This came up in a discussion elsewhere on the forums - but since then got expanded and rebalanced. Please have a look and leave a comment, either here or on the blog. Thanks!
I would not use the "When you declare that you are making an attack or a full-attack action with a melee weapon" language. I would mirror the language of Power Attack instead so that you can apply it to melee attack rolls regardless of their source (example: Cleave) rather than just attack and full attack actions.
I initially started out looking up the wording on Power Attack, but due to the bonus-rather-than-penalty nature, the phrase sounded odd. Instead I opted to follow the words used in Combat Expertise (which also works on Cleave and other attack actions).
"You can only choose to use this feat when you declare that you are making an attack or a full-attack action with a melee weapon."
First, I agree with AvalonXQ. The language of combat expertise has caused a lot more arguements than the power attack language.
Second, I think that Combat Recklessness should be usuable with ranged weapons. Think of it as being more focused on the shot, and less focused on protecting yourself. If you miss you would provoke 2 AoOs.
Third, Reckless Power should be some kind of -AC for +damage IMO.
First, I agree with AvalonXQ. The language of combat expertise has caused a lot more arguements than the power attack language.
Second, I think that Combat Recklessness should be usuable with ranged weapons. Think of it as being more focused on the shot, and less focused on protecting yourself. If you miss you would provoke 2 AoOs.
Third, Reckless Power should be some kind of -AC for +damage IMO.
Thanks for the response, in order:
* I'll try out some different wordings
* I disagree on ranged weapon use. The double-AoOs is a no-starter, as the typical character won't be using ranged attacks with reckless combat if he'll provoke twice. And when he's not threatened, he just gets + to attack without much of a measurable penalty.
* Reckless Power grants the user the ability to take no penalty on attack, but still retain the bonus to damage from Power Attack. That is pretty good and translates to much higher damage per round. (I think the 3.5 feat "Shock Trooper" that allowed the same was broken.)
Thanks for the response, in order:
* I'll try out some different wordings
* I disagree on ranged weapon use. The double-AoOs is a no-starter, as the typical character won't be using ranged attacks with reckless combat if he'll provoke twice. And when he's not threatened, he just gets + to attack without much of a measurable penalty.
Until he gets charged or surprised. I am assuming that the penalty lasts until the next round. Archer shoots with a -4 AC thinking he is safe, then the invisible rogue steps out of the shadows and full attacks him....
* Reckless Power grants the user the ability to take no penalty on attack, but still retain the bonus to damage from Power Attack. That is pretty good and translates to much higher damage per round. (I think the 3.5 feat "Shock Trooper" that allowed the same was broken.)
Ok, I missed the change that allows it to work with power attack at no penalty.
Until he gets charged or surprised. I am assuming that the penalty lasts until the next round. Archer shoots with a -4 AC thinking he is safe, then the invisible rogue steps out of the shadows and full attacks him....
hmmm... I still think it plays far too much into the strengths of a ranged fighter to grant them the feat. A melee fighter really risks something when he fights a foe and lowers his AC - as the vast majority of enemies will be able to take advantage of it immediately.
A ranged fighter would still have trouble with surprises, charges and ranged attacks - but on the whole is less likely to draw the aggro. It takes more effort for the enemy to engage the archer, and thus it happens less. Add to this that the archer is likely to only use the ability when he's 80% sure that he won't have to suffer repercussions (and he'd be right most of the time) then the feat is just combat-gold for the archer.
Also, consider: recklessness in melee makes sense - just swinging wildly while leaving yourself open can reasonably be expected to hit a foe. But shooting arrows recklessly? The only way I can reasonably interpret that is ignoring accuracy in favor of shooting more arrows - and that is already covered very effectively with Rapid Shot.