D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 power attack: the designers' rationale

[Derrick Reeves]

Y'know...

I don't think I've played the big man with the two-handed weapon in 3e.

Guess I'll have to fix that when the new rules come out.

I thought the rules change was a bit dubious, but now that the rationale has been revealed, I'm more positive about it. 3.5 looks better every day.

 

[Dark Jezter]

I was very skeptical at first--the 10th level character I adventure with regularly does 50-75 points of damage per round with his falchion and 3.0 power attack. However, with the changes to the haste spell, it's one of the ways for melee characters to make up for their full attack deficit vis a vis archers.

Unfortunately, sword and board fighters, finesse types, and TWF characters are left out in the cold by the change.

Sword & Board fighters get the new and improved tower shield.

Finesse fighters get the upgraded Weapon Finesse feat and (if their DM allows it) the Duelist class, which is now a core PrC.

Two Weapon Fighters now get Improved Two Weapon Fighting (which can now be taken earlier) and Greater Two Weapon Fighting, so that at higher levels they can make seven attacks per round.

 

[Chun-tzu]

In the Arms & Equipment Guide, there's a new magic sword called the Sword of Graceful Strikes. It's a specific magic weapon, short sword +3 that lets you use your Dex modifier instead of Str to determine damage. Combined with Weapon Finesse, that's not too shabby for a finesse fighter. Combine with Elf, Gloves of Dexterity, and the Duelist PrC, and you've got something downright dangeorus.

If it were a core item, that would be even better, of course.

 

[frisbeet]

This change does not bring PA even close to "broken".

Compare how much damage a 3.0 (or 3.5) TW fighter, 3.0 THW fighter, and 3.5 THW fighter do against a range of ACs. They all know the AC of their opponent and strike with the optimum PA which maximizes their average full attack (FA) damage/round.

Each Fighter is level 16 and has 24 Strength. Each has feats of

Power Attack
Weapon Focus, wielded weapon
Weapon Specialization, wielded weapon
Improved Critical, wielded weapon

The weapons wielded are +4 keen.

Fighter 1 (3.5 GS):
3.5 wielding a Greatsword

Fighter 2 (3.0 GS):
3.0 wielding a Greatsword

Fighter 3 (3.0 SSx2):
3.5 wielding two Short Swords. Has all appropriate TWF feats, such that he gets 3 off-hand attacks at level 16.

The average FA damage/round is = P(hitting AC__)*ave D + P(crit hitting AC__)*ave crit D, summed for all attacks. You can check the 3.0 numbers in the optimum PA spreadsheet on my website (large!); just click my signature. The 3.5 #s come from a very slight modification to this sheet.

The optimum PA maximizes ave FA dam/round, and is found by brutally calculating this value for all possible PAs (17 in this example). Format for each column: optimum PA__ave FA dam/round.

AC______3.5 GS________3.0 GS________3.0 SSx2

10_____15__210.1_____11__152.5_____13__203.2
11_____14__202.2_____11__148.1_____12__195.8
12_____13__194.3_____10__143.7_____11__188.5
13_____12__186.4_____10__139.4_____10__181.1
14_____11__178.4_____9___135.2_____9___173.8
15_____10__170.5_____9___131.0_____8___166.4
16_____9___162.6_____8___126.9_____7___159.1
17_____8___154.6_____8___122.9_____7___152.0
18_____8___147.0_____7___119.0_____6___145.0
19_____7___139.5_____6___115.0_____6___138.2
20_____7___132.3_____5___111.0_____5___131.5
21_____6___125.1_____4___107.1_____5___125.0
22_____6___118.3_____3___103.1_____4___118.6
23_____5___111.5_____2___99.1______3___112.3
24_____4___104.8_____1___95.2______3___106.2
25_____4___98.3______0___91.2______3___100.2
26_____4___92.1______0___86.7______2___94.5
27_____3___86.1______0___82.2______1___88.8
28_____2___80.2______0___77.7______0___83.1
29_____1___74.3______0___73.0______0___76.4
30_____0___68.3______0___68.3______0___69.7
31_____0___62.3______0___62.3______0___63.1
32_____0___56.4______0___56.4______0___57.1
33_____0___50.5______0___50.5______0___51.2
34_____0___45.8______0___45.8______0___45.5
35_____0___41.1______0___41.1______0___39.9
36_____0___36.6______0___36.6______0___34.4
37_____0___32.1______0___32.1______0___30.3
38_____0___27.8______0___27.8______0___26.3
39_____0___24.6______0___24.6______0___22.5
40_____0___21.4______0___21.4______0___18.8
41_____0___18.3______0___18.3______0___15.2
42_____0___15.4______0___15.4______0___13.0
43_____0___12.6______0___12.6______16__11.3
44_____16__11.6______0___10.8______16__11.3
45_____16__11.6______0___9.1_______16__11.3
46_____16__11.6______16__8.2_______16__11.3
47_____16__11.6______16__8.2_______16__11.3
48_____16__11.6______16__8.2_______16__11.3
49_____16__11.6______16__8.2_______16__11.3
50_____16__11.6______16__8.2_______16__11.3

The new PA helps make average damage more equatable in an apples-to-apples comparison.

Such analysis says nothing about the greater cost in feats of TWF, even in 3.5, nor the greater cost in wielding two +4 keen swords vs. one. This is the only meritous point for declaring the new PA change "broken", but is a weak one IMHO.

From other posts I repeat myself here with these calculations, not as a blowhard (I hope), but because I believe this kind of topic hugely benefits from exact and complete analysis, and suffers from approximation and gross generalization. And because we can do such analysis. Indeed my analyis is not complete, insofar as I haven't calculated the multitude of other comparisons also germane to the topic (the 13 Str Fighter, for example).

Anyways...new PA is not broken. It's an improvement (at least for the level 16 GS wielding fighter, putting him on par with his TWF slightly richer twin).

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I don't know. I'll reserve final judgment until I see what the many Enboarders think once it's in play. But my gut tells me that two-handed weapon fighters were already doing more damage than any other fighter build. Now, this just means they'll be doing more more damage. I understand the math rationale, but big picture, it just widens the gap between the two-handers and the other builds...

 

[Jens]

This bit strongly appeals to me:

In a perfect world, Power Attack would work just like Strength bonus to damage (half for light, normal for one-handed, one-and-one-half for two-handed). But unlike Str bonus (which generally only has to be calculated once, at which point it's written down on the character sheet), the PA bonus changes every round. Asking players to calculate those numbers on the fly grinds combat to a halt. Thus, the 3.5 PA simplifies it to "none for light, normal for one-handed, double for two-handed." Ultimately, the difference isn't that huge--a few points of damage here or there.

When I saw this thread, I was just thinking to myself "the damage bonus from power attack should be included in the strength damage bonus and multiplied along with it... maybe damage bonuses from strength should always be halved when using a light weapon, not just when wielded in the off-hand, that would make sense... then there could be a separate feat that increases the strength and power attack damage bonuses to x2 for twohanded weapons... that would be a good feat... hey, that thread looks interesting..."

I think I would still prefer the 'perfect' way to do PA damage, but at least it has been considered and rejected for a reason; it *is* easier and faster to multiply by 0 and 2 than 0.5 and 1.5.

(I just notice something. The quote says "...just like Strength bonus to damage (half for light,..." which seems to imply that light weapons *will* only get half strength bonus. Is this a bit of news I have missed or am I just reading it wrong?)

 

[Dimwhit]

I just don't buy the math arguement. That always assumes a lot of information, particularly multiple attacks. I can't count how many times my fighter was only able to attack once in a round (surprise round, full move then attack, draw a weapon and attack, etc.). In that situation, the new power attack is brutal. What fighter with a +19 on his first attack (like my 11th level fighter) would use the new power attack to chop 5 off the to hit for an extra 10 pts of damage? That's crazy! For that reason alone, the new power attack is a bit silly.

I don't know, in the long run, it probably won't be a balance breaker. It just seems that somehow people apparently thought spellcasters were tougher than fighters, and 3.5 is trying to stop that. In the campaigns I've been involved with, it's the fighters who have always dominated the combats, not the other way around. That's why I will always be convinced many of these changes were due to the munchkins. At least from my gaming perspective.

 

[Mike Sullivan]

An interesting claim that Psion made was that Power Attack would have been a "must have" feat, even if it had not been changed, because you'll more often have to cut through 3.5 DR. I have no idea if this is true, so I thought I'd run the numbers.

I'm going to pair a Werewolf (which will almost certainly have DR 5/Silver) against a greatsword-using Fighter level 4 (Werewolves are CR 3 in the present game, and I think it's not unlikely that their CR will be bumped by one for the DR change).

Werewolves have AC 16 in hybrid form, which seems unlikely to change.

Our Fighter will have Str 18 and be specialized in his Greatsword +1 (and have focus in it, of course). He has no silver Greatsword, and thus is going to be sucking up the DR.

Fighter's attack bonus is: +4 (BAB) +4 (Str) +1 (Magic) +1 (WF) = +10

Fighter's damage is: 2d6 + 6 (str) + 2 (WS) + 1 (Magic) = 16 before crits. Crits multiply by 1.1, so that's 17.6 damage. Subtract 5 for DR, and we're looking at 12.6 damage.

He hits on a 6+, which is to say 75% of the time, so his expected per-round damage is 9.45, before any Power Attacking.

Using 3.0 PA for 2 points:

He now hits on an 8+, 65% of the time, and his damage goes to 18 pre-crit, 19.8 after crit, -5 for DR is 14.8. 14.8 * .65 = 9.62.

Using 3.0 PA for 3 points:

He now hits on a 9+, 60% of the time, and his damage goes to 19 pre-crit, 20.9 after crit, -5 for DR is 15.9. 15.9 * .60 = 9.54

So, yes, 3.0 PA would help this guy. It would add a little less than a fifth of an expected hit point of damage per round. I'm going to go ahead and suggest that that's not a "must have" feat.


But maybe we should look at something different. How about a high-end challenge?

A Pit Fiend (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=rpga/articles/baatezustats) has DR 15/holy silver, and I gather that it's supposed to be a very high-level challenge, so let's pit a 20th level fighter against one.

Our 20th level fighter has a kick ass +5 keen greatsword of speed, but it ain't holy silver. He's got a modified strength of 28, and has the feats Improved Critical, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization.

So, his attack bonus is +20/+20/+15/+10/+5 (BAB, speed quality), +9 (Str), +5 (Magic), +2 (Feats) = +36/+36/+31/+26/+21

His damage is: 2d6 + 13 (str) + 5 (magic) + 4 (feats) = 29 base. His crit thresh is 15-20 x2, so he does 1.3 times that damage, or 37.7 expected damage per hit. Minus 15 for the DR, and we get 22.7 damage per hit.

The Pit Fiend's AC is 40, so the fighter hits on a 4,4,9,14,19. Ugh, that last one affects his average per hit damage. Okay, so that's 22.7 * .85 + 22.7 * .85 + 22.7 * .60 + 22.7 * .35 + 16.9 * .1 = 61.845 damage per round, expected, on a full attack.

Now, suppose that the fighter uses 3.0 PA for 1:

His damage increases to 39 per hit, on average, minus 15 for the DR is 24. So, he ends up with: 24 * .8 + 24 * .8 + 24 * .55 + 24 * .3 + 16.5 * .05 = 59.625 damage per round, expected, on a full attack.

So that's a decrease in per-round damage, making PA far from a "must have" (actually, I doubt that 3.5 PA would be a lot of use here either).

I don't know, maybe there's something in the middle there where 3.0 PA would be wildly useful.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm going to pair a Werewolf (which will almost certainly have DR 5/Silver) against a greatsword-using Fighter level 4 (Werewolves are CR 3 in the present game, and I think it's not unlikely that their CR will be bumped by one for the DR change).

Werewolves have AC 16 in hybrid form, which seems unlikely to change.

Our Fighter will have Str 18 and be specialized in his Greatsword +1 (and have focus in it, of course). He has no silver Greatsword, and thus is going to be sucking up the DR.

I'd like this example better if he didn't have a Strength score of 18. The game was designed for 25 point buy, and even though such a fighter could take 18 Strength, he usually wouldn't.

I really liked the pit fiend example, though.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Sword & Board fighters get the new and improved tower shield.

An extra +2 to AC at the cost of -2 to hit doesn't seem either impressive or desirable to me. . . .

Finesse fighters get the upgraded Weapon Finesse feat and (if their DM allows it) the Duelist class, which is now a core PrC.

The core duelist p-class is probably a good thing but the new weapon finesse will be mostly irrelevant to the finesse/nonfinesse fighter argument. Fighters use Weapon Specialization and focus so they will still only be optimized with one particular weapon just like they were before.

Two Weapon Fighters now get Improved Two Weapon Fighting (which can now be taken earlier) and Greater Two Weapon Fighting, so that at higher levels they can make seven attacks per round.

None of these do anything for the primary weakness of TWF: the lack of full attack actions.

Greater Weapon Specialization is actually at least as much of a boon to TWF characters as the changes to TWF.