Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 4821213" data-attributes="member: 43283">Sorry, it sorta seemed to me like ValhallaGH was implying/suggesting that.Well, I didn't mean &quot;sacred cow&quot; necessarily in the sense that &quot;we can't change Iterative Attacks&quot;; you've got a decent sounding change suggested. I meant it more in the sense of &quot;we need to keep Iterative Attacks&quot;.That's what I'm unsure about. It seems to be a foregone conclusion that they should be kept, as well as that they need to be modified instead of being kept in their current form.I'm just trying to figure out why they need to be kept is all. The reason for keeping them might suggest an alternative approach. Does that make sense? I feel like I'm kinda off to one side in the dark here and missing something that everyone else knows and takes for granted.Are they being kept because without them Fighters become more of a chump class to take? (I say this being a guy that usually plays Fighters in 3.x)Are they being kept because ever since Rules Cyclopedia (and the Weapon Mastery) there's been a form of Iterative Attacks?Apparently it's not because of monster stat inflation.Some other reason I'm missing? Iterative Attacks _do_ something; they're included in the game for a reason. As they stand they're not working, or they could be made to work a better way.If I could figure out what they're doing in the first place, it'd be easier for me to say &quot;Yeah, this option rocks!&quot; or &quot;What about doing [whatever] instead?&quot;Errrr... these look the same to me. Am I missing something else?Sorry for being the slow person in the thread... I'll go back and drool quietly in the corner while I wait.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scurvy_Platypus, post: 4821213, member: 43283"] Sorry, it sorta seemed to me like ValhallaGH was implying/suggesting that. Well, I didn't mean "sacred cow" necessarily in the sense that "we can't change Iterative Attacks"; you've got a decent sounding change suggested. I meant it more in the sense of "we need to keep Iterative Attacks". That's what I'm unsure about. It seems to be a foregone conclusion that they should be kept, as well as that they need to be modified instead of being kept in their current form. I'm just trying to figure out why they need to be kept is all. The reason for keeping them might suggest an alternative approach. Does that make sense? I feel like I'm kinda off to one side in the dark here and missing something that everyone else knows and takes for granted. Are they being kept because without them Fighters become more of a chump class to take? (I say this being a guy that usually plays Fighters in 3.x) Are they being kept because ever since Rules Cyclopedia (and the Weapon Mastery) there's been a form of Iterative Attacks? Apparently it's not because of monster stat inflation. Some other reason I'm missing? Iterative Attacks _do_ something; they're included in the game for a reason. As they stand they're not working, or they could be made to work a better way. If I could figure out what they're doing in the first place, it'd be easier for me to say "Yeah, this option rocks!" or "What about doing [whatever] instead?" Errrr... these look the same to me. Am I missing something else? Sorry for being the slow person in the thread... I'll go back and drool quietly in the corner while I wait. [/QUOTE]

Verification