In a Damage Reduction thread, it was pointed out that the system already favors single, powerful attacks over multiple smaller strikes. In addition, boosting the DR rating of monsters would favor huge mega-damage bursts even more, since smaller strikes would be likely to do less, or even no damage at all.
So my question is: What is the simplest rule change that would reverse this priority? What would make slow, powerful blows less effective than multiple, smaller attacks?
how about including a dex or int based feat that allows the user to bypass DR. give it a high ability prerequisite like 17 and throw in some other feat requirements like precise strike or combat expertise that will punish a strength build.
If only there was a rule that occasionally increases the damage of a given attack. Then multiple hits would have more chances of invoking that rule, hopefully when you need it most--at a critical juncture, one might say.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
blahpers wrote: If only there was a rule that occasionally increases the damage of a given attack. Then multiple hits would have more chances of invoking that rule, hopefully when you need it most--at a critical juncture, one might say. Okay. Let's say we have 1 hit with 100% damage and a 10% chance to crit and confirm it with a x2 crit modifier. Let's also say we have an alternative of 5 hits of 20% damage and the same chance to crit and confirm with a x2 crit modifier.
The 1 hit does 110% damage total.
The 5 hits do 22% each for... yes, that's right, 110% damage total.
Multiple chances to crit does nothing by itself unless you can increase the average base damage. And increasing the average base damage is the point- if you've accomplished that, the problem is solved. Now, rider effects, those actually do get better with multiple hits if you can hit reliably on all of them.
Calybos1 wrote: So my question is: What is the simplest rule change that would reverse this priority? What would make slow, powerful blows less effective than multiple, smaller attacks? Add an AC penalty to the slow, powerful blows in addition to accuracy penalty.
The theory being that you take more damage in exchange for dealing more damage and hoping the other guy runs out of HP before you do. This being vs the higher survivability of lower damage output with higher AC.
Enemies similar to starcraft 2 immortals are good if they have that sort of effect. Where any damage taken exceeding X are reduced to only dealing X damage. This promotes 'death by papercut' style of killing those enemies.
Calybos1 wrote: In a Damage Reduction thread, it was pointed out that the system already favors single, powerful attacks over multiple smaller strikes. In addition, boosting the DR rating of monsters would favor huge mega-damage bursts even more, since smaller strikes would be likely to do less, or even no damage at all.
So my question is: What is the simplest rule change that would reverse this priority? What would make slow, powerful blows less effective than multiple, smaller attacks?
I don't know about reversing the priority, but the simplest method I could come up with to make them comparable would be to make a melee version of Clustered Shots (Combat) & add in limitations to make sure it was used with weapons appropriate the two-weapon line.
What's the purpose of such a change? This seems like a clear case of "If it's not broke don't fix it."
Actually the game favor Lots of powerfull attacks. Almost every build that use a single powerfull attack are depending on setting up and still behind someone attacking several times.
If you really want to make TWF as good as THF, i assume that is what you talk about, then it is more about only having one attack on a standart action or a charge than it is about DR.
Dennis Deadsky wrote: What's the purpose of such a change? This seems like a clear case of "If it's not broke don't fix it." My players hate the 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat. They find frontline tanks dull and annoying; in fact, their current group's frontliner is just an NPC hireling with the tactical prowess of a rutabaga. (They only brought him on board a few sessions in because none of the players wanted to be a meat shield--their exact words.) The Thug, as they call him, simply throws a two-hander around and Power Attacks... and they're still irked that his strikes are occasionally more effective than the archer and 2WF ranger's. Now that they're at a level where DR is becoming a factor, this problem has only worsened.
This is a Core-Book game; the players have no desire to learn any more rules, much less seek out 'builds' and feat combos to make their characters more combat-effective. And they LOVED 7th Sea, with its emphasis on style, mobility, and panache over brute force. So we're looking for the simplest possible change that will favor a high-mobility, swift-strike model of combat over a two-handed bludgeoning model.
Your archers must have been doing something very wrong to feel invalidated by a two-handed hireling.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
abilities that add damage per attack, like power attack, favor multiple attacks.
also, giving certain attacks piercing or the ability to ignore portions of DR/- is something that favors multiple attacks.
basically anything that treats all attacks equally favors multiple attacks.
DominusMegadeus wrote: Your archers must have been doing something very wrong to feel invalidated by a two-handed hireling. They're often fighting groups of lower-level enemies rather than single foes... somebody usually manages to slip past the Thug and charge the archer and casters, or at least send some ranged attacks their way.
Why don't you take the DR for a creature multiply that by 5 (or a factor that seems appropriate) then add that in HP and remove the DR. In this way the creature maintains (nearly) the "correct" toughness and your players feel like they are accomplishing something.
Many DR can be easily overcome, especially for an archer. Should he not have enough wealth for a +3/+4 bow, encourage him to buy some of the following equipment :
- cold iron arrows costs 2g for 20 arrows, and allows the caracter to ignore the DR of many demon and feys.
- achemical silver arrows are at either 3g or 41g for 20 arrows, and allows to ignore DR of many devils (the wording for the price is unclear, and no ruling as been made afaik. A low cost wathever the case)
- a oil (potion) of bless weapon applied to the bow cost 50gp at bypass any DR/good for 1min; if anyone in your can UMD (or is a paladin), a wand gives you 50 uses of that for 750gp.
Cold iron and silver weapons are a bit costier for TWF, but not too much to not have at least one of each as backup.
If your players are fighters, they can take the Penetrating Strike Feat that let ignore part of the oponnent DR. And you can make a one-time exception to the Core-only and allow access to the Clustered Shots Feat.
All in all, DR shouldn't really pose much issue to your players, especially to the point to feel overshadowed by an hireling.
You can also change the way the hireling fight making him concentrate on maneuvers : a trip to help the TWF, a disarm on a ranged foe, a bull rush to dislodge another from the Archer, etc.
You'll need to think a bit more about how he has to fight, but this way he won't do much damage, and can create situations in which your players will shine.
[on-the-fly houserule]
If the players still have an issue with this, you could switch around the perceived bias by replacing DR by something like :
Damage Absorption :
Each time the creature is hit by an attack and this attack do more damage than its damage absorption value, the overflow damage is ignore. In effect, the creature take at most its Damage Absorption value in damage per attack. Damage Absorption is overcome in the same way than Damage Reduction.
Give around DA 20 for any creature with a DR 5, and DA 15 for a DR 10, and you're done.
Throw low HP enemies at them in large numbers or, better yet, with high miss chances. It ceases to be about damage and becomes about the action economy.
Maybe give a creature a limited ability to negate attacks, like deflect arrows but for melee. The more attacks you make, the less the negation hurts.
Also, if DR is an issue, why isn't everyone prepared? I've never had a party that didn't have cold iron and silver available at relatively low levels, and adamantine at slightly higher levels. It's not hard to deal bludgeoning, slashing and piercing damage by carrying an extra weapon, just like everyone should have a ranged option. The only DR that is hard for everyone to overcome is aligned DR.
More importantly, why do you need a two-hander to begin with? If you want a tank, sword and board makes a lot more sense. Not that you don't even need to build your party for that. I've played in many games where the tankiest character was a magus or alchemist. You don't need to have someone stand there and get hit repeatedly in order to win a fight.
Wealth By Level and crippling feat tax hurt TWF builds above all else. Why split your wealth between two weapons and take feats with high DEX requirements when you can just pick up a greatsword and Power Attack? You don't even need to full-attack to do tons of damage that way.
Also, this conversation only applies to melee builds. Stacking multiple attacks serves as the cornerstone of every ranged build.
That's partially due to how easy getting an extra ranged attack is via Rapid Shot. Imagine an equivalent feat that did the same thing for melee weapons.
Calybos1 wrote: Dennis Deadsky wrote: What's the purpose of such a change? This seems like a clear case of "If it's not broke don't fix it." My players hate the 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat. They find frontline tanks dull and annoying; in fact, their current group's frontliner is just an NPC hireling with the tactical prowess of a rutabaga. (They only brought him on board a few sessions in because none of the players wanted to be a meat shield--their exact words.) The Thug, as they call him, simply throws a two-hander around and Power Attacks... and they're still irked that his strikes are occasionally more effective than the archer and 2WF ranger's. Now that they're at a level where DR is becoming a factor, this problem has only worsened.
This is a Core-Book game; the players have no desire to learn any more rules, much less seek out 'builds' and feat combos to make their characters more combat-effective. And they LOVED 7th Sea, with its emphasis on style, mobility, and panache over brute force. So we're looking for the simplest possible change that will favor a high-mobility, swift-strike model of combat over a two-handed bludgeoning model. So, the players find the static 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat dull. I don't blame them. Have they tried tanking with reach tactics, instead? This is a much more dynamic combat style, in that constant tactical movement works best. It's still big two handed weapons, but suddenly the last thing you want to do is get locked-in to a bash-fest. Note that the worst problem with this approach is tactically challenged allies.
This approach is entirely CRB, but requires the group tactically cooperate. If they do cooperate it works really well. Not all players are willing and able to play nice with others, though. A single loose cannon idiot can muck up the entire team's battle plan. If you leave the fool to die of his own stupidity he'll only do it once, though :-)
Calybos1 wrote: My players hate the 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat. They find frontline tanks dull and annoying; in fact, their current group's frontliner is just an NPC hireling with the tactical prowess of a rutabaga. (They only brought him on board a few sessions in because none of the players wanted to be a meat shield--their exact words.) The Thug, as they call him, simply throws a two-hander around and Power Attacks... and they're still irked that his strikes are occasionally more effective than the archer and 2WF ranger's. Now that they're at a level where DR is becoming a factor, this problem has only worsened.
This is a Core-Book game; the players have no desire to learn any more rules, much less seek out 'builds' and feat combos to make their characters more combat-effective. And they LOVED 7th Sea, with its emphasis on style, mobility, and panache over brute force. So we're looking for the simplest possible change that will favor a high-mobility, swift-strike model of combat over a two-handed bludgeoning model.
This changes the question a bit.
In addition to my original suggestion, I would add the following:
To increase mobility, first you need to allow full attack with move. Otherwise you are still stuck with a single attack if you move more than 5 feet. Additionally I would also suggest allowing movement both before and after the attack. This greatly reduced the value of Spring Attack, but it greatly increases the potential for dynamic hit and move combat.
Secondly, reduce the penalties to iterative attacks so that the later attacks are more likely to hit. I recommend either a flat -5 to all after the first (+20,+15+,+15,+15), or a cumulative -2 (+20,+18,+16,+14).
As for the DR issue, if you don't have the proper counter to penetrate DR, the only option is high minimum damage to power through it. I hate suggesting a feat tax, but add a feat similar to the Clustered Shots suggested by Aralicia above that allows multiple melee attacks in a single round against the same target to total up their damage before applying DR. (I call it a feat tax because it becomes a "must have" feat.) This, combined with the increase hit chance on multiple attacks is the only way to bring up the minimum damage of multiple weaker attacks compared to single powerful attacks vs DR.
Simplest solution: Remember what Clustered Shots did for archery?
Create a melee version of it, and combine it with the text of the Two-weapon fighting feat.
Best solution: Use Path of War and enjoy Thrashing Dragon discipline.
Quote: If the players still have an issue with this, you could switch around the perceived bias by replacing DR by something like :
Damage Absorption :
Each time the creature is hit by an attack and this attack do more damage than its damage absorption value, the overflow damage is ignore. In effect, the creature take at most its Damage Absorption value in damage per attack. Damage Absorption is overcome in the same way than Damage Reduction.
Give around DA 20 for any creature with a DR 5, and DA 15 for a DR 10, and you're done.
I like this.
Freesword wrote: As for the DR issue, if you don't have the proper counter to penetrate DR, the only option is high minimum damage to power through it. I hate suggesting a feat tax, but add a feat similar to the Clustered Shots suggested by Aralicia above that allows... Some good suggestions here; thanks, everyone. I wanted to highlight this one in particular as a great fix for the DR issue. In addition to any other change I make, I'll be adding a new melee feat called Targeted Strikes, with 2WF and/or Flurry of Blows as a prerequisite.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules
|
