No Iterative Attacks in D&D

[craftyrat]

Although it is a bit more math, I was thinking about replacing extra attacks with a % bonus to damage to a single attack on a full attack action. So at BAB +6 a full attack is a single attack with a 50% bonus to damage (+100% at +11, and +150% at +16). As much as possible this would be calculated beforehand (d4 becomes d6, d8 becomes d12, etc. - close enough to a match for me).

This has the advantage of taking into account sneak attack, skirmish and the like, that a bonus based on BAB does not.

(This is in a low magic item campaign, so I don't mind bumping up melee characters a bit in comparison to spell casters)

craftyrat

 

[ValhallaGH]

Looking at a TWF dude with BAB 16... his first four attacks usually have a pretty nice chance to hit, causing easily more than 100 points of damage (taking into account energy bonus damage or sneak attack and/or str and/or magic bonuses and other stuff). A measly +8 or +10 to damage for only one or two attacks screws him horribly.

Why should characters have to deal hundreds of points of damage each round?

Why should the party's damage output have to equal a great wyrm red's hp each round?

Why should damage output be so high?

 

[borble]

or just make evry attack a full attack..........
ben

 

[danzig138]

Cheese. and people who use them are cheesy.

Whew. Thank you. I can't imagine what the world would be like without the badwrongfunonetrueway police to straighten us folk out. Hats off to you sir.

 

[jeffh]

You could kind of simplify this into giving people some extra melee damage equal to their base attack bonus.

Standard attack: as per now, unchanged.
Full attack: bonus damage equal to your attack bonus.

It's not quite right, but as a rough and ready solution it would work. I'm thinking of adopting it to speed up gameplay.

That would be exactly my suggestion from the other thread on this.

 

[Baby Samurai]

or just make evry attack a full attack..........
ben

Yeah, thanks, very helpful…

 

[Baby Samurai]

Maybe another way to go, is instead of a static bonus to damage (+ half your CL etc), use extra dice damage (+ xd6 etc), ala ToB?

 

[WhatGravitas]

Why should characters have to deal hundreds of points of damage each round?

Why should the party's damage output have to equal a great wyrm red's hp each round?

Why should damage output be so high?

Because that's the only way, they can kill their opposition faster than they're killed. Honestly. If a party want to survive a great wyrm, they have to kill it fast, fast, fast, because after five or six rounds, the wyrm's damage output has killed the party.

 

[Flynn]

Maybe another way to go, is instead of a static bonus to damage (+ half your CL etc), use extra dice damage (+ xd6 etc), ala ToB?

Then might I suggest +1d6 per iterative attack lost? It almost fits the statistical averages I came up with, and it's easy to translate. Additionally, it gives the players more dice to roll for damage and they always like that. For critical hits, these dice would multiply as well, unlike other additive dice.

Offering a suggestion,
Flynn

 

[Flynn]

Because that's the only way, they can kill their opposition faster than they're killed. Honestly. If a party want to survive a great wyrm, they have to kill it fast, fast, fast, because after five or six rounds, the wyrm's damage output has killed the party.

Essentially, if you want to use the D20 monsters as written, then their hitpoint totals require some kind of bonus damage at higher levels to roughly equal the damage capacity formerly gained from iterative attacks. Otherwise, you have to change the hitpoint totals of the monsters. As a great man (Wulf Ratbane) once said, would you rather make one change to the PCs or would you like to change thousands of monsters?

Hope this helps,
Flynn