This is a suggestion that came up during the Alpha 2 discussions, but it seemed to get some good responses, so I thought I'd bring it up again. The goal was to try and provide melee types with some more flexibility in moving around the battlefield and not completely hamstringing damage while doing so.
=============================================================
I would like to see the option for any character to give up an iterative attack for an extra move of 1/2 their normal movement and peform a full attack minus the one iterative attack given up.
So an 11th level paladin with +11/+6/+1 attacks could give up his +1 attack to move 1/2 of his normal movement (so 10' in the case of a paladin with a 20' movement) and still make his +11 and +6 attacks.
If you allowed a character to give up more than 1 attack and gain 1/2 movement each time it would add some nice options. For example, a 16th level paladin (+16/+11/+6/+1) with a 30' move could:
1) Do a 5' step and attack 4 times (+16/+11/+6/+1)
2) Move 15' and attack 3 times (+16/+11/+6)
3) Move 30' and attack 2 times (+16/+11)
4) Move 45' and attack once at +16
5) Charge 60' and attack once
Some notes:
- The extra movement would provoke AoO's if applicable.
- Two weapon combatants would have to give up their highest iterative on their off hand weapon in addition to the iteratives they give up on their main hand in order to gain the movement.
- If gaining a 1/2 move per iterative given up is deemed too much, even a 5' step gained per sacrificed iterative would help more than the current situation of all-or-nothing.
I quite agree... instead, I suggest to create a feat called "pounce" or similar, that allows a character to use their full round attack after a move. And we get rid of all these annoyng lion totem barbarian... :P
|
If the paladin had 30 feet of movement I would want to see something like this.
1) Do a 5' step and attack 4 times (+16/+11/+6/+1)
2) Move 10' and attack 3 times (+16/+11/+6)
3) Move 15' and attack 2 times (+16/+11)
4) Move 30' and attack once at +16
5) Charge 60' and attack once
Basically for every attack you give up you get 5' of movement.
I like this idea and concur with lastknightleft's numbers. An extra 5 feet of movement per iterative given up seems reasonable.
In the case of two weapon fighting I would rule that the same off-hand iterative attack is given up as is sacrificed for the primary hand. This would allow a high level TWF fighter to move 20' (5+3 atks) and still make his two best attacks, an ability they sorely need.
What about things like rapid shot and haste/speed effects?
My inclination is to allow these to be taken as normal. So a 16th level ranger with haste and rapid shot could move 20' and fire three shots at -2 (or 60 feet and fire once, or 120 feet with a charge).
I like the idea of getting an extra 5' step for giving up an iterative attack as part of a full-round action. I also like getting 1/2 your iterative attacks as a standard action, though I'd lean toward rounding down (minimum 1 attack).
Having it rounded up would be best IMO. Because for most of your career you only get one attack as a standard action until you have 4 attacks (half of 2 attacks is obviously one, but half of 3 attacks rounded down is also 1). On the flip side, you'll get 2 attacks with halving 3 and rounding up. It would give the player more rewards in shorter stretches of time.
The idea of a 5' step in lieu of an iterative attack would work fine, except you would have re-think that 5' steps do not provoke an AoO. Otherwise I like the idea.
I would suggest that the 5' step replacement should take the place in the order of the attack and those traded for iterative attacks WOULD provoke an AoO from exiting a threatened space.
For example: Fighter +15/+10+/+5 and a standard 5' step before or after the full attack.
okay
5'step/+15/5'step/+5
5'step/+10/+5/5'step
+15/+10/5'step/5'step
5'step/5'step/5'step/+5
5'step/5'step/+5/5'step
not
5'step/+15/5'step/+10
5'step/5'step/+15/+10
5'step/5'step/5'step/+15
This would eliminate an AoO from a creature with 10' reach. Or he could attack +15/+10 then take two 5' steps back from the enemy, also eliminating the AoO from leaving a threatened space.
A Fighter with a reach weapon could abuse the hell out of this rule. A tactic similar to the Spring attack with a reach weapon could be applied, but no need for any feats.
I suppose you could rule that only the first 5' step did not provoke an AoO, later ones would. Or that only the standard 5' step did not provoke, 5' steps traded for iterative attacks would.
It bears some thought and maybe playtesting.
-Jack
It seems that most of the responses to this like the idea if it's a 5' step instead of a 1/2 move per iterative given up. I'd still rather see more freedom of movement given to melee types than a few 5' steps a round.
A caster can move and cast a spell during a round (and even 2 spells a round at high level with quicken spell), and their 'increase' in power comes from the spells getting more powerful. Melee types gain power by gaining extra attacks - but they can only be used if they don't move!
What would people say to gaining 1/2 a move per iterative given up but limit the movement by saying if you move more than your movement rate in a round you cannot attack also attack (unless of course the character uses charge instead of a full attack action)?
|
It seems that most of the responses to this like the idea if it's a 5' step instead of a 1/2 move per iterative given up. I'd still rather see more freedom of movement given to melee types than a few 5' steps a round.
A caster can move and cast a spell during a round (and even 2 spells a round at high level with quicken spell), and their 'increase' in power comes from the spells getting more powerful. Melee types gain power by gaining extra attacks - but they can only be used if they don't move!
What would people say to gaining 1/2 a move per iterative given up but limit the movement by saying if you move more than your movement rate in a round you cannot attack also attack (unless of course the character uses charge instead of a full attack action)?
Eric,
As you know, I've been playtesting my Fighter Talent Feats (Think Tank - Fighters thread).
The fighter rewrite gets that "Slash n Dash" class feature that allows more 5' steps after attacks.
That was just mentioned to lay the groundwork for the playtesting testimony here:
what we've been trying is allowing full movement and full attacks. Its already widely believed/known that spellcasters are always more powerful than warriors. They can potentially cast two spells (via quickened) and still move their whole movement. Practiced Spellcaster feat (Complete Arcane) can even let you move TWICE during those castings.
So my hypotheis to try out was the full movement would not horribly unbalance things.
The rules are this:
You can Move and make a full attack action up to your full movement.
You can attack full and then move full up to your movement.
You can attack, then move, then attack again with an iterative attack.*
You can charge up to 2x movement and get one attack at +2 to hit.
You can attack, then "ready a partial charge" - (essentially you're surveying the battle until you see where you're needed - then you can do a partial charge and attack - up to your normal move, in a straight line and cannot be obstructed - all criterial of a normal charge).
You can move and do a special feat that is a full attack action and get only that one attack (such as Overhand Chop).
You can do the full attack action and get only that one attack (such as Overhand Chop), and then move.
You cannot move, attack, move, and attack. (once you moved twice, you cannot move again.)**
*You cannot move away from someone you just attacked to attack another unless that first foe does not threaten you (i.e. you must drop him to neg hps, or disarm him, or somehow move him away from you).
**Although you cannot move, attack, move, attack, the "Slash & Dash" does allow you to make the 5' steps between attacks in addition - so long as you still do not move more than what your normal amount allows.
If you intend to use your off hand against a different foe after moving, you have to apply a -2 to your first attack, otherwise you cannot later opt to use your off-hand.
(All such movement above DOES provoke AoO from anyone/everyone you move past or up to as normal; for instance if you were being threatened at fist by someone and you attacked him, dropped him, allowing you to move and attack another - as you approach that other target it DOES get to make an AoO on you since you started as threatened and moved to another threatened after making an attack - so that is a deterrent - but the 5' steps from Slash and Dash does NOT provoke AoOs.)
So far the results have been quite good. We're only trying at 6th to 8th level characters right now. So only 2 attacks max at this point.
One of the hang-ups I'm having is HASTE spell - makes it too powerful. 1 of two potential fixes I have then is Haste affects only 1 person, or it only allows the extra attack when making no move (other than a 5 ft step)
Either way - were' having a blast and is hasn't seemed unbalancing yet..... For the most part - I'm thinking for most "sweet-spot" games (levels 5-12) most of the time, it's only going to mean 2 attacks with a full attack usually (3 with two-weapon wielders).
Robert
I can see why you went that route Robert, but I'm having trouble with giving up the strategic value of trading attacks for movement. Especially at higher levels with monsters that also gain full attacks I can foresee some problems with allowing a move and a full attack (though I'm sure some of that will be seen with my 'give up 1 attack for 1/2 move' rule too).
I can imagine soft defensive characters getting ripped to shreds by some monsters if the monsters can do a move and still gain a full attack...and the same will probably happen to enemy spellcasters when your players' tanks do a move and full attack (again this is for high levels where BAB's of +11 or higher are seen).
|
|
I can see why you went that route Robert, but I'm having trouble with giving up the strategic value of trading attacks for movement. Especially at higher levels with monsters that also gain full attacks I can foresee some problems with allowing a move and a full attack (though I'm sure some of that will be seen with my 'give up 1 attack for 1/2 move' rule too).
I can imagine soft defensive characters getting ripped to shreds by some monsters if the monsters can do a move and still gain a full attack...and the same will probably happen to enemy spellcasters when your players' tanks do a move and full attack (again this is for high levels where BAB's of +11 or higher are seen).
I can understand that. I was looking more for something to fill that level 6 - 12.
I definitely see that adding more movement would make the game/combats more fun. it certainly has for our playtesting (will continue that on Sunday), with trying the single move and full attack.
I decided to try a different approach. Where-as you are trying to strade the strategic value of a move for an attack, I'm trying to imagine that it could have or should have been all along to be able to get all a full attack and a full move.
Something else I've considered: Limiting iterative attacks - only a max of 3 attacks per round (at +11 BAB). This also will cut down on the amount of attacks and dice rolls at higher level. The rationale for this is: 1) the 4th and subsequent attacks rarely hit anyway. 2)For ever BAB over 10 - add 1 point of damage to each attack.
Thus at BAB +16, instead of getting a 4th attack, they get +6 to damage for the other three attacks. This may help diminish the amount of attacks being taken, especially by high level giants etc, and still provide damage (+18 if all three hit) commensurate of what a 4th attack may have gained if it did hit.
So far there hasn't been a big problem - but the party hasn't fought anything with a lot of attacks and damage yet.
I will continue to post more feedback as I try it.
Some things that piggyback on the RAW that may have to be changed:
Haste (as I mentioned in a previous post). I have two ideas to fix that:
1) Limit it to affect only 1 person. Allowing 1 person an extra attack at highest BAB while still making full attack is still quite powerful.
2) Allow for an extra attack at 5 pts lower BAB than the last attack taken that round. (So someone with +8 / +3 makes two attacks then gets a 3rd at -2.) along with a full move.
Spring Attack. (as I mentioend before moving from one threatened targets after hitting and dropping it - to another provokes AoO.) I'm thinking this feat prevents AoOs from anyone the person attacked that round (for the purpose of AoOs provoked by movement - if he casts a spell it still provokes the AoO - only movement provoked attacks are null.)
Fighting with two-weapons. I think what I'm doing with this is that the off-hand attacks as part of the on-hand attack. In other words, the off hand attack (if only one) can only strike at the same time as the on-hand. So a person can attack with both hands, then move, then use his iterative attacks with his on-hand. Imp.Two-Weapon fighting would then allow the off-hand to attack at the same time as the on-hand's second attack roll.
Again - you cannot attack something, then move (more than 5' step) to another target and make an attack against a second target unless the first target does not threaten you at the time you leave his 'threatened' area. You can attack, and move to another target - but you can't attack second target (unless first no longer threatens you).
Since PF has released a lot of feats that use a "full attack" to get one attack, theres a big chance that many rounds, a fighter may be forgoing iterative attacks in favor of using that maneuver anyway - so all he's really getting out of this combat movement change I'm tooling with - is being able to move along with said full-attack maneuver.
Robert
|
|
It seems that most of the responses to this like the idea if it's a 5' step instead of a 1/2 move per iterative given up. I'd still rather see more freedom of movement given to melee types than a few 5' steps a round.
A caster can move and cast a spell during a round (and even 2 spells a round at high level with quicken spell), and their 'increase' in power comes from the spells getting more powerful. Melee types gain power by gaining extra attacks - but they can only be used if they don't move!
What would people say to gaining 1/2 a move per iterative given up but limit the movement by saying if you move more than your movement rate in a round you cannot attack also attack (unless of course the character uses charge instead of a full attack action)?
I see it as you see it Eric. (suprise). 5' for iterative still does not provide enough of a movement freedom trade-off.
For your purposes, I would suggest trying 1/2 move.
The problem (for me), is that this still doesn't help those with less than three attacks (minimum 11th leve before it even comes into play).
Are you then giving up your +6 BAB attack (2nd attack) or your +1 (3rd attack)?
And finally - just so that I'm sure I understand your intent:
You're suggestion of trading in one iterative attack for extra 1/2 move - does that allow a person with 30 ft move to only move 15 ft that round and make two attcks? or is that 15 ft MORE than the normal allowed 30 (45 ft that round)?
How will this apply to creatures with multiple attacks (say a Vrock or a Dire Lion)? Does the Multi-Attack creature feat play a role?
Robert
How will this apply to creatures with multiple attacks (say a Vrock or a Dire Lion)? Does the Multi-Attack creature feat play a role?
Let me just say, as I have on other threads, that I'm a big proponent of the basic idea under discussion here. (I'd also like to see fighters, as a class feature or feat, be able to "hold" movement and iterative attacks for immediate use when it's not their turn, but that's another issue).
In answer to the question above, tying the movement ability directly to the BAB iterative breaks (+6, +11, and +16) sidelines the question nicely. Currently, the vrock can move and attack (1 claw, or 1 bite), or step 5' and attack (2 claws, 2 talons, and bite). If we tie this ability to BAB (+6 to +10, move and attack; +11 to +15 two half-moves and 2 attacks; etc.), then the vrock (at BAB +11) could make a half move, attack with a claw (or talon or bite), make another half move, and attack again with something else. The Pounce ability, if used, would trump the BAB-move combo by allowing one full movement and all attacks.
|
|
How will this apply to creatures with multiple attacks (say a Vrock or a Dire Lion)? Does the Multi-Attack creature feat play a role?Let me just say, as I have on other threads, that I'm a big proponent of the basic idea under discussion here. (I'd also like to see fighters, as a class feature or feat, be able to "hold" movement and iterative attacks for immediate use when it's not their turn, but that's another issue).
In answer to the question above, tying the movement ability directly to the BAB iterative breaks (+6, +11, and +16) sidelines the question nicely. Currently, the vrock can move and attack (1 claw, or 1 bite), or step 5' and attack (2 claws, 2 talons, and bite). If we tie this ability to BAB (+6 to +10, move and attack; +11 to +15 two half-moves and 2 attacks; etc.), then the vrock (at BAB +11) could make a half move, attack with a claw (or talon or bite), make another half move, and attack again with something else. The Pounce ability, if used, would trump the BAB-move combo by allowing one full movement and all attacks.
So the Vrock with BAB+11 (in above example) could move half move, attack with claw, then move half move, attack with claw again.
What about move once and attack with two claws at the same time?
(this all seems confusing with regards to creatures with multiple attacks).
As for the "hold action" you mentioned that you'd like to see: see my post above as one of the options available:
"You can attack, then "ready a partial charge" - (essentially you're surveying the battle until you see where you're needed) - then you can do a partial charge and attack - up to your normal move, in a straight line and cannot be obstructed - all criterial of a normal charge). "
Robert
The problem (for me), is that this still doesn't help those with less than three attacks (minimum 11th leve before it even comes into play).
You're correct, my solution doesn't help when you start with 2 attacks. For myself I'm ok with this since I feel the power balance between melee types and casters isn't bad until higher levels (somewhere around 12th).
Are you then giving up your +6 BAB attack (2nd attack) or your +1 (3rd attack)?
If a character had 4 attacks at +16/+11/+6/+1, they could do the following:
1) Charge up to double base movement and attack once at +16 (standard rules)2) Take a 5' step and do full attack action at +16/+11/+6/+1 (standard rules)
3) Move 1/2 movement (meaning 15' for a character with a 30' move) and make attacks at +16/+11/+6
4) Move a full movement (30' in this case) and make attacks at +16/+11
And finally - just so that I'm sure I understand your intent:You're suggestion of trading in one iterative attack for extra 1/2 move - does that allow a person with 30 ft move to only move 15 ft that round and make two attcks?
Yes
How will this apply to creatures with multiple attacks (say a Vrock or a Dire Lion)? Does the Multi-Attack creature feat play a role?
Hmm, good question. I think I'd go with the creature losing all secondary attacks OR 1 primary attack in exchange for 1/2 movement -- But that's probably too complicated. I'm not sure if the 'trade attacks for iteratives' works as well for creatures with multiple attacks.
So the Vrock with BAB+11 (in above example) could move half move, attack with claw, then move half move, attack with claw again. What about move once and attack with two claws at the same time? (this all seems confusing with regards to creatures with multiple attacks).
Not much more so than for fighters, I guess. If the +11/+6/+1 fighter can give up the +1 and then do half move/+11, half-move +6, could he instead do full move/+11/+6? It'd work the same way, I suppose.
EDIT: After reading Eric's last post as well, I'm starting to think that maybe "trading" attacks for movement isn't the best way to structure things, as opposed to progressively adding both movement and iterative attacks as part of the BAB benefits. Dunno. This whole thing bears more thought.
|
|
EDIT: After reading Eric's last post as well, I'm starting to think that maybe "trading" attacks for movement isn't the best way to structure things, as opposed to progressively adding both movement and iterative attacks as part of the BAB benefits. Dunno. This whole thing bears more thought.
@ Krirth and Eric:
Here is the official write-up of my movement rules I handed to my players a few weeks ago (after the conversation of this kind of movement was first discussed on here) As a potential alternative to the way you both have been describing, please read and consider its effects. The main difference is that I don't want to wait till 12th level to increas viable movement. Most campaign begin falling apart shortly after 12th, and most games are run in the 5-12th range; so it would be nice as far as I am concerned for these types of advantages can begin to be utilized before campaigns truly get around to having 3 attacks per round.
That being said - I feel (although I am biased i'm sure) that my write-up is done in a clear and concise way to where it can be official rules and be understood by most. I tried to address it from most obvious angles to prevent any gaps in the rules. It does contain some verbage that correlates to my redesigned fighter in the Think Tank Fighters thread - as that is what I'm using in my future campaigns and being playtested now along with these movement rules.
MOVEMENT RULES
In a round of combat you can make one standard action along with one move action, or make attack actions, along with a move action, or two separate move actions. When spending a move action for actual movement, you can move up to the normally allowed speed (based on racial movement combined with any modifiers for class features, magical enhancements, penalties, armor use, etc). Therefore, if you use both of your allowed move actions in a round for the purpose of movement you can move up to 2 times your allowed movement speed for that round.
When making an attack action, there are two different types of attack actions: full attack, and single-attack.
Single-Attack: If your BAB is less than six, you are only allowed one attack per round. Two-weapon Fighting will allow a second (off-hand) attack, and some class features, such as Flurry of Blows, and some feats such as Rapid Shot does allow multiple attacks even when BAB is less than six. However, this is not considered a “Single-Attack” action. Sometimes, even if your BAB is six or more, you may be relegated to only making a single-attack; perhaps magically compelled (such as with a Slow spell effect), or perhaps a maneuver you are making relegates you to only taking a single-attack. When making a single-attack action, you can typically make one attack which can take place either before or after your move action for that round. (Note, you don’t HAVE to take a move action). Under normal circumstances, if you move before you attack, you cannot move again after your attack.
Full-Attack: If your BAB is high enough (six or greater), or if you are attacking with multiple weapons (or both ends of a double-weapon), or using various feats or class abilities that allow multiple attacks, you are considered to be taking a Full-Attack action. Some attack maneuvers or feat-granted attack options are considered to require a Full-Attack action (such as Overhand Chop). When such a feat declares that doing so is a Full-Attack action, this simply means that you get that attack and that attack only for the round. Under normal circumstances, you cannot combine a Full-Attack action with a single-Attack or a Standard action in the same round. You can make a single move action in conjunction with a full attack action. If your move action is used as movement, you need not use up all your movement at once. In other words, you can move a portion of your movement before your first attack, and another portion of your movement after your first attack, so long as your total movement for the round does not exceed your normal allowed movement speed for a round.
When moving while doing a full attack action, you can choose to move up to your allowed movement and them make all of your attacks for the full-attack option (or the one attack you are allow if performing an action or feat that is done as a full-attack), or you can opt to take all of your attacks first, and then move up to your allowed movement. Ultimately you can make any combination or order of attacks and movement in a round, so long as you do not make more attacks than you are allowed or make more movement in a round than you are allowed.
Attack Multiple Targets: There are a number of ways to attack multiple targets in a single round. The Cleave feat (and Great Cleave feat) allows you to attack two (or more) opponents who are standing adjacent to each other. Typically you do not move before attacking the second (or subsequent) foe(s) when using Cleave (or Great Cleave), but certain fighter talents, feats, or class features such as Slash and Dash may allow for 5’ steps between attacks. You can also attack one opponent with one or more attacks, then use a move action (or part of your move action) to move to a different opponent and then attack him as well with any remaining attacks you are allowed for that round. However, you can only attack a second target in this manner (or subsequent targets), if the last person you attacked does not threaten you at the time you move away from it (either by killing it, disarming it, not being able to reach you when you walked from it, etc). You are allowed to move from target you did attack that does still threaten you, but he is then allowed an attack of opportunity, as well as anyone else whose threatened squares you enter during your movement, and you cannot make any iterative attacks, since the last creature you did attack still threatened you. You can move away from someone who is threatening you to attack another foe that move towards (since you didn’t actually attack the first creature), however both creatures get attacks of opportunity on your for moving in and out of threatened squares.
Attacking with Two Weapons: When making full attack options with two weapons (either one attack each or multiple attacks with each), your off hand attack is always considered to be attacking at the same time as the weapon in your on-hand. If you allowed multiple attacks with your off-hand weapon (via the Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feat for instance), the second attack with your off-hand is considered to be attacking at the same time as your second attack with your on-hand is attacking. Thus, your off-hand attacks are made at the same time in a round as their equal BAB counterpart with the on-hand. Each weapon can attack two separate foes, but still are required to be made at the same time. Therefore if you make one attack, then move to a different target, your off-hand cannot attack the second target unless you have the Improved Two-Weapon Fighting Feat, and that attack would be the second iterative attack for the round.
Charge: You can charge up to twice your normal movement and make your full-attack action of attacks or full-attack maneuver. When charging you move up to two times your normal movement, and receive a +2 bonus to your attack rolls. However, your AC is lowered by 2 points due to your recklessness. Also, you can only charge in a straight line (straight as determined by left/right movement - not up/down), and you cannot charge through any square that is considered occupied or difficult terrain. Since movement in a ‘straight line’ for the purposes of charge action does not apply to up/down movement, you can potentially jump (using Jump skill) over squares containing obstacles or difficult terrain.
Attacks of Opportunity: Any time you move during a round, you may provoke an Attack of Opportunity as normal. If at the beginning of your turn, you are being threatened by an opponent, and then during your turn you move (more than a 5’ step) to attack a second target, you provoke an attack of opportunity from any creature that you move into a square that they threaten, including your target of your iterative attack.
Difficult Terrain: Any square that contains an object, creature, or terrain that the DM determines is difficult to move through, counts as 2 squares of movement when calculating your characters movement for that round. This includes squares containing companions (other PCs), henchmen, animal companions, beasts of burdens, objects such as barrels, crates, stairs/steps, or terrain such as puddles, ice, grease, rocks, rubble, debris, detritus, gravel, sand, etc and even dead creatures. Difficult Terrain invokes a penalty to Acrobatic checks of usually -2 but can be worse. You cannot take a 5’ step into or out of Difficult Terrain. The DM is encouraged to place an X or other notation on each square occupied by a creature that has been slain during combat (or multiple squares where larger creatures were killed). DMs can apply greater than a -2 to Acrobatics when standing in squares once occupied by creatures of significant size. When making attacks from squares considered as Difficult Terrain, you must make an Acrobatics – balance check of DC 10 or you cannot attack. If you fail by more than 5, you trip and fall prone in that square. DM may rule that standing in squares containing objects or very large creatures may qualify as “higher ground” when attacking someone firmly on the ground (+1 to attack rolls).
5’ Step: Some fighter talents, the Slash & Dash fighter class feature, along with some creatures racial abilities allow for instantaneous or sometimes spontaneous 5’ steps of movement. These do not provoke attack of opportunity. You can also take a 5’ step as part of your normal actions in a round. You can allocate your attacks to any number of creatures that you can reach, and so long as you take only a 5’ step for the entire round, you do not provoke an attack of opportunity from those threatening you, for the purpose of moving. Note certain abilities such as Slash & Dash allow you to take multiple 5’ steps in a round and doing so similarly allows you do so without provoking an Attack of Opportunity. If you have already moved at some point during the round (more than a 5’ step) and you move up to attack a subsequent target but only need to move 5’ to get to him, that is NOT considered a 5’ step, and does still provoke an attack of opportunity (unless that movement of 5 ft was allowed as part of a special 5’ step that some combat feat/ability/maneuver allowed you to make). For instance, you can attack, take a 5’ step, and then attack a different creature with any and all iterative attacks and this would not provoke an AoO. However, if you move 10’ towards a creature, attack, and then move towards a second creature that is only 5’ away – that 5’ is NOT considered a 5’ step that prevents attacks of opportunity since you had already moved more than 5’ in the round (unless that 5’ move was allowed as part of Slash & Dash or some other combat feat, talent, or maneuver that allowed a 5’ step in that instance).
Spring Attack: This feat now allows you to move through the battlefield making attacks on multiple targets, while preventing Attacks of Opportunity. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity (for the consequence of moving) from any creature you make an attack against in a round.
Haste: This spell increases your movement speed by 30’ per round, or doubles your speed if it is less than 30. This spell also allows you to make one additional attack at your highest BAB each round. This extra attack always comes at the end of all your movement and attacks for the round. Therefore if you’ve moved away from one target to attack another, your extra attack must go against the second target since it is adjudicated last, and you no longer threaten the first target. This spell also still provides a +1 to attack rolls, AC, Reflex Saves, and Initiative modifiers. This spell affects only 1 target within range.
Try it out if you'd like. Offer feedback. Point out obvious errors, potential loopholes, or pitfalls (like my thought of the creatures with multiple attacks in your scenarios).
Thanks,
Robert
Robert--I actually like what you just posted better than the "trading" idea. I'd compress the language a bit as follows:
TACTICAL MOVEMENT
In a round of combat you can:
(a) take one standard action, and also move up to your speed; or
(b) make all of your normal attacks, and also move a number of feet equal to your speed; or
(c) move up to twice your normal speed, but not attack or take a standard action.
Movement and attacks need not occur in any particular order, and you may split up your movement as you see fit. For example, a character with a Speed of 30 ft. and two attacks at +6/+1 could choose to move 20 ft., use the +1 attack, move another 10 ft., and then use the +6 attack. This is the primary departure from the 3.5e tactical movement rules. Movement in combat always follows the normal rules for provoking attacks of opportunity, however, including movement out of threatened squares.
----------------
I'd keep your existing text regarding TWF, charge, terrain, etc.
In this system, monsters would use exactly the same rules as characters. Monsters with the Pounce special attack can move double their normal speed and still make all their attacks, but can't choose to move 4x their normal speed.
Robert,
Considering your goal is the improve the tactical combat options for melee types up to around 12th level I think your rules are very solid. However, I have 3 campaigns I'm DMing right now - one is at 4th level, the next at 10th, and the last just over 20th level.
My experiences lead me to be more concerned with levels where BAB's are +11 or higher because that's where I start to notice the huge discrepancies in damage on standard attacks vs. full attacks. I was hoping to come up with some general combat rules to allow some flexibility in movement and full attacks without unleashing the full fury of a dragon flying accross the battlefield and killing the mage in one round.
I think I'm going to use my rules but have creatures give up all secondary attacks to gain a 1/2 move, and if that favors the players then so be it - but I'm too conservative to all the full move + full attack.
|
|
Robert,
Considering your goal is the improve the tactical combat options for melee types up to around 12th level I think your rules are very solid. However, I have 3 campaigns I'm DMing right now - one is at 4th level, the next at 10th, and the last just over 20th level.My experiences lead me to be more concerned with levels where BAB's are +11 or higher because that's where I start to notice the huge discrepancies in damage on standard attacks vs. full attacks. I was hoping to come up with some general combat rules to allow some flexibility in movement and full attacks without unleashing the full fury of a dragon flying accross the battlefield and killing the mage in one round.
I think I'm going to use my rules but have creatures give up all secondary attacks to gain a 1/2 move, and if that favors the players then so be it - but I'm too conservative to all the full move + full attack.
Thanks for the great feedback, Eric!
Thats very keen and savvy of you to be concerned with the +11 BAB and up - and the notion of the dragon.....ooooh, hadn't even considered that......you know, that'll be the perfect test! Thanks
I'm pretty sure that the wizard would be in trouble - but then again, every fighter/barbarian etc can make their full move/charge and unleash hell on the creature too - so it may actually make combats complete faster!
Nonetheless, I thank you for taking a look and being objective. Good luck on your ideas - let me know how they work out - I do see it favoriting the PCs heavily - but meh, the DM can always stack the deck as he needs.
Let us know.
Robert
|
|
Robert--I actually like what you just posted better than the "trading" idea. I'd compress the language a bit as follows:
TACTICAL MOVEMENT
In a round of combat you can:
(a) take one standard action, and also move up to your speed; or
(b) make all of your normal attacks, and also move a number of feet equal to your speed; or
(c) move up to twice your normal speed, but not attack or take a standard action.Movement and attacks need not occur in any particular order, and you may split up your movement as you see fit. For example, a character with a Speed of 30 ft. and two attacks at +6/+1 could choose to move 20 ft., use the +1 attack, move another 10 ft., and then use the +6 attack. This is the primary departure from the 3.5e tactical movement rules. Movement in combat always follows the normal rules for provoking attacks of opportunity, however, including movement out of threatened squares.
----------------
I'd keep your existing text regarding TWF, charge, terrain, etc.
In this system, monsters would use exactly the same rules as characters. Monsters with the Pounce special attack can move double their normal speed and still make all their attacks, but can't choose to move 4x their normal speed.
Kirth, thanks for the feedback. I'll work with the wording - I know there are a few grammatical errors; I'm trying to make it so that it simply is the rules instead of just adding to the PHB - so it can stand on its own, so I'm trying to address every possible angle - perhaps i'm trying too hard.
Nonetheless, I'll run it past some other players that I know and see if makes sense to them, or if they're lost - and i'll try to get the right wording.
I know its just a matter of taste and opinion, but I'm not comfortable with the choose to use the +1 BAB attack before the other. Not that it simply doesn't make sense - but for sheer simplcity, I can see how that kind of option and choice would just create confusion and hesitation every round - i'm using my experience with the players I game with and I can see that as a chronic confusion
"Do I use this one or that one? Ok I"m using that one - so I add this much this time? Oh, which one did I use last time? I can't remember was it +15, or +10?" and on and on and on....
Your thinking on creatures and notions like Pounce matches mine exactly. The only think I won't be interested in as I said is offering another option in the already complicated system to smorgasboard which attack to make first.
Nonetheless - thanks for taking a look and helping me out. If you try it out let me know what your prognosis is. I'll be trying it out a bunch more on Sunay - 6th level PCs and possibly 8th level PCs.
Ultimately, I think this helps level the playing field for warrior types vs spellcasters, and those with faster BABs will significantly get boosts over the rogues and such as their ability to move and attack and move and attack all in a round while the others are just moving and getting one attack will also help keep sneak attack in check as well.
Robert
Ultimately, I think this helps level the playing field for warrior types vs spellcasters, and those with faster BABs will significantly get boosts over the rogues and such as their ability to move and attack and move and attack all in a round while the others are just moving and getting one attack will also help keep sneak attack in check as well.
I agree completely. It also nicely eliminates the "standard action" single attack vs. "full attack action" distinction, which always seemed unduly artifical and stilted to me. Monks are now viable combatants as well, because their flurry of blows and high movement speeds now synergize, instead of conflicting with one another. I am a bit concerned about the scout, though, who will pretty much be getting his skirmish bonuses continuously, unless he's held or entangled.
I can see your point about players forgetting which attack they've already used; that's a good point. So, if we keep iterative attacks in order from highest --> lowest, you have a good start.
And flying dragons are SCARY now, because they can (for example) fly 20 ft., claw, fly another 20 ft., claw again, fly 30 ft. and bite, and then fly another 30 ft. and strike with both wings as they end their movement.
I'll work on a feat that allows "holding" attacks/movement, to address that issue separately.
This discussion is confusing me because of the multiple idea moving around but..
Why not extend the feat tree and add 'Improved Spring Attack'. The feat would allow a full round action with iterative attacks but you can move double your base movement allowance as you see fit between attacks. Maybe make any 5' adjustments between attacks causing no AoO. These 5' moves would count against your movement rate. Since you already would have 'Mobility' even if someone gets an AoO, you still have you AC bonus. No conflict with 'exceeding you movement rate' this way. Easy to use with multiple attack monster also.
So basically, Dodge gets you the AC bonus. Mobility gives you the AC bonus for AoO. Spring Attack gives you full movement with one attack in the middle. Improved Spring Attack gives you total freedom. Maybe make it a Fighter bonus feat. And maybe make it available only to Fighters, Rangers and Scouts?
EDIT: This might make Pounce obsolete. Maybe make a 5' step necessary between attacks. Or maybe make a 5' step beyond your first a no AoO move but costs you one attack. That way you can not move double then do all your attacks. On the other hand, what if it is the 'Human' equivalent to Pounce? It still takes four feats to get there.
EDIT 2: My intent is to allow someone with 30' move and five attacks to do either of the following:
1- In open quarters combat, to be able to move 20'& attack, move 20' & make two attacks, move 20' and make two final attacks. All AoO's apply.
2- Or in close quarters combat to make a 5' step w/o AoO & one attack, 5' step w/o AoO & one attack, 5' step w/o AoO & one attack, etc.
|
|
This discussion is confusing me because of the multiple idea moving around but..
Why not extend the feat tree and add 'Improved Spring Attack'. The feat would allow a full round action with iterative attacks but you can move double your base movement allowance as you see fit between attacks. Maybe make any 5' adjustments between attacks causing no AoO. These 5' moves would count against your movement rate. Since you already would have 'Mobility' even if someone gets an AoO, you still have you AC bonus. No conflict with 'exceeding you movement rate' this way. Easy to use with multiple attack monster also.
Thanks for the ideas, Dunc. Actually our design goal is to have a more advanced movement system that updates the 3.5 movment and allows more freedom of movement in combat - to get away from the stale "I take a 5' step and full attack" "then I take a 5' step and full attack" etc.
Requiring a series of 4 feats would be counter-intuitive to this design IMO.
I think it's a great way for people who don't feel the way Kirth, Eric, and I do - and who feel that movement is just fine the way it is - your idea with the fourth feat may be more to their liking.
If you're still kind of confused to what exactly we're doing and/or how, I'd be happy to be more explanatory. If you ask more speicific questions as to something you're uncertain about, I'm sure that would help.
Robert
|
|
And flying dragons are SCARY now, because they can (for example) fly 20 ft., claw, fly another 20 ft., claw again, fly 30 ft. and bite, and then fly another 30 ft. and strike with both wings as they end their movement.
I'll work on a feat that allows "holding" attacks/movement, to address that issue separately.
That flying dragon sounds wicked in this system. Can't wait to try it out.....I look forward to seeing the look on the players faces (who are helping me playtest this) when they realize they let the genie out of the bottle, and whats good for the goose, really screws em when it's good for the gander, too!!! :-)
Of course such a tactic would provoke and AoO from everyone the dragon moved by, attacked etc. Not all dragons have enough reach to be safe from harm. I think this new combat movement will certainly see more reach weapon polearms being used, and more Combat Reflexes feats taken....?
That being said: Spring Attack is the humanoid version of Fly-By Attack. So I'm thinking such a creature with Fly-By attack does not provoke an AoO from anyone it actually attacks that round. (just as my description of Spring Attack does for humanoids).
As for a feat for holding - note in my official write up (back a few posts in the SPOILER tab) there is an option for waiting and performing a "partial charge" after taking an initial attack and deciding to wait to see when you're needed.)
Robert
Robert, my problem with the discussion is I don't know which ideas are winning! Maybe a 'Here is where we are' summary. Maybe the discussion is not ready for that yet.
Reference your comments. Yea, I thought it might be easier for reverse compatibility. If you don't add Improved Spring Attack, Spring Attack rapidly becomes a mote feat with the movement freedom created by these rule changes.
Anyways the most important thing is, I like the idea of mobile combat. To quote my Alma Mater; Shoot, Move, Communicate!
|
|
Robert, my problem with the discussion is I don't know which ideas are winning! Maybe a 'Here is where we are' summary. Maybe the discussion is not ready for that yet.
Reference your comments. Yea, I thought it might be easier for reverse compatibility. If you don't add Improved Spring Attack, Spring Attack rapidly becomes a mote feat with the movement freedom created by these rule changes.
Anyways the most important thing is, I like the idea of mobile combat. To quote my Alma Mater; Shoot, Move, Communicate!
The three of us all have the same "goal" but we don't necessarily agree on all the of the speicfic mechanics. Kirth and I seem to be close to agreeing on most. Eric has a different idea and reason for it, but no less effective or brilliant; just fits his need more.
So I guess youre right - its not ready for a "here we are" summary - but truthfully never will be as I said, Erics and mine do differ to some degree. I think both are good. It just depends on what it is one is looking for getting out of it.
The Spring Attack is not a moot point - however. I'm not sure how its role will be implemented in eric's "give up an iterative attack for an extra move" scheme, but for mine - if you look inside the SPOILER tab I put, it describes how that feat interracts: "Spring Attack: This feat now allows you to move through the battlefield making attacks on multiple targets, while preventing Attacks of Opportunity. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity (for the consequence of moving) from any creature you make an attack against in a round."
Since these movement concepts can potentially provoke several attacks of opportunity, the Spring Attack helps alleviate a number of them. So it is still worth the effort of taking it - if you're a movement-laden type fighter.
Robert
That being said: Spring Attack is the humanoid version of Fly-By Attack. So I'm thinking such a creature with Fly-By attack does not provoke an AoO from anyone it actually attacks that round. (just as my description of Spring Attack does for humanoids).
My goal was to eliminate all flying-specific feats, rolling most of the movement feats (Hover, Dive, etc.) into the new Fly skill. The dragon could then take the Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack feats, and use them while flying. Again, it standardizes the rules for people vs. monsters, which is something I'm just about always in favor of.
|
|
My goal was to eliminate all flying-specific feats, rolling most of the movement feats (Hover, Dive, etc.) into the new Fly skill. The dragon could then take the Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack feats, and use them while flying. Again, it standardizes the rules for people vs. monsters, which is something I'm just about always in favor of.
that is certainly a good way of looking at things. I hadn't thought of that. I'm not sure how I feel about it (yet); would have to do some digging to see how all of that works. I think that it might not be optimal for dragons and other naturally flying creatures to apply a lot of those feats to flight....but I do see the pragmatism is making it work on the same mechanics as the humaoid races use.
Robert
I think that it might not be optimal for dragons and other naturally flying creatures to apply a lot of those feats to flight....but I do see the pragmatism is making it work on the same mechanics as the humaoid races use.
On the one hand, they'd need to take the usual chains: Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, for example. On the other hand, they get a lot of feats based on high HD (and even more if you use the Paizo 1 feat/2 HD PC feat advancement), and they're spared having to spend feats on things like Hover and Flyby Attack (which just about every dragon used to take anyway). So I figure it sort of evens out in the end -- it just means fewer feats to keep track of.
|
|
I think that it might not be optimal for dragons and other naturally flying creatures to apply a lot of those feats to flight....but I do see the pragmatism is making it work on the same mechanics as the humaoid races use.On the one hand, they'd need to take the usual chains: Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, for example. On the other hand, they get a lot of feats based on high HD (and even more if you use the Paizo 1 feat/2 HD PC feat advancement), and they're spared having to spend feats on things like Hover and Flyby Attack (which just about every dragon used to take anyway). So I figure it sort of evens out in the end -- it just means fewer feats to keep track of.
Yeah, I guess you have a point, there.
Robert
|
|
Ok Kirth, Eric, or anyone else thats been following along.....I come for advice......
I think I may have just figured out the one big flaw in my system:
Sneak attack!
For years Sneak Attack damage had illusional potential of doing ungodly amount of damage. It doesn't happen; it just has the illusion of the capability of it.
This is because when flanking, you can do the sneak attack, but MOST DMs I know (including myself) can usually play the creatures smart enough NOT to allow the rogue to flank AND get full attack actions every round.
I'm had a dreadful thought last night - about the 2 weapon wielding rogue getting 6 attacks a round and making a full attack after moving a full move all the way to get a flank and then being able to unleash all 6 attacks every round as a sneak attacks.
I have seen Sneak Attack threads here where making Sneak Attacks be a standard action, or once per round etc and I have been wholly 100% against that; I think it would be wrong under the normal combat and movement rules; but seeing this change may drastically change that.
Thoughts???
I do not want to just limit Sneak Attack to "once a round." which would nerf it too much.
So I've considered limiting it to once per round IF you have to move more than 5'; sounds like a good balancing point - but then does it put the rogue too far behind the fighter who can deal and dish out all the fighters damage they can typically deal in a round?
Robert
Sneak Attack!
I'd just change it so flanking alone is an insuffient condition, but that flanking -- if you make a Stealth check against your opponent's perception -- would still work. That would cut down your movement unless you have the fast stealth talent, and would also limit you in terms of targets (you couldn't skip over to Bog the Ogre, sneak attack him twice, then mosey over to Gog and sneak attack him, and then maybe go over to Mog and get him, too -- because you'd be limited to Sneaking against people who aren't facing in your direction). This would work very well for my group, because we still use 3.0 facing rules (the 3.5 "space" seemed artificial and overly miniatures-driven).
I'm favoring changing sneak attack for my campaigns to something like this:
1st level: +1d6 sneak attack damage
3rd level: +1 attack on sneak attacks
5th level: +2d6 sneak attack damage
7th level: +2 attack on sneak attacks
9th level: +3d6 sneak attack damage
11th level: +3 attack on sneak attacks
13th level: +4d6 sneak attack damage
15th level: +4 attack on sneak attacks
17th level: +5d6 sneak attack damage
19th level: +5 attack on sneak attacks
This way, rogues can still do nice damage with sneak attacks and actually hit things with decent AC's assuming they qualify for a sneak attack.
Also, I'd triple the sneak attack damage (so 15d6 damage at 17th level) for the first attack whenever the rogues opponent is unaware of the rogue (such as not being seen or heard from invisibility or stealth right up until the first attack....being invisible alone isn't enough, the opponent also must not know the rogue is even in the vicinity).
With the lessened damage, rogues with movement+full attack will still be dangerous, but not game-breaking.
I think if you wind up leaving sneak attack as is, you're going to have to limit sneak attacks to once per round if the rogue moves more than 5' in a round.
|
|
I think if you wind up leaving sneak attack as is, you're going to have to limit sneak attacks to once per round if the rogue moves more than 5' in a round.
Thats what I'm thinking Eric.
Thanks.
Apparently I'm not the only one here concerned that it could get stoopid. I see that as validation for my concern. I'm glad I saw this as a problem before it was too late.
I think that's what I'm going to write into it.
Thanks guys,
Robert
remember weapon speeds. A friend and I were talking about how weapon speeds was a rule we would like to see brought back. It made sense to us that a rapier was a faster weapon, than a maul. It would give bonuses to inititive
It seems it would open up a demand for lighter weapons, that has been lost to the mighty two-handed sword.