Balance of spending a feat for +1BAB?

[Elkad]

I've been considering making +1BAB a feat choice as a houserule. Take it as often as you want.

Weapon focus is +1 to hit, or the same basic effect, and is generally considered underpowered. Of course it doesn't come with more attacks, and it's usually limited to one weapon, but most people stick with one weapon for 90% of their melee anyway.

Assuming it's in the "fighter bonus feat list", a Fighter could rack up +18, for +38BAB and 8 attacks. Of course at that point he doesn't even have Power Attack to trade it all away on, so he'd likely be somewhat short of that.
You can of course get even more with various bonus feats and Chaos Shuffle

A bunch of extra attacks doesn't really move you up a tier, and the top tiers (other than maybe druid) have plenty of things to spend feats on.
PRC early entry is a concern. (solvable by careful wording)

What else am I missing?

[Âmesang]

I'm keen on the idea, mainly for 10th-level/10th-level class combinations utilizing an average base attack bonus, each; so taking a feat once would bump a person up to +15 at 20th-level instead of +14.

That lack of a single point bugs the Nine Hells out of me and is why my last character was going for 16/4 build of poor base attack bonus classes (resulting in +10 attack instead of +9).

[Necroticplague]

You don't get more attacks for BaB over 20. This is stated in the ELH (and it would be pointless even if such wasn't the case. Unless your first attacks were guaranteed hits, then the attacks at -20/-25/-30/-35 are never gonna hit anything).

That said, My main problem with it is that it's very boring. it's just a flat plus to a statistic without much interesting interaction. Might be slightly of use for high-level uberchargers, but at those points, their damage is so high the bonus this would give them would be negligible. Is there anything in particular you want this feat to be used for?

[Nettlekid]

Agreed with the above. It would be great to take once or twice to let a Rogue have four iterative attacks, or maybe to make up the BAB lost on some dip, but under most circumstances a feat which lets you do something new and special is better than a feat that just increases numbers.

[Marlowe]

IF you could take it at first level AND you have an extra feat from flaws or being Human THEN you could use this gain some other benefit that requires +1BAB.

First level Dex-Rogues (and other dex-based characters lacking full BAB) could take Weapon Finesse at the start and not have to put up with those first couple of levels of incompetence in melee. Thrown-weapon scouts could be Thrown-weapon scouts right from the start and not be crippled by the "move-action-to-draw-a-weapon-when-lacking-BAB+1" rule. And could take Quickdraw right at the start. If they want it.

That said, most of these rules seem to be ignored or houseruled away in play anyway, and become generally irrelevant after a few levels.

[Troacctid]

That said, most of these rules seem to be ignored or houseruled away in play anyway, and become generally irrelevant after a few levels.

Really? I've seen people forget about them, but I've never seen them houseruled away.

[Marlowe]

Possibly not. And one of this forum's stalwarts claims to have never seen ToM prestige classes in play even though Knight of the Sacred Seal or Anima Mage turn up in related discussions with some frequency. And I know somebody who has been playing D&D for over 25 years and still doesn't know the difference between "attack roll" and "damage roll". And people in China have no idea what Turmeric is. Personal experience is a singular beast.

[zergling.exe]

You don't get more attacks for BaB over 20. This is stated in the ELH (and it would be pointless even if such wasn't the case. Unless your first attacks were guaranteed hits, then the attacks at -20/-25/-30/-35 are never gonna hit anything).


The bolded is actually false. After level 20 you only gain epic attack bonuses, which are different. Even without that though, you still wouldn't get extra attacks because they are not actually given out for 'evey five points of base attack bonus'. They are given out specifically at BAB +6, +11, and +16. From the glossary:

base attack bonus: An attack roll bonus derived from character class and level. Base attack bonuses increase at different rates for different character classes. A character gains a second attack when his or her base attack bonus reaches +6, a third with a base attack bonus of +11 or higher, and a fourth with a base attack bonus of +16 or higher. Base attack bonuses gained from different classes, such as when a character is a multiclass character, stack.

That was the only text in the PHB I found aside from the tables that tells you when you get additional attacks. The formula is forum shorthand.

[Ursus Spelaeus]

I can see something like this being useful for opening up prestige classes in an Epic 6 campaign.
I would probably add some restriction like "Your BAB can't be greater than your number of hit dice."

[daremetoidareyo]

I can see something like this being useful for opening up prestige classes in an Epic 6 campaign.
I would probably add some restriction like "Your BAB can't be greater than your number of hit dice."

c'mon, man, I want to get one level of runescarred berzerker in.

[MisterKaws]

The bolded is actually false. After level 20 you only gain epic attack bonuses, which are different. Even without that though, you still wouldn't get extra attacks because they are not actually given out for 'evey five points of base attack bonus'. They are given out specifically at BAB +6, +11, and +16. From the glossary:


That was the only text in the PHB I found aside from the tables that tells you when you get additional attacks. The formula is forum shorthand.

Your statement is the basis of all pun-pun level munchkinry, just because the PH doesn't state that something can't be done, it doesn't mean that it can be done, because D&D uses a permissive system, where you can only do something if the game specifically says you can.

[zergling.exe]

Your statement is the basis of all pun-pun level munchkinry, just because the PH doesn't state that something can't be done, it doesn't mean that it can be done, because D&D uses a permissive system, where you can only do something if the game specifically says you can.

Well it does say at '+16 or higher'. So unless there is something else that says they get one at +21 BAB then there would be no 5th iterative to get.

And I always heard that DnD uses an exception based system?

edit: A humorous thing I just noticed in the text: you only get the iteratve for +6 when you have +6. Once you get to +7, you lose it and don't get it back until +11, when you get a 'third' attack. :smallbiggrin:

[Nettlekid]

Your statement is the basis of all pun-pun level munchkinry, just because the PH doesn't state that something can't be done, it doesn't mean that it can be done, because D&D uses a permissive system, where you can only do something if the game specifically says you can.

Your declaration of it being a permissive system actually supports his remark. You're told that you gain an iterative attack at BAB 6, 11, and 16. That's what you're permitted to get. It doesn't say you get extra attacks every 5 BAB, or just whenever, which is what a non-permissive system would be more like.

Regardless, I have no idea where you get the Pun-Pun connection with what he said.

[mabriss lethe]

I'd say it's a pretty poor trade, though I have considered making a combat feat similar to Practiced caster/manifester, that would allow you to increase your BAB by +4 capped by character level.

[Endarire]

My idea for a better BAB through a feat:

This feat gives +3 BAB, but one's BAB can't be higher than his hit dice this way. This allows 1/2 BABers to reach 6 BAB @6 and 3/4 BABers to reach 4 attacks via iteratives with some room to spare.

[Florian]

I´m very skeptical with feats that change how basic class features work.
Using a feat like this would, for example, allow some classes earlier access on other feats that have a BAB prereq or earlier entry into certain PrC without the need for dipping.
All in all a BAB feat would support casters, especially fishy types more than your regular mundanes.
Similar issues would crop up with Sneak Attack +1d6 as a feat.

As an example, take a look at the Arcane Archer PrC. The only thing holding you back from not dipping any martial class is the high BAB prereq of +6, something a pure elven wizard can only have at 12th level. Having a +1 BAB feat and taking it twice would move the entry to 11th level, allowing full progression in the PrC.

[Elkad]

I can see something like this being useful for opening up prestige classes in an Epic 6 campaign.
I would probably add some restriction like "Your BAB can't be greater than your number of hit dice."


I'd say it's a pretty poor trade, though I have considered making a combat feat similar to Practiced caster/manifester, that would allow you to increase your BAB by +4 capped by character level.

Those are exactly the things I don't like. It would turn it into a feat that is useless to full BAB classes, but gives a big advantage to caster and gish types, who don't need the help.

If I was to put a limit on it, it would be that you can't take it more times than current class-derived BAB.

Attacks beyond 4 was assumed, but it's easy to alter that rule at the same time to make sure it works like every other progression in the game.

[MisterKaws]

Well it does say at '+16 or higher'. So unless there is something else that says they get one at +21 BAB then there would be no 5th iterative to get.

And I always heard that DnD uses an exception based system?

edit: A humorous thing I just noticed in the text: you only get the iteratve for +6 when you have +6. Once you get to +7, you lose it and don't get it back until +11, when you get a 'third' attack. :smallbiggrin:


Your declaration of it being a permissive system actually supports his remark. You're told that you gain an iterative attack at BAB 6, 11, and 16. That's what you're permitted to get. It doesn't say you get extra attacks every 5 BAB, or just whenever, which is what a non-permissive system would be more like.

Regardless, I have no idea where you get the Pun-Pun connection with what he said.

Your definitions of permissive are just the opposite of mine, I meant the same thing...

About the pun-pun munchkinry: feats are easy to stack with the proper shenanigan, something like one of those feat draining powers, or even a Sarrukh, can get them to infinity pretty fast.

[Chronos]

Quoth Necroticplague:

You don't get more attacks for BaB over 20. This is stated in the ELH (and it would be pointless even if such wasn't the case. Unless your first attacks were guaranteed hits, then the attacks at -20/-25/-30/-35 are never gonna hit anything).
Yes, but if you're a high-level character in a full BAB class, then your first attacks probably were, in fact, guaranteed hits. Miscellaneous buffs to attack rolls are common enough, and enough greater than miscellaneous buffs to AC, that even without your BAB (i.e., on the last iterative attack), you're still likely to have a better than 1 in 20 chance of hitting.

Yes, yes, I know, Power Attack will bring those chances back down... except that, unless you're using Shock Trooper or the like which makes the attack bonus irrelevant, the optimal Power Attack amount is very small, if you're making a full attack.

[Necroticplague]

Those are exactly the things I don't like. It would turn it into a feat that is useless to full BAB classes, but gives a big advantage to caster and gish types, who don't need the help.

If I was to put a limit on it, it would be that you can't take it more times than current class-derived BAB.

Attacks beyond 4 was assumed, but it's easy to alter that rule at the same time to make sure it works like every other progression in the game.

.......Are you familiar with the concept of diminishing returns? It applies to game statistics as much as it does resources. +1 BaB when you already have BaB 20 is gonna be much less useful than +1 BaB when you only have 10. There's no real way to make it so that the non-full classes benefit less than the full BaB classes. The full BaB classes already have the BaB they need, and don't really have an incentive to take this feat. Only real use I could see is for fast-tracking into other feats or PRCs.

[Flickerdart]

There's really only two uses for a +BAB feat:

Reaching +11 BAB for 3 attacks, or reaching +16 BAB for 4 attacks, on a character that would not get this by level 20.
Qualifying for PrCs before you would otherwise be able to.


Personally, I frown on feats that are only useful for early entry.

[zergling.exe]

Your definitions of permissive are just the opposite of mine, I meant the same thing...

About the pun-pun munchkinry: feats are easy to stack with the proper shenanigan, something like one of those feat draining powers, or even a Sarrukh, can get them to infinity pretty fast.

I still don't understand where pun-pun munchkinry comes from in my statement. All I did was clarify EAB vs BAB, and point out that the rules don't give one iterative per 5 BAB as was being assumed.

[MisterKaws]

I still don't understand where pun-pun munchkinry comes from in my statement. All I did was clarify EAB vs BAB, and point out that the rules don't give one iterative per 5 BAB as was being assumed.

That's also the same thing I said, and pun-pun munchkinry comes from having power attack and stone power with this much BAB.

[mabriss lethe]

Those are exactly the things I don't like. It would turn it into a feat that is useless to full BAB classes, but gives a big advantage to caster and gish types, who don't need the help.

If I was to put a limit on it, it would be that you can't take it more times than current class-derived BAB.

Attacks beyond 4 was assumed, but it's easy to alter that rule at the same time to make sure it works like every other progression in the game.

More BAB doesn't do much for full BAB classes. It's just piling bigger numbers. There are already several ways for melee types to generate big numbers. What helps front liners more is greater options in and out of combat.

[Florian]

More BAB doesn't do much for full BAB classes. It's just piling bigger numbers. There are already several ways for melee types to generate big numbers. What helps front liners more is greater options in and out of combat.

As a blanket statement, this is not true.
The core game is "four guys in a dungeon, facing encounters" and the fighter is adequately equipped for that.
The more you move away from/expand on that core game, the more the tight focus of some classes will become a liability. But that is not a problem of that class itself, but of chasing it whilst still knowing that liability.

[nedz]

There's really only two uses for a +BAB feat:

Reaching +11 BAB for 3 attacks, or reaching +16 BAB for 4 attacks, on a character that would not get this by level 20.
Qualifying for PrCs before you would otherwise be able to.


Personally, I frown on feats that are only useful for early entry.
Well there are some feats which require a certain BAB, and I know spending a feat to get another early seems pointless - but it is a Fighter Feat (apparently).

Otherwise you are right. I would expect to see people use this for early entry - Gishes especially.


Possibly not. And one of this forum's stalwarts claims to have never seen ToM prestige classes in play even though Knight of the Sacred Seal or Anima Mage turn up in related discussions with some frequency.
I've never seen one used, only just seem someone use ToM for the first time :smallsigh: He is expecting to take Bloodstorm Blade though.

[Nibbens]

... and it would be pointless even if such wasn't the case. Unless your first attacks were guaranteed hits, then the attacks at -20/-25/-30/-35 are never gonna hit anything).

Regardless of what I think about the idea of a BAB +1 feat option, i think what this thread is ignoring is one of the most valuable options for fighters - improved crit range.

3 additional attacks per turn is a much higher chance to strike that 15-20 on the die - and failed confirm crits are still hits (regardless if you're taking negative 5 or 800 to the attack roll). This opens up fighters to hit quite a lot more on the later iteratives (and if the BAB feat was allowed and the conditional attacks which may or may not follow).

Heck, even if a fighter only used enough BAB feats to get 1 additional attack. That last iterative still hits on a nat 15-20. One forth of the time. Not too shabby in my opinion.

[Deophaun]

3 additional attacks per turn is a much higher chance to strike that 15-20 on the die - and failed confirm crits are still hits
I'm 99% sure only a natural 20 is an automatic hit.

[Nibbens]

I'm 99% sure only a natural 20 is an automatic hit.

In PF no. Failed confirm crits are still hits - but IIRC it's the same in 3.5. However, it's been a very long time since I played anything with a 3 in it, so I may be wrong. lol.

[Chronos]

3 additional attacks per turn is a much higher chance to strike that 15-20 on the die - and failed confirm crits are still hits (regardless if you're taking negative 5 or 800 to the attack roll).
Where do people keep getting this idea? It's not from the rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits):

Increased Threat Range

Sometimes your threat range is greater than 20. That is, you can score a threat on a lower number. In such cases, a roll of lower than 20 is not an automatic hit. Any attack roll that doesn’t result in a hit is not a threat.

[zergling.exe]

In PF no. Failed confirm crits are still hits - but IIRC it's the same in 3.5. However, it's been a very long time since I played anything with a 3 in it, so I may be wrong. lol.

3.5's increased threat range:
Increased Threat Range: Sometimes your threat range is greater than 20. That is, you can score a threat on a lower number. Longswords, for instance, give you a thread on a natural attack roll of 19 or 20. In such cases, a roll of lower than 20 is not an automatic hit. Any attack roll that doesn’t result in a hit is not a threat.

Pathfinder's:
Increased Threat Range: Sometimes your threat range is greater than 20. That is, you can score a threat on a lower number. In such cases, a roll of lower than 20 is not an automatic hit. Any attack roll that doesn’t result in a hit is not a threat.

[Deophaun]

In PF no..

In PF, yes. The language Chronos quoted shows up in the PRD as it does in the 3.5 RC.

/ And Swordsaged

[Nibbens]

Where do people keep getting this idea? It's not from the rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits):

Well dang! Tickle me pink and call me Shirley. Good to learn. lol. It's the same in PF too. I shall take my leave now. lol.

*Sneaks out so no one can see*

*Sneaks back in*

Regardless of this fact (which is good to learn/realize/remember/whatever (thanks to all who participated in this)) If a players level has a natural BAB progression, then his lowest attack bonus iterative would still be higher than his lowest iterative normally.

Level 6 with no feats:
BAB 6/1

Level 6 with 5 BAB feats:
BAB 11/5/1


Conversely,

Level 11 with no BAB feats
11/6/1

Level 11 with 8 BAB feats
19/14/9/4

So your last iterative would at least be as low as your last attack normally, so in this case, even crits threats (under my old interpenetration of the rules) wouldn't be necessary for the attacks to be effective. So Necroticplague's display of -20/-25/-30 to the attacks (while looking extreme) are simply relative to your actual BAB.