Hey everybody.
While being easy to use, I always felt it's somewhat unrealistic that even if you beat a AC for 20 or more points, you won't deal more damage unless you score a critical hit too.
I would like to use this thread to collect and discuss ideas in how to solve this "dilemma".
I will start with my idea(s) so far:
1) For every X points your attack-role beats the AC you get +Y to your damage. (Y might be a flat number or a die or what ever)
2) Critical hits are not tailored to your die role but to a specific second (critical) AC. Usually 10 points above the targets AC.
3) For every 3/4/5 points of your BAB you increase the thread range of all your attacks by 1. For every 3/4/5 x2 points you increase the critical damage multiplier by 1.
DracoDruid DO NOT USE THAT TAG. thats for design staff only man. Jason and crew only use that tag. helps to point out stuff they want people to focus on.Redo the thread with out the tag.
I was about to wonder since when the [Design Focus] tag has been cleared for people to spread their houserules around. O_o
Sorry, didn't know that. Better now?
yep sorry my post looks kinda hateful. didnt mean it as such . and yes much better.
|
Hey everybody.
While being easy to use, I always felt it's somewhat unrealistic that even if you beat a AC for 20 or more points, you won't deal more damage unless you score a critical hit too.
I would like to use this thread to collect and discuss ideas in how to solve this "dilemma".I will start with my idea(s) so far:
1) For every X points your attack-role beats the AC you get +Y to your damage. (Y might be a flat number or a die or what ever)
2) Critical hits are not tailored to your die role but to a specific second (critical) AC. Usually 10 points above the targets AC.
3) For every 3/4/5 points of your BAB you increase the thread range of all your attacks by 1. For every 3/4/5 x2 points you increase the critical damage multiplier by 1.
1) There are already feats like Power Attack and Combat Expertise to use excess points of attack bonus.
2) This one has the option of being totally devestating to low AC classes like barbarians. It also makes spells like true strike and ghost strike extremely powerful, especially if you combine true strike with ranged touch spells.
3) This one would destroy the balance of crit mulitplier vs threat range. While Devestating Blow and Weapon Mastery also do this, they come into play much later.
Then come up with a better idea!
If BAB represents OVERALL Combat Prowess, it's unlogical to need feats for doing more damage if you hit better!
|
|
Then come up with a better idea!
If BAB represents OVERALL Combat Prowess, it's unlogical to need feats for doing more damage if you hit better!
You already do more damage without using feats. If you hit by 10 or even 20 better, you have a much better chance of hitting the enemy with all your cascading attacks, thereby doing more damage.
But that's just stupid mechanic. I do better damage because I hit him more often?
Listen: If you don't think this topic is worth being changed, just stop posting in here - no offense.
|
|
But that's just stupid mechanic. I do better damage because I hit him more often?
Listen: If you don't think this topic is worth being changed, just stop posting in here - no offense.
Well, I tried to explain why, in my opinion, all supposed fixes are flawed. If you want mechanics for using excess points in combat, you might get some inspiration from the Savage Coast Campaign Setting. I'd rather see it as an optinal rule than core, because its changes on combat are significant.
Exceeding the enemies AC by a certain amount would give the character additional options, like forcing the contrahent to make a 5ft. step or giving him a weak condition like dazed. Those modifications should be weaker than things like power attack or special maneuvers because those limit the characters options and sometimes, like Power Attack, reduce his chances of hitting.|
|
Actually, your suggestion is not bad, and it mirrors the CMB staged effects (when you beat the DC by 10, 20, etc).
How about this, either as an optional rule sidebar, or as a rule?
Hit +0 - Deal damage as normal
Hit +20 - Deal damage with 1 extra dice (ie longsword does +1d8)
Hit +40 - Deal damage with 2 extra dice (ie longsword does +2d8)
Or you could do the following:
Hit +0 - Deal damage as normal
Hit +10 - Deal damage, opponent must make DC 20 Fort save or be dazed for 1 round
Hit +20 - Deal damage, opponent must make DC 30 Fort save or be sickened for 1 minute
DracoDruid, it seems like this will be a pretty one sided discussion if only people who agree with you are allowed to post. I think Power Attack and critical hits already cover this need nicely. The fact that a higher attack bonus means a better chance of confirming a critical hit should also help address your concerns about one hit power.
You obviously want more than that though, so maybe each time you gain an iterative attack (+6/+11/+16) you could gain another point onto your threat range. This way those critical hit confirmation rolls would come into play more often and BAB would make you hit harder. An easier and perhaps more balanced option would be free 3.5 style Power Attack for every PC with every weapon. What I'd try to avoid would be turning every attack roll into a math problem to determine not only if I hit but how much I hit by. This could really bog things down with multiple attacks. So could more crits, but at least crits are fun (especially since we use the Paizo crit deck)
But that's just stupid mechanic. I do better damage because I hit him more often?
If you're familiar with boxing, martial arts, or related video games the concept of a combo should make sense. Combining a few strikes in a row is often the best way to land one really good one. Also, even if all of your attacks do the same HP damage it seem clear that the one which takes your enemy from 5 to -5 HP (almost dead) is more physically damaging than the one which took him from 95 to 85 HP (just a scratch).