Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: New Packet Hits This Wednesday
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chris_Nightwing" data-source="post: 6103981" data-attributes="member: 882"><p>A quick thought on how multiple attacks might work without dramatically increasing damage when you acquire an additional attack. Let's assume that they also move towards weapon dice affecting your damage output, rather than having martial damage dice explicitly. So, at first level you get 1[W], and that might increase every few levels until it reaches some maximum. Along side this, independently, you might have a maximum number of attacks, starting at 1 (+1 with two weapon fighting) and also increasing every few levels until it reaches some maximum.</p><p></p><p>If we take an imaginary mid-level character who has a maximum of 2 attacks per action and 4[W] damage. There are several ways you could dictate how multiple attacks work, but I will discount that each attack does your 4[W] damage, since that does provide the dramatic increase in output mentioned above. You could declare before each attack how many [W] you are committing to that attack, roll and deal damage if you hit - I think this would be a little slow though as people have to assess likelihood to hit, toughness of target and so on each time they want to attack. You could declare *after* each attack how many [W] you are committing to that attack, roll and then choose how much damage you will deal - this still requires you to think about toughness of target, but less about your chance to hit. Now, that might be a bit too generous - you miss once, but there's no penalty other than you must commit all your damage to your remaining attack, which is no great loss against a single target. So, a small penalty might be that you lose 1[W] damage for each attack you miss. Multiple targets? You have the flexibility to attack different enemies, and you can divide the damage up on the fly. Single target? You're encouraged to commit all your damage if you hit first time, but if you *don't* then you get another chance.</p><p></p><p>I think a simple system like this would make martial-oriented classes have much more impact in combat. Not only will they be able to slice up multiple enemies with a single action, but they are *very* good against single targets, as their damage is made less all-or-nothing. The progression in damage output would also be smoother - no sudden doubling, with the most dramatic increase appearing when you get your second attack - though this would be an average increase, the maximum would not change.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chris_Nightwing, post: 6103981, member: 882"] A quick thought on how multiple attacks might work without dramatically increasing damage when you acquire an additional attack. Let's assume that they also move towards weapon dice affecting your damage output, rather than having martial damage dice explicitly. So, at first level you get 1[W], and that might increase every few levels until it reaches some maximum. Along side this, independently, you might have a maximum number of attacks, starting at 1 (+1 with two weapon fighting) and also increasing every few levels until it reaches some maximum. If we take an imaginary mid-level character who has a maximum of 2 attacks per action and 4[W] damage. There are several ways you could dictate how multiple attacks work, but I will discount that each attack does your 4[W] damage, since that does provide the dramatic increase in output mentioned above. You could declare before each attack how many [W] you are committing to that attack, roll and deal damage if you hit - I think this would be a little slow though as people have to assess likelihood to hit, toughness of target and so on each time they want to attack. You could declare *after* each attack how many [W] you are committing to that attack, roll and then choose how much damage you will deal - this still requires you to think about toughness of target, but less about your chance to hit. Now, that might be a bit too generous - you miss once, but there's no penalty other than you must commit all your damage to your remaining attack, which is no great loss against a single target. So, a small penalty might be that you lose 1[W] damage for each attack you miss. Multiple targets? You have the flexibility to attack different enemies, and you can divide the damage up on the fly. Single target? You're encouraged to commit all your damage if you hit first time, but if you *don't* then you get another chance. I think a simple system like this would make martial-oriented classes have much more impact in combat. Not only will they be able to slice up multiple enemies with a single action, but they are *very* good against single targets, as their damage is made less all-or-nothing. The progression in damage output would also be smoother - no sudden doubling, with the most dramatic increase appearing when you get your second attack - though this would be an average increase, the maximum would not change. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L: New Packet Hits This Wednesday
Top