D&D 3E/3.5 Problems with 3.5 Power Attack?

[Winternight]

a bit OT

Normal attack:
55% chance to hit, 2d8 + 7 damage, 20/x2 crit
.55 * (9 + 7) * 1.05 = 9.24 expected damage per round

Sorry can u explain the math behind dis?
.55 ( Attack chance - OK)
9+7 ( average damage - OK)
1.05 ( ???)

thanks

 

[Staffan]

Re: a bit OT

1.05 ( ???)

The damage increase from crits. 5% of hits are crits, and they do 100% extra damage = multiply average damage by 1.05 to account for crits.

And yes, it's 5%, not depending on hit chance - that's why it's 5% of hits that are crits, not attacks (just pre-empting an argument that often pops up in these discussions about crits).

 

[Mistwell]

Re: a bit OT

Sorry can u explain the math behind dis?
.55 ( Attack chance - OK)
9+7 ( average damage - OK)
1.05 ( ???)

thanks

Is that the crit modifier? If so, it is not accuarate. That is the chance to threaten a crit, not actually do crit damage. You still have to confirm the crit with a second roll.

 

[Snipehunt]

It's to reflect chance of critical.

edit- mistwell beat me to it.

 

[MadScientist]

Re: a bit OT

Edit: Argh beaten by like three ppl.

 

[Winternight]

Still a bit OT

The damage increase from crits. 5% of hits are crits, and they do 100% extra damage = multiply average damage by 1.05 to account for crits.

And yes, it's 5%, not depending on hit chance - that's why it's 5% of hits that are crits, not attacks (just pre-empting an argument that often pops up in these discussions about crits).

Thanx
If I undderstood that correctly a 19/x2 weapon would be 1.1 because you are having a crit in 10% of all hits.
22x damage in 20 hits -> 1.1
Also would be a 20/x3 weapon 1.1 because you hit in 1/20 a critical but then you do 3 times damage.
22x damage in 20 hits.

cool.
Internet is the source of all solutions.

Thank you

edit:
thank you too all. While I was typing more of you answered
thanx

 

[Storminator]

Just saw a 3.5 power attacker last weekend, and didn't see a problem. Did a few more points of damage in each fight.

The big benefit tho, was that the player had one more decision each round. In 3.0, PA was rarely a good option (witness all the math threads), so only rarely did anyone consider it. With a great axe in 3.5, tho, you want to consider PA every round.

More decisions --> more playing --> more fun --> good!

PS

 

[Uller]

In the context of 3.0, it seems a bit overpowered. But it looks like in 3.5 almost every class got a boost in some way. For fighters it comes in the form of better feats.

 

[Mistwell]

Re: Re: a bit OT

The damage increase from crits. 5% of hits are crits, and they do 100% extra damage = multiply average damage by 1.05 to account for crits.

And yes, it's 5%, not depending on hit chance - that's why it's 5% of hits that are crits, not attacks (just pre-empting an argument that often pops up in these discussions about crits).

Ah yes, I see, the % chance of hitting is part of the equation that includes the 5% crit number, so it isn't just a threat of a crit, it's average actual crits. Gotcha.

 

[ForceUser]

I agree. I don't think fighters should be limited in combat effectiveness.

The double damage thing just caught me by surprise and I wanted to see if anyone had actually used it in game and what the results were.

Dirge

Seems to work fine. I run a game with a 3rd level greataxe-wielding barbarian/fighter. His AC is crap but he can really bring it damage-wise. Combine that with Cleave and he is a monster on damage output.

Good for him, I say, because I beat him and his 16 AC like a red-headed stepchild almost every fight.