Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MiB" data-source="post: 1369051" data-attributes="member: 16435">Power AttackI was actually looking forward to a post like this. I also like the Power Attack feat, and it was a decent choice in 3E.In 3E, I always felt that TWF was inferior to either THF or S&B, but that the two others were well balanced.S&B gave you better AC (+2, and potentially more), while THF gave you bigger damage dice and STR x 1.5, which was good for high STR warriors. So it was a tough choice.In 3.5, they upped TWF a bit and I'm still not sure, but it seems worthwile now  However, if you are min-maxing, THF seems the method of choice now, due to the new power attack ruling.I wholeheartedly agree that PA is the method of choice in rounds were you have only one attack (and will get more by Cleaving). In other situations, since you usually lack the info to optimize the PA-rating, it tends to trade of fairly well with normal non-PA multiple attacks.However  causing lots of damage on a single blow is also better than causing it in lots of blows (DR, massive damage, bypassing defensive spells like Fire shield) AND having to maneuver and being able to do only a standard attack action should be a disadvantage compared to full attacking. With PA, it seems not to be.I think PA was fine in 3E (worth consideration, but not a definitve must have). In 3.5, it seems overpowered. Tips the scale in favor of warriors and in favor of THF especially. The only balancing aspect seems the above-mentioned "you do it, monsters do it", but I don't like that.Maybe one should consider handling PA like Combat Expertise? Max of +5, and invent Improved PA for more the +5 BAB-transfering?</blockquote>

Verification