So I had this idea the other day that I'm thinking of playing around with somewhat. Basically every character gets a pool of movement they can use while taking the full attack action, equal to 5ft per iterative attack they have (not counting the primary, so 15ft at BA 16). They can use it all at once, break it up into five foot chunks, or any other combination. Two Weapon Fighting attacks would not count, but a monk's flurry attacks would. Any movement would be subject to attacks of opportunity
I've been toying with ideas to make combat more dynamic and mobile, curious what everyone thinks of the idea.
So I had this idea the other day that I'm thinking of playing around with somewhat. Basically every character gets a pool of movement they can use while taking the full attack action, equal to 5ft per iterative attack they have (not counting the primary, so 15ft at BA 16). They can use it all at once, break it up into five foot chunks, or any other combination. Two Weapon Fighting attacks would not count, but a monk's flurry attacks would. Any movement would be subject to attacks of opportunity
I've been toying with ideas to make combat more dynamic and mobile, curious what everyone thinks of the idea.
My initial impression is that it introduces a whole nother layer of bookeeping to an already drawn-out, complicated battle...especially at higher levels, where this house rule will get the most use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I allow characters to trade iterative attacks for movement. A character with a speed of 30 ft. trades iteratives for 10 ft. of movement each (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft. difference in base land speed). So a barbarian (speed 40 ft.) with BAB +11 could attack once at +11, move 15 ft., and attack again at +1, for example. A fighter with speed 30 ft. and BAB +16, finding his opponent 10 ft. away, could take a move action and attack once at +16, or he could trade his first iterative for the 10 ft. of movement, and then attack at +11/+6/+1 -- his choice.
This houserule makes barbarians, fighters with armor training (to reduce speed penalties), and especially monks into much more useful combatants.
I allow characters to trade iterative attacks for movement. A character with a speed of 30 ft. trades iteratives for 10 ft. of movement each (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft. difference in base land speed). So a barbarian (speed 40 ft.) with BAB +11 could attack once at +11, move 15 ft., and attack again at +1, for example. A fighter with speed 30 ft. and BAB +16, finding his opponent 10 ft. away, could take a move action and attack once at +16, or he could trade his first iterative for the 10 ft. of movement, and then attack at +11/+6/+1 -- his choice.
This houserule makes barbarians, fighters with armor training (to reduce speed penalties), and especially monks into much more useful combatants.
Hmm... I rather like that approach
OK, I understand now what you mean...and it sets my mind to working. After I've chewed on it a bit, I may shamelessly steal this idea for my own game. :)
I allow characters to trade iterative attacks for movement. A character with a speed of 30 ft. trades iteratives for 10 ft. of movement each (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft. difference in base land speed). So a barbarian (speed 40 ft.) with BAB +11 could attack once at +11, move 15 ft., and attack again at +1, for example. A fighter with speed 30 ft. and BAB +16, finding his opponent 10 ft. away, could take a move action and attack once at +16, or he could trade his first iterative for the 10 ft. of movement, and then attack at +11/+6/+1 -- his choice.
This houserule makes barbarians, fighters with armor training (to reduce speed penalties), and especially monks into much more useful combatants.
What would you do with a two weapon fighter? Could he trade off hand attacks? Or is it only the primary iterative set? Lets say you have a Level 11 fighter with greater two weapon fighting and a movement of 30. What could he do with this rule. Could he attack with his primary, trade is offhand, attack with his primary etc? If not can he still attack with the offhand attack if he trades his primary?
What would you do with a two weapon fighter? Could he trade off hand attacks? Or is it only the primary iterative set? Lets say you have a Level 11 fighter with greater two weapon fighting and a movement of 30. What could he do with this rule. Could he attack with his primary, trade is offhand, attack with his primary etc? If not can he still attack with the offhand attack if he trades his primary?
The attacks stay together in pairs. So a guy with improved TWF and BAB +11 could attack at +9/+9, move 10 ft., and attack again at -1/-1.
What about doing it with this approach??
I found these in a homebrew / house rule thread on this board.
Combat Step (Combat)
Prerequisites: BAB +6
Benefit: You may move up to half your speed and still make a full-round action. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity. All attacks are at -2.
Normal: You may make a five foot step and still make a full round action.Improved Combat Step (Combat)
Prerequisites: BAB +11, Combat Step
Benefit: You may move up to your speed and still make a full-round action. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity. All attacks are at -2.
Normal: You may make a five foot step and still make a full round action.Greater Combat Step (Combat)
Prerequisites: BAB +16, Combat Step, Improved Combat Step
Benefit: You may move up to your speed and still make a full-round action. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity.
Normal: You may make a five foot step and still make a full round action.
Kirth, I am looking for an option to do these such movements. And I rather like the feat ideas that I have recently gathered. Though I'm curious as to which would be better, the feats, or your option. Or both....
Edit
Wow.. I just had a dumb moment.... It was either me, or lack of sleep. Anyway, I like the way your system works. Though I don't understand the movement. As in, the 5-10 movement thing. I'll reread it.
Edit Again
10 ft. of movement each (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft.
Nope Still don't understand. Further explanation please? It seems that I'm really dumb today.
So yeah, no one has yet to inform me how that one thingy works with the movement, I'm still at a loss.
Ok, so I'll be the jerk (again) who asks "how does this work with Whirlwind Attack?"
So yeah, no one has yet to inform me how that one thingy works with the movement, I'm still at a loss.
The trading thing works like that you give up one iteritive attack at the end to gain 10ft of movement. So with BAB 16 and base speed 30ft, you could:
Attack +16/Attack +11/Attack +6/Attack +1 orAttack +16/Move 10ft/Attack +11/Attack +6 or
Move 20ft/Attack +16/Attack +11
It seems like a rather nice approach.
There is a f&$#ed up symbol in that representation.
I originally thought it worked like that, but that symbol through me off to all hell, making me think there was additional math inside the equation.
The symbol I speak of is (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft.)
(+/- 5 ft.
See... To me.. I see that as Iterative attack divided by negative 5 per 10 feet.
I was like... wait--- what the f~+#?? How.. I.. don't...
A efficient wording in my opinion would be
(+ / 5 ft. per 10 ft.
Then again, this is now saying to me
Iterative attack traded for an additional 5 feet per 10 ft of base movement speed.
Meaning that with 30 base speed. I can trade one attack for 15 ft movement.
You stated that it'd be 10 ft though.
So if that's the case, I would believe the equation should be (+ / 10 ft.)
or
(1 attack / 10 ft.)
======================
=======================
There was also some other f&@~tarded interpretation I had, but yeah. I am still unsure if you're right.
Is it an additional 10 ft per attack traded, or is it an additional 5 ft per attack traded for each 10 ft of base movement speed you have.
Meaning Base Speed 30, like I said, trades 1 attack, gets 15 ft, not 10 ft.
Which!?
That equation is pissing me off >.> (+/-5 ft. per 10 ft.) <.< -Hates it-
There is a f&~%ed up symbol in that representation.
I originally thought it worked like that, but that symbol through me off to all hell, making me think there was additional math inside the equation.
The symbol I speak of is (+/- 5 ft. per 10 ft.)
(+/- 5 ft.See... To me.. I see that as Iterative attack divided by negative 5 per 10 feet.
I was like... wait--- what the f&~%?? How.. I.. don't...
A efficient wording in my opinion would be
(+ / 5 ft. per 10 ft.
Then again, this is now saying to me
Iterative attack traded for an additional 5 feet per 10 ft of base movement speed.
Meaning that with 30 base speed. I can trade one attack for 15 ft movement.
You stated that it'd be 10 ft though.
So if that's the case, I would believe the equation should be (+ / 10 ft.)
or
(1 attack / 10 ft.)
======================
=======================
There was also some other f&~%tarded interpretation I had, but yeah. I am still unsure if you're right.Is it an additional 10 ft per attack traded, or is it an additional 5 ft per attack traded for each 10 ft of base movement speed you have.
Meaning Base Speed 30, like I said, trades 1 attack, gets 15 ft, not 10 ft.
Which!?
That equation is pissing me off >.> (+/-5 ft. per 10 ft.) <.< -Hates it-
Calm down.
It's not an equation, it's a comment, meaning that you can trade an iterative attack for 10ft movement if your base movement ist 30ft/rd. adjust that by 5ft movement according to your base speed.
So,
at a base move 20ft/rd, you trade the i.a. for 5ft movement.
at a base move 30ft/rd, you trade the i.a. for 10ft movement.
at a base move 40ft/rd, you trade the i.a. for 15ft movement.
at a base move 50ft/rd, you trade the i.a. for 20ft movement.
and so on.
So yeah, no one has yet to inform me how that one thingy works with the movement, I'm still at a loss.The trading thing works like that you give up one iteritive attack at the end to gain 10ft of movement. So with BAB 16 and base speed 30ft, you could:
Attack +16/Attack +11/Attack +6/Attack +1 or
Attack +16/Move 10ft/Attack +11/Attack +6 or
Move 20ft/Attack +16/Attack +11It seems like a rather nice approach.
Not quite, if I understand Kirth correctly it would be:
Attack +16/Attack +11/Attack +6/Attack +1 or
Attack +16/Move 10ft/Attack +6/Attack +1 or
Move 20ft/Attack +6/Attack +1
You trade the movement for the attack that is next in line.
And I really like this idea. I think I'll make it a house rule.
Ok, so I'll be the jerk (again) who asks "how does this work with Whirlwind Attack?"
Well, since it's basically one attack against everyone in the vicinity, moving after the whirlwind attack would be prohibited.
But moving in for the whirlwind seems like a cool manuever.
I'd rule that you can move 10 foot to bring yourself into a favorable position and then make the whirlwind attack at the second highest base attack bonus.
Or, you move 20 foot into battle and then attack at your third highest base attack bonus... but by then it will be renamed to Light Breeze Attack.
It would really only be moving in the middle of a Whirlwind Attack, that would seem crazy to me. I don't see any problem with moving prior to it.
Sorry, missed the recent activity. Overall, the short version is that Cpt. Caboodle (CptC) has grasped both the letter and the spirit of the houserule to a "T." To spell things out, the long version is as follows:
(1) "+/-" means "plus or minus;" CptC had that exactly right. A character with speed 30 ft. trades an iterative attack/set of attacks for a 10-ft. step. A character with speed 20 ft. gets a 5-ft. step instead. A barbarian with speed 40 ft. gets a 15-ft. step instead. A monk with speed 60 ft. gets a 25-ft. step instead.
(2) CptC is also correct regarding attacks given up being the next in line. A guy with BAB +16, speed 30 ft. could do any of the following:
(3) Whirlwind attack requires a full attack action in which you "give up all of your regular attacks." Simple interpretation: no itereatives to give up, hence no trading them for movement. That said, CptC's suggestion (yet again) fits niocely with the underlying intent, and I'll probably allow it in my home game, if anyone thinks to try.
I've thought about allowing iteratives to provide extra movement for awhile (since before pathfinder), but I run into problems for creatures that don't have them, even though they make multiple attacks and have a high bab (such as dragons). Also, there are the issues of off-hand iteratives, and balancing them with certain feats (particularly Spring Attack and now Power Attack and Vital Strike). It has always seemed that you need paragraph after paragraph devoted just to addressing these issues (or rewriting of other rules/feats) when allowing iteratives to grant extra movement and the whole house rule seems clumsy.
Lately, I been thinking of trying out the following Feat:
Wade into the Fray (Combat)
After each successful attack, you move further into the ranks of the enemy.
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you make a full attack, you may move 5 feet after each successful attack you make. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity from every foe except the one you just attacked. When moving this way, your total movement may not exceed your speed.
Normal: You may only take one 5-foot step during a full attack.
Anyone can take it (it doesn't have prerequisites that might exclude certain fighting styles), it benefits warriors and attack oriented monsters equally, and it doesn't seem to step on the toes of other feats. In fact, it has potential to augment certain feats and fighting styles (such as 2-weapon fighting and Whirlwind Attack). I'm not sure if it totally satisfies how dynamic I'd like high level full attacks to be, but it seems to be a good start (for instance, should I allow an exception to the 5-foot step rule and allow one in conjunction with this feats movement?) And it seems very simple to resolve during play which after my last campaign (went to level 19) is one of my primary goals.
I run into problems for creatures that don't have them, even though they make multiple attacks and have a high bab (such as dragons).
I have noticed that, too.
Perhaps a multiattack could be treated in the same way as whirlwind attack, above. In the end, it's just important for the attacking dragon to step up to the fighter after he sacrificed his last attack to get out of range (as if 10 ft. would suffice...).
So, you have the BAB of the Dragon (let's say +12), and you can calculate how many attacks it would normally have (3). So the Dragon could "sacrifice" the first two attacks, and (having a base movement of 40ft) move 30ft, and then make all multiattacks at -10.
I'm uncertain though how this will affect gameplay, It surely has to be tested thoroughly.
Dragons are one I'm hestiant to extend this to. One with a BAB +16 already attacks at +16/+16/+16/+16/+11/+11/+11, rather than +16/+11/+6/+1. And it flies. Allowing it extra mobility on top of that is a bit much. If I did go that route, I'd certainly use the "pairs of attacks" trade, as I do for Two-Weapon Fighters; the dragon would trade BOTH claw attacks for a bit more movement, and/or BOTH wing attacks.
One with a BAB +16 already attacks at +16/+16/+16/+16/+11/+11/+11, rather than +16/+11/+6/+1.
Are you sure about that? I thought it had a claw-claw-bite-tail-routine, which would give it 4 simultaneous attacks, hence the whirlwind approach.
If a dragon is treated differently, then substitute "Dragon" with "Wyvern" or something similar.
But I can see the rule will lead to difficulties when extended to non-standard attack patterns.
One with a BAB +16 already attacks at +16/+16/+16/+16/+11/+11/+11, rather than +16/+11/+6/+1.Are you sure about that? I thought it had a claw-claw-bite-tail-routine, which would give it 4 simultaneous attacks, hence the whirlwind approach.
Look at a young red dragon in the PRD; it has BAB +11 and has attacks "Melee bite +17 (2d6+10), 2 claws +17 (1d8+7), 2 wings +12 (1d6+3), tail slap +12 (1d8+10)." Subtracting out STR bonuses, etc., that's a BAB +11 critter with attacks +11/+11/+11/+6/+6/+6.
EDIT: My original post had an extra +16; it should have read "+16/+16/+16/+11/+11/+11." Still, that's six attacks (a bite and 2 claws as primary attacks with no penalty, and 2 wings and a tail a secondary attacks with -5 penalty), not four.
You're right... that makes things a bit difficult. Too bad, I am really looking for ways to make combat more dynamic, but it should work for both sides.
You're right... that makes things a bit difficult. Too bad, I am really looking for ways to make combat more dynamic, but it should work for both sides.
You might give the dragon access to a Fly-By Attack feat chain allowing attacks while moving. But, honestly, dragons are already excellent mobile combatants, given their flight and breath weapons. The only critter that suffers a bit is something like an umber hulk -- which usually pops out of its tunnel right on top of you anyway -- or a troll, which needs all those attacks to get its rend in anyway. The big cats almost all get pounce, which supercedes any of this stuff. So overall, I suspect that most monsters using natural attacks won't be affected too much.
On the other hand, for monsters using weapons, the rules are the same as for PCs.
I would think that Whirlwind attack and Cleave would not be usable with this. It seems that they are geared to staying in the same place.
With the Dragon you could say it could substitute any of its attacks as movement instead of the entire iterative.
I was thinking of augmenting the 5' step as follows:
Combat Shift:
Base speed 5’ no 5' shift
Base speed 10’ – 30’ 5' shift
Base speed 35’ – 60’ 10' shift
Base speed 65’ – 90’ 15' shift
etc.
This would be augmented by size (based on the occupied square size)
5' Tiny - Medium +0'
10' Large +5'
15' Huge +10'
20' Gargantuan +15'
30' Colossal +25'
This total cannot exceed the character/creatures base move.
Any movement over this value would provoke an Attack of Opportunity.
This movement could be divided in half and taken between attacks. if the move ends in a 5 then it the 5’ would be chosen between the first or second move.
i.e a character/creature w 5’ shift could only move 1 time
10’ could move 5’ and 5’
15’ could move 10’ and 5’
etc
This would allow a creature that is Colossal move a normal steps distance. A 5-6’ human covers about 2.5-3’ with a step (about half its height) so a 5’ step is really about 2 steps. So a 30’ tall giant would cover 6 times that which would be 30’ (2 15’ steps). This would be more in line unless it has really tiny legs. A 5’ step for a colossal dragon means it would have to take baby steps the equivalent of a human taking about a 5” step. Sort of unfair.
Second it allows for characters/creatures that move with exceptional speed to move a bit farther without being attacked.
This would also make feats like Combat reflexes, Step up, and Mobility a bit more attractive. I believe it would also augment the desire to take Shot on the run or Spring attack to keep up with the pace.
You could also use this with the feat system mentioned earlier.