I posted this at the end of a long thread in the playtesting section, but then I felt that it deserved its own thread here.
Power attack defies logic, in either version (PFRPG or 3.5).
On the one hand, we have a rule that says you add your STR modifier to your attack and damage rolls. This means that the stronger you are, the more powerful your attack is, the easier it is to hit and damage your target.
On the other hand, PA says that your attack is so powerful that it makes it harder to hit but easier to damage your opponent, if you hit.
Why are these two rules in opposition.
If high strength, which can be re-worded to "lots of muscle power", uses a mechanic that increases your chance to hit and your damage, then why does PA, which can be re-worded to "using lots of muscle power" reverse the strength mechanic regarding your chance to hit?
This seems counterintuitive to me.
I am much in favor of PA reducing your own AC instead of your chance to hit.
That would fit very logically.
A strong fighter stands with his feet planted (well, he plants them momentarily when he lands his blow) and delivers powerful blows without over extending himself, thus his high strength contributes to his attack roll (blasting through his foe's defenses) and his damage (cutting deeply).
But when he uses PA, he is swinging for the bleachers, over extending himself, swinging so hard that he sacrifices his own balance and recovery time. The result is he still blasts through his foe's defenses about the same as always, but he cuts even deeper than he usually would, but in return he is off-balance and therefore it's much easier for his enemies to hit him.
But, as has been stated elsewhere, AC is a more important feature than Attack Mod, since melee characters generally receive more attacks against them in most fights, and over their careers, than the number of attacks they actually make.
This means a one-for-one ratio might underpower the feat if we base the penalty on AC rather than Attack Modifier. Therefore I propose a 3-for-4 compromise.
I also propose capping the amount, probably based on BAB, so low-level fighters can only gain a few points of damage and high level fighters can gain lots of damage.
Ergo, I would support changing PA as follows:
Power Attack
You swing so hard that you deliver devastating attacks to your enemies, but at the cost of your own defense.
Prerequisite: Base Attack Bonus 1+
Benefit: You may add any multiplier of 4 to your melee damage rolls for one full or standard melee attack. In return, you must subtract the same multiplier of 3 from your AC until the beginning of your next turn. However, your Base Attack Bonus must be equal to or higher than the amount you subtract from your AC, unless your BAB is less than 3, in which case you may still add +4 to your damage at the cost of -3 to your AC.
Special: If you are using a two-handed weapon, or a one-handed weapon with both hands, then the multiplier to your melee damage rolls is increased to +5 instead of +4. Also, you cannot reduce your AC below 1 by using this feat.
That wording might be a little awkward, but basically it means that anyone who has a BAB of 1 to 5 can get +4 damage to all attacks during their round at the cost of -3 AC until their next round. BAB 6 to 8 can go +4 DMG/-3 AC or +8 DMG/-6 AC. BAB 9 to 11 can go +4 DMG/-3 AC or +8 DMG/-6 AC or +12 DMG/ -9 AC. And BAB 18-20 can go as high as +24 DMG/ -18 AC if they want to be so suicidal. And if he's using a two handed sword, he would be able to do +30 damage at the cost of -18 AC.
This rewrite puts the feat back up into the realm of damage that could be inflicted in 3.5, but keeps the benefit of the Pathfinder version that it's much better at very low levels, while limiting the user's choices at the game table, and it solves the counterintuitive logic flaw I described above.
The only downside is that I see overzealous players, especially lightly-armored barbarians, getting chopped to pieces because they destroy their own AC to use PA on one enemy and the rest of the enemies then proceed to carve out their liver.
That's a very interesting idea there, though Staffan is right - there is a hefty issue of balance.
Power attack (currently) limits itself because you are trading offense for offense. By instead trading offense for defense, things get a bit lopsided.
For instance, it becomes a good bit more worthwhile in some situations to charge up to a single opponent, power attacking for all you can, since if you drop him with that one swing (which becomes incredibly likely to hit), you won't suffer any attacks at all. Worse is higher levels when you can move up and use Devastating Blow, or another solid standard action attack.
I do like (though it's also an issue) how combined with Combat Expertise you could essentially be moving attack *or* AC to damage. I've always felt those feats (opposite as they are) should synergize *somehow*.
Oh I like the compromise on single vs. two-handed weapons though. I'll have to consider that for a while. [What do you say folks? one-handed gets 1+str mod to damage, two-handed gets double, or double less 1 (minimum 1 more than single)?]
I've always looked a power attack as being that kind of attack that your opponent can see coming and knows full well it will hurt if it hits therefore they try to avoid being hit. This to me makes sense.
|
The problem is from a balance point of view. If you're in a situation where the opponent can't fight back, but is still capable of defending himself (e.g. the Dazed condition), you might as well PA for all you're worth because he's not hitting back anyway. You could also be in the situation where the opponent is low on hp, so a strong blow might kill him before he can strike back at your lowered AC. With attack/damage tradeoff, the different values play off against one another.
But isn't that the danger of being dazed or weakened in front of a strong power-attacking fighter?
However, in regards to the original post, I always saw the power attack option as one where you were having a wild slash (thus not as accurate as usual) in the hope of dealing more damage if you struck. As such I'm not seeing the anomaly that the OP is. However, I think it makes sense that you should lose AC as well as accuracy in exchange for damage. Sometimes it will cost you when the foe can strike back, but not as much when they are in a position as quoted. In exchange, maybe the damage (lower of strength bonus/bab) could be doubled normally, or tripled with a two-handed weapon? This would seem to set a good risk-reward while providing room for good tactical decisions on both sides of the fence. Either the Power Attacker is best to PA in certain situations, or alternatively a power attacking foe makes a good target.Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
I've always looked a power attack as being that kind of attack that your opponent can see coming and knows full well it will hurt if it hits therefore they try to avoid being hit. This to me makes sense.
I love this explination. The windup is telegraphed. I think if this description were used in the feat half of the complaints with the feat (either 3.5 or PF versions) go away.
As for the OP, its an interesting idea, and there's a feat that exchanges AC for damage in one of the Complete books IIRC. I remember it as being one of the feats I was going to take as a Frenzied Berserker (my AC was already 12, no one was going to miss me as it was, so it was a free 24 extra damage). There are definite balance problems with this exchange. Good real world idea, maybe not viable in game terms.
I remember it as being one of the feats I was going to take as a Frenzied Berserker (my AC was already 12, no one was going to miss me as it was, so it was a free 24 extra damage).
A Frenzied Berserker with AC of 12? You were lucky... one of my friends had a Frenzied Berserker with an AC of 1...
Rage(-2) + Frenzy(-4) + Reckless Rage (-2 additional AC for extra STR and CON), DEX 8(-1), Leather Armor (AC 12), charge (-2)...
When monsters with Power Attack started to appear (namely Giants), he decided to change armor (no point to deal 100+ hp with a single hit if a monster can deal the same to you with low-BaB iterative attacks that hit EVERY TIME)
Actually power attack makes perfect sense.. You wind up. You take a step back, raise your weapon high above your head, and take those few extra moments to add more force to your swing through slightly better positioning so you can use every muscle in your body not just your arms. This lets your oponent see what your doing and go 'Golly gosh.. Hes'a gonna whack me with his hurty-ma-bob from an overhand position.. I'll move thisa way.' We call this telegraphing and it is quite common in guess what.. Harder hitting but slower delivered blows.