Trading Damage for Accuracy?

[subplotkudzu]

More swashbucklery thoughts for D&D 3E: the system currently has rules for trading accuracy for more damage (Power Attack) and trading accuracy for a better defense (Expertise), but not for the idea of hitting more accurately with less force. I can understand why the original designers might have avoided it since so much of the system is built around controlling the ability to connect, but for a swashbuckler game I think it's needed.

I'm considering adding a feat that lets you take a reduction on your damage to get a bonus to hit. My current scheme is that you can boost your attack roll by up to your BAB or +3, whichever is lower (similar to the cap on Expertise). Each +1 you take hit hit gives you a -3 to your damage roll. There's the usual rule that a hit has to do at least 1 point of damage.

If I do add this, it's also likely to be the prerequisite for Improved Feint (and maybe Improved Staredown, to keep the CHA based techniques together the same way they keep the STR and INT styles together...). Do people think this makes sense? Is a +1/-3 trade off balanced? Having a +1 BAB/-1 dam is obviously broken, but is +1/-3 enough to balance it or too much? Should I instead have Weapon Finesse be the prerequisite for this? Any thoughts are appreciated.

Oh, Dave and Bec? You can post - you don't need to have an LJ account to add anonymous comments.

Comments

[corylus-unbound.livejournal.com]

First off bear in mind I don't really do game mechanics but the +1/-3 trade off seems okay to me as far as these things go but I'm obviously not on the same page of swash that you are as I don't really understand why this need for less force when subdual damage is a possibility already.

Am I missing the point entirely?

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

You're missing the point somewhat. The goal for this is not to take down the opponent without killing him - it's to take him down through an offense of a thousand paper cuts. You're still trying to kill them, but the goal is to hit a lot of times for smaller amounts of damage rather than Power Attack where you want to hit with a single fight-ending blow.

[adoxograph.livejournal.com]

How would this tie in to the "hit to embarass" idea? You know, "and suddenly his pants fall down" sort of thing...

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure about 'pants falling down' (techically that's a sunder attempt, though this would give you a bonus to hit on that), but this is a good mechanic for cutting your initials on someone.

[corylus-unbound.livejournal.com]

Okay, so it's all about inflicting a long and humilating defeat, leading ultimately to death. I get the whole Zorro initials thing but _why_ would a character want to draw it out to such a degree? I'm still befuddled.

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

No, it's not about a long and humiliating defeat - it's about increasing your chance to hit and do any damage at all.

Assume you have an attack bonus of +3 (2 points of BAB, +1 for STR) and a longsword, and your opponent has an AC of 18 and 10 HP. Each round you have a 15% chance of hitting for 1d8+1.

If you have this feat, you could boost that chance to hit to 25%, though the damage would drop to 1d8-5, with a minimum of 1 point.

If you're just playing with average damage, attacking normally does an average of .825 points per round, while trading damage for accuracy at a +1/-3 does .434, (interestingly, if I set it at +1/-2, it comes out to .713 - much closer...).

But if you go with 'average' attack rolls the regular attack would hit only every 7 rounds, and it will take 2 good hits to end the fight. If you go for accuracy you'll hit every 4 rounds. it will take 6 hits to end the fight (4 hits at a +1/-2), but by hitting more often you have a greater chance of forcing morale checks, ending a duel to first blood, scoring a critical hit, delivering a contact poison, getting the bonus damage from a magic weapon, getting your sneak attack bonus, etc.

And if your foe is a Kobold or someone else with a low HP score, your high damage potential is wasted. If thy have 3 hp HP any damage roll above 3 gives you no benefit - might as well trade them in for a higher chance to hit.

[corylus-unbound.livejournal.com]

AH! < light bulb > Now why didn't you say that in the first place?!

Thank you for the explanation. ;-)

[(Anonymous)]

Hooray, commentability. What do I know about this? Nothing. (And I don't really care for the feat system to start with, finding it overly fiddly for something that's so slow to accumulate.) I'm not sure it's actually necessary - if low-end armor is predominating, hopefully we'll all be able to hit the broad side of our opponents without it - but then no one's being forced to take it.

Bec