What if nothing stacked?

[User3]

Imagine a DnD where no bonus stacked. Other than a reworking of multiclassing, what else would be necessary?

[Username17]

I imagine a world in which people would take their one bonus to Dex, their one bonus to Armor, and their one bonus to miss chance - none of which stack, but all of which stack.

-Username17

[User3]

If nothing stacked, your dodge bonus to AC from a positive Dex mod wouldn't stack with your Armor bonus. Only one could apply to AC.

The miss chance is, of course, not stacking as much as a seperate mechanic applied to a fringe case(concealment, darkness, displacement, etc).

[Desdan_Mervolam]

All fighters would be the same after fourth or fifth level, distinguished only by weapons and feats that have no direct effect on their attack rolls, since your Base Attack Bonus and your Strenght Bonus don't stack, nor do bonuses from feats like Weapon Focus

-K

[User3]

Right. Fighters would have to take feats that granted new a combat abilities(like Tactical feats or feats like Spring Attack), rather than specializing in +1s and +2s.

[The_Hanged_Man]

I see it as the world of inherent bonuses. Same deal, really, don't invest much in bonuses until you can get the best.

[User3]

Basically, I don't see people investing much in bonuses at all if they didn't stack.

[The_Hanged_Man]

Yes they would. You'd just invest wisely. It'd be like a low-magic campaign. I've played in them. If nobody can better a masterwork sword, and you find a +3 Greatsword . . . you rock. That's a very cool, and almost priceless item. It doesn't seem like much, but that's the only way to get an edge.

1E was basically that way. IIRC, there weren't any bonuses, really. There were a few spells that gave minor bonuses, like bless and aid, that we always cast b/c it was the only way to increase the odds. A +4 sword was hot death. You'd move heaven and earth to get an 18 strength. B/c that was the only way to go.

[User3]

In a "no stacking" universe, people would only ever get one mod to an attack roll. So, a high plus magic weapon would be used by average Strength people, since the high strength ones wouldn't need it. The abilties of the weapon would be more important than the pluses.

Actually, the more I think about it, the better I feel. A simpler, easier, less number crunching, research heavy system is probably better for everyone.

Of course, I think that fighters would need a bit of a power-up. but they always have needed it. A flat 1d6 of damage per every empty level would be enough.

Clerics would be as powerful as the should be.

Buffcasters would die, whcih only seems a good thing.

Mages and other classes wouldn't even notice.

[Username17]

What you are talking about is not less number crunchy, although it would be less fun.

If you didn't get to use your Flanking Bonus and your Invisible Attacker bonus, you wouldn't bother to attempt to get them. Position would no longer really matter, and we'd go to the world of 1e where the party fighter was not only worthless out of combat, but essentially played himself in combat.

The Fighter would just be a number that determined how big he was, and people would do everything in their power to figure out some obscure way to make that single number as large as possible - after all, it's the only thing they have.

Yes, it wouldn't make a whole lot of difference to Wizards, because Wizards don't make a whole lot of rolls. What you are talking about isn't even an RPG for warriors anymore, however. It's like playing Shadowfist or Tunnels and Trolls. None of the characters really matter since they are all interchangeable anyway.

Basically, there is no value whatsoever to your proposal. Not even a little bit, not even for a little while. It compeltely sucks, end of story.

----

Now, there is a problem with bonuses going on in D&D. This is that some bonuses are set up to be pretty much character defining. And they stack.

Which is to say, it doesn't really matter if you get a Flanking Bonus and an Invisible Attacker Bonus and a Charging Bonus and it all adds up to +6 - or you just get Divine Favor or something and get a +6. The end result is the same.

So a lot of bonuses are designed as if they are supposed to replace the fact that you aren't getting any other bonuses (Divne Favor, Divine Power, GMW, Polymorph, etc). But you are getting other bonuses, and often as not you are getting more than one of these signiature bonuses, which puts you so far into crazy town that you are the mayor now.

The solution isn't to get rid of all stacking bonuses - that way of thinking gives us the blind barbarian fiasco. As soon as you try to make Flanking and Invisibility not stack, the world instantly and irrevocably becomes retarded.

If you actually want to make the world better, make a "signiature effect bonus" - a bonus that is stuff like Divine Favor and Polymorph, and make it not stack. Then everyone can have their one big bonus and still run around attempting to get circumstance bonuses by moving to advantageous positions in combat and noone's bonuses will go epic at 9th level.

Weird puritanical bullshit about how you can't gain the benefits from being strong and skilled at the same time are completely utterly retarded. They don't make the game easier or more fun, they make characters all turn into a relentless sameness and turn the entire game into a game of Stratego.

-Username17

[User3]

Status conditions could stack(proned, flanked, blinded, cover, etc).

But, fighters would have to take feats that gave them new abilties. Period. That would be their flavor, and their fun in combat. In all of my time playing 3+ DnD, I've seen like two bull rushes, and three Disarms(performed by me, the party wizard). That's not right. Fighters need a whole range of feats that do different things, not just Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specializition, and Greater Weapon specializtion.

There is only one fighter feat in the PHB that gives an honest to goodness ability: Spring Attack. Every other feat is just a way to get more damage, more attacks(more damage), better chance to hit, or avoid an AoO or gain a plus to AC. Numbers, basically.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that the meatshields of 3.5 have any difference to them at all? All I ever see is "and then I attack(+/- Powerattack/Expertise). Did I hit? Did I crit? Here's my damage. Here's my move to my next attack/move to slightly better position. Then I attack....Rinse, then repeat."

How dull. Even 40K has more tactics to it.

[The_Hanged_Man]

Hmm. I commonly see the following fighters:

TWF fighters.
Charge fighters.
Archers.
Power fighters.
Reach fighters.
Spring attack fighters.

Yeah, you end up w/ here's my attack, here's my damage. But you end up with that no matter what you do. That's what rogues do, for the love of gawd. At some point, you roll to hit, and you roll damage.

There are two problems w/ special attacks. First,they're special - you shouldn't be using them that often. Second, in 3.5 they generally suck. Bull Rush is something I've even thought about doing maybe once. Disarm is generally useless b/c it's an opposed roll that generally is close to equal. Trip is specialized, cheesy, and annoying. Sunder is unfair. Grapple is annoying, time consuming, contradictory and inane.

[User3]

I’ve disarmed after using True Strike. Cheesy, but it works.

----------------------------

Ok, since there is no way that TWF and Spring attack is a viable specialized fighter type(it does work for rogues, though), that means that what you are saying is there are only archers, chargers, reachers, and power attackers. Since Reach is just a function of weapon choice, and Power Attack is a feat taken by all fighters, you are really saying that there are archers and chargers. Based in that, they both have feats that do one thing: add more or faster attacks, or make an attack bigger. Big whoop.

I’ll just make up five feats that fighters in a “no stack” game should might have.

Crossed Swords: The fighter chooses a target in his melee range. That enemy must win an opposed Strength check each round in order to successfully attempt to make a melee attack on anyone other than the fighter. Failing the check means that the attack is lost for the round. The fighter cannot attack anyone other than the enemy he has crossed swords with.

Blinding Strike: The fighter may make an attack versus a flat-footed enemy. On a successful attack, the enemy is blinded for 1 round. On the crit, the enemy is permanently blinded until healing magic is applied.

Staple: On a successful attack on a flat-footed enemy, the fighter may use a weapon to staple an enemy to an object(floor, wall, furniture, etc). A stapled enemy must make a Strength check (DC, the attack roll) to remove the weapon, or destroy the weapon with a break check or attack. If a melee weapon is used, the fighter must let go of the weapon and cannot continue to use the it. On a crit, normal weapon damage is also applied.

Lunge: As a full-round action, the fighter gets the effects of a charge for one attack and double damage on that attack. However, the fighter must then use a full round action next round to recover from the lunge or suffer a -2 to AC and loss of Dex bonus on his turn.

Small Unit Tactician: The fighter has mastered the flow of combat, and learned to use frighteningly close attacks to firce his enemies to react and move into positions that he wants them in . When using this action, a successful attack means that the enemy takes no damage, but must use its next move action to move 5 feet in a direction that the fighter desires. Several successful Small Unit Tactician attacks on an enemy can force a single enemy to use its move action to move per 5 feet per successful attack, up to the enemies move action speed. Enemies who do not have a move action, or are prone, are unaffected.

[User3]

Eh, on the Crossed Swords ability I meant to write in the last line, "The fighter may only attack the enemy he has Crossed Swords with if he wants to prevent the enemy's attacks on its next action."

[Username17]

That's horribly complicated and inane at the same time.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty]

Well, it's a cool idea for an ability IMO. If fighters are to act as meat shields they really need ways of protecting thier allies, especially at higher levels. After all, you're a crappy meat shield if the other guy can just run around you. Being able to chop at his back while he kills your wizard just isnt' all that great.

[Crissa]

K, you've seen far more bull-rushes than two!

That's the main mode for open melee combat that my character in Frank's current game uses: Jump into the guy's square, hope he falls down, and chew him to pieces.

I really should get spring attack to help with the not being chewed back, but... Except for that last bit, I tumble.

Signature bonuses would be okay, but these 'replacement' bonuses that stack just gotta stop!

-Crissa

[Wrenfield]

1085086442[/unixtime]]Hmm. I commonly see the following fighters:

TWF fighters.
Charge fighters.
Archers.
Power fighters.
Reach fighters.
Spring attack fighters.

Yeah, you end up w/ here's my attack, here's my damage. But you end up with that no matter what you do. That's what rogues do, for the love of gawd. At some point, you roll to hit, and you roll damage.

There are two problems w/ special attacks. First,they're special - you shouldn't be using them that often. Second, in 3.5 they generally suck. Bull Rush is something I've even thought about doing maybe once. Disarm is generally useless b/c it's an opposed roll that generally is close to equal. Trip is specialized, cheesy, and annoying. Sunder is unfair. Grapple is annoying, time consuming, contradictory and inane.

I see a lot of Tripmeister builds in my gaming locale. It's the single most potent form of melee combat in the early-to-mid levels ... as long as you structure your build around it using feats like Imp. Trip, Wolf Berserker, Jotenbrud, etc. The latter 2 are from FR sourcebooks. You can even trip flying opponents (which Rich Baker confirmed is legal recently).

And bullrushing rocks. Especially if you got a battlefield control mage casting stuff like Web, Grease, Wall of Fire, etc. The bullrusher with the absolutely essential Combat Brute and Shock Trooper feats (CW) not only pounds senseless those that he bullrushes, but he also knocks said victim into the spell hazards.

I personally have little respect for Spring Attack Fighters. Especially since they more often than not need to be able to perform ground-holding, tank, and bodyguard duty. And Spring Attacking sucks for that.

[Username17]

Spring Attack can be good in a Combat Reflexes build.

It can also look bloody amazing when fighting against Wolf Squid or Trolls.

Other than that, it's worse than not having it. So its usefulness depends alot on what else you plan to do.

At no time is the standard "I'll be a 90' speed monk with Spring Attack, and I'll zip right past you and do not quite enough damage to care about!" build at all good.

-Username17