Thoughts on reworking power attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

Thoughts on reworking power attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
NobodyRemembersThis
08-01-07, 12:53 AM Hey all. Based on a discussion in another thread and the actual usefulness of Power Attack, I was thinking of a compromise. Now, Tarkin, you will have to provide the mathematics you said made Power Attack pointless. So, I instead propose thi alternate Power Attack Feat:Power Attack
Prerequisite: Str 13.
Benefit: On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to take a -3 penalty to your attack roll and deal +5 points of damage. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.
Special: 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. You'll note that I removed the two handed clause from Power Attack. I am also contemplating removing the no light weapons clause. Thoughts?
NoldorForce
08-01-07, 12:59 AM Blech. It's a static benefit, which feats really shouldn't be. Power Attack is one of the relatively few good feats out there because it isn't static (as opposed to the Weapon X line).
NobodyRemembersThis
08-01-07, 01:15 AM Blech. It's a static benefit, which feats really shouldn't be. Power Attack is one of the relatively few good feats out there because it isn't static (as opposed to the Weapon X line).Feats should be static, class abilities should be dynamic (scaling). ;) There are only 3 scaling feats in core - Power Attack, Combat Expertise, and leadership. Only Leadership should be a scalable feat - it would be impossible to implement otherwise.

Because they are class abilities (WS, GWF, GWS), they should scale. IMC, WS grants a +1 damage, with a +1 every 5 levels (+1 at levels 5, 10, 15, 20) for a grand total of +5 damage. Then again, Fighter's also get access to Superior Weapon Focus - +1 to hit, +1 every 5 levels (+1 at 5, 10, 15, 20) for a max of +5 to hit.

I have eliminated the slap in the face "fighter fix" that GWF and GWS were supposed to represent in 3.5e.
Big_Mac
08-01-07, 11:33 AM Combat Expertise is not truly Scalable because it tops out a 5 you have to take Improved CE to make it fully scalable.
Llathos
08-01-07, 01:12 PM Not sure what you want to hear...it's a pretty huge nerf to melee combatants in general as far as I can tell.

Power Attack is a current must-have because it's the engine that feeds high damage at higher levels. Its fuel is BAB and strength and it produces pain.

You just took the bite out of the blade.
Big_Mac
08-01-07, 01:22 PM Yeah it may produce pain but it also produces misses. When I am in a defensive mode I do not really care how often I miss. When tying to deal damage I really do not want to miss that often. So I have never really thought of PA as useful.

Yes with a THW you get 2 point for 1 and you get a 5% less chance to hit.
Llathos
08-01-07, 01:25 PM What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon.

You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't.

When you run into a dire bear, however, you pump AB into PA as hard as you can and hit that beastie like a mac truck.

When you're attacking an object, you PA hard.

When you're attacking a mage or other likely low AC target that needs to be put down fast, you PA.

Don't make the assumption that all targets will have an AC equal to or higher than yours then make that the case for PA being useless.
Big_Mac
08-01-07, 02:11 PM What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon.

You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't.

When you run into a dire bear, however, you pump AB into PA as hard as you can and hit that beastie like a mac truck.

When you're attacking an object, you PA hard.

When you're attacking a mage or other likely low AC target that needs to be put down fast, you PA.

Don't make the assumption that all targets will have an AC equal to or higher than yours then make that the case for PA being useless.

Yeah I understand and see what your saying but my DM must run a pretty hard Campaign then.

My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str.

Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8

+ to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20

So with average rolls w/PA I hit AC 28/ AC 23 / AC 18
and with average damage 27 27 27 total 81

with out PA I hit AC 33/ AC 28/ ac 23
and average damage is 17 17 17 total 51

Attack a level 14 Mage Safe to say the a level 14 mage could have an AC 23 or better. Bracer +5 Dex +2 Ring of prot +2 Amulet of NA +4 average HP of 36 no con bonus

So I manage to hit twice for 54 damage with PA

or 3 times without PA for 51 damage.

So all in all dead mage about the same, I do not really see the advantages. Any other attacks that come after like AoO are also at the minus 5. So again no real advantage.
Archangel_Tyrael
08-01-07, 02:38 PM Yeah I understand and see what your saying but my DM must run a pretty hard Campaign then.

My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str.

Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8

+ to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20

So with average rolls w/PA I hit AC 28/ AC 23 / AC 18
and with average damage 27 27 27 total 81

with out PA I hit AC 33/ AC 28/ ac 23
and average damage is 17 17 17 total 51

Attack a level 14 Mage Safe to say the a level 14 mage could have an AC 23 or better. Bracer +5 Dex +2 Ring of prot +2 Amulet of NA +4 average HP of 36 no con bonus

So I manage to hit twice for 54 damage with PA

or 3 times without PA for 51 damage.

So all in all dead mage about the same, I do not really see the advantages. Any other attacks that come after like AoO are also at the minus 5. So again no real advantage.

Don't do the math yourself...let the programs already out there (http://direpress.bin.sh/tools/power.html) do it.

Your best bet would actually be Power Attacking at -3 attack bonus against AC 23 (which is very, very low for a level 14 encounter) netting you an average of 5 1/2 damage a round more than not power attacking at all.
Llathos
08-01-07, 04:37 PM Excuse me what now?

An AC of 23 is extremely low for an EL 14? I disagree.

Looking at the Monster Manuals, I grabbed a handful of CR 14 mobs:

Trumpet Archon AC 27
Umber Hulk, truly Horrid AC 22
Blue Dragon Adult AC 28
Werewolf Lord, human form AC 26
Werewolf Lord, dire wolf form AC 19
Werewolf Lord, hybrid form AC 19
Advanced Dire Bear (36HD) AC17

Average AC across the group? 22.57. I'd say his target AC was pretty accurate. Furthermore, this is the TOUGHEST EL 14 scenario: a single high powered combatant. More often, I've seen EL 14 comprised of a group of lower CR creatures whose individual ACs are likely less.

What you're also forgetting is that Power Attack, beyond being situationally useful against lower AC targets, is also tremendously useful when combined with any of the multidudes of buffs that increase your attack bonus modifier.
Size increases, morale bonuses, luck bonuses, insight bonuses etc all can stack up and be channeled into power attack to produce the damage.
NobodyRemembersThis
08-01-07, 04:45 PM He said el 14 mage. IE, PC class type encounter. Not a monster type encounter. ;)

Oh and for the record, this was spawned by a couple of comments from Tarkin in another thread. I was very much hioping he would come in and explain his reasoning, but *looks around* that doesn't appear to have happened.

I am just curious if this sort of a tweak would make power attack a must have feat even if it doesn't scale. *shrug*
Vharuck
08-01-07, 04:54 PM I'll have to agree that Power Attack is not an "always on" feat but a tactical feat to affect certain situations in your favor. Mathematical proofs about D&D statistics and probability generally always give an answer relative to the mean (average), mode (most recurring number or quality), or median (the middle entry in a set). But, of course, this one comparison, or even all three, are not constants. There will be times when Power Attacking is a dumb idea, but there will also be times when it's a great idea.

However, tactics are extremely hard to prove or incorporate into a proof. So, I hope you'll understand my being leery at the math "showing" Power Attack to be pointless.
TorgSmackie
08-01-07, 05:17 PM What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon.

You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't.
Well you do if you can only hit on a 20 anyway.
jaelis
08-01-07, 06:08 PM I don't think there's much wrong with power attack as it is... why change it?

But I do agree that people tend to overdo it. In most fights, you shouldn't use much of a penalty and if you do it doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference. (Rarely have I seen it be better than weapon specialization for a full attack routine.)

But it is nice when fighting really low AC opponents, when you're limited to one attack, when you need to break through some nasty DR, or when you're trying to bust an object. That's enough to make it a good feat, but hardly the best out there.

The only thing I don't much like about it is that it favors 2H builds, since the 1:1 ratio is almost never any good while the 2:1 ratio is fairly decent. My fix to that is to use a second feat that gives a 2:1 ratio on a 1H weapon.
Empiro
08-01-07, 06:41 PM Not too bad of a change. My main gripe about Power Attack as written is that it too easily allows even a mid-level character to power attack through a stone wall in no time. Putting a reasonable cap on how much you can power attack is a good thing I think.
n00dle_king
08-01-07, 08:36 PM Not too bad of a change. My main gripe about Power Attack as written is that it too easily allows even a mid-level character to power attack through a stone wall in no time. Putting a reasonable cap on how much you can power attack is a good thing I think.If thats a big problem you could add in damage to weapons. Off the top of my head you could rule that every time you hit something with hardness your weapon has to make a fort save DC 10+hardness. You could give hammers a bonus to the save. The fact is some guy hitting a stone wall with his greatsword is just nonsense.
Dog_O_War
08-01-07, 09:03 PM I don't think using power attack as a static feat is very fun, or practical for characters of lower level (-3 to attack at level one is horrible to a 13 str fighter. also, +5 damage at level one is the powergamers wet dream).

The thing I would change about power attack is that instead of light weapons as barred, it should be certain specific weapons (like the rapier or the spiked chain for that matter) as being barred. Things like a dagger, which for all its piercing might, you can't put any extra force behind the blow?! Also having to dedicate EVERY attack in the round as if it were one continous swing to the attack penalty of the first one just because you power attacked always seemed hokey to me. But this is just one man's opinion ( unless you agree;) , in which case says so! ).
Malkonnen
08-02-07, 12:54 AM My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str.

Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8

+ to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20

No offense, but a 18 Str is awfully low for a 14th level melee fighter. 22-28 is IMO a much more likely range for Str scores on a 14th level character who is at all melee focused.

That seems to be the root of your problem with power attack: it's only as good as your attack bonus. The key to an efficient melee fighter is to scrape together every bonus available to your attack bonus so you can hit the opponents with the uber ACs, and so you can really hurt the moderate to low AC guys.

So let's see what happens if you had a 24 Str:
+14 BAB +7 Str +1 focus +4 magic = +26/21/16 to hit
2d6 +10 Str +4 magic = 2d6+14 damage with your greatsword

Now first you come up against a group of 3 frost giants (AC 21, no DR, CR 9) as an example of a low EL encounter for your level.

According to the Dire Press Power Attack Calculator, w/o power attacking you can expect to do 62.37 dmg on avg. per full attack. Not bad! But by power attacking for 5, you can boost your dmg up to 80.85. (for comparison Weapon Spec would only boost your dmg to 68.31)

Conclusion: Power attack really helps you mop up low CR mooks and the BBEG's minions.

Next up we have a Nalfeshnee Demon (AC 27, DR 10/good) as a example of a strong opponent of your CR.

According to the Dire Press Power Attack Calculator, w/o power attacking you can expect to do 26.62 dmg on avg. per full attack thanks to the demon's DR. By power attacking for 5, you can boost your dmg up to 34.65. (W Spec only offers 31.46 dmg)

Now if you planned ahead (or had a cleric with you who planned ahead) your dmg jumps up to 50.81 w/o PA, or 53.62 w/ PA, if you can bypass that DR. (in this case W Spec would be better giving you 55.66 dmg)

Now let's try a nice "tank" mob, an Iron Golem (AC 30, DR 15/Adm, CR 13).

w/o PA you can only expect a mere 11.88 dmg per round. But PAing for 5 brings you upto 18.48. (W Spec 15.84)

This time preparation gets you 41.58 or 41.74 w/ PA -1 or 45.54 w/ W Spec.

Conclusion: We see that power attack can greatly help mitigate the issue of being unprepared for a particular form or DR, even against high AC foes.

Next let's see how we fare against a reasonable BBEG you might face: an Old Blue Dragon (AC 34, DR 10/magic, CR 18)

Thanks to your magic weapon you're looking at 27.71 dmg, w/ PA offering no help. (W Spec ups you to 30.36)

Conclusion: Up against the BBEG, it's true PA probably won't help since you'll be doing your best just to hit.

Lastly let's look at your mage encounter. A 14th level wizard you can expect to have an AC of 20-27 depending on how much he focuses on buffing his AC. Let's go with AC 23 (+3 from Dex, +1 from a ring of protection, +1 from an amulet of natural armor, +4 from mage armor, and +4 from shield) as a decent median.

Assuming he's visible and you get past mirror images/blinking/displacement/etc you can expect to do 60.06 dmg/round or 71.61 w/ PA -5 or 65.78 w/ W Spec.

Conclusion: PA will definitely help if you can get past his non AC defenses.

If you ask me, PA is one of the best tools a melee fighter has at his disposal. It lets him adapt as his foes AC goes up or down, and greatly counters DR.

Hope that helps,
Malk

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
NobodyRemembersThis 08-01-07, 12:53 AM	Hey all. Based on a discussion in another thread and the actual usefulness of Power Attack, I was thinking of a compromise. Now, Tarkin, you will have to provide the mathematics you said made Power Attack pointless. So, I instead propose thi alternate Power Attack Feat:Power Attack Prerequisite: Str 13. Benefit: On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to take a -3 penalty to your attack roll and deal +5 points of damage. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn. Special: 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. You'll note that I removed the two handed clause from Power Attack. I am also contemplating removing the no light weapons clause. Thoughts?
NoldorForce 08-01-07, 12:59 AM	Blech. It's a static benefit, which feats really shouldn't be. Power Attack is one of the relatively few good feats out there because it isn't static (as opposed to the Weapon X line).
NobodyRemembersThis 08-01-07, 01:15 AM	Blech. It's a static benefit, which feats really shouldn't be. Power Attack is one of the relatively few good feats out there because it isn't static (as opposed to the Weapon X line).Feats should be static, class abilities should be dynamic (scaling). ;) There are only 3 scaling feats in core - Power Attack, Combat Expertise, and leadership. Only Leadership should be a scalable feat - it would be impossible to implement otherwise. Because they are class abilities (WS, GWF, GWS), they should scale. IMC, WS grants a +1 damage, with a +1 every 5 levels (+1 at levels 5, 10, 15, 20) for a grand total of +5 damage. Then again, Fighter's also get access to Superior Weapon Focus - +1 to hit, +1 every 5 levels (+1 at 5, 10, 15, 20) for a max of +5 to hit. I have eliminated the slap in the face "fighter fix" that GWF and GWS were supposed to represent in 3.5e.
Big_Mac 08-01-07, 11:33 AM	Combat Expertise is not truly Scalable because it tops out a 5 you have to take Improved CE to make it fully scalable.
Llathos 08-01-07, 01:12 PM	Not sure what you want to hear...it's a pretty huge nerf to melee combatants in general as far as I can tell. Power Attack is a current must-have because it's the engine that feeds high damage at higher levels. Its fuel is BAB and strength and it produces pain. You just took the bite out of the blade.
Big_Mac 08-01-07, 01:22 PM	Yeah it may produce pain but it also produces misses. When I am in a defensive mode I do not really care how often I miss. When tying to deal damage I really do not want to miss that often. So I have never really thought of PA as useful. Yes with a THW you get 2 point for 1 and you get a 5% less chance to hit.
Llathos 08-01-07, 01:25 PM	What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon. You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't. When you run into a dire bear, however, you pump AB into PA as hard as you can and hit that beastie like a mac truck. When you're attacking an object, you PA hard. When you're attacking a mage or other likely low AC target that needs to be put down fast, you PA. Don't make the assumption that all targets will have an AC equal to or higher than yours then make that the case for PA being useless.
Big_Mac 08-01-07, 02:11 PM	What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon. You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't. When you run into a dire bear, however, you pump AB into PA as hard as you can and hit that beastie like a mac truck. When you're attacking an object, you PA hard. When you're attacking a mage or other likely low AC target that needs to be put down fast, you PA. Don't make the assumption that all targets will have an AC equal to or higher than yours then make that the case for PA being useless. Yeah I understand and see what your saying but my DM must run a pretty hard Campaign then. My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str. Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8 + to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20 So with average rolls w/PA I hit AC 28/ AC 23 / AC 18 and with average damage 27 27 27 total 81 with out PA I hit AC 33/ AC 28/ ac 23 and average damage is 17 17 17 total 51 Attack a level 14 Mage Safe to say the a level 14 mage could have an AC 23 or better. Bracer +5 Dex +2 Ring of prot +2 Amulet of NA +4 average HP of 36 no con bonus So I manage to hit twice for 54 damage with PA or 3 times without PA for 51 damage. So all in all dead mage about the same, I do not really see the advantages. Any other attacks that come after like AoO are also at the minus 5. So again no real advantage.
Archangel_Tyrael 08-01-07, 02:38 PM	Yeah I understand and see what your saying but my DM must run a pretty hard Campaign then. My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str. Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8 + to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20 So with average rolls w/PA I hit AC 28/ AC 23 / AC 18 and with average damage 27 27 27 total 81 with out PA I hit AC 33/ AC 28/ ac 23 and average damage is 17 17 17 total 51 Attack a level 14 Mage Safe to say the a level 14 mage could have an AC 23 or better. Bracer +5 Dex +2 Ring of prot +2 Amulet of NA +4 average HP of 36 no con bonus So I manage to hit twice for 54 damage with PA or 3 times without PA for 51 damage. So all in all dead mage about the same, I do not really see the advantages. Any other attacks that come after like AoO are also at the minus 5. So again no real advantage. Don't do the math yourself...let the programs already out there (http://direpress.bin.sh/tools/power.html) do it. Your best bet would actually be Power Attacking at -3 attack bonus against AC 23 (which is very, very low for a level 14 encounter) netting you an average of 5 1/2 damage a round more than not power attacking at all.
Llathos 08-01-07, 04:37 PM	Excuse me what now? An AC of 23 is extremely low for an EL 14? I disagree. Looking at the Monster Manuals, I grabbed a handful of CR 14 mobs: Trumpet Archon AC 27 Umber Hulk, truly Horrid AC 22 Blue Dragon Adult AC 28 Werewolf Lord, human form AC 26 Werewolf Lord, dire wolf form AC 19 Werewolf Lord, hybrid form AC 19 Advanced Dire Bear (36HD) AC17 Average AC across the group? 22.57. I'd say his target AC was pretty accurate. Furthermore, this is the TOUGHEST EL 14 scenario: a single high powered combatant. More often, I've seen EL 14 comprised of a group of lower CR creatures whose individual ACs are likely less. What you're also forgetting is that Power Attack, beyond being situationally useful against lower AC targets, is also tremendously useful when combined with any of the multidudes of buffs that increase your attack bonus modifier. Size increases, morale bonuses, luck bonuses, insight bonuses etc all can stack up and be channeled into power attack to produce the damage.
NobodyRemembersThis 08-01-07, 04:45 PM	He said el 14 mage. IE, PC class type encounter. Not a monster type encounter. ;) Oh and for the record, this was spawned by a couple of comments from Tarkin in another thread. I was very much hioping he would come in and explain his reasoning, but looks around that doesn't appear to have happened. I am just curious if this sort of a tweak would make power attack a must have feat even if it doesn't scale. shrug
Vharuck 08-01-07, 04:54 PM	I'll have to agree that Power Attack is not an "always on" feat but a tactical feat to affect certain situations in your favor. Mathematical proofs about D&D statistics and probability generally always give an answer relative to the mean (average), mode (most recurring number or quality), or median (the middle entry in a set). But, of course, this one comparison, or even all three, are not constants. There will be times when Power Attacking is a dumb idea, but there will also be times when it's a great idea. However, tactics are extremely hard to prove or incorporate into a proof. So, I hope you'll understand my being leery at the math "showing" Power Attack to be pointless.
TorgSmackie 08-01-07, 05:17 PM	What I don't understand is why people don't see PA as a tactical weapon. You don't use PA against high AC targets. You just don't. Well you do if you can only hit on a 20 anyway.
jaelis 08-01-07, 06:08 PM	I don't think there's much wrong with power attack as it is... why change it? But I do agree that people tend to overdo it. In most fights, you shouldn't use much of a penalty and if you do it doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference. (Rarely have I seen it be better than weapon specialization for a full attack routine.) But it is nice when fighting really low AC opponents, when you're limited to one attack, when you need to break through some nasty DR, or when you're trying to bust an object. That's enough to make it a good feat, but hardly the best out there. The only thing I don't much like about it is that it favors 2H builds, since the 1:1 ratio is almost never any good while the 2:1 ratio is fairly decent. My fix to that is to use a second feat that gives a 2:1 ratio on a 1H weapon.
Empiro 08-01-07, 06:41 PM	Not too bad of a change. My main gripe about Power Attack as written is that it too easily allows even a mid-level character to power attack through a stone wall in no time. Putting a reasonable cap on how much you can power attack is a good thing I think.
n00dle_king 08-01-07, 08:36 PM	Not too bad of a change. My main gripe about Power Attack as written is that it too easily allows even a mid-level character to power attack through a stone wall in no time. Putting a reasonable cap on how much you can power attack is a good thing I think.If thats a big problem you could add in damage to weapons. Off the top of my head you could rule that every time you hit something with hardness your weapon has to make a fort save DC 10+hardness. You could give hammers a bonus to the save. The fact is some guy hitting a stone wall with his greatsword is just nonsense.
Dog_O_War 08-01-07, 09:03 PM	I don't think using power attack as a static feat is very fun, or practical for characters of lower level (-3 to attack at level one is horrible to a 13 str fighter. also, +5 damage at level one is the powergamers wet dream). The thing I would change about power attack is that instead of light weapons as barred, it should be certain specific weapons (like the rapier or the spiked chain for that matter) as being barred. Things like a dagger, which for all its piercing might, you can't put any extra force behind the blow?! Also having to dedicate EVERY attack in the round as if it were one continous swing to the attack penalty of the first one just because you power attacked always seemed hokey to me. But this is just one man's opinion ( unless you agree;) , in which case says so! ).
Malkonnen 08-02-07, 12:54 AM	My current Character is 14th so that's +14 BAB Let take 5 and PA with it so that is +10 to damage due to welding a great sword +4 with weapon focus, weapon Spec and 18 str. Total to hit is +14(BAB) +4(Str) +4(weapon) +1(focus) -5(PA) total +18/+13/+8 + to Damage is: +4(Str) +4(weapon) +2(spec) +10(PA) +20 No offense, but a 18 Str is awfully low for a 14th level melee fighter. 22-28 is IMO a much more likely range for Str scores on a 14th level character who is at all melee focused. That seems to be the root of your problem with power attack: it's only as good as your attack bonus. The key to an efficient melee fighter is to scrape together every bonus available to your attack bonus so you can hit the opponents with the uber ACs, and so you can really hurt the moderate to low AC guys. So let's see what happens if you had a 24 Str: +14 BAB +7 Str +1 focus +4 magic = +26/21/16 to hit 2d6 +10 Str +4 magic = 2d6+14 damage with your greatsword Now first you come up against a group of 3 frost giants (AC 21, no DR, CR 9) as an example of a low EL encounter for your level. According to the Dire Press Power Attack Calculator, w/o power attacking you can expect to do 62.37 dmg on avg. per full attack. Not bad! But by power attacking for 5, you can boost your dmg up to 80.85. (for comparison Weapon Spec would only boost your dmg to 68.31) Conclusion: Power attack really helps you mop up low CR mooks and the BBEG's minions. Next up we have a Nalfeshnee Demon (AC 27, DR 10/good) as a example of a strong opponent of your CR. According to the Dire Press Power Attack Calculator, w/o power attacking you can expect to do 26.62 dmg on avg. per full attack thanks to the demon's DR. By power attacking for 5, you can boost your dmg up to 34.65. (W Spec only offers 31.46 dmg) Now if you planned ahead (or had a cleric with you who planned ahead) your dmg jumps up to 50.81 w/o PA, or 53.62 w/ PA, if you can bypass that DR. (in this case W Spec would be better giving you 55.66 dmg) Now let's try a nice "tank" mob, an Iron Golem (AC 30, DR 15/Adm, CR 13). w/o PA you can only expect a mere 11.88 dmg per round. But PAing for 5 brings you upto 18.48. (W Spec 15.84) This time preparation gets you 41.58 or 41.74 w/ PA -1 or 45.54 w/ W Spec. Conclusion: We see that power attack can greatly help mitigate the issue of being unprepared for a particular form or DR, even against high AC foes. Next let's see how we fare against a reasonable BBEG you might face: an Old Blue Dragon (AC 34, DR 10/magic, CR 18) Thanks to your magic weapon you're looking at 27.71 dmg, w/ PA offering no help. (W Spec ups you to 30.36) Conclusion: Up against the BBEG, it's true PA probably won't help since you'll be doing your best just to hit. Lastly let's look at your mage encounter. A 14th level wizard you can expect to have an AC of 20-27 depending on how much he focuses on buffing his AC. Let's go with AC 23 (+3 from Dex, +1 from a ring of protection, +1 from an amulet of natural armor, +4 from mage armor, and +4 from shield) as a decent median. Assuming he's visible and you get past mirror images/blinking/displacement/etc you can expect to do 60.06 dmg/round or 71.61 w/ PA -5 or 65.78 w/ W Spec. Conclusion: PA will definitely help if you can get past his non AC defenses. If you ask me, PA is one of the best tools a melee fighter has at his disposal. It lets him adapt as his foes AC goes up or down, and greatly counters DR. Hope that helps, Malk