A power attack feat for ranged weapons...

[HeavenShallBurn]

How about something along these lines?

Strike the Vitals [Fighter]
Slow down, feel your hand steady. Take some time and wait until the shot is perfect.
Prerequisites: Point-Blank Shot, BAB 6+, Wisdom 13+
Benefit: As a full round action you can pause and aim carefully. For each successive round during which you aim your critical threat range increases by one. For every three successive rounds during which you aim your critical multiplier goes up by one.

How's that look? Not sure about the adding to crit multiplier but that part could be dumped or simply adjusted to a higher cost in time spent aiming.

 

[Machiavelli]

The trouble with that version, HeavenShallBurn, is that it does not in any way increase the "steadyness" of your shot. You either miss, hit for a bit of damage, or somehow manage to really tear your target up. The odds of doing any one of these things don't change. The mechanic that matches your version best would be, I think, an arrow with a splintering head: it still imparts the same quantity of destructive energy to the target, so if it splinters on the surface of armor or in a non-vital area of flesh (say, the calf), then it will be about as bad as being hit by any old arrow, just a somewhat more difficult wound to heal by non-magical means. However, if it strikes one's gut or other vital area, then the shredding action of the splinters will wreak havok and likely result in death.

I happen to like Nifft's idea very much. The extra damage is caused by extra attention to striking a more vital area, dealing a non-scaling amount of extra damage because the difference in lethality between a calf-shot and a thigh-shot, or a shoulder-shot and a chest-shot, is only so much. Actually nailing a vital organ is handled by critical rolls.

 

[Nifft]

It looks mechanically remarkably similar to multishot, only better: instead of suffering a -2 penalty for each arrow, you don't suffer a penalty at all, and it guarantees +1d8 damage, instead of repeating arrow damage (which may only be 1d6). The only advantage multishot has is that it could be combined with a move action... not unreasonable.

Multi-Shot has two strong advantages:
1/ You add all extra damage that applies to the arrow, too. So if your bow is a flaming, shock, thundering, holy bow, your arrows could do considerably more than just +1d6 each. You could also fire multiple "special" arrows, like a volley of three Dragon Slaying arrows.
2/ You keep your Move action (as you note).

Why couldn't your Careful Aim be applied to melee weapons as well (changing the prerequisites as appropriate)?

I'd call it "Sneak Attack".

Why doesn't it repeat base weapon damage, instead of a fixed +1d8 (halflings throwing daggers and Titans weilding Huge Great Bows gain the same benefit??)
Perhaps, in a similar vein to sneak attacking with ranged weapons, a limit to the range at which it could apply? Short or Medium, perhaps?

1/ Sneak Attack damage doesn't scale with size.

2/ The big issue I have with limiting range is that Sneak Attack already works like that, and I'm seeking to NOT be limited by the constraints of Sneak Attack, but instead model a similar mechanic with its own limitations.

The big limit of this feat is: one shot per round. That's exactly compensated for if the target has Deflect Arrows. So it's got its own weakness built in (a "perfect defense" that it can't penetrate, if the target is aware of the attack), just like Sneak Attack has Uncanny Dodge as a defense.

It's also got a hint of Power Attack built in: if you also have Rapid Shot, you can take a -2 penalty to your shot but deal +1d8 damage (average 4.5, which is close enough to 4 that you can assume I'm saying 2-for-1 Power Attack). Unlike Power Attack, it requires an extra feat to activate that effect, and unlike Power Attack, you can't choose any value to subtract. It's -2 = +1d8, and that's it.

However, it's got a weakness compared to Power Attack, which is that the extra damage isn't multiplied on a critical hit. So I figured that compensated for the fact that +1d8 is more than 2-for-1.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. Please let me know if they make sense (or not)

Cheers, -- N

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

The trouble with that version, HeavenShallBurn, is that it does not in any way increase the "steadyness" of your shot. You either miss, hit for a bit of damage, or somehow manage to really tear your target up. The odds of doing any one of these things don't change.

Cool it was just a quick off-the-cuff attempt. I agree too unreliable.

Strike the Vitals [Fighter]
Slow down, feel your hand steady. Take some time and wait until the shot is perfect.
Prerequisites: Point-Blank Shot, BAB 6+, Wisdom 13+
Benefit: You carefully aim and make one shot as a full round action. For each iterative attack you would have made in the same round increase the damage of the weapon as if it were (1 or 2 not sure) sizes larger and add the character's strength bonus.

That's a far more predictable damage model that still scales. Assuming an 11th level fighter or ranger that would have a medium sized bow doing 3d6+2x or 4d6+2x base damage, nothing to sneeze at certainly enough to penetrate most DR.

 

[Nifft]

For each iterative attack you would have made in the same round increase the damage of the weapon as if it were (1 or 2 not sure) sizes larger and add the character's strength bonus.

I'm always frightened of multiple weapon size increases, because at some point the weapon size increase goes off the chart -- does this mean it goes geometric? I've seen this abused on the WotC Char Opt boards... it's powerful.

Consider a Cleric with the Strength domain. Enlarge person + righteous might + divine power = full BAB and two size categories larger. Now, with this feat, he could gain an additional 3 or 6 size categories... and if he had Rapid Shot, another 1 or 2, and if he were hasted, yet another 1 or 2.

Low-end: 2 + 5 = 7 size categories -- what's the final damage?
High-end: 2 + 10 = 12 size categories -- what's the final damage?

Thanks, -- N

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Consider a Cleric with the Strength domain. Enlarge person + righteous might + divine power = full BAB and two size categories larger. Now, with this feat, he could gain an additional 3 or 6 size categories... and if he had Rapid Shot, another 1 or 2, and if he were hasted, yet another 1 or 2.

Low-end: 2 + 5 = 7 size categories -- what's the final damage?
High-end: 2 + 10 = 12 size categories -- what's the final damage?

Thanks, -- N

ouch, never intended it to synergize with rapid shot. I mean it just doesn't make sense to simultaneously apply a feat that increases your number of attacks and one that decreases them, that's mutually exclusive. The problem is finding a scalable mechanic that adds enough damage without being abusable.

So, to avoid the Rapid Shot cheese tie it straight to BAB. To avoid the hulking hurler syndrome increase by 1d8+strength modifier per 6 BAB?
EDIT: You know the more I try to make this thing less abusable the more it looks like your version Nifft? Bah this is what you get when you post while sleep deprived.

 

[Nifft]

EDIT: You know the more I try to make this thing less abusable the more it looks like your version Nifft? Bah this is what you get when you post while sleep deprived.

"We accept you, we accept you! One of us! One of us!"

Cheers, -- N

 

[paradox42]

You might not have meant to imply it, but I inferred it. My apologies for that.

Accepted. Civility is all too rare on the Internet.

So from 45 to 60 points now?

My turn to apologize. In my first post I wasn't speaking of the particular melee tank in my Epic game, I was speaking of a generic melee fighter using a Greatsword and Power Attacking for 20 points. Assume a STR score of 15, the least such a character should have using the elite array, and the damage adds up as follows: 40 points (from +20 Power Attack) + 3 (1.5 times STR mod of +2) + 2 (minimum possible damage for a Greatsword at 2d6) = 45. Of course, this is assuming no other bonuses to STR, even no points put into it with level-ups, and a nonmagical weapon- in most games at 20th level (the minimum possible for Power Attacking by 20 points) those assumptions are patently absurd, and the actual damage would be considerably higher.

In fact, the character in my Epic game is 30th level, and his Epic cheese is not by any means confined to his Giant Size item. His STR score even at Medium size is in the high 30s, due to a +5 inherent bonus and his Bracers of Relentless Might, and he's wielding the equivalent of a +6 Holy Anarchic Keen Adamantine Greatsword. I say "equivalent" because it's actually made of a material other than Adamantine, which happens to duplicate its Hardness-penetrating ability and by the material's own description also penetrates DR as if it were Adamantine. In any case, with all of those bonuses, it's easy to see how his minimum base damage is in the 60s when he Power Attacks for huge amounts. He frequently sets his Power Attack to the maximum possible amount, because his bonus to hit even if his BAB is entirely cancelled out is still +20something as I recall. I don't have his sheet immediately in front of me.

With archery's other advantages, I don't see strict damage output as the only thing that should matter.

In a roleplaying sense, it probably doesn't; still, I think it would be hard to argue that if the archer in a combat deals, say, 30 total points of damage to the dragon the party's fighting, while the melee tank deals over 120 with several Power Attacks that hit, and the mage deals over 100 with a couple of well-placed Disintegrates or, better still, Orbs of Acid (also a ranged touch attack, but disallows a save and ignores SR to boot), the archer's player is going to feel a little bit outclassed. Mere range and the ability to make several extra attacks are not enough.

Nifft's feat reminds me of the Order of the Bow initiate's ranged precision attack.

Good point- it does sort of look like that.

 

[saucercrab]

My turn to apologize.

My turn to accept. Thanks for the clarification.

and he's wielding the equivalent of a +6 Holy Anarchic Keen Adamantine Greatsword. I say "equivalent" because it's actually made of a material other than Adamantine, which happens to duplicate its Hardness-penetrating ability and by the material's own description also penetrates DR as if it were Adamantine.

Obdurium, perhaps?

In a roleplaying sense, it probably doesn't; still, I think it would be hard to argue that if the archer in a combat deals, say, 30 total points of damage to the dragon the party's fighting, while the melee tank deals over 120 with several Power Attacks that hit, and the mage deals over 100 with a couple of well-placed Disintegrates or, better still, Orbs of Acid (also a ranged touch attack, but disallows a save and ignores SR to boot), the archer's player is going to feel a little bit outclassed. Mere range and the ability to make several extra attacks are not enough.

By giving the archer the ability to power attack, he pretty much becomes better than the melee'er (sp?). Not only can he dish out equivalent damage, but he can start doing it quicker (not as much need to move), can do it plain quicker (via Rapid Shot), & won't be taking as much damage (if any) as the melee'er. The melee'er's gets none of the latter two things, & in fact gets the last thing in reverse (he gets in the way & soaks damage, possibly to the point of death). "Yay, I'm a buffer zone!"

I prefer it like it is (in nonepic).

 

[paradox42]

By giving the archer the ability to power attack, he pretty much becomes better than the melee'er (sp?). Not only can he dish out equivalent damage, but he can start doing it quicker (not as much need to move), can do it plain quicker (via Rapid Shot), & won't be taking as much damage (if any) as the melee'er. The melee'er's gets none of the latter two things, & in fact gets the last thing in reverse (he gets in the way & soaks damage, possibly to the point of death). "Yay, I'm a buffer zone!"

I prefer it like it is (in nonepic).

If the feat we give the archer is a pure Power Attack analogue, you are correct. This is why I like Nifft's solution so much- it requires the archer to literally give up attacks to power it up. Thus, the archer trades the ability to do damage quicker for the ability to do more damage at once. The melee attacker still gets the PA damage on every successful hit, and will still come out ahead in the final analysis; the archer, however, now has the potential to deal enough damage in one shot to stay on par with the Power Attacker's per-attack total.

This means he can do cool things like take down that marauding dragon in one shot (as Bard vs. Smaug, in the Hobbit reference I made in my first post), which under existing rules he really can't unless the dragon is less than, say, 10 years old. To me, this can only be counted as a Good Thing, though obviously I'm somewhat used to players doing crazy things like taking down Demogorgon in two rounds (yes, they did that) or taking down a Devastation Beetle at all (they also did that).

And I'm not counting Arrows of Slaying, because by the time one could get into a situation to use them against an enemy like Smaug, that enemy is pretty much guaranteed to have a Fortitude modifier high enough that it only dies (by failing the save) on a natural 1. Hardly impressive odds there.