Errata / Nerfs that you ignore in your home games

[Charon's Little Helper]

hiiamtom wrote:

Good luck with any melee build with less than 13 Strength.

I assume that's a PA reference. Unless using a two-handed weapon, PA is rarely worth using anyway. So... 13 STR need not apply.

Besides - if you REALLY want it, you can grab Piranha Strike - which is essentially the same thing if not using a two-handed weapon.

[hiiamtom]

Not taking PA is leaving up 6 or 12 damage per hit off the table, and it leaves you without two-handing that longsword when against DR. It makes up a lot of the difference in TWF for a class without sneak attack.

[Charon's Little Helper]

hiiamtom wrote:

Not taking PA is leaving up 6 or 12 damage per hit off the table, and it leaves you without two-handing that longsword when against DR. It makes up a lot of the difference in TWF for a class without sneak attack.

Except -

1. You are ignoring accuracy.

2. If you're finessing, you can't two-hand a weapon anyway.

I've run the #s. PA is counter-productive when using TWF unless you happen to be up against something with horrible AC like an ooze, in which case Piranha Strike is the same thing anyway. (Frankly - even when two-handing, PA is rarely worth it when full-attacking at levels 12+.)

[Lemmy]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

1. You are ignoring accuracy.

More often than not, the extra damage more than compensates for the reduced accuracy.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

2. If you're finessing, you can't two-hand a weapon anyway.

Yes, you can. You can use a Elven Curved Sword, for example.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

(Frankly - even when two-handing, PA is rarely worth it when full-attacking at levels 12+.)

That foes against the experience of literally everyone I've ever played with. Past 9th level or so, any dedicated combatant has accuracy high enough to hit pretty easily, to the point where there is basically no reason to not use PA most of the time. Even my friend who joined Pathfinder 6 months ago rarely turns it off, and he is far from being an optimizer.

[hiiamtom]

I've run the #s. DA is counter-productive when using Rapid Shot unless you happen to be up against something with horrible AC...

That's a hard sell on your math.

[Dragonchess Player]

Unchained summoner: restoring lesser planar binding as a 4th-level spell and planar binding as a 5th-level spell on the spell list.

Most of the other spell list alterations were fine/needed, but having to wait until 13th level (!) to call a 6 HD outsider just cuts too far into the core of the class concept, IMO. Gaining it at 10th level (the same time sorcerer) is about right (again, IMO), considering the dimensional anchor (also a 4th-level spell) requirement; that's both of the 4th-level spells known at 10th level, which is already a pretty steep price for a spontaneous caster.

[Arbane the Terrible]

BadBird wrote:

"Overpowered" is an issue in context. An easy, general dex-to-damage feat is a giant middle finger to a ton of build concepts that would prefer not to use it.

This seems like an incredibly bizarre statement to me. It's like the existence of non-spellcasting classes is a 'giant middle finger' to the wizards, or something?

(Other way around, actually, but that's another unending argument.)

[CWheezy]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

hiiamtom wrote:

Not taking PA is leaving up 6 or 12 damage per hit off the table, and it leaves you without two-handing that longsword when against DR. It makes up a lot of the difference in TWF for a class without sneak attack.

Except -

1. You are ignoring accuracy.

2. If you're finessing, you can't two-hand a weapon anyway.

I've run the #s. PA is counter-productive when using TWF unless you happen to be up against something with horrible AC like an ooze, in which case Piranha Strike is the same thing anyway. (Frankly - even when two-handing, PA is rarely worth it when full-attacking at levels 12+.)

You are extra super wrong on pa with a 2 hander. Its always worth it.

[Chengar Qordath]

All these people talking about how they've supposedly "run the numbers" and proved themselves right need to take some advice I got from my 6th-grade math teacher:

Show Your Work.

[The Sword]

Circumstances such as terrain, creature type of foes, number of foes, other members of the party and equipment available, class combinations etc etc etc mean that this is very much an opinion of what is better. Not all positions can be boiled down to a simple mathematical calculation.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Lemmy wrote:

That foes goes against the experience of literally everyone I've ever played with. Past 9th level or so, any dedicated combatant has accuracy high enough to hit pretty easily, to the point where there is basically no reason to not use PA most of the time. Even my friend who joined Pathfinder 6 months ago rarely turns it off, and he is far from being an optimizer.

Yes - on single attacks you rarely miss. Hence "when full-attacking". At level 12 you are gaining 12 damage per swing for -4 accuracy. It will rarely matter for that first swing, but it will often make your 3rd swing miss. And at 12+ most martial characters should have several Quick Runner's shirts to use once per fight.

And I'll run the level 12 #s (again - as I have before). I'll go with a samurai, because it's the martial I'm playing right now.

STR 26 (includes +4 belt) / +3 katana / Deliquescent Glove

versus AC 27 (standard level 12 - seems a bit low to me, but whatever)

Attack = +12 BAB / +8 STR / +3 enchantment / +2 focus = +25/+20/+15

Damage = 1d8 +3 enchantment / +12 STR / +12 challenge / +4 spec / +1d6 gloves = 1d8+31+1d6 (15-20/+2)

With PA = +21/+16/+11 & 1d8+43+1d6 (15-20/+2)

So without PA DPR = 101.7875

With PA DPR = 102.15

So - at level 12 you have spent a feat for statistically identical damage against AC 27 (still seems low to me). Which - as I said above - is about when PA is no longer nearly as valuable. Still situationally useful (low AC targets), but certainly shouldn't be a gimme for every attack.

As you level higher the benefits of PA will only drop, especially at 16 with the 3rd iterative, and as you get richer and put static damage rather than enchantment on your weapon. (Only very rarely useful at 16+)

Not to mention if you have any secondary benefit to hitting other than damage. (Ex: my samurai has Blade of Mercy/Enforcer combo. Not only would Blade of Mercy have shifted the damage to non-PA being marginally higher, but every time he hits a target my character can make them shaken, and on a crit make them frightened.)

For a one-handed weapon and/or TWF, the DPR isn't even close.

[Harleequin]

Im not an enormous fan of the x to y thing...!

[The Sword]

I suspect Dex to damage will remain one of those controversial topics like Gunpowder weapons, Leadership and Monster races. It's in the unchained book for good reason and the rules are there for the tables that want them. I'm not a fan of x to y either but I love the wounds/vigour system, go figure? To each their own I guess.

It's one of the reasons I love Parhfinder so much. I just wish they'd come up with a non-magical bard archetype! Lol

[Lemmy]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Stuff & Math

That's assuming the character has no buffs, no extra attacks, no flanking position...

It's really, really easy to raise attack accuracy... And pretty much every ability or effect that gives you an extra attack uses your highest attack bonus.

e.g.:

My friend's character is a 9th level Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor focused on Intimidation, follower of Shizuru. He wanted to make a samurai (character concept, not class) with spells and who was really good at scaring people...

So he ended up with a Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor (for skills and because I thought it'd be better if his attack booster could be used at will, since he's new to the game) of Shizuru who wields a katana two-handed.

The feats he chose are Power Attack, Combat Reflexes, Cleave and... something else, I don't remember what right now. I pick his spells for him, because he's still learning the game and didn't want to get swamped by spell lists and effects.

Since it fits his character concept, I advised him to get Cornugon Smash and Hurtful... That's a really good combination. Not only it makes the opponent shaken, but gives him another attack at full bonus.

So hey, his +17/+12 becomes +17/+17/+12 most of the time (turns out it's really easy to intimidate people). And then, there are spells... Heroism lasts 90 minutes and his allies will often cast Haste or Blessing of Fervor... So his actual attack routine is often a +20/+20/+15. And that's before stuff like flanking which is a free +2 (or +4, actually. I think he took Outflank).

Raising your to-hit bonus is very easy in this game... Like... Really, really easy. And extra attacks aren't rare either. This is a huge advantage to Power Attack.

Of course, there are times when not using PA is the best choice, but they are relatively rare.

[The Sword]

I agree Lemmy that many characters can improve to hit chance, as well as using flanking, higher ground, charging, aid from allies etc.

However, all these, as well as Attacks of opportunity, heroism, bardic inspiration are all circumstantial. It depends entirely on party make up and monster positioning and tactics so I don't see these can be used to anvalidate arguments that in many cases TWF has merit.

[hiiamtom]

So you should still be using power attack for a few attacks and not for others depending on the fight, and that if you land an attack that would trigger an ability (like two weapon rend) then you are better of getting the hits. That's a big step down from a blanket statement up thread - and means that using it to refute TWF still should use PA for punching through DR is a little disingenuous.

[Aratrok]

I produced a series of posts on the merits of Power Attack in September a couple of years ago. Here's the first one (math reproduced in the spoiler below).

Spoiler:

Here are some numbers as an example, using Fighters since they're fairly simple and easy to work around even if not mechanically great. Assumptions are based on standard 15 PB and normal WBL. We'll look at a minimally invested baseline- the only feats being purchased here are the Weapon Focus line (to better simulate the output of other, stronger classes that have similar or greater modifiers to accuracy and damage), Improved Critical, and Power Attack.

1st Level
Our Fighter: 18 Str, +1 BAB, Power Attack, Weapon Focus
Longsword Routine: +6 (1d8+4/19-20)
Greatsword Routine: +6 (2d6+6/19-20)
CR 1 Average AC: 12
Longsword DPR: 6.85
Longsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 7.87
Greatsword DPR: 10.48
Greatsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 11.98

4th Level
Our Fighter: 20 Str (+1 level bump, acquired a +1 Str item), +4 BAB, Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Masterwork Weapon
Longsword Routine: +11 (1d8+7/19-20)
Greatsword Routine: +11 (2d6+9/19-20)
CR 4 Average AC: 17
Longsword DPR: 9.27
Longsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 10.73
Greatsword DPR: 12.90
Greatsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 15.23

8th Level
Our Fighter: 22 Str (+1 level bump, advanced to a +2 Str item), +8 BAB, Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, +1 Weapon, Weapon Training +1
Longsword Routine: +18/+13 (1d8+10/19-20)
Greatsword Routine: +18/+13 (2d6+13/19-20)
CR 8 Average AC: 21
Longsword DPR: 24.22
Longsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 27.23
Greatsword DPR: 33.40
Greatsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 38.52

12th Level
Our Fighter: 26 Str (+1 level bump, advanced to a +5 Str item), +12 BAB, Power Attack, [Gtr] Weapon Focus, [Gtr] Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, +2 Weapon, Weapon Training +2, Boots of Speed (Haste)
Longsword Routine: +27/+27/+22/+17 (1d8+16/17-20)
Greatsword Routine: +27/+27/+22/+17 (2d6+20/17-20)
CR 12 Average AC: 27
Longsword DPR: 77.46
Longsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 85.53
Greatsword DPR: 102.01
Greatsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 117.04

16th Level
Our Fighter: 32 Str (+1 level bump, better Str item, inherent bonuses), +16 BAB, Power Attack, [Gtr] Weapon Focus, [Gtr] Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Critical Focus, +5 Weapon, Weapon Training +3, Gloves of Dueling (+2), Boots of Speed (Haste)
Longsword Routine: +40/+40/+35/+30/+25 (1d8+25/17-20)
Greatsword Routine: +40/+40/+35/+30/+25 (2d6+30/17-20)
CR 16 Average AC: 31
Longsword DPR: 159.73
Longsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 192.73
Greatsword DPR: 200.34
Greatsword DPR w/ Power Attack: 253.71

Percent increase for a longsword user at 1st level: 15%
Percent increase for a longsword user at 16th level: 20.7%
Percent increase for a greatsword user at 1st level: 14.3%
Percent increase for a greatsword user at 16th level: 26.6%

Over the course of the thread, the following conclusions were drawn:

• Power attack is almost always a significant damage increase against average AC targets for one handed or two handed combatants
  
• Power attack declines in usefulness against extremely high AC targets, but often remains a small increase in damage output
  
• The impact of Power Attack grows at higher levels to become more meaningful for two handed combatants
  
• Power Attack is significantly weaker for two-weapon fighters, due to their decline in accuracy (and they generally falter harder against high AC targets)
  
• Power Attack doesn't function as effectively for characters with large static increases to damage but lagging accuracy (such as sneak attacking rogues)

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

[Dragonchess Player]

As far as the benefits of Power Attack for two-handed weapon use go:

Run the numbers using a scimitar and falchion/nodachi (instead of longsword and greatsword) with keen/Improved Critical after 7th-9th level... The benefits of Power Attack are even greater for a crit-fishing character. The samurai using a +3 katana rather than a +2 keen katana or not taking Improved Critical (Katana) at 9th level is actually hurting their DPR.

[CWheezy]

The Sword wrote:

Circumstances such as terrain, creature type of foes, number of foes, other members of the party and equipment available, class combinations etc etc etc mean that this is very much an opinion of what is better. Not all positions can be boiled down to a simple mathematical calculation.

Pretty much all those don't matter though

[CWheezy]

You can also math those out too if you want

[Scythia]

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

Ack! This blood is too healthy, my feeble body can't handle it. If only I had inherited some terminal illnesses I would certainly live longer.

[Ventnor]

Scythia wrote:

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

Ack! This blood is too healthy, my feeble body can't handle it. If only I had inherited some terminal illnesses I would certainly live longer.

Probably a more "Raiders of the Lost Ark" interpretation. The divine is so powerful that it prematurely destroys mortal flesh with its magnificence.

[Cevah]

Ventnor wrote:

Scythia wrote:

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

Ack! This blood is too healthy, my feeble body can't handle it. If only I had inherited some terminal illnesses I would certainly live longer.

Probably a more "Raiders of the Lost Ark" interpretation. The divine is so powerful that it prematurely destroys mortal flesh with its magnificence.

I was thinking of Immortal.

/cevah

[Scythia]

Ventnor wrote:

Scythia wrote:

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

Ack! This blood is too healthy, my feeble body can't handle it. If only I had inherited some terminal illnesses I would certainly live longer.

Probably a more "Raiders of the Lost Ark" interpretation. The divine is so powerful that it prematurely destroys mortal flesh with its magnificence.

From the same source as the Ark itself, we have beings which are mixed mortal and divine blood: Nephilim. They weren't noted as having any shorter of a lifespan, although apparently 600 was the average for all mortals of the time. :P

[Samasboy1]

Ventnor wrote:

Scythia wrote:

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

You'd think having the blood of an immortal would extend your life longevity but apparently not.

That's your interpretation, To say that the blood of a divine would burn out a mortal frame and cause the aging cycle to be even shorter than a Humans is just as valid.

Ack! This blood is too healthy, my feeble body can't handle it. If only I had inherited some terminal illnesses I would certainly live longer.

Probably a more "Raiders of the Lost Ark" interpretation. The divine is so powerful that it prematurely destroys mortal flesh with its magnificence.

Except outsiders aren't, precisely, "divine." They aren't, themselves, gods.

So human/undead crosses (short/immortal) live very long lives, human/elemental crosses (short/immortal) live very long lives, human/elf crosses (short/long) live longer lives, human/shadow crosses (long/immortal) live longer lives, human/orc crosses (short/shorter) follow the pattern and live shortened lives, heck even human fish men (short altered by immortal fish magic) live longer lives.

But ONLY the influence of immortal blood of CERTAIN kinds of outsiders fails to have an effect on their descendant's lifespans?

Monkey snot. I like tieflings/aasimar having at least half-elf lifespans. Changelings, maybe, too since hags seem to live quite a long time.

Other than that, I agree with many others that Scarred Witch Doctor shouldn't even exist as a non-Con based caster, I like the original Crane Wing, weapons that say they make unarmed strikes do lethal damage are actually unarmed strikes and deal monk damage; ignoring several other FAQ, errata, and clarifications.

[Lemmy]

The Sword wrote:

I agree Lemmy that many characters can improve to hit chance, as well as using flanking, higher ground, charging, aid from allies etc.

However, all these, as well as Attacks of opportunity, heroism, bardic inspiration are all circumstantial. It depends entirely on party make up and monster positioning and tactics so I don't see these can be used to anvalidate arguments that in many cases TWF has merit.

I didn't say TWF doesn't have merit, only that it's weak compared to the alternatives. It can still work... It just takes considerably more effort and investment and will often provide lesser results.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Lemmy wrote:

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Stuff & Math

That's assuming the character has no buffs, no extra attacks, no flanking position...

It's really, really easy to raise attack accuracy...

Yes.

It's also really easy to raise static damage further. (which helps attacks without PA much more than those with PA)

It's also even easier to raise AC (Ex: Every dragon should have Mage Armor/Shield up at the least for +8 AC if not actual magic gear from their horde) - which is why I think the baseline AC seems rather low.

[Lemmy]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Yes.

It's also really easy to raise static damage further. (which helps attacks without PA much more than those with PA)

Not as easy as raising accuracy, though. Getting a +2 simply by moving or positioning yourself is trivial. Merely leveling up raises your accuracy (and possibly damage, if you have PA).

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

It's also even easier to raise AC (Ex: Every dragon should have Mage Armor/Shield up at the least for +8 AC if not actual magic gear from their horde) - which is why I think the baseline AC seems rather low.

Kinda... AC doesn't go up with level, and the main problem with Shield is that it only lasts a few minutes. Besides, if the AC is so high that only your first attack hits, it's still better to be a 2-hander with PA.

Sure, characters with good static bonuses to damage such as Sneak Attack get extra benefits from TWF... I never said TWF was unplayable, only that it's generally less effective than the alternatives. The sheer feat and gold investment required, plus the -2 to accuracy is pretty bad... And that's not even counting that pointless Dex prerequisite and the problem with DR.

[Not Lemmy]

My completely unbiased opinion is that Lemmy is right.

[LuniasM]

DR absolutely hits TWF hard. You can say "Well we'll have Weapon Versatility, Weapon Blanche's, spells, magic items, etc to bypass it" but that simply doesn't always apply. I'm totally not just mad that elementals are immune to flanks and crits and have typless DR. Weapon Blanch only takes effect after applying it to your Weapon and holding it over a hot fire for a full round, meaning it isn't as easily-accessible as one might believe, especially if you get caught off-guard or can't scout ahead. It is also rather rare to see someone preparing spells specifically to beat DR rather than the more commonly-accepted "good" spells, though I suppose that's a bit anecdotal.

Dex-to-damage has been in play for our S&S Gunslinger for about 4 levels with guns and just this level with Scimitars (he dipped UnRogue) and it hasn't really caused problems. Touch AC on his musket has though. I'm playing a Strength-based Hunter and getting up to 5 attacks per full attack, most at full BAB, and that's without Haste and the like. We both deal roughly equivalent damage but he also has to deal with range increments, water (his one true weakness), soft cover, and misfires while I just have to be in the front and either charge to get into range or let them come to me and get a couple AoOs from it. If anyone wants to see the attack rundown later I'll post it, but our GM does a lot of work redesigning the AP and ensuring that fights are a challenge so situational modifiers run rampant. He has been nice enough to not use wind spells to shut the gunslinger down yet but I feel it coming.

[Chengar Qordath]

LuniasM wrote:

DR absolutely hits TWF hard. You can say "Well we'll have Weapon Versatility, Weapon Blanche's, spells, magic items, etc to bypass it" but that simply doesn't always apply. I'm totally not just mad that elementals are immune to flanks and crits and have typless DR. Weapon Blanch only takes effect after applying it to your Weapon and holding it over a hot fire for a full round, meaning it isn't as easily-accessible as one might believe, especially if you get caught off-guard or can't scout ahead. It is also rather rare to see someone preparing spells specifically to beat DR rather than the more commonly-accepted "good" spells, though I suppose that's a bit anecdotal.

Not to mention that with Two Weapon Fighting, you usually have to double up on your spells/items to deal with DR, since a lot of them only apply to one weapon at a time.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Lemmy wrote:

Kinda... AC doesn't go up with level, and the main problem with Shield is that it only lasts a few minutes. Besides, if the AC is so high that only your first attack hits, it's still better to be a 2-hander with PA.

If the AC is such that the 1st hit WITH PA will hit, then the 2st two WITHOUT PA will hit. (At 12, the 2nd attack sans PA is at only -1 vs. the 1st attack with PA.) In terms of DPR, the higher the AC, the less value PA is. In my above #s - at AC 28+, not using PA would have higher DPR.

At the AC of a CR 11 white dragon with Mage Armor / Shield (AC 38) using PA would be a very bad decision. (DPR 30.3225 vs 18.8625)

The only time the 1 attack thing matters is when you don't get a full attack. (A definite advantage for PA. Especially useful with reach weapon AOOs if you want to do damage rather than trip etc.)

[Edymnion]

Covent wrote:

Funnily enough the ACG errata is what made me decide to never play PFS again.

Really?

I remember taking one look at all of the restrictions and pure b+$$%#+* that PFS play required and went "Nope, not even going to start that."

[Trogdar]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Lemmy wrote:

Kinda... AC doesn't go up with level, and the main problem with Shield is that it only lasts a few minutes. Besides, if the AC is so high that only your first attack hits, it's still better to be a 2-hander with PA.

If the AC is such that the 1st hit WITH PA will hit, then the 2st two WITHOUT PA will hit. (At 12, the 2nd attack sans PA is at only -1 vs. the 1st attack with PA.) In terms of DPR, the higher the AC, the less value PA is. In my above #s - at AC 28+, not using PA would have higher DPR.

At the AC of a CR 11 white dragon with Mage Armor / Shield (AC 38) using PA would be a very bad decision. (DPR 30.3225 vs 18.8625)

The only time the 1 attack thing matters is when you don't get a full attack. (A definite advantage for PA. Especially useful with reach weapon AOOs if you want to do damage rather than trip etc.)

Sure, but if you're fielding a dragon with that kind of armor class, you are either expecting melee combat to be a gory mess or you're relying on a caster to strip those buffs. Either way, two weapon fighting had nothing to do with overcoming the challenge.

[Covent]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Lemmy wrote:

That foes goes against the experience of literally everyone I've ever played with. Past 9th level or so, any dedicated combatant has accuracy high enough to hit pretty easily, to the point where there is basically no reason to not use PA most of the time. Even my friend who joined Pathfinder 6 months ago rarely turns it off, and he is far from being an optimizer.

Yes - on single attacks you rarely miss. Hence "when full-attacking". At level 12 you are gaining 12 damage per swing for -4 accuracy. It will rarely matter for that first swing, but it will often make your 3rd swing miss. And at 12+ most martial characters should have several Quick Runner's shirts to use once per fight.

And I'll run the level 12 #s (again - as I have before). I'll go with a samurai, because it's the martial I'm playing right now.

STR 26 (includes +4 belt) / +3 katana / Deliquescent Glove

versus AC 27 (standard level 12 - seems a bit low to me, but whatever)

Attack = +12 BAB / +8 STR / +3 enchantment / +2 focus = +25/+20/+15

Damage = 1d8 +3 enchantment / +12 STR / +12 challenge / +4 spec / +1d6 gloves = 1d8+31+1d6 (15-20/+2)

With PA = +21/+16/+11 & 1d8+43+1d6 (15-20/+2)

So without PA DPR = 101.7875

With PA DPR = 102.15

So - at level 12 you have spent a feat for statistically identical damage against AC 27 (still seems low to me). Which - as I said above - is about when PA is no longer nearly as valuable. Still situationally useful (low AC targets), but certainly shouldn't be a gimme for every attack.

As you level higher the benefits of PA will only drop, especially at 16 with the 3rd iterative, and as you get richer and put static damage rather than enchantment on your weapon. (Only very rarely useful at 16+)

Not to mention if you have any secondary benefit to hitting other than damage. (Ex: my samurai has Blade of Mercy/Enforcer combo. Not only would Blade of Mercy have shifted the damage to non-PA being marginally higher, but every time he hits...

Didn't we discuss this before?

Also did it not come out that samurai is a very different proposition from Barbarian/Fighter/Monk etc. due to challange granting it large amounts of static damage?

I found my post here.

It looks like yours was removed due to quoting someone I assume.

Try running your numbers with a barbarian or a fighter or you could just use the math I presented in my post.

If this was not you I apologize, but I could not tell for sure as the original post math I was replying to was removed.

[Lemmy]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

If the AC is such that the 1st hit WITH PA will hit, then the 2st two WITHOUT PA will hit. (At 12, the 2nd attack sans PA is at only -1 vs. the 1st attack with PA.) In terms of DPR, the higher the AC, the less value PA is. In my above #s - at AC 28+, not using PA would have higher DPR.

At the AC of a CR 11 white dragon with Mage Armor / Shield (AC 38) using PA would be a very bad decision. (DPR 30.3225 vs 18.8625)

The only time the 1 attack thing matters is when you don't get a full attack. (A definite advantage for PA. Especially useful with reach weapon AOOs if you want to do damage rather than trip etc.)

Again, that's ignoring buffs, extra attacks and positioning bonuses.

e.g.: The 2-hander uses Cornugon/Smash Hurtful (with those feats he didn't spend on TWF/ITWF/Double Slice/Whatever and attacks twice... And/or he benefits from Haste (because if the Dragon has Shield, why wouldn't the PCs have Haste, which is probably the most commonly cast buff?) and gets a much more meaningful extra attack than the TWFer... And/or he gets attacks of opportunity and again his extra attacks are much more meaningful.

Meanwhile, the TWFer probably has a similar penalty to attacks, even without PA. Right out of the gate it suffers a -2, then its attack suffers because additional weapons cost additional gold, so chances are the enhancement in the TWFer's dagger is lower than the one in the 2-handers sword.

Look... I never said PA is always a good idea... But the occasions where it isn't are relatively rare for a 2-hander. I also never said TWF is without merit... Only that it's less effective than other combat styles most of the time.

[Lemmy]

Trogdar wrote:

Sure, but if you're fielding a dragon with that kind of armor class, you are either expecting melee combat to be a gory mess or you're relying on a caster to strip those buffs. Either way, two weapon fighting had nothing to do with overcoming the challenge.

Not to mention the TWF probably has the same accuracy as the Power Attacking two-hander.

TWF imposes a -2 to attack rolls and an extra gold cost that will probably keep their weapon enhancement bonus at least 1 point lower for much of the game.

[Dragonchess Player]

CWheezy wrote:

You can also math those out too if you want

Going with the samurai above (since the character does seem to have Improved Critical):

Without Power Attack (+25 hits AC 27 on a 2+) --

Spoiler:

((0.95 x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.95) x 35.5) + (0.7 x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.7) x 35.5) + (0.45 x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.45) x 35.5)) = 37.05 + 10.1175 + 27.3 + 7.455 + 17.55 + 4.7925

= 104.265 DPR

With Power Attack (+21 hits AC 27 on a 6+) --

Spoiler:

((0.75 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.75) x 47.5) + (0.5 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.5) x 47.5) + (0.25 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.25 x 0.25)* x 47.5)) = 38.25 + 10.6875 + 25.5 + 7.125 + 12.75 + 2.96875
*- because the range to hit is less than the critical threat range

= 97.28125 DPR

Looks like Power Attack is a poor option, right? Not so fast...

With haste active (i.e., boots of speed if not cast by a party member; what self-respecting PC isn't using haste by 12th level?):

Without Power Attack --

Spoiler:

((0.95** x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.95) x 35.5) + (0.95 x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.95) x 35.5) + (0.75 x (35.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.75) x 35.5) + (0.5 x (35.5 x 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.5) x 35.5)) = 37.05 + 10.1175 + 37.05 + 10.1175 + 29.25 + 7.9875 + 19.5 + 5.325
**- because a natural 1 is always a miss

= 156.3975 DPR

With Power Attack --

Spoiler:

((0.8 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.8) x 47.5) + (0.8 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.8) x 47.5) + (0.55 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.55) x 47.5) + (0.3 x (47.5 + 3.5)) + ((0.3 x 0.3) x 47.5)) = 40.8 + 11.4 + 40.8 + 11.4 + 28.05 + 7.8375 + 15.3 + 4.275

= 159.8625 DPR

Boots of speed are a much better investment for boosting DPR than deliquescent gloves...

Also, DPR with Power Attack increases even more if the samurai is also benefitting from heroism (+2 morale bonus on attack rolls and damage; lasts hours at 10 min/level with CL 12, possibly with a lesser extend metamagic rod), Inspire Courage from a bard (+3 competence bonus on attack rolls and damage), etc.

[Triune]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Lemmy wrote:

That foes goes against the experience of literally everyone I've ever played with. Past 9th level or so, any dedicated combatant has accuracy high enough to hit pretty easily, to the point where there is basically no reason to not use PA most of the time. Even my friend who joined Pathfinder 6 months ago rarely turns it off, and he is far from being an optimizer.

Yes - on single attacks you rarely miss. Hence "when full-attacking". At level 12 you are gaining 12 damage per swing for -4 accuracy. It will rarely matter for that first swing, but it will often make your 3rd swing miss. And at 12+ most martial characters should have several Quick Runner's shirts to use once per fight.

And I'll run the level 12 #s (again - as I have before). I'll go with a samurai, because it's the martial I'm playing right now.

STR 26 (includes +4 belt) / +3 katana / Deliquescent Glove

versus AC 27 (standard level 12 - seems a bit low to me, but whatever)

Attack = +12 BAB / +8 STR / +3 enchantment / +2 focus = +25/+20/+15

Damage = 1d8 +3 enchantment / +12 STR / +12 challenge / +4 spec / +1d6 gloves = 1d8+31+1d6 (15-20/+2)

With PA = +21/+16/+11 & 1d8+43+1d6 (15-20/+2)

So without PA DPR = 101.7875

With PA DPR = 102.15

So - at level 12 you have spent a feat for statistically identical damage against AC 27 (still seems low to me). Which - as I said above - is about when PA is no longer nearly as valuable. Still situationally useful (low AC targets), but certainly shouldn't be a gimme for every attack.

As you level higher the benefits of PA will only drop, especially at 16 with the 3rd iterative, and as you get richer and put static damage rather than enchantment on your weapon. (Only very rarely useful at 16+)

Not to mention if you have any secondary benefit to hitting other than damage. (Ex: my samurai has Blade of Mercy/Enforcer combo. Not only would Blade of Mercy have shifted the damage to non-PA being marginally higher, but every time he hits...

There is a reason you chose a character with no inherent accuracy bonus and a large bonus to damage, and that is because it skews the numbers in favor of your point. Quite disingenuous.

General statistics are preferable to anecdotes. This highlights why perfectly.

[Darius Silverbolt]

I use free use many house rules for my games. I tend to pay close attention to the errata's and understand why the occur. I use some of them and many of them just don't come up in my games.

As the GM first I must ensure the game is fun and the storyline makes sense.

I must admit the DPR stats that are often brought up here and there are not important in my game as I adjust things to challenge the players. So if the party can handle a CR+4 encounter on a whim then that is what the standard encounters will be.

I already have to adjust as my table tends to be 8-9 players and I only allow 15 Point buys and CRB races only.

YMMV.

[ccs]

All of them.
If we find something that we feel needs changing, we discuss it & decide upon something that works for us.
This usually happens long before official errata occurs. And since we're using something that already pleases us? There's no need to go looking for the official change.