Fixing the Power Attack problem

[CleverNickName]

How the heck does your BAB get to 50? You'd have to be like level 80 to get 50 BAB, and that'd only be if you counted the epic bonus to attack as actual BAB (which it doesn't). And if you're level 80, there's a lot more things to worry about than someone trading in 50 attack for PA...

I think he was being rhetorical. The highest BAB you can get in the game (that I know of, anyway) is +20.

The high BAB is only part of the problem, in my experience. Adding an uncapped bonus to damage is bad enough, but letting that bonus be doubled, tripled, or even quadrupled on a critical hit is just absurd.

 

[Jin_Kataki]

The problem is not that it simply favours 2H weapons but that it so overwhelmingly favours 2H weapons to the extent that sword & board is a highly sub-optimal choice. Now, there still needs to be some differentiation: if there were none then everyone would go for sword & board. We needto hit the fine point balancing 2H and s&b,

I have always been under the impression the cap of -5/+5 was official. I never really looked at in the book, but every game I have played in has always had that rule. I guess without the cap it may get overwhelmingly powerful. As it is used in the game I play in though I see no issue with it. 1 for 1 with 1 hand 2 for 1 with 2 hands. I think it makes perfect sense.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

OK, you still don't get the 2 1.5 for 1 on Str, but you do get the AC for the shield.

Minor nitpick, but fixed nonetheless.

Why's PA have to be as good, or even nearly as good, for sword and board as it is for two-handed? I don't expect Imp. Shield Bash to be useful to two-handers... That said, if you want an extra feat to let you get the two-handed benefit one-handed, it's probably ok... *pictures some crazy oversized two-weapon fighter with leap attack, shock trooper, and pounce (Barb 1) abusing this horribly, shrugs*

I took a few steps to "fix" PA in my houserules...

Power Attack [General, Fighter]
Prerequisite: Str 13
Benefit: You may take a penalty on your melee attack rolls, which cannot exceed your base attack bonus, and add it to your melee weapon damage rolls. The extra damage is doubled for two-handed weapons or one-handed weapons wielded in two hands, and halved for light weapons or off-hand weapons. Unarmed strikes count as one-handed weapons for the purpose of this feat.
Synergy: If you have both this feat and Oversized Two Weapon Fighting, you may treat your off-hand weapon as its proper size with regards to the extra damage from this feat. Thus, a longsword in the off-hand would gain extra damage on a 1-for-1 basis.
Normal: A character may subtract a number from his attack rolls and add it to his melee damage rolls, but it can not exceed the character’s base attack bonus, up to a maximum of five points, and weapons wielded in two hands gain no additional damage. Light (except unarmed strikes) and off-hand weapons gain no extra damage from this.


This uses a houserule I have for "feat synergies" between Power Attack and Oversized Two Weapon Fighting in this case, though that part's really not important. Note how the "Normal" is altered from RAW.

[sblock]Feat synergies are just unique benefits between two feats if you possess both. I like the concept. Another example would be: If you have Quickdraw, you can "quick sheath" any weapon for which you also have Weapon Focus.[/sblock]

 

[Arkhandus]

No, the -5/+5 cap has always only been for Expertise/Combat Expertise.

Also, it's fairly stupid. While it might make some sense for Power Attack, Armor Class is generally inferior to attack bonuses on most characters and creatures, to where it's rather hard to avoid getting hit at upper levels. At that point AC is just for lessening the amount of Power Attack enemies can get away with and still hit you most of the time. Unless AC is made easier to get, Expertise doesn't really need a limit of -5/+5.


For Power Attack, I'd really just suggest using the 3.0 form of it, where the damage bonus is a 1-for-1 tradeoff regardless of what kind of melee weapon you use. Unarmed strike, bite attack, rapier, dagger, broken bottle, greatsword, or a log, always a 1-for-1 tradeoff.

Strength bonus to damage already favors two-handed weapons. Threat range increases, critical multiplier increases, and other things that help you get more critical hits already favor two-handed weapons for their greater damage. Heck, the existence of Animated magic shields favors two-handed weapons.

There's no reason for Power Attack to give anything extra to two-handed weapons when sword-and-board is already inferior at most levels (low levels are fairly even or slightly favor sword-and-board). And anyway, being able to defeat enemies in combat is more important than being able to avoid/survive attacks yourself; a super-tough walking tank is no good to the party if the bad guys decide to just go around him and kill the softer targets first. So there's no need to make the offensive choice (Power Attack) so vastly superior to the defensive choice (Combat Expertise).

At the very least it would make swashbuckling types and other one-handed weapon wielders more reasonable choices, since they wouldn't be so very weak by comparison. Two-weapon fighting is also rather inferior for the most part because of PA's overwhelming favor towards two-handed weapons. It shouldn't just be a decent choice for rogues.

 

[Jin_Kataki]

Eh. I guess I can kinda see where you guys are coming from, but it still just seems to make sense to me that the feat favors one over the other.

 

[Kerrick]

I think he was being rhetorical. The highest BAB you can get in the game (that I know of, anyway) is +20.

Yeah, I was exaggerating for the purposes of making my point.

The high BAB is only part of the problem, in my experience. Adding an uncapped bonus to damage is bad enough, but letting that bonus be doubled, tripled, or even quadrupled on a critical hit is just absurd.

A good point, that. Especially if you're getting 3 or 4 attacks/round.

Also, it's fairly stupid. While it might make some sense for Power Attack, Armor Class is generally inferior to attack bonuses on most characters and creatures, to where it's rather hard to avoid getting hit at upper levels. At that point AC is just for lessening the amount of Power Attack enemies can get away with and still hit you most of the time. Unless AC is made easier to get, Expertise doesn't really need a limit of -5/+5.

That, or you could just make Improved Combat Expertise (which I could've sworn was already a feat, but I can't find it), which grants up to -10/+10. Same with Power Attack.

 

[Arkhandus]

Kerrick: You're thinking Superior Expertise, I think, which was first printed in Oriental Adventures. It removes the -5/+5 cap for Expertise (Combat Expertise in 3.5). It was probably reprinted in Complete Warrior or something like that.

I was just saying that Power Attack really shouldn't have an unlimited range of -/+ when Combat Expertise is limited to just -5/+5, as it is in the core rules.

 

[Quartz]

That, or you could just make Improved Combat Expertise (which I could've sworn was already a feat, but I can't find it), which grants up to -10/+10. Same with Power Attack.

It's in the SRD. And it removes the CE limit entirely.

 

[Kerrick]

Kerrick: You're thinking Superior Expertise, I think, which was first printed in Oriental Adventures. It removes the -5/+5 cap for Expertise (Combat Expertise in 3.5). It was probably reprinted in Complete Warrior or something like that.

Never read either of those books (or even seen them).

It's in the SRD. And it removes the CE limit entirely.

Ah, got it. I could've sworn it was an epic feat, but I couldn't find it the first time I looked in the text SRD. I found it on d20srd.org.