No More Multiple Attacks?

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I thought I read somewhere that the multiple attacks per round by PCs is going the way of the dodo bird.

Is this the case? If so, doesn't that imbalance things? (i.e., taking away a lot from fighter-types)

 

[WayneLigon]

Not so much, I would think. After all, everyone gets the multiple attacks after a while - fighters just get them first and best. It might well be that fighters get something to compensate for it, but I can see the reason for getting rid of them. I already have people in my campaign confused a little about them - I have three out of six people very new to D&D and RPG's.

 

[Orcus]

Its clear there are multiple attacks. See the spined devil stats. What I think they are getting away from are the multiple attacks at reduced power that normally, by the third attack, are pretty much useless. I still expect to see PCs with multiple attacks at higher levels or by feat or something.

 

[Clavis]

IMHO opinion only Fighters (straight-up, regular Fighters) should ever have had multiple attacks, thus making Fighters special and attractive as a character class.

 

[AffableVagrant]

In the new Star Wars RPG (the prototype for 4e) multiple attacks are removed. It works great and it speeds things up A LOT. PCs can take a feat where they may make 2 attacks at -5/-5, and later, a feat that allows for 3 attacks at -10/-10/-10. It's cool because multiple attacks becomes a tactical choice, where the fighter must weigh his options, and it doesn't force the guy to have to choose between moving or attacking.

I was skeptical at first, but now I'm a believer.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

And remember it's just ITERATIVE attacks that are disappearing, so if your character concept compels you to have multiple attacks, you can take the appropriate feat(s) as mentioned, or dual-wield. Iteratives are too often lame freebies, i.e. you have to stand in one place and then you get extra attacks that quickly become worthless. In the new system you won't have to sacrifice movement and the feats will be balanced so that while overall worthwhile you are choosing 1 at full bonus, 2 at -5 (or whatever) to BOTH, or 3 at -10 (or whatever) to ALL THREE. As mentioned, an actual tactical decision.

 

[A'koss]

They touched upon this briefly in one of their early Design & Development articles...

This is supposed to be an imaginary discussion between players in the future about a 3rd level fighter...

“Yeah. I thought about going high Con and using a hammer, but I wanted to start with the chance to make a couple of attacks, so I’m using Rain of Blows as my good weapon attack, and I went with high Wis so that I can switch to the better oppy powers later.”

So it sounds like there'll be trait/feat/martial ability that will allow it.

 

[D.Shaffer]

They're not getting rid of multiple attacks. They're getting ridding of extra attacks derived from your BaB. If the Saga rules are any indication, ititerative attacks are being replaced with a damage bonus.

 

[lukelightning]

Hopefully they will reign in a lot of the "and then" monsters as well.

You know the ones I'm talking about. It bites you, then claws you, then claws you again, and then it does a tail whip, and then a head butt, and then....

I think monsters in general need to get their attacks reduced. Just because a lion has claws on each foot doesn't mean it should get multiple attacks. I'd say it gets one attack...a maul. Sure it's attacking with multiple limbs, but overall it should be treated as a single attack.

Another good example are octopuses (note: octopi is not the plural. If you want a Latinate plural of octopus, it is octopodes which sounds totally whack). They should not get 9 attacks because of their 8 arms and beak. They should get one attack...a grab attack with a bonus for their multiple arms. Then if the grab succeeds, they get to bite and constrict or *shudder* go hentai on you.

 

[Gwathlas]

In the new Star Wars RPG (the prototype for 4e) multiple attacks are removed. It works great and it speeds things up A LOT. PCs can take a feat where they may make 2 attacks at -5/-5, and later, a feat that allows for 3 attacks at -10/-10/-10. It's cool because multiple attacks becomes a tactical choice, where the fighter must weigh his options, and it doesn't force the guy to have to choose between moving or attacking.

I was skeptical at first, but now I'm a believer.

Seems there's no need for 4e you can just buy starwars and pretend it's D&D. Hey all the monsters are going to be strykers brutes leaders or some silly role name. Besides 4e is not D&D it's a pastiche of starwars, re: the combat and skills system. there's an orc kingdom (FR), how ebberon and lots of talk of silos, pick two colors red/white. black/green... how mtg. So besides losing multiple attacks the game has lost it's identity, it's heart and it's soul.