|
If you are going to make a statement such as this, then show your work. If you believe it works differently then how everyone was taught then include references showing why you think it works that way and examples of what it means in play.
Also if you are not going to read how power attack works then you may wish to avoid these discussions. As written under power attack ANY primary natural attack that does 1.5*str bonus benefits from the 50% bonus on power attack. Period.
Finally, every other feat/ability in the game that lets you apply your str bonus twice to damage specifically states that it is applied twice, this one doesn't. If you wish to read it that way for your games that's fine but that's not how the rules as written have ever handled it.
6/3*3
Both in one pass
6/3=22*3=6
or
6*3=1818/3=6
To think for this I'm graduating as a mechanical engineer with specialization in robotics
So, your interpretation is that it's a wash and the net results are that your bonus damage doesn't change and you just apply your flat str bonus to damage?
OK, an argument could be made for that, I disagree but you have given enough information for the math focused her to begin dissecting it.@Gauss, the simple fact that the Bestiary is for strictly for GM use and that comment is directed at said GM (taken from that book as an introduction for this group of feats) AND each and every one of these feats refers to the CREATURE not player or adventurer.
If your GM decides to allow these feats for your use then fine for you, the intent whoever is as GM tools.
If the material in here were appropriate for player use then every creature, ability and power in this book would also be open for you as well.
The question for you is why would they intend for this one chunk of 2 pages out of 321 be available and not the rest of it?
Be careful when allowing bestiary feats.
Quicken spell-like ability. Have a look at that.
as for the original post, the answer is simple. He roled that character so let him shine where he shines but also make sure he is weak where he is weak. IE in combat he shines and there is no way the other characters can use words or describe an action to make their dice hit better---what they roll is what they roll--so he shines.
now once they are out of combat and stealth is required, or diplomacy or some other skill---do not let the fighter try to talk his way INTO having a skill he does not. If he does not have a skill--he will most likely fail and has to suffer the consequences. example a barfight ensues---the PCs get in trouble--the cleric picks diplomacy and talks his way out, the rogue stealths out, the ranger stealths out. The fighter does not have a high enough skill to get out with anything--tough. You get the strengths with the weakness. After paying fines or missing out on some roleplaying, he would learn to value the skills, much as his combat is valued by the others. Too many people let 7 cha, or 7 int or 7 wis characters ROLEPLAY their way to skills they should not have using the players abilities instead of the characters. The 7int, 7 wis fighter is NOT going to come up with the great plans---make him roll for his character to actually come up with a decent plan--just like your other characters have to roll to hit or damage.
I have not been playing long and have already seen several low level melee toons with 2 or even 3 dump stats. focusing everything on str, con, dex. Just begging for someone to charm them. Makes it easy at low levels to Overpower everything, but will be problems in the higher games.
and invariably it is the fighter or rogue with the low int and wis who comes up with the ambush plans or solves riddles. But their "character" just would not have the brains for that without a roll. Just because the player has an average or above intelligence does not mean they can play their "character with the low wis and int" as coming up with the ideas they as players can think up.
aye, I agree.
Toons?
It's slang the next generation uses for "Characters". It is a shorted form of cartoon, which is from some of the more cartoon like MMORPGs.
It's not a trend I really comprehend as truly meaningful or applicable, which I suspect is a sign that I'm getting old. I miss "avatar" for my computer game characters.
as for the original post, the answer is simple. He roled that character so let him shine where he shines but also make sure he is weak where he is weak.
I think the original post has a slightly different problem, in that the other PCs have "inefficient" builds that target some RP method of combat they like, but require ideal conditions to really pull off. The fighter has a strong general build that is simply more efficient (or direct) in combat.
I suspect the real problem is that the fighter ends the combat before the others feel they have a chance to make a significant contribution. The problem isn't the fighter is "overpowered", but that
1) during significant parts of the game session, the other players aren't as powerful as they thought they would be, and
2) it is hard to design an combat encounter that is appropriately challenging for this group.
Edit: I would add that not all players enjoy playing a min-maxed character. These players would rather do things that sound exciting in combat, as this takes priority over being good mechanically. The problem is then how to mix efficiently built characters with the inefficiently built characters in one party, and still let everyone have fun in combat.
Why is it slipping over? I have been an avid Pokemon player for over 10 years, but I never talked about my character's moveset.
I'm afraid you've lost me, but a discussion for the evolution of game terminology should be a new thread.