Home Rule balancing question: Making Martial Classes Matter

[Pleh]

I'm very new to optimizing builds, but recently it's been made clear to me that most martial builds that want to stay seriously competitive are given the recommended 1 level dip into Barbarian Spirit Lion Totem ACF to get the monstrous Pounce ability.

It kept coming up as the way to go for a number of different builds I was researching, and it got me to feeling bad as a GM that my martial players may be so handicapped in building melee-ers that are both mechanically effective while also being stylistically diverse.

As such I have developed the desire to build a house rule for my games (3.5 ed) that makes Pounce into a feat that is readily accessible to low level players (who may not want to research all the splatbooks or the internet to build an effective melee character).

So here was my idea:


Blitzkrieg
Your weapon is like an extension of yourself, allowing you to attack more aggressively.
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13, Power Attack
Benefit: When you make a charge, you can follow it with a full attack.
Special: A fighter may select Blitzkrieg as one of his fighter bonus feats.

I liked this idea because it felt both mechanically balanced (in my mind) and it made fluff sense as well.

It makes sense to stack such an aggressive maneuver onto Power Attack, making it a bit costly to TWF builds, but not unattainable. The basic idea behind Pounce was that certain monsters, those that are cat-like in reflexes, could use all of their natural attacks at the end of a charge. Certainly a martial combatant familiar enough with their weapon (like it was an extension of themselves) could learn to do the same thing if they specifically trained for this kind of "Lightning war" assault tactics.

I like the Dex prereq because pulling off a maneuver like this would require a certain amount of physical self control and balance. Also, this applies a gentle "MAD tax" to THF builds to keep them from just min-maxing Str. Also, the Dex Prereq also makes this feat vulnerable to Dexterity Damage (from poison or debuffing magic, etc).

Finally, I like it because it doesn't feel like I'm taking anything special away from Barbarian Spirit Lion Totem. By giving a few restrictions to the feat, the ACF remains more advantageous to those who were already going with those sorts of builds. They won't have the MAD tax (allowing them to focus more heavily on their Str based abilities) and they won't lose Pounce when they suffer Dex damage (because they gain their ability from their spirit totem, not from their own physical form).

---

So, how did I do? What would (or should) be the actual effect of adding this feat to a 3.5 game (for now, assuming this is the only homebrew addition)? Does it balance things well, or is it too powerful? Is it easy enough for most any martial build to get it, or is the cost higher than the reward?

Most importantly, does it look like this feat might make characters more fun to build and games more fun to play (at least for martial characters)?

[Flickerdart]

Rogues and TWFers are hosed for no reason. Power Attack is already dealing the most damage.

And dealing damage is not the problem. Doing things other than damage is the problem.

[ComaVision]

Honestly, if this were available I'd still be dipping Barb or doing something else for full attacks, the preqs are too prohibitive. It also is harder on the already feat-starved and inferior TWF.

[Gallowglass]

So there are two critiques I would give.

1st, yes you see the spirited charge dip in every martial op build you are going to see on this board. This is because martials only do one thing. Attack and do damage*. And, in the system as designed, the most efficient way to do that, once you get to iterative attacks, is with full attack actions. So the trick of being able to get to where you need to go and still full attack is inherently optimized to how combat works in the DnD/Pathfinder system.

So giving them an alternate path into that will reduce the optimization dependence on the spirited charge dip. But it won't change the fact that the full attack charge is still the best inherent martial attack strategy. Its not giving the martials anything new to do and it isn't going to "make them matter" because they are still only doing the one thing. They don't have the access that spellcasters have to doing other things. No skills, no non-combat spells, no divinations, no play in the other 70% of the game that isn't combat.

2nd, I would not tie it to power attack. Why? Power attack is, much like spirited charge, an essential grab because it is inherently optimized to how combat works in the DnD/Pathfinder system.

Think about it. Without any other features, without classes, without feats how does base melee combat work?

You move to next to the enemy. You roll a d20, add your BaB and add your str bonus. See if you hit. If so, roll damage + str bonus.

You don't need any feats to do that, you don't need a class, you don't need any features. That's the default method.

If you want to do something else (use dexterity instead of str, use intelligence to fight smarter, use a reach weapon effectively, use an exotic weapon) you have to spend features and feats to do that. So someone who wants to be an agile two weapon warrior is immediately at a disadvantage over the guy who wants to work with the system as designed. So while that agile, two weapon warrior is spending feats and features to get to where the baseline fighter is already, that baseline fighter gets to spend his feats on something else. And where the two-weapon warrior needs to spend four or five feats to get the baseline, the baseline just needs ONE feat. Power attack. It scales, it works with the system as designed, it can be used on every swing, and the balance (-n to hit) subtracts from something that the baseline fighter has lots of and gets for free as they level up (BAB)

So I wouldn't tie it to power attack, because you are trying to build alternate paths, alternate strategies to give martials more flexibility in their chosen field (attacking and do damage), so don't stack your new option on top of the already dominant option. You'll just end up with multiple fighters with the same flavor.


*damage can mean physical damage, or it can mean debuffing attacks like trips, grapples and the like.

[Eldariel]

If you want to fix this, just enable full attacks as a standard action/at the end of a charge; it has some implications for monsters (most importantly, by-the-book martial monsters become a whole lot more dangerous) but removes the need for stuff like Pounce (you'll probably want to specify that Charge-multipliers only apply on the first attack after charge, or limit them in some other way). If you want to further address this angle, make default spell casting times 1 round (and thus vulnerable to disruption and immobile) while warriors get to move and attack each round - of course you'll have to see what, if anything, to do about swift/immediate action spells, quicken spell and the like separately. Suddenly, combat mobility favours melee and martial types can actually meaningfully contribute against casting creatures as a baseline, both in defensive and offensive functions. Casting is still the most powerful combat option but at least it has a clear weakness.

EDIT: Actually, you can further this angle by enabling using your move action to match/block an opponent you're in melee with. This means you can still throw down those melee fights and martially prohibit enemy movement (unless they can Overrun you) and have a use for your move actions while engaged in melee but in the meanwhile, your move actions aren't locked to standing there and full attacking.

[tsj]

I my view the solution is to cover all class options with Tier 3 alternatives ... I call it simply. .T3

[J-H]

Have you looked at ToB?

[HurinTheCursed]

A 2-feats tax on dex-based feat starved build is not the optimal solution. And clever fighters have to get even more MAD to benefit from it.


If you want to fix this, just enable full attacks as a standard action/at the end of a charge; it has some implications for monsters (most importantly, by-the-book martial monsters become a whole lot more dangerous) but removes the need for stuff like Pounce (you'll probably want to specify that Charge-multipliers only apply on the first attack after charge, or limit them in some other way). If you want to further address this angle, make default spell casting times 1 round (and thus vulnerable to disruption and immobile) while warriors get to move and attack each round - of course you'll have to see what, if anything, to do about swift/immediate action spells, quicken spell and the like separately. Suddenly, combat mobility favours melee and martial types can actually meaningfully contribute against casting creatures as a baseline, both in defensive and offensive functions. Casting is still the most powerful combat option but at least it has a clear weakness.

EDIT: Actually, you can further this angle by enabling using your move action to match/block an opponent you're in melee with. This means you can still throw down those melee fights and martially prohibit enemy movement (unless they can Overrun you) and have a use for your move actions while engaged in melee but in the meanwhile, your move actions aren't locked to standing there and full attacking.
With standard rules, casters can move AND be dangerous while melee can move OR be dangerous. Reversing things as you propose seems interesting while it remains simple and elegant.
It would be faster, more lethal and allow more builds to works, bringing the diversity highlighted by Gallowglass. Maybe a few things to tweak for full round casting and pouncers but it seems like a good way to balance without forcing into T3 who will become stronger than ever though.

More complicated but maybe better for inter tiers balance, I would say T1 need 1 full round to cast, T2 remain unchanged, T3 get 1 extra swift each round, T4 get 1 extra move or swift each round, T5 get 1 extra standard, move or swift action each round, T6 get a second round. Monsters with no class get 1 extra move or swift.
Still disparities at borders between tiers but it's probably more even globally.

[Flickerdart]

More complicated but maybe better for inter tiers balance, I would say T1 need 1 full round to cast, T2 remain unchanged, T3 get 1 extra swift each round, T4 get 1 extra move or swift each round, T5 get 1 extra standard, move or swift action each round, T6 get a second round. Monsters with no class get 1 extra move or swift.
Still disparities at borders between tiers but it's probably more even globally.
T1s win before combat even begins. Nerfing them just screws over unoptimized blaster wizards.

[HurinTheCursed]

OK. But this intra tiers disparity is still better than the current inter+intra tiers disparity ?
And 3.5 is probably beyond salvageable regarding balance but if you were the OP, what would you do ?

[Tiktakkat]

I just eliminated the full attack penalty.
And I eliminated the iterative attack penalty.
It doesn't make fighters into wizards by any means, but at least they get to full attack more than once per combat without random dips and what not.

[Beheld]

I would play 3.Tome with all my houserules.

Which has amongst other things the rules:

1) Full attacks go +20/+15/+15/+15 at 20 BAB.
2) There's a feat called Blitz. That feat has no pre-reqs, but if you have 6 BAB you can full attack as a standard action.

That's certainly a better version to me, than this feat which only works for charges and power attackers.

[Flickerdart]

2) There's a feat called Blitz. That feat has no pre-reqs, but if you have 6 BAB you can full attack as a standard action.
This seems like a giant feat tax - all characters that attack (as opposed to using spells/maneuvers) would want to take it. Why not enable this by default after characters reach 6 BAB? This has precedent in Martial Arts, where you gain a benefit simply by having the prerequisites.

[Troacctid]

Is there really a compelling reason to tie full attacks to a charge? Why not instead just have the feat make full attacks into a standard action?

Here is my improved version of the feat.
Troacctid's Swiftness
You have studied the techniques of the legendary warrior Troacctid, and your footwork is nearly as quick as hers.

Prerequisites
Base attack bonus +6; Weapon Focus (any) or proficiency with all martial weapons

Benefit
You can make a full attack as a standard action. You can also make a full attack with melee weapons while mounted, even if your mount moves more than 5 feet.

Normal
Making a full attack requires a full round action, and you cannot make more than one melee attack while mounted if your mount moves more than 5 feet.

Special
This feat can be used in conjunction with a Spring Attack, Flyby Attack, or Swim-By Attack, allowing you to make each of your attacks at any point during your movement. (This replaces the single attack made in a Spring Attack, although you may still avoid attacks of opportunity from one target as normal, and Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz still function normally if you have them.)

At 6th level, a monk may select Troacctid's Swiftness as her bonus feat, even if she does not have the prerequisites.

A fighter may select Troacctid's Swiftness as one of her fighter bonus feats. A scout may select Troacctid's Swiftness as one of her scout bonus feats. A ranger using the Champion of the Wild variant may select Troacctid's Swiftness as one of her Champion of the Wild bonus feats.

[Eldariel]

I'm not sure I'm a fan of all these feats being tied to 6+ BAB. TWFers, Monks and similar have multiple attacks from level 1 and they certainly aren't breaking anything if they get to actually use their abilities 1-5 (or longer). And yeah, I completely agree with Flickerdart: I think it's completely unnecessary to make it a feat tax.

[Flickerdart]

I'm not sure I'm a fan of all these feats being tied to 6+ BAB. TWFers, Monks and similar have multiple attacks from level 1 and they certainly aren't breaking anything if they get to actually use their abilities 1-5 (or longer).

I would err on the side of caution here. 1-5 are melee's strongest levels as-is. If you take an attack routine like Unarmed strike/Claw/Claw/Bite/Whirling Frenzy and let people use it on a charge before HP is high enough to try and provide a defense, the game becomes way too swingy.

[Troacctid]

I'm not sure I'm a fan of all these feats being tied to 6+ BAB. TWFers, Monks and similar have multiple attacks from level 1 and they certainly aren't breaking anything if they get to actually use their abilities 1-5 (or longer). And yeah, I completely agree with Flickerdart: I think it's completely unnecessary to make it a feat tax.
The intent is to make BAB more relevant, not to universally make full attacks better. The BAB restriction ensures that full-BAB classes are the primary beneficiaries.

[Beheld]

This seems like a giant feat tax - all characters that attack (as opposed to using spells/maneuvers) would want to take it. Why not enable this by default after characters reach 6 BAB? This has precedent in Martial Arts, where you gain a benefit simply by having the prerequisites.

1) That's not all that the feat does. It's a Tome Races of War Scaling Feat, so it does five things. That is one of them.
2) The main reason to make it a feat, even one that everyone takes, rather than just changing the rules, is because monsters exist. If you change the rules so that all characters full attack as a standard action, then that drastically changes the balance of many creatures in the Monster Manual. If you don't do that, and make it a feat, then the DM can choose whether to drastically increased the damage of monster A.