That is a perfectly reasonable approach.
Kinda meta-gamey, but that can be reasoned away as practice against a variety of opponents.But what I started the thread about was the people for whom using power attack always and forever is a matter of dogmatic faith. There are no circumstances where they will not power attack.
And I would say that that is viable on most full BAB classes close to 95% of the time.
The only exceptions are:When PA will alter your crit chance. (here the math can get wonkey)
When your non-PA damage *.05*PA hit penalty > PA damage * hit% with PA - this is very hard to do with full BAB characters, because other damage bonuses are not that common in high enough quantity.
When you don't need to PA to kill an enemy - this is probably the most common, but it relies on your GM giving you hints as to how tough the enemy is. Its a larger problem at low levels.
|
... And I would say that that is viable on most full BAB classes close to 95% of the time...
Couple of weeks ago I saw a rogue 2/bard 1/battle oracle 5. So it wasn't really even a 3/4 BaB class. It functions as a 1/2 BaB class. But he had a THW and power attack. Used it every time even though rarely hitting. Only reason they survived was because he was functionally a meat shield rather than DPS* until the other casters SoS spells finally succeeded.
* Though he certainly crowed about the huge damage he rolled when he hit. The fight I watched, not a single opponent he hit was taken down by damage. All of them went down to SoS spells.
PA while twf and multiclassed in several 3/4 classes, could be questionable.
However, assuming your character build isn't awful, you should always (or practically always) power attack. You need to understand how dice work.
Just because you missed by exactly 2 the last time, and the time before that, and the time before that too, doesn't mean you should stop power attacking. Your chances of rolling in the "unsweet spot" where you miss purely because of power attack are still exactly the same. In your original post, the cleric was rolling a string of similar numbers. However, in the long haul, he is correct; he will do more damage by using power attack than without it. There are exactly 3 possibilities when you attack with PA
1. You roll low enough to miss, power attack or no power attack. Using Power Attack in this case made no difference on the outcome.
2. You hit the "unsweet spot" and roll one of the few numbers where a regular attack would have hit. This is the only time power attack can hurt you.
3. You roll high enough to hit, power attack or no power attack. Power attack always helps you here, you are doing extra damage for no drawback in this case.
If you are using pa with a 3/4 BAB. then at level 20 you are taking a maximum of -4 to your attacks. In other words: there are exactly 4 numbers on a d20 that fill the "unsweet spot".
80% of the time Power Attack is either helpful, or is neither helpful nor harmful. 20% of the time it is harmful. At lower levels, the "unsweet spot" is smaller, If your BAB is 4-7 (level 10 or below for 3/4 classes) than 90% of the time PA is helpful or neither helpful nor harmful, and PA is only harmful 10% of the time.
This is why using PA is almost always the best course of action.
|
|
That really isn't a sufficient analysis.
Is the times when it is helpful good enough to out weight the times when it is harmful?
Lets say you have a +4 BaB so your power attack with a THW is -2 hit and +6 damage.
You are fighting a high AC opponent, without power attack you need a 18 on the die to hit = 15% chance to hit.
With power attack you need a 20 on the die to hit = 5% chance to hit.
Using power attack dropped your number of hits to 1/3 as many. Is that +6 on damage sufficient to tripple your average damage with that one strike? Probably not.
In this case, power attack works out to less damage in the long run with a high AC opponent.
Is that the normal case with a full BaB? No. Does it ever occur? Yes. With a 3/4 BaB it is a bit more likely to occur. With some of the multiclass conglomerations I've seen, I think it is becoming at least fairly frequent of an occurance.
An odd facit of the system is that a 20 always hits. So if you needed a 20 to hit anyway then it does help without harming in the slightest.
In my experience, and from crunching numbers, the lower your odds to hit, the worse power attack hurts you and reduces your mean DPR rather than increase it. Hence for a 3/4 BAB class it's rarely worth it to Power Attack. For a fighter with Power Attack, a two-handed weapon, and weapon training, it is almost always worth it.
I currently play a 15th level one handed weapon fighter with whom my rule of thumb is, approximately, if I believe the enemy's AC is equal to about the bonus of my primary attack -9 I will use Power Attack on a full attack. This changes depending on buffs. So for instance if my attack routine is at 40/40/35/30 (with haste and some buffs), I would power attack (causing a routine of 35/35/30/25) if I thought my enemy's AC was 31 or below.
A weapon with a lot of extra d6s and a lot of static damage informs that decision. I deal 1d8+20+1d6 electricity+1d6cold+2d6 holy/15-20x2 before buffs, and stagger foes on a crit. Power attack is +10 damage. It's not worth adding much risk of missing out on the former to gain the latter.
The number I use as a rule of thumb is likely to drop precipitously next level when I gain an iterative attack at -15. Probably it would drop by 4pts or so to AC=primary attack -13. PA is likely to still see use on standard action attacks, which had been depressingly frequent till we started playtesting mythic.
Some circumstances would change that. For instance, if enemy DR was causing trouble I might be more willing to resort to power attack.
With a two handed weaponeer I would be more generous.
That really isn't a sufficient analysis.
Is the times when it is helpful good enough to out weight the times when it is harmful?
well to figure that out you have to multiply out the percent chance that its helping times the extra damage vs the percent chance of it hurting times the extra damage. This will vary by character and by monster.
Suppose then, that you're a level 8 character, not wielding the weapon in 2 hands, and with PA, you need to roll a 11 to hit.
So 50% chance of it being purely beneficial (we're cutting out the dont-matters here) times 4 damage per hit =2.
compare to how much damage that extra hit is worth. Suppose your attack is 1d8+5. You've got a +3 str mod, a +2 sword, and basically nothing else.
take 9.5 (average damage) multiply by the chance that it will matter (10%) and you end up with 0.95.
2 vs 0.95. Using PA adds +2 to your average dmg/attack (damage per attack, not per hit, or per round), and not using PA adds +0.95, so it's better to use PA here.
----
Now suppose that same 8th level character is a rogue and suppose he will get Sneak Attack if he hits, This adds a fair chunk to the damage total
DPA (damage per attack) for power attack remains at 2 (we're assuming that while using PA, your rogue needs an 11 to hit again).
DPA for a hit by the rogue increases dramatically though, 1d8+4d6+5 is your damage on a hit.
23.5 * 10% = 2.3. Your damage/attack is now 2.3 It's better to not use power attack in this situation, albeit only slightly.
----
Let's go back to the non-sneak attack for a moment. Suppose its very easy to hit. Suppose that while PAing you only need a 6.
DPA for PA = 75% * 4 = 3.
DPA for not power attack is still 0.95.
So you can see how using PA is more beneficial the easier it is to hit.
-----
And lets go into the converse of course. Suppose a target is very difficult to hit, with PA, you'll need a 18.
DPA for PA = 15% * 4 = 0.6
DPA for no PA = 9.5 * 0.1= .95.
Here you see it's better not to use PA again.
-----
You can calculate a break point with relative ease. Just find the point where the numbers converge. You can do this for your own character, and find out just exactly when it is better to be using PA and when it isn't. For our 8th level character with no sneak attack, we just need to figure out when the damage/attack from PA dips below .95.
Got it figured out? It's when you have a 20% chance to hit. 20% * 4 =.08, but 25%*4=1.
In other words, for this character, as long as the character needs a 16 or less to hit (with PA mods included) it is better to use PA. If he needs a 17 or more to hit with PA mods included, it is better not to. You can do this calculation for any character. Most of the time PA will come out on top.
There is a Google Doc used for the 'DPR Olympics' that shows the added DPR of +1att as well as for +1dmg.
Those stats themselves show the general trend, but for more accuracy you can just adjust the +att/+dmg stats yourself and compare to normal.
The Google Doc spreadsheet used the average AC for the typical APL you would face as a character of that level,
but you can adjust the AC as desired to cover the appropriate Char Level / APL, or adjust to your preferences.
But average DPR is only tangentially relevant in many situations, there are cases where reducing average damage can be desirable if it increases reliability of hitting and doing some damage. If you just need to hit a monster one more time to kill it, and doing lots more damage doesn't really matter, forgoing Power Attack is probably a good idea (same goes for if you know several allies will have a chance to attack it before it acts again, everybody not using Power Attack may have lower average DPR, but a lower chance to not kill it). Miss Chance can also have similar effect, even though Power Attack's attack modifier doesn't directly interact with it, it makes things 'swingier' because Power Attack will make you miss more and Miss Chance will also make you miss more, so you may want to forgo Power Attack because if you can't do anything about Miss Chance you at least want as much of the non-Miss Chance attacks to hit AC. Things like Pugwampi unluck can have a similar dynamic.
I don't like it. Its basically asking the dice gods to make me miss by 1.
I do use it every time I use coup-de-grace :-)
I don't like it. Its basically asking the dice gods to make me miss by 1.
Same here. I'm a total stickler for accuracy. Even if I have to sacrifice a little DPR, I still prefer to hit more often for less damage.
Forget the hare, I'm with the tortoise.
I do think it is wierd how many people grab it at 1st level.
You dont' really even need the damage to drop things at that level,
if you have 18/20 STR and are 2-handing a Greatsword/Nodachi/Bastard Sword/Dwarven Waraxe.
Although if you want to get something like Cleave off the bat, that's how you do it. But on it's own merit? Not so much.
Doesn't mean you have to use P.A. all the time though. There are situations where it makes sense though.
|
|
...Got it figured out? It's when you have a 20% chance to hit. ...
I've got it.
A lot of people don't. They have read on the boards that you should always power attack with a THW. It is now dogmatic faith with no reasoning. If they are planning to use a thw, the get the feat power attack. If they have it, they will use it every time no matter what.|
|
Damage wise, Power Attack gives you a +2. That is equivalent to +4 to STR.
At first level, you want to kill things fast. Downing them in one or two attacks is better than using three or even four attacks for the same result.
He is saying that at first level most things will drop to one hit even without that +2.
|
|
He is saying that at first level most things will drop to one hit even without that +2.Damage wise, Power Attack gives you a +2. That is equivalent to +4 to STR.
At first level, you want to kill things fast. Downing them in one or two attacks is better than using three or even four attacks for the same result.
I get that. But a 1st-level character is so squishy and the healing so rare that overkill is an advantage. Basically, you want to go from "most things" to "almost everything".
|
|
... I get that. But a 1st-level character is so squishy and the healing so rare that overkill is an advantage. Basically, you want to go from "most things" to "almost everything".
Long time ago I did play with a guy that only looked at his minimum damage. He assumed it was likely that all the mooks at least had a decent chance to go down with one shot. So he was always trying to maximize the minimum so he could spend as little time on the mooks as possible.
|
|
... I get that. But a 1st-level character is so squishy and the healing so rare that overkill is an advantage. Basically, you want to go from "most things" to "almost everything".Long time ago I did play with a guy that only looked at his minimum damage. He assumed it was likely that all the mooks at least had a decent chance to go down with one shot. So he was always trying to maximize the minimum so he could spend as little time on the mooks as possible.
Actually, it also works on tougher opponents ;-)
...Got it figured out? It's when you have a 20% chance to hit. ...I've got it.
A lot of people don't. They have read on the boards that you should always power attack with a THW. It is now dogmatic faith with no reasoning. If they are planning to use a thw, the get the feat power attack. If they have it, they will use it every time no matter what.
I didn't mean to come across as patronizing, occasionally I use rhetorical questions when I talk. Note to self: don't do that on messageboards.
although I didn't do my calculation factors for a two-handed weapon, all that was for a one-handed weapon.
On to the point though: It's extremely rare to fight an enemy you can only hit on a 17+ or an 18+. If that is the case than calculating damage from PA is probably not very relevant. Your PC should either
1. Run away.
2. switch to something that isn't melee attacking, like spellcasting.
Even a newbie can understand this readily. Dogmatically sticking to PA when you make melee attacks is hardly ever the wrong choice. So for somebody who is unwilling to do all the calculations, sticking to PA all the time is just a generally helpful practice that is also easy to understand. Telling them "it's always better" is not far from the truth.
You can tell a child: "Mammals don't lay eggs, they bear live young." or you can tell them:
"Mammals don't lay eggs, they bear live young, this applies to practically every mammal on the planet except the group known as the monotremes, which includes the platypus and the echidna, both of which actually lay eggs. But they're classified as mammals anyway because they bear other signature mammal traits like being warm blooded, having body hair, mammary glands in femlaes, and a four-chambered heart, and they lack the traits of other animals that lay eggs (like birds and reptiles). There are exaclty 3 species of monotrmes on the planet. They are the short-beaked echidna, the long-beaked echidna, and the duckbilled platypus. By comparison, there are about 4600 species of mammals on the planet."
My point is; PAing all the time is practically never the wrong choice, especially when using a weapon in two hands. In the cases where it IS the wrong choice, probably making melee attacks in general is the wrong choice too! Without going into the details and the extremely rare cases, "always power attack, no matter what." is good advice.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if I would go as far as "...extremely rare..."
I would agree it is pretty rare for a full BaB high strength focus class for the first itterative attack with a level appropriate opponent.
But the ittertives, playing up, 3/4 BaB (and the multi-combo less than 3/4 BaB), non-strength focused builds - it happens a bit more.
"...Without going into the details and the extremely rare cases, "always power attack, no matter what." is good advice."
I would rather say something like, "If you have high strength, good attack bonus, and are using a THW it is usually worth while to use power attack. However, if you are missing with pretty good rolls... STOP USING IT."
PAing all of the time, no exception, may or may not be bad tactics, depending on the circumstance.
When my fighter on Jade Regent starts swinging his flail two-handed, he power attacks. He wears a buckler so that he can go to two-handed If he's swinging two handed he's trying to crush some monsters to pulp, and that is not the time to hold back. If it's AC is so high he can't hit it effectively (he's L12 with duelist's gloves and greater weapon focus), then the party has no business fighting it anyways.
When my fighter is performing a trip or disarm combat maneuver, he'll sometimes still be power attacking so that it's active for AoOs.
When my fighter is using expertise, he usually isn't power attacking. Unless he only expects to get one swing that round, in which case he power attacks anyways.
When my fighter is trying to perform an exceptionally dickish reposition maneuver (tactical reposition is really, really nice), he may not power attack, since it's not just about beating the CMD, it's about beating the CMD by an adequate margin.
And when my fighter is fighting something with a pitifully low AC, he'll use expertise and power attack at the same, because screw them.
|
|
I know this is a horrible thread necro and I usually don't like it when people do that. However, I just got a call from a friend who was a PFS GM last night and it applies so perfectly to what started the thread way back when last year.
There was a guy with a melee cleric that used power attack, power attack + maneuvers, power attack + improvised weapon, power attack + prone, and power attack + subdual attacks (at -4) for every single attack all session long. He only hit 1 time the entire scenario with a bull rush.
He was cursing to the point where my friend had to threaten to ask him to leave. He complained about the GM, the authors, and lack of support from other players. When someone said try not using power attack especially with other things that lower your attack role, he just said that was a stupid thing to say and they obviously didn't know how the game was played so shut up. After he stomped out, they all said they hoped he didn't come back.
No, I don't know any of the details of his build or the opponents. But to me, it seems like a situation where I might at least consider, just possibly, temporarily, not using power attack
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I know this is a horrible thread necro and I usually don't like it when people do that. However, I just got a call from a friend who was a PFS GM last night and it applies so perfectly to what started the thread way back when last year.
There was a guy with a melee cleric that used power attack, power attack + maneuvers, power attack + improvised weapon, power attack + prone, and power attack + subdual attacks (at -4) for every single attack all session long. He only hit 1 time the entire scenario with a bull rush.
He was cursing to the point where my friend had to threaten to ask him to leave. He complained about the GM, the authors, and lack of support from other players. When someone said try not using power attack especially with other things that lower your attack role, he just said that was a stupid thing to say and they obviously didn't know how the game was played so shut up. After he stomped out, they all said they hoped he didn't come back.
No, I don't know any of the details of his build or the opponents. But to me, it seems like a situation where I might at least consider, just possibly, temporarily, not using power attack
Huh. My PFS melee cleric always Power Attacks, and has no trouble hitting. I mean, he's not necessarily hitting on a 2 like some martials, but still. Wonder what this guy's issue was.
|
|
...
Huh. My PFS melee cleric always Power Attacks, and has no trouble hitting. I mean, he's not necessarily hitting on a 2 like some martials, but still. Wonder what this guy's issue was.
Don't know. I will see the GM this weekend, but he may not give me many details since he said I haven't run that scenario yet.
I know this is a horrible thread necro and I usually don't like it when people do that. However, I just got a call from a friend who was a PFS GM last night and it applies so perfectly to what started the thread way back when last year.
There was a guy with a melee cleric that used power attack, power attack + maneuvers, power attack + improvised weapon, power attack + prone, and power attack + subdual attacks (at -4) for every single attack all session long. He only hit 1 time the entire scenario with a bull rush.
He was cursing to the point where my friend had to threaten to ask him to leave. He complained about the GM, the authors, and lack of support from other players. When someone said try not using power attack especially with other things that lower your attack role, he just said that was a stupid thing to say and they obviously didn't know how the game was played so shut up. After he stomped out, they all said they hoped he didn't come back.
No, I don't know any of the details of his build or the opponents. But to me, it seems like a situation where I might at least consider, just possibly, temporarily, not using power attack
Sounds like this guy (1) had a bad roll day and (2) is kind of a jerk when things don't go his way. Acting like that is a good way to ruin the game for everybody involved. Power Attack is the least of his problems.
If I have a build that bothers taking Power Attack (or Deadly Aim, for that matter), I tell the GM that I'm using it all the time unless I say otherwise. I might let up if my opponent is weak enough or injured enough that I'm confident that I can KO it with a single shot; that way I have a higher probability of landing that shot.
|
We've had a lot of people who just use power attack all the time not really thinking about it. It's always funny when they're trying to get the final blow and knock the bad guy out and when they're calculating the damage are like oops forgot turn off power attack and completely destroy them.
And for the necro'd people who say they stop using it mid-round how is that done since the effects last until your next turn?
Power Attack? Useful to bring doors down.
And on criticals.
|
|
I believe that is meant to be stopping using it in mid-combat between rounds. Not stopping in the middle of a round of iterative attacks....
And for the necro'd people who say they stop using it mid-round how is that done since the effects last until your next turn?
Right, should have power attacked the coffee.
I've noticed way too many people who take Power Attack at level 1. I don't care if you are a barbarian with a two handed weapon - you're going to miss a lot at level 1, so it's not worth it. Wait until level 3 or 5 when you're hitting more consistently, unless you're taking Furious Focus at the same time.
At level 1 you are going to miss a lot regardless. -1 is bad at that level. If the extra 3 damage is a kill and at level 1 it often is that is more than worth the -1.
