Please rate Lightning Fists

[smetzger]

Well when you read it and flurry of blows I can get Lightning Fists 2 attacks and Flurry of Blows 1 attack extra.

So 4th level I am getting 5 attacks but at -7.

When you get to a higher level you could have 8 attacks a round.

Uhm, its been errated so that you cannot Flurry and Lightning at the same time.

 

[tarkin]

1) When compared to Power Attack -5, Lightning Fists does more damage. I did the math. Try it out on your characters. It does NOT matter what target AC you are going up against. Power Attack almost always increases damage LESS than Lightning Fists does. The effect is more pronounced if you have high strength scores and are using things like Greater Magic Fang.

Note this does not mean that Lightning fists is always a good idea, it simply means that it is always a BETTER idea than Power Attack - which is usually a bad idea.

2) A smart Monk can do the following: Take Expertise, Take Power Attack. Take Lightnign Fists. Forget about trying to hit their AC, just go for the magic 20. You get +5 to your AC and a lot of attack rolls. When you do in fact roll a natural 20, the Power Attack will make your blows do so much damage, your average Damage is as good as the fighter.

 

[Christian]

That's annoying, Tarkin.

Yes, Power Attack will give you less average damage than Lightning Fists. Which gives you less average damage than Flurry of Blows (unless you need a 19 or 20 to hit). Both of those feats stink, in general. Where Power Attack actually comes in handy is a) when you're dealing with an enemy with damage resistance at a higher plus than your magic weapon/Ki strike/whatever, or b) when you want to get Cleave and Great Cleave, which are actual useful feats ...

Your Expertise/Power Attack/Lightning Fists method is statistically sound, absolutely. And those ninety-round combats with about fifteen successful strikes in toto are really exciting, too.

 

[CRGreathouse]

When compared to Power Attack -5, Lightning Fists does more damage. I did the math. Try it out on your characters. It does NOT matter what target AC you are going up against. Power Attack almost always increases damage LESS than Lightning Fists does. The effect is more pronounced if you have high strength scores and are using things like Greater Magic Fang.

This is wrong. It is true when the character only has a single attack and chooses not to Flurry, but that's unusual.

 

[smetzger]

bump

 

[tarkin]

Regarding lightning Fists.

This is wrong. It is true when the character only has a single attack and chooses not to Flurry, but that's unusual.

PROVE IT.

I did the math, i would love to see yours.

My math said that when you double your attacks, you are effectively ADDING the possible damage.

At 1 attack doing 1d6, Strength of 14, that means a Flurry increases damage by 1d6+2 (average 5), at the cost of -2 to hit. Power attack only increases it by +2 for the -2, so Power Attack is worse than Flurry, in that case.

Lightning Fists will double the number of attacks at Level 6-9.

Assuming level 7/8 that means you are adding 1d10+2 average +7, at a cost of -5. Power Attack would only do +5 for -5. If your strength is higher than 14, say 22 after magic, the difference becomes even more dramatic. Ever notice how fighter types tend to get get high Strength?

Lightning Fists is almost always better than Power Attack.

If you disagree, fine. Prove.

Do not just state that I am wrong, give me an example of any character and ANY AC your choice. Show me the average damage for both Power Attack and Lightning Fists for your example or show me your math formulas.

 

[tarkin]

That's annoying, Tarkin.

...
a) when you're dealing with an enemy with damage resistance at a higher plus than your magic weapon/Ki strike/whatever, or
...
b) when you want to get Cleave and Great Cleave, which are actual useful feats ...

Your Expertise/Power Attack/Lightning Fists method is statistically sound, absolutely. And those ninety-round combats with about fifteen successful strikes in toto are really exciting, too.

Answers

A) You do have a good point here, but not much of one. If concerned about dealing with high DR, get yourself a Ring of +5 Magic Fang. or similar item. Power Attack is a poor way to deal with that situation.

B) Cleave and Great Cleave do have some uses, but are not that powerfull unless your DM insists on having you fight a hoard of weaker creatures. I would never go after them as my main feat trail.

C) 90 combat rounds for 15 succesfull strikes. Wow. That was expertedly stated to make it sound 15 times worse than it really was. Lets try again 90/15 is the same as 6/1.

Hm, To get Lightning Fists you have to be 4th level, then you would be getting 3 attacks at 6th, it takes you 6+ rounds. YES at the lowest possible level your ridiculous 90/15 claim is valid.
When you hit 6th level, then you get an extra attack, so 5 rounds per hit. Somewhere between 6th and 10th you should afford Boots of Haste, making it 4 rounds per hit. By 10th you get 6 attacks per round, making it about 3 rounds before your hit.

The strategy may not be the best in all cases, but it is far better than you seem to think, even if you roll your eyes.

When going up against a high AC creature that you need a 18 or better to hit, it becoms a BRILLIANT strategy.

 

[Christian]

PROVE IT.

Chill, tarkin ...

CRG, it is worthwhile to delve into some details. We'll take an eighth-level monk doing 1d10+2-averaging 7.5- per unarmed attack (7th-level monks do only 1d8) who normally needs a 10 to hit. With his base full attack routine, he'll do 7.5*(.55+.4) = 7.1 points of damage per round. With a flurry, he'll do 7.5*(.45+.45+.3) = 9 points of damage per round. With lightning fists, he'll do 7.5*(.3+.3+.3+.15) = 7.9 points of damage per round. With his regular attacks and 5 points of power attack, he'll do 12.5*(.3+.05) = 4.375 points of damage per round. And with a flurry of blows and 3 points of power attack, he'll do 10.5*(.3+.3+.05) = 6.825 points of damage per round. So LF is a better than PA here, although only a bit better than PA with a FoB, but not anywhere near as good as a straight FoB.

Let's try an eighteenth-level monk now. (Think big, I always say!)He gets five attacks per round at (say) 1d20+4 damage, averaging 14.5. You might think that the bonus damage on all of those attacks will outweigh the extra LF attack damage, right? We'll suppose he needs a five to hit with his base attack (attack bonuses typically outstrip AC at high levels). With just his base attacks, he averages 14.5*(.8+.65+.5+.35+.2) = 36.3 points of damage per round. By flurrying, he bumps this to 14.5*(.7+.7+.55+.4+.25+.1) = 39.1 points of damage per round. But with lightning fists, he'll only do 14.5*(.55+.55+.55+.4+.25+.1+.05) = 35.5 points per round. Now, with 5 points of power attack on his base routine, he'll do 19.5*(.55+.4+.25+.1+.05) = 26.3. Ugh. But with just 3 points of power attack and a flurry, he'll do 17.5*(.55+.55+.4+.25+.1+.05) = 33.3 points per round. Much better, but still not as good as Lightning Fists, which is still not as good as a simple Flurry of Blows.

 

[Christian]

When going up against a high AC creature that you need a 18 or better to hit, it becoms a BRILLIANT strategy.

That's the one point I'll concede. But it still wouldn't convince me to take Power Attack or Lightning Fist. There are too many better feats, and too few opportunities for a monk to get them ... IME, if you're up against a creature that you need an 18 to hit, you have big problems, especially at high levels. The game is balanced so that the interesting rolls for high level combatants are the later iterative attack rolls. When it's that high at the front-end, you're badly outclassed, and should be retreating rather than looking for ways to boost your average damage slightly.

And yes, 90/15 is the same as 6/1, and is a bit of an exaggeration. With six attacks per round, needing a twenty to hit each time, you'll average three hits per ten rounds. But with the damage you do, at the levels we're talking about, either your combat contribution will be negligible, or it will take many, many rounds of combat for your group to finish the damn thing. I'd probably prefer to take some risks and try to take it down faster, even with a lower success probability ...

But, to each his own. Your monk development path is probably better than many others I've seen ...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

It doesn't seem that useful to me. Monks have a low AC bonus and do loads of damage (a poor way to balance a class, IMO), and this makes things worse.

On the other hand, some monks will still like this feat. A monk that takes Weapon Finesse will have a decent attack bonus, and this will help against certain creatures with a low AC, like animated objects.