|
I've never understood the appeal of this feat.
Sure, doing lots of damage is sexy, but DR to one side I would have thought the most efficient way of dealing damage was with lots of little blows rather than with a small number of big ones.
In most cases any damage beyond taking an opponent down to -1 hp is wasted. Power attacking barbarians with greataxes are frightening but most of the time smashing someone down to -50 is just wasted effort. If by the laws of probability you were destined to do 100 points of damage over 4 rounds, you'd be better off doing it with 4 x 25 pt blows than with 2 x 50 pt ones.
Richard
there's a formula which calculates average Damage per round against an AC value. so if you're lv 5 you can take the average AC for a lv8 boss monster. Then do the calculations like BAB, STR, and other bonuses to hit and damage. Then you can see what the DPR is with and without power attack. With power attack will be higher if you're making a DPR build.
Summary, usually the people who hit things are accurate, so damage is better.
At low levels it can be overkill. At mid levels, the monsters no longer go down in one hit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Power Attack is well worth it. When you go from 100 point to 75 points you are less likely to change your strategy and go into panic mode than when you go from 100 down to 30 or less.
Another way to look at it, other than hit points is how many rounds until you can end an opponent. The longer they stay alive the longer they can kill or hurt you. Killing things with big hits works very well in Pathfinder. You can kill things with two weapon fighting, but it is not nearly as efficient, and even then you need to either push strength or get dex to damage along with other bonuses.
Another thing about big hits is that they are not impacted as much by DR that you cant bypass.
As an example if you do 70 points of damage over 5 hits, and the opponent has DR 10 then you only really did 20 points of damage.
If you do 70 points of damage over 3 hits then you have done 40 points of damage, which is double.
Unless you are fighting someone with really high AC compared to your attack bonus then you should be power attacking assuming you have the right weapon for it, but most full BAB martials can get attack bonuses so high that eventually their 2nd and 3rd attacks can reliably hit.
I dont subscribe to the PA always on philisophy. But two handing a weapon it is always a good idea to have the option. Too often you will have to move and only get one attack as a result. And if you have a good way to get AOOs they also benefit from PA.
If you have other ways to boost damage PA losses some appel but it is still a very solid feat.
If by the laws of probability you were destined to do 100 points of damage over 4 rounds, you'd be better off doing it with 4 x 25 pt blows than with 2 x 50 pt ones.
Richard
That's not necessarily true - 2x50 will frequently be better purely because of DR. You stop seeing significant overkill happening past low levels on anything other than crits anyway, so lots of little blows tend to screw you.
There is also the fact that when you do the maths it isn't 4x25 vs 2x50.
It's 7x15x1.1=115.5 vs 6x21x1.1=138.6
Note that those numbers are for a level 4 fighter with 18 str, power attack, weapon focus and weapon specialization swinging at 17 AC (expected CR 4 AC) with a MW greatsword 10 times.
HP at CR4 is about 40, so overkill isn't a real issue either. In fact, without power attack three hits will most likely be needed, as opposed to probably 2 with power attack.
Let's use an easy example for why PA is the preferred method over TWF as the OP suggests.
5th level warrior (yes, NPC class for simplicity) with 18 STR. 2 handing a weapon with PA:
+7 to hit d10+12 damage.
5th level warrior TWF 16 STR, 18 DEX, weapon finesse.
+7 to hit d6+3, +7 to hit d6+1.
Same to hit, 17.5 avg dmg vs 11 avg dmg.
Also notice that the TWF needed an extra feat and stat buy to do less damage.
If you have the PA feat, then it should pretty much always be on. The only corner case is if you know that the enemy would die in one hit from your non-power-attack attack.
That said, pretty much all damage increasing feats increase your average damage and should thus always be on. Even two-weapon-fighting, which is a bit weak, should almost always be used if you already have the feat.
And that's the real question, "Should I get this feat over some other feat?" PA is a strong feat to get. Especially if you are using a weapon two-handed. And if you have it, you should use it.
Let's use an easy example for why PA is the preferred method over TWF as the OP suggests.
5th level warrior (yes, NPC class for simplicity) with 18 STR. 2 handing a weapon with PA:
+7 to hit d10+12 damage.
5th level warrior TWF 16 STR, 18 DEX, weapon finesse.
+7 to hit d6+3, +7 to hit d6+1.
Same to hit, 16.5 avg dmg vs 11 avg dmg.
Also notice that the TWF needed an extra feat and stat buy to do less damage.
Don't forget that DR5 shuts the TWF down hard (1.7 damage per hit), while the THF only loses about 30% of it's output (12.5 damage per hit). The THF can even get some damage through DR10 (7.5 damage per hit) while TWF does no damage without a crit.
The entire TWF system should just be replaced with one feat that's worded something like:
"Whenever you attack with your main hand, you may also make an attack with your offhand. This offhand attack takes a -3 to its attack roll. The offhand attack does half of the damage it would have done as a main hand attack. You may apply this damage as a single source from both weapons or as two separate sources of damage. If your off-hand weapon is light, you reduce the -3 penalty to hit to -1."
With that change, two weapon fighting would be much more relevant, but would still not be as strong as just using a two-handed weapon.
Another major downside for TWF is the expenses for keeping two weapons up to par - special materials and enhancement costs are all doubled.
Your opportunity attacks will also be a lot weaker, unless you're using a double weapon.
Actually, TWF builds can output a truly insane amount of damage out of sheer action efficiency, but they require some extremely exact builds and knowledge of splatbooks (at least in old 3.5e). You need to account for most of the typical pitfalls (DR, MADness, lower weapon dices, etc.), all of which require a crapload of feats and classes/PrCs that actively synergise with a TWF build.
It's not a task for the faint of heart.
Actually, TWF builds can output a truly insane amount of damage out of sheer action efficiency, but they require some extremely exact builds and knowledge of splatbooks (at least in old 3.5e). You need to account for most of the typical pitfalls (DR, MADness, lower weapon dices, etc.), all of which require a crapload of feats and classes/PrCs that actively synergise with a TWF build.
It's not a task for the faint of heart.
If you took the same amount of stats, feats, gold and system mastery and poured it into being really good with a two-hander, the two-hander will still be superior.
Just add haste and suddenly the TWF can't compete.
If you took the same amount of stats, feats, gold and system mastery and poured it into being really good with a two-hander, the two-hander will still be superior.
Just add haste and suddenly the TWF can't compete.
Only if we ignore effects that happen "per attack". Part of a good TWF build is getting as many on-hit effects as you possibly can, in order to take advantage of your superior number of attacks per round.
I don't like it either. Not for any maths based reason, but because I have an aversion to the idea of making my attacks less accurate. My philosophy is that a miss does no damage at all.
Only if we ignore effects that happen "per attack". Part of a good TWF build is getting as many on-hit effects as you possibly can, in order to take advantage of your superior number of attacks per round.If you took the same amount of stats, feats, gold and system mastery and poured it into being really good with a two-hander, the two-hander will still be superior.
Just add haste and suddenly the TWF can't compete.
TWF crit fishing builds that give rider conditions can be nasty.
I don't like it either. Not for any maths based reason, but because I have an aversion to the idea of making my attacks less accurate. My philosophy is that a miss does no damage at all.
That philosophy is generally not supported by the math. The extra damage done when you do hit by far outweighs the extra times you miss.
I don't have my spreadsheet open, but usually, you will do more damage Power Attacking unless the to-hit penalty from Power Attack drops your attack percentage below about 30%. There's some variation with iteratives and such, but it's a good rule to follow.
My philosophy is that a miss does no damage at all.
While true, that's balanced out by how much more damage you do on a hit, and that's not a philosophical question but a technical one. You're looking at the price, but not the value, which is a lousy way to make investment decisions.
|
Much of it depends upon your GM. If they run naked monsters straight from the beastiary - Power Attack is almost always worth it for full BAB classes. If most monsters boost their gear with even a fraction of their treasure - it becomes FAR less so as defenses are boosted a lot by gear.
('Standard' DPR is based off of naked monsters - so in those cases PA is worth it even without a two-handed weapon.)
|
|
5th level warrior (yes, NPC class for simplicity) with 18 STR. 2 handing a weapon with PA:
Warriors are just about the worst class for TWF. You need a class with lots of static bonuses. Fighter/Samurai/Slayer etc. (And at low levels TWF is inferior. It's only at higher levels that it gains a DPR edge.)
For example - if the level 5 character were fighers instead of warriors - both with 18 STR. (The TWF needs 15dex min.) Both at the same accuracy (TWF & PA both give -2 accuracy)
THW (greatsword) = 2d6+16 (6 str +6 PA +2 Spec +1 training +1 magic) mean damage of 23 sans crit
TWF (double-axe) = 1d8+8 (4 Str +2 Spec +1 training +1 magic) & 1d8+7 (4 Str +2 Spec +1 training) mean damage of 24 sans crit
Oh look - the TWF has 1 point more damage! Of note - this does require two more feats (Exotic/TWF/Double Slice vs PA) and a better dex score. But the difference only becomes greater as you level.
(Of note - this does have plenty of disadvantages. No second attack on the charge. Weaker AOOs. DR issues etc.)
But it's certainly not as cut and dry of a choice as your strawman example showed it to be.
Much of it depends upon your GM. If they run naked monsters straight from the beastiary - Power Attack is almost always worth it for full BAB classes. If most monsters boost their gear with even a fraction of their treasure - it becomes FAR less so as defenses are boosted a lot by gear.
('Standard' DPR is based off of naked monsters - so in those cases PA is worth it even without a two-handed weapon.)
I just ran some calculations.
With the fighter I had above, Power attack DPR=Non Power attack DPR when AC=24. This is a level 4 fighter. For power attack to be not worth it the target has to have the AC of a CR11 character. Getting AC that high is absurd. A dragon fieldplate wearing wildshaped (medium size) level 4 druid with Ironskin up and 12 Dex could have an AC of exactly that. That field plate eats almost all the WBL up of a level 4 PC.
Unless you can think of a reasonable way of boosting AC to anywhere the amount required to make Power Attack not worthwhile without showering the PCs in treasure from over-equipped monsters, I don't think that "it varies according to GM" is really true outside pathological examples. The times when a PC is going to be up against something with the AC of a CR=APL+7 creature are going to be close to 0.
|
|
Much of it depends upon your GM. If they run naked monsters straight from the beastiary - Power Attack is almost always worth it for full BAB classes. If most monsters boost their gear with even a fraction of their treasure - it becomes FAR less so as defenses are boosted a lot by gear.
('Standard' DPR is based off of naked monsters - so in those cases PA is worth it even without a two-handed weapon.)
I just ran some calculations.
With the fighter I had above, Power attack DPR=Non Power attack DPR when AC=24.
1. If you give them a +1 greatsword instead of masterwork (probable by 4), the AC cutoff is lower.
2. Level 4 is just about the top tier for PA. At higher levels it becomes far less worth it. Unlike what people say - PA doesn't actually scale well. (The bonus increases numerically while the penalty increases by %.) Especially once you get iteratives PA starts to fall off as PA's accuracy penalty is more detrimental to them. (Often still useful for charges sans pounce.)
3. PA is often a good deal for two-handers. You won't hear me say otherwise. But it's mediocre for one-handers, and at high levels it often isn't worth the loss of AC for a lack of shield.
4. A 24AC isn't that hard to get by level 4. Heck - my level 4 monk's AC is 27. If I'd focused on it, it would have been higher. It's only an absurd AC is you're focused on the 'default' AC table as being the standard.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
strawman
This doesn't mean what you think it means.
TWF crit fishing builds that give rider conditions can be nasty.
I was gonna bring up crits, yes, but you could also argue that unless you go deep-book-delving for shenanigans, most things find a way to become immune to precision damage.
Also, people complain about the cost of enchanting TWF weapons, but given how much mileage you get out of the right ones, they end up paying for themselves in the long run.
Yes it does. You made a flawed argument to represent the other side so that you could destroy it with ease and 'prove' your point.strawmanThis doesn't mean what you think it means.
If that is what you saw, then you need to work on reading.
|
|
If that is what you saw, then you need to work on reading.Yes it does. You made a flawed argument to represent the other side so that you could destroy it with ease and 'prove' your point.strawmanThis doesn't mean what you think it means.
You gave an example to represent the THW & TWF sides with what is probably the WORST class for TWF to 'prove' the inferiority of TWF. How is that not a strawman? (perhaps not intentional - I don't know)
Much of it depends upon your GM. If they run naked monsters straight from the beastiary - Power Attack is almost always worth it for full BAB classes. If most monsters boost their gear with even a fraction of their treasure - it becomes FAR less so as defenses are boosted a lot by gear.
('Standard' DPR is based off of naked monsters - so in those cases PA is worth it even without a two-handed weapon.)
I just ran some calculations.
With the fighter I had above, Power attack DPR=Non Power attack DPR when AC=24.
1. If you give them a +1 greatsword instead of masterwork (probable by 4), the AC cutoff is lower.
2. Level 4 is just about the top tier for PA. At higher levels it becomes far less worth it. Unlike what people say - PA doesn't actually scale well. (The bonus increases numerically while the penalty increases by %.) Especially once you get iteratives PA starts to fall off as PA's accuracy penalty is more detrimental to them. (Often still useful for charges sans pounce.)
3. PA is often a good deal for two-handers. You won't hear me say otherwise. But it's mediocre for one-handers, and at high levels it often isn't worth the loss of AC for a lack of shield.
4. A 24AC isn't that hard to get by level 4. Heck - my level 4 monk's AC is 27. If I'd focused on it, it would have been higher. It's only an absurd AC is you're focused on the 'default' AC table as being the standard.
How are you getting 27AC. Also, how much wealth did you stick in it.
As for PA scaling, I might go find/build a stereotypical level 10 pounce barbarian and see how it goes.
You gave an example to represent the THW & TWF sides with what is probably the WORST class for TWF to 'prove' the inferiority of TWF. How is that not a strawman? (perhaps not intentional - I don't know)If that is what you saw, then you need to work on reading.Yes it does. You made a flawed argument to represent the other side so that you could destroy it with ease and 'prove' your point.strawmanThis doesn't mean what you think it means.
1) It's also the worst class for THF.
2) I gave the TWF an extra feat over the THF.
3) I didn't assume a DR senario.
4) I didn't enchant the weapons and talk about WBL concerns of TWF.
5) I didn't give the THF a 20 STR.
6) I didn't give the TWF A 14 STR.
7) I didn't give the THF a great sword.
8) I didn't give the TWF A d4 weapon.
In general, I used a simplified setup to illustrate the base differences between builds, on the whole I gave more stuff to the TWF than I did the THF. So, not a strawman.
|
|
How are you getting 27AC. Also, how much wealth did you stick in it.
It wasn't hard. 10 +4dex +3wis +1monk +3barkskin +1deflection +4mage armor, +1dodge = 27 AC / 20 Touch / 22 Flatfooted.
As I said - it wouldn't have been hard to get higher with a better dex/wis (but needed 18 Con for Swift Drinker), or a tiefling with Armor of the Pit or some such.
The only wealth is a +1 ring of protection and a wand of mage armor.
A fighter can get up there too without much more difficulty. 10 + 11fullplate +3shield +1dex +1deflection +1nat armor = 27 AC. A bit more wealth spent (+1 armor/shield & the AoNA vs the wand), but no bonus feat involved. (And his weapon is cheaper than an AoMF.) And again - it could be higher if feats were spent or a tower shield is used. (I don't like the Pathfinder towershield though - was nerfed since 3.5) For sword & board, a 24+ AC is basically a gimme by 4. They can hit 23 with no magic or feats at all.
|
|
In general, I used a simplified setup to illustrate the base differences between builds, on the whole I gave more stuff to the TWF than I did the THF. So, not a strawman.
Yes - you could have made the strawman much worse. But warrior is a class with NO static bonuses. TWF requires plenty of static bonuses to compete with THW. *Shrug* Maybe it doesn't quaify as a strawman if it's not intentional. That being the case - I apologise. But it was still a poor example.
Yes - you could have made the strawman much worse. But warrior is a class with NO static bonuses. TWF requires plenty of static bonuses to compete with THW. *Shrug* Maybe it doesn't quaify as a strawman if it's not intentional. That being the case - I apologise. But it was still a poor example.
In general, I used a simplified setup to illustrate the base differences between builds, on the whole I gave more stuff to the TWF than I did the THF. So, not a strawman.
An argument isn't a strawman just because you don't agree with it.
Warrior is the worst class choice for THF as well. That's what you are missing. You keep saying that the TWF needs static bonuses to help them out. That part of my point that you are happy to handwave away. TWF NEED HELP TO COMPETE.
You know what your example didn't do when you switched to fighter? Take the two-handed fighter archetype and add the extra damage from overhand chop. That's the problem with using the complex PC classes (and why I didnt) because you have to deal with the realization of those classes. overhand chop would have pushed the THF over top even in your contrived senario.
Other stuff you didn't mention include:
1) damage delt after moving.
2) extra damage gained from haste
3) benefit of furious focus (less feats required for THF)
I'm sure I could go on.
|
|
You keep saying that the TWF needs static bonuses to help them out. That part of my point that you are happy to handwave away. TWF NEED HELP TO COMPETE.
TWF gets double the benefits from all static bonuses. Saying that getting benefits due to the combat style means that it "NEEDS HELP TO COMPETE" is like saying barbarians are lame vs fighters because they need rage to compete.
And I did actually mention that there are disadvantages to TWF such as less damage when moving / extra resources used etc. (Though Haste doesn't happen very often at level 5.)
And frankly - at level 5 TWF is just barely starting to catch up to THF. At high levels their DPR is far higher, especially against decent AC. However, said extra DPR comes with all of the disadvantages of TWF (less when moving/extra resources/more DR issues etc).
Again - I'm not saying that TWF is inherently better - just that it isn't as cut & dry as you seem to be insisting. (Though I would argue that the most powerful high level combat style is TWF with a pair of heavy shields. [cheesey as all get-out] Slightly less damage than standard TWF and an extra feat & trait - but even more defense than sword & board.)
Eventually (like level 5 or higher) the loss to-hit with PA is always made up by the extra damage.
You can also stack bonus to-hit to such an extent that your chance to-hit the target does not actually decrease (you can go from needing a 2 or higher to needing a 2 or higher). At that point PA is just free damage.
|
|
Eventually (like level 5 or higher) the loss to-hit with PA is always made up by the extra damage.
You can also stack bonus to-hit to such an extent that your chance to-hit the target does not actually decrease (you can go from needing a 2 or higher to needing a 2 or higher). At that point PA is just free damage.
IF you use the standard low AC table. Especially for your main attack. (iteratives will still have accuracy issues, especially at level 11+)
How are you getting 27AC. Also, how much wealth did you stick in it.It wasn't hard. 10 +4dex +3wis +1monk +3barkskin +1deflection +4mage armor, +1dodge = 27 AC / 20 Touch / 22 Flatfooted.
As I said - it wouldn't have been hard to get higher with a better dex/wis (but needed 18 Con for Swift Drinker), or a tiefling with Armor of the Pit or some such.
The only wealth is a +1 ring of protection and a wand of mage armor.
A fighter can get up there too with relative ease. 10 + 11fullplate +3shield +1dex +1deflection +1nat armor = 27 AC. A bit more wealth spent (+1 armor/shield & the AoNA vs the wand), but no bonus feat involved. (And his weapon is cheaper than an AoMF.) And again - it could be higher if feats were spent or a tower shield is used. (I don't like the Pathfinder towershield though - was nerfed since 3.5)
Your Monk is an extremely defensively orientated build. Probably one of the best ways of getting a high AC.
Your fighter is rocking 8k WBL with that load out(2k over WBL), assuming you have no other gear of note. +1 fullplate is also only 10AC unless you have the trait Defender of the Society. He is also absurdly defensively orientated.
These are extremely narrow builds that rely on min/maxed gear loadouts and PC wealth to achieve an extremely high AC. You cannot seriously expect a GM to be regularly throwing Tiefling Fullplate Equipped Shield fighters at the PCs, which is what is required to actually make power attack not worth using(or at least without turning the game into Monte Haul).
Anyway, here is a level 10 barbarian build.
Based off a barbarian from here - I am stripping out the intimidate stuff for more DPR and pounce.
10th level Half Orc Barbarian
Ability Scores:
STR: 24 (+6) (16 base, +2 racial, +2 level, +4 Belt), 28 (+8) when raging
DEX: 14 (+2)
CON: 14 (+2) (13 base, +1 level), 18 (+4) when raging
INT: 10 (0)
WIS: 12 (+1)
CHA: 8 (-1)
Feats:
Weapon Focus (Falchion),Improved Critical(Falchion) ,Improved Initiative , Power Attack, Furious Focus
Rage (25 rounds/day) – Rage Powers: Lesser Beast Totem, Superstition (+3), Beast Totem, Clear Mind, Greater Beast Totem
(Improved Uncanny Dodge, DR 2/-, etc. blah blah)
Gear (62,000gp)
+3 Falchion(18,000)
+4 Chain Mail (16,150)
+4 Belt of Giant Strength (16,000)
Gloves, Deliquescent (8000)
Handy Haversack (2000)
Cloak of Resistance +1 (1000)
Attack routine when raging (attack bonus = 8 str+10 bab+3 weapon +1 weapon focus - 3 PA (second hit only)=22/17 or 22/14 PA, damage= 8x1.5 str+3 weapon bonus + 5 weapon + 6x1.5 PA +3.5 acid = 20 + 3.5 acid + 9 PA)
Attack bonus/Damage
No PA
1st +22 / 2d4+15+1d6 acid dmg
2nd +17 / 2d4+15+1d6 acid dmg
PA
1st +22 / 2d4+26+1d6 acid dmg
2nd +14 / 2d4+26+1d6 acid dmg
Expected damage (AC=x)
Damage when not Power attacking=1/20*(20-x+22+1)*(20*1.3+3.5)+1/20*(20-x+17+1)*(20*1.3+3.5)
Damage when Power attacking=1/20*(20-x+22+1)*(29*1.3+3.5)+1/20*(20-x+14+1)*(29*1.3+3.5)
Using the magic of wolfram alpha
PA=No PA when x=35.2 i.e. if attacking an AC of 36,PA is worse than no PA
This is ignoring DR, which would be common at this level.
It would be especially common considering that this is the AC of a CR20 creature.
TIL that Power Attack scales up apparently. This gap is really not closing.
Also, if you think that 36AC is not unreasonable to have at CR10, please, show me some characters that would reasonably have that sort of AC without being decked out in absurd amounts of wealth. These should be generic NPCs that can be used in a multitude of places, have roughly appropriate NPC WBL and have an offense and defence that is balanced, not super high AC monks, UMDing druids, Tiefling Mithral Fullplate equipped Shield Fighters or other extremely specialized builds that can only be used once in a blue moon against PCs and kind of suck against other optimized builds that properly balance offence and defence.
EDIT:screwed up the damage maths slightly - fixed that (although the difference between the ACs was literally less than 0.1)
EDIT 2:Used -2 instead of -3 for PA - now expected AC for them to be equal is 35.2. Fixed numbers around the place
|
|
Your Monk is an extremely defensively orientated build. Probably one of the best ways of getting a high AC.
Extremely? No. He still has 3 attacks (nearly) every round at +7 for 1d8+4 damage. At 5 he'll get pummeling style and scorching ray practically at will.
Your fighter is rocking 8k WBL with that load out(2k over WBL), assuming you have no other gear of note. +1 fullplate is also only 10AC unless you have the trait Defender of the Society. He is also absurdly defensively orientated.
Okay - WBL is a bit high. Like I said - it takes a bit more effort than the monk. And what fighter DOESN'T take Defender of the Society? He can hit AC 23 with no magic gear/defensive feats at all. And how is that absurdly defensive? Because he actually has a shield?
You keep saying that the TWF needs static bonuses to help them out. That part of my point that you are happy to handwave away. TWF NEED HELP TO COMPETE.TWF gets double the benefits from all static bonuses. Saying that getting benefits due to the combat style means that it "NEEDS HELP TO COMPETE" is like saying barbarians are lame vs fighters because they need rage to compete.
And I did actually mention that there are disadvantages to TWF such as less damage when moving / extra resources used etc. (Though Haste doesn't happen very often at level 5.)
And frankly - at level 5 TWF is just barely starting to catch up to THF. At high levels their DPR is far higher, especially against decent AC. However, said extra DPR comes with all of the disadvantages of TWF (less when moving/extra resources/more DR issues etc).
Again - I'm not saying that TWF is inherently better - just that it isn't as cut & dry as you seem to be insisting. (Though I would argue that the most powerful high level combat style is TWF with a pair of heavy shields. [cheesey as all get-out] Slightly less damage than standard TWF and an extra feat & trait - but even more defense than sword & board.)
TWF doesn't get double the benefits from static bonuses. For one, your number of attacks will stagnate at 3, so it's only "double" for 3/4 BAB classes. Even then, with a single useage of Haste, you once again fall shy of "double."
Furthermore, TWF imposes a rather strict penalty on all of your attacks, meaning that even if we say you have double attacks, your static bonuses to damage are pulling less than double weight.
Speaking of Static bonuses, 2-handing a weapon gets you a static bonus of STR and Power Attack that matches two attacks of the TWF. Including the issue of less than double attacks, and the 2HF gets more out of these static bonuses. Of course, this difference is increased when you take into account the high DEX feat requirements you'll need for your TWF feats, since it's unlikely you'll even have the same amount of STR as an equivalently leveled 2HF.
The one case for a TWF to be outright better than a 2HF comes from a Shield Master Ranger with the 2 Weapon Fighting Combat Style. Rangers can ignore requirements on their Style feats, so they can ignore silly prerequisites on top of getting those feats earlier than otherwise. On top of that, the Shield Master feat elliminates TWF penalties for Shields, allowing you to Dual wield even Heavy Shields with no penalty on the attack roll, meaning that your static damage bonuses pull the exact same weight as a 2HF's.
The Shield Master feat for Dual Shield Weilding even allows you to ignore the extra price inherent to enchanting 2 weapons, as Shield enchantments are half cost (Shield Master allows you to use Shield enchantment bonus as weapon enchantment bonus).
As a Ranger, he also has access to the Spell "Instant Enemy," which allows him to use his Favored Enemy bonuses on any opponent he deems fit. As such, he gains a huge static bonus to attack and damge, and can reliably make his extra attacks hit. When it comes to 2WF, no other combination comes close (except maybe the Slayer, who also gets some of the Ranger's stuff, and some gunslinger stuff, which only works due to attacking Touch AC allowing them to tank their attack bonus at no cost).
The only real downside is the terrible crit range on the Shield. When crits are taken into account, something such as the falcata bein 2-handed is likely going to do even more damage.
|
|
Anyway, here is a level 10 barbarian build.
For that particular build - PA is a solid choice. I never said that it wasn't good for two-handed builds, especially barbarians (who get fewer static damage bonuses than most classes). All I said which you guys seem to take offense at is that it's overrated and certainly not always worth it.
Though I will point out a couple of issues.
1. Your numbers seem wrong. At level 10 PA gives +9 damage (where did you get the extra +2 difference?) and -3 accuracy (I see the furious focus - but you only have -2 for the second swing). Note: I could be missing a barbarian thing here - I don't know the class super well.
2. As soon as you hit level 11 and gain another iterative, the difference in accuracy will start to show considerably more as PA will often make the 3rd swing miss. That's really when PA starts to hurt.
3. Without Furious Focus (two feats worth of commitment instead of one) the crossover would be at a much lower AC even with your iffy numbers.
But again - with that much of a commitment to PA on this build, PA is usually worthwhile.
|
|
TWF doesn't get double the benefits from static bonuses. For one, your number of attacks will stagnate at 3, so it's only "double" for 3/4 BAB classes. Even then, with a single useage of Haste, you once again fall shy of "double."
Fair enough - I slightly overstated it. I'll correct to "almost double". Haste especially I'll give you - though past the 2nd iterative they rarely hit anyway. They're only really valuable to unarmed build with pummeling style hoping for a 20 to crit the whole thing. :P
Furthermore, TWF imposes a rather strict penalty on all of your attacks, meaning that even if we say you have double attacks, your static bonuses to damage are pulling less than double weight.
Not when in comparison to a build using PA. At level 8+, the TWF build will be more accurate than a build using PA.
Your Monk is an extremely defensively orientated build. Probably one of the best ways of getting a high AC.Extremely? No. He still has 3 attacks (nearly) every round at +7 for 1d8+4 damage. At 5 he'll get pummeling style and scorching ray practically at will.
Your fighter is rocking 8k WBL with that load out(2k over WBL), assuming you have no other gear of note. +1 fullplate is also only 10AC unless you have the trait Defender of the Society. He is also absurdly defensively orientated.Okay - WBL is a bit high. Like I said - it takes a bit more effort than the monk. And what fighter DOESN'T take Defender of the Society? He can hit AC 23 with no magic gear/defensive feats at all. And how is that absurdly defensive? Because he actually has a shield?
For the Monk
I should have said "One of the best ways of getting a high AC without crippling your offence". Even so, 1d8+4 isn't exactly mind blowing. You have to burn ki along with a full attack to deal about the same damage as a figher or barbarian. You can do this for 5 rounds with your ki pool. If you don't burn ki, your 2 attacks, which have lower attack bonuses than a typical fighter(+10)/barbarian(+11), can barely 2 round a CR3 creature. The fighter/barbarian also effectively has pounce compared to you, because they don't need to full attack. You really aren't doing too great in the offence department.Also, a scorching ray is a whopping 14 average damage if it hits, and you can do that twice before you empty your ki pool(I don't know if you have a way around this). Not impressive. Neither is pummeling style - the barbarian and fighter get all their attacks pooled into one for the purpose of DR too.For the Fighter
He is basically locked in to one of two attack styles if he wants to use a shield - either sword and board or shield twf. Neither of these is doing particularly well on the DPR front. This still isn't enough to make power attack not worth it anyway. He might be able to get there if he burns feats on it (npcs don't usually get traits anyway, so he needs a feat for extra treats), but then he will suck at actuallly killing things.
I will take a look at my numbers. You are right about the -3 thing at the least. It won't make much of a difference. Besides, you made a statement that power attack is much less worthwhile if the GM throws defensively orientated creatures at you. It doesn't look like that is the case so far. THF is the most common attack style for full BAB fighters, after all.
Not when in comparison to a build using PA. At level 8+, the TWF build will be more accurate than a build using PA.
Even when you factor in that TWF is more MAD, more feat-intensive and spreads your WBL thinner?
TWF doesn't get double the benefits from static bonuses. For one, your number of attacks will stagnate at 3, so it's only "double" for 3/4 BAB classes. Even then, with a single useage of Haste, you once again fall shy of "double."Fair enough - I slightly overstated it. I'll correct to "almost double". Haste especially I'll give you - though past the 2nd iterative they rarely hit anyway. They're only really valuable to unarmed build with pummeling style hoping for a 20 to crit the whole thing. :P
Furthermore, TWF imposes a rather strict penalty on all of your attacks, meaning that even if we say you have double attacks, your static bonuses to damage are pulling less than double weight.Not when in comparison to a build using PA. At level 8+, the TWF build will be more accurate than a build using PA.
No it won't. Because at level 8 I'll have a +3 weapon and you'll be swinging 2 +2's.
Not when in comparison to a build using PA. At level 8+, the TWF build will be more accurate than a build using PA.Even when you factor in that TWF is more MAD, more feat-intensive and spreads your WBL thinner?
Clearly not. If you accounted for that then CLH would say you build a strawman.
|
|
Clearly not. If you accounted for that then CLH would say you build a strawman.Not when in comparison to a build using PA. At level 8+, the TWF build will be more accurate than a build using PA.Even when you factor in that TWF is more MAD, more feat-intensive and spreads your WBL thinner?
EVERY TIME I've made the comparison I've mentioned such disadvantages.
@OP: Yes, it's overvalued. For classes with explicit damage boosters, it's not needed. They can diversify and be more interesting. Power Attack is great for classes without damage boosters like the vanilla fighter or classes that just get accuracy bonuses like rangers. On barbarians, paladins, inquisitors, and so on, it's simply overkill to the point of being boring.