[PF] Power Attack - How much of a nerf?

[Snake-Aes]

Lots of people really, really complain about how power attack has been "Utterly destroyed" in its Pathfinder version... But did it really?
PF-PA works on Light weapons on a 1:1 rate, One-handed weapons on a 1:2 rate and Two-handed weapons on a 1:3 rate, and it has a fixed scale: instead of picking how much bab you trade, you trade 1 + level/4 BAB for the corresponding damage.

Both with 1h and 2h, 3.5-PA takes on a significant sacrifice of attack to surpass PF-PA's damage.

The big question is this:
What tools are used by builds that rely on dumping obscene amounts of AB into PA for it to outperform PF's? Assume necessary feats or spells are available to both versions.
My biggest doubt arises from the fact people seem to forget that taking a -10 to your ab isn't generally a good idea because you still want to hit.

[Fax Celestis]

Shock Trooper's Heedless Charge is now pretty much useless.

[Draz74]

Mostly Shock Trooper. Also various tricks that let you make melee attacks as touch attacks, such as Wraithstrke, Emerald Razor, or Heartseeking Amulet.

[Esser-Z]

My biggest doubt arises from the fact people seem to forget that taking a -10 to your ab isn't generally a good idea because you still want to hit.

Weeeell... Remember that hitting tends to get progressively easier as you level up, and you have to be at least level 10 to take a -10...

[Ravens_cry]

None of those EXIST in Pathfinder, at least Core.
Basically it's more powerful. It gives you a 2 to 1 ratio, 3 if you're if your using a two handed weapon, but is less flexible.

[Fax Celestis]

None of those EXIST in Pathfinder, at least Core.

Doesn't matter. Pathfinder is explicitly and intentionally backwards-compatible.

[Ravens_cry]

Doesn't matter. Pathfinder is explicitly and intentionally backwards-compatible.

It's still not the same system. It's less a change then say trying to add 3.5 stuff to Mutants and Masterminds, but it still isn't the same thing.

[Snake-Aes]

Weeeell... Remember that hitting tends to get progressively easier as you level up, and you have to be at least level 10 to take a -10...

That's the thing, you will still lose a lot of overall damage if you keep pumping most or all your ab into it. A character pretty much needs to have a final bonus to attack equal or greater than the enemy's AC before having any hopes of reliably hitting with a full dump.
----------------
So, the big one is shock trooper. You can't get -bab to AC in trade of +2*bab to damage. For this one you have to evaluate the benefits of losing a limited amount of AC instead of most(or all) of it.
PF-PA is less powerful for shock troopers. Anything else? What came first to mind was bonus shenanigans like true strikers.

[Tyndmyr]

Basically all your uber-charger builds are shot. It's still a viable feat at low levels, since for a bit, the better conversion makes up for it. However, it doesn't continue to scale.

And one of the biggest problems with melee classes is that they don't scale the same way magic users do.

[Fax Celestis]

True strike, et al., are impacted as well, yes. Feats are less dynamic in their design as there's no potential for "if you spend at least X on your PA, you get Y extra effect". Spending feats to augment your Power Attack (Favored Power Attack, Leap Attack, etc) becomes less worthwhile as the actual return is severely impacted. Having a binary on-off for Power Attack rather than a scalar system also means that against high AC opponents you can't dial it back one or two points to increase your chances of hitting but still maintain a higher damage output: you have to dial it back to nothing.

It's a pretty major change, and not the way I would have gone about it.

[Draz74]

There's a web site out there called Dire Press Power Attack calculator. It tells you what amount of Power Attack will do the ideal amount of average damage, depending on your attack bonus, damage bonuses, and the target's AC. It even works with iterative attacks.

Even without anything like Shock Trooper, it's not too hard to get a result of -10 Power Attack being optimal at higher levels, if you're fighting low-AC monsters like Giants. Particularly if you are only making a single attack in a round.

Anything else? What came first to mind was bonus shenanigans like true strikers.

True Strike ... yeah, that's another situation where tons of Power Attack is optimal, but it didn't get mentioned because using it is a weak use of a Standard Action, even if you have 3.5e Power Attack. (Quickened True Strike is pretty viable for a high-level gish, though.)

[Thrawn183]

It makes oozes a lot more dangerous. An Elder Black Pudding is a CR 12 with an AC of 1. Some of the larger animals become more dangerous as well: a Tyrannosaurus with a CR of 8 and an AC of 14. A reasonably built melee class should be hitting that on a 2.

It's a lot worse if you can make attacks as a touch attack. There are a whole lot of creatures out there that are almost entirely reliant upon natural armor and are essentially giant buckets of HP

It gets still worse if you have a DM like me who likes to use lots of those creatures as meat walls for big encounters. Example a CR 11 Druid hiding behind 3 T-Rexes. It's an EL 13 which makes it a nice final fight for a level 10-11 party. Start throwing in some buff spells and that Fighter is gonna wish he could power attack for everything he's got.

[Person_Man]

{table]Level | 3.5 Damage | 3.5 Damage * 2 | 3.5 To-Hit | PF Damage | PF Damage * 2 | PF To-Hit
1 | 2 | 4 | -1 | 3 | 6 | -1
2 | 4 | 8 | -2 | 3 | 6 | -1
3 | 6 | 12 | -3 | 3 | 6 | -1
4 | 8 | 16 | -4 | 6 | 12 | -2
5 | 10 | 20 | -5 | 6 | 12 | -2
6 | 12 | 24 | -6 | 6 | 12 | -2
7 | 14 | 28 | -7 | 6 | 12 | -2
8 | 16 | 32 | -8 | 9 | 18 | -3
9 | 18 | 36 | -9 | 9 | 18 | -3
10 | 20 | 40 | -10 | 9 | 18 | -3
11 | 22 | 44 | -11 | 9 | 18 | -3
12 | 24 | 48 | -12 | 12 | 24 | -4
13 | 26 | 52 | -13 | 12 | 24 | -4
14 | 28 | 56 | -14 | 12 | 24 | -4
15 | 30 | 60 | -15 | 12 | 24 | -4
16 | 32 | 64 | -16 | 15 | 30 | -5
17 | 34 | 68 | -17 | 15 | 30 | -5
18 | 36 | 72 | -18 | 15 | 30 | -5
19 | 38 | 76 | -19 | 15 | 30 | -5
20 | 40 | 80 | -20 | 18 | 36 | -6
[/table]

This chart assumes that you will be using a two handed weapon for all cases. While Pathfinder has a superior Damage Bonus/To-Hit Ratio of +3/-1 compared to the 3.5 D&D +2/-1 Ratio, it produces a smaller damage bonus. If you introduce a multiplying factors, such as a lance, Spirited Charge, Leap Attack, Headlong Rush, Valorous Weapon, Supreme Power Attack, Battle Jump, or Rhino's Rush, the superiority of 3.5 D&D Power Attack become exponential. For example, at 11th level a Fighter with 3.5 Power Attack and Leap Attack can deal 44 extra damage per hit. Whereas a 11th level Fighter with Pathfinder Power Attack and Leap Attack can deal an extra 18 points of damage per hit.

And as others have pointed out, the 3.5 D&D To-Hit penalty can be mitigated or removed via Shock Trooper, touch attacks, or anything that boosts your To-Hit considerably (and there are TONS of buffs in D&D). So the smaller To-Hit penalty from Pathfinder isn't really that much of a benefit to the player, unless they are not allowed to use non-core material.

For this reason, if I'm playing a Pathfinder game, I always play a caster or a 3.5 D&D class. In particular, the Binder, Totemist, Incarnate, and Tome of Battle classes are relatively more powerful in Pathfinder because their mechanics don't rely on nerfed Pathfinder feats.

[Snake-Aes]

i do believe your PA chart is off. It is 1:2 for 2handers so you'll be doing a max of +40 there.

[Person_Man]

i do believe your PA chart is off. It is 1:2 for 2handers so you'll be doing a max of +40 there.

Read the descriptive text. My chart assumes that you are always using a two handed weapon. The *2 category assumes a multiplying factor, such as Leap Attack, Headlong Rush, etc.