Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 87
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    That is one houserule. Those particular abilities normally take a standard action to use; just make it so you can use an attack along with them as a standard action.
    You're making at least two houserules - full attack as standard action and this.

    We are talking about Navar's houserule. But what do you think about my houserule:
    I like Navar's idea, but personally I use a houserule that allows bonus/extra attacks from feats, spells, class features, etc. to be added to a normal standard action attack. That makes investing into TWF or other feats of that type actually worth it, because they get to be used much more often. It's a quasi-partial full attack.
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-27 at 12:06 AM.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    You're making at least two houserules - full attack as standard action and this.
    No, I am replacing the idea of full attacks on a standard action with gaining the ability to use a special attack as part of a standard action attack. The rule of blasting is that damage should always have some sort of debuffing/controlling rider effect. Apply the same thing to melee and you make it less boring.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    My mistake, I thought you are suggesting your houserule as a solution to Rejakor's houserule obsoleting standard action attacks.

    You didn't comment on my houserule.
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-27 at 12:18 AM.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    UK

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    No, I am replacing the idea of full attacks on a standard action with gaining the ability to use a special attack as part of a standard action attack.
    Which ones? Trip, Disarm, and Sunder seem like they'd definitely be in.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutremaine View Post
    Which ones? Trip, Disarm, and Sunder seem like they'd definitely be in.
    Trip, Disarm and Sunder can be used in a full attack instead of the attacks. So Full Attack as standard action is still the better option.
    Concerning Grapple, Bull Rush or Overrun... you would have to go into more details about how that would work, Tvtyrant, because I'm not seeing it.
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-27 at 03:43 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    Trip, Disarm and Sunder can be used in a full attack instead of the attacks. So Full Attack as standard action is still the better option.
    Concerning Grapple, Bull Rush or Overrun... you would have to go into more details about how that would work, Tvtyrant, because I'm not seeing it.
    Instead of attacks, yes. But this is an additional ability, not a replacement one. And I would make it work as follows:

    Overall: You do not make separate roles for the special ability and the attack; you instead use your attack role as the role for your special ability check (you roll a D20 to hit, and your D20 role is used again for your opposed check. Saves time.) You still roll damage as normal.

    Bullrush or Overrun: You move and make the attack; however much movement you have remaining is used to fulfill the Bullrush or Overrun. If you move your full movement and have none remaining, the bullrush simply moves the enemy back one square if they fail their check. If you do not have move remaining and you use Overrun, on a successful Overrun you shove the enemy prone and move into their square.

    If you have enough move, you can push the enemy back as far as you have move left on the Bullrush, or you can move over them and move as far as your remaining move on the Overrun.

    Grapple: You hit the opponent with your attack, and then you make an opposed grapple check (no need to make the touch attack to initiate, since you already did that with the hit). If you succeed the opponent is grappled, which forces it to use its own standard action to attempt to get free the following turn.

    Trip: You attack. On a hit you make an opposed trip attempt, and on a success the opponent is knocked prone. If you have improved trip you get an additional attack as well.

    Disarm: You hit the opponent (fluffed as in the arm or hand), and then make the disarm attempt. I would also add in an AoO against someone picking up their weapon.

    Sunder: You hit the enemy, then make a lightning fast attack to hit their weapon. Opposed roles and all that.

    Entangle: Hit with a rope or chain weapon (lasso, whip, spiked chain, etc). Make an opposed check (BaB or Use Rope vs. opponents BaB) and if successful the opponent is entangled. You lose your weapon afterwords.


    If you wanted to go further, put some status ailments like stun and daze in there as special attacks.

    personally I use a houserule that allows bonus/extra attacks from feats, spells, class features, etc. to be added to a normal standard action attack. That makes investing into TWF or other feats of that type actually worth it, because they get to be used much more often. It's a quasi-partial full attack.
    It certainly gives a big boost to TWF! How would you deal with double weapons?
    Last edited by Tvtyrant; 2012-10-27 at 03:17 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    dascarletm's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    I consider making one houserule to be easier than making multiple houserules.
    okay EXAMPLE A:
    Houserule 1: Everytime a character casts a spell you need to say a Verbal component (if it has one) that includes the letters of spell name and the school.
    This has to be made on the spot in 20 seconds if it is a Tuesday, 30 on a Monday, 10 on any other day. If it is a full moon then you can Square the day of the month and add it to the amount of time.

    EXAMPLE B:
    Houserule 1: Rogue sneak attack is gained at every level

    Houserule 2: Every Fighter gets sneak attack on non-feat levels.

    Obviously these examples are ridiculous and silly, but they prove my point.

    Making full attacks standard, and single attacks combined with a maneuver is simpler than your deal.
    Dascarletm, Spinner of Rudiplorked Tales
    Quote Originally Posted by (Un)Inspired View Post
    That being said, If one of my players came up to me a proposed using IHS to conceive I would absolutely let them do it. Melee never gets to have nice things. I'm not about to take away their right to have kids.
    Quote Originally Posted by killem2 View Post
    dascarletm, you are so hot it is crazy.

    Sarcasm blue is for lazies.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Forcing melee, in any fight that doesn't involve multiple rounds of hammering on a foe from point blank range (and for most enemies, unless you are a sword and board AC focused fighter, that will actually kill you), to only get full attacks occasionally was a stupid idea in the first place.

    Spellcasters, and to a lesser extent rogues, get damage that scales with their level per attack.

    Fighters etc do not. They rely on multiple attacks in order to do damage appropriate for their level (except, y'know, uberchargers, but that is one specific build and not suitable for all levels of op). Removing their capacity to be able to do that unless the DM sets up fights where the enemies run headfirst onto the fighter's sword so the fighter can full attack them.. was a dumb idea.

    Here's the easy fix for that idea; Full Attacks are Standard Actions.

    People like this fix because; It makes fighters that aren't very specific combinations of classes and feats more viable in campaigns and combats not specifically designed for them i.e. it takes workload off the DM.

    It preserves charge; There is still a reason to charge, i.e. if the enemy is more than one move action away, but still within the range of 2 move actions in a straight line. This can come up in lots of ways tactically and thematically, from chase scenes to getting into combat faster.


    People don't like this fix because; They think it will make fighters overpowered; This is provably mathematically wrong. Melee full BAB classes are the weakest archetype in the game by a long shot. And this doesn't even push them up to parity. I can run the math for you if you want.

    It removes the benefit for standing in one place attacking; I personally don't really see the point of this benefit as I like mobile combats. But you could very easily fix this by having standing still and then attacking provide you with an extra attack, or perhaps +4 AC (or just the normal benefit of not getting AoO'd by foes, which is, y'know, STILL a reason not to take a Move action when you can just 5' step)

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    It certainly gives a big boost to TWF! How would you deal with double weapons?
    TWF needs the boost compared to THF or even sword and board, especially for anyone that isn't a rogue (and melee rogues suck compared to thrower or archery rogues for this exact reason, so don't try the 'OH BUT ROGUES WILL BE OVERPOWERED' argument), to the point where i've collapsed the entire TWF feat chain down into a single feat and only one person in 5 games actually took it (he was a rogue).

    I had to write more feats for TWF, including adding dex to damage and giving free counterattacks (robilar's gambitesque) and disarms to TWF and all this other stuff contained in like, a feat, before anyone even tried it. And then they sucked and I had to make it even better because their character couldn't really contribute to the party and it was my fault.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    People don't like this fix because; They think it will make fighters overpowered;
    Citations needed.

    It removes the benefit for standing in one place attacking; I personally don't really see the point of this benefit as I like mobile combats.
    And that's your preference. Other people might have different preference.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Titan in the Playground
     
    TuggyNE's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Recovering from RSI
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    Citations needed.
    Being any more specific than "I've seen it before" is likely to run into the rule against bringing baggage from other threads in. Suffice it to say that I too have seen this attitude in various other places.
    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    That's RAW for you; 100% Rules-Legal, 110% silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    "Common sense" and "RAW" are not exactly on speaking terms
    Projects: Homebrew, Gentlemen's Agreement, DMPCs, Forbidden Knowledge safety, and Top Ten Worst. Also, Quotes and RACSD are good.

    Anyone knows blue is for sarcas'ing in · "Take 10 SAN damage from Dark Orchid" · Use of gray may indicate nitpicking · Green is sincerity

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Being any more specific than "I've seen it before" is likely to run into the rule against bringing baggage from other threads in.
    Not really. He's making a statement. I'm asking for citations to support that statement. I'm not saying it's false. I just want to see it, because for example I personally don't think it is overpowered.
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-28 at 03:00 AM.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Titan in the Playground
     
    TuggyNE's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Recovering from RSI
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    Not really. He's making a statement. I'm asking for citations to support that statement. I'm not saying it's false. I just want to see it, because for example I personally don't think it is overpowered.
    Er ... he was also saying it wasn't overpowered? Now I'm confused.
    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    That's RAW for you; 100% Rules-Legal, 110% silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    "Common sense" and "RAW" are not exactly on speaking terms
    Projects: Homebrew, Gentlemen's Agreement, DMPCs, Forbidden Knowledge safety, and Top Ten Worst. Also, Quotes and RACSD are good.

    Anyone knows blue is for sarcas'ing in · "Take 10 SAN damage from Dark Orchid" · Use of gray may indicate nitpicking · Green is sincerity

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by tuggyne View Post
    Er ... he was also saying it wasn't overpowered? Now I'm confused.
    Yes, but he also said that most people think it is. I'm asking for some support for this statement. What's confusing?

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    Yes, but he also said that most people think it is. I'm asking for some support for this statement. What's confusing?
    At no point did I ever say most people think it is overpowered. I said 'people', which does not mean all, most, or any specific amount of people - it just means 'more than one'.

    I also don't need to cite for things that are common knowledge. If you ask any person who has spent any amount of time on roleplaying forums (such as this one), you'll find that they have personal experience of many threads where people have objected, violently and at great length, to any houserule, supplement, build or ideology that gives fighters anything worthwhile. These are also typically the same people who think that Fireball is the strongest spell in core, and that wizards are weak because they can only fireball 'so many times per day'.

    These people, and others less vehement but who assume that the first group has some kind of point (hint: they do not), are the reason 'Fighters Don't Get Nice Things', and view anything other than a Weapon Focus fighter as cheating and 'munchkinry', and view any houserule to increase fighter ability as the same.


    As for your other complaint, considering that you intentionally misquoted it without the part where I said it was what I prefer, and your complaint was that I didn't state it was a preference... well. That's just dishonest, and a strawman, so i'm not going to respond to it.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    At no point did I ever say most people think it is overpowered. I said 'people', which does not mean all, most, or any specific amount of people - it just means 'more than one'.
    My bad. But it doesn't matter. I'd still like to see some citations.

    I also don't need to cite for things that are common knowledge. If you ask any person who has spent any amount of time on roleplaying forums (such as this one), you'll find that they have personal experience of many threads where people have objected, violently and at great length, to any houserule, supplement, build or ideology that gives fighters anything worthwhile. These are also typically the same people who think that Fireball is the strongest spell in core, and that wizards are weak because they can only fireball 'so many times per day'.

    These people, and others less vehement but who assume that the first group has some kind of point (hint: they do not), are the reason 'Fighters Don't Get Nice Things', and view anything other than a Weapon Focus fighter as cheating and 'munchkinry', and view any houserule to increase fighter ability as the same.
    {Scrubbed}

    As for your other complaint, considering that you intentionally misquoted it without the part where I said it was what I prefer, and your complaint was that I didn't state it was a preference... well. That's just dishonest, and a strawman, so i'm not going to respond to it.
    Can you point to me where exactly did I misquote you or was dishonest? I do not seem to recall ever complaining about you not stating something as your preference.
    Last edited by Roland St. Jude; 2012-11-04 at 03:55 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    {Scrub the post, scrub the quote}
    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane
    It removes the benefit for standing in one place attacking; I personally don't really see the point of this benefit as I like mobile combats.
    And that's your preference. Other people might have different preference.
    per·son·al/ˈpərsənəl/
    Adjective:
    Of, affecting, or belonging to a particular person rather than to anyone else.
    pre·fer
       [pri-fur] Show IPA
    verb (used with object), pre·ferred, pre·fer·ring.
    1.
    to set or hold before or above other persons or things in estimation; like better; choose rather than: to prefer beef to chicken.
    Your quote, and the way it was phrased, heavily indicated that I had stated that it was one way, and your response was phrased as if reminding me that it was not a universal truth and only my opinion - when, in fact, I had already indicated through the text that it was my opinion I was expressing in that sentence - and the rest of the paragraph pretty clearly showed that that was an aside, further reinforcing the idea that I wasn't stating an absolute, but rather my personal preference.

    Dishonest is perhaps a bit of a strong word - if you didn't mean it that way, or are ESL and don't understand the finer shades of the english language, i'll gladly rescind it - but as written it's simply a way of implying an opponent said something that they did not and then attacking it - or, a 'strawman argument'.
    Last edited by Roland St. Jude; 2012-11-04 at 03:57 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    It wasn't a "strawman argument". I was fully aware that you're stating your personal preference. I acknowledged it and just added that other people can have other preferences. Maybe I was stating the obvious. Sue me.
    I do not appreciate that apparently you're taking me for an idiot. I know what "personal" means. You do not have to quote multiple definitions.

    Your idea is to make full attacks standard actions. My problem is that it will almost obsolete single attacks. You might not care. I do, as might other people. Your solution is to make more houserules or homebrewed abilities to make single attacks worthwhile. Sure, we can do that, but then we're right back to my earlier point - one houserule vs. multiple houserules/homebrew.

    I don't really feel the need to spend my time doing research for you.
    Then don't make statements that you can't or won't back up.

    {Scrub the post, scrub the quote}
    Oh, I will.
    Last edited by Roland St. Jude; 2012-11-04 at 03:58 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    If you're houseruling away AoOs in your game, then changing full attacks to standard actions does do away with full round attacks.

    Otherwise, they remain, as if you are within reach to full attack someone, then you're next to someone (or have spent feats/spells to have more reach than enemies), and if you move, they can AoO you. So the point of full attacking is then to not get AoOed.


    Otherwise, I suggested easy simple houserules to make full round full attacks better than standard action full attacks (+AC, +1 attack, whatever).

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    I admit that AoOs slipped my mind, but even then the problem remains. Because unless you build your character for AoOs or for some reason most of your enemies are constantly provoking, making a full attack will be superior to making a single attack. And I know, you suggested, more than once, to make houserules for single attacks (or full round full attacks). But that's the thing - for your houserule to work properly we have to make even more houserules. Personally I prefer to make one houserule that works on its own and doesn't require add-ons.
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-28 at 10:37 AM.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    dascarletm's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post

    Your idea is to make full attacks standard actions. My problem is that it will almost obsolete single attacks. You might not care. I do, as might other people. Your solution is to make more houserules or homebrewed abilities to make single attacks worthwhile. Sure, we can do that, but then we're right back to my earlier point - one houserule vs. multiple houserules/homebrew.
    Multiple house rules doesn't automatically mean it'll be more complex. Two very simple house rules is basically the same as 1 very simple one.
    Dascarletm, Spinner of Rudiplorked Tales
    Quote Originally Posted by (Un)Inspired View Post
    That being said, If one of my players came up to me a proposed using IHS to conceive I would absolutely let them do it. Melee never gets to have nice things. I'm not about to take away their right to have kids.
    Quote Originally Posted by killem2 View Post
    dascarletm, you are so hot it is crazy.

    Sarcasm blue is for lazies.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by dascarletm View Post
    Multiple house rules doesn't automatically mean it'll be more complex. Two very simple house rules is basically the same as 1 very simple one.
    But it does mean it'll be more work.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    No.

    Doing my tax return is more work than working out how much money it takes me to catch a bus, a ferry, another bus, and also buy lunch.

    Two simple things are not automatically more complex than one complex thing.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    But it's not two simple things. You have to add multiple houserules to your houserule for it to work properly. That is more work.
    And BTW, my houserule isn't very complex. So it's more like "Simple houserule vs. Simple houserule + more houserules".

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Banned
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Sydnah, Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    I don't think anyone has agreed that your houserule would be simple so far.

    In play, stuff that requires you to look things up and has multiple, table-like conditions is far more likely to be annoying than something that changes a mechanic once in an easily understandable way.

    'You can full attack as a standard action, but if you spend a full-round action to do it instead you get one extra attack at your highest BAB.' - is a single sentence of rule text, is simple, uses existing terminology, does not require math, and is logical (you can full attack as a standard, or /better full attack/ as a full round).

    Your rule is more fiddly than this admittedly simple fix.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    What part about my houserule is hard to understand?
    Last edited by Darius Kane; 2012-10-28 at 03:44 PM.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    dascarletm's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    What part about my houserule is hard to understand?
    comprehension is not the issue. Unless I want to memorize that table, I'll need to look up everything when I want to use it.

    On the other hand 2 simple changes that I now know even when looking at it once is much easier to implement. Yours could be a "better" or more desirable fix in terms of gameplay, but in terms of simplicity versus complexity yours is more complex.
    Dascarletm, Spinner of Rudiplorked Tales
    Quote Originally Posted by (Un)Inspired View Post
    That being said, If one of my players came up to me a proposed using IHS to conceive I would absolutely let them do it. Melee never gets to have nice things. I'm not about to take away their right to have kids.
    Quote Originally Posted by killem2 View Post
    dascarletm, you are so hot it is crazy.

    Sarcasm blue is for lazies.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    UK

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by Darius Kane View Post
    Your idea is to make full attacks standard actions. My problem is that it will almost obsolete single attacks. You might not care. I do, as might other people.
    I'm in the 'don't care' camp. Single attacks are obsolete even in core.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Banned
     
    Darius Kane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by dascarletm View Post
    comprehension is not the issue. Unless I want to memorize that table, I'll need to look up everything when I want to use it.

    On the other hand 2 simple changes that I now know even when looking at it once is much easier to implement. Yours could be a "better" or more desirable fix in terms of gameplay, but in terms of simplicity versus complexity yours is more complex.
    My houserule doesn't have a table.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutremaine View Post
    I'm in the 'don't care' camp. Single attacks are obsolete even in core.
    Not really. In Core you can't move and full attack too easily unless you build for it.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Serpentine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dinosaur Museum aw yisss.
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Houserule to make melee more mobile

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    Suggestion, instead of using charge mechanic:

    Each BAB iterative allows an additional 5 ft of movement and still full attack. That is, at +6/+1 the fighter can move 10 ft and full attack. At +11/+6/+1 he can move 15 ft and full attack. At +16/+11/+6/+1 he can move 20 ft and full attack. Only allow this for full BAB classes. Rogues can spend a talent for the ability. Monks can do it as part of Flurry of Blows, allowing for more movement since they get more iterative attacks.

    Make each extra 5 ft of movement a class feature for the appropriate level to handle multiclassing, stacking from 1st level between classes like Uncanny Dodge so that a fighter 4/barbarian 2 can have the 10 ft movement and full attack but a fighter 4/cleric 3 would not since cleric would not have the class feature to stack.
    I like this idea, aside from the multiclassing issues and "only for full attack classes" stuff others have mentioned. What about just making it a specific Fighter feature, possibly some other select martial classes?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •