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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bowbe" data-source="post: 4122361" data-attributes="member: 6328">I noticed a couple "anti" power bumps that I thought were nice.One in particular was that they brought down power attack to the realm of sanity again.Add your strength bonus vs. adding your level, double your strength bonus for two handed is a smarter way to go. I argued this in that so called "3.5 proofread" a zillion years ago. It still chucks on a big grip of damage without being rediculous. I got poo'ed down when I pointed out how broken that was for 3.5 by the dev's and everyone else. So I said fine, thank you for making it that much easier to kill PCs! Basically it forces fighter types to use a little more of their other feats and abilities in combat than just maxing their power attack and hoping for a nat 20 to end the combat. I would caution Pathfinder RPG dev's against offering too many "armor proficiencies" to the fighter however. Nothing is more obnoxious than a fighter in the 12-14 range than a fighter with an armor class in the mid 30's, except maybe a barbarian of 16th-18th that can't fail a save. Reason? It creates another form of power creep where you have to rely on scores of monsters that are +25 or so to hit in order to create a challenge that can land a blow an average of 50% of the time. Thats going to be a high casualty combat and things can go bad very quickly for the party or the DMs well planned encounter.  If said fighter fails a save vs. domination, that leaves the PCs with a foe that has an AC in the mid to high 30's. At the same time I'd kind of like to see a "natural armor bonus" in its place available to rangers, barbarians, fighters or whatever that do not stack with heavy armor. Casey</blockquote>

Verification