No Iterative Attacks in D&D

[Matrix Sorcica]

I think I agree that adding BAB (my Variant II) is the best way to go, but I want to hear what Sorcica thinks.

Undecided.... But if I have to choose, I think I'd go for variant II.
I think my decision will be based on whether it takes a full attack or not to get the damage bonus. And I'm totally undecided on that

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

But what I'm thinking is give +(half the level) to any weapon damage (like the saga edition) and multiply the base damage by (1/5 of the bab) if full attack, so:
Melee +5 greatsword +35 (10d6+31 crit 17) – average damage: 67,26 (including criticals)

uhm.. 1/5 of 20 is 4. 2d6 would become 8d6 or am I getting something wrong?

 

[SeRiAlExPeRiMeNtS]

uhm.. 1/5 of 20 is 4. 2d6 would become 8d6 or am I getting something wrong?

Yes, I was thinking in add 1/5 * base damage in a full attack, for a fighter with a great sword it would be 2d6 in levels 1 to 4, 4d6 5 to 9, 6d6 10 to 14, 8d6 15 to 19 and 10d6 at level 20.

 

[Thondor]

edit- I just realized I only read about half of this thread before posting. I think most of what I was saying still holds but I'll get back to you tomorrow, when I have time to read the rest of it. Besides I'd like to think about it some more.

sorry.

 

[Baby Samurai]

My main concern right now is addressing sneak attacks with theses variants, and I still don’t know which variant to go with.

There have been a lot of people on these boards and WotC (thanks to everyone – Flynn, Lina Inverse, starfire311, Sorcica, Ashanti, bonethug etc) who have been really helpful on this subject, but I can't get a consensus on which of my proposed 3 variants to use. Just when I think everyone is leaning towards Variant I, two other people, whose opinions I respect, say go with Variant II, or III.

Maybe a new variant, which, as Ranger REG (thanks, dude) suggested, where you trade of swift actions for more attacks (at BAB) and add half your character level (rounded down) to damage, ala Star Wars: Saga Edition?

 

[Baby Samurai]

How about this:


Variant IV: Trade a Move action for an additional attack, and add half your character level (rounded down) to damage.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Maybe a new variant, which, as Ranger REG (thanks, dude) suggested, where you trade of swift actions for more attacks (at BAB) and add half your character level (rounded down) to damage, ala Star Wars: Saga Edition?

This was my initial intention with this. To make a D&D compatible variant of ths SW Saga approach.

That's why I edge towards variant II (or maybe IV). Also because as I've said I'd like combat to be more that just hacking away.

 

[Baby Samurai]

This was my initial intention with this. To make a D&D compatible variant of ths SW Saga approach.

That's why I edge towards variant II (or maybe IV). Also because as I've said I'd like combat to be more that just hacking away.

I would actually like a system where characters and monsters get their full array of attacks as a standard action, thus giving combat more movement and moving away from standing in one place and hacking, which becomes even more apparent at higher levels (for melee types). At levels 1 to 5 a fighter can move and still get his full attack, but suddenly when he reaches 6th (1st iterative) he's encouraged to not move more than 5 ft. a round and stand there like a schmoe – we must fix this.

Maybe something like:

Every character gets 3 actions a round: Standard, Move, and Swift. You may sacrifice a Move action for an Attack action (a sub-category of Standard so you still can't cast/manifest 2 spells/powers a round). And you may sacrifice a Move or Standard action for an additional Swift action.

 

[Flynn]

I would actually like a system where characters and monsters get their full array of attacks as a standard action, thus giving combat more movement and moving away from standing in one place and hacking, which becomes even more apparent at higher levels (for melee types). At levels 1 to 5 a fighter can move and still get his full attack, but suddenly when he reaches 6th (1st iterative) he's encouraged to not move more than 5 ft. a round and stand there like a schmoe – we must fix this.

Maybe something like:

Every character gets 3 actions a round: Standard, Move, and Swift. You may sacrifice a Move action for an Attack action (a sub-category of Standard so you still can't cast/manifest 2 spells/powers a round). And you may sacrifice a Move or Standard action for an additional Swift action.

Personally, I'd suggest the following:

In a round where you have used your Standard action to make an attack, you may sacrifice two swift actions to make a second attack with the same weapon.

Hope that helps,
Flynn

BTW, could you post a link to the WOTC thread where you are discussing this as well?

 

[Flynn]

My main concern right now is addressing sneak attacks with theses variants, and I still don’t know which variant to go with.

See my response above on that very subject. I'd suggest going with the increase die variant. It's easier on the players that way, and your players don't have to do math.

There have been a lot of people on these boards and WotC (thanks to everyone – Flynn, Lina Inverse, starfire311, Sorcica, Ashanti, bonethug etc) who have been really helpful on this subject, but I can't get a consensus on which of my proposed 3 variants to use. Just when I think everyone is leaning towards Variant I, two other people, whose opinions I respect, say go with Variant II, or III.

You may just have to make a decision without concensus. That's okay. Find the people that best support the same goal you are looking for, and weigh their opinions a little heavier. I say go with Variant I. I think it's more accurate. I'm only going to go with Variant II because it's easier on my players.

Maybe a new variant, which, as Ranger REG (thanks, dude) suggested, where you trade of swift actions for more attacks (at BAB) and add half your character level (rounded down) to damage, ala Star Wars: Saga Edition?

That's a possibility,
Flynn