Zyrusticae
First Post
Hmmm. Well, here's my view on how to handle things:
1. Multiply base weapon damage at each iterative attack bonus. The full attack action is gone; attacking in melee is always considered a standard action.
1a. Use rules from SAGA Edition concerning extra damage from strength. 2x Str for two-handed weapons, 1x for each hand. (Considering adopting the rule of adding damage from 1/2 character level as well. Warriors could use some help, personally.)
2. At each iterative attack bonus, sneak attack dice is increased in size by one category (i.e. from D6 to D8, then from D8 to D10).
3. For natural attacks, primary attack is a standard action. Attacking with both primary and secondary attacks should require two swift actions, i.e. rooting the creature to the spot for the round. They do not get bonus damage from BAB, so penalties are not necessary. (Many of them already have incredible damage from high STR scores, anyway.)
Reasoning:
1. Results in a fairly close approximation of damage using normal iterative attacks in D&D, only with fewer rolls.
1a. Melee fighters are already fairly gimped in relation to spellcasters, so a little assistance on their end is hardly something I could consider imbalancing.
2. Of course, rogues lose a considerable amount of damage from the loss of iterative attacks, and this helps to compensate for that loss fairly well.
3. To be able to bite and claw at someone at the same time, it's kind of hard to be running at the same time, right? And of course, this gives incentives for warriors to move around in melee combat and avoid getting hit by the full force of a creature's wrath, which is always a good thing.
Oh, and I have some other concerns that could use some addressing here. For example, I use house-rules regarding armor and class defense bonuses.
Class Defense Bonus: A class's defense bonus is determined by taking its BAB and dividing it by two, rounding up, then adding that number to 1/2 the class's base reflex save (that is, without the Dex bonus, and again, rounded up. This means the highest defense a character can ever get, without items, is 26). This is considered a dodge bonus, and stacks with all other sources of dodge AC.
Armor gives the upper half of its AC rating to the character's AC, and the lower half is used as damage reduction (ex: chainmail, which has a +5 AC rating, would give 3 to the character's AC and provides a 2/- damage reduction). This damage reduction stacks with other sources. Treat natural armor in a similar manner.
The Logic: It only makes sense that the characters who are trained to dodge, weave, and fight the best would also happen to be the best at defending themselves. It makes absolutely no sense for a character, throughout their entire career, to not improve their ability to avoid attacks. Like, at all. It's just nonsensical.
Also, the strength of armor is not only in its ability to make otherwise painful blows pretty much harmless, but also to reduce the impact of attacks that do connect solidly. It made no sense to me that, once attacks got through, they always did full damage - regardless of whether or not the character was wearing studded leather or a full suit of platemail.
On top of that, I've always had a thing against the way D&D made characters so dependent upon their items for defense. Without them, they're practically defenseless. This is not cool.
Consider the math:
Armor Class = 10 + ½ BAB (round up) + ½ Ref Save + Dex Bonus + ½ AC Bonus (round up) + 1/2 NA Bonus (round up) + Deflection Bonus + Dodge Bonus
Level 20 fighter AC = 10 + 10 + 5 + 1 + 7 (+5 adamantine full plate) + 3 (amulet of natural armor +5) + 5 + 2 (Dodge + Improved Dodge) = 42
Attack Bonus = 20 + 8 (Strength Bonus) + 5 (Enhancement Bonus) = 33
Touch AC = 10 + 10 + 5 + 1 + 2 = 28
Touch Attack (from a wizard) = 10 + 6 (Dex) = 16
Damage Reduction = 6 + 2 = 8, + 3 (adamantine) = 11/-
[Notes: He has Lightning Reflexes, and improved dodge (which gives +1 dodge AC and +1 ref saves).]
Observations: Wizards and other characters who rely on touch attacks can still hit fighters and such fairly decently, but it's no longer so horribly easy (a +14 touch attack on an AC of 16? Pfft!).
A wizard fighting a warrior with the combat expertise feat will likely have to resort to spells that do not involve touch attacks.
Armor still remains useful (as compared to the UA variant, where armor is completely useless), and rather than being based on what kind of armor a class can wear (which was a really stupid concept to begin with), it's based entirely on a class's offensive and defensive capabilities. Which I like, naturally.
The Problem: Using the 'no full attack actions' variant, damage reduction quickly becomes useless, as each attack deals enough damage to render it obsolete. Considering increasing the effect of damage reduction at every would-be iterative attack bonus, i.e. multiplying DR by 1.5x at +6, 2x at +11, and 2.5x at 16. Alternatively, one could simply give every character a DR bonus equal to 1/2, 3/4, or 1x a character's BAB to compensate for the extreme damage values at higher levels. This would represent a character's increasing propensity for turning otherwise harmful attacks into less harmful ones, or knowing techniques for reducing the effort required to do so (HPs represent dodging ability as well, remember that).
1. Multiply base weapon damage at each iterative attack bonus. The full attack action is gone; attacking in melee is always considered a standard action.
1a. Use rules from SAGA Edition concerning extra damage from strength. 2x Str for two-handed weapons, 1x for each hand. (Considering adopting the rule of adding damage from 1/2 character level as well. Warriors could use some help, personally.)
2. At each iterative attack bonus, sneak attack dice is increased in size by one category (i.e. from D6 to D8, then from D8 to D10).
3. For natural attacks, primary attack is a standard action. Attacking with both primary and secondary attacks should require two swift actions, i.e. rooting the creature to the spot for the round. They do not get bonus damage from BAB, so penalties are not necessary. (Many of them already have incredible damage from high STR scores, anyway.)
Reasoning:
1. Results in a fairly close approximation of damage using normal iterative attacks in D&D, only with fewer rolls.
1a. Melee fighters are already fairly gimped in relation to spellcasters, so a little assistance on their end is hardly something I could consider imbalancing.
2. Of course, rogues lose a considerable amount of damage from the loss of iterative attacks, and this helps to compensate for that loss fairly well.
3. To be able to bite and claw at someone at the same time, it's kind of hard to be running at the same time, right? And of course, this gives incentives for warriors to move around in melee combat and avoid getting hit by the full force of a creature's wrath, which is always a good thing.
Oh, and I have some other concerns that could use some addressing here. For example, I use house-rules regarding armor and class defense bonuses.
Class Defense Bonus: A class's defense bonus is determined by taking its BAB and dividing it by two, rounding up, then adding that number to 1/2 the class's base reflex save (that is, without the Dex bonus, and again, rounded up. This means the highest defense a character can ever get, without items, is 26). This is considered a dodge bonus, and stacks with all other sources of dodge AC.
Armor gives the upper half of its AC rating to the character's AC, and the lower half is used as damage reduction (ex: chainmail, which has a +5 AC rating, would give 3 to the character's AC and provides a 2/- damage reduction). This damage reduction stacks with other sources. Treat natural armor in a similar manner.
The Logic: It only makes sense that the characters who are trained to dodge, weave, and fight the best would also happen to be the best at defending themselves. It makes absolutely no sense for a character, throughout their entire career, to not improve their ability to avoid attacks. Like, at all. It's just nonsensical.
Also, the strength of armor is not only in its ability to make otherwise painful blows pretty much harmless, but also to reduce the impact of attacks that do connect solidly. It made no sense to me that, once attacks got through, they always did full damage - regardless of whether or not the character was wearing studded leather or a full suit of platemail.
On top of that, I've always had a thing against the way D&D made characters so dependent upon their items for defense. Without them, they're practically defenseless. This is not cool.
Consider the math:
Armor Class = 10 + ½ BAB (round up) + ½ Ref Save + Dex Bonus + ½ AC Bonus (round up) + 1/2 NA Bonus (round up) + Deflection Bonus + Dodge Bonus
Level 20 fighter AC = 10 + 10 + 5 + 1 + 7 (+5 adamantine full plate) + 3 (amulet of natural armor +5) + 5 + 2 (Dodge + Improved Dodge) = 42
Attack Bonus = 20 + 8 (Strength Bonus) + 5 (Enhancement Bonus) = 33
Touch AC = 10 + 10 + 5 + 1 + 2 = 28
Touch Attack (from a wizard) = 10 + 6 (Dex) = 16
Damage Reduction = 6 + 2 = 8, + 3 (adamantine) = 11/-
[Notes: He has Lightning Reflexes, and improved dodge (which gives +1 dodge AC and +1 ref saves).]
Observations: Wizards and other characters who rely on touch attacks can still hit fighters and such fairly decently, but it's no longer so horribly easy (a +14 touch attack on an AC of 16? Pfft!).
A wizard fighting a warrior with the combat expertise feat will likely have to resort to spells that do not involve touch attacks.
Armor still remains useful (as compared to the UA variant, where armor is completely useless), and rather than being based on what kind of armor a class can wear (which was a really stupid concept to begin with), it's based entirely on a class's offensive and defensive capabilities. Which I like, naturally.
The Problem: Using the 'no full attack actions' variant, damage reduction quickly becomes useless, as each attack deals enough damage to render it obsolete. Considering increasing the effect of damage reduction at every would-be iterative attack bonus, i.e. multiplying DR by 1.5x at +6, 2x at +11, and 2.5x at 16. Alternatively, one could simply give every character a DR bonus equal to 1/2, 3/4, or 1x a character's BAB to compensate for the extreme damage values at higher levels. This would represent a character's increasing propensity for turning otherwise harmful attacks into less harmful ones, or knowing techniques for reducing the effort required to do so (HPs represent dodging ability as well, remember that).
