Fighters, Two Weapons and multi-attacking... and Magical weapons, too.

[wolfstone]

Okay. Got my hands on the new PHB and after reading through it, I see that the only class that gets multiple attacks per round is the Fighter (true, some other classes get a second attack, but sadly only the Fighter class can attack 4 times per round as far as I can tell).

see that two-weapon fighters can make two strikes (1 per light one handed weapon in each hand), but when combined with a Lvl. 20 Fighter's 4 attacks per round, does that make for 8 weapon strikes (4 x 2)?

As for weapons, are there weapons with attack and damage bonuses like in 4th Ed.? (Such as a +6 sword.) The section on weapons does go into much detail.

99% of my experience in D&D is with 4th Ed., though I've studied the 3rd. Ed.s. Weapons with enhancements have remained a mystery as to how they work and what kinds of bonuses they can come with/gain.

Thanks in advance.

[Sartharina]

I see that two-weapon fighters can make two strikes (1 per light one handed weapon in each hand), but when combined with a Lvl. 20 Fighter's 4 attacks per round, does that make for 8 weapon strikes (4 x 2)?
No, they only get 1 as a bonus action each round, for some reason. Frankly, I wouldn't have minded if they got a second off-hand attack at level 11.

[Zeuel]

Okay. Got my hands on the new PHB and after reading through it, I see that the only class that gets multiple attacks per round is the Fighter (true, some other classes get a second attack, but sadly only the Fighter class can attack 4 times per round as far as I can tell).

see that two-weapon fighters can make two strikes (1 per light one handed weapon in each hand), but when combined with a Lvl. 20 Fighter's 4 attacks per round, does that make for 8 weapon strikes (4 x 2)?

As for weapons, are there weapons with attack and damage bonuses like in 4th Ed.? (Such as a +6 sword.) The section on weapons does go into much detail.

99% of my experience in D&D is with 4th Ed., though I've studied the 3rd. Ed.s. Weapons with enhancements have remained a mystery as to how they work and what kinds of bonuses they can come with/gain.

Thanks in advance.

If the playtest is of any help then it looks like they did a giant numbers squish in this edition. Instead of having weapons go from +1 to +5 like in 3e and earlier or from +1 to +6 like in 4th, it looks like they go from +1 to +3 with anything above +1 being kinda rare. Also I think armor only went up to +2.

[HorridElemental]

Why are you sad that other classes only get the second attack and not more?

It just means they get actual class features instead of the "omg I can swing my sword one extra time!" deal that fighters get.

[wolfstone]

Why are you sad that other classes only get the second attack and not more?

It just means they get actual class features instead of the "omg I can swing my sword one extra time!" deal that fighters get.

I'm sad because in the 3s, every class got at least 2 attacks per round and many got 3. Fighters, Paladins an Rangers got 4 and now only Fighters get four (5 with two-weapon fighting, apparently, as one is a 2 strike an the rest are single strikes, according to Sartharina). 5th Ed. really seems to want players attacking as infrequently as possible. I see that spell-users are limited to a single 8th and 9th level (each) spell per day, which sucks. The whole combat system appears hamstrung to me. I'm not liking it anywhere near as much as the 3s.

To be fair, though, I've mostly played 4e, in which you will usually only get one attack per turn, unless you use an Action point for a second attack, or use a power that lets you score more than a single hit. The lack of multiple attacks for every class (even if it's only 2) seems like a downgrade, especially compared to the 3s.

[HorridElemental]

I'm sad because in the 3s, every class got at least 2 attacks per round and many got 3. Fighters, Paladins an Rangers got 4 and now only Fighters get four (5 with two-weapon fighting, apparently, as one is a 2 strike an the rest are single strikes, according to Sartharina). 5th Ed. really seems to want players attacking as infrequently as possible. I see that spell-users are limited to a single 8th and 9th level (each) spell per day, which sucks. The whole combat system appears hamstrung to me. I'm not liking it anywhere near as much as the 3s.

My point was, the other classes get really nifty things called "class features" while Fighters are once again stuck with "I swing my sword".

I'll take the class features that do something other than " I move, I attack".

[wolfstone]

True, but other classes got multiple attacks as well (see my edit to my prior reply) as more features. Also, if you can't raise a stat above 20 via leveling up, then why list stats and bonuses up to 30 pts. / +10? How do they expect players to raise a stat above 20?

This is what bothers me the most, as players like myself who have notoriously bad luck on die-rolls will have a harder time scoring a hit. In 4th ed., you could get up to +38 on average, or max out at +42 to atk rolls. In 5th, you only get up to a +11 (+12 if you have a weapon that's a +1, +14 max) atk bonus. I hope that monster stats are going to be lower to compensate for the lower bonus so that low-luck players like me can succeed at least part of the time on attacks.

[hawklost]

True, but other classes got multiple attacks as well (see my edit to my prior reply) as more features. Also, if you can't raise a stat above 20 via leveling up, then why list stats and bonuses up to 30 pts. / +10? How do they expect players to raise a stat above 20?

This is what bothers me the post, as players like myself who have notoriously bad luck on die-rolls will have a harder time scoring a hit. In 4th ed., you could get up to +38 on average, or max out at +42 to atk rolls. In 5th, you only get up to a +11 (+12 if you have a weapon that's a +1, +14 max) atk bonus. I hope that monster stats are going to be lower to compensate for the lower bonus so that low-luck players like me can succeed at least part of the time on attacks.

So far none of the creatures have a super high AC. The Highest AC a creature has (which is a CR 30 creature) is 25. That is the Tarrasque, which is supposedly an epic creature. Everything else appears to have AC 21 or lower so far. So with a +11 you will have a 50% chance to hit it always.

As for why they list stats to 30, that is because Monsters are bounded to 30 instead of 20 like PC races.

Note, in very rare cases (Barbarian specifically) some stats can be raised above 20.

[Jigawatts]

The numbers are lower across the board in this edition. Its entirely feasible that you can be fighting a bad guy with AC 17 at level 10.

As for stats, normal mortals cant go any higher than a stat of 20, only exceptional monsters and divine beings can achieve that. Although there will be a few ways to go above 20, most likely in the form of magical items. A Girdle of Giant Strength for example will set your Str score higher than 20 while you wear it (the Fire Giant version set it to a 25, IIRC). All this will become clearer when the DMG comes out.

[Falka]

5E is way less edgy than 4th. You can't compare the numbers because it's simply unfair, they are different games.

Fighters get more attacks because they specialize in combat. Other classes get features so it balances out. A Paladin has spells and supernatural powers.

[Yuki Akuma]

3E was kinda an aberration when it came to iterative attacks. In previous editions, only warrior-types got them, and (pure) Fighters/Fighting Men got the most.

[Person_Man]

There are two specific 5E design issues you should keep in mind:

1) Each Turn and combat in general should be relatively quick. (It was not uncommon for optimized builds in 3.0/3.5/PF to have 8+ attacks per round, and 4E combat was very long/grindy for a variety of reasons).

2) Some players really like very simple classes that just make a lot of attacks and deal damage.

3) The previous editions are filled with abilities/spells/feats/effects that add extra actions of some kind, and people are going to want to import them into 5E.


To achieve these goals, WotC dramatically reduced the number of attacks most classes could take each round, but kept the Fighter as the simple/lots of attacks class, and then they added the Bonus Action to accommodate but keep a cap on all the extra actions added by other stuff, such as Two Weapon Fighting.

I'm not in love with the implementation, but so far it seems to be working fairly well.

[wolfstone]

There are two specific 5E design issues you should keep in mind:

1) Each Turn and combat in general should be relatively quick. (It was not uncommon for optimized builds in 3.0/3.5/PF to have 8+ attacks per round, and 4E combat was very long/grindy for a variety of reasons).

2) Some players really like very simple classes that just make a lot of attacks and deal damage.

3) The previous editions are filled with abilities/spells/feats/effects that add extra actions of some kind, and people are going to want to import them into 5E.


To achieve these goals, WotC dramatically reduced the number of attacks most classes could take each round, but kept the Fighter as the simple/lots of attacks class, and then they added the Bonus Action to accommodate but keep a cap on all the extra actions added by other stuff, such as Two Weapon Fighting.

I'm not in love with the implementation, but so far it seems to be working fairly well.

I hope that they work in ways to get more bonus actions. If they're worried about abuse, they can limit it to 2-weapon users, as most other classes don't get the bonus to the second swing. I'm just really sad to see Rangers lose the 4 attacks per round because for the 2-weapon Rangers, it made sense. I'm surprised to see the concentration skill for Wizards is gone, and they're spell slots per-day were dramatically reduced. I guess they felt Wizards were too overpowered and did what they did to limit their power so that they couldn't concentrate as easily or cast as many spells per day.

[Zeuel]

I really like that the Fighter has 4 attacks a round. Fighters had the most attacks in earlier editions and 3.X took that away from the Fighter and just kind of compensated the Fighter with extra feats. It seems to be a balancing thing in this edition as well since a lot of other fighting classes have easier access to damage boosts(Paladins have Divine Smite, Rangers have Hunter's Mark/Foe Slayer/Colossus Slayer, Barbarians have Rage, Blade Warlocks have Hex and Lifedrinker) to offset having fewer attacks. I think it really helps to make each class feel really different from each other despite doing similar things.