making power attacks ubiquitous?

[Spiritchaser]

This is a "what do I break" thread

After reading another thread, the question occurred, what if every weapons subgroup had an available feat option for between +6 damage -3 to hit and +10 damage, -5 to hit?

I don't think they can all be +10, -5 or it takes the weapon die a little too far out of the math a little too often.

Rapiers could slice at throats, hand axes at joints...

I don't discount the effort in coming up with a group of such feats with distinct and interesting secondary bonuses, and names that aren't cheesy, but I do have faith that it's possible.

In campaigns with lots of easy to hit targets it may feel like a feat tax on optimizers, but isn't that better than coralling into one path?

Obviously a campaign with high AC does makes this irrelevant, and hopefully there's a middle ground where it is an interesting choice for any martial

[Boccobsblog]

Have you looked at the Feats Unearthed Arcana article? I seem to recall it mentioning how to create feats similar to those you're describing.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I like -Proficiency to attack, +2*Proficiency to damage as a universal option for anything with an attack roll-- no feats required. It scales better than -5/+10.

[Zman]

I like -Proficiency to attack, +2*Proficiency to damage as a universal option for anything with an attack roll-- no feats required. It scales better than -5/+10.

It does scale better but ends up being just as problematic and suffers from a few major problems. Advantage becomes even better and any class option that grants easy Advantage, ie Reckless Attack or Shield Master or Battlemaster Trip becomes significantly better. The second major problem is it really effectively lowers the CR of low AC enemies and moderate AC enemies to a degree while leaving high AC enemies intact. Making this change really makes CR balance worse.

If you are going to add that rule I would really stress that making the Power Attack an only once per turn ability to keep it from being too unbalanced, if you do that it becomes a useable feature of the game that won't ruin CR balance in regards to AC and will scale well throughout the game.

[gkathellar]

If you're going to go this route, just make it an option for weapon attacks, rather than a set of feats. Otherwise, it becomes obligatory, and nobody wants that.


If you are going to add that rule I would really stress that making the Power Attack an only once per turn ability to keep it from being too unbalanced, if you do that it becomes a useable feature of the game that won't ruin CR balance in regards to AC and will scale well throughout the game.

Seems like it would only really effect fighters much.

Still, intuitively it seems like an interesting approach to the problem. Have you looked into the math on this idea? How does it figure between different classes?

[N810]

You could tack it on to weapon proficiency. :smallwink:
that way only users skilled with the weapon could bring out it's full potential.

[Zman]

If you're going to go this route, just make it an option for weapon attacks, rather than a set of feats. Otherwise, it becomes obligatory, and nobody wants that.



Seems like it would only really effect fighters much.

Still, intuitively it seems like an interesting approach to the problem. Have you looked into the math on this idea? How does it figure between different classes?

Not the scaling proficiency modifier, but I have run the math for my houserules for GWM which is in the spreadsheet in my signature. GWM damage was explosive under a Reckless Barbarian, worse when it had a bonus action attack like a Berserker or similarly a Reckless PAM Barbarian. By making it only a single Power Attack per turn it brought the damage boosts down to a more reasonable level.

[Grod_The_Giant]

At the very least, you could link it to the Attack option specifically. Or do -prof/+prof, which would also reduce the impact.


You could tack it on to weapon proficiency. :smallwink:
that way only users skilled with the weapon could bring out it's full potential.
Does anyone ever use a weapon they're not proficient with?:smallconfused:

[N810]

...and that's the way it should be.
otherwise you'll start seeing casters and the like
running around with great weapons, just incase...

[MaxWilson]

This is a "what do I break" thread

After reading another thread, the question occurred, what if every weapons subgroup had an available feat option for between +6 damage -3 to hit and +10 damage, -5 to hit?

I don't think they can all be +10, -5 or it takes the weapon die a little too far out of the math a little too often.

Rapiers could slice at throats, hand axes at joints...

I don't discount the effort in coming up with a group of such feats with distinct and interesting secondary bonuses, and names that aren't cheesy, but I do have faith that it's possible.

In campaigns with lots of easy to hit targets it may feel like a feat tax on optimizers, but isn't that better than coralling into one path?

Obviously a campaign with high AC does makes this irrelevant, and hopefully there's a middle ground where it is an interesting choice for any martial

Because I'm a fan of GURPS headshots and vitals shots, I'd allow anyone to make an attack at -5 to hit for +5 to damage. It's pretty worthless really from a DPR perspective--just a way of converting advantage to hit into increased damage, which appeals to my sense of realism.

The benefit of GWM/Sharpshooter (aside from other benefits like ignoring cover) is that you get a high enough bonus that it's actually a net damage increase.

[Foxhound438]

Face value, I'm not sure giving it to everyone as a feat would be the best plan, as has been mentioned by a lot of people above. I'm more inclined to say that it's a standard once per turn option for everyone. I'm not entirely a fan of the way the "power attack" feats in 5e are set up in the first place, as it really does make for huge swings in power level early on. Scaling them on proficiency bonus seems a much more suitable approach to me.