Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 06:26 AM	Power Attack [General] Prerequisite Str 13. Benefit On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn. Special If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls. You can’t add the bonus from Power Attack to the damage dealt with a light weapon (except with unarmed strikes or natural weapon attacks), even though the penalty on attack rolls still applies. (Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon.) A fighter may select Power Attack as one of his fighter bonus feats. Improved Power Attack Prerequisite: Power Attack Benefit: As Power Attack, except: "On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the twice number to all melee damage rolls. " "If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add four times the number subtracted from your attack rolls. " Greater Power Attack Prerequisite: Improved Power Attack Benefit: As Improved Power Attack, except: "[...]and add the three times number to all melee damage rolls. " "If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add six times the number subtracted from your attack rolls. " Anyone seeing any problems if I would allow the power attack tree to go up this scale? Edit: I think I'll include Superior Power Attack, too, which is pre epic. Superior Power Attack Prerequisite: Greater Power Attack Benefit: As Greater Power Attack, except: "[...]and add the four times number to all melee damage rolls. " "If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add eight times the number subtracted from your attack rolls. " Edit 2: After some consideration with the replies I see a Bab requisite as necessary to keep this tree away from the CoDzilla classes. well to make it something more specific for melees i guess a bab limit needs to be placed... IPA: +5 bab GPA: +16 bab SPA: +18 bab quote (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=13293630&postcount=15)
DM Zoc 08-03-07, 06:35 AM	I think this is a bad idea. I think this is the exact opposite of what we need. On the high end, this would mean that barbarian with his greatsword is doing over 2d6+120 per swing. As is, power attack already shows up sword-and-board and two-weapon fighters (most of the time). At the very least, add BAB requirements to the improved and greater versions.
zeratulcraft 08-03-07, 07:15 AM	They have Improved/Greater Power Attack, it's on the Frenzy Barb. And it's capable of truly stupid amounts of damage, like my favourite 20d6+575 on shock troop pounce power full attack.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 07:37 AM	I think this is a bad idea. I think this is the exact opposite of what we need. On the high end, this would mean that barbarian with his greatsword is doing over 2d6+120 per swing. As is, power attack already shows up sword-and-board and two-weapon fighters (most of the time). At the very least, add BAB requirements to the improved and greater versions. which is exactly what i wanted, also not adding the bab requirement cause i want the fighter to have the benefit of having greater at lvl 2 or 1 if you play a human one. even then i doubt this will compare to any spellcaster or imbalance the game ...
Radijs 08-03-07, 08:28 AM	With these feats instead of having mortal kombat you'll have MOUNTED COMBAT! A spirited charge with a lance and this greater power attack will get you a whopping 18 points of damage for every point of BAB traded in. Sign me up!
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 09:30 AM	With these feats instead of having mortal kombat you'll have MOUNTED COMBAT! A spirited charge with a lance and this greater power attack will get you a whopping 18 points of damage for every point of BAB traded in. Sign me up! I'll throw you in a dungeon with 5ft passages and you are welcome to join the game ... it's just something against Codzilla, though it doesn't even come close
jaelis 08-03-07, 09:41 AM	it's just something against Codzilla, though it doesn't even come close You see that argument a lot when someone presents an overpowered warrior feat. But it's not a good one, for a couple reasons. First, you need to worry about balance within the warrior styles, not just between warriors and casters. For instance, if I introduced a martial weapon that had a base damage of 2d8 19-20/x4, and claimed it was balanced because clerics are so powerful, it would still be far and away the best weapon. Every warrior would, in a sense, be forced to use it if they want to operate at anything like optimum effectiveness. Your feats are the same way. They become essentially required feats... every barbarian is going to start to look pretty much the same in your game, and even the fighters will all be 2H specialists. The point, I guess, is that if you want to do something like this, you need to develop a whole set of feats of comparable power, unless you want the warrior classes to be really boring. But second, it doesn't really solve the CODzilla problem without more work. Because nothing prevents a cleric/druid from taking them too. They are both more-than-competent melee-ers, this will make them even more so.
Spikes01k 08-03-07, 09:52 AM	Power Attack is fine as is except when being used with TWF. If anything TWFers should have a feat that makes it so that they can add 1.5 power attack to their weapons.. It would help make getting TWF being worth something.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 10:01 AM	You see that argument a lot when someone presents an overpowered warrior feat. But it's not a good one, for a couple reasons. First, you need to worry about balance within the warrior styles, not just between warriors and casters. For instance, if I introduced a martial weapon that had a base damage of 2d8 19-20/x4, and claimed it was balanced because clerics are so powerful, it would still be far and away the best weapon. Every warrior would, in a sense, be forced to use it if they want to operate at anything like optimum effectiveness. Your feats are the same way. They become essentially required feats... every barbarian is going to start to look pretty much the same in your game, and even the fighters will all be 2H specialists. The point, I guess, is that if you want to do something like this, you need to develop a whole set of feats of comparable power, unless you want the warrior classes to be really boring. But second, it doesn't really solve the CODzilla problem without more work. Because nothing prevents a cleric/druid from taking them too. They are both more-than-competent melee-ers, this will make them even more so. Considering that the feat tree requires a full 4 feats, i doubt the clerics are going to take them. that'd be 12 class levels worth of feats into a single tree. i really think they have some better feats to take. Barbarians too would be taking a huge feat investment into the tree. the fighter is the only class who's got enough feats to compensate for this deep feat investment to make it anywhere near effective. and melee still get owned with any save or die spells
Gnarl 08-03-07, 10:12 AM	What kind of gaming experience do you expect from those feats? If you want a disgusting blood bath, then you're going to get it. Imagine these feats on dragons, giants, advanced magical beasts etc... You're begging for KOS :D. If your party members are helping you, you already should be doing an obscene amount of damage with your power attacking two-handed tripping halberd fighter. I personally don’t think there’s any reason to make any deadlier. You might consider something not quite as powerful. A feat to increase the power attack of a one-handed weapon to 1:2 ratio or 1:1.5 could be a nice idea. Something to deal power attack damage with a light weapon would be another interesting idea. I wouldn't allow those feats in my game. It would make my monsters way to nasty for the PCs :p.
runestar 08-03-07, 10:14 AM	even then i doubt this will compare to any spellcaster or imbalance the game ... *Shrugs* It's your game, not mine.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 10:31 AM	What kind of gaming experience do you expect from those feats? If you want a disgusting blood bath, then you're going to get it. Imagine these feats on dragons, giants, advanced magical beasts etc... You're begging for KOS :D. If your party members are helping you, you already should be doing an obscene amount of damage with your power attacking two-handed tripping halberd fighter. I personally don’t think there’s any reason to make any deadlier. You might consider something not quite as powerful. A feat to increase the power attack of a one-handed weapon to 1:2 ratio or 1:1.5 could be a nice idea. Something to deal power attack damage with a light weapon would be another interesting idea. I wouldn't allow those feats in my game. It would make my monsters way to nasty for the PCs :p. you didn't read my previous post did you? it takes 12 HD in feat investments for anything other than a fighter to even take this tree, keeping in mind 12 HD worth of exp that a freaking lot of investment. Yes maybe a couple of dragons, giants and other melee will take a dip into improved power attack but to get the full benefit they'd have to have some fighter class levels, which at that point should be a thread to my party anyways. this is to give the melee's whether monsters or players some kind of umph! to put the fear back in, "omg that hurts" and melees are dangerous again even if the party doesn't back them up. this feat doesn't protect them from either being dominated or anything else that spell caster do, so sure i don't mind bloodbath anyways, and i can throw a few more melees at them more often and caster are going to consider if they really want to try tanking those or leave it to the melees to do their job ...
NobodyRemembersThis 08-03-07, 10:58 AM	Wrong again. A human Barbarian would have 3 of the 4 by level 3, and would have all 4 at level 6. A non human can have them all at level 9. And, since the fighter doesn't get nice things like increased move or rage or uncanny dodge or damage reduction or skill points, the fighter will have 4 extra feats by the time a non human barbarian has maxed this tree, or 3 bonus feats by the time a human barb has maxed this tree. Your proposal is unbalanced and actually hoses the fighter more than other melee class. Try again, with pre-reqs and a better sense of balance. How about this: Improved Power Attack requirements: Power Attack, Strength 15, base attack bonus +5 Benefit: when using Power Attack, add +5 damage. Special:This may be taken as a fighter bonus feat. Better?
Bihlbo 08-03-07, 11:44 AM	Benefit: As Power Attack, except on your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the twice number to all melee damage rolls. If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add four times the number subtracted from your attack rolls. Apart from the other problems already presented, you seem to have forgotten that multipliers in D&D don't multiply each other, they stack. In trying to keep within the same parameters, these feats would need to do the same thing. Therefore, IPA = 1-handed weapon (1HW) is 2x damage, or 2HW is 3x damage GPA = 1HW is 3x damage, or 2HW is 4x damage SPA = 1HW is 4x damage, or 2HW is 5x damage Aside from the reason I already gave, if four feats is all it takes for you to power attack for 5 and deal 2d6+(Str bonus x 1.5)+40 with a greatsword, then there is literally no reason for a character to ever fight with two weapons, use a shield, or be anything but a human non-sorc/wiz. Take the human cleric - by level 6 he has all four PA feats. With base 14 Str he can wield a quarterstaff into battle with Bull's Strength cast, and with an attack bonus of +3 to his roll deal 1d6+30 (average 33 damage). By getting party members to demoralize, flank, or otherwise hinder a target (trip, grapple, etc) nothing with less than 5HD stands a ghost of a change against a single attack. And it costs the character nothing at all. He still has all his spells, he hasn't used any GP in the process, and there are no other long-term penalties. Not even a 14 Str rogue can pull this off sneak attacking with a longspear, PA, and bull's strength (1d8+3d6+12 = average 27). Also I'll add that it's just bad game design to put this kind of power into the hands of anyone who wants it. Clearly PA is something that is going to be a greater focus for fighters and barbarians than for other classes (except for paladins perhaps) because the focus of the class is doing melee damage while being armored and on the front lines. Just like you wouldn't add a feat that grants anyone with Weapon Finesse the ability to convert all their melee damage into negative energy, I think any feat in your proposed tree beyond PA itself should have some limitation that would only put this into the hands of a barbarian, fighter, or paladin.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 01:49 PM	Apart from the other problems already presented, you seem to have forgotten that multipliers in D&D don't multiply each other, they stack. In trying to keep within the same parameters, these feats would need to do the same thing. Therefore, IPA = 1-handed weapon (1HW) is 2x damage, or 2HW is 3x damage GPA = 1HW is 3x damage, or 2HW is 4x damage SPA = 1HW is 4x damage, or 2HW is 5x damage Aside from the reason I already gave, if four feats is all it takes for you to power attack for 5 and deal 2d6+(Str bonus x 1.5)+40 with a greatsword, then there is literally no reason for a character to ever fight with two weapons, use a shield, or be anything but a human non-sorc/wiz. Take the human cleric - by level 6 he has all four PA feats. With base 14 Str he can wield a quarterstaff into battle with Bull's Strength cast, and with an attack bonus of +3 to his roll deal 1d6+30 (average 33 damage). By getting party members to demoralize, flank, or otherwise hinder a target (trip, grapple, etc) nothing with less than 5HD stands a ghost of a change against a single attack. And it costs the character nothing at all. He still has all his spells, he hasn't used any GP in the process, and there are no other long-term penalties. Not even a 14 Str rogue can pull this off sneak attacking with a longspear, PA, and bull's strength (1d8+3d6+12 = average 27). Also I'll add that it's just bad game design to put this kind of power into the hands of anyone who wants it. Clearly PA is something that is going to be a greater focus for fighters and barbarians than for other classes (except for paladins perhaps) because the focus of the class is doing melee damage while being armored and on the front lines. Just like you wouldn't add a feat that grants anyone with Weapon Finesse the ability to convert all their melee damage into negative energy, I think any feat in your proposed tree beyond PA itself should have some limitation that would only put this into the hands of a barbarian, fighter, or paladin. multipliers only stack on numbers of dice, not actual numbers. Numbers get mulitplied and since power attack is number based, not dice based, they get multiplied. well to make it something more specific for melees i guess a bab limit needs to be placed... IPA: +5 bab GPA: +16 bab SPA: +18 bab The shorter gap at the high levels is for those that choose to continue picking this feat tree, while i leave a single dip into IPA for non-melee classes. Also considering at lvl 6 with an attack of +3 the cleric is sure to hit anything ... like maybe on a 18-20 he might hit something, and at that point, if he does roll that high, i'd let him have that high of an damage amount. consider also this, to deal the full benefit of the power attack you'd have to use up all your bab; which results in ****** to hit chances. At that point if you actually hit anything, i'd would let you deal that amount of damage, considering the penalty to hitting something. of course is all negate by a simple "glove of true strike" which solves all the to hit problems... but that's 1 hit per round, vs 4 full attacks. @NobodyRemembersThis consider that the fighter has 3 extra feats, he could have great cleave by that time and slaughter mobs of monster with a spike chain while the barbarian still is hitting 1 monster at a time in each round. so the fighter does progress faster in the beginning, only at the high end do they catch up to each other faster, especially with the barbarian not needing to sacrifice all his bab to deal the same amount of damage, or getting a better to hit chance while sacrificing all his bab vs a fighter, it is still a melee oriented feat tree.
NobodyRemembersThis 08-03-07, 02:23 PM	You don't get to move with Great Cleave, so "slaughter" is not necessarily the case. After level 6, a fighter can barely compare to a barbarian, and after level 10 it is no contest - the core fighter sucks, in a bad way. And, you can't balance these feats with the fighter in mind - you need to balance it in regards to the other melee classes; the ones that are actually played and that gain the most benefit from power attack. Specifically, Cleric, Paladin, Druid, and Barbarian. These classes have other abilities that make the penalty of power attack less important. Especially the cleric and druid. Unless you make these fighter only or require a 15/17/19 strength requirement, these are horrible feats - the class you intend them for won't get as much use out of them as a Druid melee build or a Cleric "smash" build will.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 03:29 PM	You don't get to move with Great Cleave, so "slaughter" is not necessarily the case. After level 6, a fighter can barely compare to a barbarian, and after level 10 it is no contest - the core fighter sucks, in a bad way. And, you can't balance these feats with the fighter in mind - you need to balance it in regards to the other melee classes; the ones that are actually played and that gain the most benefit from power attack. Specifically, Cleric, Paladin, Druid, and Barbarian. These classes have other abilities that make the penalty of power attack less important. Especially the cleric and druid. Unless you make these fighter only or require a 15/17/19 strength requirement, these are horrible feats - the class you intend them for won't get as much use out of them as a Druid melee build or a Cleric "smash" build will. Well you still kill more with a "reach" weapon on a power attack then with a normal melee, also if barbarian gets the highest amount of benefit from this feat tree, then I did do my job right, since this was a melee feat tree to begin with. Of course a barbarian has other feat trees to consider, and probably should, since this one is just for damage out put.
BlackFiend 08-03-07, 04:09 PM	I always beleived that the best way to improve is to add layers, not compound. Combine: power attack with sickened. Power attack with blown away condition. Power attack with D6 increments of nonlethal (concussion) Power attack with checked condition (very interesting for when its an AoO)
Dither 08-03-07, 05:06 PM	Power attack with checked condition (very interesting for when its an AoO) Might be interesting to combine PA with feats like Stand Still (similar to echked condition), or use PA to qualify for feats that normally require a character to be Large or larger, such as Large And In Charge (Draconomicon?) and Awesome Blow (Monster Manual).
Frugal 08-03-07, 05:35 PM	This makes what a frenzied berserker does look like nothing. 8:1 pay-off?! That's insane. Oh but wait, why don't I just take a frenzied berserker on top of it and stack this with supreme power attack, that'll give me another +100% (using errata wording) and leap attack for another +100% (using errata wording) so that's another +4 for every -1 netting me a total of 12:1, I'll use shock trooper so that goes to my AC instead of to-hit penalty so that means I'm getting a +240 damage from this feat if I'm 20th level and use it for full power attack, I still have my +20 to hit, plus STR and plus any other bonuses so odds are I'm hitting, then I'll use supreme cleave to take out anything else I threaten, before taking a 5' step to take out anything else I can get near. This is insane.
Ubasrawr 08-03-07, 05:51 PM	This makes what a frenzied berserker does look like nothing. 8:1 pay-off?! That's insane. Oh but wait, why don't I just take a frenzied berserker on top of it and stack this with supreme power attack, that'll give me another +100% (using errata wording) and leap attack for another +100% (using errata wording) so that's another +4 for every -1 netting me a total of 12:1, I'll use shock trooper so that goes to my AC instead of to-hit penalty so that means I'm getting a +240 damage from this feat if I'm 20th level and use it for full power attack, I still have my +20 to hit, plus STR and plus any other bonuses so odds are I'm hitting, then I'll use supreme cleave to take out anything else I threaten, before taking a 5' step to take out anything else I can get near. This is insane. and people complain about wizards .... ;)
NoldorForce 08-03-07, 06:47 PM	Apart from the other problems already presented, you seem to have forgotten that multipliers in D&D don't multiply each other, they stack. In trying to keep within the same parameters, these feats would need to do the same thing. Therefore, IPA = 1-handed weapon (1HW) is 2x damage, or 2HW is 3x damage GPA = 1HW is 3x damage, or 2HW is 4x damage SPA = 1HW is 4x damage, or 2HW is 5x damageBut Power Attack doesn't use multipliers. It instead uses a different attack/damage ratio depending on your weapon size. Plus, the original Improved Power Attack and Supreme Power Attack don't use multipliers, but instead additive percentages. The assumption that they're different is implied by the fact that errata exists swapping one for the other. On topic, these feats are rather absurd. You're already getting big returns if you just use this a little and don't try to add other stuff (like charging multipliers). I'd seen a different version of Improved Power Attack that allowed you to choose your modifier on a per-attack basis rather than a per-turn basis; that seemed more reasonable.
Gnarl 08-03-07, 07:26 PM	you didn't read my previous post did you? Sure I did :D. I was just giving my opinion. Its fine in your game if you think it fits but there's no way I'd ever allow those mine. Have fun with them though, I'd certainly like some feedback on what I consider monstrosities (and I consider myself a power gamer).
Frugal 08-03-07, 09:42 PM	and people complain about wizards .... ;) Apparently you don't grasp the issues with game balance. Adding more power to the game is very dangerous. Yes, Clerics, Druids and Wizards are powerful. But, that doesn't justify creating a broken feat tree to "fix" that. The reason is because you have to be extremely careful with who can get access to that power. As written, I'm willing to be there are several ways that a cleric or druid can get these feats and become even more broken. That's the problem. You're only looking at this from the situation of the fighter, arguably one of the weakest classes in the game, and it is a good idea to figure out ways to make the fighter more viable, but you also have to consider if those methods can also be used by more powerful classes. As I mentioned, the frenzied berserker comes to mind, it's already one of the most powerful melee builds out there, especially when using leap attack, adding these feats just takes that class and makes it even more obscenely broken. And guess what, that just leaves the fighter still languishing behind the power curve. Let alone what would happen if a druid or cleric had these feats.
Ubasrawr 08-04-07, 01:03 AM	Apparently you don't grasp the issues with game balance. Adding more power to the game is very dangerous. Yes, Clerics, Druids and Wizards are powerful. But, that doesn't justify creating a broken feat tree to "fix" that. The reason is because you have to be extremely careful with who can get access to that power. As written, I'm willing to be there are several ways that a cleric or druid can get these feats and become even more broken. That's the problem. You're only looking at this from the situation of the fighter, arguably one of the weakest classes in the game, and it is a good idea to figure out ways to make the fighter more viable, but you also have to consider if those methods can also be used by more powerful classes. As I mentioned, the frenzied berserker comes to mind, it's already one of the most powerful melee builds out there, especially when using leap attack, adding these feats just takes that class and makes it even more obscenely broken. And guess what, that just leaves the fighter still languishing behind the power curve. Let alone what would happen if a druid or cleric had these feats. I don't see how a cleric or druid is getting a 16 bab? no matter how much you multi class you ain't getting a 16 bab with being a cleric or druid and epic bab doesn't qualify as to allow you to have that feat, since it's epic bab and not bab.
NoldorForce 08-04-07, 03:17 AM	I don't see how a cleric or druid is getting a 16 bab?Clerics can get it easily with Divine Power. Or Persistent Divine Power, one of the biggest complaints against the class. There are also a few cleric PrCs that give full BAB. It's more difficult for druids (likely requiring careful multiclassing into PrCs), but doesn't really matter, considering what Pounce and a pack of natural weapons can do. Really, the whole "anything you can do I can do better" situation rears its head time and again with CoDzilla.
StruckingFuggle 08-04-07, 03:51 PM	I'll throw you in a dungeon with 5ft passages and you are welcome to join the game ... Alrighty then. I'll just make a small-sized character, mounted on a medium-sized creature ... hey, he even gets a +1 to hit, thus helping his splattery attacks land more often! :) Unless the dungeon is set up such that no one, ever, even being medium sized, can make charges. Then what kind of dungeon is that? :) Barbarians too would be taking a huge feat investment into the tree. the fighter is the only class who's got enough feats to compensate for this deep feat investment to make it anywhere near effective. and melee still get owned with any save or die spells *cough*twolevelfighterdip*cough* And the last end of the tree isn't alone, it's bad enough at Improved. Plus how it stacks, still, with Leap Attack, and synergizes with Shock Trooper, AND stacks with the same ability from Frenzied Berserker... ... hm. I wonder just how much you could pack into a Fighter 4 / Barbarian 2 / Frenzied Berserker... Shock Trooper, and the Lion Totem Variant, ... The question there is... : Falchion or Scythe? :D
Frugal 08-04-07, 05:34 PM	I don't see how a cleric or druid is getting a 16 bab? no matter how much you multi class you ain't getting a 16 bab with being a cleric or druid and epic bab doesn't qualify as to allow you to have that feat, since it's epic bab and not bab. Cleric 16/Fighter 4 comes to mind right away, loses 9th level spells though. But still pretty damn potent. And that's just one really quick core-only example. Or divine power, as mentioned already, which means not sacrificing any levels of cleric.