Is power critical worth a feat?

[Sejs]

Yes. I believe that it is worth a feat.

 

[Seule]

I don't like the concept of a feat that is usable only once/day. It just doesn't seem to fit the concept of feats being (usually) some kind of training. Once/day is better suited for racial or class abilities.

I have to agree with this.

Plus, what's the conceptual background behind this? With Power Attack you are sacrificing chance of hitting for damage. With this, you are doing what? Swinging really hard? That's covered under Power Attack. I think I like this feat even less now.
It's one of two feats from all the builder books that I have banned.

--Seule

 

[MadScientist]

Dont' forget it's steep bab requirement, and it's prerequisite of improved critical.

Ah your right I did forget about that! What is the BaB requirement anyway? (obviously at least +8, I'm at work and don't have my books) I think the improved critical prerequisite does hurt a little for people weilding low threat range weapons, who would benefit most from power critical. I still think the feat is worth while and potentially devastating though.

I'll certainly consider power critical for my guisarme weilding barbarian/fighter if he's lucky enough to survive long enough to get it!

 

[Yeoman]

Ah your right I did forget about that! What is the BaB requirement anyway? (obviously at least +8, I'm at work and don't have my books)

+12

I used quite a bit with my Halberd specialized fighter. It worked nicely on that weapon.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

This is worth several feats. What if you have a vorpal weapon? Or any other special effect triggered on a critical?

As for true strike items, I hope to never see an official melee weapon that has true strike. Even if it's once per day.

 

[Mike Sullivan]

Ah your right I did forget about that! What is the BaB requirement anyway? (obviously at least +8, I'm at work and don't have my books) I think the improved critical prerequisite does hurt a little for people weilding low threat range weapons, who would benefit most from power critical.

Improved Critical is exactly as good for a Battleaxe (20/x3) as it is for a Longsword (19-20/x2), and exactly as good for a Scythe (20/x4) as it is for a Falchion (18-20/x2).

If absolutely necessary, I can prove this using math.

 

[Seule]

Improved Critical is exactly as good for a Battleaxe (20/x3) as it is for a Longsword (19-20/x2), and exactly as good for a Scythe (20/x4) as it is for a Falchion (18-20/x2).

If absolutely necessary, I can prove this using math.

Correct, Improved Critical is just as good. However, Power Critical is not, as it overwrites the critical range for one attack. It is not very good for the Falchion, but great for the Scythe.

--Seule

 

[MadScientist]

Improved Critical is exactly as good for a Battleaxe (20/x3) as it is for a Longsword (19-20/x2), and exactly as good for a Scythe (20/x4) as it is for a Falchion (18-20/x2).

If absolutely necessary, I can prove this using math.

Not quite because with low threat range/high mutiplier weapons the extra damage from criticals is more likely to be blow-through damage or damage in excess of the damage necessary to put an opponent down. So for average damage, you're right they are exactly equivalent but a 19/X2 weapon will inflict more 'useful' damage than a 20/x3 weapon. Thats why I think criticaling more often is a little better with a high threat range/low multiplier weapon than with a low range/high multiplier weapon.

 

[Mike Sullivan]

Correct, Improved Critical is just as good. However, Power Critical is not, as it overwrites the critical range for one attack. It is not very good for the Falchion, but great for the Scythe.

Yes, I know. However, if you read the passage I quoted above, you'll see that Mad Scientist indicated that he thought that the Improved Critical prerequisite for Power Critical degraded the utility of Power Critical for high-crit-multiplier weapons, because Improved Critical was sub-optimal for high-crit-multiplier weapons.

This is not the case.

 

[Mike Sullivan]

Not quite because with low threat range/high mutiplier weapons the extra damage from criticals is more likely to be blow-through damage or damage in excess of the damage necessary to put an opponent down. So for average damage, you're right they are exactly equivalent but a 19/X2 weapon will inflict more 'useful' damage than a 20/x3 weapon. Thats why I think criticaling more often is a little better with a high threat range/low multiplier weapon than with a low range/high multiplier weapon.

This is counterbalanced by the fact that you're more likely to "waste" a critical threshhold for a high-threshhold weapon. For example, if you have a keen scimitar and the Improved Crit feat, your threat range is 12-20 x2. Supposing that, for a given attack (possibly your secondary or tertiary), you hit only on a 15+, your effective threat range is 15-20/x2, and your expected damage decreases.

In contrast, a keen heavy pick with Imp. Crit. has a threat range of 18-20 x4. If you hit only on a 15+ with it, you still get your full crit thresh range, and thus your expected damage is higher for it than for the scimitar.

This, I think, roughly approximates a balance against the increased chance of "blowthrough" with the pick.