Weapon-Based BAB Full Attacks

[Jane_Smith]

People for many years have said that base attack progressions, as-is, is pethetically underpowered. A -15 attack penalty for a fighters 4th attack might as well just not exsist, after all...

Now, while I understand the reasoning behind it, that durring a suddeny frenzy of swings you loose slightly more power/accuracy each swing, for a character with magic aiding them, superhuman strength, or just enough regular training should still have a decent chance to hit every swing.

Another thing I strongly beleive in - is that weapons should determine how many attacks you get, in addition to feats/spells (like haste), etc. A greataxe, for example, should get fewer attacks then a dagger, dont you agree?

I found a solution - the Everquest Rpg d20 booklet has converted all forms of base attack into just a single 'value'. Effectively, everyone gets X base attack value. Their is no extra attacks gained by base attack - so a fighter is +20 at level 20, a wizard is +10, a rogue is +15, etc. You gain extra attacks when your base attack bonus is high enough to give your next attack +1.

Now, the fun part? Their is 6 speed catagories/levels of weapons. When you use a natural weapon, or hand-held weapon, its base speed value, + other modifiers, determine your extra attacks and their attack bonuses/iterative attack penalties.

Incredibly Fast - You take a -1 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 5 times a round with this weapon (maximum 20/19/18/17/16). This speed is impossible to reach without magical aid and other forms of resources, no weapon is naturally made this fast.

Very Fast - You take a -2 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 5 times a round with this weapon (maximum 20/18/16/14/12).

Quick - You take a -3 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 4 times a round with this weapon (maximum 20/17/14/11).

Standard - You take a -4 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 4 times a round with this weapon (maximum 20/16/12/8).

Slow - You take a -5 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 3 times a round with this weapon. (maximum 20/15/10).

Very Slow - You take a -6 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. You may attack a maximum of 3 times a round with this weapon. (maximum 20/14/8).

So... Level 5 fighter with +5 base attack value with a Dagger (Quick base speed) would get +5/+3 attack with it. At level 10, it would be +10/+7/+4/+1, while the same fighter with a greataxe (slow) would get +10/+5.

The only issue with this is - weapon damage needs to be greatly changed to make these changes worth-while and not just make everyone go "ew, two-hander BAD!". Im guessing greatswords would be 2d10 or 2d8ish, and so forth.

The major issue with everquest, rpg's, weapons, despite this good idea for bab values... is that they did not change weapons at all. Kinda sad when you can get 4-5 attacks from a dagger as a barbarian and do more damage then that fully-decked out enchanted greataxe could ever dish out... If you use this system, modifications must be made to weapons to make them fit this system.

[Latronis]

Another thing I strongly beleive in - is that weapons should determine how many attacks you get, in addition to feats/spells (like haste), etc. A greataxe, for example, should get fewer attacks then a dagger, dont you agree?

Nope, I most certainly do not agree.

[Milskidasith]

Adding complexity to the combat system in order to get rid of an imbalance that isn't that bad (weapons being slightly more powerful than each other, compared to the +infinite damage of ubercharging) is not a good idea. The only use I can see is that at level 4 (or 5) I can, with a magically quickened dagger, get a five attack full attack. Woo!

[Project Icarus]

I get the idea, and I like what you're trying to do. I agree that the BAB progression system is broken.

The idea of heavier weapons getting less attacks per round makes sense, too...
However, on top of that, you're putting heavy penalties onto them - which is the same problem that you're trying to fix. Giving them more dice won't work either because, once again, that's just trying to make up for the huge penalties you've given them.

Like I said, I like the idea behind it. But in the end, you've just taken the already broken system and made it - on top of being still broken - more complicated with more rules.

[DaTedinator]

What Project Icarus said.

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it - perhaps on Sean K. Reynold's website? - but someone was talking about weapon speeds, and they made the point that while yes, a dagger could attack more times than, say, a shortspear, the shortspear is longer and takes less time, effort, and risk to reach the target.

Thus the simplification of a set number of attacks; with a battleaxe, you're generally swinging once per attack (if even); with a dagger, it's safe to assume you're either swinging multiple times, or waiting for a good opening, whatever fits the flavor of your character.

It's not perfect, but it's simple.

[paddyfool]

Yep, a light and fast weapon might enable you to get a lot of attacks off, but only if your opponent is wide open. You could have a feat to enable this, e.g.

Exploitative flurry: Requirements - Dex 13+, Weapon Finesse. While using a light weapon or one with the finesse quality against an opponent who would be denied their Dex bonus to AC, you may choose to flurry your attacks with the weapon as if you were a monk of your level.

Unfortunately, this gets abusive with sneak attack, which it would stack with very nicely, so would be a shoe-in for any combat rogue optimisation build without really adding anything to the game... maybe it would do better as a class feature for some form of light-weapon prestige class, or a better balanced Swashbuckler.

[Zeta Kai]

Yep, a light and fast weapon might enable you to get a lot of attacks off, but only if your opponent is wide open. You could have a feat to enable this, e.g.

Ah, the Fix-it-With-a-Feat fallacy... :smallsigh:

[Surgo]

Weapon speed, one of the worst aspects of AD&D :(

Why not just fix it the way the Tomes do: "iterative attack penalties are never more than -5". So a BAB +20 guy makes his attacks at +20/+15/+15/+15.

[ericgrau]

At higher levels bonus damage far outweighs the weapon's base damage. So the only thing that will matter will be getting the fastest weapon possible. No thanks.

[Duke of URL]

At higher levels bonus damage far outweighs the weapon's base damage. So the only thing that will matter will be getting the fastest weapon possible. No thanks.

QFT. This will just turn the game into a race for the most non-weapon damage bonuses possible to stack with the fastest weapon obtainable.

You'd have to completely redesign major portions of the combat system to minimize non-weapon damage bonuses in order to make this idea work

[Dante & Vergil]

An idea could be for adding normal (x1) strength modifier for average towards damage, 2x for slow, and 3x for very slow. For the lighter weapons, x.5 for quick and x.25 for very fast.
You can probably even do this with magical enchantments, and master qualities, for those who use masterwork varients that scale upwards.
Also, make wielding them based on there speeds as well.
Those are some ideas to add to it, but it still may not fix the problems with this type of system. I'm not a miracle worker. I can only do so much.

[lightningcat]

Take 2 (accursed internet connection)
________
I have the 2002 printing of the Everquest Player's Guide in in it there are 6 weapon speeds that determine iterative attacks. The BABs in that system go up to +30 and iterative attacks max out out 5 attacks per round.

Incredibly Fast - You take a -2 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. This speed is impossible to reach without magical aid and other forms of resources, no weapon is naturally made this fast.

Very Fast - You take a -3 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. No weapon is naturally made this fast.

Quick - You take a -4 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. This is the normal speed for light weapons.

Standard - You take a -5 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. This is the normal speed for one-handed weapons.

Slow - You take a -6 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. This is the normal speed for two-handed weapons.

Very Slow - You take a -7 iterative penalty on extra attacks with this weapon. No weapon is normally this slow.

Spells such as haste improve the speed of weapons you use by one catagory, while spells such as slow reduce the speed of weapons you use by one catagory.

There is also a feat that improves the speed of your weapons by one catagory (9th level minimum).

Now if I were going to use this system, I would have the following modifications:
Get rid of the maximum number of iterative attacks, leave it based off of the character's BAB.

The quickness weapon property improves the speed of the weapon by one catagory. This counts as a +1 enhancement.


Modified Feat: Two-Weapon Fighting
Benefit: You can make iterative attacks with your off-hand weapon as if the weapon speed of that weapon was 2 slower then normal. Normal penalties for two-weapon fighting still apply.

Modified Feat: Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Benefit: You can make iterative attacks with your off-hand weapon as if the weapon speed of that weapon was 1 slower then normal. Normal penalties for two-weapon fighting still apply.

Modified Feat: Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
Benefit: You can make iterative attacks with your off-hand weapon normally. Normal penalties for two-weapon fighting still apply.


New Feat: Quicken Attack
You have developed a fast fighting style.
Prerequisites: BAB +9
Benefits: You figure your iterative attacks as if your weapon speed was one faster then normal.
Special: Quicken Attack counts as a Fighter bonus feat.
_________

When I first saw this thread I wasn't much of a fan of the idea, but it has grow on me.

[Kensen]

While it's true that IRL it's faster to attack repeatedly with smaller weapons, in D&D the number of attacks is an abstraction. If you make this change because you think it's realistic, you should also consider other things that would affect the outcome in a ...say dagger vs greataxe fight. Reach, for example. With a smaller weapon it is possible to attack fast but against most opponents you won't have as many opportunities to attack because it's difficult to get close enough.

In D&D, adding stuff just because it's realistic... well don't go there. :smallbiggrin:

[lightningcat]

In D&D, adding stuff just because it's realistic... well don't go there. :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, we slaughter enough catgirls with this forum that we don't need to add more. :smallamused:
But this option would help the dagger fighter build, and not hurt the heavy weapon build, and might even make it possible for a wizard to be effective in melee. Sorry, nothing can do that.

But everyone likes different options and levels of complexity, and even levels of realism. Although talking about realism in a game that includes all of the strange stuff that D&D has is an entirely different thread.