Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Jonathan Tweet denounces Power Attack
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cadfan" data-source="post: 3905324" data-attributes="member: 40961"><p>*shrug*</p><p></p><p>The fact that finding the proper amount to power attack requires creating an equation for expected damage giving constant average damage without power attack, constant target AC, variable power attack to hit modifier and variable damage, then taking its derivative, setting it equal to zero, and solving the question, IS a problem, even if no one does all that work during an actual game.</p><p></p><p>Power attack accomplishes three things.</p><p></p><p>1) It gives fighting characters something to do with excess BAB. If you're charging an enemy, you only get one attack per round anyways, and you hit on a -4 or above, you might as well power attack a bit.</p><p>2) It lets people simulate wild, crazed swings of an axe, lowering their chance to hit in exchange for a gamble for huge damage.</p><p>3) It lets people optimize their damage by power attacking for one or two here or there as the situation merits.</p><p></p><p>My thoughts on these: </p><p></p><p>1) Power attack accomplishes the first pretty well. </p><p></p><p>Personally, I'd rather accomplish the same thing with a rule like this- Feat: Crush. Effect: For every two full points by which you beat a target's armor class, deal one extra point of damage. This bonus applies to all attacks automatically unless you choose otherwise.</p><p></p><p>2) Power attack is not so great at the second. Frankly, the damage isn't big enough to justify the risk. If I'm going to reduce my chance of hitting by a half, I want to see around a 100% increase in damage. I'd be in favor of a feat that lets a player lower his chance of hitting in exchange for a bonus to damage, but it had better be a BIG bonus. I want it to be a momentous decision that has everyone on the edge of their seat as the player rolls, not a small decision that everyone kind of ignores.</p><p></p><p>I'd rather see a feat like this: Feat: Demolish. Effect: You may choose to subtract 10 from an attack roll. If the attack hits, you deal triple damage, and the target you strike suffers a Fortitude Stun Attack with bonus equal to your character level plus your strength. Normal rules for multipliers apply. You must choose before you roll the attack.</p><p></p><p>With a feat like this, everyone knows that your risking a serious chance of missing your attack. But if you hit, its going to be awesome.</p><p></p><p>3) And while power attack is awesome at the third if you do the calculus, I don't think the third is a good idea. I'd rather that tactical decisions revolve around in game effects, rather than number juggling. I say this as someone who is pretty good at number juggling.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cadfan, post: 3905324, member: 40961"] *shrug* The fact that finding the proper amount to power attack requires creating an equation for expected damage giving constant average damage without power attack, constant target AC, variable power attack to hit modifier and variable damage, then taking its derivative, setting it equal to zero, and solving the question, IS a problem, even if no one does all that work during an actual game. Power attack accomplishes three things. 1) It gives fighting characters something to do with excess BAB. If you're charging an enemy, you only get one attack per round anyways, and you hit on a -4 or above, you might as well power attack a bit. 2) It lets people simulate wild, crazed swings of an axe, lowering their chance to hit in exchange for a gamble for huge damage. 3) It lets people optimize their damage by power attacking for one or two here or there as the situation merits. My thoughts on these: 1) Power attack accomplishes the first pretty well. Personally, I'd rather accomplish the same thing with a rule like this- Feat: Crush. Effect: For every two full points by which you beat a target's armor class, deal one extra point of damage. This bonus applies to all attacks automatically unless you choose otherwise. 2) Power attack is not so great at the second. Frankly, the damage isn't big enough to justify the risk. If I'm going to reduce my chance of hitting by a half, I want to see around a 100% increase in damage. I'd be in favor of a feat that lets a player lower his chance of hitting in exchange for a bonus to damage, but it had better be a BIG bonus. I want it to be a momentous decision that has everyone on the edge of their seat as the player rolls, not a small decision that everyone kind of ignores. I'd rather see a feat like this: Feat: Demolish. Effect: You may choose to subtract 10 from an attack roll. If the attack hits, you deal triple damage, and the target you strike suffers a Fortitude Stun Attack with bonus equal to your character level plus your strength. Normal rules for multipliers apply. You must choose before you roll the attack. With a feat like this, everyone knows that your risking a serious chance of missing your attack. But if you hit, its going to be awesome. 3) And while power attack is awesome at the third if you do the calculus, I don't think the third is a good idea. I'd rather that tactical decisions revolve around in game effects, rather than number juggling. I say this as someone who is pretty good at number juggling. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Jonathan Tweet denounces Power Attack
Top