Grazzt said:
Absolutely, you're right.
I think I was on the fence as to whether he would choose Initiative as one his trained skills – thanks for spotting it.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
No Iterative Attacks in D&D
- Thread starter Baby Samurai
- Start date
Absolutely, you're right.
I think I was on the fence as to whether he would choose Initiative as one his trained skills – thanks for spotting it.
Thondor said:
I'm going with the Saga system:
-Double Attack, Dual Weapon Mastery, Mighty Swing, Rapid Strike, Triple Attack, Whirlwind Attack etc replacing iterative attacks.
-The new withdraw action replaces the 5ft. step.
-Half character level as bonus damage.
-2 x Str bonus when wielding two-handed.
-1 x Str bonus for off-hand damage.
As for monsters, they're pretty much the same – one natural attack as a standard action, or attack with all of their natural weapons as a full round action, but the only difference is that when they make a full attack (full round action), all of their natural attacks are at a –5 penalty, not just the secondary. If they have Multiattack, then all of their attacks in a full round action would be at –2.
Flynn
First Post
Part of our problem here may be underlying assumptions in regards to how these things should be calculated. I've seen mention of a number of non-SRD feats that, of course, will boost damage out of proportion to the baseline. Here's a quote from a related thread that might help clarify some thoughts on the baseline itself.
If you just look at the percentages to hit over a range of 1 to 20 on the die roll (so we're only looking at the percentage of success and the numbers and AC don't matter), and calculate basic percentages of success, without even looking into damage, you come up with some approximate values for average damage based on the number of iterative attacks: 2 attacks = x1.5, 3 attacks = x1.8 and 4 attacks = x2.0 base average damage. With that, you can have any feats you want, and it still doesn't change what the percent of success is.
I have players that have a hard time adding up their bonuses, and they never write them down, so we have to add them up every time. Moving to non-iterative attacks works for me as a means of resolving that issue. Of course, if they can't add very well and remember it, then multiplying is out of the question. I am willing to make a few sacrifices to accomodate the simplification process. For the tendencies of my players and the feats I allow in game, the following including a list of my basic assumptions:
-There are no iterative attacks. If someone wants an extra attack, they can spend an action point to get it at a dramatically appropriate moment of their choosing.
-Two-weapon fighting still exists and both hands take the same penalty. (-8/-4, or -4/-2 with TWF). Fighting with more than one weapon is a full-round action.
-Characters and creatures add their BAB as bonus damage on non-natural attacks. Unarmed combat, such as a monk's unarmed attack, counts as a non-natural attack for these purposes. (Alternately, one could multiply the attacks damage by the x1.5, x1.8, and x2.0 numbers mentioned above, but I don't want the complications for my players.)
-2 x Str bonus to damage when wielding two-handed weapon; 1 x Str bonus damage for one-handed weapons.
-Creatures get the full range of natural attacks, but only as a full-round action. The primary attack is adjusted down by -5 (-2 with multiattack) to reflect the use of universally applied attack penalties.
-DR is kept the same. Yeah, it makes higher level characters more effective against creatures with DR, but I'm okay with that. (Alternately, one could multiply DR by the x1.5, x1.8, and x2.0 numbers mentioned above.)
-Sneak attacks and bonus weapon damage dice remain the same. (Alternately, one could up each d6 to d8 at +6 BAB, d10 at +11 BAB, and 2d6 at +15 BAB; and up each d10 to 2d6 at +6 BAB, 2d8 at +11 BAB, and 2d10 at +16 BAB.)
My approach won't reproduce a high level barbarian raging with tons of feats that maximize his damage and all that, but I'm okay with that, because I may not run a 20th level barbarian with all those complications for quite some time.
Hope that helps,
Flynn
Wulf Ratbane said:
If you just look at the percentages to hit over a range of 1 to 20 on the die roll (so we're only looking at the percentage of success and the numbers and AC don't matter), and calculate basic percentages of success, without even looking into damage, you come up with some approximate values for average damage based on the number of iterative attacks: 2 attacks = x1.5, 3 attacks = x1.8 and 4 attacks = x2.0 base average damage. With that, you can have any feats you want, and it still doesn't change what the percent of success is.
I have players that have a hard time adding up their bonuses, and they never write them down, so we have to add them up every time. Moving to non-iterative attacks works for me as a means of resolving that issue. Of course, if they can't add very well and remember it, then multiplying is out of the question. I am willing to make a few sacrifices to accomodate the simplification process. For the tendencies of my players and the feats I allow in game, the following including a list of my basic assumptions:
-There are no iterative attacks. If someone wants an extra attack, they can spend an action point to get it at a dramatically appropriate moment of their choosing.
-Two-weapon fighting still exists and both hands take the same penalty. (-8/-4, or -4/-2 with TWF). Fighting with more than one weapon is a full-round action.
-Characters and creatures add their BAB as bonus damage on non-natural attacks. Unarmed combat, such as a monk's unarmed attack, counts as a non-natural attack for these purposes. (Alternately, one could multiply the attacks damage by the x1.5, x1.8, and x2.0 numbers mentioned above, but I don't want the complications for my players.)
-2 x Str bonus to damage when wielding two-handed weapon; 1 x Str bonus damage for one-handed weapons.
-Creatures get the full range of natural attacks, but only as a full-round action. The primary attack is adjusted down by -5 (-2 with multiattack) to reflect the use of universally applied attack penalties.
-DR is kept the same. Yeah, it makes higher level characters more effective against creatures with DR, but I'm okay with that. (Alternately, one could multiply DR by the x1.5, x1.8, and x2.0 numbers mentioned above.)
-Sneak attacks and bonus weapon damage dice remain the same. (Alternately, one could up each d6 to d8 at +6 BAB, d10 at +11 BAB, and 2d6 at +15 BAB; and up each d10 to 2d6 at +6 BAB, 2d8 at +11 BAB, and 2d10 at +16 BAB.)
My approach won't reproduce a high level barbarian raging with tons of feats that maximize his damage and all that, but I'm okay with that, because I may not run a 20th level barbarian with all those complications for quite some time.
Hope that helps,
Flynn
Last edited:
Flynn said:
1.) At what penalty, if at all, will these extra attacks be made? Can they spend 2 action points for two extra attacks?
2.) So you're not going with the multiply the base weapon damage by number of attacks (I still like that one)?
3.) I too am going with the Saga system on this one
4.) Cool, I'm going the exact same route with monsters.
Flynn
First Post
Baby Samurai said:
Nope. One action point to get one extra attack, and at no penalty. (I am using Grim Tales action points, where an action point can get you an extra standard action by the emulating Heroic Surge feat for my current game, so I'm taking the True20 approach and still allowing it, even though D&D doesn't have the Heroic Surge feat.)
Baby Samurai said:
Nope. I like that one a lot, but it causes complications with players, and I'm hoping to use my streamlined combat to teach my son more about the basics of the game.
Hope that helps,
Flynn
Flynn said:
Just curious, what complications have you noticed?
Quartz
Hero
A little bit of thread necromancy...
I made a suggestion earlier in the thread and it seemed to have generated some confusion but no actual feedback. I've modified it a little and I'd appreciate your thoughts.
A full attack is resolved with one roll. The character applies any feats like Power Attack and Combat Expertise, then adds his full BAB to both the attack and damage rolls.
Example: Tordek has a BAB of +10. He applies 5 points of BAB to Combat Expertise raising his AC by 5 and 2 points of BAB to Power Attack raising his damage by +4 for a two-handed weapon. His adjusted AB is now 3. Plus +5 from Str, +3 from feats (WF, MWM), and +2 from magic gives him an adjusted AB of +13 and damage of +15 (+5 Str, +4 feats, +2 magic, +4 PA). He can make a normal attack at +13/+15 or a Full Attack at +23/+25.
Example: Redgar has BAB +20, a +5 2H weapon, +8 from Str 26, +3 / +4 from feats (as Tordek). He puts 5 pts of BAB to Combat Expertise and 5 pts to Power Attack at +10 for an adjusted AB of 20 -5 -5 +5 +8+3=+26. He can attack as Standard Action at +26 for +27 damage or as a Full Attack at +46 and +47 damage.
Example: Lidda is a 2nd level rogue with a BAB of +1, Weapon Finesse (Dex 16 / +3), and Weapon Focus. She can attack as a Standard Action at +5 to hit and +0 damage, or make a Full Attack at +6 to hit and +1 damage.
Since TWF requires a Full Attack, TWF - and Flurry, and multiweapon fighting for monsters - is rendered just a special effect, except that you take the best of each weapon. For example, someone carrying a silver weapon in one hand and a Bane weapon in the other is treated as having one weapon with both properties.
I'm aware that this has significant ramifications for the Ranger class, and makes critical hits both easier to confirm and more dangerous. It also affects Massive Damage.
I made a suggestion earlier in the thread and it seemed to have generated some confusion but no actual feedback. I've modified it a little and I'd appreciate your thoughts.
A full attack is resolved with one roll. The character applies any feats like Power Attack and Combat Expertise, then adds his full BAB to both the attack and damage rolls.
Example: Tordek has a BAB of +10. He applies 5 points of BAB to Combat Expertise raising his AC by 5 and 2 points of BAB to Power Attack raising his damage by +4 for a two-handed weapon. His adjusted AB is now 3. Plus +5 from Str, +3 from feats (WF, MWM), and +2 from magic gives him an adjusted AB of +13 and damage of +15 (+5 Str, +4 feats, +2 magic, +4 PA). He can make a normal attack at +13/+15 or a Full Attack at +23/+25.
Example: Redgar has BAB +20, a +5 2H weapon, +8 from Str 26, +3 / +4 from feats (as Tordek). He puts 5 pts of BAB to Combat Expertise and 5 pts to Power Attack at +10 for an adjusted AB of 20 -5 -5 +5 +8+3=+26. He can attack as Standard Action at +26 for +27 damage or as a Full Attack at +46 and +47 damage.
Example: Lidda is a 2nd level rogue with a BAB of +1, Weapon Finesse (Dex 16 / +3), and Weapon Focus. She can attack as a Standard Action at +5 to hit and +0 damage, or make a Full Attack at +6 to hit and +1 damage.
Since TWF requires a Full Attack, TWF - and Flurry, and multiweapon fighting for monsters - is rendered just a special effect, except that you take the best of each weapon. For example, someone carrying a silver weapon in one hand and a Bane weapon in the other is treated as having one weapon with both properties.
I'm aware that this has significant ramifications for the Ranger class, and makes critical hits both easier to confirm and more dangerous. It also affects Massive Damage.
Flynn
First Post
Quartz said:
No, I thought I addressed it pretty clearly, and my words should indicate that I would not consider it a good idea. I think I made my reasons for having that opinion pretty clear, without quoting numbers and the like. Please reread my words and let me know if you are still confused by my reply.
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3526300&postcount=90
With Regards,
Flynn
Quartz
Hero
Not sure how I missed that but I think you're significantly misapplying the probabilities. The chance of succeeding blows actually connecting indeed, as you say, lessens, but the chance of at least one of the blows actually connecting increases dramatically.
Let's take the extreme example: the character has 4 attacks, each of which can only hit on a 20. You're arguing that there's only a 1 in 160000 chance of him connecting on all four (quite correct) and so the damage should be very much reduced. I'm saying that there's a 1 in 5 chance of him hitting on at least one attack - the probability of all 4 attacks missing is 0.81).
Let's take the example of a character with 4 attacks who would ordinarily hit on a 1 if 1 were not an automatic miss. So she hits on 1, 6, 11, and 16. The probability of all her secondary attacks missing is 9%.
Consider the example of a character who hits on 11 and 16 - 50% chance and 25% chance. The probability of both attacks missing is 0.375. 3/8. That means that there's a 5/8 chance of at least one attack hitting.
The bonus I suggest adding to the to hit and damage is less than sum of the to hit bonuses and the sum of the extra damage that successful secondary attacks would typically do.
Moreover, this is quick and simple, operates at all levels, and provides a trade-off for the loss of the move action.
Let's take the extreme example: the character has 4 attacks, each of which can only hit on a 20. You're arguing that there's only a 1 in 160000 chance of him connecting on all four (quite correct) and so the damage should be very much reduced. I'm saying that there's a 1 in 5 chance of him hitting on at least one attack - the probability of all 4 attacks missing is 0.81).
Let's take the example of a character with 4 attacks who would ordinarily hit on a 1 if 1 were not an automatic miss. So she hits on 1, 6, 11, and 16. The probability of all her secondary attacks missing is 9%.
Consider the example of a character who hits on 11 and 16 - 50% chance and 25% chance. The probability of both attacks missing is 0.375. 3/8. That means that there's a 5/8 chance of at least one attack hitting.
The bonus I suggest adding to the to hit and damage is less than sum of the to hit bonuses and the sum of the extra damage that successful secondary attacks would typically do.
Moreover, this is quick and simple, operates at all levels, and provides a trade-off for the loss of the move action.
Similar Threads
D&D 3E/3.5
Homebrew Content
