[3.X] Everyone Gets Full BAB

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

[3.X] Everyone Gets Full BAB

Post by JonSetanta »

Simple change.
Everyone gets full Base Attack Bonus.

Non-weapon users will most likely be using spells anyway and it only affects Rays so no change there. Rays become a near guarantee hit every time.

I predict the biggest change would be for those in the middle with normally 3/4 progressions such as Bard or Monk.
They would be rewarded for making attacks.


I would tack on another rule of adding 2x level to damage per hand used to wield a weapon but that's something else beyond a simple change.
Something to make damage scale with level.
Last edited by JonSetanta on Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Stinktopus
Master
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:07 am

Post by Stinktopus »

You're right, we need to somehow buff Clerics and Druids. They're falling behind.
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

Indeed. I don't get what is motivating this or how it is anything but a buff to spellcasters and makes non-spellcasters even less relevant.

Damaging scaling would be good, however, but it is completely unrelated to this idea.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

4e's idea of putting all attacks on the same schedule was pretty good. The implementation was... terrible. But the idea was pretty good. Medium BAB classes multiclass really poorly, which is a shame because there isn't much reason other than the shitty attack bonuses that you couldn't be a Rogue/Assassin/Scout.

Tentatively, I'd be in favor of it. Certainly if I was making an edition of D&D from scratch and wanted to do open multiclassing I wouldn't have different attack bonus progressions.

-Username17
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

It'd be workable with a lot of other changes, but just adding it in to the otherwise unaltered 3.x class system doesn't make much sense.

Its one of the things that almost-sorta-works for 5e, simply because additional attacks are implemented separately and stat prioritization keeps a fairly strong barrier between classes. But for 3e, full BAB is a serious class feature, even though it is one of weak points of the 3e class system.
sabs
Duke
Posts: 2347
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:01 pm
Location: Delaware

Post by sabs »

It would be fine if the current Full BaB classes had powers and abilities worth using.
User avatar
NineInchNall
Duke
Posts: 1222
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NineInchNall »

Stinktopus wrote:You're right, we need to somehow buff Clerics and Druids. They're falling behind.
Clerics already have full BAB. Druids, well, yeah, it's a buff to them, but ... It's also a buff to all those shit-tastic multiclass combinations that effing suck as things stand, and I'm totally willing to go all Rawlsian and measure our progress by the degree of improvement to the worst off.

What it does is negate "Full BAB" as a thing that has any sort of balance consideration. So no one gets to say, "Well, the Fighter may not get good special abilities or spells, but that's okay because he gets full BAB."

In the proposed world, that would be, "Well, the Fighter may not get good special abilities or spells, but that's okay because he gets the same BAB as everyone else. ... Oh. My bad. Yeah, we need to give him more special abilities or spells."
Last edited by NineInchNall on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

Post by JonSetanta »

As far as CoDZilla goes I assumed melee was a subpar option for them anyway.
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

sigma999 wrote:As far as CoDZilla goes I assumed melee was a subpar option for them anyway.
It doesn't change the fact that even as a possibly subpar option that they still do it better than classes whose entire schtick is fighting. The raison d'etre of a Fighter is pure combat. Clerics and Druids already do it just as well if not better than fighters with buffs, debuffs, battlefield control, utility spells, great self healing, better skill lists, domains, etc.

A Druid and a Fighter would differ by 10 HP and 6 feats. In comparison the druid can...

Heal himself
Automatically use scrolls and wands on its spell list
Have an Animal Companion roughly comparable to or superior to a poorly built Fighter in combat. He can just accidentally have that happen.
Wild Shape into better ability scores and great abilities
Cast, assuming 20 Wisdom, 59 level's worth of spells, 4 of them 5th and 4th.

You completely negate Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers in the core book while giving mild boosts to Monk, Bard and Rogue.

If you want to argue that...

Full Arcane=Low BAB
Full Divine=Medium BAB
6 levels of spells or less=Full BAB

Now that I think I can get on board for.

But you're still negating Full BAB classes.

That and dipping and prestige classing will be tremendously attractive, even moreso than now.
Last edited by Insomniac on Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
NineInchNall
Duke
Posts: 1222
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NineInchNall »

Insomniac wrote:You completely negate Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers in the core book while giving mild boosts to Monk, Bard and Rogue.

...

But you're still negating Full BAB classes.
Under the core rules, the full BAB classes are already negated by not offering anything besides full BAB.
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

So, what, give the other classes full BAB in recognition that the non-spellcasters have to be completely rewritten? We already knew that.
Omegonthesane
Prince
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:55 pm

Post by Omegonthesane »

Voss wrote:So, what, give the other classes full BAB in recognition that the non-spellcasters have to be completely rewritten? We already knew that.
Many of them have, in fact, already been completely rewritten in a way that satisfies the Denizens.

Taped onto 3.Tome, this would devalue the martial classes' power of "get full benefit from scaling Martial feats", however I'm not instantly certain how big a deal that is compared to having actual class features that aren't "pick from the universal list five times as many feats as you actually want".
Kaelik wrote:Because powerful men get away with terrible shit, and even the public domain ones get ignored, and then, when the floodgates open, it turns out there was a goddam flood behind it.

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath, Justin Bieber, shitmuffin
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

Post by JonSetanta »

NineInchNall wrote: Under the core rules, the full BAB classes are already negated by not offering anything besides full BAB.
Precisely. There's a lot left wanting.

If full BAB is the only selling point for a Fighter then I won't play it.
Insomniac
Knight
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:59 am

Post by Insomniac »

Full BAB meant more. Fighters used to be the only people who could use magical weapons. Now you can't imagine any character using anything but a magical weapon.

Iterative attacks used to be their thing, too. Now everybody gets them. Same with feats. Everybody gets 'em, fighters just get a few more.

Every single one of their core schticks was whored out.
They're basically an NPC class right now but with more Full BAB
options, oof.

What do you do with splat book stuff? Do they all get Full BAB, too?
Last edited by Insomniac on Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

The classic (post-1985) fighter advantages were the best stat mods with the best boosters, best weapons, best attack and damage and hit point and AC bonuses available, best number of attacks from level 1 and forever after, ... you weren't just a little better at fighting, it was huge. Things that could take down a fighter alone would walk all over the other three together, assuming they were stupid enough to try.

3e didn't just give all that to everyone else, it nerfed the fighter all the fucking way. 2e is 4-5 auto-hitting attacks dealing death on every blow against most monsters, 3e is 4 attacks where 3 of them miss and you need to hit about eight times to kill anything.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
User avatar
JonSetanta
King
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: interbutts

Post by JonSetanta »

tussock wrote: 3e didn't just give all that to everyone else, it nerfed the fighter all the fucking way. 2e is 4-5 auto-hitting attacks dealing death on every blow against most monsters, 3e is 4 attacks where 3 of them miss and you need to hit about eight times to kill anything.
I don't recall deathblows in AD&D but you're right about the missing.

The 3.X equivalent would be a full bonus on every extra attack, not that diminishing shit.
User avatar
nockermensch
Duke
Posts: 1898
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:11 pm
Location: Rio: the Janeiro

Post by nockermensch »

Deathblows happened because hitpoints were a joke before 3e. Giants and dragons had like 10d8 hp, without con bonuses. And by the level you were supposed to be killing giants and dragons, fighters were hitting for like 3d6+10 damage.
@ @ Nockermensch
Koumei wrote:After all, in Firefox you keep tabs in your browser, but in SovietPutin's Russia, browser keeps tabs on you.
Mord wrote:Chromatic Wolves are massively under-CRed. Its "Dood to stone" spell-like is a TPK waiting to happen if you run into it before anyone in the party has Dance of Sack or Shield of Farts.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

I suppose most of my monsters were weaker too, individually. Big fights against scores of baddies resolved pretty quickly when many PCs could one-hit or one-spell bunches of them per round. You can't run those fights in 3e, so they end up facing smaller number of bigger HP and AC, the Wizard switches to save-or-lose and the Fighter becomes a speed bump.

And even still.

AD&D Hill Giants have 33 hp, 2nd edition 54, 3e's 102, 4e 159.
AD&D Fighters approach 30 average damage (50 for Rangers), 2e maybe 35, and 3e can hit 50 or so. 4e drops down to 30 again. Not winning.

Wait! 5e Hill Giant has 76 hp, vs Fighter's ... WTF? Where did the damage bonus go? I seem to be doing 10 damage, maybe 13 at 20th level? Whut? Why? Where did my fucking 6d6+20 bonus damage go? Uck.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Post Reply