I hate how Power Attack makes it harder to hit harder armor.
Reckless swing can always be dodged easier, but it should-
Ok nevermind
Arguing over pathfinder abstractions is not what this thread is for.
|
I hate how Power Attack makes it harder to hit harder armor.
Reckless swing can always be dodged easier, but it should-
Ok nevermind
Arguing over pathfinder abstractions is not what this thread is for.
There is the Armor as DR variant that addresses this somewhat. So Dodge and Deflection still affect hit chance while Armor/Shield/NA only affect damage.
It's a flaw in feat design of making mechanics "NO! Not unless..." instead of "Yes, but...". Feats should enhance what the character can do, not gate off what they can't.
Completely agree. As a GM running a home game, I would totally let someone swing more wildly to get some extra damage on their attack without having Power Attack -- but the penalties for doing so would be more severe than having the feat. Perhaps they provoke an AoO due to leaving their stance so wide-open, or they're even less accurate than someone trained in the feat would be. This solidifies the feat as formal training or whatnot for the "proper" way of doing something, but does not preclude being able to at least attempt to do that thing without having the feat. Exactly what should happen though I feel should firmly be in the realm of GM and player adjudication, and not enshrined in any rules. If the feat represents the sole proper way (or ways) of doing something, then there are likely myriad other ways of going about it that are less optimal, each of which may have different drawbacks.
Off topic: As for armor, I'm a fan of how Hackmaster 5e handles it -- wearing armor makes you easier to hit due to less maneuverability but gives you DR, and a shield adds a range where if it would miss your defense including the shield but would hit you if you didn't have a shield, then the weapon does damage to the shield (some of which could soak into you if it's high enough).
Describing a particularly high or low damage roll as a desperate blow or a cautious flick can be fun sometimes even if there aren't any mechanical bonuses backing it up.
|
The fact however remains that this is a situation where it should be the default state of taking a penalty to do additional damage without investing a feat. Spending a feat slot should let you power attack at no penalty, possibly adding a +1 bonus each time your BAB would grant an additional attack. Now that would be a feat.
This would be a less restricted, more powerful version of Weapon Specialization and thus would completely reshape the game's balance. Power Attack could provide a reduced penalty, or - as I run things - introduce an additional -2 AC penalty for those who attempt a power attack without the feat.
It's a flaw in feat design of making mechanics "NO! Not unless..." instead of "Yes, but...". Feats should enhance what the character can do, not gate off what they can't.
In general, I would agree with you, but there are certain things that do make sense to gate off completely without proper training. If you don't know how to feed extra magic into your spells to Empower them, then you just don't know how. Attempting to do so would more likely end up in causing the spell to fizzle out, explode, or simply kill you than anything productive. As such most of what could be described as "mental feats" generally make sense to be a binary can-or-can't based on whether or not you have the proper feat. Even a fair few "physical feats" make sense to gate off. Performance feats, for example, frequently describe manoeuvres so precise or complex that trying to pull them off without extensive training or practice would most likely result in an embarrassing fumble or dropping your weapon.
Feats that have been mentioned previously tend not to have a significantly destabilizing effect on the game. Making a dirty trick combat manoeuvre to angle a polished shield or sword to dazzle an enemy is a pretty minor effect that could be done by anyone, not just those with Blinding Flash. Weapon damage types (in reference to Weapon Versatility) tends to be a very situational thing that would generally be a waste to spend a feat on. If you're spending enough time fighting enemies with DR/bludgeoning to justify it, then why don't you have a mace? And if you aren't facing them often enough (or are playing an archetype that specializes in one or two specific weapons), then there are plenty of other feats and abilities you can take instead to simply increase your overall damage or circumvent a few points of DR. Removing these feats (largely because they already were in supplemental material, rather than the core book) don't drastically reshape the game balance like Power Attack. I agree it's a bit unfortunate that wild blows - which seemingly any person could do - require a feat, but at least we have charge.