I always liked the idea of -5/+(1 damage die). This makes the maneuver actually bad in the general case, although it's still good if your attack bonus is buffed way higher than the enemy's AC. It's also another subtle buff to the greataxe over the greatsword.
I like the OP's idea of introducing this trade-off into the other pillars, but those pillars very distinctly lack any sort of consistent degree-of-success mechanic. Occasionally a check will say "If you succeed by 5 or more..." but I don't think that's widely adopted enough to make the -5/+10 formula work here.
I really wish that "skill crits" were a thing. If you roll a 20 on an ability check, it should feel special (or if you have Expertise, a 19-20). Then the trade-off could just be -5/+crit. The meaning there is pretty clear: you're taking a really risky approach that might have a better payoff. I'm not sure this sort of thing should be gated by a feat, though. It seems like id't work better as just a thing in the DM's toolbox. Like, "If the player describes a risky approach with a big payoff, increase the DC by 5, but if they succeed, they get an extra benefit, such as..."
I like the OP's idea of introducing this trade-off into the other pillars, but those pillars very distinctly lack any sort of consistent degree-of-success mechanic. Occasionally a check will say "If you succeed by 5 or more..." but I don't think that's widely adopted enough to make the -5/+10 formula work here.
I really wish that "skill crits" were a thing. If you roll a 20 on an ability check, it should feel special (or if you have Expertise, a 19-20). Then the trade-off could just be -5/+crit. The meaning there is pretty clear: you're taking a really risky approach that might have a better payoff. I'm not sure this sort of thing should be gated by a feat, though. It seems like id't work better as just a thing in the DM's toolbox. Like, "If the player describes a risky approach with a big payoff, increase the DC by 5, but if they succeed, they get an extra benefit, such as..."
