Potential houserule: Full attacks as standard actions

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I was playing around with this idea. My goal isn't to make a T1 fighter or something silly like that; I just wanted melee to be easier to create without being completely useless from about levels 6-14. I have a few different questions about the consequences of such a houserule:

In general...

- How would it affect a strictly Pathfinder ruleset?
- How would it affect a strictly 3.5 ruleset?
- How would it affect a 3.P ruleset?

More specifically for 3.5...

- How would it affect Tome of Battle? My first impression is that standard action strikes become weaker, making counters and boosts more tempting to take. Overall it seems like an indirect nerf to ToB, though initiators will still be more versatile than their core counterparts.
- In low op games, will certain T3-5 classes be considered "overpowered?" In particular I'm thinking of an unoptimized Scout or unoptimized TWF Rogue. Without tricks, it's hard for either of them to get a lot of attacks with their precision dice, but now it's trivial.
- Does this break Druids even more? Usually I think of Druids taking pouncing forms anyway (helloooo fleshraker), but are there wildshape/AC/summon forms out there that could really take advantage of this?

I know this is not enough to put melee at the same level as casters; I just think it makes it easier to build a melee character that can contribute at mid levels without heavy optimization. Other thoughts?

[aquaticrna]

i played a 3.5 dervish that was pretty heavily optimized that could basically do this, though he could move between two attacks. It was strong for sure, and definitely on par with having pounce (maybe slightly stronger, considering those abilities in a vacuum) but it wasn't game breaking. i could see it helping out melee classes substantially, but in even a mid-op game with casters i highly doubt that they're going to outshine anyone. Also, as a druid, even without the ability to full attack as a standard i can usually get it anyways with fairly minimal effort

[Treblain]

I've seen this discussed on the forums before.

The game isn't designed that way, so there are inevitable problems. It weakens TWF and natural weapons, it unbalances things that were designed with Pounce in mind, and ToB is about the same.

Tiers are a measure of versatility, so increasing damage from non-magic classes doesn't affect them too much. It's possible to make a build powerful enough to kill anything in one hit with T4-5 classes already.

[Eldariel]

It weakens TWF and natural weapons...

What? No, it strengthens them. One of the biggest issues with natural weapons and TWF is that you can't move normally if you want to use your extra attacks. This changes that dynamic upside down. It comparatively buffs TWF and natural weapons, bringing them a bit closer to two-handing.

It doesn't increase warrior power much. What it does do is allow for a wider range of warrior builds to be competitive as you no longer need a means to move and attack in the build. Basically, it fixes some intra-warrior imbalance and makes them a bit more mobile in combat. Pure gold in my books. Though it does weaken the higher level ToB strikes which is unfortunate, but ToB manages just fine regardless.

[thompur]

I was playing around with this idea. My goal isn't to make a T1 fighter or something silly like that; I just wanted melee to be easier to create without being completely useless from about levels 6-14. I have a few different questions about the consequences of such a houserule:

In general...

- How would it affect a strictly Pathfinder ruleset?
- How would it affect a strictly 3.5 ruleset?
- How would it affect a 3.P ruleset?

More specifically for 3.5...

- How would it affect Tome of Battle? My first impression is that standard action strikes become weaker, making counters and boosts more tempting to take. Overall it seems like an indirect nerf to ToB, though initiators will still be more versatile than their core counterparts.
- In low op games, will certain T3-5 classes be considered "overpowered?" In particular I'm thinking of an unoptimized Scout or unoptimized TWF Rogue. Without tricks, it's hard for either of them to get a lot of attacks with their precision dice, but now it's trivial.
- Does this break Druids even more? Usually I think of Druids taking pouncing forms anyway (helloooo fleshraker), but are there wildshape/AC/summon forms out there that could really take advantage of this?

I know this is not enough to put melee at the same level as casters; I just think it makes it easier to build a melee character that can contribute at mid levels without heavy optimization. Other thoughts?

Make it a class feature for the Fighter, starting, say, at 7th level. Then, at 11th level, reduce the Fighters penalty for extra attacks by 5, at 16th level by 10, and by 20th, just eliminate them.

[Re'ozul]

It makes flyby attack even better (especially for archers who like to flit from cover to cover).

In Pathfinder it greatly reduces the appeal of the vital strike line of feats.

It also greatly reduces the time it takes to play out moving/retreating battles.

[Eldariel]

Make it a class feature for the Fighter, starting, say, at 7th level. Then, at 11th level, reduce the Fighters penalty for extra attacks by 5, at 16th level by 10, and by 20th, just eliminate them.

What about Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, Monks, Knights, Swashbucklers, Samurais and all the other full attack dependent classes that don't currently get them?


In Pathfinder it greatly reduces the appeal of the vital strike line of feats.

Well. That feat chain is pretty worthless anyways, so meh. PF really, really dropped the ball on this one. They had the chance of simply changing it, making it work sensibly and instead they made some stupid workarounds (same with 5' steps) that cost even more feats and are superspecific and not even very good...

[Draz74]

It makes melee a lot harder to run away from, and makes high-Speed archers "kiting" extremely (scary) effective.

It won't break the game as long as both sides of the battle are pretty much set on fighting, but it gets screwy as soon as things like running away become important.

[ImperatorK]

Remember that monsters gain from this houserule as much, if not more benefits.
Also, there is already such a thing in PF. Mobile Fighter archetype gets it on 20th level, fat too late, IMO.

[thompur]

What about Barbarians, Paladins, Rangers, Monks, Knights, Swashbucklers, Samurais and all the other full attack dependent classes that don't currently get them?


Well. That feat chain is pretty worthless anyways, so meh. PF really, really dropped the ball on this one. They had the chance of simply changing it, making it work sensibly and instead they made some stupid workarounds (same with 5' steps) that cost even more feats and are superspecific and not even very good...

For the most part, they already get nice things: Barbarians get Rage and speed, Pally's and Rangers get spells, Knights and Swashies get some moderately useful class features, I'd let monks do it with Flurry of Blows, and Samurai have...have...O.K. point taken...But TBH it was part of my Fighter fix.(And yes, I know it doesn't fix the fighter, but I don't want to go into it fully, lest I derail the thread).

[Starwulf]

I've seen this discussed on the forums before.

The game isn't designed that way, so there are inevitable problems. It weakens TWF and natural weapons, it unbalances things that were designed with Pounce in mind, and ToB is about the same.

Tiers are a measure of versatility, so increasing damage from non-magic classes doesn't affect them too much. It's possible to make a build powerful enough to kill anything in one hit with T4-5 classes already.

Keep in mind that he also said he is doing this so that melees can be effective WITHOUT a lot of optimization. I take that to mean he likely plays with people who either dislike optimization, or just aren't very good at it, and this is, definitely, an effective solution to that.

[Endarire]

I already use full attacks as standard actions. I also use iterative attacks at +0/-5/-5/-5 instead of +0/-5/-10/-15. Third, charging up to your normal speed is a standard action while charging up to double your speed is a full-round action. Finally, Pounce gives full accuracy on iterative attacks (+0 instead of -5), but all other accuracy modifiers apply.

These are my rules.

Full Round Maneuvers
Maneuvers requiring you to charge (like Charging Minotaur) still do. Now, their initiation action instead is whatever action is required to charge. You may only use one such charging maneuver per full attack, and this charge maneuver must be the first maneuver or attack you use in a full attack.

Full-round maneuvers that require a full attack (like Flashing Sun) instead only require a full attack.

Other full-round maneuvers (like Ring of Fire or Time Stands Still) still require a full round to use.

Using Maneuvers on Attacks
Whenever you make an attack with a melee weapon, you may instead use a martial strike that requires a standard action.

EXCEPTION: Extra attacks from martial maneuvers and stances (like Dancing Mongoose and Scything Blade) are only standard attacks, not maneuvers.

For example, a hasted Warblade11 gets 4 attacks per round with +11/+11/+6/+6 base accuracy.

He could use 4 strikes instead of his standard attacks, such as War Leader’s Charge (+11)/Mithral Tornado (+11)/Elder Mountain Hammer (+6)/Emerald Razor (+6 touch).

He could use Dancing Mongoose to give him a extra attack, but this would be a standard attack.

If he used Flanking Maneuver, his allies would get only a standard attack against the flanked target.

If he used Flashing Sun- normally a full attack action- he would get an extra attack this round on a full attack, but his base accuracy would become +9/+9/+9/+4/+4 and he wouldn’t be able to use strikes instead of basic attacks.

[NecroRick]

For the most part, they already get nice things: Barbarians get Rage and speed, Pally's and Rangers get spells, Knights and Swashies get some moderately useful class features, I'd let monks do it with Flurry of Blows, and Samurai have...have...O.K. point taken...But TBH it was part of my Fighter fix.(And yes, I know it doesn't fix the fighter, but I don't want to go into it fully, lest I derail the thread).

So let Samurai (only) take full actions as partial actions, and anybody else who wants it has to dip into Samurai :D :D :D

[Treblain]

What? No, it strengthens them. One of the biggest issues with natural weapons and TWF is that you can't move normally if you want to use your extra attacks. This changes that dynamic upside down. It comparatively buffs TWF and natural weapons, bringing them a bit closer to two-handing.

Miscommunication on my part. It doesn't weaken TWF, but TWF is a way of navigating around the full attack rules, and this changes that aspect of it. And there's a chance I got my understanding of natural weapons backwards.