Is it intentional to allow these two feats to work together?
Here's my situation:
Fighter level 2 (BAB +2)
Strength 18 (+4 modifier)
Has both Power Attack & Overhand Chop as feats
weapon of choice is greatsword
Power Attack is not a Combat Feat, so it can be used in conjunction with Overhand Chop, correct?
This being the case, the fighter can take a -2 penalty on his attack rolls (which is his BAB, and add a +4 bonus to damage (because he is using a 2-handed weapon). He can also use his Overhand Chop feat at the same time to deal an additional 8 points of damage (twice his Strength modifier). So the 2nd level fighter is now doing 2d6+16 points of damage (because he also gets his normal +4 modifier from Strength). He takes a -2 on the attack roll and has to use a full round action to do this. Is this correct?
We just created characters last night, so haven't had a chance to playtest this yest. But the player of the fighter was a bit excited at the prospects. Can't say that I blame him. Of course, I can turn this right around and do it to them as well, I guess.
I just wanted to check to see if I am reading these feats correctly so that our playtest is accurate.
That sounds about right. :o)
Lets see
2d6 (base weapon damage) +
4 (power attack for 2 (max bab)) +
8 (double strength mod) +
6 (1 and 1/2 strength mod)
= 2d6 + 18 ( as a full-round action with a -2 penalty to the attack)
Using a weapon two-handed gives 1 and 1/2 strength mod bonust to damage.
However I believe the feat was meant to mean something different. The way the feat reads it would seem to add the double strength on top of normal damage. However, and I may be wrong, but I think the double strength mod is supposed to be used instead of the 1 and 1/2 strength mod rather than getting it on top. In this case it would be
2d6 (base weapon damage) +
4 (power attack for 2 (max bab)) +
8 (double strength mod)
= 2d6 + 12 ( as a full-round action with a -2 penalty to the attack)
You can use the previous numbers by the rules, but I think the second set is what was intended.
Re-reading Overhand Chop, I'm inclined that it is the +12 damage from Zynete's second figures.
Overhand Chop is a bit unclearly written. You understand the feat's intended purpose if you read the "Normal" section as well.
Normal: You normally add 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier to damage rolls with a two-handed weapon.
You are correct, the fighter in question would do 2d6 (great sword) + 8 (Overhand Chop) + 4 (Power Attack).
However, Overhand Chop still needs some serious reworking. As it is meant to function, it becomes useless once a fighter hits 6th level. You can give up the second attack to get 1 to 2 more points of damage or make two attacks for the same full-round action.
|
Overhand Chop is a bit unclearly written. You understand the feat's intended purpose if you read the "Normal" section as well.
Normal: You normally add 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier to damage rolls with a two-handed weapon.You are correct, the fighter in question would do 2d6 (great sword) + 8 (Overhand Chop) + 4 (Power Attack).
However, Overhand Chop still needs some serious reworking. As it is meant to function, it becomes useless once a fighter hits 6th level. You can give up the second attack to get 1 to 2 more points of damage or make two attacks for the same full-round action.
I agree. Combat feats shouldn't have their immediate superiors.
Charging is a full-round action, so therefore Overhand chop has a use for any level fighter on the charge. This could get particularly brutal for anyone using a lance and Spirited Charge. Yes, I know that a lance is a piercing weapon and using it to overhand chop someone is comical, but the rules don't establish that you cannot do it.
Using Overhand chop is a full round action, meaning it cannot be used as part of another full round action. I would prefer that it could be used with a charge, but as it is written, it cannot be.