|
I might as well post here, since it seems the CharOp'ers are gathered:
Someone mentioned 2WF, but how do you deal with STR when using a Double Weapon?
(I'm speaking generally, Power Attack would be on top of this)I have a Barbarian character (Yalka, on my profile) who has a Double Greatspear.
I figured the main-hand attack would be at 1.5x STR DMG bonus (for 2h)
and the off-hand would be at .75x STR DMG bonus (1.5(2h)*0.5(o-h))...Thoughts?
Double Weapons
Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaffs, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he or she incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.The character can also choose to use a double weapon two handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
So if you make two attacks you get: Main 1xStr, Off 0.5xStr.
If you make one attack you get: 2-Handed 1.5xStr.
A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he or she incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
Yeah... I can sorta see your reading ("as if fighting with two weapons"),
but I think it's 100% agreeable that the SRD's wording is TERRIBLE.It doesn't say "you incur ALL penalties of 2WF" or say that you are even considered to be wielding 2 separate weapons, it just says you suffer the ATTACK penalities associated with 2WF: There's nothing to indicate that the 2Handed bonus would be negated, which is just contingent on using 2 hands. The off-hand attack obviously qualifies for the off-hand damage bonus penalty. The 2nd half just says you can choose to use it 1h or 2h if you're not taking the off-hand, which isn't a choice for polearms anyways (and kindof indicates that they're mainly talking about 1-hand-able Double Weapons...)
I'm inclined to keep on applying the 2WF Attack Penalties (When I chose it, I didn't even know Double Weapons were "Light Weapons" for 2WF purposes), AND keeping the 2handed Strength multiplier for both ends, multiplied by half for the off-hand. I feel it's balanced, and makes sense this way (+A MW Double Weapon like this costs over 600 gp).
Even by your reading, it's still bizarre, because how/when do you 'choose' to use it as a double weapon? Could you use the off-hand during your turn, and then switch back to "2 handed" bonus (of course, polearms always NEED 2 hands) for any AoO's...?
See what I mean? :-)
|
|
Even by your reading, it's still bizarre, because how/when do you 'choose' to use it as a double weapon? Could you use the off-hand during your turn, and then switch back to "2 handed" bonus (of course, polearms always NEED 2 hands) for any AoO's...?
See what I mean? :-)
Further support:
Off-Hand Weapon
When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only ½ your Strength bonus.Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed
When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1½ times your Strength bonus. However, you don’t get this higher Strength bonus when using a light weapon with two hands.
I admit it is unclear, but the between-the-lines on these rules imply that you wield the weapon as normal for either two-weapon fighting or two-handed weapons. I'm in the dark as to how your attack of opportunity scenario would work, as per RAW. I'm inclined to rule that you can switch between the two (double or two-handed) as a free action, thus no penalties on attacks outside your turn.
A lot of wha tLogic Ninja posted is coming right off a disagreement over on the BG boards. He's even using the numbers there, albeit not in the correct context, to try and make his point.
First of all, he's using the tarrasque as 'the' CR 20 melee monster. And we're supposed to handle '4 a day'. Right. The unique, campaign ending monstrosity, one to a world, tarrasque, slayer of ancient Wyrms and destroyer of whole civilizations, we're supposed to handle '4 a day'.
Uh huh.
Second, it is most definitely not your 'typical' CR 20 melee brute. A CR 20 Dragon is closer to standard melee, and Dragons are designed to be melee hell on wheels at whatever their CR is...they are the toughest things by CR by level.
The 'average' Melee brute at most levels is a lower level brute with some class levels amping it up, some, really. But! We'll use a Dragon, because dragons are multi-functional...they can do well at all roles.
Suddenly, attack rolls are back sort of into the realm of the believable. A CR 20 Dragon hovers around 27 HD and has a base attack bonus of about +30ish, +39 or so with Strength and penalties. It can have anywhere from 3 to 7 attacks, depending on what it does (wings, kick, tail, claws, bite, sit on someone). Unlike the tarrasque, it's actually got a brain and can make good assessments of foes. Sure, sure, argue it won't get into melee...well, it's not its choice. The melees will happily bring the fight to it, probably with dmg-multiplying charges.
it's base AC is 35-36...right on the baseline of 15+CR that, amazingly, the tarrasque, the balor and the pitfiend all sit right around, sans buffing.
Miss chances tend to be overcome as easily or more easily then AC at these levels. Too, they don't last as long as AC does, especially as magic items.
SUre, it would take an AC of 48 or so to get to the magic 50% number of misses, but once you hit that, any amount of AC starts significantly biting into the dragon's ability to hurt you in melee combat. Getting a 48 with a shield is not all that hard.
A CR 9 Dragon sits around a +18 to hit...steep, but possible to beat at level 9 with careful feat and stat placement. Once you get over AC 28, dmg from the dragon will taper off significantly. You just have to build for it.
Will it be as effective as a one-shotting charger build? No, but that's okay, if you don't play one shot chargers. If you've other plans and character, you'll do just fine with a high AC.
==Aelryinth
Yeah. Definitely an area for wording improvement in Pathfinder.
The true wierdness in the text is that they're obviously presuming that the Double Weapon is usable either 1h or 2h (look @ 2nd part), when just visually, I would think Double Weapons are 2h-ONLY weapons.
In any case, I would say that whether or not one rules the 2Handed damage bonus applies to the off-hand attack (@ half, of course), it would STILL apply to the main hand (w/ 2WF attack penalty of course). And, of course, even though that's sortof a 'half-way' position, there's nothing in the text to particulary suggest that reading, either! :-)
Aelryinth, please stop trolling the Paizo boards.
For the benefit of everyone else: If given half a chance he will go on, and on, and on about sword and board as he has an unnatural affection for it. Quote tags will be broken, bold tags applied everywhere, chain posting will abound... And this entire forum will look as if some monster breathed radioactive fire on it. This has already destroyed one forum, and started on a second. Now, here's a third.
I'd very much be in favour of returning Power Attack and associated feats to their former glory.
The only reason I can see for not allowing a variable amount is all those people complaining that it's so hard to do all that math. And since that never made sense to me (since you can choose "easy numbers"), I don't see a reason at all.
People who have issues with basic math should not play a game that involves arithmetic. Thank you, that is all.
Gonna have to say ya -1 for +2 is simple and not to cumbersome as PR put it.
The issue with sword and board fighters is not that twohanders out damage them[they should] its that they don't get enuff use out of the shield
What about two weapon fighters though. For everything they spend on their fighting style they need to out damage a two handed fighter. Unless they can get some other trick though.
For TWFs, you dip for bonus damage and hope the enemies aren't immune to precision.
My issue with Power Attack (PA) in 3.5 was that, as CoL correctly pointed out, it made 2-handed weapons (THW) obligatory for melee fighters, barbarians, and paladins. Two-weapon fighting (TWF) was reserved for rogues, who could add sneak attack damage to their off-hand attack. Sword and shield sucked at low levels (not enough gold for a numerically good shield) and even worse at high levels due to the eventual availability of floating shields, cloaks of displacement, and the like.
Yes, character flavor counts for a lot, but not if it makes you a mere babysitting charge for your compatriots. I don't sit around all day trying to min/max builds, but I also don't make a sorcerer 3/druid 2 character and claim that I'm contributing as much to the party as a 5th level wizard. (Because I wouldn't be. I'd be two cohorts with a half-action each.) In 3.5, you HAD to use PA w/THW just to be viable -- never mind "optimized."
Paizo took option 1: nerf Power Attack. That made PA not 20x better than all the others anymore, because the hit penalty now is often much larger than the statistically optimal one, w/respect to damage output. It's also faster, because people don't spend time calculating the right number of points to put into it. But that started the myriad complaints of "change it back!" Because one thing the 3.5 PA fans point out ad nauseum (but not less correctly for all that) is that the melee classes don't need to be nerfed, they need to be thrown a bone or two. But if we change PA back to 3.5, then TWF and shield use become obsolete again for fighter-types.
What to do? I'd propose either of the following:
1. PA works as in 3.P, but for all weapons (even light ones), and does 2:1 for any primary weapon (even if used one-handed), and 1:1 for an off-hand weapon. If that makes it obligatory for all martial characters, then give it to fighters and barbarians as a bonus feat that gets added to their list of class features. This makes melee classes comparatively stronger, which many seem to feel is needed.
2. PA works as in 3.5, but does 1:1 for 1-hd. weapons, and 1:1.5 (instead of 1:2) for THW. This makes THW fighters somewhat weaker, but that's offset by the greater flexibility in allocation. Encounters may need to be scaled back slightly.
For TWFs, you dip for bonus damage and hope the enemies aren't immune to precision.
A pure fighter shouldn't need to dip. Maybe two weapon rend needs to be improved, or have an improved version.
Enemies are the same. As long as this is so, the only possible solution is to boost TWF and SAB greatly. PAing THFs were just barely keeping up at best. Now, they cannot even do that.
Consider, even without PA a TWF is down a feat, needs to keep up two weapons instead of one, and even if his base damage is the same (say 1d6+2 + 1d6+1 vs 2d6+3) the fact it is divided over two hits means DR is twice as much of a factor. On top of that, TWF takes -2 to hit. Another net loss. If THF also takes -2 to hit, he's 4 damage ahead and has a better weapon. Making TWFers damage builds is doomed to fail as their job is already done better.
Now, what TWF actually does is not give you more attacks, but gives you more openings to attack. You feint with one weapon, strike with the other. If anything, a TWF would be more accurate offensively while being somewhere between SAB and THF defensively due to parrying with one weapon and striking with the other. Course, now he's only fighting with a one handed weapon but still. With an accuracy bonus, and fixed PA he can still do at least some damage while having some other advantage such as treat enemy as flat footed vs an attack, etc.
For that matter, SAB only works when you use the shield to prevent them from attacking you, not for blocking hits.
Edit: 1d10 + str * 1.5 once a round max isn't good enough. Period. Remember, enemies are the same.
Also remember, PF weakened melees and ignored or buffed casters for the most part. Sure, certain spells were changed but those either are nice but not critical things, or actually hurts someone other than the caster (not having a safe place to sleep means everyone gets stabbity death).
In that vein, I'd like to see some shield feats that do something other than use it as an inferior secondary attack. How about a feat that lets you block movement in a threatened square? Lets you share your shield bonus with an adjacent ally?
Regarding TWF for fighters, I let them trade fighter bonus feats for +1d6 sneak attack each. This prevents the full rogue dip for rogue talents and reflex saves and the like, so they can stay fighters. Mechanically, it's a bad deal (keep approx. 1 hp/level, but lose all those rogue goodies, slightly offset by the fact you're still progressing towards things like weapon training), but it's an option for those who want it.
Regarding TWF for fighters, I let them trade fighter bonus feats for +1d6 sneak attack each. This prevents the full rogue dip for rogue talents and reflex saves and the like, so they can stay fighters. Mechanically, it's a bad deal (keep approx. 1 hp/level, but lose all those rogue goodies, slightly offset by the fact you're still progressing towards things like weapon training), but it's an option for those who want it.
Lots of options like these in the end of the class section in Unearthed Arcana.
In that vein, I'd like to see some shield feats that do something other than use it as an inferior secondary attack. How about a feat that lets you block movement in a threatened square? Lets you share your shield bonus with an adjacent ally?
Then you're getting closer (and taking pages from the ToB Crusader's book) but it's still contingent upon a potentially vulnerable ally standing right next to you. Well, they're either going to be across from you to SA with flanking, or well away from you as they have no business meleeing. See the problem?
Then you're getting closer (and taking pages from the ToB Crusader's book) but it's still contingent upon a potentially vulnerable ally standing right next to you. Well, they're either going to be across from you to SA with flanking, or well away from you as they have no business meleeing. See the problem?
It's not a problem if you stand next to the wizard, and help keep monsters from grappling him... some things are useful only in a specific context, but if you can position yourselves so that context occurs more often, it can be a good deal. Don't have ToB, by the way, but if it has useful things like this, I may take a look at it. Thanks!
Lots of options like these in the end of the class section in Unearthed Arcana.
Yessir, there are. And I'm a big fan!
Ok. So you're just standing beside the Wizard, doing nothing until someone comes over. Isn't that kinda... subservient? More like what you'd expect from a cohort? And even then, the enemy can just attack from the other side.
Also, how about everyone else?
Enemies are the same. As long as this is so, the only possible solution is to boost TWF and SAB greatly. PAing THFs were just barely keeping up at best. Now, they cannot even do that.
Consider, even without PA a TWF is down a feat, needs to keep up two weapons instead of one, and even if his base damage is the same (say 1d6+2 + 1d6+1 vs 2d6+3) the fact it is divided over two hits means DR is twice as much of a factor. On top of that, TWF takes -2 to hit. Another net loss. If THF also takes -2 to hit, he's 4 damage ahead and has a better weapon. Making TWFers damage builds is doomed to fail as their job is already done better.....
Maybe you should start a two weapon fighting thread?
Ok. So you're just standing beside the Wizard, doing nothing until someone comes over. Isn't that kinda... subservient?
No more so than the typical "heal-bot" cleric. And not all opponents are intelligent; many will just charge at whatever hurts them. Maybe you wouldn't want to play a "guardian" fighter; maybe I wouldn't, either, but that doesn't mean it should be disallowed -- there's a demand for it, or else the dwarven defender PrC wouldn't exist.
Ok. So you're just standing beside the Wizard, doing nothing until someone comes over. Isn't that kinda... subservient?No more so than the typical "heal-bot" cleric. And not all opponents are intelligent; many will just charge at whatever hurts them. Maybe you wouldn't want to play a "guardian" fighter; maybe I wouldn't, either, but that doesn't mean it should be disallowed -- there's a demand for it, or else the dwarven defender PrC wouldn't exist.
Dwarven Defender = walk briskly now! Completely pointless (and requires multiple wasted feats to enter). It also can't really 'defend' anyone unless they are behind them in a 5' passage. Which is... the same as anyone else.
Also, heal bots are another sign of a severely underutilized party. Not just the cleric. The entire party is doing something wrong if the cleric is healing in combat outside of emergencies and the Heal spell. Reason is simple. One round of healing negates less damage than you take. Other spells negate more damage than one round of enemy attacks deal out. Therefore, combat healing, even every round doesn't work pre Heal. Buffing to prevent the damage does. Out of combat healing does. (get wands for this)
By the way, unless they're completely mindless they'll go after greatest threat. Even predatory animals (Int 2) understand attacking the small and weak first as opposed to the big guy in all the metal. This just happens to be the typical caster, and maybe the rogue. Especially if he's a Halfling.
Dwarven Defender = walk briskly now! Completely pointless (and requires multiple wasted feats to enter). It also can't really 'defend' anyone unless they are behind them in a 5' passage. Which is... the same as anyone else.
I never said it was a good/effective/useful PrC; I said that there exists a demand for a character who can protect his allies. So far that demand has not been met. It's been addressed with a lot of useless flavor text and very little "crunch" to back it up.
Also, heal bots are another sign of a severely underutilized party.
Yes, they are, but I see them all the time. In the real world, most players just enjoy playing; they're not tactical experts. I don't screen potential players by forcing them to beat me 3 out of 4 chess games before I let them roll up a character.
By the way, unless they're completely mindless they'll go after greatest threat. Even predatory animals (Int 2) understand attacking the small and weak first as opposed to the big guy in all the metal. This just happens to be the typical caster, and maybe the rogue. Especially if he's a Halfling.
Which is why it would be useful to have the big guy in metal able to effectively protect that tasty halfling morsel. As of now, he can't. I'd like him to be able to.
Hello all, been out for awhile just wanted to drop two coppers here. Power Attack is fine the way PA has done it, if your players make builds that are completely unrelated to roleplay remind them that this is a roleplaying game and the build should match the character not vice versa.
There is no way to make an unabusable game this game has DMs for a reason.
Stormwind Fallacy.
To Kirth: Lockdown could kinda do it, but PF completely ruined tripping, thereby negating the possibility. For those unfamiliar with the terminology, Lockdown is a spiked chain tripper with various AoO based effects to keep enemies from moving. Since he has reach, he can at least protect a decent size area. Especially if he is Large or larger.
To Kirth: Lockdown could kinda do it, but PF completely ruined tripping, thereby negating the possibility. For those unfamiliar with the terminology, Lockdown is a spiked chain tripper with various AoO based effects to keep enemies from moving. Since he has reach, he can at least protect a decent size area. Especially if he is Large or larger.
Yeah. My friends and I kind of made it a point never to use spiked chains or Monkey Grip -- sort of a matter of pride. A gamer's got to be able to look at himself in the mirror.
Spiked Chains are useful, and what elevates you into (not over!) mediocrity. Monkey Grip is just a trap though. Can't believe I missed this.
Spiked Chains are useful, and what elevates you into (not over!) mediocrity.
Yeah, but mechanics aside, if you picture some sort of Anime in your head, we don't want to play it. Personal preference, obviously, but the taboo is strong. No spiked chains; no double-bladed swords, no 10-ft.-long Manga swords. Inviolable house rules.
Besides, in a perfect world, a fighter would be viable without being predicated upon the selection of a specific weapon. I'd still like him to be. He's not.
Some more minor errors to point out:
First, Logic Ninja, quit baiting and trying to start and continue a flame war. It's how the others accusing me managed to get all those other threads locked down, even after I stopped posting to them.
Second, keep in mind that DR can be bypassed, and will be bypassed by intelligent fighters using TWF. Also note that magical effects apply TWICE for TWF, including such goodies as wounding and force dmg. I understand the former is especially popular among TWF. Getting the extra enhancement bonus to dmg means, for example, that you have 2 Shortswords +5 +str compared to one greatsword +5+str...or 2-12+10 +1.5 str +2-12+5+1.5STr. Any and all other fixed bonuses accrue faster to TWF then to THW.
Weapon Cost is an issue on its own, but 2+7 equiv weapons = cost of 1 +10 weapon. That's really not that bad. If you consider it as 'sword and shield, you can have a +10 'weapon' shortsword, and a +7 offhand shortsword for the price of a +10 weapon and +10 shield.
Thirdly, Dwarven Defender bashing is old and useless. The 'brisk walking' just displays someone who doesn't know anything about the class. The Stance is not the reason you take the class. Everything ELSE is the reason you take it.
Fourth, a Lockdown build uses Stand Still to keep people in place, relying on a high Reflex save to keep them stuck in one spot if they try to move. Gatling Gun Tripper uses Trip for the same effect, and the one you should invoke for your example. The main difference is Lockdown relies on Thicket of Blades to provoke the AoO to stop movement, and GGT relies on the enemy getting up from prone for the AoO (because GGT was made before ToB existed).
Power Attack works fine if the dmg is restricted to the primary hand, and everyone gets the same dmg:power ratio. Once you start doubling and tripling PA, things start getting out of control quickly.
===Aelryinth
Spiked Chains are useful, and what elevates you into (not over!) mediocrity.Yeah, but mechanics aside, if you picture some sort of Anime in your head, we don't want to play it. Personal preference, obviously, but the taboo is strong. No spiked chains; no double-bladed swords, no 10-ft.-long Manga swords. Inviolable house rules.
Besides, in a perfect world, a fighter would be viable without being predicated upon the selection of a specific weapon. I'd still like him to be. He's not.
I am sorry but you just lost all my respect by throwing that trash talk about anime. This thread is about power attack and everyone seems to have gotten completrly off topic.
Power Attack works fine if the dmg is restricted to the primary hand, and everyone gets the same dmg:power ratio. Once you start doubling and tripling PA, things start getting out of control quickly.
===Aelryinth
Power attack can be negated in a number of ways, just ask Turin the Mad.
There is even a feat that can negate power attack damage in complete warrior. Feat/Spell combination can make damage completely useless.
P.S. One example is the feat Elusive Target (PG 110, CW)
Spiked Chains are useful, and what elevates you into (not over!) mediocrity.Yeah, but mechanics aside, if you picture some sort of Anime in your head, we don't want to play it. Personal preference, obviously, but the taboo is strong. No spiked chains; no double-bladed swords, no 10-ft.-long Manga swords. Inviolable house rules.
Besides, in a perfect world, a fighter would be viable without being predicated upon the selection of a specific weapon. I'd still like him to be. He's not.
If you can picture some sort of anime in your head, you are looking at it wrong. Further, the BSF is only a viable type at low levels. If you do not want to be a BSF (that's Big Stupid Fighter, by the way) you make damn sure you can do something besides hitting the thing with the other thing. This is where chargers and trippers come in. You get some options, or you don't keep up. Simple as that.
I am ignoring Aelryinth/The Authority/whatever other aliases he has on the grounds that he thinks everyone who disagrees with him is the same person and is still committing various logical fallacies accordingly.
I think both parties should either get back to the topic on hand or leave the thread honestly. This is for discussing the merits and flaws of PRPG's Power Attack feat and whether it should be changed, reverted to 3.5, or kept the same. Not some personal dispute between people who've rubbed one another the wrong way.
In regards to the Power Attack feat I think it's an example of things being needlessly nerfed in the PRPG. I love most of the changes but the more I see the more I roll my eyes and sigh as I see myself continuing to put house rules on the game, they just get moved from one area to another. I've playtested the present form of PA, in the two games I have characters using it regularly in it's become almost useless. Just a feat that permits you to get cleave. It negates the previous feats flexibility which would permit it to be taken by a rogue or some class lacking the emphasis on strength and add a little punch to their damage at the sacrifice of accuracy. If the calculations get to complex put a cap on them or a time limit on the player.
I still don't see why it was nerfed in such a fashion, there are ways of adjusting a feat without castrating it if it's too complex or takes too much time. I've yet to see one player, even a strength monkey, look at this feat and go "Awesome! I love this change and how it applies to my character!" anyone who does is likely a masochist of gaming who thinks someone must have a stat at 6 in order to be a good role player. From my account the majority of the people who come here either want the feat reverted back to 3.5 or else somehow changed from what it is at present. I've yet to do a full count but that's what I've gathered.
Sorry for the rant. In my opinion fighters need all the help they can get and PRPG's PA isn't the way to do it.
...I thought the 'personal dispute' was long done. Eh.
Power Attack works fine if the dmg is restricted to the primary hand, and everyone gets the same dmg:power ratio. Once you start doubling and tripling PA, things start getting out of control quickly.
===Aelryinth
Power attack can be negated in a number of ways, just ask Turin the Mad.
There is even a feat that can negate power attack damage in complete warrior. Feat/Spell combination can make damage completely useless.
P.S. One example is the feat Elusive Target (PG 110, CW)
Since Logic Ninja can't muster a soluable argument, I'll assume he has conceded his points need some support.
Elusive Target is, however, the ONLY mechanism out there to defeat Power Attack, other then a high AC (and that will likely not work if we are talking a charger build) or miss chances (which are AC by another name, and something else prepared fighters compensate for). Shock Trooper's sack PA to AC means TH rolls for PA can stay very high, and that charge combo is where most PA abuse comes in.
Elusive Target also has that nasty Expertise requirement of 13 Int, which is truly annoying to almost every melee who might want to take it.
I love Elusive Target, I think it's a great feat...but having to have a 13 Int to take it is annoying as all get out. Personally I think much of Elusive Target could be folded into Defensive Fighting and Total Defense, and nobody would miss it.
And no, I'm not The Authority. Just because LogicNinja likes to bring up tired arguments from other boards, doesn't mean other people don't like to use the arguments of others, as well.
===Aelryinth
Everyone who disagrees with you is the same person (LogicNinja) is trade mark both of your common behaviors. I presume the lack of the term s***ninja is due to that offending the mods.
I am refusing to feed you. Simple as that. This will be my last reply to anything you say.
|
|
Lich-Loved--err, I mean, THE AUTHORITY--the benefit of the old Power Attack was that a player could choose how much accuracy he wished to sacrifice. Taking away player control from the Power Attack and Combat Expertise feats is a very poor choice.
To make Power Attack truly viable, it needs to be reverted and then altered so that characters get +2 on damage rolls for every -1 they take on their attack rolls.
I've got to agree with Psychic Robot on this. The simpler the rule the easier it is to use and not be abused.
I'll add my voice to the crowd who'd like PA to be reverted back to 3.5 version.
Reasons are twofold. First, in my experience when a character full attacks, he'll want to take at most a penalty of 3 or less, unless he's sure hes going to hit (Coup de grace, wraithstrike, etc). Anything more will hurt his damage output. (This might not apply to all characters, and I'm not taking into account other feats than power attack. Also, my experiences come from observing a barbarian in action during levels 8 to 11) With this in mind, a spiked chain wielding, feapon finesse using character with strength of 13-16 gains most from PF PA. This Absurdity is even more visible, when you realize that the spiked chain wielder wouldn't want to get stronger because it would reduce his damage output.
The second reason is that melee fighters were pretty boring to play when compared to spellcasters, who have real choices on what to do each round. In 3e, PA was one of the only ways a player could customize his character's attacks. Deciding the amount of power attack was sometimes the only real decision made each round. If customization from PA is removed, melee combat actions will degenerate into identical full attacks round after round after round.
I'll add my voice to the crowd who'd like PA to be reverted back to 3.5 version.
Reasons are twofold. First, in my experience when a character full attacks, he'll want to take at most a penalty of 3 or less, unless he's sure hes going to hit (Coup de grace, wraithstrike, etc). Anything more will hurt his damage output. (This might not apply to all characters, and I'm not taking into account other feats than power attack. Also, my experiences come from observing a barbarian in action during levels 8 to 11) With this in mind, a spiked chain wielding, feapon finesse using character with strength of 13-16 gains most from PF PA. This Absurdity is even more visible, when you realize that the spiked chain wielder wouldn't want to get stronger because it would reduce his damage output.
The second reason is that melee fighters were pretty boring to play when compared to spellcasters, who have real choices on what to do each round. In 3e, PA was one of the only ways a player could customize his character's attacks. Deciding the amount of power attack was sometimes the only real decision made each round. If customization from PA is removed, melee combat actions will degenerate into identical full attacks round after round after round.
Actually, this seems to be a very low level use of PA. At higher levels, and especially the math optimizers, use of PA can regularly exceed 10 or higher points. Some builds are made with such excessive TH rolls that full attacking for BAB to the hilt is the standard way to play, as hitting is still almost guaranteed. With good party buffing, that's not that difficult to attain. Indeed, the Frenzied Berserker class is built around attaining such massive Str mods that Supreme Power Attack is the way to go.
This is where Power Attack is abused. Paizo simply removed the abuse potential from the feat and sped up game play in one fell swoop. While the 1:1 micromanagement of the feat was fun, it isn't neccessary, and there's no reason you can't include it as a house rule if you so choose. In terms of balance and control, I'll give the nod to Paizo.
--
As to Logic, I'll lump you in with a bunch of guys who like to post on the BG boards, especially since one of them made pointed reference to The Authority as you are, and you are using their arguments, which were devalued long ago. Sorry, you're kind of ID'ing yourself, and blaming me for the threads they flamed and closed is another ID'ing trademark of that bunch (people outside the situation saw rather more clearly what was going on).
So, yeah, I'll lump you in with em. Why wouldn't I? You ARE one of them.
Me, I've no clue who The Authority is. AFAIK, I'm still Aelryinth on the EnWorld boards.
===Aelryinth
I am sorry but you just lost all my respect by throwing that trash talk about anime. This thread is about power attack and everyone seems to have gotten completrly off topic.Spiked Chains are useful, and what elevates you into (not over!) mediocrity.Yeah, but mechanics aside, if you picture some sort of Anime in your head, we don't want to play it. Personal preference, obviously, but the taboo is strong.
Wow, good thing I clearly stated it was a personal preference, not an attack on the fans.
No need to go around picking fights.
|
I honestly apologize if this has been stated prior, but here is one of my primary reasons for approving Paizo's change to PA.
Scenario:
A 1st level fighter, stripped to his underclothes, is thrown into a adamantine-walled cell, exhibiting fine quality craftsmanship(i.e. no glaring structural defects) with no spaces exhibiting anything less than a hardness of 20 and significant hp.
This fighter has a strength of 13, the Power Attack feat, and a thick iron bar that he can wield with two hands. Assuming this bar does 1d10 base damage, (and ignore the consequence of a weaker material striking adamantine, though no such consequence is stipulated in the rules)and he uses full PA with each blow, his damage ranged from 4-13 (1d10+1+2). In other words, he will never bash his way out.
Now, take a fighter with the same ability score (Str 13), only he is level 20. Now, by sacrificing the accuracy of his blows (his muscles cannot exert anymore effort than the 1st level fighter, mind you) and lashing out against his prison, he will deal 42-51 (1d10+1+40) damage per round, devastating his prison in a matter of minutes.
That's right, by aiming less and turning his finely honed precision strikes into wild swings, he has gained the ability to devastate the hardest non-magic metal in D&D (I assume). But, if he and the 1st level fighter had a rock-carrying contest (i.e. maximum load), they would tie.
By making Power Attack based on transforming the penetrating power (i.e. to hit enhancement of Strength) of a blow into an ungainly but more kinetically-charged wild swing (i.e. Strength bonus to hit converted to damage), we see a simple system wherein the extra damage makes sense, and we avoid the logic loopholes of a man's combat precision "magically" transforming into a tremendous destructive force because he wrapped two hands around a metal club.
Trust me, I couldn't trap a 15th level party in a antimagic field + adamantine cage for more than 20 rounds, thanks to a heavy flail and a Strength of 16 on a 13th level cohort.
So you can't trap a high level Fighter in a metal box. The problem with them getting half decent things (not even nice things) is what, exactly?
In the tradition of "If it's not broke, don't fix it"...what was so wrong with Power Attack that it needed a change?
I vote for leaving it as is (3.5 version).
It needs to be altered so that sword 'n' board fighters don't get screwed.
Aside from this, yes, it should be reverted.
I think Power attack is fine. Sword and board fighters need to be changed so they don't get screwed.
Get me?|
|
PA was broken. It was the only way you can do 1300 damage per round or even just 300 per round on other character builds.
I don't like the PF PA, I like a very simple PA -5 to hit and +5 damage and with a two-handed weapon it is +7 damage. In this way, it is automatic (usually) and you don't have to calculate odds and all the garbage math that PA, used to cause.
For reference:
BloodStorm Thrower (or BS Thrower for short)
The BS Thrower is a cute little guy that can throw up to 16 daggers a round that are all touch attacks and fully power attacked.
Halfling
Warblade 1/Swordsage 4/Bloodstorm Blade 10/Master Thrower 5STR13/DEX22/CON14/INT8/WIS14/CHA8 (Starting Stats w/ Halfling mod and +5 stat boost to dex)
STR19/DEX28/CON20/INT14/WIS20/CHA14 (w/ belt)
STR19/DEX32/CON20/INT14/WIS20/CHA14 (w/ book)FORT +21 (2+1+7+1+5+5)
REF +29 (0+4+3+4+5+11+2)
WILL +18 (0+4+3+1+5+5)
HP 12 + 4d8 + 10d12 + 5d8 + 100 = ~227
AC 42 (10+11dex+5wis+8 bracers+4 ring+4amulet)
BAB +19
Initiative +12
Skill Points 77 at least 8 in balanceFeats
1 Point Blank Shot (+1 to hit and damage within 30’)
3 Rapid Shot (-2 to hit but +1 attack)
6 Power Attack (-1 to hit for +1 damage)
9 Two-Weapon Fighting (Gain an additional off hand attack at -2 to all)
12 Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Gain an additional off hand attack at -5)
15 Iron Heart Aura (+2 to your allies near you)
18 Shadow Blade (Use Dex for shadow hand weapons including damage)
BSB3 Precise Shot (ignore -4 to fire into melee)
BSB6 Weapon Specialization (+2 damage)
BSB9 Stormguard Warrior (don’t take AoO gain +4 hit and damage, swap 1 or more attacks to do a touch attack each that hits allows +5 damage next turn, and some other lame ability)Class Features
Battle Clarity (INT to Reflexes)
Weapon Aptitude (Use fighter only feats and alter weapon based feats to different weapons)
Quick to Act (+1 Initiative)
Discipline Focus: Shadow Hand (Weapon focus: Dagger, Short Sword, Sai, Siangham, Unarmed Strike, Spiked Chain, Wisdom bonus to...
This is why 4.0 was created. Do you actually play this character or is just some math game you play?
4.0 just makes everyone the same. By the way, why hasn't anyone pointed out daggers are light weapons and therefore invalid targets for Power Attacking? The build is illegal.
Actually, this seems to be a very low level use of PA. At higher levels, and especially the math optimizers, use of PA can regularly exceed 10 or higher points. Some builds are made with such excessive TH rolls that full attacking for BAB to the hilt is the standard way to play, as hitting is still almost guaranteed. With good party buffing, that's not that difficult to attain. Indeed, the Frenzied Berserker class is built around attaining such massive Str mods that Supreme Power Attack is the way to go.
I wouldn't call ~10th level character a very low level one. Also, if you improve the to hit/damage ratio of power attack with Frenzied Berserker, leap attack or some other ability, more PA can be used for optimal damage output, that much is obvious. If abilities like these make power attack abusable, it's not power attack's fault in my mind. It's these PA improving abilities' fault. The way PA is written now benefits finesse warriors more than strong warriors in low to mid levels unless they can boost their to hit rolls.
This is where Power Attack is abused. Paizo simply removed the abuse potential from the feat and sped up game play in one fell swoop. While the 1:1 micromanagement of the feat was fun, it isn't neccessary, and there's no reason you can't include it...
Actually, I'm going to use PFRPG mostly in Pathfinder Society play, where I can't house rule PA the way I like, and where I can't optimize my character to make PA make sense. That's why I'd like to see PA being useful to the characters it's supposed to.
|
Magagumo,
From a simulation point of view, this is accurate. But consider the rules. By 20th level, a wizard can warp the very laws of the universe. And you are saying it's unfair that a guy that walks around with these walking demi-gods on a notionally equal level might be able to beat his way out of a metal box with a giant metal bar?
This I think touches on one of the reasons fighters are so weak in the normal rules - we can conceive, in real terms, what a fighter can do - and therefore we place limits on him that we don't place on clerics and wizards. If we're not going to nerf spellcasters to the point where they're not infinitely more powerful than fighters at high level, then some pretty fundamental changes are required to get a fighter up to a point where he can at least, by squinting, still see the hind end of spellcaster power level as he nears level 20.
I think Tome of Battle did an excellent job of this - though the mechanic, being so much like spellcasting, rubbed many the wrong way, and the flavor from ability names turned those who are not fans of wuxia and/or anime off. Abilities that I felt were very key to martial character viability at high levels included:
- Thicket of Blades: a crusader stance that allowed a fighter to gain attacks of opportunity even on 5' steps.
- Shield Counter: when crusader wielding a shield was attacked, he could as an immediate action attempt a shield bash. If successful, he negated the attack against him.
- Shield Block: when an adjacent ally is attacked, a crusader wielding a shield could as an immediate action add his shield AC plus a bonus to his ally's AC against a single attack.
- Foehammer (and others, this was relatively common): Ignore DR for a single attack.
- Entangling Blade: A successful attack reduces the target's movement speed by some amount for one round.
- Leaping Flame: If you are successfully with either a melee or ranged attack, you teleport up to 100' to stand next to the enemy that attacked you as an immediate reaction (this is magical, but I could see something similar on a lesser scale that removes all supernatural components)
- Searing Charge: if you charge an enemy, you gain a fly speed for one round equal to your base speed to get to the opponent. I see that as a leaping charge sort of thing. :)
- Diamond Defense: as an immediate reaction to making a saving throw, you give yourself a save bonus (about half your level).
- Action Before Thought (Reflex), Mind over Body (Fortitude), Moment of Perfect Mind (Will) - you can replace your save, as an immediate action, with a skill check (concentration, in this case) - and a 1 does not count as an automatic failure.
- Disrupting Blow - a successful attack forces a save, if the save fails the enemy can't take actions for a round.
- Iron Heart Surge - you can use a standard action to throw off some lingering effect on yourself
- Wall of Blades - As an immediate reaction to an attack against you, you make an attack. You can use the higher of your attack roll or your AC to defend against that one attack.
There are also abilities that allow fire damage, super damage, healing, extra attacks and fun with dice rerolls,etc., but this gives people a taste, anyway. Shield feats that allowed you give your shield bonus to an adjacent ally once / round, or block one attack / round on a successful shield bash would help sword and board fighters greatly! The ability to ignore DR on attack for a round or two of combat is a great help to archers and TWFs. Removing movement, maneuverability, and/or actions from opponents on successful hits a certain number of times / day, or under certain circumstances, gives fighters a lot more viability at high level (actions being the one currency that remains valuable throughout all levels - or why would Time Stop and Celerity be so poweful?). Supernatural or near supernatural movement in short bursts allows a fighter to have a chance against different movement modes or difficult terrain. Save bonuses / encounter or / day, or occasional rerolls, or skill checks to "bull through the pain" or whatever give them a little more durability against high level magic. I would rather see options like this introduced as class abilities - maybe as options to choose from like rogue abilities - along with the weapon and armor proficiencies.
Power Attack should be returned to its 3.5 form - and then options added to make sword and board and TWF viable.
|
|
I still wonder if all the people pushing for PA nerfs are aware just how much raw HP damage is required to deal with equal level enemies. Nothing has been done to the MM after all.
A feat should not be required to make the game function properly.
If melee types cannot do enough damage to be effective they need something added to them. PA should not be "the" feat that allows them to be competitive in damage. It can easily be thrown out of wack and made to do way too much damage. Wraithstrike, quickened True strike, several psionic powers, a couple Bo9S powers, shock trooper feat, and others all allow for ways to min-max PA.
From the other end of the argument. How many DMs actually use PA against the PCs? When using really strong things like giants and dragons. They often have more HD (BAB) than their CR would indicate. Do you knowing add an extra +10 to +15 damage from that giants attack every round? I never did. Two reasons, I would wind up with a TPK, and I didn't want the extra calculation when attacking with each monster against each PCs AC. They already did enough damage.
From the DM's chair I would like to see PA be something you turn on or turn off.
I would prefer to see -5 to hit, +2 damage with a light weapon, +5 damage with a one handed weapon and +7 damage with a two handed weapon. Simple and straight forward.