Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 narukagami Sep 22, 2009 15:39:32	A friend and I were discussing certain actions you should be able to do without feats, that for some reason you can't do at all without the feats, things like Power Attack for example. Our general agreement was that having the feats should obviously make you better at these actions, and a lesser version should be available without the feat (similar to how Autofire is effected by Advanced Firearms Proficiency). There are already many feats in the d20 system are just enhanced versions of actions you can already take, so there is a precident for it already. I was thinking that instead of changing the feats, it'd be easier to create an action thats just a worse version of the feat. Anyway, here are my ideas, keep in mind they are NOT feats in themselves, but additions to the basic options you have during combat: Power Attack You wildly swing your weapon with all your might, if you manage to land a hit, its gonna hurt. On the character’s action, before making attack rolls for a round, the character may choose to add +1 to all melee damage rolls for every -2 penalty they take to their attack roll. This number (the damage bonus) may not exceed the character’s base attack bonus. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage applies until the character’s next action. When weilding a two-handed weapon, the penalty to attack rolls is reduced to -1 for every +1 damage. Burst Fire You attempt to group your shots on an enemy, but without training and practice it can be difficult. When using an automatic firearm with at least five bullets loaded, the character may fire a short burst as a single attack against a single target. The character receives a –4 penalty on the attack roll, but deal +1 dice of damage. Firing a burst expends five bullets and can only be done if the weapon has five bullets in it. Alternate ideas: Instead of +1 dice of damage, just a flat damage bonus? Or keep the +1 die bonus, but increase the attack penalty? Double Tap Shooting two shots in rapid succession can take a target down quick, but without practice is hard to pull off. When using a semiautomatic firearm with at least two bullets loaded, the character may fire two bullets as a single attack against a single target. The character receives a –2 penalty on this attack, but deals +1 (maybe +2?) damage with a successful hit. Using this action fires two bullets and can only be done if the weapon has two bullets in it.   So... thoughts? Balanced? Ect?
#2 backstabbist Sep 22, 2009 15:48:33	I like your Power Attack the way it is. With DTap & Burst, I would say we could borrow a page from the Autofire raw: 4 more penalty for trying it without the feat... -6 to Dtap 3dice, -8 to Burst 4dice
#3 narukagami Sep 22, 2009 17:09:38	I had thought of just doubling the penalty for DTap and Burst Fire, but I wasn't entirely sure on the balance of allowing the damage bonus to remain the same with only an increased penalty. But then again, as you mentioned, Autofire RAW only changes the attack penalty.
#4 narukagami Sep 23, 2009 15:44:35	OK! Revised versions: Burst Fire You attempt to group your shots on an enemy, but without training and practice it can be difficult. When using an automatic firearm with at least five bullets loaded, the character may fire a short burst as a single attack against a single target. The character receives a –8 penalty on the attack roll, but deal +2 dice of damage. Firing a burst expends five bullets and can only be done if the weapon has five bullets in it. Double Tap Shooting two shots in rapid succession can take a target down quick, but without practice is hard to pull off. When using a semiautomatic firearm with at least two bullets loaded, the character may fire two bullets as a single attack against a single target. The character receives a –6 penalty on this attack, but deals +1 die of damage with a successful hit. Using this action fires two bullets and can only be done if the weapon has two bullets in it. And a new one! Aimed Shot (Based off Dead Aim) You're no trained marksman, but everyone should know the value of taking the time to aim. Before making a ranged attack, the character may take a full-round action to line up your shot. This grants the character a +1 circumstance bonus on his or her next attack roll. Once the character begins aiming, he or she can’t move, even to take a 5-foot step, until after the character makes his or her next attack, or the benefit of this action is lost. Likewise, if the character’s concentration is disrupted or the character is attacked before his or her next action, the character loses the benefit of aiming.
#5 DwarfFighter Sep 25, 2009 5:06:16	I feel the attack roll penalties for Double Tap and Burst Fire are too high. How about sticking to the same penalties specified by the feats but tweaking damage instead? For a Double Tap you roll an additional dice for damage but discard the lowest roll. For Burst Fire you roll two additional dice for damage but discard the two lowest rolls. This'll mean taking the attack options help increase your chance to beat the Massive Damage  threshold (e.g. best 2 of 3d8), but taking the feats makes it all the more reliable. -DF
#6 backstabbist Sep 25, 2009 7:51:44	well, the high ToHit penalties are exactly what happens: You have no problem HITTING with normal shooting, but you MISS when you try to do trick shooting... you dont hit but the bullets are weaker   When you have 10seconds to fire 15 rounds at a close target, most will hit, but when told to fire all 15 shots in just 3seconds, a lot will hit the ground halfway to target.   As for generally saying ToHit penalties for untrained folks attempting fancy tricks is high, of course it is, thats what makes it require training(feat) to do decently If the penalty makes the shot very very unlikely, maybe you shouldnt be attempting it, however, you can try to get lucky and pull off that trick shot for the trick effect Consider how much easier the trick is for a higher level guy: When you have +6BAB, that -6Penalty is washed out to the point that you are as accurate with the trick as a noob plain shot... you & the noob need to roll the same ToHit to hit the same target.  Whether you are a Strong6  or a Smart12
#7 DwarfFighter Sep 27, 2009 7:25:03	Let's see: If you have the Burst-Fire feat you take a -4 to the attack roll and essentially increase damage by a factor of x2.0. So, when should you use this feat? In terms of average damage output the cut-off point is where the chance to hit drops so low that the overall damage also suffers: You don't want to deal double damage at the cost of missing on more than twice the number of attacks. The sweet spot is an attack that requires that you roll 13+ on the d20 to hit with the standard single-shot attack mode. In this case you hit on 8 "pips" out of the 20 "pips" on a d20. With a -4 penalty you hit on a roll of 17+ (4 "pips"). If the "non-proficient" BF attack roll takes a -6 penalty, then the sweet spot is a 9+ (12 "pips") as the penalty reduces your chace to hit to 15+ (6 pips). Let's look at an example: Let's say you need 11+ to hit (e.g.: +10 ranged attack vs. defense 21) with a standard attack, and the attack deals an average of 10 damage. Assuming a even distribution of attack rolls (1-20) you'll score a total of 10 hits for a total of 100 damage. Using the Burst-Fire feat you now score 6 hits instead for 20 points of damage per hit, a total of 120 damage. Using the "non-proficient" BF at a -6 penalty you score 4 hits for 20 points of damage per hit, a total of 80 damage. Assuming that the attacker will take the most reliable attack option in terms of total damage output, it stands to reason that they'll most likely use the "non-proficient" BF option only when dealing with enemies that are extremely easy to hit. Now, my players aren't usually in the habit of gunning down low-level unarmoured civillians that are standing in the open at point blank range. I'm not a fan of including options that er never used. -K
#8 backstabbist Sep 27, 2009 10:00:58	Just because you always get the same one flavor, dosent mean we have to stop the ice cream shop from carrying the other 30 Its about trying to get lucky, not banning options because they are not wnat a metagamer minmaxer would do. Flair, style, dashing darring do... not everyone gets the brass ring on the first try, yet we reach for it.   Yes, trying to do something you dont have the feat for is more difficult, and less efficient, than geting the feat, but thats the point: with the feat you get better results, but you can still try to get a lucky shot. Never trying anything but the most efficient attack is not adventure, its accounting. Make the heroic attempt, cause you can spend an AP to have a great tale to tell afterward. Just because something is hard to do, and folks will likely fail, doesnt mean we must forbid them from trying if they want to take a chance on it. Grab the brass ring, Carpe Ringum       Also, Autofire without feat is 4 worse Disarm without feat is 4 worse Trip without feat is 4 worse etc so DTap & Burst should follow that pattern.
#9 Ragitsu Sep 27, 2009 12:51:58	Bravo, backstabbist.
#10 nobodez_here Sep 27, 2009 13:59:29	I'm still a fan of +50% damage for DT and +100% damage fro BF. It makes it work better with the larger weapons (such as the mounted weapons in the vehicles chapter).
#11 TheRealOrion Sep 27, 2009 14:28:00	Yes, well put, Backstabbist. There are times where optimising becomes kind of boring. The gaming moments I remember are mostly action-movie ridiculousness, like leaping off of a building and grabbing a hovering bot (a la Attack of the Clones) or shooting backwards, off the mirror of a motorcycle while navigating a winding country road (a la Mission Impossible). Action Points are a great way for players to have the opportunity to try crazy stuff like that with some potential for success because of those extra dice.
#12 Ragitsu Sep 27, 2009 15:09:38	Mission Impossible 2 makes me weep. It's a testament to how bad that film is when Tom Cruise solely keeps mentioning John Woo's "vision" in interviews related to it.
#13 nclanceman Sep 27, 2009 15:12:17	Mission Impossible 2 makes me weep. It's a testament to how bad that film is when Tom Cruise solely keeps mentioning John Woo's "vision" in interviews related to it. It's a testament to how bad that movie is when one (well, me) can walk out of the theater and realize they don't remember anything about what happened in it.
#14 Ragitsu Sep 27, 2009 15:17:13	Besides, I like the stunt in Mission Impossible 3 where Ethan is falling down the side of a glass building and manages to shoot two guards while orienting himself much more.
#15 DwarfFighter Sep 27, 2009 16:03:38	Its about trying to get lucky, If you need a 20 to hit anyway then yeah: you just need to get lucky. Then the modifiers don't mean nothin' anyway. Look: I'm not saying that it's wrong to tack on an extra -4 "non-proficiency penalty" and call it a working game mechanic. I'm just saying that it's stupid.
#16 backstabbist Sep 27, 2009 22:12:54	Look: I'm not saying that it's wrong to tack on an extra -4 "non-proficiency penalty" and call it a working game mechanic. I'm just saying that it's stupid. If you dont like something, its stupid?   You can play any way you want at your house, but you show poor personal character to label others stupid for playing the way they want (especially when we  consider the VALID LOGIC behind the way they play) You think its stupid to have a mechanic that adds up penalties to -8? Could you explain how Two Weapon Fighting works in your new world order? Cause in the plain gaming world, without a feat a guy without a 'light' weapon is on a express train to Penaltyville.  Heck, that TWF feat negates -6 penalty plus another -2 penalty negation... One feat for more than +6 sound fair? TWF: Possible featless? Sure, its just -6 -10 by RAW. Why would you accept a featless -10 mechanic, but a featless -8 is far too impossibeand attempts must be forbidden by rules because you feel things that are not minmaxed are Stupid.  That is the whole reason to take feats, to let you counter the big Featless Penaltys (Autofire-4, TWF -10).  Its the reason we play Adventurers rather than bookies or accountants... what do you spend your AP on if not to make the hard to make rolls?   LightningShot TWF Burst Ofhand-Non-light, with just the Burst feat is ... uh... -2 -10 -4... uh, -16 Have you told WoC they are stupid for not forbidding that? Is it stupid?  Are you going to tell a +17BAB guy he is forbidden from even attempting a -16 shot because he will likely miss?   Do you forbid the guy without PFP from taking an Adjacent Longarm Autofire, cause that would be -4 & -4 & -4?   If you need a 20 to hit anyway then yeah: you just need to get lucky. Then the modifiers don't mean nothin' anyway. but when you need an 18,19,or 20 to hit we would say that is a longshot, but not impossible GM: "ok, BigAl... you're +8 and -4 against their 18def, you're gonna need a 14 to hit with that Autofire. ..... Jimmy, you dont have the feat so you need a 18. ..... and do you wnt to waste another 5rnds trying to Burst that guy again Princess?" Princess: "If I do hit him, he will rue the day he accused me of Knock-Off Gucci.  Its just a 19, how hard can that be?"
#17 narukagami Sep 30, 2009 19:52:49	Sorry I haven't really posted in a while, just went through a big move and haven't had much time to write up responses to anything. Thankfully, Backstabbist is pretty much on the same page as me regarding the idea of these new actions. Initially I had thought of keeping the penalty low but lowering the damage for D-Tap and Burst Fire, but while easy to change for burst fire (just take away a die), double tap was slightly more problematic (it was only one extra die), initially I thought of "one die, but of one type lower than the base, ex. 2d8 becomes 2d8+1d6," but thought maybe this was slightly more complicated than I wanted it to be. The least complex method would be to give it some sort of flat bonus, and I wasn't sure on what kind of flat bonus it could get. And I don't particularly like the idea of "roll extra dice, keep lowest" as it doesn't fall in line with the system's usual standard method. Just giving the two actions a "non-proficiency" penalty was the simplest and most balanced way to do it. Personally, I'm not worried about the penalites being too high. There are numerous actions already in the core rules that are just plain bad ideas to try without appropriate feats or conditions. You're probably not going to try to trip without Improved Trip. You're probably not going to even try Two-Weapon Fighting without the feats and a light weapon. You're not likely to fight with a weapon you're not proficient with given the choice. So, you're probably not going to try burst fire and double tap without the feats either. The point is the option is available, even if you never use it. Sounds strange, but in the long run it makes more logical sense than just saying "you can never EVER even ATTEMPT these actions without special feats, no matter what. Period."