Why not let melee make full attacks after moving?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 282 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Midnightoker wrote:

Fair enough gents I am listening.

I would like to see the "half action/swift action" become something better to be honest, the counter action or some such nature.

basically turn it into an immediate action and give all classes an immediate action. Creates more room for dynamic play in my opinion, makes more sense to me that combat can be reactive to other actions in combat outside of your next turn.

just my 2 cents although you guys might want to ignore me and carry on :) haha

Honestly the Swift/Immediate action just needs more things to use it on. And those things have to be worthwhile in their own way, so you have to do more than think 'that +1 Dodge for a swift action is not worth using because I need to have my Slay Evil Immediately swift action available for any opportunity!'

I honestly can't think of anything a low level Fighter would use a swift action on.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Midnightoker wrote:

Fair enough gents I am listening.

I would like to see the "half action/swift action" become something better to be honest, the counter action or some such nature.

basically turn it into an immediate action and give all classes an immediate action. Creates more room for dynamic play in my opinion, makes more sense to me that combat can be reactive to other actions in combat outside of your next turn.

just my 2 cents although you guys might want to ignore me and carry on :) haha

Honestly the Swift/Immediate action just needs more things to use it on. And those things have to be worthwhile in their own way, so you have to do more than think 'that +1 Dodge for a swift action is not worth using because I need to have my Slay Evil Immediately swift action available for any opportunity!'

I honestly can't think of anything a low level Fighter would use a swift action on.

To be fair though pathfinder has made the immediate action much more prominent, I just wish there was something built in small already (+1 to a certain defender or some other small action) that you could get class abilities or feats later to change/make better.


One thing with this system is that there are a lot of people who are going to be using readied actions.


Madcap Storm King wrote:
One thing with this system is that there are a lot of people who are going to be using readied actions.

Yeah. I wonder if this wouldn't cause a lot of empasse.. if, mostly, you have 1 attack after a charge, you can decide to use that attack in some creative manner (a maneuver or similar stuff, using the +2 on the top of that).


Madcap Storm King wrote:
One thing with this system is that there are a lot of people who are going to be using readied actions.

I really don't consider that to be a bad thing. The readied action is usually a poor choice, opening up that flexibility sounds good to me.


Kyrt-rider if you use the system you proposed are you going to give riding animals a boost? As by level 6 the fighter out move speeds the horse?

edit for clarification:

if you are proposing that your movement per round be broken up by the number of actions (a la Rifts/Palladium) then I can see it: a highly skilled melee-er can have X number of actions but can only move Y feet total (Z on a charge; and AA with a run action if doing nothing else)each action he can move up to Y(Z,AA)/X Squares(ft, whatever)


Dragonsong wrote:
Kyrt-rider if you use the system you proposed are you going to give riding animals a boost? As by level 6 the fighter out move speeds the horse?

Hmmm, that's an interesting item and one I hadn't considered yet, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

The simplest way to handle it, would be treating the rider's ranks in ride as the animal's BAB for purpose of extra move actions (unless said animal happened to have higher BAB than that) under the explanation of the rider guiding and pushing the animal (If one can push an animal to 10x it's speed for a single burst, I don't see why you can't coax it this way as well.)

These 'ride based' move actions for the mount would only work for movement based move actions (moving, rising from prone, etc) rather than extra attacks.

That's my idea for it off the top of my head, feedback is appreciated.


no worries i also made an addendum to clarify my thinking a smidge more.


Dragonsong wrote:
no worries i also made an addendum to clarify my thinking a smidge more.

I read it. It's a possible idea, but I prefer to leave the move actions more fluid, such that if a character really needed to he could spend all 3 of his move actions moving to reach a target. (Speaking of which, I need to define a charge under this system)... hmmm...

Charge: By spending one or more move actions and the standard action, a character can make a 'charge.' A charge has a maximum distance equal to the charger's move speed times all actions spent. As such, a medium character's charge action with a single move action and using their base speed would have a range of 60 feet.

A charge must be made in a straight line, and can not be made through difficult terrain, however the charger can attempt a jump check to clear obstacles.

For every move action spent, the standard action attack made at the end of the charge gains +2 attack (which also benefits a bull-rush or trip attempt that might be made at the end of said charge.)


In my own games, full-attacks are standard actions. It doesn't slow gameplay down at all, really. Definitely no less than a wizard bombing something with an AoE and going "Ok, I need 6 saving throws".

In my games, it actually goes a step further. Iterative attack penalties are capped at -5, putting PCs more comfortably on par with monsters who get to ignore iterative penalties (the most they ever loose on a natural attack is -5).

So the BAB goes like this:
Fighter: +20/+15/+15/+15
Rogue: +15/+10/+10
Wizard: +10/+5

And as to improving things like monks, dual wielding, and so forth - yes, dear god yes it does. You can move and slash with both weapons. In some ways it's like granting pounce to everything, but not quite (you can charge as a standard action during a surprise round to move 30 ft, then full-attack with Pounce, so it's still a nice ability). Enemies with multiple attacks usually had some way to get them in anyway (for example, pounce, rend, rake, improved grab, and so forth).

Likewise, it helps melee characters scale up at a more appropriate pace, I feel. When you consider that all melee really has going for it is sick damage dealing potential, while spellcasters can end fights by throwing down some good spells from the get-go (save or die or not), or even just play hit & run with standard action spells + movement capabilities. Archery fighters are amazing because they deal solid damage but they can full-attack almost always.

Melee on the other hand has to deal with stuff like the Withdraw action, tumbling away, readied action to move when they move, reach, and all that stuff. Throwing them a bone hasn't hurt my games in the least, from what I've seen.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ashiel, we need to drag you down to Houston for a game with Kirth, cause we're all of like-minds. :)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Ashiel, we need to drag you down to Houston for a game with Kirth, cause we're all of like-minds. :)

How far is houston from austin? I will be in that area visiting my father for the holidays

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

About two hours east. Kirth plays on Mondays, so if you can make time we'll see. I'm on vacation from the 18th to the 7th and plan on heading down there for a game one of those Mondays.

I'm also running my game in Austin on the 18th and 4th, and could probably find you an NPC to guest as. :)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Ashiel, we need to drag you down to Houston for a game with Kirth, cause we're all of like-minds. :)

Sounds fun, but I live in NC. Maybe an OpenRPG game sometime. :)


Ashiel wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Ashiel, we need to drag you down to Houston for a game with Kirth, cause we're all of like-minds. :)
Sounds fun, but I live in NC. Maybe an OpenRPG game sometime. :)

I've got a similar problem, I'm up here in WA.


I posted this on another thread (the monk thread) but this thread is a perfect fit. I had a houserule in 3.5 allowing full attacks after a move. For each iterative attack you get, you can move 5ft in a round and still perform a full attack. So, at low levels, this pretty much works like default 3.5, but once your BAB is high enough, you can move further and still dish out some damage. However, monks can add half of their bonus to speed to this movement making them the mobility kings of the battlefield.

So at 20th level, a Fighter can move 20ft and full attack.
A monk in comparison can move 45ft (15 from BAB, and 30 from his bonus to speed).

I haven't tested this rule out yet, so I'm not sure how it performs during play.


Soullos wrote:

I posted this on another thread (the monk thread) but this thread is a perfect fit. I had a houserule in 3.5 allowing full attacks after a move. For each iterative attack you get, you can move 5ft in a round and still perform a full attack. So, at low levels, this pretty much works like default 3.5, but once your BAB is high enough, you can move further and still dish out some damage. However, monks can add half of their bonus to speed to this movement making them the mobility kings of the battlefield.

So at 20th level, a Fighter can move 20ft and full attack.
A monk in comparison can move 45ft (15 from BAB, and 30 from his bonus to speed).

I haven't tested this rule out yet, so I'm not sure how it performs during play.

It looks decent. The distance is a little short for the non-monks during the middle levels, but it's workable.


Kyrt's Revision wrote:


Full Attack Actions no longer exist.

Iterative attacks are no longer granted. Instead, characters gain additional move actions every X BAB (where, when changing as little of the game as possible, this would be at BAB = 6, 11, and 16)

Move actions may be used to make attacks at a flat penalty (still debating the value of that penalty between -3,-4, or -5)

and

kyrt-ryder wrote:


I think you're discussing ToZ's system (or possibly combining them). In mine he would only have 4 move actions and a standard. (So 5 total)

Only because I am coming late into this thread, I just want to make sure I understand what I am seeing here. Were I to plug this into the Fighter progression, I get:

    1st +1 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 1 Move Action
    2nd +2 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 1 Move Action
    3rd +3 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 1 Move Action
    4th +4 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 1 Move Action
    5th +5 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 1 Move Action
    6th +6 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 2 Move Actions
    7th +7 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 2 Move Actions
    8th +8 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 2 Move Actions
    9th +9 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 2 Move Actions
    10th +10 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 2 Move Actions
    11th +11 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 3 Move Actions
    12th +12 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 3 Move Actions
    13th +13 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 3 Move Actions
    14th +14 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 3 Move Actions
    15th +15 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 3 Move Actions
    16th +16 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 4 Move Actions
    17th +17 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 4 Move Actions
    18th +18 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 4 Move Actions
    19th +19 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 4 Move Actions
    20th +20 BAB; 1 Standard Action; 4 Move Actions

Where:

  • A Standard action is just that: Attack, Combat Maneuver, etc, etc.
  • A Move Action is just that, or may be traded up to a Standard Action at a [-x] modifier ([-x] being -5 or whatever is deemed appropriate).

    Assuming the above is correct, I have some questions:
    1. Does the [-x] modifier only apply to rolls concerning attacking more than once or does it also apply to all rolls related to BAB? i.e. I spent my normal standard action on attacking, now I want to disarm my opponent before I finish my turn. Is my CMB likewise affected because it is a function of BAB?

    2. Taking it a step further, I have points in the UMD skill. I spent my standard action attacking normally and now I want to use a wand of fireballs I stole from a Wizard. Should my UMD skill be affected by the [-x] modifier?

    [Just throwing it out there. Yours is an interesting idea and I want to see if it will work. It might put and end to a lot of the rubbish, non-constructively critical threads about 'WTB Moar QQ regarding [ClasstypeXYZ] being the worst class in PFRPG' Just sayin' ;/


  • Here are the answers to your questions Shakor (and btw, you got the progression right for the core game. I myself am contemplating a quicker progression, but my homebrew is practically a different game, so I won't go into that here.)

    1. All rolls related to BAB, just like iterative attacks. Your CMB is affected the same way it is by iteratives (meaning if, in your games, CMB for attack-based checks like Disarm take the penalty, then they do with this system as well.)

    2. Using a wand is a standard action, and therefore can't be used with a move action, however, you could drink a potion. (If you scrapped the level caps for items, and allow 'potions' that can be thrown for external spell effects, you could throw a potion of fireball much like an alchemist would throw a bomb. Except that's a class feature he doesn't have to pay for.)

    Also, some wands will produce effects that one uses with attacks multiple times(such as the Flameblade spell, or chill touch.) In that case you can treat those attacks (but not the casting itself) as attacks that can be used during a move action.


    kyrt-ryder wrote:

    Here are the answers to your questions Shakor (and btw, you got the progression right for the core game. I myself am contemplating a quicker progression, but my homebrew is practically a different game, so I won't go into that here.)

    1. All rolls related to BAB, just like iterative attacks. Your CMB is affected the same way it is by iteratives (meaning if, in your games, CMB for attack-based checks like Disarm take the penalty, then they do with this system as well.)

    2. Using a wand is a standard action, and therefore can't be used with a move action, however, you could drink a potion. (If you scrapped the level caps for items, and allow 'potions' that can be thrown for external spell effects, you could throw a potion of fireball much like an alchemist would throw a bomb. Except that's a class feature he doesn't have to pay for.)

    Also, some wands will produce effects that one uses with attacks multiple times(such as the Flameblade spell, or chill touch.) In that case you can treat those attacks (but not the casting itself) as attacks that can be used during a move action.

    Brilliant. That helps me understand a little better where this is going and it has answered some unasked questions as well. Thank you very much.


    Shakor wrote:
    kyrt-ryder wrote:

    Here are the answers to your questions Shakor (and btw, you got the progression right for the core game. I myself am contemplating a quicker progression, but my homebrew is practically a different game, so I won't go into that here.)

    1. All rolls related to BAB, just like iterative attacks. Your CMB is affected the same way it is by iteratives (meaning if, in your games, CMB for attack-based checks like Disarm take the penalty, then they do with this system as well.)

    2. Using a wand is a standard action, and therefore can't be used with a move action, however, you could drink a potion. (If you scrapped the level caps for items, and allow 'potions' that can be thrown for external spell effects, you could throw a potion of fireball much like an alchemist would throw a bomb. Except that's a class feature he doesn't have to pay for.)

    Also, some wands will produce effects that one uses with attacks multiple times(such as the Flameblade spell, or chill touch.) In that case you can treat those attacks (but not the casting itself) as attacks that can be used during a move action.

    Brilliant. That helps me understand a little better where this is going and it has answered some unasked questions as well. Thank you very much.

    Happy to help. Any other questions, thoughts, or ideas on your mind Shakor?


    kyrt-ryder wrote:
    Soullos wrote:

    I posted this on another thread (the monk thread) but this thread is a perfect fit. I had a houserule in 3.5 allowing full attacks after a move. For each iterative attack you get, you can move 5ft in a round and still perform a full attack. So, at low levels, this pretty much works like default 3.5, but once your BAB is high enough, you can move further and still dish out some damage. However, monks can add half of their bonus to speed to this movement making them the mobility kings of the battlefield.

    So at 20th level, a Fighter can move 20ft and full attack.
    A monk in comparison can move 45ft (15 from BAB, and 30 from his bonus to speed).

    I haven't tested this rule out yet, so I'm not sure how it performs during play.

    It looks decent. The distance is a little short for the non-monks during the middle levels, but it's workable.

    Yeah, I wanted to go middle of the road for this issue. Although, this is the base. I do have a feat that increases the "Full-attack-move" by 5ft. Haste would increase this as well and a few magical items in short bursts. But I also was worried about the lethality in higher levels or monsters with much higher HD than the current level of the campaign, so this middle of the road approach is to make sure monsters won't get out of hand at those levels.


    kyrt-ryder wrote:


    Happy to help. Any other questions, thoughts, or ideas on your mind Shakor?

    Hmm, thinking about the first part again, maybe I don't have it fully understood. Let's write it out:

  • At BAB 0 to +5, I have a Standard Action and a Movement Action.
  • At BAB +6 and higher, I gain more Movement Actions as appropriate to my iterative attacks.
  • I can trade any Movement Action for a Standard Action, provided the Standard Action uses a function of BAB (attack with a melee weapon, throw a grenade-like weapon, fire a missile weapon, or use a Combat Maneuver). In addition, this action carries with it a [-x] modifier.

    Damn, I thought that I could trade the movement action for any standard action. Such as using a wand or even going into total defense before making an attack action at [-x] As I reread the thread, I don't think that is how your mechanic is intended (being that there are no BAB related rolls associated with Wand activation, Total Defense et.al.).

    That is to say I am not really fussed about making the above work. It is just more of an example of what is and is not allowed. I also suppose that were it the case, every Arcane Archer would be casting True Strike before applying Deadly Aim to their next ranged attack. Every Round. Eesh.

    So, as I understand it, it would be more correct of me to state:

  • I can trade any Movement Action for an Attack Action, (attack with a melee, ranged or unarmed weapon), or perform a Combat Maneuver. In addition, this Attack Action or Combat Maneuver carries with it a [-x] modifier.

    I'm also assuming that the Full Round options are now standard actions. So I could still charge as a normal, standard action, gaining an attack at the end of my charge (the action uses a function of BAB) and then use (for example) a combat maneuver at [-x]. Alternatively, (seeing that the wizard is in trouble) I could disarm my current opponent using my normal standard action, and automatically avoid attacks of opportunity (assuming my opponent didn't have Improved Unarmed Strike)as I charge the wizard's opponent, attacking it at [-x]

    I have skipped over characters with a BAB 0 through to +5 (i.e. lower level characters of any type); can they still trade their movement action for an Attack Action or Combat Maneuver? With that in mind, I am also wrapping my head around how feats that use full attack options (Many Shot and Rapid Shot) work at those BAB levels. I'm interested in mulling this over more.


  • Soullos wrote:
    kyrt-ryder wrote:
    Soullos wrote:

    I posted this on another thread (the monk thread) but this thread is a perfect fit. I had a houserule in 3.5 allowing full attacks after a move. For each iterative attack you get, you can move 5ft in a round and still perform a full attack. So, at low levels, this pretty much works like default 3.5, but once your BAB is high enough, you can move further and still dish out some damage. However, monks can add half of their bonus to speed to this movement making them the mobility kings of the battlefield.

    So at 20th level, a Fighter can move 20ft and full attack.
    A monk in comparison can move 45ft (15 from BAB, and 30 from his bonus to speed).

    I haven't tested this rule out yet, so I'm not sure how it performs during play.

    It looks decent. The distance is a little short for the non-monks during the middle levels, but it's workable.
    Yeah, I wanted to go middle of the road for this issue. Although, this is the base. I do have a feat that increases the "Full-attack-move" by 5ft. Haste would increase this as well and a few magical items in short bursts. But I also was worried about the lethality in higher levels or monsters with much higher HD than the current level of the campaign, so this middle of the road approach is to make sure monsters won't get out of hand at those levels.

    If you're concerned about monsters, an easy tweak to make with this rule would be...

    For the purpose of monsters (defined as creatures who have racial hit dice), use their CR or BAB, whichever is lower, to determine number of move actions a round. (For monsters with class levels determine this for the base CR first, then add the BAB from those class levels.)


    kyrt-ryder wrote:

    If you're concerned about monsters, an easy tweak to make with this rule would be...

    For the purpose of monsters (defined as creatures who have racial hit dice), use their CR or BAB, whichever is lower, to determine number of move actions a round. (For monsters with class levels determine this for the base CR first, then add the BAB from those class levels.)

    The lower of CR or BAB? I like it. Nice and elegant.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

    I feel I must point out something.

    Adding iteratives at a lesser penalty is a damage boost. I think we can all agree that extra dmg/rd is not what melees need...they need to get their existing damage off every round as readily as the mages do.

    3 attacks at 100%/75/75 do the same dmg as 4 attacks at 100/75/50/25. Adding a 4th attack at 75% is a flat +25% boost to damage...a major uptick.

    The current 4 iteratives is actually made to equal 1/2E weapon spec, of 5 attacks/2 rounds with weapon spec.

    A much easier way to do this is simply to assign # of attacks by Character level as a class ability adn simply move away from BAB (which doesn't work anyway, or dragons would all get iteratives despite never picking up a sword!), top it off with 3 flat att/rd from the Melee classes, 1 at full, 2 at -5...and if they dont' move (full attack), all of them at par.

    Otherwise you're getting waaay too complex.

    ==Aelryinth


    Aelryinth wrote:

    I feel I must point out something.

    Adding iteratives at a lesser penalty is a damage boost. I think we can all agree that extra dmg/rd is not what melees need...they need to get their existing damage off every round as readily as the mages do.

    3 attacks at 100%/75/75 do the same dmg as 4 attacks at 100/75/50/25. Adding a 4th attack at 75% is a flat +25% boost to damage...a major uptick.

    The current 4 iteratives is actually made to equal 1/2E weapon spec, of 5 attacks/2 rounds with weapon spec.

    A much easier way to do this is simply to assign # of attacks by Character level as a class ability adn simply move away from BAB (which doesn't work anyway, or dragons would all get iteratives despite never picking up a sword!), top it off with 3 flat att/rd from the Melee classes, 1 at full, 2 at -5...and if they dont' move (full attack), all of them at par.

    Otherwise you're getting waaay too complex.

    ==Aelryinth

    I pretty much agree with this (actually, I agree with most every post by you I've seen, Aelryinth). I do have iterative penalties capped at -5 though, because I feel it makes them more appealing. HP scales rather quickly, in all honesty, since every HD you're likely adding somewhere between 5-10 hit points, whereas damage scales noticeably slower. Likewise, HP means you're either conscious or unconscious, so if you want to be a threat at higher levels you're going to want to be able to be as dangerous as you were 12 level ago. I've found that capping iteratives makes that more of a reality.

    It does mean at levels 6, 11, and 16 you get a nice damage spike, but that's not much different than spellcasters getting new levels of spells.

    Mind you, it makes Vital Strike and its advanced versions far less attractive, but then again those feats really aren't very good anyway, more like a "well, the +5 in my +20/+15/+10/+5 is pretty much useless, since I've only got a 5% chance to hit, so I'll just sack that iterative to increase my weapon damage a tiny bit".

    Finally, it has a secondary benefit for me. Several of my players who enjoy playing Fighter-types can't keep their notes strait, and half the time they can't remember which attacks had which bonuses, and so forth. While to me, iterative attacks aren't very complicated, they seem to find such things somewhat difficult. It cuts down on their confusion, and speeds up our gameplay.


    TriOmegaZero wrote:

    About two hours east. Kirth plays on Mondays, so if you can make time we'll see. I'm on vacation from the 18th to the 7th and plan on heading down there for a game one of those Mondays.

    I'm also running my game in Austin on the 18th and 4th, and could probably find you an NPC to guest as. :)

    Hazah!

    I will contact you beforehand if I go sir!


    kyrt-ryder wrote:
    Madcap Storm King wrote:
    One thing with this system is that there are a lot of people who are going to be using readied actions.
    I really don't consider that to be a bad thing. The readied action is usually a poor choice, opening up that flexibility sounds good to me.

    I do see it as being a problem for mages combating ranged characters. Editing the concentration rules a bit for casting after taking damage would probably help with that.

    It does make the readied action against approach scenario a worse option, since you end up eating a lot more than one attack now for doing so. Maybe you could add a feat or other rule that allows the sacrifice of two move actions to gain an additional readied action?


    Madcap Storm King wrote:
    kyrt-ryder wrote:
    Madcap Storm King wrote:
    One thing with this system is that there are a lot of people who are going to be using readied actions.
    I really don't consider that to be a bad thing. The readied action is usually a poor choice, opening up that flexibility sounds good to me.

    I do see it as being a problem for mages combating ranged characters. Editing the concentration rules a bit for casting after taking damage would probably help with that.

    Yeah, I can see how that might be a problem. DC 10 level+damage dealt gets insane at higher levels.

    DC = 10+ spell level + attacker's BAB might work, as an idea off the top of my head.

    I will have to put some thought into this though, because you're right Madcap, that's a significant change that needs consideration.

    Quote:


    It does make the readied action against approach scenario a worse option, since you end up eating a lot more than one attack now for doing so. Maybe you could add a feat or other rule that allows the sacrifice of two move actions to gain an additional readied action?

    True. I've never actually seen that option taken in play anyway though, so I'm not sure the impact it has to negate that option.

    I'd be more interested in opening up the immediate action for movement outside of the turn anyway though.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
    Auxmaulous wrote:

    TOZ unrelated/related I liked your move/action point system you posted in the other place.

    Gave me some ideas-
    Imagine using some of those points to suspend debuffs/negative affects on the fighter as long as he uses a point or two each round to suppress a effect.

    I actually though a mini-economy of purchasable benefits/suspend negative effects that would be another way to spend action points. So more options besides extra attacks and moves. Maybe even super attacks - not something stupid, just an attack to get past whatever your Monk PC couldn't get past in her fight with the monster she couldn't damage.
    At a cost of course, but something that breaks the "ok, I hit it again" routine.

    Ex- Use Full action to temporarily negate the effects of level drain/enervation. After the fight the effects kick in, but during the course of the fight full action points could be used for a number of things besides attacks and moves.

    In any case it was a good idea.

    251 to 282 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why not let melee make full attacks after moving? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.