Show me that Power Attack is ever Worth it..

[Rothe_]

Power attack is crappy even when you get a small increase in DPR, since you could get a bigger increase from another feat in many cases.

Stuff that makes PA more attractive also includes:
- damage on a miss feats (hammers and scimitars have those)
- damage on a miss powers
- high resistances to damage
- enemy could drop with one blow using PA (you sometimes can guess, most of the time this is useless)
- very large hit bonuses from buff effects, some leaders can boost to-hit by +5 or more

 

[DracoSuave]

I can agree with that for the most part, PA doesn't get really good until paragon tier.

 

[Shin Okada]

When you have leaders/controllers throwing out attack/defense buffs/debuffs power attack becomes good quite quickly. If your best buddy in melee is a Strength cleric with brand, this is a fantastic feat. Looks like it'll combo well with all the psion's defense debuffs, too...

I think Destil got the point. You don't need to ALWYS use power attack. But when you got good amount of bonus to you attack roll, it is a nice option that you can trade some of it into additional damage.

4e is meant to be a game of teamwork. Leaders will either give you attack bonus or lower opponent's defense. Controllers give opponents bad conditions. And almost everyone try to let opponent grant combat advantage to their friends.

Calculating the efficiency just from one character's stats alone is a little bit nonsense in 4e.

 

[DracoSuave]

Calculating the efficiency just from one character's stats alone is a little bit nonsense in 4e.

No, but understanding that point can tell you 'I have +2 to attack, so this works out two points better' or 'I have +3 to damage, so that works out a little worse'

The math for how much buffs affect the situation is linear. A bonus to hit affects it proportionally in one direction, and a bonus to damage affects it linearly in another direction. So you can actually add A, subtract B, and come up with your temp. sweet spot.

Not hard at all, really.

 

[Shin Okada]

Well, for example, one of my PC has +19 melee weapon attack bonus at L 11.

We still meet monsters of lower level than PC in official modules. Say, trolls (L 9 brute) in a module for 11th-level adventurers.

Now, troll's AC is 20. If my PC flank that troll, even if I use Power Attack, I still hit it at 2+.

So, it is simply nice to inflict +6 damages per hit.

This is an extreme case for sure. Troll has particularly low AC. But similar occasion happens as leaders tend to give better attack bonuses.

 

[Garthanos]

This is an extreme case for sure. Troll has particularly low AC. But similar occasion happens as leaders tend to give better attack bonuses.

Sure when hitting is gravy.. a boost to damage is more useful.. but umm you arent likely being challenged right then are you?... a boost to ones effectiveness when one doesnt really need it is... umm well hardly as useful as an improvement to ones ability when one does need it though at the other end of the scale we also get a negative a situational benefit of marginal degree that only helps when one is close to the middle of a tpk.

Another thing that can make power attack more useful... low armor class high hit point enemies.

 

[Shin Okada]

Another thing that can make power attack more useful... low armor class high hit point enemies.

Well, brutes tend to have lower AC and high HPs. Artilleries tend to have lower AC and stronger attacks.

It may save your (or your ally's) life if you can kill those attackers faster.

 

[two]

I think it's important not to underestimate the "overkill" question, and the all-important ACTION question.

Let's say you hit stuff and do average damage of 15 per round.

Let's say with power attack you are at -2 to hit and +5 damage or something like that, upping your average damage to 20 for the -2 to hit cost.

The only time that this really matters (compared to not using power attack or another - to hit + to damage power) is when the additional +5 damage actually leads to a monster dropping faster than it would otherwise.

If you at attacking a monster with 10 HP or less, it's always stupid to use power attack. Your normal average damage will kill it 90% of the time.

On the other hand, if the monster has 17 HP, it's likely a lot more worth it to use power attack. The chances are not so good that a normal hit will drop it in one round; much better than your power attack will. If you hit. Because it will kill the monster in one shot, REMOVING an enemy action (otherwise it gets to attack again next round).

Similarly, imagine going up against something huge (say, 100 HP). You do 5 HP more with your power attack hit. Will that percolate down, after the monster has been hit a lot more, to it dying a round earlier? What are the odds of this? How often does that 5HP actually get the monster to act 1 time less?

The decision to use Power Attack isn't just a mathematical one of higher DPR. A DPR of 15 compared to 17 is drowned out by other considerations, such as: what sort of enemy is this? Does it have special resistances? It is really weak and injured, and any sort of hit will kill it? Is it juicy fresh and we need to somehow kill it as soon as possible, before we all die?

My impression is that many times these sorts of decisions are very difficult to make accurately, and power attack should be avoided simply to remove this constant stress/worry from the player's mind.

I'd say that 95% of the time it's either optimal or can't be proved that isn't not optional given the circumstances to NOT use Power Attack. The other 5% of the time you have to think really hard about it and have some rather strange circumstances going on. I don't want to take a feat which makes me sweat and rewards me so rarely. NO thanks.

 

[Garthanos]

I think it's important not to underestimate the "overkill" question, and the all-important ACTION question.

Let's say you hit stuff and do average damage of 15 per round.

Let's say with power attack you are at -2 to hit and +5 damage or something like that, upping your average damage to 20 for the -2 to hit cost.

The only time that this really matters (compared to not using power attack or another - to hit + to damage power) is when the additional +5 damage actually leads to a monster dropping faster than it would otherwise.

If you at attacking a monster with 10 HP or less, it's always stupid to use power attack. Your normal average damage will kill it 90% of the time.

The number of hitpoints that monsters normally have means it needs to be nearly out of the fight (a condition that might be quite detectable) or a minion before that question even comes to the drawing board.... meaning that most of the battle higher dpr is just better. If its a first level monster and bloodied .... maybe dont power attack (others have to be even closer to gone).

If its a minion don't power attack... (If your dm keeps minion status hidden and still uses them quite a bit this can really be a solid reduction on the value of power attack... and a solid increase in the value of sure strike)

What this means is that higher dpr really is more useful most of the time.. and if you don/t want to worry about fringe cases you dont have to.

 

[CapnZapp]

And if there's even -one- build where a feat is optimal, that feat is not a trap.

I disagree. I think your assertion is largely irrelevant.

If there is a feat which renders suboptimal results for many people because the math is difficult and/or counter-intuitive then that feat is bad design.

Power Attack is bad design. It may not be a trap according to your definition, but it is a trap to lots of gamers in practice, and that's all that matters.

If it was introduced in a Dragon article, with a sidebar explaining things (perhaps even lifting your excellent explanation verbatim) then maybe just maybe it would be okay.

As a heroic PHB1 feat? Not a chance. It's a trap, plain and simple.