Heya guys!
I have a question about the feat Power Attack. It starts off as taking a -1 penalty to attack rolls to gain a +2 to damage. At higher levels, you can take additional attack penalties to gain higher damage.
My question is: at higher levels, can I choose to use this feat at a lower level? For example, at my current level I could take a -3 attack penalty to gain +6 to damage. Can I voluntarily choose to take only a
-1 attack penalty to gain +2 damage instead?
I'm asking because sometimes you run into high AC critters, where I may not want to take the full -3 attack penalty. I'd like to know if that option is available.
Thanks guys!
No, you can't choose what penalty to apply when using Power Attack. It's a fixed penalty and bonus based on your BAB.
(the 3.5 version of the feat did let you choose, but it also gave a lesser bonus to damage)
No, you can't choose what penalty to apply when using Power Attack. It's a fixed penalty and bonus based on your BAB.
(the 3.5 version of the feat did let you choose, but it also gave a lesser bonus to damage)
Thanks Are, I appreciate the help!
I'm asking because sometimes you run into high AC critters, where I may not want to take the full -3 attack penalty. I'd like to know if that option is available.
If the AC is that high, just don't use it at all. Better a hit with no bonus damage than a miss with a lot of it.
That's part of why it changed from 3.x - when you could pick a variable amount, you had to decide "Do I take a -4 or a -5 against this creature?" with no good way to make that decision. Now it's just on or off, so a much more clear-cut decision.
|
That's part of why it changed from 3.x - when you could pick a variable amount, you had to decide "Do I take a -4 or a -5 against this creature?" with no good way to make that decision.There was good information to make this decision, it was just difficult for many people to process and could result in metagaming. And, even after making the decision, the math at the table was daunting to some. If a combat goes on for a while, the AC range tends to be well established to the players. While the characters don't know about armor class, they should reasonably know that an opponent is of a certain difficulty to hit in an analogous way. Having that info, the character can decide how hard to swing, and the player makes the mechanics decision based on that. If that complexity is the same thing for you as "no good way," then I get your point. :)
That's part of why it changed from 3.x - when you could pick a variable amount, you had to decide "Do I take a -4 or a -5 against this creature?" with no good way to make that decision.There was good information to make this decision, it was just difficult for many people to process and could result in metagaming. And, even after making the decision, the math at the table was daunting to some. If a combat goes on for a while, the AC range tends to be well established to the players. While the characters don't know about armor class, they should reasonably know that an opponent is of a certain difficulty to hit in an analogous way. Having that info, the character can decide how hard to swing, and the player makes the mechanics decision based on that. If that complexity is the same thing for you as "no good way," then I get your point. :)
Even knowing the exact AC isn't necessarily helpful in deciding between (for example) a +13 attack bonus or a +14 attack bonus. How much does that 5% more chance to hit matter? It's certainly calculatable, but I don't know anyone who can do it in their head, on the fly, while working on tactics. So in most cases, it devolved to either "I power attack for full" or "I power attack for some small number (1-3)" Which is pretty close to the current On/Off model.
The only thing I miss about the old Power Attack is that my Dragons can no longer power attack for 15-20 :)
|
|
Even knowing the exact AC isn't necessarily helpful in deciding between (for example) a +13 attack bonus or a +14 attack bonus. How much does that 5% more chance to hit matter? It's certainly calculatable, but I don't know anyone who can do it in their head, on the fly, while working on tactics. So in most cases, it devolved to either "I power attack for full" or "I power attack for some small number (1-3)" Which is pretty close to the current On/Off model.
I made a spreadsheet that told me my expected output for my power attackers. I printed out a sheet that was a reference page. It told me everything I needed to make the decision based on my assumptions about AC and remaining HP. While there is a theoretical right answer, usually the difference between two numbers was insignificant. There was almost never a theoretical best answer that was higher than about +4 unless dealing something with a very high or very low AC. Animals and things you could only hit on a 20 come to mind.