters and manifesters only have 1/4 of their total spells/power points, but a portion of these (pp = to manifester level plus ability modifier, spells = one level of spells per encounter) can be refreshed by taking a full round action that provokes an AoO.

 

[nightspaladin]

Ok I have a concern. I know how to do caster based rolls, but how do you convert existing traps and special abilities that list a static dc. For instance, say a module I am playing on running has a dc 14 trap, would it be best to just subtract 10 from it and make the traps' attack +4 to the roll to beat the party's defense? or is there another calculation that people are thinking is better?

 

[Baby Samurai]

For instance, say a module I am playing on running has a dc 14 trap, would it be best to just subtract 10 from it and make the traps' attack +4 to the roll to beat the party's defense?

Yes.