A Change to Power Attack

[airwalkrr]

I don't like 3.5 PA, but I wouldn't change one core thing just because some prestige classes or feats in optional supplement are too good in combination with that. I hope you're doing this chance first because you want to change PA itself!

You'll notice that problems with supplemental material was only one of six different criteria for wanting to change it.

 

[starwed]

One additional option to make PA less attractive is to allow a players to "Fight aggressively" similar to how they can fight defensively. Maybe a -2 to attack for +2 damage, +4 with two-handers.

(Personally I'd also add an offensive option with -4 AC, +2 to attack as well. I guess the charge action kind of covers this, but still, I like the symmetry of trade-offs. )

Random thought: if you weaken power attack, you make Monkey Grip a much better feat. Hooray!

 

[Harm]

The problem with your "solution" is you're lowering the overall damage of melee-centric character. While power attack is far more powerful than other feats, it's also the only thing really keeping fighters/barbarians etc. even CLOSE to the power level of mages. It simply doesn't compare to slay living or assay spell resistance + harm (75-150 damage!) or a maximized empowered (via a rather inexpensive wand) greater fireburst, 150 + 7d10 damage to everything in range. Adding +30 or +40 damage to an attack that is very likely going to miss after the to hit penalty is really dick all compared to what a cleric can do with a touch attack spell.

It's an ability easily defeated by AC, and when you ARE fighting lower AC opponents the amount of damage a good rogue build can put out will make you wonder why anyone would play a barbarian, power attack or no. If power attack is causing problems in your campaign, either bump the AC on the mobs up slightly (even a few points will dramatically lower damage output), or don't let power attack damage be increased by other feats or crits.

 

[Li Shenron]

The problem with your "solution" is you're lowering the overall damage of melee-centric character.

I think that might be a benefit in someone's game

Also notice that after 50 points of damage, a melee attack becomes a save-or-die effect, due to the rules for death from massive damage, which makes it somehow more similar to what spells can achieve. You might want to check which is the minimum character level at which a "melee build" can reach this ability, and compare it to the minimum level a spellcaster has access to save-or-die spells.

 

[Harm]

I think that might be a benefit in someone's game

They would have extremely weak mages and rogued in that game then.

Also notice that after 50 points of damage, a melee attack becomes a save-or-die effect, due to the rules for death from massive damage, which makes it somehow more similar to what spells can achieve. You might want to check which is the minimum character level at which a "melee build" can reach this ability, and compare it to the minimum level a spellcaster has access to save-or-die spells.

Sound Lance will be breaking 50 damage off maximize at level 7 for straight clerics and wizards. Specialist type wizards can probably do it a level or two earlier. Using empowered rod which at 8th can be bought with starting cash will add a further 4d8 to sound lance 3 times per day. At 8th level, power attack will add +16 damage at the cost of 8 to-hit which means a fighter with 20 strength, double weapon focus and a +3 weapon will have +8 to hit and will be missing anything with more than 18AC (which is everything) more than half the time. 0.25% of the time they'll crit (assuming it's not undead, construct etc.) and might break 50 if they roll well on their base damage.

Never seen a monster die from failing their massive damage fort save. I've seen plenty of monsters die from the massive amounts of damage a cleric rams into them though.

 

[airwalkrr]

The problem with your "solution" is you're lowering the overall damage of melee-centric character. While power attack is far more powerful than other feats, it's also the only thing really keeping fighters/barbarians etc. even CLOSE to the power level of mages. It simply doesn't compare to slay living or assay spell resistance + harm (75-150 damage!) or a maximized empowered (via a rather inexpensive wand) greater fireburst, 150 + 7d10 damage to everything in range. Adding +30 or +40 damage to an attack that is very likely going to miss after the to hit penalty is really dick all compared to what a cleric can do with a touch attack spell.

The truth of the matter is that this is what D&D is all about. At low levels, the warriors deal out the most damage and take the hits. At high levels, they become shields for the mage. But the game is balanced that way. If your philosophy is that warriors need to deal as much damage as the mages at high levels, then you obviously believe in a higher power curve overall than I do.

Never seen a monster die from failing their massive damage fort save.

You obviously do not play the game as much as I do. I see it happen all the time. Happened just a couple weeks ago in my Age of Worms campaign as a matter of fact. Power builds for warriors can hit 50+ damage regularly and not sacrifice too much of their ability to hit with the proper bonuses from feats, PrCs, spells, and other abilities. There is at least a 5% chance of killing a monster everytime you deal 50+ damage, and well-built a warrior can do this all day long. A wizard or cleric can usually only do it a couple times each day.

And need I remind you of Shock Trooper? Or Leap Attack? Or Spirited Charge? Or the lance? Or the exotic weapon master? There are plenty of ways to boost your PA damage without sacrificing to much in the to-hit penalty.

 

[BRP2]

For me, this still does not address the issue that numerous abilities in the game are too powerful when combined with the way Power Attack works.

No offense Airwalkrr, but you are not making a lot of sense. Obviously you are not seeing your own problem. Just ban everything, every- other-thing, or everything but one thing about Power Attack that isn't in PHB. It is really that simple.

If Critical Hits + Power Attack is your problem: don't multiply Power Attack damage. Simple really and kind of make sense. You can just consider Power Attacking "sacrificing accuracy for critical damage" so stacking it with a critical damage multiplier wouldn't make sense.

Another point I have is that you are pretty much slapping anyone who wants to play a straightforward melee in the face. Let me tell you, Power Attack or not, mages are stronger. If your problem is that mages don't have the endurance of melee, why not make their endurance stronger using varient rules that allows them to constantly recover spells throughout the day(I know there is one like that in UA). This way you don't take an already handicapped playing style(when compared to sneak attack-ers and reality-altering spell casters) and break both their arms too.

My final point: size doesn't make sense. The strength gained by size is represented by the stat named strength. So if you were to use a non-size based Power Attack(-3 for 1d6, multiply by 1.5 if 2-handed) you can limit the amount of times one get this bonus by their STR mod(originally BAB might be a good idea so players with high-strength are not too strong in the beginning). Someone with STR18(+4) could drop Attack-12 for 4d6 added to their damage. If thats too steep, make it -2 for each additional time it is applied(+4 would mean Attack-9 for 4d6 which is very nice). Basically, turn it into a parallel of Sneak Attack.

 

[airwalkrr]

No offense Airwalkrr, but you are not making a lot of sense. Obviously you are not seeing your own problem. Just ban everything, every- other-thing, or everything but one thing about Power Attack that isn't in PHB. It is really that simple.

And that, my friends, is the textbook definition of irony.

I would rather make a blanket rule about power attack than make an adjustment to or ban every other ability in the game based on it. I attempted it once. The list is LONG. I don't think you appreciate how long it is.

If Critical Hits + Power Attack is your problem: don't multiply Power Attack damage. Simple really and kind of make sense. You can just consider Power Attacking "sacrificing accuracy for critical damage" so stacking it with a critical damage multiplier wouldn't make sense.

It's just one of my problems. This fix addressed but one of my problems. My fix addresses all of them.

Another point I have is that you are pretty much slapping anyone who wants to play a straightforward melee in the face. Let me tell you, Power Attack or not, mages are stronger. If your problem is that mages don't have the endurance of melee, why not make their endurance stronger using varient rules that allows them to constantly recover spells throughout the day(I know there is one like that in UA). This way you don't take an already handicapped playing style(when compared to sneak attack-ers and reality-altering spell casters) and break both their arms too.

I don't recall "balancing mages against melee characters" being one of my criteria for wanting to change PA in my OP.

My final point: size doesn't make sense. The strength gained by size is represented by the stat named strength. So if you were to use a non-size based Power Attack(-3 for 1d6, multiply by 1.5 if 2-handed) you can limit the amount of times one get this bonus by their STR mod(originally BAB might be a good idea so players with high-strength are not too strong in the beginning). Someone with STR18(+4) could drop Attack-12 for 4d6 added to their damage. If thats too steep, make it -2 for each additional time it is applied(+4 would mean Attack-9 for 4d6 which is very nice). Basically, turn it into a parallel of Sneak Attack.

Size makes lots of sense. If you think the size bonus to Str is supposed to be the only representation of a large creature's size advantage, then you have already lost the argument. Grapple checks, trip attempts, disarm attempts, etc. all have size modifiers that favor the larger character. You get Str and the size modifier to all of these things, why not PA?

 

[Harm]

The truth of the matter is that this is what D&D is all about. At low levels, the warriors deal out the most damage and take the hits. At high levels, they become shields for the mage. But the game is balanced that way. If your philosophy is that warriors need to deal as much damage as the mages at high levels, then you obviously believe in a higher power curve overall than I do.

Thats your opinion. It's wrong, and you're welcome to keep it. I'm pretty sure no one else wants it.

You obviously do not play the game as much as I do. I see it happen all the time. Happened just a couple weeks ago in my Age of Worms campaign as a matter of fact. Power builds for warriors can hit 50+ damage regularly and not sacrifice too much of their ability to hit with the proper bonuses from feats, PrCs, spells, and other abilities. There is at least a 5% chance of killing a monster everytime you deal 50+ damage, and well-built a warrior can do this all day long. A wizard or cleric can usually only do it a couple times each day.

Couple times a day? Odd, you just stated the complete opposite above, that mages are the damage dealers. Any wizard or cleric of a level who can only hit 50 damage "a couple times a day" has dedicated the majority of their spellbook to non-damageing spells.

The at least 5% for killing a monster is more of an at most unless you're feeding your party underleveled monsters. Most mobs hit 14+ fort saves fast, or are immune to crits, or are played by a GM that makes them more than drooling idiots and has them buff themelves.

Additionally you can use the varient from DMGpg27 for larger mobs and massive damage, or simply toss it out because it's a stupid holdover from the previous edition that makes no sense at higher levels. For a first level wizard 4 points of damage is massive, for a 20th level fighter, 50 isn't.

And need I remind you of Shock Trooper? Or Leap Attack? Or Spirited Charge? Or the lance? Or the exotic weapon master? There are plenty of ways to boost your PA damage without sacrificing to much in the to-hit penalty.

And need I remind you that I already answered that above and said if you don't like the synergy, don't allow it. Hell, don't allow any of the money-making-power-up-cheesy- stuff that isn't in PHB or DMG and all of your problems would dissapear and the game would be better.

Speaking of a couple times per day however, thats about as often as Leap Attack/Shock Trooper could even be used unless you're having seriously odd fights. Also by doing a charge you're not doing a full attack action and those additional 1-5 hits could be doing more.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

An optional power attack idea, just for fun.

Every -1 to hit you take, your threat range increases by 1.

Even more optional...

Your threat multiplyer increases by 1 per -5.
If wielding a two handed weapon, threat multiplyer increases by 1 per -3.


This would increase the chance of a crit, but keep large chunks of damage from the standard power attack from multiplying, (i.e. no +20 damage from a -10 PA turning into a +40, +60 or +80). Any number crunchers out there know if this would move damage up, down, or at all?