Initiative order & multiple attacks.

[Whimsical]

So if you get 4 attacks in a round, and you hit an opponent with all 4 attacks, doing enough damage to drop him below 0 HP, then he doesn't get to attack you at all in that round? That doesn't make sense to me.

That's why in the surprise round you are limited to only one attack.

So, just make sure your combats start with a surprise round, then everyone gets a chance to attack before dying.

If I understand correctly, in 4e D&D, everyone will only get one attack each round.

 

[ElectricDragon]

Then aren't you also so skilled that, assuming you're surrounded by enough weak opponents, you should be able to make 24 attacks within 6 seconds?

If you have the feat, Great Cleave, then this is possible.

Ciao
Dave

 

[irdeggman]

So if you get 4 attacks in a round, and you hit an opponent with all 4 attacks, doing enough damage to drop him below 0 HP, then he doesn't get to attack you at all in that round? That doesn't make sense to me. I thought that a round of combat equated to 6 seconds, and EVERYONE's turn for that round happens during that 6 second span. If you are skilled enough to make 4 attacks during those 6 seconds, they happen at a rate that is more or less evenly distributed throughout that span, meaning that your 4th attack would come around the 5th or 6th second. In that case, if you have better initiative, you should strike first, but your opponent should also be able to strike during the round and before you make all of your attacks, assuming your 1st attack doesn't kill him.

Don't go down that path it leads to madness, madness I say.

The very next question and I do mean the very next question that will be asked is what about weapon speed?

I mean why should someone wielding a great sword not have a penalty on when in the round he attacks when compared to someone wielding a dagger.

Weapon speeds were an inherent part of the formula you are talking about and were "dropped" in 3.X.


In D&D combat is very, very abstract. That is the one premise that has to be understood when looking at how combat works - if you don't you will be totally lost and confused.

 

[Herzog]

Well, what about weapon speed?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Herzog

 

[Infiniti2000]

Well, what about weapon speed?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Herzog

Try this rant by Sean K. Reynolds:

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/weaponspeeds.html

 

[Elethiomel]

Well, what about weapon speed?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Herzog

Weapon speed is a factor that pales in comparison to weapon reach. If I was holding a greatsword and you were holding a dagger, the dagger might be easier to move around, but you wouldn't get near enough to me to use it without suffering an attack from my greatsword. That's assuming we're both aware of each other and in an open field.

Now, that's only one out of a *myriad* of factors you have to consider if you want to create a "realistic" combat system. Combat would turn into the slowest slog you could imagine if you wanted to make it "realistic".

 

[Olaf the Stout]

So if you get 4 attacks in a round, and you hit an opponent with all 4 attacks, doing enough damage to drop him below 0 HP, then he doesn't get to attack you at all in that round? That doesn't make sense to me. I thought that a round of combat equated to 6 seconds, and EVERYONE's turn for that round happens during that 6 second span. If you are skilled enough to make 4 attacks during those 6 seconds, they happen at a rate that is more or less evenly distributed throughout that span, meaning that your 4th attack would come around the 5th or 6th second. In that case, if you have better initiative, you should strike first, but your opponent should also be able to strike during the round and before you make all of your attacks, assuming your 1st attack doesn't kill him.

D&D does not equal realism. The sooner you accept this, the less the logical part of your brain hurts when you read the rules.

On a slightly more serious note, yes your opponent probably should get at least 1 attack in before you get all 4 of yours. However, by the 3.5E D&D rules they don't. You can change it if you want in your game but it would be a house rule.

Olaf the Stout

 

[doosler]

On a slightly more serious note, yes your opponent probably should get at least 1 attack in before you get all 4 of yours. However, by the 3.5E D&D rules they don't. You can change it if you want in your game but it would be a house rule.

Olaf the Stout

I am in the process of writing an adventure/campaign to put some friends through. I don't know the official rules well enough to follow them religiously. I plan on developing a lot of house rules as I go along. Hopefully things will remain consistent. I am not sure exactly how I will handle combat, but I can tell you one thing for sure: No one is making 4 attacks on an enemy in a single round without the enemy having a chance to make a single attack on them.

 

[Deekin]

I am in the process of writing an adventure/campaign to put some friends through. I don't know the official rules well enough to follow them religiously. I plan on developing a lot of house rules as I go along. Hopefully things will remain consistent. I am not sure exactly how I will handle combat, but I can tell you one thing for sure: No one is making 4 attacks on an enemy in a single round without the enemy having a chance to make a single attack on them.

That can't happen unless both sides start next to each other and both are aware of starting combat at the same time.

 

[Ranger REG]

A basic one, but it needs clearing up.
I'm in combat against four orcs. I have two attacks. The orcs each have just one.
Now, say I win initiative. I go first in the round.
Am I supposed to make both my attacks at once, or make one, then the orcs make theirs, then I make my next one. What if one of the orcs (orc 1) also has two attacks, and he comes next in initiative order. Does it go me, me, orc 1, orc 1, orc 2, orc 3, orc 4? Or does it go me, orc 1, orc 2, orc 3, orc 4, me, orc 1?
I know it's not as complicated as it used to be (hence the joke: "No, no, I attack you, then you attack me, then I attack you twice...) but I think it needs a bit of clarification.

It's clear and simple

When your turn comes up, and you're capable of making multiple attacks, you can choose to resolve them all. You don't resolve everybody's first attacks, and then second attacks, etc.

Just remember that making multiple attacks is a full-round action.