Definitive (supposed) Leap Attack answer

[buzz]

My group has been flailing on our mailing list about Leap Attack. We've gotten multiple, contradictory answers from WotC. Eventually, one of us actually called them up and spoke to a rep. A few days later I and he received this definitive ruling. I'm wondering if they are contacting everyone who asked about Leap Attack, as neither of our requests mentioned that we were in the same group.

Hey there Mark. There was a revisit to the Leap Attack feat official answer, and it seems that I misunderstood what the answer was supposed to be. Because of our Help system, I'm able to send you this update and inform you how the rule is supposed to be properly adjudicated. This is passed down from the big dogs.

The 100% entry in the errata only applies to the second sentence. The 100% entry in the errata document was created to cut down on the confusion regarding the intent behind the word "double". They got rid of the "double" entry because it confused how it was supposed to work with other effects that "doubled" power attack damage.

The 3rd sentence is not changed. The "Tripled" entry is intended to replace the "doubled" entry mentioned in the Power Attack feat.

The final math behind the feat is as follows:

Power Attack + Leap Attack + one-handed weapon: -1 atk, +2 damage

Power Attack + Leap Attack + two-handed weapon: -1 atk, +3 damage

According to the errata, Leap Attack doesn’t add any more damage when used with a two-handed weapon than it does when used with a one-handed weapon. Either way, it is intended to add one more point of damage per point of attack penalty.

I'm very sorry for the confusion that has occurred regarding this issue. Hopefully this will help to solve any debates that have occurred due to the previous incorrect ruling on my part.


Take Care and Good Gaming!

Upshot... it's x2/x3.

Did anyone else receive this?

 

[Legildur]

If you search for some recent threads on this topic, I think you'll find that there was a different outcome. Personally, I think the one-handed=+2 and two-handed=+3 per point(while overkill) is the better reading of the feat.

 

[Felix]

The 100% entry in the errata document was created to cut down on the confusion regarding the intent behind the word "double".

If people still have a hard time doing DnD doubling math, then Leap Attack is the least of their problems.

Should have kept the terminology consistent.

 

[buzz]

If you search for some recent threads on this topic, I think you'll find that there was a different outcome. Personally, I think the one-handed=+2 and two-handed=+3 per point(while overkill) is the better reading of the feat.

The response I posted post-dates the recent discussions. My and my buddy's initial queries included the previous custserv answers that had been posted to ENWorld. The emails we received are reportedly corrections to those.

I.e., x2/x3 is the current official stance from WotC custserv, or so this email would indicate. Whether this has been communicated throughout the custserv staff, I have no idea.

 

[starwed]

If people still have a hard time doing DnD doubling math, then Leap Attack is the worst of their problems.

The main problem was the Leap Attack/Frenzied Berserker combo, and that had nothing to do with D&D math. (The exact wording of the separate abilities working together in a weird way.)

 

[RigaMortus2]

If people still have a hard time doing DnD doubling math, then Leap Attack is the least of their problems.

Should have kept the terminology consistent.

Well it is kind of off putting. Traditionally when you do D&D doubling math, it is applied to the damage as a whole (weapon damage + Str mod + enhancement bonus + power attack + smite + whatever else you can throw in there) whereas Leap Attack only affects the extra damage from Power Attack. I can see where some confusion would lie.

Also, if you want to be really nit picky, the D&D math only comes into play when you have multipliers. Since the first part of the errata on Leap Attack states you ADD +100% of the damage (instead of saying doubling or "multiply by two"), you can kinda get around it because of the RAW wording. Similiarly, when you "triple" the damage, that could mean one of two things... damage x3 (which would be a multiplier, and thus follow the D&D multiplication rules) or you could ADD the damage 3 times. I know, it's a play on words, but if you want to use the multipication rules as they are written, then only emphasis what you do when you multiply a number, not add it numerous times And yes, I know it is technically the same thing, and "real world" math backs that up, but we are talking D&D terms/lingo here, where you have to worry about things like the definition of "effect".

 

[Felix]

Well it is kind of off putting. Traditionally when you do D&D doubling math, it is applied to the damage as a whole (weapon damage + Str mod + enhancement bonus + power attack + smite + whatever else you can throw in there) whereas Leap Attack only affects the extra damage from Power Attack. I can see where some confusion would lie.

Sure, there would be some confusion, but the introduction of new terminology to increase damage would be worse (and is!).

Since Leap Attack increases the benefit gained from Power Attack, simply say that LA adds one additional damage for every point of BAB you sacrifice. For example, if you PA for 5 with a one-handed weapon in one hand, you gain a +10 bonus to damage; if you PA for 5 with a two-handed weapon (or 1-hand in two), you gain a +15 bonus to damage.

That language would apply to the Frenzied Berserker by changing the Improved PA from (One handed: -2/+3 to -1/+2) (Two handed: -1/+3 to -1/+4) and Supreme PA from (One handed:-1/+2 to -1/+3) (Two handed: -1/+4 to -1/+5).

Instead of this -1/+8 business or whatever we have with the "+100%" nonsense.

 

[buzz]

In my original query to WotC and my deliberations with my group, I suggested the following wording:

"If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you deal twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls. If you use this tactic with a two-handed weapon, you deal three times the number subtracted from your attack rolls."

This is the exact same terminology that the Power Attack feat uses, and is very clear about what it is you're multiplying and by how much.

 

[RigaMortus2]

In my original query to WotC and my deliberations with my group, I suggested the following wording:

"If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you deal twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls. If you use this tactic with a two-handed weapon, you deal three times the number subtracted from your attack rolls."

This is the exact same terminology that the Power Attack feat uses, and is very clear about what it is you're multiplying and by how much.

If I use Combat Expertise and -5 off my Attack Rolls to add +5 to my AC, then I Leap Attack, do I deal +15 damage w/ a two-handed weapon? After all, it says I deal three times the number subtracted from my attack rolls.

What if I have a "pounce" ability and I am two-weapon fighting, that is -2 to all of my attack rolls. So -2 (primary attack) plus -2 (off-hand attack)= -4. I've subtracted -4 from my attack rolls, do I deal +8 damage for these one-handed weapons?

Does this -/+ apply to light weapons (unlike it does w/ Power Attack)?

I get your point, just be fa-ci-cious (or however you spell it).

I think you have to specify that the bonus damage comes from your use of Power Attack.

 

[buzz]

I think you have to specify that the bonus damage comes from your use of Power Attack.

The paragraph in question is the second one in the Leap Attack description. I'd be assuming the first one would state that this is in the context of PA. But, yes, it should ideally be clear.