Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 4944540" data-attributes="member: 43283">It doesn't to my knowledge. It might scale fine in SWSE, but D&D doesn't have a linear scale happening on monster stuff.You're closer by adding BaB as a Damage bonus, but that's still going to fall short of some potential. It's a subject that's been bandied about and there isn't really a solution that works for everyone.Trailblazer sets things up so that there's still Iterative Attacks but it's streamlined and easier on the math side. How fast that is in comparison to no Iterative Attacks and a flat damage bonus is debatable; I say debatable not because some folks won't see a speed up but debatable because it's partially a personal preference thing and therefore some folks aren't going to feel it's appreciably faster.Part of the problem in this issue is that there's a chunk of people in the "good enough for me" camp, while there's another camp that's hardcore math and percentages and deltas and all that stuff. Those two groups square off and start arguing about damage potentials and then they start arguing about the damage at different levels.An awful lot of the arguments against a flat damage bonus come about because people arguing against it start looking at the high levels (16+) of the game. I've got no clue how many people are really playing at that level; my gut instinct is that the people that _don't_ like Iterative Attacks are probably playing lower level games in the first place.Here's another interesting thought:<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/3515972-post34.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/3515972-post34.html</a>The entire thread is an interesting read.And here's another interesting read that's parallel to the other thread:<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-rules-discussion/195546-removing-multiple-attacks-what-changes-must-done-monsters.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-rules-discussion/195546-removing-multiple-attacks-what-changes-must-done-monsters.html</a>Wulf makes an interesting point here:<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4612174-post20.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/4612174-post20.html</a>I think that his bit about the vanilla sword vs the holy flaming longsword is something that slips by an awful lot of people. I personally don't usually see lots of funky magic weapons in games. You're lucky if you get a basic +[something] weapon and that's about it. So for me, the BaB as a Damage Bonus is good enough. But I also play in games that don't tend to hit level 16+ either. So the two of those things combined (basic magical weapons and below 16) means that what's going to work for me isn't going to work for others.I think some people also don't realize how fast things like AC and Hit Points sky rocket as CRs increase. Again, it's something you're less likely to notice (or feel the effects of) at lower levels.I don't want to hijack the thread I'll just leave it at that.</blockquote>

Verification