partial base attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

partial base attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Fallenangel359
07-30-07, 06:23 PM my group is about to enter a game of multiworld dnd, with multiple DMs, where each world is ran by 1 dm. Basically a world hopping game. The idea was spawned by the fact we kept trading who is DM, and we kept spawning new games every few sessions, and we never got to stick with a character, which made it hard to really put much thought into any one character

with 4 DMs, we have a vote, and you need 3 to have a rule go into effect.

We are split down the middle on partial base attack.

Whats weird is we all approved ability score retraining from PH2, but partial base attack causes arguements.

2 DMs say no, me and one DM say yes.

One of the DMs that says no, says that in the case of the character I wrote up, who has 8 martial based class levels, and 5 classes, should have it, because the character is so martially inclined that not letting him have it would just kill the character, but hes still against it as a rule.

I'd like to see a debate on the pros and cons of partial base attack, so I can make a decent arguement that we should have it.

One thing I actually tempted the DM that is on the fence is, he'll be doing an artificer, and I mentioned craft points. Maybe a trade in votes...

so yeah
Morwen
07-30-07, 06:38 PM Pros: Better for multiclassing and prestige classing, for non-full-bab classes.
Cons: Better for multiclassing and prestige classing, for non-full-bab classes.

That's basically it (if you'll excuse the slightly tongue-in-cheek answer :)). If you want to lessen the strain of multiclassing and prestige classing on characters, use the rule. If you don't want to do that, don't use the rule.

After all, that's all it does. The rule does nothing for characters with only one class, and it does nothing for characters with only full-bab classes.
Fallenangel359
07-30-07, 07:15 PM I was hoping for something a little more detailed. Remember, rocket science just boils down to burning stuff.

One person pointed out that a cleric 1, wizard 1, sorceror 1, rogue 1 never really learned how to fight, which represents why he doesn't have base attack, while a fighter 3, rogue 1 knows how to fight.

I came up with a counter arguement of what happens when you have multiple mellee oriented classes?

In this particular case its oa samurai 2, sohei 1, totemist 2, 1 swordsage, 1 fighter, and 1 iaijutsu master. Base attack 4 comes too late to be of use for sunschool, and base attack 4 at 7 doesn't qualify for iaijutsu master, like 6 would from partial.

I want partial base for myself, so I can qualify for the last prestige class, aswell as qualify for sunschool at 6.

The 2 people who say no, say no because they think the whole purpose of not getting base at 0, is to punish people for over multiclassing, aswell as not knowing learning how to fight by specializing in any area.
I brought up the point that this character has weapon focus in 6 different weapons, has multiple exotic weapon proficiencies, aswell as martial weapon proficiency from 4 different sources.

The whole purpose of the character is to be quick, mobile, and use iaijutsu.

So its either the character can work with partial, or the character doesn't work at all.

The 6 warblade, 2 lasher goliath (la buyoff), is the one thats most against the partial stacking

Kinda amuses me, considering he is BAB 8,
Rebel581
07-30-07, 08:08 PM With the rogue/wizard/cleric/whatever example, that's a bad example. They DID learn how to fight. They just didn't learn how to fight as efficiently as a fighter. To give partial BAB, that fixes that problem with rogue/wizard/cleric/whatever builds. I remember once that a friend of mine made a character with 1 level of bard and then decided to multiclass into cleric 2nd level so we'd have a healer. He had +0 BAB for two levels when his character would have sufficiently learned how to fight to the point of a +1 BAB.

I say go for it. It's easier on multiclass characters (which already have some issues) and it doesn't effect those who don't multiclass.
Tequila_Sunrise
07-30-07, 10:01 PM Although it sounds to me like you're debating this for the wrong reasons (everyone wants their character to be better than the others), here's my 2 cp. I like partial BAB and saves because it's simpler. Instead of having to consult X different tables to come up with a total bonus, I only have to consult one table per progression type. In the case of saves, this means that a character can only get the +2 1st level bonus once per save type. This might be an encouragement to multiclassers, especially someone like you, but there are other more effective ways to limit multiclassing.

TS
starfire311
07-30-07, 10:35 PM I like fractional BAB and Saves, because it makes more sense... It shows that you are improving gradually at every level, even if it isnt enough to make a difference.

A 1st level wizard learns to fight a little bit, and learns a little bit mroe when the hit level 2, and thus giving them a BAB of +1, it isnt that a 1st level wizard knows nothing about fighting and then suddenly trains and learns as much as a fighter when he goes from 1 to to as a fighter learns from going from 1 to 2.
strenoth
07-31-07, 01:55 AM partial BaB can help but never hinder characters, but if doing that as fractional, you really shoudl do Saves as fractional as well, which as mentioned above, prevents multiple good saves from sky rocketing, but allows poor saves to keep steady.
EjoThims
07-31-07, 09:51 AM I've run across more problems not using partial BAB and saves than using them.

That +2 bonus right off the bat to good saves makes Monk Class dipping insane.

Partial BAB and saves are also a simpler system book keeping wise, especially since even the PHB groups BAB and save progression by level into groups and not classes.
Thanuir
07-31-07, 11:12 AM There really are no reasons, beyond total math illiteracy, to not use partial BAB.

And if it is too complicated, here's a impler variant: Totall all classes with half bab. Compare to wizard chart. Total all classes with 3/4 bab. Compare to cleric chart. Sum these figures together. Add any bab provided by full-bab classes.

E.g. Bard 1 / rogue 3 would have the bab of a 4th level rogue (3), instead of 2 (2 from rogue 3, 0 from bard level).

This does not help with rogue 1/ wizard 3, who would still have only 1 bab. But there is no need to count with fractions.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Fallenangel359 07-30-07, 06:23 PM	my group is about to enter a game of multiworld dnd, with multiple DMs, where each world is ran by 1 dm. Basically a world hopping game. The idea was spawned by the fact we kept trading who is DM, and we kept spawning new games every few sessions, and we never got to stick with a character, which made it hard to really put much thought into any one character with 4 DMs, we have a vote, and you need 3 to have a rule go into effect. We are split down the middle on partial base attack. Whats weird is we all approved ability score retraining from PH2, but partial base attack causes arguements. 2 DMs say no, me and one DM say yes. One of the DMs that says no, says that in the case of the character I wrote up, who has 8 martial based class levels, and 5 classes, should have it, because the character is so martially inclined that not letting him have it would just kill the character, but hes still against it as a rule. I'd like to see a debate on the pros and cons of partial base attack, so I can make a decent arguement that we should have it. One thing I actually tempted the DM that is on the fence is, he'll be doing an artificer, and I mentioned craft points. Maybe a trade in votes... so yeah
Morwen 07-30-07, 06:38 PM	Pros: Better for multiclassing and prestige classing, for non-full-bab classes. Cons: Better for multiclassing and prestige classing, for non-full-bab classes. That's basically it (if you'll excuse the slightly tongue-in-cheek answer :)). If you want to lessen the strain of multiclassing and prestige classing on characters, use the rule. If you don't want to do that, don't use the rule. After all, that's all it does. The rule does nothing for characters with only one class, and it does nothing for characters with only full-bab classes.
Fallenangel359 07-30-07, 07:15 PM	I was hoping for something a little more detailed. Remember, rocket science just boils down to burning stuff. One person pointed out that a cleric 1, wizard 1, sorceror 1, rogue 1 never really learned how to fight, which represents why he doesn't have base attack, while a fighter 3, rogue 1 knows how to fight. I came up with a counter arguement of what happens when you have multiple mellee oriented classes? In this particular case its oa samurai 2, sohei 1, totemist 2, 1 swordsage, 1 fighter, and 1 iaijutsu master. Base attack 4 comes too late to be of use for sunschool, and base attack 4 at 7 doesn't qualify for iaijutsu master, like 6 would from partial. I want partial base for myself, so I can qualify for the last prestige class, aswell as qualify for sunschool at 6. The 2 people who say no, say no because they think the whole purpose of not getting base at 0, is to punish people for over multiclassing, aswell as not knowing learning how to fight by specializing in any area. I brought up the point that this character has weapon focus in 6 different weapons, has multiple exotic weapon proficiencies, aswell as martial weapon proficiency from 4 different sources. The whole purpose of the character is to be quick, mobile, and use iaijutsu. So its either the character can work with partial, or the character doesn't work at all. The 6 warblade, 2 lasher goliath (la buyoff), is the one thats most against the partial stacking Kinda amuses me, considering he is BAB 8,
Rebel581 07-30-07, 08:08 PM	With the rogue/wizard/cleric/whatever example, that's a bad example. They DID learn how to fight. They just didn't learn how to fight as efficiently as a fighter. To give partial BAB, that fixes that problem with rogue/wizard/cleric/whatever builds. I remember once that a friend of mine made a character with 1 level of bard and then decided to multiclass into cleric 2nd level so we'd have a healer. He had +0 BAB for two levels when his character would have sufficiently learned how to fight to the point of a +1 BAB. I say go for it. It's easier on multiclass characters (which already have some issues) and it doesn't effect those who don't multiclass.
Tequila_Sunrise 07-30-07, 10:01 PM	Although it sounds to me like you're debating this for the wrong reasons (everyone wants their character to be better than the others), here's my 2 cp. I like partial BAB and saves because it's simpler. Instead of having to consult X different tables to come up with a total bonus, I only have to consult one table per progression type. In the case of saves, this means that a character can only get the +2 1st level bonus once per save type. This might be an encouragement to multiclassers, especially someone like you, but there are other more effective ways to limit multiclassing. TS
starfire311 07-30-07, 10:35 PM	I like fractional BAB and Saves, because it makes more sense... It shows that you are improving gradually at every level, even if it isnt enough to make a difference. A 1st level wizard learns to fight a little bit, and learns a little bit mroe when the hit level 2, and thus giving them a BAB of +1, it isnt that a 1st level wizard knows nothing about fighting and then suddenly trains and learns as much as a fighter when he goes from 1 to to as a fighter learns from going from 1 to 2.
strenoth 07-31-07, 01:55 AM	partial BaB can help but never hinder characters, but if doing that as fractional, you really shoudl do Saves as fractional as well, which as mentioned above, prevents multiple good saves from sky rocketing, but allows poor saves to keep steady.
EjoThims 07-31-07, 09:51 AM	I've run across more problems not using partial BAB and saves than using them. That +2 bonus right off the bat to good saves makes Monk Class dipping insane. Partial BAB and saves are also a simpler system book keeping wise, especially since even the PHB groups BAB and save progression by level into groups and not classes.
Thanuir 07-31-07, 11:12 AM	There really are no reasons, beyond total math illiteracy, to not use partial BAB. And if it is too complicated, here's a impler variant: Totall all classes with half bab. Compare to wizard chart. Total all classes with 3/4 bab. Compare to cleric chart. Sum these figures together. Add any bab provided by full-bab classes. E.g. Bard 1 / rogue 3 would have the bab of a 4th level rogue (3), instead of 2 (2 from rogue 3, 0 from bard level). This does not help with rogue 1/ wizard 3, who would still have only 1 bab. But there is no need to count with fractions.