-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 power attack: the designers' rationale
- Thread starter Piratecat
- Start date
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
Re: re
The fighter/wizard will not be much better off than a normal fighter if all he does is cast Tenser's Transformation. It gives +1 BAB/clvl which will enable hit to pull even with the fighter's BAB. It will also give him an average of +5 strength which may put him ahead of the fighter but probably won't (since the multiclass put his stat increases towards int or cha and the single class fighter put them into strength and probably has at least a +4 enhancement item (min level for a multiclassed Ftr/Wiz to cast Tenser's is 12) and may have put a higher score into strength to begin with).
Now, if the fighter/wizard is actually a ftr 2/wiz 6/Eldritch Knight 6 with a +11 BAB and a caster level of 11 (assuming that Andy Collins meant 1/1 BAB when he said Eldritch Knight's get good BAB) and that he's polymorphed into troll form for a base 22 strength, has Blink active (or improved invisibility) and the expert tactician feat, he might be able to do some serious damage with power attack. (After Tenser's, that's an average strength of 27 and a BAB of +16) If he's got Eyebite running too, it will be even worse. However, that's a highly focussed character utilizing a number of synergies--none of which is all that powerful in itself. And, after casting two 4th level spells and a 6th level spell with an expensive material component, the character still isn't much better off than a normal 14th level fighter (Str 25 (with a +6 belt), BAB +14, greater weapon focus (which the fighter/wizard doesn't have--this makes up for the fighter/wizard's strength bonus to hit), greater weapon specialization (the +4 damage more than makes up for the strength difference to damage), didn't take (at least) a round in combat to power up). In the end, the transformed fighter/wizard's only real advantage is in the +2 BAB, temporary hit points, and tactical options (Improved Trip works much better if you're polymorphed into a troll; a quickened True Strike is an inefficient use of a spell slot but if a character has it, he can ensure that the tertiary attack hits--even with power attack, etc).
The fighter/wizard will not be much better off than a normal fighter if all he does is cast Tenser's Transformation. It gives +1 BAB/clvl which will enable hit to pull even with the fighter's BAB. It will also give him an average of +5 strength which may put him ahead of the fighter but probably won't (since the multiclass put his stat increases towards int or cha and the single class fighter put them into strength and probably has at least a +4 enhancement item (min level for a multiclassed Ftr/Wiz to cast Tenser's is 12) and may have put a higher score into strength to begin with).
Now, if the fighter/wizard is actually a ftr 2/wiz 6/Eldritch Knight 6 with a +11 BAB and a caster level of 11 (assuming that Andy Collins meant 1/1 BAB when he said Eldritch Knight's get good BAB) and that he's polymorphed into troll form for a base 22 strength, has Blink active (or improved invisibility) and the expert tactician feat, he might be able to do some serious damage with power attack. (After Tenser's, that's an average strength of 27 and a BAB of +16) If he's got Eyebite running too, it will be even worse. However, that's a highly focussed character utilizing a number of synergies--none of which is all that powerful in itself. And, after casting two 4th level spells and a 6th level spell with an expensive material component, the character still isn't much better off than a normal 14th level fighter (Str 25 (with a +6 belt), BAB +14, greater weapon focus (which the fighter/wizard doesn't have--this makes up for the fighter/wizard's strength bonus to hit), greater weapon specialization (the +4 damage more than makes up for the strength difference to damage), didn't take (at least) a round in combat to power up). In the end, the transformed fighter/wizard's only real advantage is in the +2 BAB, temporary hit points, and tactical options (Improved Trip works much better if you're polymorphed into a troll; a quickened True Strike is an inefficient use of a spell slot but if a character has it, he can ensure that the tertiary attack hits--even with power attack, etc).
Celtavian said:
Numion
First Post
Celtavian said:
Actually not going to be higher than suggested, but a little lower. Depending on opponent monsters HP a certain percentage of damage is wasted on average, namely the portion that brings the monster below -1. Since 3.5 PA increases the average damage / strike, so is the absolute wasted part a bit higher. Resulting then in a little lower total average.
Last edited:
Re: Re: re
Go with whatever you think appropriate. The spells listed should provide a person with base attack to spare though I think Prayer and Divine Favor don't stack.
They can also probably lose the 2 pts of base attack from the strength boost giving them an additional +2 pts of damage, for a total of +4. If they are doing 20 pts already, then 4 more pts is a 20% or so increase per hit. Fairly substantial.
Remember, this is prereq feat and can be taken by anyone at first level. A min/maxers dream.
Ok, this one is not too bad. I did the math on it. You would come out pretty much like a level 16 fighter. The cleric combo is still very bad as is any spell that gives attack bonus. Imagine how useful True Strike will be now for doubling damage.
Went a little brain dead on this one. Still could be a problem on epic levels, but probably not going to be a problem pre-twenty.
Its kind of hard to back up the claim until you see someone come up with a truly sick combination.
I just know the following will be true:.
1. Spells that give an attack bonus will be at a premium now because you can gain twice as much damage for the loss of a single base attack.
2. All strength enhancing items will be even more useful because you can trade strength attack bonus for double damage for two-handed weapon wielders.
3. This feat can be taken by anyone with no prereq's. That is what bothers me the most. Any character of any type and any level can take this feat to double their damage wielding a two-handed weapon. A feat this good should not be able to be taken by any tom, dick or harry. Greatsword wielding Paladins are probably happy as clams since they can cast Divine Favor on themselves as well as Smite more times per day. Trade that Smite attack bonus for double the damage.
4. Ask yourself was Power Attack a useless feat to begin with? IMO, it wasn't. Now it is twice as good for two-handers rather than half as good for two-weapon wielders, which I would have preferred.
These are dragons wielding two-handed weapons?
Tail slap attack I believe is 1.5 times damage, though I guess we could go by the letter of the law and not consider them two-handed weapons, though they receive a two-handed weapon damage bonus. One tail slap attack won't be too bad, so no biggy.
I agree with your assessment that Power Attack was too good for two-weapon wielder. Getting the full bonus with both weapons was unfair to two-hand weapon users. I don't agree that Power Attac was useless for two-hand weapon users. It was a prereq feat for other better feats while still having its place, similar to Dodge.
Power Attack was great for a two-handed weapon user when dealing with a bunch of low AC foes that you could cleave through or whirlwind attack. It is a feat that anyone can gain at first level.
I feel this version of Power Attack is too good. It isn't the equal of other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise that have a cap as well as leading to bigger and better feats. This feat should be something only a higher level person should be able to take giving them a good boost in damage, twice as much as before.
Can you honestly say that the new Power Attack is equivalent to other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise? I can't. It is too good as is right now, and will greatly encourage two-handed weapon wielders.
In my campaigns, there was never any shortage of two-handed weapon wielders, and they held their own against the two-weapon users in the party. There are disadvantages to using two-weapons such as having to use a light weapon in the off hand, and that still gives you a -2 penalty to hit for all attacks. If you use an equal sized weapon, it was a -4 penalty.
These are balancing factors. The way they had it before, a two-weapon user and a two-handed weapon user stacked up quite nicely because of the feat combinations they took, though I didn't have anyone trying to min/max their damage as some do. I don't really get the reason for them making a prereq feat this good while also not improving greatly other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise. There is no cap on Power Attack, yet Dodge gives a very minor bonus and Expertise caps at 5.
Explain the inconsistency? When did it become important to further enhance the damage of two weapon users based solely on Power Attack? Why didn't they just reduce the efficiency of Power Attack for two weapon users? I'm sorry, based on my experience, this is going to give a serious damage enchancement to two-handed weapon users while leaving two-weapon users the same as before.
Mike Sullivan said:
Go with whatever you think appropriate. The spells listed should provide a person with base attack to spare though I think Prayer and Divine Favor don't stack.
They can also probably lose the 2 pts of base attack from the strength boost giving them an additional +2 pts of damage, for a total of +4. If they are doing 20 pts already, then 4 more pts is a 20% or so increase per hit. Fairly substantial.
Remember, this is prereq feat and can be taken by anyone at first level. A min/maxers dream.
Ok, this one is not too bad. I did the math on it. You would come out pretty much like a level 16 fighter. The cleric combo is still very bad as is any spell that gives attack bonus. Imagine how useful True Strike will be now for doubling damage.
Went a little brain dead on this one. Still could be a problem on epic levels, but probably not going to be a problem pre-twenty.
Its kind of hard to back up the claim until you see someone come up with a truly sick combination.
I just know the following will be true:.
1. Spells that give an attack bonus will be at a premium now because you can gain twice as much damage for the loss of a single base attack.
2. All strength enhancing items will be even more useful because you can trade strength attack bonus for double damage for two-handed weapon wielders.
3. This feat can be taken by anyone with no prereq's. That is what bothers me the most. Any character of any type and any level can take this feat to double their damage wielding a two-handed weapon. A feat this good should not be able to be taken by any tom, dick or harry. Greatsword wielding Paladins are probably happy as clams since they can cast Divine Favor on themselves as well as Smite more times per day. Trade that Smite attack bonus for double the damage.
4. Ask yourself was Power Attack a useless feat to begin with? IMO, it wasn't. Now it is twice as good for two-handers rather than half as good for two-weapon wielders, which I would have preferred.
These are dragons wielding two-handed weapons?
Tail slap attack I believe is 1.5 times damage, though I guess we could go by the letter of the law and not consider them two-handed weapons, though they receive a two-handed weapon damage bonus. One tail slap attack won't be too bad, so no biggy.
I agree with your assessment that Power Attack was too good for two-weapon wielder. Getting the full bonus with both weapons was unfair to two-hand weapon users. I don't agree that Power Attac was useless for two-hand weapon users. It was a prereq feat for other better feats while still having its place, similar to Dodge.
Power Attack was great for a two-handed weapon user when dealing with a bunch of low AC foes that you could cleave through or whirlwind attack. It is a feat that anyone can gain at first level.
I feel this version of Power Attack is too good. It isn't the equal of other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise that have a cap as well as leading to bigger and better feats. This feat should be something only a higher level person should be able to take giving them a good boost in damage, twice as much as before.
Can you honestly say that the new Power Attack is equivalent to other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise? I can't. It is too good as is right now, and will greatly encourage two-handed weapon wielders.
In my campaigns, there was never any shortage of two-handed weapon wielders, and they held their own against the two-weapon users in the party. There are disadvantages to using two-weapons such as having to use a light weapon in the off hand, and that still gives you a -2 penalty to hit for all attacks. If you use an equal sized weapon, it was a -4 penalty.
These are balancing factors. The way they had it before, a two-weapon user and a two-handed weapon user stacked up quite nicely because of the feat combinations they took, though I didn't have anyone trying to min/max their damage as some do. I don't really get the reason for them making a prereq feat this good while also not improving greatly other prereq feats like Dodge or Expertise. There is no cap on Power Attack, yet Dodge gives a very minor bonus and Expertise caps at 5.
Explain the inconsistency? When did it become important to further enhance the damage of two weapon users based solely on Power Attack? Why didn't they just reduce the efficiency of Power Attack for two weapon users? I'm sorry, based on my experience, this is going to give a serious damage enchancement to two-handed weapon users while leaving two-weapon users the same as before.
Last edited:
drnuncheon
Explorer
Mike Sullivan said:
Er, Mike? Where did the extra 2 feat slots come from? You've got 7 feats in the first example and 9 in the second. Unless it's a ranger (and therefore getting extra 2WF feats for free) I don't think this is exactly a fair comparison.
J
Last edited:
Mike Sullivan
First Post
Re: Re: Re: re
Nope, only tail-swipes do that.
Destil said:
Nope, only tail-swipes do that.
Mike Sullivan
First Post
drnuncheon said:
I think that it is exactly a fair comparison.
Fighters in general are going to be paying for GWF and GWS in their chosen weapons in 3.5. Yes, that's two feats that they weren't going to pay in 3.0, but everyone's going to be paying for them... And a common complaint about Fighters in 3.0 was that after mid levels, no feats were really worthwhile to take.
The TWF stuff ends up being the same number of feats in 3.5 for greater benefit -- in 3.0, you've got Ambi, TWF, and ITWF. In 3.5, you'll have TWF, ITWF, and GTWF.
Mike Sullivan
First Post
Re: Re: Re: re
I think that Dodge is underpowered. I think that Expertise is probably better than either version of Power Attack, though I haven't backed up that general feeling with any close analysis.
TWFers were weak in comparison to big weapon fighters in 3.0. I'm sorry to keep harping on this, but I need to point out again that aside from the 3.5 PA change, 3.5 TWFers got very much improved in comparison to 3.0 TWFers!
You can't look at the PA change in a vacuum. If PA was overly good for TWFers in 3.0, it'd be killer for them in 3.5, if it hadn't changed as well. If 3.0 TWFers were "keeping up" with big-weapon fighters (a contention that I'd argue, actually), then they'd significantly exceed them in 3.5.
Because "they" (and I) feel that not only is PA too good for TWFers, it's almost no use at all for big weapon fighters. Remember that, though we've been focussing on the TWF/big-weapon comparison, 3.0 PA is better for sword-and-board guys than it is for big-weapon guys, too.
Well, hey, I like your non-insulting tone, so I'll try running that Cleric combo that you were talking about, later today. But I'm still just not seeing any of the (admittedly worrying!) combos that people are talking about work out in practice.
Did you check out my look at the Fire Giants?
Celtavian said:
I think that Dodge is underpowered. I think that Expertise is probably better than either version of Power Attack, though I haven't backed up that general feeling with any close analysis.
TWFers were weak in comparison to big weapon fighters in 3.0. I'm sorry to keep harping on this, but I need to point out again that aside from the 3.5 PA change, 3.5 TWFers got very much improved in comparison to 3.0 TWFers!
You can't look at the PA change in a vacuum. If PA was overly good for TWFers in 3.0, it'd be killer for them in 3.5, if it hadn't changed as well. If 3.0 TWFers were "keeping up" with big-weapon fighters (a contention that I'd argue, actually), then they'd significantly exceed them in 3.5.
Because "they" (and I) feel that not only is PA too good for TWFers, it's almost no use at all for big weapon fighters. Remember that, though we've been focussing on the TWF/big-weapon comparison, 3.0 PA is better for sword-and-board guys than it is for big-weapon guys, too.
Well, hey, I like your non-insulting tone, so I'll try running that Cleric combo that you were talking about, later today. But I'm still just not seeing any of the (admittedly worrying!) combos that people are talking about work out in practice.
Did you check out my look at the Fire Giants?
drnuncheon
Explorer
Mike Sullivan said:
The point is that the first fighter has two feats that are unaccounted for, so we don't know if they'll have a direct effect on damage, single attacks, etc. That's why I'd classify it as unfair - you're giving the second guy two extra feats. Of course he's better! That's like claiming someone's a faster runner because he won a race from a 50 foot head start.
Take them both down 2-3 levels so they don't have those 2 extra feats, and then compare them. The gap will still be present, because of Ambidexterity, but it will be a lot smaller.
(Depending on the level, it may vary, since I2WF is easier to get in 3.5.)
Mike Sullivan said:
Well, unless you're restricting to core books only, GTWF was in 3.0 as of Masters of the Wild.
J
