No Iterative Attacks in D&D

[Jhaelen]

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 they have to in order to stand a chance against enemies who have hundreds of hit points AND dish out hundreds of points of damage each round?

 

[Baby Samurai]

Then might I suggest +1d6 per iterative attack lost?

That's exactly what I was thinking, but it still doesn’t seem like quite enough for someone who had say: +15/+10/+5 (1d10+7) or what have you.

 

[Baby Samurai]

It just occurred to me that when they bring out the Conversion Document (to convert Expanded SW Core Rules characters to Saga action) there will probably (hopefully) be just what we're looking for to convert iterative attacks into a standard action.

 

[Flynn]

That's exactly what I was thinking, but it still doesn’t seem like quite enough for someone who had say: +15/+10/+5 (1d10+7) or what have you.

Baby Samurai,

I ran the numbers and came up with an interesting observation. It doesn't matter what the base weapon damage is, but if you add the base weapon damage again when you would normally have an iterative attack, then the numbers work out very well across the board. This scales with weapon damage, from daggers to greatswords.

Essentially, I found the following:

BAB Range   Wpn Dmg Mult
0-5             x1
6-10            x2
11-15           x3
16-18           x4
19-20           x5

That pretty much follows the iterative process up to 19th level, and I don't think it would hurt anything to simply smooth the curve out for simplicity's sake and just roll another set of weapon damage for each iterative attack.

Essentially, weapons and unarmed combat base damage dice are multiplied by the number fo attacks the character would have under normal D&D rules. A fighter with a bastard sword inflicts a base damage of 1d10 at Levels 1-5, 2d10 at 6-10, 3d10 at 11-15 and 4d10 at 16+. A two-handed sword would follow in the same pattern: 2d6/4d6/6d6/8d6. A dagger would be 1d4/2d4/3d4/4d4, and so on.

You are a genius!

This is definitely the approach I will be taking,
Flynn

 

[Baby Samurai]

1.) You are a genius!

2.) This is definitely the approach I will be taking

1.) Hardly, you're the one who ran with my musing and did the math.

2.) Me too – you rule!

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

This is great!

Questions:

1) What about crits?

2) What about a Spycraft 2.0 approach with two half-actions a round (i.e. 2 attacks)?

3) How will this work with the SAGA "spend swift actions to increas damage rule"? It hardly seems worth it now to spend the swift actions at high BAB?

This is looking oh so good

 

[Baby Samurai]

This is great!

Questions:

1) What about crits?

2) What about a Spycraft 2.0 approach with two half-actions a round (i.e. 2 attacks)?

3) How will this work with the SAGA "spend swift actions to increas damage rule"? It hardly seems worth it now to spend the swift actions at high BAB?

4) This is looking oh so good

1.) Good question – maybe just multiply the base weapon damage and static bonus?

2.) I know nothing about Spycraft aside from what you've just mentioned, but I'm interested.

3.) I didn't know you could spend swift actions to increase damage in Saga. But I am thinking of implementing the Saga rule of exchanging a move or standard action for a swift action

4.) Glad you like it, welcome to the Iterative Think Tank!

 

[Flynn]

1.) Good question – maybe just multiply the base weapon damage and static bonus?

That was my thought, and another good reason to consider it an increase in the weapon's base damage.

2.) I know nothing about Spycraft aside from what you've just mentioned, but I'm interested.

Spycraft does half actions and actions instead of standard, move and full-round actions. You can only attack once per half-action, and you can spend both half-actions to make two attacks. Spycraft predates True20 and Saga Edition in its removal of iterative attacks.

3.) I didn't know you could spend swift actions to increase damage in Saga. But I am thinking of implementing the Saga rule of exchanging a move or standard action for a swift action

Saga will offer two feats that essentially allow you to trade a standard action and two swift actions (you get the second swift action by burning your move action to get it), in exchange for an additional die of damage based on what your weapon uses. The two feats will be called Mighty Blow and Rapid Shot, if I recall correctly.

For me, I'm giving the same basic functionality to Power Attack, to make it easier on players. Take a -2 on the attack, get an extra die of damage. Simple, and no major numbers to keep track of.

Hope This Helps,
Flynn

 

[Baby Samurai]

1.) That was my thought, and another good reason to consider it an increase in the weapon's base damage.


2.) Spycraft does half actions and actions instead of standard, move and full-round actions. You can only attack once per half-action, and you can spend both half-actions to make two attacks. Spycraft predates True20 and Saga Edition in its removal of iterative attacks.


3.) For me, I'm giving the same basic functionality to Power Attack, to make it easier on players. Take a -2 on the attack, get an extra die of damage. Simple, and no major numbers to keep track of.

1.) I meant that with a greatsword you would only get an additional 2d6 with a crit and double the static bonus, is that what you were thinking too?

2.) How does True20 handle it?

3.) I like that, I like that a lot.

 

[Flynn]

1.) I meant that with a greatsword you would only get an additional 2d6 with a crit and double the static bonus, is that what you were thinking too?

That would be the least overpowering, I think. At the levels where it would come into play (aka high level play), I think it would probably be okay to say it would be a matter of gaming style on the part of the GM (high damage versus moderate damage). For mathematical purposes, though, I agree with only applying the crit to the base weapon damage, before BAB multiplier increases.

2.) How does True20 handle it?

They don't use hitpoints, and they rewrote the monsters, so their solution ultimately doesn't apply to our desired approach.

Hope this helps,
Flynn