Iterative attacks no longer integral to BAB - Crazy Prediciton of the Day 2

12 posts / 0 new
Last post
The entire "stand there and take it like a man" so that you can perform your full series of iterative attacks becomes exceedingly dangerous at high levels. And all characters automatically gain iterative attacks, even if they are not martially focused.

Also, four or five attacks in one round is really slow. That's a lot of dice to roll and a lot of numbers to throw at the DM all at once. Plus, you have to perform each one at a time when the monster is low on HP, since extra attacks get to go to a new target. This does not seem to fit in the idea of faster, more fun combat.

I predict that Star Wars Sage Edition gave a hint (but not the full view) of what to expect for D&D 4e on this matter. Iterative attacks, as a function of BAB, will be removed. In its place will be a series of feats/talents/whatever that allow an immediate action to make an extra attack(s) and other mechanisms that do not allow as many attacks as we see today.
I cant remember where, but i think it is already known that itterative attacks are out of the game.
I might be wrong, though
I cant remember where, but i think it is already known that itterative attacks are out of the game.
I might be wrong, though

This would be good -- they slow down play for very marginal benefits. A neat idea but it really makes high level play less fun.

I would much rather see martial class do bonus damage at higher levels . . .
Since when did fighters not want to stay next to their target and hit them as many times as they could as hard as they could? Increasingly dangerous? That's why you're supposed to have magic beefing up Con, AC, and granting DR such as from stoneskin. Unless you're one of those ppl that likes to "low-magic" the game with out re-thinking CRs at high levels. A fighter with no magic support in the current edition is increasingly useless the higher level you get, iterative attacks or no.
It is not that crazy. I think 4e might be putting more emphasis on standard actions and less so on full-round actions.
I think even more so than in the Saga System, they will do away with full-attacks in 4e.

The Double Attack and Triple Attack feats are great, but they should still only take a standard action. Anything to encourage movement, or at least allowing melee combatants to do more different things on their turns (via swift and move actions) is a plus in my book.

Swinging 5 times when most of those are going to miss is boring and takes a long time (especially when you have to refigure your attack bonus for each attack due to modifiers). Moving around to flank your enemy and swinging once or taking a swing and pushing back an enemy with your move action are both fun and cinematic.
they will do away with full-attacks in 4e.

This has been confirmed.

Also, look at that play-test article with the dragon; it makes multiple attacks as a standard action.

My group has ported over many of the Saga changes (half CL to damage, no iterative attacks, charge is a standard action, withdraw is a move action, no 5 ft. step etc) to our fortnightly Planescape campaign, and we find combat has much more ebb and flow (last session was like that scene from Kill Bill Vol. I) than the often monotonous melee combat of 3.5, where you get into a position where you can full attack and then whack away till either you or the enemy drops.
Since when did fighters not want to stay next to their target and hit them as many times as they could as hard as they could? Increasingly dangerous? That's why you're supposed to have magic beefing up Con, AC, and granting DR such as from stoneskin. Unless you're one of those ppl that likes to "low-magic" the game with out re-thinking CRs at high levels. A fighter with no magic support in the current edition is increasingly useless the higher level you get, iterative attacks or no.

No, it's dangerous for others to stay around a fighter. Then everyone else will use effective high level attacks as standard actions, then move away from the fighter, rendering his full attack useless. Two weapon fighting rangers and flurrying monks have the same problem. It's hard to almost impossible to use your full attack at higher level, and casters are casting 9th level spells as standard actions.
No, it's dangerous for others to stay around a fighter. Then everyone else will use effective high level attacks as standard actions, then move away from the fighter, rendering his full attack useless.

Bingo! Not to mention that if you adhere to the spotting distance rules in the DMG, the fighter will typically take 1-2 rounds just to reach his opponent. This is only 1 attack he gets to make during this time...

Archers have it easier, since they are more or less assured a full attack each round. But overall, I think doing away with it would be a step in the right direction.
Again, this is a prediction. None of the designers have come out and said that this is the way it will be. It has been stated as "fact" by people intrepreting designer blogs or making speculations, but it would be more honest to declare it a prediction, which is what I am doing.
Again, this is a prediction. None of the designers have come out and said that this is the way it will be. It has been stated as "fact" by people intrepreting designer blogs or making speculations, but it would be more honest to declare it a prediction, which is what I am doing.

http://p198.ezboard.com/Dungeon-design-in-4e/fgameschat19968frm10.showMessage?topicID=1110.topic

Andy Collins flat out states that the full attack action (multiple, iterative attacks) has been removed.
http://p198.ezboard.com/Dungeon-design-in-4e/fgameschat19968frm10.showMessage?topicID=1110.topic

Andy Collins flat out states that the full attack action (multiple, iterative attacks) has been removed.

Of course, without my reading this, it's still a prediction. Just like the blindfolded magician who guesses the card being held up for the whole audience to see... ;)

I wasn't aware that there were blogs off the Wizard's site; thanks for pointing that out!