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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 933299" data-attributes="member: 3146">True Strike+Power Attack was never very useful except in a few smackdown situations when combined with Spirited Charge and/or Rhino Hide Armor. At low levels, the power attack damage is severely limited by BAB. At high levels, 2 full attacks or a charge and a full attack is usually more advantagous.The change may make true strike+power attack a more viable tactic but in most situationsFighter 2/wizard 6/spellsword 2: BAB +6, 14 str, +3 glaiveAtk +11/+6 1d10+6; +13/+8 against opponent without dex bonus using Improved Invisibility.Fighter 8/Sorceror 2: BAB +9, 18 str, +3 greatsword, weapon focus, weapon specialization; Atk +17/+12 2d6+11Against two opponents: A: AC 22 (+4 dex, +6 armor, +2 buckler) B: AC 24 (+3 dex, -1 size, +12 natural)Average Damage/Round (old/new)Spellsword against opponent ACharge + full attack: 15.525 damage/round or 27.025 (imp invis)True Strike+power attack: 16.625 (old) or 22.325 (new)Spellsword against opponent BCharge + full attack: 12.075 damage/round or 20.7 (imp invis)True Strike+power attack: 16.625 (old) or 22.325 (new)Fighter/sorceror against opponent ACharge+full attack: 40.5True Strike+Power Attack: 25.65 (old) 34.2 (new)Against opponent B:Charge+Full attack: 35.1True Strike+Power Attack: 25.65 (old) 34.2 (new)(weaknesses of the analysis: failed to account for a possible 2nd attack in a True Strike+full attack combo (probably doesn't have much chance of hitting though considering that it would be a secondary attack at full power attack); failed to account for the possibility of the Spellsword using Expert Tactician to pull off the True Strike+Power Attack combo twice in the two rounds (using Imp Invis); failed to account for criticals. I don't think any of that negates my conclusions however).Conclusion: True Strike+Power Attack is a potentiall advantageos combination but not devastatingly so. In all of the above situations, it added up to less damage than a charge+full attack from the fighter/sorceror and even had the spellsword done so twice using expert tactician and improved invisibility (and a greatsword) with the new power attack, his damage total would only have been slightly higher than the fighter/sorcerors's partial+full attack combo.) The combination seems to fare better the higher the AC of the creature being attacked and since neither example had a good AC, it's possible that True Strike+Power Attack could be significantly more effective against high AC creatures. In other situations--such as when combined with rhino hide armor or spirited charge, it would have the potential to be significantly more effective than partial attack+full attack. However, even with the new power attack and a two handed weapon it is only obviously superior in certain situations rather than across the board. (And that is true of all tactics--improved trip, is obviously a very good tactic in some situations but not others--so there is nothing broken about True Strike+power attack whether the old or the new version is in use).In 3e, the primary uses of power attack were allowing fighters to punish low AC enemies such as zombies or skeletons, overcome DR or the hardness of animated objects, and allowing characters to gain extra damage on charge attacks that were sure to hit (such as a raging fighter/barbarian with a modified 28 strength from rage and buffs charging opponent A above--he would hit on a roll of -3). True Strike+Power Attack was a marginal side use that was only occasionally advantageous to a few of the characters with the feat.</blockquote>

Verification