Is Power Attack balanced?

[Nifft]

Is it weaker than Combat expertise, weapon finesse, or toughness in the grand scheme of things though?

Worse than Combat Expertise? Maybe. PA leads to Cleave, while CE leads to Improved Trip.

Worse than Toughness? No. Toughness sucks.

Worse than Weapon Finesse? No, but they're similar in that they define an archetype.

Even without WF, Dexterity is already the best stat in the game. It adds to your AC, one save, one kind of attack (ranged), many key skills (including escape artist, balance, ride, tumble and stealth skills), and initiative (!!!).

Strength adds to one kind of attack (melee) and most damage rolls, some skills (but not combat skills), and carrying capacity.

If you are not relying on Strength-based damage in melee (because you are a sneak attacker, or a Diamond Mind strike user, or for whatever reason), then Weapon Finesse allows you to dump Strength entirely. I can't think of another feat that is required for so many archetypes, except perhaps Power Attack. And I can't think of another feat that so effectively obviates an ability score.

I'd say they're about even.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Emirikol]

Worse than Combat Expertise? Maybe. PA leads to Cleave, while CE leads to Improved Trip.

Even without WF, Dexterity is already the best stat in the game. It adds to your AC, one save, one kind of attack (ranged), many key skills (including escape artist, balance, ride, tumble and stealth skills), and initiative (!!!).

You bring up an excellent point about dexterity compared to strength in regards to "overall bonuses to a character"...but, Weapon finesse is only good for crappy weapons though, which aren't getting the x3.5 benefit that a power attack gives.

Give me a guy who's down a little AC who can use his greatsword, +4 strength bonus (x1.5), doubled power attack bonus (+20 damage at 10th level) over a guy who has a rapier and a +4 dex bonus to hit (only).

There's no contest there between PA and WFinesse.
PA - (d12 + 6 + 0-20 = 7-38 points of damage)
WF - (d6 +4 + 0 = 5-11 points of damage) but a better AC

A fighter can be healed if he has a crappy AC, but knocks a monster out in a round or two...a swashbuckler with a rapier who's spending 18 rounds to take out the same monster all the while the monster is decimating the party isn't very effective IMO

jh

 

[Moon-Lancer]

if we look at it, the cap for CE is capped because 1 bab is not equal to 1 ac. This is shown by attacks go up faster then ac does.

Likewise, if we factor in PA this would mean 1 bab = 1 damage, and it turn would mean that 1 damage would have to be equal to 1 ac (if you cap pa and are not using a thw). Should i be able to trade all my hit points to ac? no thats crazy.

This is why CE is capped and power attack is not. 1=1 attack/damage is generally not worth it. I cant say if power attack 1=2 is broken, but 1=1 is sub par. in most cases. if making a choice for 1=1 damage or 1=1 to ac, when dealing with attacks, AC is the better choice.

 

[Nifft]

A fighter can be healed if he has a crappy AC, but knocks a monster out in a round or two...a swashbuckler with a rapier who's spending 18 rounds to take out the same monster all the while the monster is decimating the party isn't very effective IMO

Swashbuckler with a rapier?! Yuck. No thanks.

Rogue with two daggers! That's my man. Halfling, just for the extra Belkar factor. You think I do 1d3-1 with both hands, eh? No, I do 1d3-1 +10d6, six times. Seven with haste. Oh, you want to throw in four level of Fighter (or two Fighter / two Barbarian; or one Fighter / one Barbarian / two Ranger)? Okay, now I do it eight times a round (nine with haste), though the extra damage has fallen to a mere +8d6 per hit.

Also, with Quickdraw, he can throw them. Lots of them.

Halfling Rogue with two daggers. Don't stand between them.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I have found what Nifft says to be true in the right curcumstances it does more damage then a fighter, however when fighting ozzes, undead, constructs or elementals, that rogue might as well just give up his turns to give the fighter a +2 to hit.

 

[Nifft]

I have found what Nifft says to be true in the right curcumstances it does more damage then a fighter, however when fighting ozzes, undead, constructs or elementals, that rogue might as well just give up his turns to give the fighter a +2 to hit.

Absolutely. But that's the rock-paper-scissors of D&D's current balance: some things are immune to some attacks. (The counterpoint to Power Attack, of course, is Elusive Target...)

Cheers, -- N

 

[James McMurray]

In my 3.0 games some fighters took Power Attack. In my 3.5 games (with the same players) practically all fighters take Power Attack unless they're intentionally avoiding it because it's stale.

That's all the evidence I need to convince me it's too powerful.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Absolutely. But that's the rock-paper-scissors of D&D's current balance: some things are immune to some attacks. (The counterpoint to Power Attack, of course, is Elusive Target...)

Cheers, -- N

so true. Im playing a game were the rogue fighter inviablade in the group lays down all kinds of hurt. I get a tad jealous, but when we fight unread or something like that, I feel really sorry for him. although funny enuff the other character in the group is a beguiler. You can guess whos job it is to take out undead, and anything immune to crits and mind effecting spells. .... . Strangely they go hand in hand

My only complaint of elusive target is that its not core, and when your dm creates alot of encounters with the srd, that feat is likely to rarely see use... if ever. It also has alot of prerequisites, but it would be unbalanced otherwise.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

2H is balanced by Power Attack.

TWF is balanced by Sneak Attack.

Sword-n-board is balanced by PHB-II.

I don't see the need to have one feat benefit all fighting styles equally.

Cheers, -- N

If sneak attack was a feat, I would agree entirely.

It isn't.

 

[jasin]

The original plan of x1.5 for power attack with a 2 handed weapon was a better idea. But sadly wotc felt that math was too hard.

I've heard this before, but always from a guy who heard it from a guy. Can you perhaps point me to the source of this?