PDA

View Full Version : Power Attack and Combat Expertise



Rebonack
2007-01-05, 01:37 PM
This is something that's been bugging me for a while. Power Attacks allows the user to sink BAB for extra damage. Furthermore, there are oodles of feats (and class skills; I'm looking at you Frenzied Berserker) for improving this ability under specific circumstances such as a charge.

Combat Expertise is pretty much Power Attack's defensive counter part. Sink BAB for AC. But... only up to 5. Except if you burn another feat to allow you to sink as much BAB as you want. And no feats (at least none that I know of) for adding to its effectiveness.

This seems strange to me. Is offence supposed to be 'weaker' than defense? That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not in my experience.

Anyone else agree here?

Saph
2007-01-05, 01:48 PM
I think it's intended to stop higher-level characters stacking a few armour and shield and cover and natural armour and dodge bonuses and pairing them with defensive feats to make their character's AC so high that they can't be hit with anything other than a natural 20.

High AC can actually be more effective than high damage, especially if you're trying to hold off enemies while the rest of the party get rid of them.

- Saph

MrNexx
2007-01-05, 01:52 PM
It is odd, now that you mention it. Why doesn't expertise have the same capless state that Power Attack does? Why don't sword and boarders get the same two-for-one deal with Expertise that two-handers get with Power Attack?

DragonWatcher
2007-01-05, 01:58 PM
It is odd, now that you mention it. Why doesn't expertise have the same capless state that Power Attack does? Why don't sword and boarders get the same two-for-one deal with Expertise that two-handers get with Power Attack?


Because, as Saph stated, high AC is far more gamebreaking than high damage. If you can sink BAB into AC without limit, and give yourself an AC that can only bit hit with a nat 20, then you can afford to take all the time you need to win a fight. Whereas if you can do massive damage, but can't hit the opponent, while he's clobbering you... you're chances of winning are in the toilet.

Matthew
2007-01-05, 01:58 PM
It's basically because Feats aren't balanced against one another. Power Attack worked differently in 3.0. It worked with Light Weapons and only provided 1:1 Ratio of Damage. (Combat) Expertise wasn't revised and Power Attack was.

Bobbis
2007-01-05, 02:03 PM
Power Attack:
Con: Lower your chance to hit. Pro: If your attack hits with it's lower chance to hit, you'll do more damage. I.E. Power attack, when used, will not always work.

Combat Expertese:
Con: Lower your chance to hit. Pro: Your AC is higher, lowering chances to hit against you. I.E. Combat Expertise, when used, will always work.

Since power attack has a chance of not working, it must be given some benefit over it's defensive variant.

Rebonack
2007-01-05, 02:14 PM
Yes, but this is where all the boosting feats for Power Attack come in. Like, say, Shock Trooper.

That +far too much bonus you get on a charging Power Attack (especially with Leap Attack thrown in) now has your normal attack bonus and it's doing massive damage to boot. Throw in Karmic Strike and the fact that your AC sucks doesn't really matter.

Combat Expertise, on the other hand, gets nothing of the sort.

its_all_ogre
2007-01-05, 02:34 PM
be a duskblade.
use true strike and power attack with greatsword and expertise.
gain AC and damage and still hit more often than normal!

Fax Celestis
2007-01-05, 02:37 PM
I smell a homebrewed solution coming on. I'll see what I can do.

Thomas
2007-01-05, 03:59 PM
Combat Expertise is only useful as a prerequisite for Improved (thing) feats. Defensive warrior builds go Duelist and eventually get +18 to AC when fighting defensively, for a -4 penalty to attacks...

There's a lot of poor feats. Nothing says they all have to be equally useful.

ken-do-nim
2007-01-05, 10:45 PM
In the campaign I play in, the DM tears his hair out every time I use combat expertise. I actually do 5 points combat expertise, 3 points from fighting defensively (5 ranks in tumble) and then an additional point against my dodge opponent. So in a 14th level game, I can get my armor class up to 40. Here's the big secret, you do this when you move up and attack with your standard action. See, you get the same ac bonus from fighting "full defensively" as I call it whether it's a standard action or a full attack action, yet you only sacrifice one attack with the standard action.

Generally speaking, slowing down fights (as fighting defensively does) favors the player characters because of their resource advantage. If you can keep the BBEG busy, the other characters can be moving into position/buffing/summoning help etc. I really enjoy holding off the hordes until the other party members are ready.

oriong
2007-01-05, 10:55 PM
It's because power attack is designed, in theory, to be self-balancing to some degree. Like the OP said, offense and defense meant to be balanced against each other.

Power Attack: A penalty to Offensive (i.e. attack penalty) in exchange for a bonus to offense (i.e. damage penalty).

Combat Expertise: a penalty to Offense in exchange for a bonus to Defense.

In the case of power attack, the feat is designed to mostly to balance itself, you sink enough of a bonus into power attack and you're killing your chances to hit (and thus use that damage), not to mention that the penalty significantly reduces your chances of sucessful iterative attacks. In fact, while power attack doesn't explicitly have a cap, anyone taking more than a -5 penalty to attack (unless you're fighting a creature with pitiful AC, or an inanimate object) is basically shooting themselves in the foot, so there's not really much of a reason to give it a cap. the cap is built in. On the other hand, the Defense Penalty from Combat Expertise could skyrocket high above reasonable limits, forcing both combatants into an eternal 'who rolls a natural 20' situation.

So, within core rules power attack and combat expertise are about equal (although Nexx's idea of 1.5 bonus for sword and board is quite an interesting one). The problem comes with the fact that many designers are understandably enamored with power attack and many later books introduce feats to improve and enhance it's effectiveness, making the modified power attack much more impressive.

Now, combat expertise can still be used strategically quite a bit, but 'add on' feats have been neglected probably because defense is less 'interesting' than offensive to many designers.

ken-do-nim
2007-01-05, 11:01 PM
Now, combat expertise can still be used strategically quite a bit, but 'add on' feats have been neglected probably because defense is less 'interesting' than offensive to many designers.

There is one feat - defensive throw. If your dodge opponent misses you, you get a free trip attempt. Using combat expertise to improve your ac improves the odds that your dodge opponent misses you, and you hardly need a good to hit roll to make the touch attack on the trip.

oriong
2007-01-05, 11:15 PM
right, there are a couple of feats that still have good synergy and it's probably quite useful to grapplers, and others who get to use touch attacks a lot. Power attack is just an already excellent feat, made better by a lot of extra options.

Miles Invictus
2007-01-06, 12:49 AM
Power Attack is effective against only one target at a time -- the guy you're currently attacking. Combat Expertise is effective against anyone who bothers to attack you, so its usefulness increases as you face multiple foes simultaneously. If you're flanked by four opponents, Expertise applies to every single attack they make on you -- that's anywhere from four, at low levels, to a whopping thirty-two attacks from a quartet of 20 BAB, hasted, Perfect TWFing individuals. And you aren't even fully surrounded, either -- depending on the sort of combat grid you use, you could potentially be surrounded by six or even eight people at once.

Additionally, Combat Expertise is a great way to neutralize an enemy who uses Power Attack. If you take Expertise to five, and your opponent Power Attacks for the same, he has an effective -10 to hit. That's the difference between succeeding on a natural two, and needing a twelve to hit. Or the difference between hitting half the time (on a ten) and needing a natural twenty to make a successful attack.

That's not to say that Expertise is a better feat than Power Attack, but I can certainly see why it was capped. Of course, it sounds like they have a second feat that removes the cap, which seems strange to me -- if it's balanced, then it shouldn't be split into two feats. If it's not balanced, they shouldn't have a feat that removes the cap.

EvilRoeSlade
2007-01-06, 12:58 AM
That's not to say that Expertise is a better feat than Power Attack, but I can certainly see why it was capped. Of course, it sounds like they have a second feat that removes the cap, which seems strange to me -- if it's balanced, then it shouldn't be split into two feats. If it's not balanced, they shouldn't have a feat that removes the cap.


Eh? Why can't requiring two feats be part of the balancing factor? Isn't that the idea with the whole prerequisite system?

oriong
2007-01-06, 12:59 AM
Of course, it sounds like they have a second feat that removes the cap, which seems strange to me -- if it's balanced, then it shouldn't be split into two feats. If it's not balanced, they shouldn't have a feat that removes the cap.

not really, it's very common for a feat to exist, and then a later feat improve the existing feat. Weapon focus and improved weapon focus, monkey grip and weild oversized weapon, spell focus and greater spell focus etc. It's certainly nothing new, it just changes the question from "is this balanced for the cost of one feat" to "is this balanced for the cost of two feats"

Thrawn183
2007-01-06, 01:14 AM
My question is this: would anyone here consider getting both feat trees so that they can use them in different situations? If not, and one is chosen more often than the other than... I guess you have your answer as to which is better (Disclaimer: assuming of course that party dynamics etc. doesn't play a role)

Miles Invictus
2007-01-06, 02:34 AM
Believe it or not, I have cracked open a PHB once or twice. I'm talking about the specific instance of Combat Expertise and its improvements.

If uncapped Expertise is broken (e.g. turning every combat into "Only natural 20s hit" or adding high Expertise to the spiked-chain-trip-monkey combo), requiring one more feat doesn't really restore balance.

If it's not broken, however, it's not worth that second feat slot to remove the cap. As has been brought up, you are only rarely going to sacrifice more than 5 BAB.

oriong
2007-01-06, 02:49 AM
I don't think that's the case.

One thing: uncapped combat expertise is not broken, although it can be VERY annoying simply because no one wants to spend 30 minutes trading misses. there are often many ways to handle it and relatively few ways it can be used synergistically with other feats. the best use is probably to outwait an opponent's buffs/time-limited abilities and that's about it.

And while you certainly wouldn't want to sacrifice more than 5 BAB to power attack in most cases simply because you reach the point where what you sacrifice is destroying what you gain. This isn't the case for Combat Reflexes, after all if you're a 20th level fighter who wants to go on all out defense, why not just make an attack at -20 for +20 to AC. sure you won't likely hit, but it's still a decent option. It's still fairly 'self-capping' since playing the waiting game is a bad idea (especially with a Dodge Bonus) but what you're buying is the option to go over in cases where it IS helpful (with touch attacks versus something like dragons, , vs. raging barbarians, etc.)

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 05:37 AM
As an aside, Combat Expertise has the additional bonus of being a dodge bonus, thus working against things like, say, ranged touch attacks from a Wizard's Ray of Exhaustion.

Rebonack
2007-01-06, 06:02 PM
I suppose it would really help Combat Expertise if there were some feats that augmented it in the same way feats like Leap Attack augments Power Attack.

Something like, say, providing two points of dodge bonus per BAB when using the total defense action. Or even providing said bonus so long as the user doesn't attack someone.

I don't know, it seems like it needs something.

MrNexx
2007-01-06, 06:03 PM
I still think 2:1 when using a shield is a good idea...

oriong
2007-01-06, 09:37 PM
I agree, that actually sounds like quite a good idea (maybe not necessarily by default, but it would make an excellent feat). Shield fighters get a bit neglected feat-wise compared to other styles.

I guess the main problem is that it's a bit tougher to 'spice up' passive abilities, Combat Expertise certainly is the prerequisite for a whole lot of feats, but very few do anything to the original feat.

TheOOB
2007-01-06, 09:57 PM
I think 2:1 with shields is a little too much. Power Attack gets such a bonus because damage generally is easy to come by and not near as valuable as AC(not to mention HP scales directly to level while AC scales with EQ). Case in point Weapon Spec provides +2 damage in a specific situation, and dodge provides +1 AC in a specific situation, even thoughg dodge provides half the numerical bonus it is generally considered a much better feat.

Allowing you to trade more then 5 BAB for combat expertise, or giving a 2:1 ratio w/shields (as opposed to possibly a 1.5:1 ratio) allows you to become near unhittable without a comparable disadvantage.

Matthew
2007-01-07, 06:37 AM
Just make the 2:1 Ratio available through a Feat at a similar level that Animated Shield becomes available. Two Handed Weapons would still have a slight Damage edge (Base Damage Die + 1.5 Strength Modifier), but there would still be a reason to use Weapon and Shield.

As for Combat Expertise, the unlimited version is available from Level Six for Fighters, so it's really just a question of whether it should be an extra Feat or not.

Saph
2007-01-07, 12:06 PM
In the campaign I play in, the DM tears his hair out every time I use combat expertise. I actually do 5 points combat expertise, 3 points from fighting defensively (5 ranks in tumble) and then an additional point against my dodge opponent. So in a 14th level game, I can get my armor class up to 40.

Yup. The thing about Armour Class is that it becomes exponentially better the higher it is. If your opponent's attack bonus is close to your Armour Class, then an extra point or two of AC isn't going to do much good. However, if your AC is 16 points higher than your opponent's attack bonus, then each extra point of AC will make a huge difference. If your AC is 20 points or more above the enemy attack bonus, you're effectively unkillable by normal attacks, because you'll be able to heal any damage you take long before they can finish you off.

Hence anything that gives you large amounts of AC can potentially be very good, if you stack it with everything else.

Remember, too, that if you're a fighter type, soaking up attacks is almost more important than dealing damage. Lots of characters can deal out damage, not many characters can soak it.

- Saph

Matthew
2007-01-07, 01:32 PM
This seems strange to me. Is offence supposed to be 'weaker' than defense? That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not in my experience.

Anyone else agree here?

I just rememebered, I asked this same question many months ago and proposed a few Feats:

Power Attack, Combat Expertise and Combat Feats (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=280065#post280065)

grinner666
2007-01-07, 01:41 PM
Combat Expertise is only useful as a prerequisite for Improved (thing) feats. Defensive warrior builds go Duelist and eventually get +18 to AC when fighting defensively, for a -4 penalty to attacks...

There's a lot of poor feats. Nothing says they all have to be equally useful.

You're forgetting Whirlwind Attack. One of my favorites, especially with Spiked Chain. :smallbiggrin:

And yes, I KNOW Spiked Chain is cheesy. That's one of the things I love about it.

grinner666
2007-01-07, 01:43 PM
Remember, too, that if you're a fighter type, soaking up attacks is almost more important than dealing damage. Lots of characters can deal out damage, not many characters can soak it.

Thank you. Finally SOMEBODY who understands fighters.

Khantalas
2007-01-07, 01:47 PM
Wizard: You enjoying soaking that damage, Fighter? I'm quite happy with being unreachable, unseen and dealing lots of damage, thank you.

Saph
2007-01-07, 02:49 PM
Wizard: You enjoying soaking that damage, Fighter? I'm quite happy with being unreachable, unseen and dealing lots of damage, thank you.

It's called teamwork . . .

- Saph

Desaril
2007-01-08, 12:08 AM
Consider also that there is a free version of combat expertise: fighting defensively. Anyone can take -4 BAB and get a +2 AC. I think you should be able to fight less defensively, i.e. -2 BAB for +1 AC, but more importantly, I think anyone should be able to trade BAB for Damage on a 2:1 ratio.

Basically, since anyone can choose to fight defensively, they should also be allowed to "swing wild" (featless power attack).

Also, should spellcasters be allowed to "fight defensively" while casting or directing a spell? For spells that don't require an attack roll, its a free +2 AC

ken-do-nim
2007-01-15, 06:56 PM
PS: I just bought Complete Scoundrel today, and there's a new feat for you combat expertise lovers called Deadly Defense. I can't get into specifics because of the OGL restrictions here, but suffice it to say now you can attack defensively and deal more damage!

Sendal
2007-01-15, 07:27 PM
I hugely enjoy having a huge AC. I got it to 38 being a level 11 Paladin wearing magic full plate and with the very nice divine shield feat I achieved a shield modifier of +11. And that is at no penalty to offencive capability. (I could still powerattack.)

It means that rather than being a meat shield that will gradualy be beaten down, you can be a brick wall that they can only hit with a crit (which practicaly never confirms).

That is until the GM cottons on and sends stuff that that deals untyped damage with no save, no attack role etc.

In conclusion, Excessive AC rules.

Matthew
2007-01-15, 07:29 PM
Hmmn. Do Criticals Threaten when you need to roll 21+ to hit? I always thought not...

MrNexx
2007-01-15, 07:55 PM
Incidentally, Shining South has an interesting feat for groups which use Combat Expertise... It's called Allied Defense, and it lets Combat Expertise apply to adjacent allies, too.

Hallavast
2007-01-15, 08:38 PM
Besides, how effective are you really going to be when you power attack for more than 5?

Draz74
2007-01-16, 12:42 AM
Besides, how effective are you really going to be when you power attack for more than 5?

Very effective, when you're using Shock Trooper.

Sendal
2007-01-16, 11:16 AM
Or smiting, or have 26 strength

Starbuck_II
2007-01-16, 12:18 PM
Hmmn. Do Criticals Threaten when you need to roll 21+ to hit? I always thought not...
If you roll a natural 20 again. Nat 20's always hit.

Matthew
2007-01-16, 02:14 PM
Strange. Must be an older edition rule. It makes sense, though, that since the comfirmation is 21 and isn't subject to the automatic miss rule, why should it be subject to the automatic hit? Oh well.

Sir_Banjo
2007-01-17, 04:57 AM
This is something that's been bugging me for a while. Power Attacks allows the user to sink BAB for extra damage. Furthermore, there are oodles of feats (and class skills; I'm looking at you Frenzied Berserker) for improving this ability under specific circumstances such as a charge.

Combat Expertise is pretty much Power Attack's defensive counter part. Sink BAB for AC. But... only up to 5. Except if you burn another feat to allow you to sink as much BAB as you want. And no feats (at least none that I know of) for adding to its effectiveness.

This seems strange to me. Is offence supposed to be 'weaker' than defense? That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not in my experience.

Anyone else agree here?

No.

I think my reason for this becomes apparent when one examines what lowering the BAB actually means to each feat.

Power Attack is all about damage. It is a feat that is more intimately tied to BAB. If you take too much off BAB you are actually hurting yourself because you increase the chance that you'll miss and waste all that damage. You can take a little off and be relatively sure of a hit, or, you can take a lot off and accept that you'll probably miss.

You face no such compromise with Combat Expertise. You get the bonus to AC whether your attack hits or not. In fact, hitting the target becomes secondary to them not hitting you. And that's without examining the requirements for Combat Expertise. It's a well known fact that Intelligence is usually the dump stat for fighter-types (who are most likely to take the feat) who aren't multiclassed wizards or rogues. From a purely power gaming perspective, they'll never get the return on points placed into Int that they would if they'd placed them into one of the combat stats.

And so that is why I think the RAW are logical and fair.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-01-17, 06:04 AM
Hmmn. Do Criticals Threaten when you need to roll 21+ to hit? I always thought not...

The confirmation roll is also an attack roll, so if you roll two 20s you score a critical hit even you need 21+ to hit.

Matthew
2007-01-17, 06:37 AM
Sure, but there is no auto failure for confirmations, doesn't seem to make sense, though it seems to be the case.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-01-17, 06:46 AM
The critical roll, or confirmation roll as it is often called, is the same as an attack roll, so the rules for attack rolls apply.
A natural one on an attack is always a miss, so a natural one on your confirmation roll would also be an automatic miss, no?



Critical Hits: When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target’s Armor Class, and you have scored a threat. The hit might be a critical hit (or “crit”). To find out if it’s a critical hit, you immediately make a critical roll—another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made. If the critical roll also results in a hit against the target’s AC, your original hit is a critical hit. (The critical roll just needs to hit to give you a crit. It doesn’t need to come up 20 again.) If the critical roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.



Automatic Misses and Hits: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on the attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit.

Matthew
2007-01-17, 06:50 AM
Interesting. I have seen this argument before and the last time it was had, the evidence suggested the confirmation roll didn't fail on a 1. I can't remember how it played out, though. Probably worth starting a new thread or putting this into the questions and answers section.