Why STR should not multiply damage and for Power Attack

[slaughterj]

I suggested that STR not have a multiplier effect with 2-handed weapons for damage or Power Attack, and several have been against this, but without much support for their position other than that OGL is that way. Let me explain further, and if anyone cares to response, please do so more substantively.

A number of points:
1. STR didn't multiply in damage for 2-handed weapons for many years in DnD, and worked fine. Therefore, just because the OGL has it that way now doesn't mean it's "the right way", it's just a choice.
2. Power Attack is already one of the best feats, if not the best, on a 1:1 ratio, so there is no need to exaggerate its effects by damage multiplication.
3. The weapon damage itself for 2-handed weapons well exceeds their 1-handed equivalent versions, e.g., Greatsword does 2d10 compared to Broadsword which does 1d10, Tulwar does 2d8 compared to Scimitar which does 1d8, etc. Therefore, there is plenty of "bonus" already built into the 2-handed weapons, much more than a 1-handed weapon gets even by being wielded 2-handed. That's like having 2 Broadswords in 1 hand! And 2d10 is certainly better than 1d10 with a Broadsword and 1d8 with a Shortsword.
4. The 2-handed weapon wielder gets to use his greater damaging weapon in surprise rounds, charges, moves and attacks rounds, etc., while a 2-weapon fighter gets only 1 weapon to use in those situations, which gives the 2-handed weapon fighter plenty of massive benefits.
5. The 2-handed weapon fighter applies all the damage once against the foes DR, and likely has a higher AP due to the larger weapon (Greatsword has base 4 compared to Broadsword which has base 3, Tulwar has base 3 compared to Scimitar which has base 2, etc.), compared with the 2-weapon fighter who has to apply them separately against DR and likely has a lower AP as well.
6. The 2-handed weapon fighter gets 2x for Power Attack while the 2-weapon fighter gets only 1x, but even worse, nothing for the off-hand light weapon though still incurs the attack penalty.

In summary, all of the aforementioned benefits for fighting with a 2-handed weapon instead of 2-weapon are plenty, and it is not necessary to further exaggerate the effects by employing damage multipliers for STR bonus to base damage and Power Attack damage.

Now, on to a comparison:
Character A: 5th level Hyborian Barbarian, STR 18, wielding a Greatsword, and having Power Attack
Character B: 5th level Hyborian Borderer, STR 18, wielding a BroadSword and a Shortsword, and having Power Attack

Character A doing a maximum power attack with the Greatsword (which he can use even when Character B can only use 1 attack with a lesser weapon) will do on average:

Greatsword - 11 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 2 (STR multiple) + 5 (base Power Attack) + 5 (Power Attack multiple) = 27 damage.

Character B doing a maximum power attack with the Broadsword and off-hand Shortsword (note, no Power Attack damage because it is a light weapon, but still suffers the attack penalty?!) will do on average:

Broadsword - 5.5 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 5 (base Power Attack) = 14.5 damage.

Shortsword - 4.5 (base dice) + 2 (STR halved) = 6.5 damage.

Therefore, against an unarmored foe, Character A does 27 damage and triggers a massive damage save while Character B does 21 damage (IF Character B was not in a surprise round, having to charge, having to move and then attack, etc., all of which would mean 6.5 less damage) and does not trigger a massive damage save. In rounds where Character A and B have to move around, Character A will be doing ~2x the damage of Character B.

Against a foe with DR 6, Character A does 24 damage (has enough AP to halve DR) and triggers a massive damage save while Character B does 14.5-3 + 6.5-6 (short sword lacks enough AP to halve DR in this case) = 12 damage and does not trigger a massive damage save. Therefore, against armored foes, Character A will be doing ~2x the damage of Character B.

It does not seem reasonable for a character with a 2-handed weapon to do 2x the damage of a 2-weapon fighter (two sizeable weapons at least, I'm not saying 2 knife dork should be on par with greatsword dude), it seems they should be in the same ballpark. Two-weapon fighters get few benefits (the opportunity to attack a different foe with the second attack being the significant one) to go with the significant drawbacks of not being a two-handed weapon fighter. Therefore, I think there should be a fix for how much damage is done, and at least remove the modifiers to Power Attack (i.e., remove 2x for 2-handed, and allow use for light) if nothing else, and consider full damage for off-hand weapons (i.e., *maybe* retain the 1.5x multiple for STR to base damage for 2-handed weapons, but that's it).


(Note, in addition to changing 2-handed weapon damage to avoid the grossly exaggerated effects it generates, I would like to see STR damage be even for off-hand weapons (avoids complexity and if one can fight equally well either way, what's the basis for the penalty?) and Power Attack to work regularly for light weapons (otherwise, the 2-weapon Finesse fighter who uses Power Attack is screwed, because he will take the Power Attack attack penalty for the off-hand light weapon but not get the bonus damage, so not only is he likely not to circumvent the armor in the first place due to the attack penalty, he likely won't have any effect due to the armor's DR which won't have to worry with additional damage from power attack from the light off-hand weapon).)

 

[Sutek]

First off, a thread has already been started to discuss Strength benefits to weapon damage and it would have been the appropriate thing to post your comments ther instead of diluting the issue by starting another thread. It makes you appear arrogant to do so instead of following the discussion in the previously initiated thread.

Secondly, we arent'talking about "old D&D" because ther was no 2 handed weapon in those days. Nothing from that edition really exists except that weapons deal damage. Martial versus exotic categories, reach weapons and Finesse weapons, armor piercing values and hand requirement categories are a product of 3rd edition d20 OGL D&D, on which the Conan RPG bases it's rule set.

Under that pedantic, formulaic rule set, weapon damage results decrease when using an off-hand to attack (reducuing overall damage by 0.5x normal) and increasing when using two hands to propel the blow (1.5x damge). That is logical and totally makes sense. You put more strength into a blow in which you use more energy (more hands) and less when using a normally physically weaker off-hand strike.

Next is your equations:

Character A: 5th level Hyborian Barbarian, STR 18, wielding a Greatsword, and having Power Attack
Character B: 5th level Hyborian Borderer, STR 18, wielding a BroadSword and a Shortsword, and having Power Attack

Character A doing a maximum power attack with the Greatsword (which he can use even when Character B can only use 1 attack with a lesser weapon) will do on average:

Greatsword - 11 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 2 (STR multiple) + 5 (base Power Attack) + 5 (Power Attack multiple) = 27 damage.

Character B doing a maximum power attack with the Broadsword and off-hand Shortsword (note, no Power Attack damage because it is a light weapon, but still suffers the attack penalty?!) will do on average:

Broadsword - 5.5 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 5 (base Power Attack) = 14.5 damage.

Shortsword - 4.5 (base dice) + 2 (STR halved) = 6.5 damage.

27 points with a single, powerful blow versus 21 with two attacks and lighter weapons seems a fair trade off, particularly given that the Shortsword is capable of being used for a Finesse attack, thus totally by-passing a foe's armor which the two-handed attack cannot do. Yes, he can have a better chance of inflicting a Massive Damage blow, but ther's one fact that you are omitting from your argument:

Power Attack is not always a good idea.

Were the 2-handed fighter employ that average 21 damage agaist your DR6 foe, he could hope to deal far less damage, this is true. But, if he were to make both attacks as Finesse attacks successfully with just his Shortsword, he could deal 13pts of damage unaffected by the opponent's DR. Further more, with Improved Two-weapon Combat instead of Power Attack he can perform 3 itteraative Finesse atacks with that sword.

It's a different mode of combat. Facing a foe with DR6, the dual sword weilder you describe has to think of something else rather than simply bashing it out.

Finally, your assertion that a "two knife dork" shouldnt'be on par with a great ax weilding warrior bringts to mind the best use of dual weapon fighting: Coupling it with Sneak Attack and Finesse, two knives can mete out 1d4+2d8 = average of 10points of damge twice per round minimum because of weilding two weapons for an average of 20pts of damage...

...with knives.

Ignoring armor if the weilder's DEX gets him decent attack rolls.

Try that with an arming sword and shortsword, and you get 1d10 and 2d8 and 1d8+2d8 respectively, or 13+12 = 25 average...

...per round.

Your argument is based on the assumption that more dice on the weapon profile means the weapon is "better" or more damaging, when in reality, the system evens out when characters with the right abilities get the right weapons and the right rolls, regardless of the weapon damge profile.

 

[slaughterj]

First off, a thread has already been started to discuss Strength benefits to weapon damage and it would have been the appropriate thing to post your comments ther instead of diluting the issue by starting another thread. It makes you appear arrogant to do so instead of following the discussion in the previously initiated thread.

Don't get your panties in a twist, my subject merited it's own thread, and if you don't like it, you don't have to respond to it! :lol:

Under that pedantic, formulaic rule set, weapon damage results decrease when using an off-hand to attack (reducuing overall damage by 0.5x normal) and increasing when using two hands to propel the blow (1.5x damge). That is logical and totally makes sense. You put more strength into a blow in which you use more energy (more hands) and less when using a normally physically weaker off-hand strike.

The fact that the weapons have bigger or more dice addresses this just fine. As for whether the specific multiplier is logical and totally makes sense, I don't think that is necessarily the case - rather it seems like an arbitrary number to use the 1.5x multiplier for STR bonus to damage and 2x multiplier for Power Attack - why wouldn't both work at 1.5x or both at 2x? Once you look at it that way, you see they just pulled a number of out the sky and applied it, so that's pretty far from "totally makes sense."

27 points with a single, powerful blow versus 21 with two attacks and lighter weapons seems a fair trade off, particularly given that the Shortsword is capable of being used for a Finesse attack, thus totally by-passing a foe's armor which the two-handed attack cannot do.

Okay, so you want to do a comparison of Mr. Greatsword versus 2-Weapon Finesse dude, fine, I'll run the numbers and we'll see how that shakes out.

Versus unarmored dude:

See the same example I posted above about power attack, because Finesse dude will do no better, and only will do less damage if he doesn't power attack.

Versus DR 6 armored dude:

Character A doing a maximum power attack with the Greatsword (which he can use even when Character B can only use 1 attack with a lesser weapon) will do on average:

Greatsword - 11 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 2 (STR multiple) + 5 (base Power Attack) + 5 (Power Attack multiple) = 27 damage - 3 DR (6 halved due to AP) = 24 damage.

Character B doing a finesse attack with the Arming Sword and off-hand Shortsword will do on average (and note, I am still assuming 18 STR, which is good for the damage analysis, but likely means not as high of a DEX for the Finesse fighter and therefore a lower likelihood of success in hitting):

Arming Sword - 5.5 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 5 (base Power Attack) = 14.5 damage.

Shortsword - 4.5 (base dice) + 2 (STR halved) = 6.5 damage.

Therefore, Character A does 24 while Character B does 14.5+6.5=21 damage IF both attacks circumvent the armor or down to 14.5-6+6.5-6=9 damage IF both attacks fail to circumvent the armor (as STR doesn't add to AP, neither weapon has enough AP to halve the DR 6). So even while you bring up Mr. Finesse, he seems to run the gamut from 9 to 21 damage (i.e., ~15 on average) compared with Mr. Greatsword who does 24 damage and triggers a massive damage save. Consequently, I fail to see where you have established that a 2-weapon finesse fighter is a viable alternative to the 2-handed weapon power attacking fighter. The only benefit here is that while the 2-weapon finesse fighter still could do some damage if the attack rolls are -1 to -6 of what he needs to circumvent the armor's DR compared to the 2-handed weapon fighter who would miss if the attack roll at -5 does not hit, but running those numbers is a bit more involved (and should take into account that because of the finesse fighter had the high STR to do the damage being done, that his DEX may be lower and have less chance to hit overall with finesse attacks).

Your argument is based on the assumption that more dice on the weapon profile means the weapon is "better" or more damaging, when in reality, the system evens out when characters with the right abilities get the right weapons and the right rolls, regardless of the weapon damge profile.

Clarify with specificity. You seem to be making assumptions with this statement.

 

[Foxworthy]

A number of points:
1. STR didn't multiply in damage for 2-handed weapons for many years in DnD, and worked fine. Therefore, just because the OGL has it that way now doesn't mean it's "the right way", it's just a choice.

In old DnD only thieves could climb. The multiplier for damage is for balance in the SRD. DR does through it off though.

2. Power Attack is already one of the best feats, if not the best, on a 1:1 ratio, so there is no need to exaggerate its effects by damage multiplication.

It's for balance. See below.

3. The weapon damage itself for 2-handed weapons well exceeds their 1-handed equivalent versions, e.g., Greatsword does 2d10 compared to Broadsword which does 1d10, Tulwar does 2d8 compared to Scimitar which does 1d8, etc. Therefore, there is plenty of "bonus" already built into the 2-handed weapons, much more than a 1-handed weapon gets even by being wielded 2-handed. That's like having 2 Broadswords in 1 hand! And 2d10 is certainly better than 1d10 with a Broadsword and 1d8 with a Shortsword.

You're not comparing the weapons the same way the SRD makers do.

A greatsword does 2d10 fine.

Two Broadswords do 2d10.

Equal if both hit. Though using two broadswords is harder, and rightfully so.

A greatsword has a 1.5 str bonus to damage.

The two broadsword have 1 and a .5 which equal a 1.5 if both hit.

Equal if both hit. Though using two broadswords is harder, and rightfully so.

The greatsword would get a bonus of +4 damage out of a two point power attck.

Two broads swords would get a +2 and +2 out of a power attack equalling +4 total.

Equal if both hit. Though using two broadswords is harder, and rightfully so.

In the SRD the base damage of two longs swords would be 2d8 compared to the greatswords 2d6, but the SRD gives the two weapon user a greater penalty. Conan makes the damage output the same but make sit easier for the two weapon fighter to hit as a trade off.

4. The 2-handed weapon wielder gets to use his greater damaging weapon in surprise rounds, charges, moves and attacks rounds, etc., while a 2-weapon fighter gets only 1 weapon to use in those situations, which gives the 2-handed weapon fighter plenty of massive benefits.

Right that is a quirk of the system but that seems more like a need to adjust multi attack rules so that you can attack with both hands as a standard action. This does pose problems that will be noted below.

5. The 2-handed weapon fighter applies all the damage once against the foes DR, and likely has a higher AP due to the larger weapon (Greatsword has base 4 compared to Broadsword which has base 3, Tulwar has base 3 compared to Scimitar which has base 2, etc.), compared with the 2-weapon fighter who has to apply them separately against DR and likely has a lower AP as well.

DR does throw the balance off but smaller weapons do have a harder time of going through armor. Realisticly two weapons aren't as effect at doing damage as one weapon would.

6. The 2-handed weapon fighter gets 2x for Power Attack while the 2-weapon fighter gets only 1x, but even worse, nothing for the off-hand light weapon though still incurs the attack penalty.

Addressed above. Though I'm not sure why light weapons don't get a damage bonus from power attack. It was a change from 3.0 to 3.5 so I think it was a balance issue due to the fact that two shortsswords could nerf the same damage as a greatsword in DnD with the added bonus that that if the person has sneak attack they could do a lot of damage with two weapons over one.

The one advantage two weapon fighting has is that if you catch someone flat footed and are close enough you are go9ing to wreck them withs neak attack damage. This far exceeds the damage the two handed weapon will do.

 

[Sutek]

Ahhh...

...someone better at working out the numbers gets right to the heart of the matter.

Long and short of it is that power attack has it's uses, but if you want a character to poound out loads of damage, dont'try to use two weapons; used 2 handed weapons instead. Using two weapons is the best choice for Finesse attacks, particularly if both weapons are capable.

Nice summation, Foxworthy. 8)

 

[MadDog]

2 weapons have to get through twice the DR compared to a single 2H strike.

As a 2H weapon gets 1.5x the STR bonus, it would be more consistent to have power attack/2H to give a 1.5x bonus, not a 2x bonus.

Mad Dog

 

[Foxworthy]

2 weapons have to get through twice the DR compared to a single 2H strike.

As a 2H weapon gets 1.5x the STR bonus, it would be more consistent to have power attack/2H to give a 1.5x bonus, not a 2x bonus.

Mad Dog

If that was true then off hand weapons would get a .5x bonus to power attack. But I beleive it's done as 2x 1x and 0x to keep the math simple and to have even odd points of power attack be useful. Since if it's 1.5x you get no benefit from odd investments of penalty.

 

[Daz]

I agree with you that two-handers are too poweful in Conan d20. I'm dealing with this personally by lowering the two-hander power attack bonus to 1.5 and upping the light weapon power attack to .5 and giving nasty situational modifiers to people using big weapons in crowded spaces (just TRY to use a bardiche in a crowded bar).

You however go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too far wrt weakening two-handers. As things stand in your rules there would be absolutely no benefit to wielding a broadsword two-handed which I think is bad for both flavor, balance and making combat interesting.

 

[MadDog]

If that was true then off hand weapons would get a .5x bonus to power attack.

Works for me.

Mad Dog

 

[Trodax]

slaughterj, I'm right there with you in feeling that two-handed weapons are a bit too powerful and that it would be a good idea to slightly weaken them and bring them on par with the other fighting styles.
However, as I've said in other recent threads, my stance is that it would be better to lower the base damage of the weapons, rather than to lower the Str multiplier they get normally or the bonus they get from Power Attack.

Here are my reasons for thinking this (and I'm splitting it into two parts - normal Str modifiers and Power Attack modifiers - since the reasons are different):

Why keep the 1.5xStr for two-handers and 0.5xStr for off-hand weapons?
The 1.5xStr for wielding a weapon in two hands I definitely think should be kept, not because of the bonus it gives big two-handed weapons, but because I think there should be some benefit to wielding a one-handed weapon in two hands. It's cool to be able to grip your broadsword in two hands and gain something from doing so.
The 0.5xStr for wielding an off-hand weapon, OTOH, I actually think could be dropped quite easily without affecting all that much (the two-weapon fighter would get a little boost).

Why keep the Power Attack bonus of x2 for two-handers and x0 for light weapons?
Well, this for me has to do with the size of the bonus you get relative the damage you're normally doing. argo explained this to me in his usual eloquent manner in a thread a while back:

From a certain design perspective 3.0 PA (where it was 1:1 for all weapons, including light weapons) gave too good a tradeoff for light weapons. This is apparent when you look at it from the angle of a cost/benefit analysis centered on average damage. Example, take a 1d4 dagger and now PA for 1. You take a 5% penalty to your chance to-hit and in exchange you average damage goes from 2 to 3, a 50% increase. Now compare that with a 2d10 greatsword (still using 3.0 PA where it is 1:1 for two handed weapons) and PA for 1. The greatsword wielder takes the same 5% penalty to-hit but his average damage only goes from 10 to 11, a 10% increase.

Couched in those terms it is obvious that the smaller your weapons the better PA is for you. The WotC designers felt that they wanted PA to be the feat for guys using big weapons so they changed it to 0:1:2 progression in 3.5

Now, as I said that all makes sense if you accept the basic prepositions, espically the idea the PA is supposed to be "for the guys with big weapons". However I personally take a more "abstract" view of this design and I feel that PA is the feat for "guys who want to focus on offense/damage". I have no problem conceptually picturing a PA with a dagger as an exampel of the attacker passing up on the easy hit to land a telling blow. So IMC I let you get 1:1 PA with light weapons. However I do keep 1:2 PA for two-handed weapons since I feel that sort of "crushing blow" is apropos for a Conan game.

Basically, if Power Attack is 1:1 for all weapons, it will be a better deal the smaller the weapon you have. Taking a -2 penalty on your attack roll to gain +2 (for example) is a much better idea if your normal damage is 1d4+4 (dagger) than if it's 2d10+6 (greatsword). I therefore like the x2 bonus for two-handers (it could be x1.5 instead but, as been said, I think that's mostly to make the math smoother).
I do agree that you very well could let Power Attack work normally for light weapons, though (another boost for the two-weapon fighter).

 

[jadrax]

giving nasty situational modifiers to people using big weapons in crowded spaces (just TRY to use a bardiche in a crowded bar).

There is a -2 penalty for using any weapon longer than a cutlass in a low ceilinged environment, such as in a ship. I think a lot of bars and other buildings could be counted as low ceilinged in Conan too.

 

[slaughterj]

You however go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too far wrt weakening two-handers. As things stand in your rules there would be absolutely no benefit to wielding a broadsword two-handed which I think is bad for both flavor, balance and making combat interesting.

Incorrect. Two-handed weapon fighters would still get to use their full weapon in surprise/partial rounds, charges, rounds where they move and attack, while the two-weapon fighter only gets to use one of his weapons. Those are some big benefits for using a two-handed weapon. Plus, the damage dice are bigger or more for two-handed weapons.

 

[slaughterj]

4. The 2-handed weapon wielder gets to use his greater damaging weapon in surprise rounds, charges, moves and attacks rounds, etc., while a 2-weapon fighter gets only 1 weapon to use in those situations, which gives the 2-handed weapon fighter plenty of massive benefits.

Right that is a quirk of the system but that seems more like a need to adjust multi attack rules so that you can attack with both hands as a standard action. This does pose problems that will be noted below.

[/quote]

Nice analysis above, but even you note there are some issues, such as the quote above. Therefore, presumably you agree that some tweak might be appropriate. It is unclear whether the best solution is (1) modifying STR from 1.5x to 1x for weapons, (2) modifying STR from 2x to 1.5x or 1x for Power Attack, (3) allowing for an attack with each hand as a standard action (nice extra suggestion to consider, I can see a Thief readily jabbing two knives into someone's back, though agree that it seems a bit unwieldy with the thief doing it with an arming sword and shortsword - maybe the solution is to allow two light weapon attacks as a standard action?), (4) allowing Power Attack with light weapons (a house rule I use, why get it with your fist but not a dagger?), (5) modifying off-hand STR damage from .5x to 1x. Maybe the best solution is one or more of these, or even something else, but I think some tweaks would be good. Maybe just allowing Power Attack with light weapons, modifying off-hand STR damage from .5x to 1x, and allowing attacks with 2 light weapons as a standard action (get in two quick punches?), then people aren't whining that two-weapon fighting is being dialed back, just others are getting some more bonuses?

Also, your response mentioned the efficacy of two-weapon fighting with sneak attack. I agree that that is effective, however, many potential two-weapon fighters (Soldiers, Borderers, Nomads) do not have sneak attack, and even Thieves don't get two-weapon fighting and have to sink a feat into it or splash a class to get it. Plus, sneak attack occurs some but nowhere near the frequency of Mr. Greatsword wreaking havoc on every round in the combat.

Trodax, thanks for the Argos' quote, that is good information, especially noting the 3.0 to 3.5 change about Power Attack.

 

[kintire]

There is, of course, another consideration too.

Now, on to a comparison:
Character A: 5th level Hyborian Barbarian, STR 18, wielding a Greatsword, and having Power Attack
Character B: 5th level Hyborian Borderer, STR 18, wielding a BroadSword and a Shortsword, and having Power Attack

Character A doing a maximum power attack with the Greatsword (which he can use even when Character B can only use 1 attack with a lesser weapon) will do on average:

Greatsword - 11 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 2 (STR multiple) + 5 (base Power Attack) + 5 (Power Attack multiple) = 27 damage.

Character B doing a maximum power attack with the Broadsword and off-hand Shortsword (note, no Power Attack damage because it is a light weapon, but still suffers the attack penalty?!) will do on average:

Broadsword - 5.5 (base dice) + 4 (base STR) + 5 (base Power Attack) = 14.5 damage.

Shortsword - 4.5 (base dice) + 2 (STR halved) = 6.5 damage.

Lets try this again, but instead of fighting one formidable oppoent, we are fighting a swarm of lesser foes: Say first level pirates with 7hp. Assume half damage points round up.

Now, mr A Smacks his opponent for 27 damage. well, okay, but 20 of those points are a complete waste of time. once the guy is disabled, he's out of the fight which is all you need, so he's actually only doing 7 effective damage.

Mr B Smacks opponent 1 for 15 damage. 7 effective, eight wasted. He smacks opponent 2 for 7 damage, all effective.

Result? A has done 7 effective damage, B has done 14.

 

[Sutek]

Against fisrt level goons, this discussion loses some meaning. If you you Power Atack, you double the ammount you sacrifice, so it insta-kills 7HP schlubs like that by sacrificing a mere -3 off your TO HIT roll.

That -3 doubles for damage to +6, and you can't roll less than a 1, so that's 7 points of damage without even having any STR modifier factor into it.

One big problem I have with this argument is that (A) there is a problem with the x2 multiplier from Power Attack, asserting that it is "too high" and (B) there is an issue with off-hand/two handed multipliers (0.5x and 1.5x respectively) and also being screwed up or flawed somehow when itterative attacks kick in.

These are two separate issues, so where is the problem really? One is related to a Feat and the other to the OGL rules. I'm totally not getting what the real issue is with the "wield clause", we'll call it. If you wield a weapon in a weak hand, you'll deal less damge with it, and conversely deal more damage if you use the strength of both arms to drive the blow.

Also, the number sacrificed for Power Attack cannot ever exceed you BAB. To be able to sacrifice -5 to hit and gain +5 damage (or +10 two-handed) characters have to be either 5th or 7th level (depending on class) or higher. This further means that (A) you shouldn't be dealing with a puny little group of 7hp goons anymore and (B) you should probably be facing foes with at least some DR regularly, if not high DR which the added damage will help surpass.

Now, the thing that's always been dumb to me, and that no one has yet mentioned, is that this sacrifice to TO HIT and bonus to damage counts for any attacks made all the way through to your next turn. That means you use Power Attack, essentially making more wild swings in hopes of hitting harder, but somehow manitain that degree of wreckless abandon and brutal wounding prowess for like...any other attack you make util your next turn. This doesn't seem big until someone initiates a disarm, grapple or trip attack against you, and then what happens? It gets confusing, not to mention a little over the top in terms of the duration of the bonus.

For some reason I seem to recall Power Attack, like Sneak Attack, requireing a Full Round Action in D&D 3.0, but it's been so lon, I could be totally wrong about that.

If ther was any tweak I could see being made, I'd suggest that the penalty to hit ALWAYS reflect the damage bonus award, so if you are using a two-handed weapon and gain +10 damage by using power attack, then the penalty TO HIT doubles also to -10...so you had better be high level or high STR toi off-set it.

Personally though, I dont'see a fundamental problem, especially if moderate to high DR enemies are in the picture.

Plus, sneak attack occurs some but nowhere near the frequency of Mr. Greatsword wreaking havoc on every round in the combat.

Well, now, that's just utterly false. Most of the party I'm running has a level of thief, and in a good Conan story, that's the way it oughta be. It's FAR easier to get Sneak Attack than be a really effective two-handed powerhouse, and I think I showed that with my example of damage dealt by a 1st level thief weilding arming + short swords, Finessing and Sneak Attacking.

Here's a question:
Do you think the +5BAB Thief's ability to Power Attack with a two-handed weapon for +10 to damage is too high compared to thier ability to Sneak Attack for weapon + 4d8 damage? The average damage of 4d8 is 16, plus can be dished out with a weapon in each hand. That's an average of 32 points of Sneak damage compared to a paltry +10 if he wants to Power attack with the same weapon, and I've not even factored in STR bonus or weapon damage yet!

I just think you've seen power attack be more brutal than you've wanted it to be, but don't have anybody pushing the system or really delving into the damage potential of attack modes other than "I want the weapon that does the most dice of damage."

 

[Krushnak]

in my game the deadliest character is a pirate dual wielding an arming sword and short sword. with 2 other melee characters in the party, both soldiers both using 2 handed weapons.

the way i do power attack in my game is all weapons can power attack and all do *1 damage, however the str bonus with a 2 hander goes from 1.5 to 2 and one hander goes from 1 to 1.5 and off hand from .5 to 1, base str is all that applies to ap. ive always seen it more as you know how to apply your strength to an attack more effectively while occasionaly going reckless.

 

[Sutek]

Precisely.

I also allow light weapons to Power Attack, which isn't legal in the RAW.

 

[quigs]

Honestly, the problem in my game wasn't the feats or the SRD rules, it was the difference in damage dice between a 1 handed weapon and a 2 handed one.

I understand that damage dice were increased one grade for most weapons, but I think they went too far with the 2 handed weapons. A short sword going from 1d6 to 1d8 is fine. A greatsword going from 2d6 to 2d10 is a bit much. Same with the bardiche. 1d12 to 2d10 is a huge increase compared to most other weapons.

 

[Krushnak]

yeah but d@d had some really retarded damages for weapons in that game. honestly the best weapon was the bastard sword and i never saw a reason to use anything else. but in conan the variation is good and alot more realistic and suits the stories and genre alot better. honestly a 2 hander should always be a vastly better choice for dealing damage and piercing armour. however this conan and players should be changing weapons like they should be changing their socks. weapons break, get lost, get stolen or sometimes a 2 hander is just not practical to use.

 

[slaughterj]

Plus, sneak attack occurs some but nowhere near the frequency of Mr. Greatsword wreaking havoc on every round in the combat.

Well, now, that's just utterly false.

Whaaaaa? Are you trying to tell me that Mr. Sneak Attack gets to do sneak attack damage just as often as Mr. Greatsword gets to swing his 2-handed weapon? I think everyone would disagree with you on that one. Mr. Greatsword gets to swing EVERY combat round. On the other hand, Mr. Sneak Attack only gets to do a sneak attack IF a foe is flatfooted, blinded, stunned, helpless, flanked, etc. or if Mr. Sneak Attack is invisible (yeah, that's happens a lot), and several of those situations are nerfed by uncanny dodge / reflexive parry. Therefore, I dare say Mr. Sneak Attack does not deal sneak attack damage EVERY combat round, thus less than Mr. Greatsword gets to attack, and only every other combat round if he is lucky enough to set up flanks or is a good feinter and takes only one attack.