Quote Originally Posted by Ralasha View Post
True enough, I'll post my reasons here:
The explanation of BAB in the class description is for those players whos' DM's choose to interpret the BAB as stacking for purposes of total, but not for purpose of number of attacks. I have had some that go let us say you have fighter 6, and paladin 10: you get two attacks, rather than three at :+16/+6
+10/+5 from paladin, and +6/+1 from fighter, whereas by normal rules this would be +16/+6/+1, or +16/+11/+6/+1. due to total BAB.
Interesting - this would seriously encourage players of fighting characters to stick with one class all the way, cause losing out on your multi-attacks by taking other classes is a pretty big punishment... but it sort of stands up to realism, in that you're diluting your training.

I'll admit I did wonder for a few minutes when I first picked up D&D 3rd Ed what the BAB tables meant - specifically I couldn't tell if I was supposed to add +1 for first level, then +2 for 2nd, making +3 total, and so on: I doubtred it, cause it seemed way over powered, but then I hadn't read the new AC rules yet - but the explanatory text made it fairly clear.
I think, if you have any issue with the lose of multiple attacks that this system enforces, then you should just point your DM to this text from the SRD:
Quote Originally Posted by SRD
Base Attack Bonus: Add the base attack bonuses acquired for each class to get the character’s base attack bonus. A resulting value of +6 or higher provides the character with multiple attacks.
Or, if you think it's fine, don't bother. I've played in plenty of games that used house rules that went directly against the RAW.