Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TwoSix" data-source="post: 7619848" data-attributes="member: 205">That's not bad.&nbsp; It puts the &quot;+mod on BA attacks&quot; back into feat territory, to go along with PAM and XBE.&nbsp; Moving the -X/+Y into a separate feat would make it so you need 2 feats for every combination of -X/+Y and a reliable BA attack, which is appealing.&nbsp; (PAM/GWM, SS/XBE, DW/New feat)Maybe for the scaling bonus, do something that gives a die bonus, rather than a flat increase?&nbsp; A die bonus makes it more interesting for rangers, and attractive for a rogue dip.&nbsp; Something like &quot;When you make an attack while wielding a one-handed weapon in each hand, treat any 1 you roll as the maximum result instead.&quot;&nbsp; That gives a (N-1/N) increase per die, or slightly less than 1 per die.Edit:&nbsp; Just checking the difference between PAM and this DW feat idea for Barbarians and Fighters, they're equal DPR in the 2 attack/1 BA scenario for barbarians w/o styles.&nbsp; GWM is still better then both on its own, though, unless accuracy is really low.&nbsp; I liked my idea, but I have to say this idea is pretty elegant too.&nbsp; The imbalance between different fighting styles is almost entirely driven by feats, so using feats to fix it makes sense.Edit2:&nbsp; Missed a major point there...the BA attack needs to scale in a featless game.&nbsp; Maybe that would be the place to add the follow-up on a miss rule?&nbsp; Might be too strong.&nbsp; Have to check.Edit3:&nbsp; Nah, that doesn't solve the &quot;how to make the BA worthwhile&quot; aspect.&nbsp; Hmm.&nbsp; Maybe this:&nbsp; &quot;While wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, your bonus action attack does +2 damage for every attack you've made that has hit this turn.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TwoSix, post: 7619848, member: 205"] That's not bad. It puts the "+mod on BA attacks" back into feat territory, to go along with PAM and XBE. Moving the -X/+Y into a separate feat would make it so you need 2 feats for every combination of -X/+Y and a reliable BA attack, which is appealing. (PAM/GWM, SS/XBE, DW/New feat) Maybe for the scaling bonus, do something that gives a die bonus, rather than a flat increase? A die bonus makes it more interesting for rangers, and attractive for a rogue dip. Something like "When you make an attack while wielding a one-handed weapon in each hand, treat any 1 you roll as the maximum result instead." That gives a (N-1/N) increase per die, or slightly less than 1 per die. Edit: Just checking the difference between PAM and this DW feat idea for Barbarians and Fighters, they're equal DPR in the 2 attack/1 BA scenario for barbarians w/o styles. GWM is still better then both on its own, though, unless accuracy is really low. I liked my idea, but I have to say this idea is pretty elegant too. The imbalance between different fighting styles is almost entirely driven by feats, so using feats to fix it makes sense. Edit2: Missed a major point there...the BA attack needs to scale in a featless game. Maybe that would be the place to add the follow-up on a miss rule? Might be too strong. Have to check. Edit3: Nah, that doesn't solve the "how to make the BA worthwhile" aspect. Hmm. Maybe this: "While wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, your bonus action attack does +2 damage for every attack you've made that has hit this turn." [/QUOTE]

Verification