D&D 4E The math behind power attack and why it needs to be redone in 4e

[Najo]

I disagree. There's nothing wrong with my memory, and I have a firm grasp on what benefits my character. Considering I was dealing with ACs of around 20 (or less), you'll find I was making the smart call.

The fact is that power attack is a mechanically beneficial feat to have, and with proper use it can ensure that a PC defeats opponents faster than without it. It's ridiculous that this can even be under debate after seven years of mechanical experimentation with the system by tens of thousands of players.

But the other fact is that power attack misleads players by 1) being available as a starting feat, 2) only beneficial in certain power gaming builds.

It's ridiculous that this is even under debate when the D&D designers themselves are coming out saying the feat doesn't work like advertised and needs work, and the tens of thousands of players...well the ones using the math charts did know. The ones who weren't, going on "gut", well they didn't realize it. It shows that the majority isn't always correct.

 

[Najo]

This, IMHO, is the worst sin of Power Attack. The replacement should actually do what it looks like it does.

Cheers, -- N

That is the overall point about all of this. It should do what it advertises. I agree with you Nifft.

Another point to consider:

There is a high percentage of players using the feat wrong. The forums have proven that. So many players think it is helping, and go by their gut on it. In reality, it hurts their ability to do damage.

There is another camp, that loves the feat for the wrong reasons. That camp knows how to min/max it and break the feat with ungodly amounts of bonus damage and virtually no penalty to their to hit.

There very fact that both of these extremes exist and are about 80-90% of the feat's usage shows that the feat needs to be fixed. The first group is refusing to see that, even with math laid out. The second group is reinforcing how broken power attack gets when it works.

 

[Ahglock]

I don't think it was meant to be a dig at your intelligence but a remark about a well-known cognitive bias: it's much easier to remember when power attack works, because that's exciting, than it is to remember when it doesn't, because that's a non-event.
It's quite obvious from the discussion on this forum, which includes perhaps the best-educated D&Ders out there, that power attack has not been studied by most players, and that their gut instincts are not backed up by the math.

Power attack can be used to increase combat effectiveness -- when to-hit probability is high and damage is low -- but it can also easily reduce combat effectiveness, and it's not immediately obvious to everyone which effect they're getting.

Actually I'd say the math presented doesn't represent a D&D game in the slightest or at least the results the anti-power attackers keep implying at least.

Power attack works great for lots of people because when facing the appropriate CR monsters at levels 10+ there to hit is 1 or less. When on a charge you hit on a -7, PA comes in handy, whether or not your base damage is high or low.

I'd say at the mid to higher levels hitting on a -7 is more common than the need a 10+ numbers meant to show how bad power attack is.

This is especially true when appropriate encounters are frequently made up of multiple lower CR mosnters.

 

[Najo]

Really? Cleave? I've never seen any fighters take this feat. It just seems so ... situational. You have to drop an opponent and a second one has to be in reach. This isn't a common thing IME, where you frequently face one opponent, or multiple opponents spread out because of reach/size.

Agreed I have never taken cleave for that very reason.

Cleave should look like this:

Cleave
You can follow through with powerful blows.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack
Benefit: If you deal a creature enough damage to make it incapacitated (typically reducing it to below 0 hit points or kilingl it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that incapacitated the previous creature. If there is no creature within melee range, you may take an additional 5-foot step instead. You can use this ability once per round.

That way, at least it gives something back for being so situational.

Note: I am not condoning that every feat should always have a non-situational use. But feats that are almost entirely useless based on the play style of your GM or players should be weighed if they are good enough.

For example, turn undead and favor enemy are entirely useless if you Gm doesn't include undead or the favored enemy. Because of this, they are not considered as valuable class features when compared to others by the designers. Cleric's main value is decent fighting, good support, great healing and moderate other spells. Turning undead is not really counted in its class features when balancing it.

If you don't throw hordes of creatures at your players or if your players don't use alot of manuvering to gather creatures together, then cleave becomes dead weight. It shouldn't be that dependant on the game environment and still cost a whole feat. The 5 foot step allows the melee fighter to close the gap, and stays in theme with the momentum moving them forward and causing a powerful strike that can fell 2 foes.

 

[Nifft]

Power attack works great for lots of people because when facing the appropriate CR monsters at levels 10+ there to hit is 1 or less. When on a charge you hit on a -7, PA comes in handy, whether or not your base damage is high or low.

Only if you know your opponent's AC precisely.

PA rewards meta-gaming to a degree very few other feats or options can match.

It's bad.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Ahglock]

Only if you know your opponent's AC precisely.

PA rewards meta-gaming to a degree very few other feats or options can match.

It's bad.

Cheers, -- N

Usually after a couple rounds my players can guess the AC or roughly guess it without meta-gaming, its in game in play experience the character not the player would be picking up.

When you hit on a 2, the character would be saying holy crap this guy is easy to hit he is walking right into my sword. That aint meta-gaming when you throw on some power attack in your next attack. When you face 5 more giant slugs in the same encounter you easily can open up with power attack on the remaining ones and it just isn't meta-gaming.

Meta-gaming is always rewarded, but you don't have to meta-game to be rewarded by power attack.

 

[Cadfan]

Usually after a couple rounds my players can guess the AC or roughly guess it without meta-gaming, its in game in play experience the character not the player would be picking up.

When you hit on a 2, the character would be saying holy crap this guy is easy to hit he is walking right into my sword. That aint meta-gaming when you throw on some power attack in your next attack. When you face 5 more giant slugs in the same encounter you easily can open up with power attack on the remaining ones and it just isn't meta-gaming.

Meta-gaming is always rewarded, but you don't have to meta-game to be rewarded by power attack.

After a couple of rounds my players aren't typically making standard action attacks. They're engaged and making full attacks.

Which means that power attack is basically pointless by the time they've figured out if its useful.

 

[Najo]

Meta-gaming is always rewarded, but you don't have to meta-game to be rewarded by power attack.

A feat like cleave, mentioned earlier, says attack the next guy. Feats like improved trip make it so you don't give an attack of opportunity to your foe. Feats like improved initiative increase your initiative. Good game mechanics clearly state what they are doing. In a RPG, they should encourage role playing along with the tactical elements of the game. Even feats like weapon focus and weapon specialization increase to hit and damage respectfully, without spending to much time up with the raw mechanics. Simple, one way bonuses.

Power attack is intriguing, and it appears to say: "hey you, me. swanky gamer guy, you can do neat, elegant controlled hits with me." Power attack teases you with a sliding scale and the illusion of choice. It seems harmless enough: subtract from to hit, add to damage. But that is where the metagaming begins. The minute you start working the numbers, and crunching that math (which is likely for most gamers to do as they are often above average intelligence), power attack turns into a pause the game type effect and focus on the math problem. It wouldn't do this if it was a simple -2 to hit +2 to damage choice. Even better, if it was a gain damage at another cost other than a penalty to hit.

See, it is meta gaming because we go out of the game and above it into the mechanics and ignore the actions of the character. The barbarian wouldn't adjust his wild, brutal swing with exact prescision, figuring out exactly how much of a risk he would take. He would go for it, and hit with all he has. Likewise, each degree of increasing the amount of damage should be a benefit. If I want to do a -1/+1 or a -2/ +2 or a -3/ +3 then they should scale the risk/ reward smoothly, but they don't. It fluctuates.

The real proof Power Attack needs to be fixed is simple though. In the midst of the action, my character stepping up and taking a wild swing that nails my enemy hard if I hit him should be exciting, and put us on edge. It should be from declaration to dice roll and result, a moment of tension and fast paced action. The rest of the players should hold their breath because I declared a power attack and they know its risky. Not because they are waiting for me to do the math on it.

I realize this is why the players who do not do the math on it like it. It gives them that. But the feat isn't really giving those players much back in return. As for those who abuse it, I am sure that those groups hate the feat. It makes things to easy and takes alot of the spotlight away from the other characters. The last few who are playing with the feat properly and benefiting but not abusing it, well they are doing it with boring math forumlas and tables, which is meta gaming and hurts the flow of the game.

Power attack needs to evolve and be fun. It is possible, it can keep the basic feel without to much overhaul and it would get rid of the all of these issues plus keep the action flowing.

 

[Lanefan]

My. Head. Hurts.

Lane-"too many numbers"-fan

 

[Oldtimer]

If I want to do a -1/+1 or a -2/ +2 or a -3/ +3 then they should scale the risk/ reward smoothly, but they don't. It fluctuates.

No, it follows a smooth bell curve. I wouldn't call that "fluctuates". There is a very predictable (assuming you can guesstimate your opponent's AC) optimum. And that's just the problem - players that take their time to calculate that optimum.

The real proof Power Attack needs to be fixed is simple though. In the midst of the action, my character stepping up and taking a wild swing that nails my enemy hard if I hit him should be exciting, and put us on edge. It should be from declaration to dice roll and result, a moment of tension and fast paced action. The rest of the players should hold their breath because I declared a power attack and they know its risky. Not because they are waiting for me to do the math on it.

Well, this is really the only reason it needs to be fixed. Take away all the calculations and it works fine - in the right situations.