|
So I've been thinking about making Melee Combatants more mobile;
Has anyone tried allowing a melee character to move their speed as part of a full attack?
So a character could move and attack, or attack and move, or attack move attack move attack move attack?
Would it be so gamebreaking to allow them to do so? I think they could use the boost, and I can't see how it would cause any problems, assuming you allowed the same for monsters.
It would give the melee types a bit of a boost to keep up with casters at high levels, and I'd think it would make combat more interesting, but I can't think of a downside.
Can anyone else see a problem here?
I've house-ruled full-attacking to be a standard action without any problems.
We also discussed this, but never tried it. Overall, it looks like a good and simple way to make fighting classes more relevant at high levels.
The rationale for the original rule is to make positioning more relevant and interesting. But in action, it kills tactics, because staying put is always the better choice if you can do it. To top it off, we also have the attack of opportunity mechanic to stop people moving. Two remedies for one problem that was questionable in the first case.
There are some options - like the mobile fighter AT or the Spring Attack feat - that get obsoleted by this, but these options are generally easy to ignore. No class loses its purpose from this.
The tactic to skirmish fight a creature with many attacks stops working, but that was never a popular tactic anyway.
I think charge should still allow only one attack.
Would you allow(or require) it on a charge? Because that's basically pounce, which can be pretty game breaking, you know after seeing all those barbarian spirited charge pounce builds...
I've been toying around with a simple system to make it so get to make some of your attacks with a standard action if you've moved less than a certain portion of your move speed, but it might need some refinement, basically:
More than 5 ft, but equal to or less than 1/2 movement= -1 iterative attack as a standard action. -1 attack to both hands if two-weapon fighting.
More than 1/2 movement = -2 iterative attacks as a standard action. -2 attacks to both hands if two-weapon fighting.
To illustrate: A fighter with +12/+7/+2 BAB using a 2-hander and 30ft speed can make three iterative attacks normally. With this, they could move up to 15 feet and still make two attacks at +12/+7 BAB or move more than that and make one attack at +12.
A monk flurrying with a +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 BAB and 90ft speed can make seven iterative attacks normally. With this they could move up to 45 feet and make five attacks at +18/+18/+13/+13/+8 BAB or move more than that and make three attacks at +18/+18/+13.
It seems like a decent trade-off to me and definitely helps make move speeds (especially for monks) matter more, but I haven't got a chance to playtest it yet. Maybe I could get the community to try it...
As something a bit more moderate, how about a feat that allows you to make an extra 5' step? Can be taken more than once, is a Combat feat. Prerequisites Dodge, Mobility.
|
|
Hmm. that really wouldn't help fix things.
Since I want a widesweeping change to nonmagical combat as a whole, a feat simply won't do it. I want all of the combatants to feel free to move around instead of standing still.
I could maybe see something like (and I think this may be too harsh):
Full Attack: As part of a full attack action, you can move, up to a maximum of your move speed (broken up however you want between attacks, but you must decide how far you intend to move in advance). If you move up to 5ft, there is no penalty. If you move more than 5 feet, up to half your move speed, all your attacks for the round are at -1. If you move more than half your move speed, all your attacks for the round are at -2.
-1 and -2 are pretty insignificant, given how much easier this makes flanking and similar tactical advantages. Make it -2 and -4 (with feats to reduce that to -1/-2) and it would probably be better.
I think that simply making full attack a standard action would work better and balance out better than other options. This is because it affects everyone equally, PC and enemy.
The bonus from charge would be the increased speed, attack bonus, and possible synergy (spirited charge, lance).
Unlike a 5 ft. step, I'd not allow any movement in the middle of an attack sequence - this is strictly attack-move or move-attack.
Still not sure I am going to use this, but it is interesting to discuss the pros and cons.
I'm not a big fan of allowing full attack as an standard action (although that would be better than having everyone stand still like they do right now), so to increase mobility I tried this rule:
(The wording can be a bit confusing, though. I'd appreciate suggestions for making it clearer)
Movement Followed by Multiple Attacks: When a character reaches BAB +6, she gets the ability to use a full-round action to move up to her full movement speed and make up to 2 attacks. However, the second attack must be provided by something other than BAB. (e.g.: Two-Weapon Fighting, Haste, natural weapons, etc). Obviously, the character must be able to use this extra attack in the first place. (i.e.: You don’t get to make an extra attack if you don’t have an extra attack to make. No Haste attack without Haste)
Similarly, when a character reaches BAB +11, she gets the ability to use a full-round action to move up to her full movement speed and make her first 2 iterative attacks and up to 2 extra attacks, for a total of 4 attacks (2 from BAB, 2 from something else).These extra attacks must be provided by something other than BAB. (e.g.: Two-Weapon Fighting, Haste, natural weapons, etc). Obviously, the character must be able to use these extra attacks in the first place. (i.e.: You don’t get to make an extra attack if you don’t have an extra attack to make. No Haste attack without Haste )
All attacks use the same bonuses they would have during a full attack.
I let PCs take a half-move and still full attack; they can get the full pounce ability by spending a feat. I also let them interspace their iterative attacks and movement (for example, a BAB +11 character could move 10 ft., make a couple of attacks, and, if he drops that guy, move five more feet and attack again).
|
|
@Lemmy. That would be a little better, but kindof hard to remember in comparison, and I don't think it goes far enough.
I'm inclined to do what Kirth does, that's very similar to what I was thinking. Though I may give penalties of some sort for the attack+move. Or, conversely, I may give a bonus if you don't move. Perhaps a +2 AC.
Staying still isn't necessarily a worse option then, but the defualt assumption would become that people move and attack.
I also let them interspace their iterative attacks and movement (for example, a BAB +11 character could move 10 ft., make a couple of attacks, and, if he drops that guy, move five more feet and attack again).
That's a great idea. Gonna seriously think about implementing that in my games.
@Lemmy. That would be a little better, but kindof hard to remember in comparison, and I don't think it goes far enough.
I'm inclined to do what Kirth does, that's very similar to what I was thinking. Though I may give penalties of some sort for the attack+move. Or, conversely, I may give a bonus if you don't move. Perhaps a +2 AC.
Staying still isn't necessarily a worse option then, but the defualt assumption would become that people move and attack.
I don't think it's that complicated, actually... If you have BAB +6, you can move use 2 of your two "primary" attacks, (those that use full BAB), at BAB +11, you can make 2 of your "primary" attacks and 2 of your "secondary" ones (BAB -5). But yeah, it's harder to remember than simply allowing a full attack as standard action.
The reason I don't simply give move+full attack is because I want to have a trade off between moving and standing still. An actual trade-off, that is, not the current "move and suck" vs "stand still and one-shot the BBEG".
My rule encourages players to weight their options and then decide what's the best course of action. ("Should I go first and deal less damage or let him come to me so that I can retaliate with greater force?").
Full attacks should be better than moving and attacking, IMO. I just don't want them to be only viable way for martial characters to stay relevant.
BTW, I honestly can't believe I forgot to make Pounce a feat for PCs.
-.-'
Whatever method is used, the staggered condition should prevent full attacks. After all, that is basically all it does, and it is a part of several important spells like slow.
So my version of full attack would be a new action, the Full Standard Attack (yes, ugly name). This is so that other full-round actions can remain full-round actions. Basically, I am only changing full attack, not any other full-round action.
Full Standard Attack
A full standard attack is a standard action, a mix of a full attack action and an attack action.
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must make a full attack or full standard attack to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
You must take your movement before or after all the attack in a full standard attack, unlike a full attack where you can take a step between attacks.
Whatever method is used, the staggered condition should prevent full attacks. After all, that is basically all it does, and it is a part of several important spells like slow.
That's true. Which is why I addressed that in my house-rule:
Movement Followed by Multiple Attacks: When a character reaches BAB +6, she gets the ability to use a full-round action to move up to her full movement speed and make up to 2 attacks. However, the second attack must be provided by something other than BAB. (e.g.: Two-Weapon Fighting, Haste, natural weapons, etc). Obviously, the character must be able to use this extra attack in the first place. (i.e.: You don’t get to make an extra attack if you don’t have an extra attack to make. No Haste attack without Haste)
Similarly, when a character reaches BAB +11, she gets the ability to use a full-round action to move up to her full movement speed and make her first 2 iterative attacks and up to 2 extra attacks, for a total of 4 attacks (2 from BAB, 2 from something else).These extra attacks must be provided by something other than BAB. (e.g.: Two-Weapon Fighting, Haste, natural weapons, etc). Obviously, the character must be able to use these extra attacks in the first place. (i.e.: You don’t get to make an extra attack if you don’t have an extra attack to make. No Haste attack without Haste )
All attacks use the same bonuses they would have during a full attack.
Moving and attacking is a full-round action, so it can't be done while staggered.
That said, I do wish the Staggered condition wasn't as crippling as it is...
I've house-ruled full-attacking to be a standard action without any problems.
I did too, with several addendums though, so as to not make single-attack and especially standard attack based feats obsolete.
- when you make a full attack you can't take another move action afterward the same turn. (meaning if you want to move and attack, you have to move first, then attack)
- You can use all feats an special attacks that normally are made with a single attack as part of a full attack . The special attack/feat then only applies to the first attack you make and your first attack suffers a cumulative -2 penalty for each such special attack applied to it. You can still use your iteratives without any penalties or bonuses to them.
- You can't use a feat or special attack that normally replaces your full attack in the same full attack action with one that is normally made as a standard attack.
- You can still use all of these feats and special attacks as before without taking the penalties.
- You can use feats and special attacks made with a standard attack with special attack actions, such as spring attack.
-You can charge and full attack. But the +2 charge bonus only applies to your first attack, unless you have pounce.
So to give some examples:
-With Whirlwind attack you can choose to use whirlwind attack with a -2 penalty to all attacks granted by the feat, and still make your iterative attacks without additonal penalties. Or you can orgo your iteratives and make your whirlwind attack without penalty.
-With vital strike you can add the additional damage to your first attack and incur a -2 penalty to that attack and still make your iterative attacks. Improved Vital Strike would make that penalty a total of -4 etc.
-If you choose to use Cleave in your full attack your first attack incurs a -2 penalty to the attack roll and generates an extra attack if it hits, that incurs the same penalty. Or you make it as a standard attack without penalty. Great cleave would add to the penalty form cleave making it -4.
-You can use vital strike and cleave together, but their penalties stack and vital strike wouldn't apply to the additional attacks.
-You can use vital strike and/or cleave during a spring attack.
-You can not use cleave or vital strike with whirlwind attack.
Whenever I say first attack i mean the first attack with the highest BAB. In case of a creature fighting with only natural weapons that would be one attack with one primary natural attack of the creature's choice, to be resolved before any others. If it only has secondary natural attacks then it applies to a secondary attack.
It does help with mobility a lot, and gives martials a bit of an extra edge in the whole caster/martial disparity thing.
I may give penalties of some sort for the attack+move. Or, conversely, I may give a bonus if you don't move. Perhaps a +2 AC. Staying still isn't necessarily a worse option then, but the defualt assumption would become that people move and attack.
Simple fix: turn all the "teamwork" feats into "stance" feats. Instead of requiring an ally who knows the same feat (honestly, how often does that happen?), instead just require that the character be standing still to get the benefit.
I've house-ruled full-attacking to be a standard action without any problems.
Seconded. I've done this also, and it worked out quite well.
|
|
Simple fix: turn all the "teamwork" feats into "stance" feats. Instead of requiring an ally who knows the same feat (honestly, how often does that happen?), instead just require that the character be standing still to get the benefit.
Hmm. Perhaps.
I will consider this, and my idea of a +2 Dodge Bonus to AC when you're not using more than a 5ft step.