EDIT: Yes its to all of your attacks or combat maneuvers that round...includes AoO and anytime you attack til your next turn
Power Attacking using a 2H weapon is a direct trade of -1 to hit for +3 for damage, goes up to -2 hit for +6 dmg at +4 BAB, ect.
if a Two-Handed fighter is say lvl 6 his BAB for attacks is +6/+1
lets say these are his stats (jst go with them, I don't care about any if, and or buts)
STR 20
DEX 16
CON 16
INT 12
WIS 10
CHA 8
ok now he wields a Greatsword his attacks would be (with Power attack) as follows
Greatsword +9 (2d6+13)/+4 (2d6+13)
Now I'm adding NO FEATS or CLASS FEATURES to this just straight BAB and STR bonus so don't try to wine about my numbers lol
Now add in the class features from your archetype and there ya go (you weren't very specific on what level you were asking your initial question about)
Yes the numbers are good. This is why PA is more or less a must for a str based melee build. - Now don't start with that too much. Fighters can have nice things too.
And your not completely wrong if you have +6/+1 bab - with PA thats +4/-1 so perhaps that second attack doesn't hit - and you just got your 1 big swing effect...
And have a look at Vital strike:
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together before adding bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), precision-based damage, and other damage bonuses. These extra weapon damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit, but are added to the total.
and the fact that the archetype you mentioned eventually get a +100% bonus on his Power Attacks instead of the +50% thanks to Greater Power Attack and gets a full double strength bonus on his iterative attacks thanks to Backswing
Yes. Power attack is very good, characters who are all about power attack do more damage than anyone else, and this is all completely intentional.
What wizards get is amazing amounts of versatility, not crazy damage dealing.
and the fact that the archetype you mentioned eventually get a +100% bonus on his Power Attacks instead of the +50% thanks to Greater Power Attack and gets a full double strength bonus on his iterative attacks thanks to BackswingActually thats a common misconception. It's either one with full double strength, or all following ones with full double strength. If you look, Overhand chop only gives it to you if you make a single attack and backswing only gets it for you for all attacks following on a full attack. aka you never get the full 2.0 on every attack.
He said iterative.
EDIT: It appears there is no official definition of iterative; I had always seen it used to discuss the attacks at lower base attack bonus. I should not have supposed you used the terminology identically.
Thank you Pavsdotexe :)
and for you Thomas Long I wasn't talking about Overhand Chop I was talking about these two
Backswing (Ex)
At 7th level, when a two-handed fighter makes a full-attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls for all attacks after the first.
This ability replaces Armor Training 2.
AND
Greater Power Attack (Ex)
At 15th level, when using Power Attack with a two-handed melee weapon, the bonus damage from Power Attack is doubled (+100%) instead of increased by half (+50%).
This ability replaces Armor Training 4.
I have no COMMON misconceptions sir...only uncommon and rare :P
Iterative attacks ARE THE ATTACKS AFTER THE FIRST my friend...just to clarify that for you to avoid further confusion
again I made no mention of overhand chop in my initial post sir :)
EDIT: Please take no offense for the caps...they are simply that way out of my angst while typing and not "yelling" at you as some people use caps for :). If I mean to offend you will know it for certain lol
While the definition of the word itself technical doesn't mean "after the first" here is the definition I could find and for me if you "repeat" something there has to be a "first" to repeat :)
it·er·a·tive (t-rtv, -r--tv)
adj.
1. Characterized by or involving repetition, recurrence, reiteration, or repetitiousness.
EDIT: If read that way then its your "repeat" attacks so "after the first attack" seems like it works as a good definition for Pathfinder :)
P.S. sorry for all my edits...I consistently hit "submit post" before I actually have my full thoughts on the page lol
By the combat rules as written Backswing and Overhand Chop should work in concert, at least as I understand it (I know the designer of the archetype said otherwise, but he did not mention the official combat rules).
I quote from srd:
"Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action."
(only have the german hardcover, p. 187)
I read it that you can ALWAYS decide after your first attack if you go on to full attack or take a move action afterwards. But maybe it is only possiple to decide between Attack and Full Attack if you ANNOUNCED a Full Attack in the beginning (?). But that would imply full attack actions generally had to be announced (never read that anywhere).
On the other hand, Overhand Chop specifically mentions needing "a single attack"...
If I did not have to decide between full attack and attack before I act the following situation would be possible: fighter stands adjacent to evil sorcerer and fells him with his first attack, but he is not exactly sure if this bastard is dead. On the other side of the battlefield his buddies need him urgently. Player to DM: "It was only a single attack and so I apply my bonus from overhand chop to the damage and take the move action to get adjacent to the other enemies near my comrades" (to be able to take a full attack against one of them next round).
But one could argue the character does not know in the beginnig of the round if he will use a single or a full attack and thus would apply the bonus to his first attack and then decide if he would go on to attack(and then apply his backswing damage) or take a move.
I hope I made myself comprehendable, it's already late in Germany.
shameless bump
Turgan, this has been debated before and hopefully, I do not start another debate about this but here goes:
If you are going to leave yourself the option to make a full attack you cannot do anything that would negate your ability to make a full attack.
Ie: you must behave during that first attack as if you are making a full attack using whatever full attack restrictions you may have. If you then decide to leave it as one attack then you do not get to retroactively change things and remove those restrictions or add single attack bonuses that you did not initially use.
Conversely, if you use an ability that MUST have a full attack then you cannot then choose to declare that first attack was only a standard action. (Example: Manyshot)
Overhand Chop and Backswing are incompatible. The first requires a single attack only and the second requires a full-attack action.
If you use Overhand Chop you are committing to not using a Full-attack.
If you plan on using Backswing you cannot do anything (such as Overhand Chop) that would prevent you from using a full-attack action and thus Backswing.
- Gauss
Thanks very much for your answers, Gauss and Kyrt-ryder.
Yes. Power attack is very good, characters who are all about power attack do more damage than anyone else, and this is all completely intentional.
What wizards get is amazing amounts of versatility, not crazy damage dealing.
Idk a wizard with meanwhile rods tossing a quickened disintegrate followed by an empowered,maximized disintegrate at 19 or 20th seems pretty hardcore to me.