Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 ssvegeta555 Jun 03, 2008 2:23:38	Ok, I'm been looking at 4e, Pathfinder, and SW Saga and wish to take elements from these into a 3.5 game. One thing I want to change was the Full-Attack action. I hated the fact that in order to get more than one attack you had to use a full-round action. It made combat boring and static. The fighter and his foe would just wail on each other without budging very far (5ft steps don't count, honestly). I like how 4e is making it easier to get 'full power' even after moving. Because in 3e you move more than 5ft you're doing minimal damage, yet the spellcasters weren't hindered in the least. What if I make multiple attacks as a standard action? How would that change combat? Combat classes get a big boost, perhaps shortening the gaps between the spellcasters. What if this rule only applied to melee attacks, ranged attacks still require full-round action (they hardly moved anyways, plus it could account to the aim required)? Another option I was thinking was that you don't get additional attacks for BAB. If you would normally gain a new attack, you instead deal an additional damage equal to your weapon's base damage. A short sword does 1d6, but with a BAB netting another attack, you instead make one attack dealing 2d6 damage with the same sword. This only effects the weapons base damage, other modifiers are not multiplied (i.e. ability scores, magic items such as flaming weapons, spells and so on). I'm not sure how two-weapon fighting would be effected for these options, but I just want to get the idea out there and see what you all think.
#2 nonsi Jun 03, 2008 6:18:10	1. Click my sig. 2. Go to post #3. 3. Open the "Revised Rules" spoiler. 4. Scroll down to "Multiple Attacks and Movement". After that, you can find a lot of other goodies in posts #1,#2,#3,#4.