C'mon CODOG... say or do something!

[gpk]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

Awesome! Any thought as to how the cheap and common availability of random Divine Power clickies relate to this problem and perhaps overall class balance?

[Vorn]

As noted frequently elsewhere it looks like the attack progression is meant to encourage standing in place in order to mimic the extra number of swings given in PnP for a full attack option. After reading all of the posts above and renewing my reading glasses prescription...I don't see what is so bad with doing away with the +5/+10/+15 altogether and just giving folks with higher BAB more swings/attacks, perhaps even sped up a bit from the current model. That way you don't have to worry so much about the AC spread, don't really need to fix ranged fighting with attack progression, don't have other second and third order effects to deal with (like implementing ranged touch attacks at some point?). Do folks really make characters who depend upon those attack progressions in order to be effective in melee? I mean, it's nice to hit the stunning blow or trip on one of the later swings to make sure it lands, but it hardly seems to be a requirement.

[Jesster]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

Just a thought, but I had been hoping that instead of more "to hit" bonuses at 15 and 20 BAB; perhaps there could be a 10% and 20% alacrity bonus instead. That way, those characters who multiclass from the high BAB classes won't lose a +5 to hit, they just won't swing quite as fast as a "pure" BAB character at 20th level. This would also mean that the mid range BAB classes would get the same eventual bonuses to hit and balancing AC wouldn't be such a problem.

[gpk]

Just a thought, but I had been hoping that instead of more "to hit" bonuses at 15 and 20 BAB; perhaps there could be a 10% and 20% alacrity bonus instead. That way, those characters who multiclass from the high BAB classes won't lose a +5 to hit, they just won't swing quite as fast as a "pure" BAB character at 20th level. This would also mean that the mid range BAB classes would get the same eventual bonuses to hit and balancing AC wouldn't be such a problem.

That's exactly what a couple previous posters and myself have been saying, it's nice that others think that way too.

[Jesster]

That's exactly what a couple previous posters and myself have been saying, it's nice that others think that way too.

Ack... sorry... missed them. I had been skipping ahead to Codog's posts ;)

Thanks,

Jesse

[EinarMal]

That's exactly what a couple previous posters and myself have been saying, it's nice that others think that way too.

I agree BAB should really do three things.

1. Increase your to-hit (just use a flat bonus no progressive to-hit)
2. Qualify you for feats that have BAB as a requirement
3. Increase your attack SPEED

That is a much easier system to balance, just give attack speed boosts so you swing a little faster at each BAB milestone. Even just 5-10% would be enough that stacks with everything. So a pure BAB character would have a nice 5-10% swing speed advantage without the +60 versus +40 problem of attack to-hit bonus.

Now here is the issue though, melee and non-casters are already falling behind big time so if the overall effect is a reduction in power of the melee classes that would not be good. So the overall speed of attack must be balanced properly.

[MysticTheurge]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

I know the speed of animations has been discussed before, but given that you have, as has already been mentioned here, the ability to adjust attack speed via Alacrity, I really would prefer to see that be the primary increase, across the board.

As you hit the appropriate BAB thresholds, your attack speed should increase, instead of getting additional bonuses to hit. Ideally, this would happen throughout the game, but even just doing it at 15 and 20 as Jesster suggests would be better than the current +15 (and potentially +20) attacks.

In D&D, Higher BAB characters get extra attacks while standing still, though they come at a to-hit penalty. I recognize that implementing the penalty would be problematic, but even if you gave all attacks at +0, but increased the speed of them while standing, you'd come closer to hitting the mark on how this aspect of D&D works.

Barring that, reducing the bonuses granted would be the best option. Either a system that progresses constantly, but offers smaller bonuses (+0/+2/+4/+6/+8/+10) or one that increases in waves (+0/+0/+5/+5/+10/+10) would be better than what's currently happening.

[gpk]

Ack... sorry... missed them. I had been skipping ahead to Codog's posts ;)

Thanks,

Jesse

Oh no no, I was being sincere, it's nice that others independantly come up with the same ideas.
(one can't always be expected to read through all the boring disserations ;)).

Dropping the progressive attack bonuses could be problematic, but I can see as a reduction maybe being a good thing overrall.
If there's no real incentive to stand still and trade blows w a mob, ppl wont. Everyone will be taking spring attacks and just run circles aroudn the mobs and no risk to the player. The same reasons given for ranged combat not to be as powerful as melee combat.
These reasons makes sense to me, there's only so much you can do without making the game turn based.

[oronisi]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

First off, thanks for finally responding to this issue. Second off, myself and many others pointed that out when the game launched after seeing the dev team's 'vision' of D&D. You've had 2 years now to discuss a resolution. At least it's not too late....

[Dworkin_of_Amber]

What a quiet thread this has become! I thought I would come back out of the cave for a moment to update you on a few items related to this thread.

1) Eladrin and I discussed topic #8 from Missing Minds post and decided to go ahead and make a standing attack progression for ranged combat. I made the change in Module 6 that long as you are standing still, you will receive the same combo bonuses that melee combat receives so long as you don't move or perform other interrupting actions.

BAB 1-4 the bonuses will be +0,+0
BAB 5-9 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5
BAB 10-14 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10
BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+15

Hopefully, this change will reward brave archers who stand their ground. These bonuses will apply to all arrows of the many shot volleys, will propagate through all targets penetrated by improved precise shot, and will stack with bonuses given by new active ranger enhancements.



Codog: Question for you... will this Attack Progression be applied to Crossbows & Repeating Crossbows?

And not to beat a dead horse, but yes, the other posted have a really good point in allowing the Attack Progression to continue/work with Shot on the Run (and Spring Attack for Melee). It has always been troubling that the -4 movement penalty in DDO is really negligable (I consider that GH covers that penalty, so there really isn't one)... yet my attack progression doesn't work... now with a Attack Progression for ranged types... I would think that a reward for Spring Attack or Shot on the Run really should be the ability to maintain our Attack Progression.

I understand the concept of the Attack Progression as a "Reward for those who stand their ground"... *BUT* how often is any ranged attacker going to get 5 shots off without having to move? Not very likely, unless he has a wall of Shield Blockers in front of him! As it stands, Shot on the Run is really only useful for Repeater Builds (IMHO), and Spring Attack is really only for Whirlwind Attack (Again, IMHO)... I think that granting the full BAB Progression while moving for those two feats would REALLY make them worth taking, and create some agonizing feat decisions for many Ranged types, instead of the cookie-cutter builds we see now.

Just my 0.02cp.

[gpk]

I understand the concept of the Attack Progression as a "Reward for those who stand their ground"... *BUT* how often is any ranged attacker going to get 5 shots off without having to move? Not very likely, unless he has a wall of Shield Blockers in front of him! As it stands, Shot on the Run is really only useful for Repeater Builds (IMHO), and Spring Attack is really only for Whirlwind Attack (Again, IMHO)... I think that granting the full BAB Progression while moving for those two feats would REALLY make them worth taking, and create some agonizing feat decisions for many Ranged types, instead of the cookie-cutter builds we see now.


(repeat alert) It's either time Mobilty got a useful fix (+1 dodge while moving with say a +5 synergy bonus to tumble and heck maybe even DR1/-) or dropped altogether.

Forgive me for repeating the argument again, but if you grant moving players the same benefits as players standing still the game will suffer. It's too easy for a player to just run around and kite and kill mobs without ever getting hit, zero risk to self for dead mobs. Real-time play and various technological limits come into play here (pardon the pun) and must be deatlh with in some fashion. Weaker ranged vs melee combat and not having the same perks as a non-moving player is one of the concessions that must be made for the game to still be fun.

[MysticTheurge]

And not to beat a dead horse, but yes, the other posted have a really good point in allowing the Attack Progression to continue/work with Shot on the Run (and Spring Attack for Melee).

Ok, I want to take a moment to address this suggestion by looking at the D&D rules.

In D&D, on your turn, you can choose to either make a single attack at your highest BAB or you can choose to make a full-attack action, which gives you multiple attacks at decreasing BAB. The former is a standard action, while the latter is a full-round action. On your turn you can either take one full-round action, or a standard action and a move action. (Move actions are shorter, easier things that, not surprisingly, includes moving.) This means you can either choose to a) move and make a single attack or b) make a full attack.

In DDO, the attack progression system is designed to simulate this dichotomy. You can either stand still and get more attacks or move and get fewer attacks.

In D&D, you're normally required to either make your movement before or after your atttack. Spring Attack and Shot on the Run allow you to move both before and after making your attack, but you still can only make a single attack if you want to move.

DDO doesn't have "turns" so there's no way to differentiate between "moving before or after your attack" and "moving before and after your attack" so instead they apply a penalty to-hit while you're moving. Spring attack removes this penalty, essentially saying "you can move before and after your attack without penalty."

There are two potential problems here right off the bat. First, DDO's reversed attack progression means you're getting attacks at your lowest attack bonus instead of your highest attack bonus when you're moving. Second, it may be that the removal of the attack penalty is sufficient to replicate the effects of SotR/Spring Attack in D&D, which really are quite powerful and otherwise unable to be replicated.

However, allowing for the "full attack" progression while moving with these feats doesn't feel like the right solution as that would seem to be going too far in the other direction (I mean who wouldn't want these feats at that point), would completely eliminate any reason for standing still and also wouldn't be in keeping with D&D. But perhaps something should be done.

Solution A: This solution depends heavily on whether they change the attack progression and how. If they keep a kind of increasing iterative bonus, then perhaps SotR and Spring Attack should make it so your attacks while moving use your highest bonus instead of your lowest one. Right off the bat, this would mean as much as a 14 point difference in attack bonus while moving, instead of just a 4 point one.

Solution B: Since characters without SotR/Spring Attack have their movement limited in D&D while attacking, perhaps a similar thing should be done in DDO. Under this system, if you swing your weapon while moving, you take a penalty to hit (as you do now) but your movement speed is also slowed for a time afterward (perhaps something like a -10 or -15% penalty for 6 seconds). Taking SotR/Spring Attack removes both the to-hit penalty and the movement penalty.

Edit -- I also like gpk's suggestion that mobility get another look. A simple +1 bonus to AC while moving would definitely be beneficial for movement-based builds. And it's nicely in keeping with D&D where you're getting an AC bonus vs. AoOs which mostly come from moving around the battlefield.

[D'rin]

BAB 1-4 the bonuses will be +0,+0
BAB 5-9 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5
BAB 10-14 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10
BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+15




What this also shows is that there will not be a +20 to hit for lvl 20 apparently. I may be wrong but if you look at what he is saying in regards to ranged progression matching melee. It will go +0/+0/+5/+10/+15. So a +15 is the highest bonus we will be getting with a BAB of 20. Makes multi classing just fine since you won't be missing out on to much.

[Vorn]

If there were no bonus 'to hit' in the progression and all that increased was the speed of attacks overall by BAB it would seem spring attack and shot on the run (both feat intensive chains) wouldn't be unbalanced. They cost three feats to get that could be put elsewhere. You'd be moving around and attacking without the -4. Does moving slow down the number of swings one gets currently (bad Vorn plays nothing but various melee's and hasn't noticed)? If it does then perhaps an enhancement line for SA or SOtR could affect that?

Concur that mobility could use some sort of fix for a combat envirionment that doesn't have attacks of opportunity. Spring attack similarly provides defence from AoO in PnP that isn't really reflected in the game. Well, except when tumbling, I suppose.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

Well how its supposed to work in those situations is you split the difference and the AC of the bad guys should be tuned to a +50 to hit on average. So the rogue with the +40 has a chance to hit but will prob miss on his last (err first here) swing and the fighter with a +60 is guarenteed to hit on the first shot (well with your backwards system, the last shot) and have a chance at other hits.

[Dworkin_of_Amber]

Ok, I want to take a moment to address this suggestion by looking at the D&D rules.

In D&D, on your turn, you can choose to either make a single attack at your highest BAB or you can choose to make a full-attack action, which gives you multiple attacks at decreasing BAB. The former is a standard action, while the latter is a full-round action. On your turn you can either take one full-round action, or a standard action and a move action. (Move actions are shorter, easier things that, not surprisingly, includes moving.) This means you can either choose to a) move and make a single attack or b) make a full attack.

In DDO, the attack progression system is designed to simulate this dichotomy. You can either stand still and get more attacks or move and get fewer attacks.

In D&D, you're normally required to either make your movement before or after your atttack. Spring Attack and Shot on the Run allow you to move both before and after making your attack, but you still can only make a single attack if you want to move.

DDO doesn't have "turns" so there's no way to differentiate between "moving before or after your attack" and "moving before and after your attack" so instead they apply a penalty to-hit while you're moving. Spring attack removes this penalty, essentially saying "you can move before and after your attack without penalty."

There are two potential problems here right off the bat. First, DDO's reversed attack progression means you're getting attacks at your lowest attack bonus instead of your highest attack bonus when you're moving. Second, it may be that the removal of the attack penalty is sufficient to replicate the effects of SotR/Spring Attack in D&D, which really are quite powerful and otherwise unable to be replicated.

However, allowing for the "full attack" progression while moving with these feats doesn't feel like the right solution as that would seem to be going too far in the other direction (I mean who wouldn't want these feats at that point), would completely eliminate any reason for standing still and also wouldn't be in keeping with D&D. But perhaps something should be done.

Solution A: This solution depends heavily on whether they change the attack progression and how. If they keep a kind of increasing iterative bonus, then perhaps SotR and Spring Attack should make it so your attacks while moving use your highest bonus instead of your lowest one. Right off the bat, this would mean as much as a 14 point difference in attack bonus while moving, instead of just a 4 point one.

Solution B: Since characters without SotR/Spring Attack have their movement limited in D&D while attacking, perhaps a similar thing should be done in DDO. Under this system, if you swing your weapon while moving, you take a penalty to hit (as you do now) but your movement speed is also slowed for a time afterward (perhaps something like a -10 or -15% penalty for 6 seconds). Taking SotR/Spring Attack removes both the to-hit penalty and the movement penalty.

Edit -- I also like gpk's suggestion that mobility get another look. A simple +1 bonus to AC while moving would definitely be beneficial for movement-based builds. And it's nicely in keeping with D&D where you're getting an AC bonus vs. AoOs which mostly come from moving around the battlefield.

Well stated, MT. I like these, but maybe there is a Solution C, to go half-way in-between. Since DDO is a more active-combat system, with no "rounds", per se... maybe allowing SotR and SA to allow you to perform your Attack Chain -1 Attack at standard bonuses might be a good in-between. For example, a L15 Fighter would get 4 attacks at +0/+0/+5/+10 (instead of +0/+0/+5/+10/+15) while moving if he has Spring Attack? Would that be a balance over just the +0 we get now while moving? Since PnP Gets one attack at their highest bonus while moving, they can at least expect a reasonable percentagee chance to hit... with the reversed Bonuses, and the mobs that love to run forever, maybe allowing "Attack Chain -1" or something like that would offset the differences, yet still remain fair?

And I agree that Mobility needs some fix, with the removal of AoO, tumble is far less useful, and with the Combat System, you really aren't getting attacked while tumbling anyways... so it's a Dead Feat, except to unlock Spring Attack.

[Mad_Bombardier]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.Thank you Eladrin. :)

[Solmage]

1) Eladrin and I discussed topic #8 from Missing Minds post and decided to go ahead and make a standing attack progression for ranged combat. I made the change in Module 6 that long as you are standing still, you will receive the same combo bonuses that melee combat receives so long as you don't move or perform other interrupting actions.


Thanks for the bug fixes and for doing this. I however want to suggest that you also consider a power-attack-like feat for ranged combat. Currently, the best ranged fighters are rangers who totally neglect dexterity because the strength damage does add up quite a bit. (And for the same reason, they're also the ones who are the best at two weapon fighting, except for rogues, but it seems like you're addressing this already).

So if you created a feat that reduced your to-hit in exchange for higher damage, the very high dex fighters could still do reasonable ranged damage by trading off the to-hit which they have in abundance. As far as a rationale for the feat, it makes sense that if you aim for a vulnerable spot, it will be harder to hit, but will do more damage if it does hit. (Trying to hit the neck or head, for example, makes it more likely the shot misses than if you just target the torso. But it will do a lot more if it does hit).

Now all the feat needs is a name. Oh and some code. :p . (The name may be harder to implement than the code, what with all the precision-like feats we already have, all doing wildly different things, heh). Possible names.. aimed shot, marksman's shot, deadly shot, rangedontsucknomore shot, etc. :cool:

[Mad_Bombardier]

However, allowing for the "full attack" progression while moving with these feats doesn't feel like the right solution as that would seem to be going too far in the other direction (I mean who wouldn't want these feats at that point), would completely eliminate any reason for standing still and also wouldn't be in keeping with D&D. But perhaps something should be done.

Solution A: This solution depends heavily on whether they change the attack progression and how. If they keep a kind of increasing iterative bonus, then perhaps SotR and Spring Attack should make it so your attacks while moving use your highest bonus instead of your lowest one. Right off the bat, this would mean as much as a 14 point difference in attack bonus while moving, instead of just a 4 point one.

Solution B: Since characters without SotR/Spring Attack have their movement limited in D&D while attacking, perhaps a similar thing should be done in DDO. Under this system, if you swing your weapon while moving, you take a penalty to hit (as you do now) but your movement speed is also slowed for a time afterward (perhaps something like a -10 or -15% penalty for 6 seconds). Taking SotR/Spring Attack removes both the to-hit penalty and the movement penalty.MT, what do you think about...

Solution D: Spring Attack/SotR being changed to also preserve the combo chain, as seen with active tumbling (would have to be on a very short timer, say 5 seconds). I think that would best replicate the benefits of SA/SotR in D&D while also rewarding the player for standing and attacking. You wouldn't get the to-hit bonuses while moving and attacking, but could attack 1/2/3 kill target, move to next target attack 4/5. Too powerful?

[Aesop]

I think I like C the one where SotR and SA allow you to have a partial progression

I also like the Mobility suggestion of having an AC bonus while moving...even if it is only a small bonus... +1 or +2 Dodge Bonus would be a nice thingy... I'd even keep the +4 while Tumbling.

Aesop

[krud]

Solution B: Since characters without SotR/Spring Attack have their movement limited in D&D while attacking, perhaps a similar thing should be done in DDO. Under this system, if you swing your weapon while moving, you take a penalty to hit (as you do now) but your movement speed is also slowed for a time afterward (perhaps something like a -10 or -15% penalty for 6 seconds). Taking SotR/Spring Attack removes both the to-hit penalty and the movement penalty.

would it work the same way casting and moving currently works (for those without combat casting feat)? Not a bad idea, but i can hear the outcry mounting from over the hill. i wouldn't mind seeing a change. I could spec my ftr/rog back into the SA character I had originally planned for.

[MysticTheurge]

would it work the same way casting and moving currently works (for those without combat casting feat)?

It would certainly make sense. It's the same general theory. You're performing a standard action (cast or attack) and moving, so you move slower.

[BlueBadger]

I'll start off by saying that I'm an Undergrad in Computer Science... but basically it seems to me that there are some technical limitations imposed by the existing system/game content that as far as I know really limit a lot of the changes that people are talking about. If a new game was being created right now, a lot of these ideas would be very good suggestions but as it stands now I think they are limited in how much they can change some a lot of the attack animations. If I remember correctly, they have different animations for attacking while moving (sorta... like the overhand swing that people were complaining about a few months back), but basically between not being able to change PnP rules that can, sorta, be simulated (but potentially in ways that makes them less then ideal solutions) by a computer when there are solutions that would just work better for a computer, and the existing content... there's a lot less that they can do to fix the problem.

I remember reading a while back that Bioware were really interested in doing their own IP and rules system that was targeted for computers because the number crunching and what is "easy" is just different.

Anyhoo basically it comes down to I don't think they can/will make the attack speeds faster (they probably wouldn't be able to stack very good with the existing alacrity speedups, haste and everything else...) or add extra attacks beyond the PnP attack progression... the best idea I heard was the getting highest attack bonus while moving but even then I think that would be too powerful and not necessarily technically feasible. I also like the idea of the slowing the movement down the way it works for casters who move while casting but I don't know if they'd have to do a whole new set of animations (would make it so that this change is VERY unlikely and probably the reason this change hasn't happened yet/will happen) but if it doesn't require new animations to look semi decent, it would be something they'd probably consider doing.

seems like an interesting design and technical problem because no matter what, I don't think you'll be able to satisfy all constrains and you certainly won't be able to make everyone happy!

[HumanJHawkins]

I'll start off by saying that I'm an Undergrad in Computer Science... but basically it seems to me that there are some technical limitations imposed by the existing system/game content that as far as I know really limit a lot of the changes that people are talking about.

With much respect and the best of intentions (honestly), one of the most important lessons any computer science undergrad needs to learn follows: You will solve many more problems and solve them much more elegantly, if you see nothing as a limitation. See only facts, not limitations.

Now... Think of each "fact" which you formerly called a "limitation" as a pillar in front of you as you try to walk across a field. You need only walk around it. But what if you start to go around, only to find another pillar in your way? Well, try the other side. And what if you keep doing this until you find you are surrounded by a big circle of pillars? Have you considered how tall they are? Perhaps you can go over them. Have you considered how hard they are? Perhaps you can break through them. Do you have a phone? Perhaps you can call in a back-hoe.

If you take this approach to programming, you will solve 99% of your issues long before you get to the back-hoe. I say this as someone who has been solving software issues professionally for most of my career (whether that was my official job at the time or not).

(And, just so you don't think I am parsing words with the "limitation" vs. "fact" thing, I do so because in many cases you will find that the thing you thought was a limitation turns out to be the key to your solution... You have to tip that pillar over to get across a river for example.)

Good luck.

[Codog]

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+15


Codog is totally wrong!!! What a loser!

After much discussion, this has been corrected to:

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+10

Because 2H weapons still have a slightly slower animation on the 5th attack, we've added another glancing attack onto that attack to help compensate. We managed to fix the animations for the 5th attack on one handed, one handed with shield, and dual wield attack animations. This change will become affective in Module 6.

Thanks for your feedback on this topic. This topic will continue to be an ongoing discussion for the character team. "To hit inflation" is certainly an area that we can improve upon in future releases. We would make further changes to this progression at this time, but that would require a huge retest of most of our content and rebalancing of almost all of our monsters. We're running too tight on time for our module 6 release to make changes that dramatic.

Best regards,

Codog

PS. Where do I officially join the Eladrin fan club?

[Lorien_the_First_One]

After much discussion, this has been corrected to:

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+10

Um.... Sorry but that's stupid. The BASE ATTACK BONUS is 15. So where's the 15? This is an unnecessary diversion from D&D rules and it just plain doesn't make any sense.

[Lillitheris]

Um.... Sorry but that's stupid. The BASE ATTACK BONUS is 15. So where's the 15? This is an unnecessary diversion from D&D rules and it just plain doesn't make any sense.

Yes, the BAB is 15. Yes, Codog should have worded it better. What he means is:

+15/+15/+20/+25/+25

- Edit -
Oh and one more thing. The increasing bonuses are an unnecessary diversion from D&D. They should decrease by 5 after each swing.
I.e. in D&D a level 15 full BAB melee class would have a progression of +15/+10/+5

- Edit2 -
Ha! I beat Eladrin!

[Eladrin]

Um.... Sorry but that's stupid. The BASE ATTACK BONUS is 15. So where's the 15? This is an unnecessary diversion from D&D rules and it just plain doesn't make any sense.
The 15 is in the base +15 to hit that's not included in those additional bonuses that Codog listed.

[The_Phenx]

Those are the additional bonuses stacked at the middle and end of the attack animation sequence.... read in addition to the +15 BAB you would recieve at 15th level

[juniorpfactors]

Codog is totally wrong!!! What a loser!

After much discussion, this has been corrected to:

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+10

Because 2H weapons still have a slightly slower animation on the 5th attack, we've added another glancing attack onto that attack to help compensate. We managed to fix the animations for the 5th attack on one handed, one handed with shield, and dual wield attack animations. This change will become affective in Module 6.

Thanks for your feedback on this topic. This topic will continue to be an ongoing discussion for the character team. "To hit inflation" is certainly an area that we can improve upon in future releases. We would make further changes to this progression at this time, but that would require a huge retest of most of our content and rebalancing of almost all of our monsters. We're running too tight on time for our module 6 release to make changes that dramatic.

Best regards,

Codog

PS. Where do I officially join the Eladrin fan club?

codog or eldarin,,,,what if any of these mod 6 implementations actually affect Repeater builds... I know you confirmed rapid reload weeks ago....but so much says ranged combat just wondering if the ranger enhancements would stack and benifit rangers with Repeater builds

[Gratch]

Because 2H weapons still have a slightly slower animation on the 5th attack, we've added another glancing attack onto that attack to help compensate. We managed to fix the animations for the 5th attack on one handed, one handed with shield, and dual wield attack animations. This change will become affective in Module 6.


So is this saying that Superior Two-Handed fighting is no longer a new feat and instead sort of "part of the combat system" at least until the 2H weapon animation gets in-line with the others? Or is there *also* a feat that will raise you up to two glancing attacks on the 5th swing?

Us Two-Handed fighters getting 2 feats for 15th, 16th would really appreciate the latter.

[GeneralDiomedes]

Yes, the BAB is 15. Yes, Codog should have worded it better. What he means is:

+15/+15/+20/+25/+25

- Edit -
Oh and one more thing. The increasing bonuses are an unnecessary diversion from D&D. They should decrease by 5 after each swing.
I.e. in D&D a level 15 full BAB melee class would have a progression of +15/+10/+5


They would also swing 3 times as fast as a level 1 character .. which would be pretty crazy in DDO.

[Codog]

So is this saying that Superior Two-Handed fighting is no longer a new feat and instead sort of "part of the combat system" at least until the 2H weapon animation gets in-line with the others? Or is there *also* a feat that will raise you up to two glancing attacks on the 5th swing?

Us Two-Handed fighters getting 2 feats for 15th, 16th would really appreciate the latter.

Superior Two-Handed fighting will give you an additional glancing blow giving you a total of two glancing attacks on the 5th attack.

Thanks for asking!

Codog

[Gratch]

Superior Two-Handed fighting will give you an additional glancing blow giving you a total of two glancing attacks on the 5th attack.

Thanks for asking!

Codog

Pure Excellence.

[lethal413]

so what would be an ideal ranger/caster split for an arcane archer?

[moorewr]

PS. Where do I officially join the Eladrin fan club?

Just put him in your signature. :)

[Codog]

codog or eldarin,,,,what if any of these mod 6 implementations actually affect Repeater builds... I know you confirmed rapid reload weeks ago....but so much says ranged combat just wondering if the ranger enhancements would stack and benifit rangers with Repeater builds

The standing attack bonus progression for ranged combat applies to all ranged weapons including the repeating crossbow.

Regards,

Codog

[Mad_Bombardier]

Superior Two-Handed fighting will give you an additional glancing blow giving you a total of two glancing attacks on the 5th attack.

Thanks for asking!Whoa, that's crazy! Sure, it matches Superior TWF granting 2 extra hooks. But, sucks for any melee focused 'pure' Bard, Cleric, or Rogue who can never take the feat. :(

[MysticTheurge]

Whoa, that's crazy! Sure, it matches Superior TWF granting 2 extra hooks. But, sucks for any melee focused Bard, Cleric, or Rogue who can never take the feat. :(

Til Epic Levels or if they take an even fighter level (or their first) at 20th.

[Invalid_86]

An excellently delivered point related to one of our major concerns, the fate of the mid-BAB character in endgame. We'll have to discuss the matter a bit more internally before offering a resolution.

Just have BAB decrease with additional swings like in PnP. Put mutiple attacks on a timer so you can't just take the full BaB first attack over in over- automatically have it go to 2nd attack within X time and 3rd attack within X+Y time. That would solve alot of the problems we are having, and make armor a heck of alot more useful.

Please?

[Aesop]

Just have BAB decrease with additional swings like in PnP. Put mutiple attacks on a timer so you can't just take the full BaB first attack over in over- automatically have it go to 2nd attack within X time and 3rd attack within X+Y time. That would solve alot of the problems we are having, and make armor a heck of alot more useful.

Please?

They've stated that the reason they won't do this is to give incentive to standing tanks... ie the wall that just sits there and soaks up getting hit. Otherwise people will just run in circles around the mobs swinging away.

Aesop

[HumanJHawkins]

Just have BAB decrease with additional swings like in PnP. Put mutiple attacks on a timer so you can't just take the full BaB first attack over in over- automatically have it go to 2nd attack within X time and 3rd attack within X+Y time. That would solve alot of the problems we are having, and make armor a heck of alot more useful.

I'm not sure I get what you are saying, but if I have even the slightest grasp of it, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

The extra attacks from high BAB are not some kind of thing you turn on. They are inherent to what a Fighter is. Here is how the game melee should work for different classes at high levels:


Fighter: Lots of attacks, and most of them hit for a huge amount of damage each.
Rogue: Few attacks, many of which hit. However, damage is only huge when backstabbing, etc.
Cleric: Few attacks which sometimes hit for relatively low damage unless using clerical buffs... The cleric should be using Slay Living and/or healing, etc.
Arcane Casters: One attack, which almost always misses and does almost no damage when it hits. This is the price of having PK, FoD, and WoF.
Bard: Few hits, which sometimes hit for OK damage. The bard should be using his spells and songs to soften the enemy up so that this is all that is needed.
So, in short, Fighters are melee engines... In pure melee non-crowd-controlled sword vs. armor combat they should be attacking, hitting, AND rolling damage vastly in excess of all other classes. All other classes have other ways that they are vastly superior to fighters, so this is only fair. If anyone thinks this is not, just go count the kills of various classes in PVP... You will see that however one-sided this pure melee skill is in favor of fighters, it is easily counterbalanced by the other abilities of other classes. No fighter nerfing needed!

[iamsamoth0]

Are the creatures able to progress along this same path? Or do they have something similar already? I rue the day I am being pegged by the skelie archers that are always perched up on some cliff, it's already feels like they are using sledgehammers for ammo.

Still though, a valid point was made above, melee types should be dropping bombs at some point to make up for lack of decent range, or crowd-control methods.

[gpk]

Well glad to see a player discussion had a positive outcome for the game!

Eladrin | Codog, just to clarify, the swing rate/attack speed is going to be faster for BAB 15 right? It's not just another attack at +10 at the same overral speed?

BAB 15 is a big deal to the primary melee classes and we've been anticipating this next attack at level 15 for a while, we just felt that +15 would unbalance things now and in the future and that more melee power should come in the form of alacrity.

[Invalid_86]

They've stated that the reason they won't do this is to give incentive to standing tanks... ie the wall that just sits there and soaks up getting hit. Otherwise people will just run in circles around the mobs swinging away.

Aesop

Thus the timer. Say 1 "round" is 2 seconds in DDO. Set the timer so that your first attack in a round is always at your full bonus. If you take a second attack in that time it's at -5, a third -10. So in 2 seconds you could take three attacks, or run in circles always trying to have a max to hit bonus by swinging once in a while effectively getting one attack every 2 seconds. There's really no reason why it couldn't be done- and it would solve alot of problems.

[mgoldb2]

Thus the timer. Say 1 "round" is 2 seconds in DDO. Set the timer so that your first attack in a round is always at your full bonus. If you take a second attack in that time it's at -5, a third -10. So in 2 seconds you could take three attacks, or run in circles always trying to have a max to hit bonus by swinging once in a while effectively getting one attack every 2 seconds. There's really no reason why it couldn't be done- and it would solve alot of problems.

I don’t see how that encourages people to stand still. What you saying is I can stand still and take neg to my attack or I can move and take the exact same neg to my attack but on top of that if it takes long enough I get my full attacks back. How would that fix anything?

[Invalid_86]

I don’t see how that encourages people to stand still. What you saying is I can stand still and take neg to my attack or I can move and take the exact same neg to my attack but on top of that if it takes long enough I get my full attacks back. How would that fix anything?


The idea is within that timed window the second attack you take is always at -5, the third will always be at -10. If you move it stays the same. If you stay still it stays the same. You can either wait between swings and always have the max BAB, missing additional attacks, or just swing away. It prevents the whole move and spam first attack thing.

[mgoldb2]

The idea is within that timed window the second attack you take is always at -5, the third will always be at -10. If you move it stays the same. If you stay still it stays the same. You can either wait between swings and always have the max BAB, missing additional attacks, or just swing away. It prevents the whole move and spam first attack thing.

I understand that part but it dont address Aesop's post about just running around in a circle. Who cares if I get a few less attacks in if I can avoid taking damage. I just keep swinging away with your idear but I see no reason for me to stand still.

[ahpook]

Codog is totally wrong!!! What a loser!

After much discussion, this has been corrected to:

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+10

While this is certainly better than ending up at +15, I wish you would consider dropping the bonuses altogether and use attack speed as the differentiator. So many of the problems raised in this thread simply vanish if you are not dealing with an incresing bonus to hit and 10 pts is a large chunk of a d20. I understand that it is not reasonable for mod 6 but keep it in mind for the future.

Thanks.

[Serpent]

Codog is totally wrong!!! What a loser!

After much discussion, this has been corrected to:

BAB 15-20 the bonuses will be +0,+0,+5,+10,+10

Because 2H weapons still have a slightly slower animation on the 5th attack, we've added another glancing attack onto that attack to help compensate. We managed to fix the animations for the 5th attack on one handed, one handed with shield, and dual wield attack animations. This change will become affective in Module 6.

Thanks for your feedback on this topic. This topic will continue to be an ongoing discussion for the character team. "To hit inflation" is certainly an area that we can improve upon in future releases. We would make further changes to this progression at this time, but that would require a huge retest of most of our content and rebalancing of almost all of our monsters. We're running too tight on time for our module 6 release to make changes that dramatic.

Best regards,

Codog

PS. Where do I officially join the Eladrin fan club?

Thank You. And a slightly faster swing would be great if possible.

[MysticTheurge]

Thus the timer. Say 1 "round" is 2 seconds in DDO. Set the timer so that your first attack in a round is always at your full bonus. If you take a second attack in that time it's at -5, a third -10. So in 2 seconds you could take three attacks, or run in circles always trying to have a max to hit bonus by swinging once in a while effectively getting one attack every 2 seconds. There's really no reason why it couldn't be done- and it would solve alot of problems.

An iterative decreasing attack bonus simply doesn't work within the context of a real time game. It would cause far more problems than it would solve.

[gpk]

Thank You. And a slightly faster swing would be great if possible.

Yes there has to be a faster swing at the major BAB tiers, 5/10/15/20 to simulate the "extra attack". It need not be overpowering or balance-breaking, but there has to be be a noticeable boost in overall combat prowess here as this is the bread and butter for the primary combat classes.

[Invalid_86]

I understand that part but it dont address Aesop's post about just running around in a circle. Who cares if I get a few less attacks in if I can avoid taking damage. I just keep swinging away with your idear but I see no reason for me to stand still.

That's actually quite simple. Give an overall -4 to hit while moving unless you have Spring Attack.

So if you have 3 attacks with a +6 BAB you would have:

Standing still +6 +6 +1
Moving +2 +2 -3
Moving with Spring Attack +6 +6 +1


An iterative decreasing attack bonus simply doesn't work within the context of a real time game. It would cause far more problems than it would solve.

It seems that increasing the bonus is causing just as many problems.

[MysticTheurge]

It seems that increasing the bonus is causing just as many problems.

Yes. And it should also be done away with.

[HumanJHawkins]

Holy Cow... I don't get this whole discussion. This must be why my mathematically well built TWF is not as effective as some inferior non-TWF builds. Are you saying that my BAB 14 TWF doesn't get 3 dwarven axe and 2 hand axe attacks in the time it takes a BAB 1 rogue to swing a dagger? And this is by design?

Is it true that I only get maybe 3 attacks with +15 to the first or something to compensate? Because that is not a very good help when I was going to hit anyway. And it is completely useless when I am using a "only works on crit" weapon.

Someone who knows, please answer so I can tweak my build (or just abandon it in favor of a 2-handed build).

[Mad_Bombardier]

Holy Cow... I don't get this whole discussion. This must be why my mathematically well built TWF is not as effective as some inferior non-TWF builds. Are you saying that my BAB 14 TWF doesn't get 3 dwarven axe and 2 hand axe attacks in the time it takes a BAB 1 rogue to swing a dagger? And this is by design?

Is it true that I only get maybe 3 attacks with +15 to the first or something to compensate? Because that is not a very good help when I was going to hit anyway. And it is completely useless when I am using a "only works on crit" weapon.

Someone who knows, please answer so I can tweak my build (or just abandon it in favor of a 2-handed build).HJH, currently your TWF gets 4 mainhand attacks and 3 offhand attacks, but the overall animation is slightly slower than single weapon, so the net increase is roughly +60% Rate of Attack (instead of a flat +75% for 3 extra attacks). In Mod6, GrTWF will grant offhand hook on first attack, too. Adding another 12.5% attacks in the same amount of time. So, mathematically, you will be seeing a boost to about +83% rate of attack with GrTWF over SWF (still with slower overall animation, instead of +100% RoA for 4 extra attacks). Not sure how SupTWF will add up as we don't know what the 5th attack is going to do to the animation times.

[EinarMal]

HJH, currently your TWF gets 4 mainhand attacks and 3 offhand attacks, but the overall animation is slightly slower than single weapon, so the net increase is roughly +60% Rate of Attack (instead of a flat +75% for 3 extra attacks). In Mod6, GrTWF will grant offhand hook on first attack, too. Adding another 12.5% attacks in the same amount of time. So, mathematically, you will be seeing a boost to about +83% rate of attack with GrTWF over SWF (still with slower overall animation, instead of +100% RoA for 4 extra attacks). Not sure how SupTWF will add up as we don't know what the 5th attack is going to do to the animation times.

I saw some mention of the animation time being fixed in Mod6 so that will hopefully go away as well.

[Mad_Bombardier]

I saw some mention of the animation time being fixed in Mod6 so that will hopefully go away as well.That would be neat. But, not sure I ever saw that note. I know I've mentioned that the extra attack with GrTWF will largely (but not totally) fix the problem. At least we'll be at 175+% rate of attack like PnP. :)

[EinarMal]

Because 2H weapons still have a slightly slower animation on the 5th attack, we've added another glancing attack onto that attack to help compensate. We managed to fix the animations for the 5th attack on one handed, one handed with shield, and dual wield attack animations. This change will become affective in Module 6.

This seems to imply that the animations have been timed out to take the same amount of time to me....

[Mad_Bombardier]

This seems to imply that the animations have been timed out to take the same amount of time to me....Cool, thanks! I got so wrapped up in 2 glancing blows, that I missed the animation time portion of that statement. :eek: Huzzah, Codog! :D

[HumanJHawkins]

your TWF gets 4 mainhand attacks and 3 offhand attacks<CUT>

Thanks for the explanation... I think I am just misunderstanding what all of that +15, +10, +5 talk is about. But don't bother trying to clarify that for me unless you really want to. As long as I get roughly the right number of attacks (including appropriate penalties for the extra ones), I am happy.

[Dworkin_of_Amber]

Thanks for the explanation... I think I am just misunderstanding what all of that +15, +10, +5 talk is about. But don't bother trying to clarify that for me unless you really want to. As long as I get roughly the right number of attacks (including appropriate penalties for the extra ones), I am happy.

To try and state things simply.

In Pen&Paper D&D, The Attack Chain Progression starts with your first attack at your highest To-Hit Bonus, and all subsequent Attacks in the Chain (or Round) at progressely lower and lower To-Hit Bonus. DDO Reverses the Attack Progression Bonuses, and "Tiers" them, as seen below:

Let's say you are a Fighter in PnP, and your To-Hit Bonus +15, and you get 5 attacks a round (I know this might not be the right numbers per PnP, but it will work for the demonstration here).

Pen & Paper: First Attack +15, Second Attack +10, Third Attack: +5, Fourth Attack: +0, Fifth Attack: -5
DDO: First Attack +0, Second Attack +0, Third Attack: +5, Fourth Attack: +10, Fifth Attack: +10

Or to write it out more simply:
PnP: +15/+10/+5/+0/-5
DDO: +0/+0/+5/+10/+10

NOTE: Yesterday it was originally posted that the 5th Attack would be at +15 in DDO... this was later reversed to +10.


The major difference is that DDO Rewards you for standing still and completing your attack Chain. PnP penalizes for multiple attack per round. But the primary difference is due to round-timing, and the ability to Move & Attack. PnP allows you to chose between (there are other choices, but for this discussion only 2):

PnP Allows:
1) Stand and perform my entire attack chain this round: +15/+10/+5/+0/-5
2) Move and perform one attack this round. +15

DDO Allows:
1) Stand Still and get the entire attack chain: +0/+0/+5/+10/+10
2) Move and attack: +0

The major difference revolves around the handling of Option #2. PnP allows a movement and a single attack at your HIGHEST attack bonus. While in DDO, if you move (without or without Spring Attack or Shot on the Run), you get single attacks at +0 bonus. This means that DDO REWARDS you for standing still and attacking, while, from a certain point of view, PnP rewards you for moving and attacking.... up until you factor in Attack of Opportunity (AoO), which DDO ignores.

But the long and short of it is that DDO severely penalizes us for Moving and Attacking, given that while moving, all attacks are at +0 To-Hit Bonus. This has a number of effects on the game.

1) Fighting in place, like Doors, or standing in the middle of a bunch of mobs, has rewards with higher to-hits later in the chain
2) Kiting and attacking, or circling and attacking is not an efficient way to kill mobs (in most cases)

Mostly, it hurts the Backstab melees, and the Finesse types, as they can't do the "Dance around the mob, stabbing and moving out of the way of their attacks" method of fighting, as all their attacks will be at +0, while the Barbarian who stands there and swings repeatedly, get the progressive attack bonuses.


Hopefully that all makes sense?
Dworkin

[Vorn]

Big D,
Isn't it for a 15th lvl fighter:
PnP: full round w/5' step: +15/+10/+5 or moving: +15

DDO: non-moving/tumbling spring attack: +15/+15/+20/+25/+25 or moving: +11 or +15 with spring attack

[Mad_Bombardier]

Big D,
Isn't it for a 15th lvl fighter:
PnP: full round w/5' step: +15/+10/+5/0/-5 or moving: +15

DDO: non-moving/tumbling spring attack: +15/+15/+20/+25/+25 or moving: +15No 5th attack in PnP D&D. So, that one is at BAB+16 is: +16/+11/+6/+1. The list for DDO is correct and yes, both moving attacks are at full BAB+15 (with Spring Attack). :)

[Vorn]

Oops! No fourth or fifth attack in PnP and I forgot the spring attack for the +15 (or a -4 for moving)
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/fighter.htm

[daydrmrzzz]

I was curious how the devs are going to have the extra attack from rapid shot fit into he attack progression. If they have it add an extra attack at the lowest AB, it will actually hurt those with the feat. Here are some numbers for 4 different versions of rapid shot compared to not having rapid shot. I made the following assumptions to make the comparison: 600 arrows fired at a mob with an AC high enough that at AB +0 or -2, only a 20 hits, at +3 an 18 hits, at +5 a 16 hits, at +8 a 13 hits, and at +10 an 11 hits. Here are the results at BAB +5/+10/+15 (at BAB <5 there is no difference between any of the options or the current implementation).

NO RAPID SHOT (+0/+0/+5/+10/+10)
BAB 5: 70 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 10: 128 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 15: 162 hits out of 600 shots

PnP implementation (1 extra shot at highest bonus, all at -2 to hit, -2/-2/+3/+8/+8/+8)
BAB 5: 60 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 10: 132 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 15: 145 hits out of 600 shots

Extra attack at lowest AB (+0/+0/+0/+5/+10/+10)
BAB 5: 60 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 10: 108 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 15: 140 hits out of 600 shots

Extra attack at highest AB (+0/+0/+5/+10/+10/+10)
BAB 5: 90 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 10: 162 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 15: 185 hits out of 600 shots

Extra attack at highest AB, capped at +5 (+0/+0/+5/+5/+10/+10)
BAB 5: 90 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 10: 132 hits out of 600 shots
BAB 15: 160 hits out of 600 shots

Also, adding the extra attack at +0 BAB is the worst option for all cases (unless BAB <5), even worse than not having rapid shot at all!. Also, assume a mob is charging you, and you need the extra AB to have a chance of hitting it. If the extra attack from rapid shot is at +0 AB, you would need to waste 3 shots at AB +0 before you get a bonus, whereas someone without rapid shot only has to waste 2 shots before getting a bonus. PLEASE DON'T IMPLEMENT THE EXTRA ATTACK AT +0 AB!.

[Kerr]

Yes. And it should also be done away with.

Now you've lost me.

You said an interative decreasing BAB would cause more problems than it solves.

Now you've said the interative increasing BAB should be done away with.

So what then? Have one BAB, get rid of the attack sequences with +/- and the attack sequence with difference swings is just visually different, with no change to BAB for that swing?

[MysticTheurge]

So what then? Have one BAB, get rid of the attack sequences with +/- and the attack sequence with difference swings is just visually different, with no change to BAB for that swing?

Essentially, yes. I think the best solution is to have neither an increasing nor decreasing attack bonus, but simply a faster rate of attack while standing still. Though actually, I've since been reminded (by this thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=129599)) how the decreasing attack bonus and AC play well together, especially at higher levels. I'm not sure there's a way to really implement a decreasing bonus attack chain for PCs without screwing up too much other stuff. You could, theoretically, give enemies a decreasing attack progression and give PCs a flat attack progression with increases in swing speed to provide incentive to stand still.

[Mad_Bombardier]

I was curious how the devs are going to have the extra attack from rapid shot fit into he attack progression.Rapid Shot in DDO just gives a flat % rate of fire increase. No need to worry about extra attacks in the chain, as you get the whole chain faster and start a new chain.

[QuantumFX]

Essentially, yes. I think the best solution is to have neither an increasing nor decreasing attack bonus, but simply a faster rate of attack while standing still. Though actually, I've since been reminded (by this thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=129599)) how the decreasing attack bonus and AC play well together, especially at higher levels. I'm not sure there's a way to really implement a decreasing bonus attack chain for PCs without screwing up too much other stuff. You could, theoretically, give enemies a decreasing attack progression and give PCs a flat attack progression with increases in swing speed to provide incentive to stand still.

There would have to be a lot of mob AC rebalancing but I think DDO is going to have to go with a more P&P model to avoid the future issues you've brought up earlier. It's easier to balance around a full BAB character's 2nd or 3rd attack than a current model's 4th attack.

Back when DDO had the fast attack bug I had an idea to make it not worth the effort, keep DDO's OCD'elicious right mouse click fest flavor and make the attack progression work correctly. It definately needs some constructive feedback though. The idea is to give the click happy player his rush but make sure the attacks don't connect as often.

Some variables need to be established:
- How long is a round in DDO. (Seems to be 2 seconds)
- How many attacks do you want a full bab character to perform at lvl 20 (Where number of attacks stops in P&P.) (Seems to be 5 for Sword n Board and THF, 9-10 for TWF {Should apply to double weapons too if implemented})

Step 1 - Make all your "standing" animations do the correct number of attacks in the time it takes to complete a round.
Step 2 - Make a countdown timer that kicks off when you right mouse click or hit a special attack key. The timer will last the exact amount of time allocated for a "round".
Step 3 - Make the first attack at full BAB with each additional attack roll getting a cumulative -5 added to the roll. (i.e. BaB, BaB -5, BaB -10, BaB -15, etc.)

Exception #1: Two Weapon Fighting will automatically alternate between main and off hand attack. The feats will slow the BaB penalties.

Examples: (not including penalties for weapons)
No TWF feats (Main 1: BAB, Offhand 1:BAB-5, Main 2: BAB-10, Offhand 2: BAB-15, Main 3: BAB-20, Offhand 3: BAB-25, Main 4: BAB-30, Offhand 4: BAB-35, Main 5: BAB-40, Offhand 5: BAB-45)
With TWF feat (Main 1: BAB, Offhand 1:BAB, Main 2: BAB-5, Offhand 2: BAB-10, Main 3: BAB-15, Offhand 3: BAB-20, Main 4: BAB-25, Offhand 4: BAB-30, Main 5: BAB-35, Offhand 5: BAB-40)
With ITWF feat (Main 1: BAB, Offhand 1:BAB, Main 2: BAB-5, Offhand 2: BAB-5, Main 3: BAB-10, Offhand 3: BAB-15, Main 4: BAB-20, Offhand 4: BAB-25, Main 5: BAB-30, Offhand 5: BAB-35)
With GTWF feat (Main 1: BAB, Offhand 1:BAB, Main 2: BAB-5, Offhand 2: BAB-5, Main 3: BAB-10, Offhand 3: BAB-10, Main 4: BAB-15, Offhand 4: BAB-20, Main 5: BAB-25, Offhand 5: BAB-30)
With STWF feat (Main 1: BAB, Offhand 1:BAB, Main 2: BAB-5, Offhand 2: BAB-5, Main 3: BAB-10, Offhand 3: BAB-20, Main 4: BAB-15, Offhand 4: BAB-15, Main 5: BAB-20, Offhand 5: BAB-25)

Exception #2: Rapid Shot - Yes, it would have to be changed to a toggleable feat. When active it will give a -2 to hit for all shots but bump the degredation of BAB in a manner similar to TWF.

(ex. Feat active and including feat penalty: Shot 1: BAB-2, Shot 2: BAB-2, Shot #3: BAB-7, Shot #4: BAB-12, Shot #5: BAB-17)

[totmacher]

I choose you, Codog-chu

[binnsr]

I choose you, Codog-chu

sadly, It's quite possible that Codog has abandoned us..

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h311/eldamir/codog-sadpanda.jpg

[honkuimushi]

I choose you, Codog-chu

What are you doing? Celebrating the release of the Pale Master?