Would it be too much if you could do things like bull-ruch or over-run multiple times a round. and in calculating your CMB you put your base attack bonus to be whatever it is for that attack, so your chances of continuesly pulling off the manuever several times is rather small but could be possible.
What do you guys think?
I think the issue with those is they are somewhat contingent upon also using a Move Action (like Charge), though if that's the case, I'd prefer they simply list any movement requirements instead of being Full Round Actions - If we end up seeing "Weak Iterative" Standard Attacks, then Attack-Equivalent Over-Run/Bullrush seems quite viable... So basically: YES!
For Grapple, if concern with it is being able to Pin in one round, the wording of Pin can still require a successful Grapple vs. the opponent on your previous Turn. Multiple Grapple Attempts on the first round would be useful for giving more of a chance to succeed, and possibly enabling usages like "Move Opponent" if the first Grapple succeeded. Making it "Attack-Equivalent" means characters are able to use their Iterative Attacks for Shivs or Punches - Which, given there's already Grapple penalties for not having both hands free, it doesn't seem like there needs to be Action Economy restrictions to mixing Grapples & Melee Attacks as well...
"Weak Iterative" Standard Atacks do bring up some interesting cases:
Greater Grapple (Grapple as Move Action, presumably at full BAB) would essentially mean exchanging your lowest Iterative for an extra Grapple at full BAB... Which given the requirements for Greater Grapple (and situational usefulness of Grapple), I don't think is NECESSARILY too much... But the ability DOES feel like it's designed around the 1-Grapple-per-Round (for non-Grab Monsters) rule, so it might be re-designed completely if Grapples-as-Attack Actions are allowed...???
How would Charge & Partial Charge work? Still just one attack? (I'd say so)
Iterative or multiple move action maneuvers like bull rush or overrun seem contrary to the existing combat rules.
Full round attacks only allow a single 5' move. In return, you get to make multiple attacks.
Overrunning someone, or bull rushing them, means moving into their space. Doing it more than once/round means moving more than once per round.
Since you cannot currently move twice during a full-round action, and since you cannot currently attack more than once with a standard action, using these maneuvers more than once seems impossible without violating a bedrock principle of actions in combat.
The same logic holds true for charging.
Now, maybe with feats, we can bend the rules. Feats always bend rules - that's what they're there for.
So some kind of feat that lets you apply a bull rush, overrun, or charge at the end of a normal move action might allow you to double-move, applying one of these maneuvers at the end of each move.
It might be problematic, but it should be workable.
Just be careful the wording/prerequisites don't allow low-level characters to use this as a loophole to get two attacks each round when they would not otherwise be able to attack more than once.
***************************************
As for grappling multiple times per round, I'm firmly against it.
Grappling is already the "easy mode" against enemy spellcasters and BBEGs and small groups of foes. A single round of grapple by just one player character can eliminate a full round's worth of options for the most dangerous enemy we face.
Imagine a group of PCs finds a single hag, at a level where it's an even fight for the party vs. the monster.
Now one PC initiates a grapple and the rest bang on the hag. Next round, the hag spends her entire round getting free, but can make no attacks. So the PC grapples her again, and the following round she breaksb free. Round after round goes by, and she never fires off even one attack, and eventually the players hack her apart - all because one player grappled her every round.
As currently written, that player might fail. He might roll poorly on a grapple attempt. The hag might escape the "easy mode" death trap.
But let that player try again multiple times each round, and she'd a goner for sure.
Likewise in reverse, when your tactic is to hold someone down, pin them, restrain them, for a period of time, they only get one chance each round to escape. Letting them attempt multiple escapes every round will make the tactic of holding someone almost impossible.
Grappling will be reduced to Grapple/escape, re-grapple/escape, re-grapple/escape...
Not a good plan, I think.
Re: ORun/BRush, since Jason's post on the Standard Action-Melee/Magic subject mentioned that Standard Attacks may scale ("weak Iterative"), I suspect that the wording for these may be adjusted, if Standard Actions allow multiple attacks.
Re: Grapple, I *AM* somewhat unhappy with the huge gap between Imp Grab and "normal" Grapplers. Imp Grab granting a Maneuver bonus & not interfering with DPS at all seems fine and reasonable; Forcing non-Imp Grab combatants to use a FR Action is just odd because at low levels Grapple IS equal to the number of Attacks you can take, but at higher levels, combat scaling is hugely skewed depending on if you choose to melee or grapple. Obviously, in your Hag example, it's optimal to Conjure (or Wildshape into) an Imp Grab creature with lots of attacks and direct it onto the Hag.
Personally, I feel that Iterative Grapples isn't that big a problem (certainly with per-round pacing for Pin) because the dropping BAB lowers the chances signifigantly (given the number of complaints on the high DC of CMB, I'd think this would be relevant). In any case, I ultimately care less about having multiple Grapple Attempts per round than being able to take OTHER attacks while Grappling: Otherwise, the existence of the "both hands not free" penalty to Grapple just seems BIZARRE if there's NO WAY (bar Imp. Grab or Greater Grapple) to attack with that Shiv while Grappling your opponent. Making the change to allow that, independent of whether multiple Grapples/round are allowed, would improve the situation alot, IMHO.
re: your concern about Grapple being the ultimate "caster counter", I strongly suspect that changes to Spellcasting Provocation and Casting Defensively will make simply Casting Defensively in Threat Range NOT such an "automatic" easy option, thus Grapple will not be so starkly a better Spell-Disruption option (besides Readying Actions). If BAB scales in increasing the chances of provoking an AoO/losing the spell, I'd expect being Grappled to only have a higher base DC, which seems a reasonable trade-off for not doing any damage whatsoever.
Honestly, Casters being heavily encouraged to have melee bodyguards, as in 2nd Edition, doesn't seem such a bad outcome... I'm not advocating completely recreating 2nd Ed. dynamics, just a balance - And my suggestions about Maneuver AC would allow multiple ways for wary Casters to increase their AC against Grapples and the like. Unifying Casting Defensively and Fighting Defensively (so they both increase AC) would also be nice...
Anyhow, can't wait to see how it all turns out :-)