Jonathan Tweet denounces Power Attack

[Abraxas]

P.S. It's All Power Attack, All the Time.

Other than here at EN world I've not heard it called that. It's always been Full Power Attack, All The Time.

Interesting

 

[Najo]

Not all smart and mathematically-inclined gamers are optimizers. For example, the math PhD I used to game with would never 'run the numbers' before choosing his PC's actions. That just wasn't his style, which is to say he prioritized others aspects of the gaming experience over raw combat efficiency.

Which is besides my original point, that it's strange to label selfish, counterproductive behavior at the gaming table 'smart'.

Try this phrasing on for size: "Last night a dumb player ground the game to a halt trying to decide how much Power Attack to use". Sounds better, doesn't it?

I am not saying ALL smart people do that. I am saying that it does happen though. Players who either don't care about the math, don't want to take the time or are "dumb" are going to say" max power attack!". It is the player's that realize the mathematical effects more instinctively, i.e. the smart ones, that will start figuring out the probabilities.

This doesn't mean all do that. But, the fact the feat allows for this ind of behavior and actually doesn't benefit the player much anyways means that the feat should be fixed. That is all that matters here. By the game system, there is little benefit to taking Power Attack other than to get to other feats.

 

[Najo]

Not all smart and mathematically-inclined gamers are optimizers. For example, the math PhD I used to game with would never 'run the numbers' before choosing his PC's actions. That just wasn't his style, which is to say he prioritized others aspects of the gaming experience over raw combat efficiency.

Which is besides my original point, that it's strange to label selfish, counterproductive behavior at the gaming table 'smart'.

Try this phrasing on for size: "Last night a dumb player ground the game to a halt trying to decide how much Power Attack to use". Sounds better, doesn't it?

The fourth grade math is the adding and subtracting.

The spreadsheets that show how power attack actually is not as good as people think is another more in your high school realm. Seeing the true effects and understanding them comes in with college level math.

I am really surprise people aren't getting this still.

 

[FireLance]

A thought just occured to me about how Power Attack might be changed in 4e. I recall one of the podcasts mentioned something about fighters still dealing damage on a miss. If Power Attack damage adds to the damage dealt on a miss (possibly half the damage it would have dealt on a hit), that might go some way towards fixing its "deceptive" nature. There would still be some scope for optimizing expected damage, but if an un-optimized Power Attack was not very much worse than an optimized Power Attack, perhaps players would be more willing to sacrifice a bit of mechanical effectiveness for role-playing flavor.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Other than here at EN world I've not heard it called that. It's always been Full Power Attack, All The Time.

Interesting

If you can find a usage that predates the 2002 printing of Heroes of High Favor: Half-Orcs, you're welcome to (re)claim provenance, with my regards.

Who knows where gamers get these things?

 

[BadMojo]

The fourth grade math is the adding and subtracting.

The spreadsheets that show how power attack actually is not as good as people think is another more in your high school realm. Seeing the true effects and understanding them comes in with college level math.

Ya know, the longer this debate goes on I am starting to change my position on power attack. Calculating average damages and poring over spreadsheets to find the amount of PA that provides the most damage vs. any given AC just isn't my idea of fun, at or away from the table.

The whole thing is starting to feel way to meta-game for my tastes. It's not even so much the amount of slow down at the table, since a wizard trying to decide which spell to cast will probably take just as long for many players. PA is just starting to feel like a distraction from the game unless you do All Power Attack, etc., which really defeats the purpose of a feat where you need to declare a modifier.

 

[Klaus]

Ya know, the longer this debate goes on I am starting to change my position on power attack. Calculating average damages and poring over spreadsheets to find the amount of PA that provides the most damage vs. any given AC just isn't my idea of fun, at or away from the table.

The whole thing is starting to feel way to meta-game for my tastes. It's not even so much the amount of slow down at the table, since a wizard trying to decide which spell to cast will probably take just as long for many players. PA is just starting to feel like a distraction from the game unless you do All Power Attack, etc., which really defeats the purpose of a feat where you need to declare a modifier.

Other options:

-2 attack, maximize weapon base damage (so greataxe does 12 points of damage). You sacrifice accuracy in exchange to using the weapon to its fullest.

-2 attack, add in your Strength modifier again, so a Str 18 barbarian with a greataxe deals 1d12 + 4 (Str) + 2 (two hands) + 4 (Str again), for a total of 1d12+10 (opposed to the usual 1d12+6).

 

[Evilusion]

I have not read the entrie thread so forgive if I duplicate anything. The power attack feat is not broken for me or my group. There is nothing hard about subtracting one number and adding that to another number. Why Jonathan Tweet denounces it I will never know? To list some examples from my group at low and medium levels we tend to use -1 to -5. Higher levels we tend to up that to a max of -10. Why you may ask? My players would rather hit and do normal damage. Compaired to having a less chance to hit and cause more damage.

Where I do thinnk power attack shines though is either getting through DR (if you do not the proper abilitys) or killing the minions of the BBEG. Where is does not shine is vs the BBEG where the BBEG ac is 10 or more points over your attack bonus.


Evilusion

 

[Najo]

I have not read the entrie thread so forgive if I duplicate anything. The power attack feat is not broken for me or my group. There is nothing hard about subtracting one number and adding that to another number. Why Jonathan Tweet denounces it I will never know?

Read the thread and you will understand. Heck, read my posts and you will at least see the other side of the coin. The key point is mathematically power attack doesn't give you more damage on average over time. Power attack also plays counter to how it should feel. The crunch and the fluff do not match well. Power attack is a massive, hard hit blow that sacrifices accuracy for damage. The feat allows to much sliding adjustment and fine tuning, which feels more like aiming and not giving it all you got to hit something really hard. The fine tuning of the modifier when the feat is used is metagaming and where someone can waste alot of time if they wish, and this can be done every combat round. Spells are only prepared at the start of each day, and thus do not constantly interrupt the combat like Power Attack.

Where I do thinnk power attack shines though is either getting through DR (if you do not the proper abilitys) or killing the minions of the BBEG. Where is does not shine is vs the BBEG where the BBEG ac is 10 or more points over your attack bonus.

I agree with you on this point completely.

 

[Najo]

Other options:

-2 attack, maximize weapon base damage (so greataxe does 12 points of damage). You sacrifice accuracy in exchange to using the weapon to its fullest.

-2 attack, add in your Strength modifier again, so a Str 18 barbarian with a greataxe deals 1d12 + 4 (Str) + 2 (two hands) + 4 (Str again), for a total of 1d12+10 (opposed to the usual 1d12+6).

My suggestion in another thread was this:

Power Attack
Pre: Str 13+
You may choose to use power attack as a full-round action. Make a single melee attack. If your attack hits your foe, you automatically cause a critical hit. If your attack misses, your opponent may make an attack of opportunity against you.

You may only use this feat once per round.

So far, this approach I like the best.

1) It is on or off toggle.
2) It has no messy modifiers, but a clear cost to missing. The idea is your swinging hard and leaving yourself open.
3) It has an immediate benefit of auto criting.
4) It is doing more damage, and thus getting over DR or breaking things easier.
5) The once per round shows the cost and strain it causes.
6) The full round action shows the putting all you have behind the hit it needs.

Not saying this is the end all be all. 4e changes things a bit too. But this direction solves alot of the problems without being dull.