What ever happened to the idea of creating feats that would allow multiple attacks beyond taking a full-round action/5' step? I remember a discussion way back around the Alpha stage mentioning something of this sort and haven't heard anything new since.
It could be something as simple as this:
Combat Tactician (Combat)
Prerequisite: BAB +11
Benefit: Whenever you perform a full-round action, you may take an additional 5' step during your turn as a swift action. As normal, this 5' step does not provoke attacks of opportunity. You may not use this feat for a full-round action in which a 5' step is not allowed.
Normal: You may only take one 5' step as part of a full-round action.
|
I would rather that "multiple attack and move" is a standard combat option for all characters, rather than a feat, say that the character can trade attacks for movement in some ratio. Maybe even just allow more than a five foot step (but not exempt from AoOs like the five foot step is). If there was going to be an actual feat (preferably in addition to those rules), put it a few deep in a feat chain and basically make it into Pounce.
I would rather that "multiple attack and move" is a standard combat option for all characters, rather than a feat, say that the character can trade attacks for movement in some ratio. Maybe even just allow more than a five foot step (but not exempt from AoOs like the five foot step is). If there was going to be an actual feat (preferably in addition to those rules), put it a few deep in a feat chain and basically make it into Pounce.
I believe there is a need to expand melee combat beyond the current: "I can stand still and make lots of attacks or I could move and make one attack." Melee combat as it stands tends to be very static in this regard. I have made a proposal above, believing that feats would be the simplest, most backwards compatible way to help enhance melee combat, but really, I'm for any solution that allows melee oriented characters to get multiple attacks beyond a 5' step. This is especially true at high levels of play (11th level and beyond).
|
|
Yeah, we both agree on the fact that it has to change. As people have discussed (particularly Kirth Gerson), the inability to make a serious movement and still have multiple attacks is progressively more crippling for the fighters (particularly when compared to the number of standard action spells that therefore allow a move action for the casters in the same round).
I really do think that there needs to be a pounce feat for players (and not as a fighter-only feat, as I really don't like fighter-only feats and was sad to see some of the new ones Jason posted be fighter-only) but even without a feat I think that the current rules on combat movement are too hard to meleers. Although it wouldn't be backwards compatible in terms of rules, at least it wouldn't change stat blocks (as it would be the same for everyone, just a different combat rule).
Yeah, we both agree on the fact that it has to change. As people have discussed (particularly Kirth Gerson), the inability to make a serious movement and still have multiple attacks is progressively more crippling for the fighters (particularly when compared to the number of standard action spells that therefore allow a move action for the casters in the same round).
I really do think that there needs to be a pounce feat for players (and not as a fighter-only feat, as I really don't like fighter-only feats and was sad to see some of the new ones Jason posted be fighter-only) but even without a feat I think that the current rules on combat movement are too hard to meleers. Although it wouldn't be backwards compatible in terms of rules, at least it wouldn't change stat blocks (as it would be the same for everyone, just a different combat rule).
As a DM, I feel pounce would go too far. I have a group of 17th level characters: one a 2-weapon fighter with 7 attacks (8 when they cast haste; a spell they often use), who would shred lots of enemies before they even begin to act if given pounce. On the other hand, being able to attack 8 times if only moving 5' vs. attacking only 1 time when moving 10' or more is a great disparity at this level. The character has mitigated this somewhat by taking spring attack and bounding assault from the PHBII. But such a feat chain as spring attack, bounding assault, rapid blitz isn't offered in Pathfinder and is a very focused feat chain besides to get the benefit of multiple attacks.
Since martial types rely on full attacks so heavily, movement feats are key.
However, I wouldn't want it to become a "feat tax." But they need something.
|
|
As a DM, I feel pounce would go too far. I have a group of 17th level characters: one a 2-weapon fighter with 7 attacks (8 when they cast haste; a spell they often use), who would shred lots of enemies before they even begin to act if given pounce. On the other hand, being able to attack 8 times if only moving 5' vs. attacking only 1 time when moving 10' or more is a great disparity at this level. The character has mitigated this somewhat by taking spring attack and bounding assault from the PHBII. But such a feat chain as spring attack, bounding assault, rapid blitz isn't offered in Pathfinder and is a very focused feat chain besides to get the benefit of multiple attacks.
I think that at 17th level the meleers need something like this, although obviously some encounters would needs be reconsidered (but are they really hitting with all seven? Even -5 plus the -2 for TWFing can be pretty grievous against level-appropriate brute opponents, let alone the -10 on the third attack with each hand. All he'd be getting is a chance at more hits...).
Mobile Combatant (Combat)
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6; Dodge, Mobility
Benefit: You may trade one or more attacks for 10 ft. of movement each. Your attacks and movement can be taken in any order you choose. For example, an 11th level fighter could attack once, take a 5-ft. step, attack again, move 10 ft., and attack again.
Normal: You can move only one 5-ft. step when making a full attack.
RE: TWF characters
As it currently stands, TWF requires a vast expenditure of feats to gain additional attacks, and still levies a penalty to attack rolls and still requires you to spend twice as much on weapons as everyone else. Anthony's 7-attack wonder has spent upwards of 3-4 feats already; why punish him further?
Something along these lines will almost certainly be houseruled as a standard combat rule at my table. Unfortunately, I now have very little faith that it will appear as an official possibility in the published Pathfinder game -- neither in the combat rules description nor as a feat.
Off topic for this forum, but:
One nice change in this regards would be to remove the Haste spell's requirement for a Full Attack Action. I mean really, is it that overpowered to allow someone to move and attack twice?
How about a feat chain along these lines? In addition to the basic feat described, you'd of course have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).
Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisite: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.
|
How about a feat chain along these lines? In addition to the basic feat described, you'd of course have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).
Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisite: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.
I like this; not only does it give meleers some mobility during combat but it lets them decide how much they want to pump into it as well. I like this idea a great deal. *thumbs up*
Thanks! You know, I was thinking we'd probably need to specify that it applies only to melee attacks, so as to avoid stepping on the Manyshot feat -- until I remembered that Manyshot has been nerfed in Pathfinder as well.
How about a feat chain along these lines? In addition to the basic feat described, you'd of course have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).
Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisite: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.
I think that is the perfect balance between Pounce and the current state of affairs. Nicely Done!
|
How about a feat chain along these lines? In addition to the basic feat described, you'd of course have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).
Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisite: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.
Hmmm... I don't know -- that's effectively better than 'Haste', since it grants you an extra attack as part of any standard action *AND* attacks of opportunity. It should, at least, have Combat Reflexes as a prerequisite.
I'm reminded of 'Expert Tactician' in 3E -- you got an extra attack per round against any opponents who didn't get their DEX-bonus to AC. I think I'd prefer it to 'Efficient Strike', because IMO that would encourage flanking and teamwork more.
I believe a WotC Splat-Feat allowed two attacks as part of a Standard Action, but using the same roll.
Re: Haste, this applies to Standard Attacks (and allows max 2 att's),
Haste Applies to Full Attacks(allowing full Itt. att's, + haste +2WF/etc).
They don't overlap/stack, so I don't see the problem.
And Asgetrion, if you look at the wording of Kirth's Feat (Efficient Strike),
it says "OR as part of an AoO" not "AND". So it's one or the other, which seems balanced to me.
And only with one AoO, if you choose that (and you have to CHOOSE it ahead-of-time by not using it w/ a Standard Attack)
Seriously, this seems appropriate for a 'high level' Feat to keep Melee-ists on-par with Casters,
at least when they're on "their turf" where they should shine (melee range)
(Casters have Quicken Spell on top of all spells being Standard Actions to begin with)
Changing casting to being Full Action by default, would change things, of course.
I think the BAB requirement could be more like +10, though...