Leap Attack feat & Monsters?

[Iku Rex]

We on the ENWorld "D&D Rules" forum pass back and forth our experiences with using the D&D rules so that we can build on each other's successes and have even more fun than otherwise. Blatantly tossing around extreme interpretations and attempting to call them normal doesn't help that goal.

Actually, "we on the ENWorld 'D&D Rules' forum" tend to want to establish what the rules are. It's the main purpose of the forum. At least, that used to be the case and I'd like to think it still is. Most of us are even capable of understanding the difference between what the rules are and what the rules, in our opinion, ought to be. Feel free to offer your thoughts on the latter, but do try to keep the two apart in your posts.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Can you perhaps explain a little more how you "read" the extra damage from power attacking with a two-handed weapon to be equal to the number subtracted from your attack rolls? It seems to me that this "reading" flat out contradicts the Power Attack feat...

I never stated that. So at least be accurate in your quotes.

What I said was the maximum damage modifier you can get with Leap Attack is x3. I don't buy into the cheesy interpretation that just b/c Power Attack doesn't use the word "doubled" (it uses "twice"), then you can still apply the "tripled" from Leap Attack without worrying about the multiplier rule. If that's how you want to run it, fine. But that's where I roll my eyes as a DM, pat the player on the head, and say, "Nice try buddy."

It's pretty simple really (unless you're trying to be a rules lawyer and twist interpretations). If you pull 5 with a two-handed weapon, you add twice the amount in damage (10). With Leap Attack, you triple it (15). Going from 5 to 15 is tripling. Which is the x3 I referred to. I can't imagine too many DMs out there allowing x6 damage. But hey, nothing surprises me around here anymore.

p.s., All this is off-topic and if you want to really use EN World for what it's intended for, you should be starting another thread to discuss how Power Attack and Leap Attack works.

So I guess the real question is: Should a creature that adds 1.5x its Str modifier to damage be considered the equivalent of using a two-handed weapon for purposes of Power/Leap Attack? And I think the answer is no, b/c if that were true it would normally be getting 2x when using Power Attack (and 3x with Leap Attack). The RAW don't support that, although personally I think they should.

 

[Iku Rex]

I never stated that. So at least be accurate in your quotes..

I wasn't quoting you, I was summarizing your expressed position. You "read" the feat so that it "gives up to 3x the number subtracted for Power Attack". (A quote. You can tell by the quotation marks.) Since the feat clearly states that you get "triple the extra damage from Power Attack" with a two-handed weapon it follows that in order to read the feat to "give up 3x the number subtracted for Power Attack", then the extra damage from power attacking with a two-handed weapon must be equal to the number subtracted from your attack rolls. The logic involved is not very complicated.

What I said was the maximum damage modifier you can get with Leap Attack is x3. I don't buy into the cheesy interpretation that just b/c Power Attack doesn't use the word "doubled", then you can still apply the "tripled" from Leap Attack without worrying about the multiplier rule.

Nobody's offered that argument. What I said was: At no point do more than one multiplier apply to an abstract value. The values being multiplied are "the number subtracted from your attack rolls" (doubled as part of the regular Power Attack calculation) and "the extra damage from Power Attack" (tripled with the Leap Attack feat). They are not the same value.

You'll notice that I even used the word "doubled" in my post. :\

Furthermore you claim to "read" the feat to give triple the attack penalty in extra damage, while the multiplying rule frankthedm wanted to apply would leave us with 2x*3x= 4x .

If that's how you want to run it, fine.

Actually, that's not "how I want to run it". But due to my awe-inspiring mental abilities I am capable of keeping "how I want to run it" apart from "what the feat says".

It's pretty simple really (unless you're trying to be a rules lawyer and twist interpretations). If you pull 5 with a two-handed weapon, you add twice the amount in damage (10). With Leap Attack, you triple it (15). Going from 5 to 15 is tripling. Which is the x3 I referred to.

That's not what it says and there's no reasonable way to read it like that.

Here's a short quote from the CW Frenzied Berserker errata. "A 10th-level frenzied berserker deals +100% the normal damage from her use of the Power Attack feat. In other words, when using the Power Attack feat, a frenzied berserker wielding a two-handed weapon gains a +4 bonus on damage rolls (instead of a +2 bonus) for each –1 penalty she applies to her attack rolls.") "

When this ability doubles the normal damage from Power Attack, why isn't the result +2 damage for each -1 penalty on attacks? Is "the extra damage from Power Attack" (Leap Attack) very different from "the normal damage from her use of the Power Attack feat" (Supreme Power Attack)?

 

[Legildur]

Once again, WotC's proof reading lets them down.

All I know is that if I my 12th level glaive wielding half-orc Barbarian had taken Leap Attack instead of Blind Fight, that my DM would have had kittens the first time it was used. Then, most likely, he'd either nerf the feat to something more reasonable, or his critters would suddenly be making use of it against us.....

Either way, when you talking about the sort of attack bonuses a raging, charging, half-orc barbarian with a belt of giant strength and magical glaive can achieve, the Leap Attack ability very quickly becomes outrageous no matter what the ruling....

Though I am watching this thread with interest to see what the final consensus is.

 

[FoxWander]

Darn, and here I thought the errata made it easier when it actually just confuses the issue more. If the errata had changed the second sentence and then removed the third sentence completely, I think we'd be left with a pretty balanced (and easy to understand) feat. I think that may have been the INTENT, but they seem to have failed miserably if it was.

The problem is in the language used: the power attack feat doesn't mention 'extra damage', it says "subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls" or, for weapons used two-handed, "instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls".

If the writer of Leap Attack had said, two or three times the number subtracted from your attack roll instead of, double or triple the 'extra damage from power attack', there wouldn't be any of this confusion.

So, for weapons used two-handed, is the 'extra damage' the amount subtracted from your attack roll which is doubled for a power attack OR tripled for a leap attack? Or is the 'extra damage' the doubled amount itself from the power attack, ALL of which gets tripled in a leap attack (for a net effect of 6x the amount subtracted from your attack roll)?

I think I'll give WOTC customer service a try, with a specific example so hopefully I'll get a clear answer. Not that that will actually clear up the issue based on how little faith folks seem to have in customer service, but at least it'll be something.

 

[Legildur]

I think I'll give WOTC customer service a try, with a specific example so hopefully I'll get a clear answer. Not that that will actually clear up the issue based on how little faith folks seem to have in customer service, but at least it'll be something.

I used to strongly hold that view, but that has been moderated after seeing a few reputable posters commenting a few months back that custserv had lifted their game. It may be that we get a nice surprise.

 

[FoxWander]

Well I submitted it to Customer Service, we'll see what they have to say. For the record, here's what I submitted...

My gaming group can't decide on how Leap Attack is supposed to work, specifically in regards to two-handed weapons. I'll form my question as an example to answer. My character is using a greatsword, he subtracts 4 from his attack roll and power attacks with a leap attack- how much damage do I add to my melee damage when I land an hit my target? Please be specific as to how much damage comes from what effect to arrive at the total amount added to damage so that we can be clear on how the feat works. Thank you.

I'll let you all know what they tell me.

 

[Amazing Triangle]

When I read the errata as it is now. A Single handed weapon allows you to go from 1:1 of hit to damage; to 1:2 of hit to damage. This is a single step. Therefore it would make the most sense that 3x is actually a replacement not an enhancement. So it would go from 1:2 of hit to damage, 1:3 of hit to damage with a two-handed weapon.

I do agree if the feat only offered a 1:2 for single handed weapon/light weapon and offered 1:4 or 1:6 for a two handed weapon would allow an excessive increase in the damage potential changing it from a nice feat into a must have feat.

As it is now written I would deduce it would be a 1:3 hit:damage it would be a replacement not multiplier.

 

[Iku Rex]

Well I submitted it to Customer Service, we'll see what they have to say. For the record, here's what I submitted...

(This is not a good Custserv question. You need to feed them all the relevant facts as well as the question.)

 

[FoxWander]

(This is not a good Custserv question. You need to feed them all the relevant facts as well as the question.)

Such as... Could you give me an example of what you mean?

I mean, I could've explained the differences in thought- that people read the same thing and all have valid arguments for seeing it as x3, x4, or even x6 the amount subtracted from the attack roll, but that would've just confused the issue to them as well. For the purpose of knowing an 'official' answer they don't need to see the different ways people are confused on the issue, they just need to tell me the answer to my question so we know what is intended by the feat.

I'd be happy to submit a more lengthy question, though, if you'll let me know what you'd like it to include.