Power Attack and Combat Expertise

[Rebonack]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I smell a homebrewed solution coming on. I'll see what I can do.

[Thomas]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I still think 2:1 when using a shield is a good idea...

[oriong]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[grinner666]

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.

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

[grinner666]

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.