House Rule idea - Multiple Attacks as Standard Action

[DJroboninja]

Hi everybody!

So I had a house rule idea to liven up melee combat and close the gap between two-handers and non-two-handers. Basically:

- Two weapon fighters can make main and off hand attack as a standard action (any other attacks as full attack)

- One-handed/sword n' board can make their first and second iterative attack (once it becomes available) as standard action (any other attacks as full attack)

- Two handers are unchanged

Does this make non 2H a little more equal in damage? Does it break the game? Is it stupid?

I don't know. That's why I came to you guys

[eggynack]

The TWF boost makes sense, but sword and board feels off. It's as if the S&B fellow is also just using TWF. Might make sense to give a more defensively inclined bonus. The balance of the whole thing seems fine though. The other styles don't seem like they'll overtake THF in damage on this basis.

[Extra Anchovies]

I would instead let them make the attacks you listed whenever they would make a single attack. This allows for Spring Attack (and, if in PF, Cleave and Vital Strike) to be viable feats for non-THFers.

Also, if this is 3.5, let characters with Flurry of Blows make one attack + their extra flurry attacks (usually one, or two if they have 11 levels of monk) as a standard action. Lets monks take advantage of that speed bonus.

[Feint's End]

Seeing that there are things like travel devotion and pounce that won't actually change much albeit the change for TWF makes sense (I have this house rule anyways).

The problem is more that TWF doesn't really deal a lot of damage and sword and board isn't worth it because you can get almost the same defense while TH and deal much, much more damage. Another big part is that TH is just cheaper.

So to fix the issue you'd first have to make TWF and sword and board cheaper (like ruling a lot of the feats into one ... giving the whole TWF line as one feat is a good start) ...then you need to fix the inherent damage issue those have (which is much harder)

[Troacctid]

Well, in 5th edition, full attacks are just a standard action, period. BAB is no longer a thing, and iterative attacks are a class feature that only the martial classes get. It seems to have worked out okay over there.

[OldTrees1]

Well, in 5th edition, full attacks are just a standard action, period. BAB is no longer a thing, and iterative attacks are a class feature that only the martial classes get. It seems to have worked out okay over there.

Seconding this^. Full Attack 1/round as a standard action is a reasonable buff for non casters.

[Forrestfire]

I'd go with just letting people full attack when they'd normally be allowed attacks. It seems fair. Everyone melee is trying to get a source of pounce anyway... May as well just cut out the middleman for everyone (even the casters, imo. Makes people more inclined to gish instead of playing the actually disruptive spellcaster strategies).


The TWF boost makes sense, but sword and board feels off. It's as if the S&B fellow is also just using TWF. Might make sense to give a more defensively inclined bonus. The balance of the whole thing seems fine though. The other styles don't seem like they'll overtake THF in damage on this basis.

Sword and board basically is two-weapon fighting. In real combat, the shield was just often used as an offensive weapon (especially since it's got such a large striking surface) in addition to its defensive uses. Makes sense to me, fluffwise.

[eggynack]

Sword and board basically is two-weapon fighting. In real combat, the shield was just often used as an offensive weapon (especially since it's got such a large striking surface) in addition to its defensive uses. Makes sense to me, fluffwise.
If the iterative is necessarily a shield bash, sure, but it sounds like both attacks can be with the weapon, especially because one handed fighting gets the same benefit.

[Forrestfire]

Oh, I see. I had read the TWF one as "can use main iteratives and offhand attack", not "can attack twice." Yeah, that'd be weird.

[Ashtagon]

Better idea:

As a standard action, you may make whatever set of attacks that RAW says can be done with a full-round action.

As a full-round action, you can do the above, and one of:

a) +2 insight or morale bonus (attacker's choice) to all melee attack rolls for the round.
b) +2 dodge bonus to Armour Class for the round.
c) Make a melee attack roll against an incoming melee attack. In effect, the attacker must overcome both his Armour Class and his defending attack roll.

As a special option, if a character has multiple weapon attacks, he can use any or all of them to "parry" as per (c) above, using that attack roll to defend against a single incoming attack that round instead of making an attack of his own.