-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Is power attack too powerful?
- Thread starter Drommon
- Start date
DarkMaster
First Post
No. THF less attack than TWFDrommon said:
THF less AC than S&B
THF more damage than the others
the Jester
Legend
I think it's okay. Powerful, yes; but good for the goose=good for the gander. As long as monsters use it too it's all right.
Keep in mind that a double-handed weapon wielder gives up:
*more chances for crits, sneak attacks, etc (vs. 2wf) or
*a substantialy better AC (weapon/shield)
Seems okay to me.
Keep in mind that a double-handed weapon wielder gives up:
*more chances for crits, sneak attacks, etc (vs. 2wf) or
*a substantialy better AC (weapon/shield)
Seems okay to me.
Endur
First Post
It makes for big hits at times. However, many times the monsters have so few hit points that even a small hit would have killed them.
Is it powerful with a two-handed weapon? Yes. But it also helps explain why a character with PA should bother to swing the weapon in two hands.
Is it powerful with a two-handed weapon? Yes. But it also helps explain why a character with PA should bother to swing the weapon in two hands.
Drommon said:
Nifelhein
First Post
one of my players is seriously concerned about this, what i think is that people think about the abuses that can be taken with it, thus they think it is broken.
I have seen a high level two weapon fighter and to me it seemed a broken creature, of course it was made to be that and so he was good at it, but when he discovered that he could not stand his feet against attacks due to low hp, he got a little pissed... he was a rogue character.
Anyway, I think it is okay and that we should have at least two more style oriented feats, one for weapon and shield and another for single handed weapon, this one is lacking good feats and an option you don't see much around.
I have seen a high level two weapon fighter and to me it seemed a broken creature, of course it was made to be that and so he was good at it, but when he discovered that he could not stand his feet against attacks due to low hp, he got a little pissed... he was a rogue character.
Anyway, I think it is okay and that we should have at least two more style oriented feats, one for weapon and shield and another for single handed weapon, this one is lacking good feats and an option you don't see much around.
jgsugden
Legend
*Sigh*
Yes, this issue has been discussed many times, especially since 3.5 came out and the rules changed. The math behind the feat tends to surprise people.
Here are the most important pieces of info:
1.) Power attack is often poorly used, at least during a full attack. Many PCs use it to drastically increase their damage per attack, but fail to properly account for the number of misses that result from the use of the feat, especially with their second, third or fourth attack. The truth of the matter is, unless you're hitting very easily with your worst attack (or are having trouble hitting at all with your best attack), you're unlikely to want to power attack for much, even with a 2 handed weapon (if your main goal is to increase your average damage per hit versus a set AC.) This means that the only times power attack really helps you out is in situations where your foe is pathetically easy to hit or is incredible hard to hit - which should be rare circumstances.
2.) Power attack requires information to optimize. If you don't know a foe's AC, it is very hard to know how to optimize your PA. As a result, the number of times a PC actually gets the maximum benefit out of power attack is rare.
3.) Power attack is most useful in single attack scenarios (slowed, attacking after moving, when you can't attack except for AoOs, etc ...) instead of full attack scenarios. In those instances, it is fine for a fighter to do an obscene amount of damage with one hit as it will be his only attack for the round (with the exception of AoOs).
4.) The math behind optimizing PA is complex - more complex than any of the models I've seen thrown around in the past. Death from massive damage, attacks of opportunity, the total hit points of your foes, etc ... are just a few of the variables that I've rarely, if ever, seen discussed in those models. And I've never seen one that takes into account all of them.
5.) If you find that in your games, the fighters using PA are getting all the action and the wizards, sneaky rogues, etc ... are not being effective, you may wish to revise PA. If not, don't worry about it. For most games, it will not be an issue.
Yes, this issue has been discussed many times, especially since 3.5 came out and the rules changed. The math behind the feat tends to surprise people.
Here are the most important pieces of info:
1.) Power attack is often poorly used, at least during a full attack. Many PCs use it to drastically increase their damage per attack, but fail to properly account for the number of misses that result from the use of the feat, especially with their second, third or fourth attack. The truth of the matter is, unless you're hitting very easily with your worst attack (or are having trouble hitting at all with your best attack), you're unlikely to want to power attack for much, even with a 2 handed weapon (if your main goal is to increase your average damage per hit versus a set AC.) This means that the only times power attack really helps you out is in situations where your foe is pathetically easy to hit or is incredible hard to hit - which should be rare circumstances.
2.) Power attack requires information to optimize. If you don't know a foe's AC, it is very hard to know how to optimize your PA. As a result, the number of times a PC actually gets the maximum benefit out of power attack is rare.
3.) Power attack is most useful in single attack scenarios (slowed, attacking after moving, when you can't attack except for AoOs, etc ...) instead of full attack scenarios. In those instances, it is fine for a fighter to do an obscene amount of damage with one hit as it will be his only attack for the round (with the exception of AoOs).
4.) The math behind optimizing PA is complex - more complex than any of the models I've seen thrown around in the past. Death from massive damage, attacks of opportunity, the total hit points of your foes, etc ... are just a few of the variables that I've rarely, if ever, seen discussed in those models. And I've never seen one that takes into account all of them.
5.) If you find that in your games, the fighters using PA are getting all the action and the wizards, sneaky rogues, etc ... are not being effective, you may wish to revise PA. If not, don't worry about it. For most games, it will not be an issue.
Last edited:
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
jgsugden said:
Good analysis, jgsugden. I want to put emphasis on point #3.
As a practical matter it is too much hassle for the benefit to bother with PA unless I am getting a single attack only, preferably a charge. Owing to the complexities of figuring in miss chances for all iterative attacks, it is too much work just to push average damage up by a few scant points.
Tactically speaking, average damage is an overrated measure of combat effectiveness. As pointed out in the DMG, wild swings in luck work against the PCs in the long run. Therefore it is more important to take down enemies consistently than it is to have an occasional glorious round. A savvy player will tend to favor a high hit chance even at the cost of lessening average damage.
Endur
First Post
One other comment about power attack.
I generally either don't use it, or I use it to the maximum. i.e. transfer all my BAB into extra damage.
Especially when you have a barbarian character with a high strength and a magic weapon with a decent bonus to hit, it makes some sense to transfer everything into damage through power attack with a weapon that is swung in two hands.
For instance, in one game I have a level 20 Barbarian who wields a non-magic longsword in two hands (str 30 when raging). His normal to hit is +31 and his damage is 1d8 +15. When power-attacking, his to hit is +11 and his damage is 1d8 +55. Against a low ac opponent (or a stationary object), he does a tremendous amount of damage with power attack. Against a high AC opponent such as a Pit Fiend, he better roll 20's if he wants to hit the target.
Wulf convinced me that this was a valid strategy with his "All Power Attack, All the Time!" approach, even before 3.5 came out.
I generally either don't use it, or I use it to the maximum. i.e. transfer all my BAB into extra damage.
Especially when you have a barbarian character with a high strength and a magic weapon with a decent bonus to hit, it makes some sense to transfer everything into damage through power attack with a weapon that is swung in two hands.
For instance, in one game I have a level 20 Barbarian who wields a non-magic longsword in two hands (str 30 when raging). His normal to hit is +31 and his damage is 1d8 +15. When power-attacking, his to hit is +11 and his damage is 1d8 +55. Against a low ac opponent (or a stationary object), he does a tremendous amount of damage with power attack. Against a high AC opponent such as a Pit Fiend, he better roll 20's if he wants to hit the target.
Wulf convinced me that this was a valid strategy with his "All Power Attack, All the Time!" approach, even before 3.5 came out.
Last edited:
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
All Power Attack, All the Time! would be particularly effective if you get many attacks (e.g. Flurry of Blows), plan on using (Improved) Combat Expertise, or both.
