|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
This seems to be one of those feats that Pathfinder 1 suffered from a lot. Highly situational with little bonus to make it worth while.
In this case the feat actually seems worthless, but maybe someone can provide some perspective on how this is not.
---
(2 Actions) SWIPE FEAT 4
You take a mighty swing against two adjacent
enemies. Make a melee Strike and compare the attack
result to the AC of up to two foes, both of whom must be within your
melee reach and adjacent to each other. Roll damage only once, and
apply it to each creature you hit. If you critically hit one target and
not the other, roll the extra critical hit damage separately. A Swipe
counts as two attacks for your multiple attack penalty.
---
- This requires two enemies to be adjacent to each other. A situation that isn't likely to come up all that often. Which is fine... if the bonus is powerful enough to make it worth it. Or if there were ways to help make certain the "situation" was more common. Which there isn't.
- You are sacrificing 2 attacks to do this, which means you could have already hit both of these "adjacent" foes with the number of actions being expended.
- You are gaining a +5 attack on the second foe, due to the first attack action not suffering any negatives. This seems like a net positive at first. Except you could roll badly on that first attack. Based on pathfinder 1 experience and reading on "Rolling twice" vs. "Rolling once". Rolls done at "advantage" effectively give you a +5 bonus. So you are sacrificing the ability to roll twice, which could result in a low roll. Which means the +5 bonus gained from this ability is effectively nullified by the fact that you are not rolling twice.
---
I just don't understand this design philosophy. If you're going to introduce a feat that is only beneficial in limited situations, it should be worth it. Or you should have additional feats within the class that can help to ensure the situation is more likely. But even in the case of this ability/feat the benefit isn't really worth it even if you could consistently make this situation common.
I know you don't want to make situational feats overpowered... but the benefit should be large enough to warrant it being useless in most circumstances. Or there should be tools to help the character force the situation.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Ultimis wrote: This seems to be one of those feats that Pathfinder 1 suffered from a lot. Highly situational with little bonus to make it worth while.
In this case the feat actually seems worthless, but maybe someone can provide some perspective on how this is not.
---
(2 Actions) SWIPE FEAT 4
You take a mighty swing against two adjacent
enemies. Make a melee Strike and compare the attack
result to the AC of up to two foes, both of whom must be within your
melee reach and adjacent to each other. Roll damage only once, and
apply it to each creature you hit. If you critically hit one target and
not the other, roll the extra critical hit damage separately. A Swipe
counts as two attacks for your multiple attack penalty.
---
- This requires two enemies to be adjacent to each other. A situation that isn't likely to come up all that often. Which is fine... if the bonus is powerful enough to make it worth it. Or if there were ways to help make certain the "situation" was more common. Which there isn't.
- You are sacrificing 2 attacks to do this, which means you could have already hit both of these "adjacent" foes with the number of actions being expended.
- You are gaining a +5 attack on the second foe, due to the first attack action not suffering any negatives. This seems like a net positive at first. Except you could roll badly on that first attack. Based on pathfinder 1 experience and reading on "Rolling twice" vs. "Rolling once". Rolls done at "advantage" effectively give you a +5 bonus. So you are sacrificing the ability to roll twice, which could result in a low roll. Which means the +5 bonus gained from this ability is effectively nullified by the fact that you are not rolling twice.
---
I just don't understand this design philosophy. If you're going to introduce a feat that is only beneficial in limited situations, it should be worth it. Or you should have additional feats within the class that can help to ensure the situation is more likely. But even in the case of this ability/feat the...
you misunderstand the "rolling with advantage is +5" math.
"rolling twice keep best" is on average +3-+5.
but when you do 2 attacks, you're not doing that.
you're doing: "roll 2 dices, keep both" which is +0.
Average damage of 2 attacks, using the same roll, at +0 both
vs
average damage of 2 attacks, using seperate rolls, at +0/-5 will ALWAYS be in quite a high favor for the 1st.
vs2 opponents, swipe will, on average, be quite a high damage increase.
*
furthermore, it's not even "roll twice" it's "roll once at +0 the second time at -5". And if you succeed on only one of them, it's half damage compared to swipe.
IF and only IF your second attack was at +0 and not -5, then you would have the exact same AVERAGE damage as Swipe but with a more median bellcurve (higher chance to do some damage, lower chance to do high damage, like rolling 2d4 instead of 1d10 for damage)
It is roll twice in this example because you specifically lose both actions from swipe and if you roll low on it you *miss* both. Which means while yes "you get double damage" on a hit, you also lose double the damage on a miss. So you're example of missing one of the rolls for half damage is meaningless.
At best this swipe feat is giving you maybe a +2.5 atk bonus in a highly situational scenario.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I generally find like "two enemies are adjacent to each other" is an extremely rare occurrence unless you are fighting in a hallway or similar. As a GM it feels like "put two mobs next to each other" is one of those "deliberate tactical mistakes" that is hard to balance.
I'd much rather we have "2 enemies within reach" abilities than "2 enemies are adjacent" since the latter is so GM-dependent.
This is actually one of the better ones, giving you essentially two ‘first attacks’, where first attack damage is around twice second attack damage.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ultimis wrote: It is roll twice in this example because you specifically lose both actions from swipe and if you roll low on it you *miss* both. Which means while yes "you get double damage" on a hit, you also lose double the damage on a miss. So you're example of missing one of the rolls for half damage is meaningless. no. this is not how math works.
you roll once for double damage yes.
but the opposition isn't "roll twice keep best"
is roll once at +0, roll again at -5, each hit is half the damge of wipe hitting.
that's nowhere near equal.
run the averages and see.
for starters, "roll ttwice keep best" is +4-5 when you hit on a 11. Your attack at -5 doesn't hit on a 11, it hits on a 16, making it at best a "+2"
Ultimis wrote: At best this swipe feat is giving you maybe a +2.5 atk bonus in a highly situational scenario. no, mathematically it's exactly "+5 on your second attack". And given that on average your second attack has a 25% success rate, boosting that up to 50% means that swipe is more or less:
"double the chance to hit with your second attack."
edit:
the actual math, simplified, for a 11+ to hit doing 20 damage per hit would be like:
swipe:
45% hit for 40
5% crit for 80
average 22
2 hits:
43,75% for 1 hit/1miss for 20
9% for 2 hits for 40
6,25% for 1 crit/1miss for 40
3,25% for 1 crit/1hit for 60
0,25% for 2 crits for 80
average 17.2
Which if the second attack had a bonus of +5 attack (which is what you are arguing, not damage):
45% for 1 hit/1miss for 20 9
20.25% for 2 hits for 40 8.1
5% for 1 crit/1 miss for 40 2
4.5% for 1 crit/1 hit 60 2.7
.25% for 2 crits for 80 .2
Average Damage: 33.9 Damage
Seems to suggest you are not getting a +5 attack on the second attack effectively.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ultimis wrote: Which if the second attack had a bonus of +5 attack (which is what you are arguing, not damage):
45% for 1 hit/1miss for 20 9
20.25% for 2 hits for 40 8.1
5% for 1 crit/1 miss for 40 2
4.5% for 1 crit/1 hit 60 2.7
.25% for 2 crits for 80 .2
Average Damage: 33.9 Damage
Seems to suggest you are not getting a +5 attack on the second attack effectively.
wut?
read what you wrote mate
9+8.1+2+2.7+0.2= 22
it seems that I AM getting that +5 attack on the second attack afterall.
+0/0 is exactly the same as 1 attack at +0 on average it's the curve that changes (+0/+0 produces more results towards the middle)
where did that 33.9 come from?
Typing this from phone. Not as easy to switch back and forth. Looks like I typed the wrong number in when adding up the accumulative damage.
Yes, this is an effective +5 attack bonus in this unlikely situation. A still fairly terrible feat, but not as bad as it originally looked.
Ultimis wrote: Typing this from phone. Not as easy to switch back and forth. Looks like I typed the wrong number in when adding up the accumulative damage.
Yes, this is an effective +5 attack bonus in this unlikely situation. A still fairly terrible feat, but not as bad as it originally looked.
that's around 28% damage increase when there're 2 opponents adjustent to one another.
that's a pretty big damage increase for an early feat imo, but each to his own.
28% damage in a situation that may come up 1 every 4 encounters depending on GM and campaign. Good against targets you are one shotting, because else it is better to focus two attacks onto the same target to remove action economy of foes.
Ideally this is a trash clearer, where the trash lines up for you. The very same class adds cleave and greater cleave and whirlwind for trash clearing.
Ultimis wrote: 28% damage in a situation that may come up 1 every 4 encounters depending on GM and campaign. Good against targets you are one shotting, because else it is better to focus two attacks onto the same target to remove action economy of foes.
Ideally this is a trash clearer, where the trash lines up for you. The very same class adds cleave and greater cleave and whirlwind for trash clearing.
Dunno, my experience is that the majority of fights have more than 1 enemy and that in all such occasions there are plenty of rounds where opponents are next to each other.
Plus, you'll never drop a CR equivalent opponent in 1 round (unlike pf1) so beelining towards one opponent as opposed to dealing more damage but split between 2 opponents is not that bad in my experience.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
My player actually stopped to read this feat out loud. The whole table laughed, and the Barbarian promptly chose a lower level feat, because all of the level 4 barbarian feats and especially this one are worthless.
It's so situational. It will never come up unless you are moving first in the initiative order, facing animal intelligence foes or are in a hallway.
If they allowed the second target to be any target in your reach instead of just adjacent to the first target, and if it only counted as one attack toward MAP, then it'd actually be worthwhile and a good use of one of your precious, limited supply of feats. In its current form, it would have to only take one action instead of two, and even then it'd still never come up, but at least it wouldn't be so punitive when it did.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Fuzzypaws wrote: My player actually stopped to read this feat out loud. The whole table laughed, and the Barbarian promptly chose a lower level feat, because all of the level 4 barbarian feats and especially this one are worthless.
<snip>
The other two level 4 feats are both fantastic. More speed so you can get into and around combat easier? Yes please! Climb and swim speeds equal to land speed so again you are never stuck unable to get to the fight? Wow! They may not directly add to your damage in a theorycrafting sense but in practice I expect both to be invaluable. I skipped Swipe just because both other level 4 feats were too good to pass up!
I won't say this feat is great, it's situational like cleave was, often good at low level, and not so good at higher levels. But now that retraining is part of the core rules and not optional, taking this isn't such a trap.
It does seem like a decent feat went the GM is using larger groups of slightly lower level creatures, in which case since they are all likely to have the same AC and your attack will be at the highest base value, means your more likely to critical both opponents. That would help the clear things out a lot faster.
I actually think this feat is better if the barbarian doesn't go first, but either case is going to depend on the creature's intelligence, their fighting style and how the GM plays how those two things work together.
I had a barbarian in the previous edition that ended up with cleave and cleaving finish. Cleave didn't often come up, but when it did, combined with cleaving finish it was horrific for the GM. And this is with a more or less normal build and not the broken mashups using all the little splatbooks for advantages.
All I have to say is the barbarian in our playtest managed a double swip crit a few times with a great ax not only critting both but adding the crit specialization effect as well, so with a +1 great ax they took 6d12+(Mod+rage)x2 each, while i know statistically you can not rely on it, there are defidently pro's and con's to rolling once, every ax swipe has a 5% (at least) chance of being triple die, double mod 2 targets, mayhem
I haven't played with anyone using Swipe, but could it benefit from some teamwork?
Having the barbarian act after a fighter or monk with some feats and maybe a club group weapon to pull of a shove now and then to position enemies?
Edit: Or is there a gravity spell in the playtest that pulls targets towards a point?
Recent threads in Classes
|
