Pathfiner Vital Strike

[navar100]

My group likes Vital Strike. However, we keep getting confused on how it works.

1) Is the extra weapon dice itself multiplied on a critical hit?

2) Can Vital Strike be used in conjunction with Cleave, accepting it only works if it does work on the first opponent attacked?

3) How about a charge?

4) Does the extra weapon dice damage include damage from a bard's inspire courage, a magic weapon's enhancement bonus, or various spells and class abilities that provide +# to damage and so forth?

5) Power Attack?

Our group will still like Vital Strike even if the answer is no to everything. We just want clarification.

[Ryulin18]

1)Is the extra weapon dice itself multiplied on a critical hit?

Yes. The damage is totaled and then doubled. So if you swing a bastard sword with vital strike it would be (2d10+str) x 2


1) 2) Can Vital Strike be used in conjunction with Cleave, accepting it only works if it does work on the first opponent attacked?

Vital strike is an attack action, meaning it is its own standard action. It can't be combined with spring attack, charges or cleaves.


1) 4) Does the extra weapon dice damage include damage from a bard's inspire courage, a magic weapon's enhancement bonus, or various spells and class abilities that provide +# to damage and so forth?

No. You are swinging a sword harder. You roll the weapons damage dice an extra time and then add the bonuses on.


1) 5) Power Attack?

Power attack does work with vital strike, IIRC.

[StreamOfTheSky]

My group likes Vital Strike. However, we keep getting confused on how it works.

1) Is the extra weapon dice itself multiplied on a critical hit?

2) Can Vital Strike be used in conjunction with Cleave, accepting it only works if it does work on the first opponent attacked?

3) How about a charge?

4) Does the extra weapon dice damage include damage from a bard's inspire courage, a magic weapon's enhancement bonus, or various spells and class abilities that provide +# to damage and so forth?

5) Power Attack?

Our group will still like Vital Strike even if the answer is no to everything. We just want clarification.

1. No. Your base weapon damage multiplies, the extra weapon damage from Vital Strike does not.

2. No. Both use standard actions to do, and are thus incompatible.

3. No. You cannot use a standard action on a charge. At least, I know of no way to.

4. No. It is just the wapon's damage dice, added again. If it was a medium sized greatsword, for example, it would just be an extra 2d6 damage. Nothing else added to it.

5. No. It is simply extra damage dice. Power Attack adds damage to an attack once. It is still the same attack that VS is adding damage to, the extra damage is not its own attack.

[navar100]

Ok. I think I get it now. Now I have to convince the group. :smallsmile:

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I think #1 is unclear. If you consider it bonus damage dice, then it doesn't multiply on a crit. If you consider it modifying the weapon's base damage for that attack, then it does multiply on a crit. Since weapon damage usually only changes due to size I'd err on it being bonus damage dice, but again the wording is entirely unclear.

Otherwise I agree with StreamOfTheSky. To be crystal clear about Power Attack and Vital Strike, however, you can use them together, but their effects don't directly interact.

[Sayt]

I think #1 is unclear. If you consider it bonus damage dice, then it doesn't multiply on a crit. If you consider it modifying the weapon's base damage for that attack, then it does multiply on a crit. Since weapon damage usually only changes due to size I'd err on it being bonus damage dice, but again the wording is entirely unclear.

Otherwise I agree with StreamOfTheSky. To be crystal clear about Power Attack and Vital Strike, however, you can use them together, but their effects don't directly interact.

Vital strike is COMPLETELY clear on the matter. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vital-strike-combat---final)


These extra weapon damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit, but are added to the total.

Basically, Vital strike has no synergy with any feat except Power attack, and those only inasmuch as they're not exclusive. just about the only time I'd consider using it is if I was trying to stack weapon size. (Say, Enlarge Person+Lead Blades, for Medium->Huge Weapon.)

Basically instead of (Weapon Die+Damage Mods) you get ((Weapon Die)+(Weapon Die+ "Flat" Damage Mods))

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Whoops, missed that last line.

[Ravens_cry]

Devastating Strike and Improved Devastating Strike give improved bonus damage, the former +2 for every other Vital Strike line feat and the latter an equal bonus to critical confirmation rolls and the bonus to damage *does* multiply on crits.

[Person_Man]

It's also worth mentioning that the Vital Strike feats aren't that great (unless you're using a really big weapon).

The bonus damage is only the base damage of the weapon, and it only applies once per turn. So even if you're using a greatsword, you're adding an average of 7 points of damage once per turn. That's less bonus damage then you'd get from a Feat which adds an extra attack (of which their are many), less then a Feat which multiplies damage (Spirited Charge), less then Power Attack (which effects every attack you make), etc.

Even vanilla Weapon Specialization (+2 damage on each attack) would provide a better bonus once you get 4+ attacks per turn. (And the bonus damage from Weapon Specialization is multiplied).

[Ravens_cry]

Too bad you can't use it on a charge.:smallannoyed:

[JanusThePaladin]

What sort of things does Vital strike stack with? I know it stacks with a rogue's sneak attack. Is there anything else?

[Eldariel]

What sort of things does Vital strike stack with? I know it stacks with a rogue's sneak attack. Is there anything else?

It "stacks" with all damage adding effects. It's merely another one. Anything that would apply on your normal attack more or less applies with Vital Strike too.

Basically, it allows your standard action attacks to be ever-so-slightly more efficient, when you're denied full attack.

[subject42]

Does anyone know the rationale behind making vital strike a standard action, and thus incompatible with charging and spring attack? Have the Pathfinder devs ever given a serious answer?

Or am I just stuck with the omnipresent, snarky response of "melee can't have nice things"?

[Eldariel]

Does anyone know the rationale behind making vital strike a standard action, and thus incompatible with charging and spring attack? Have the Pathfinder devs ever given a serious answer?

Or am I just stuck with the omnipresent, snarky response of "melee can't have nice things"?

The purpose of the feat was to make it less painful to not be able to full attack on higher levels. It's an incomplete answer that costs feats but that's its function; it's limited to standard action attacks 'cause its replacement is limited to full-round action and thus they're kinda not supposed to "mix" with anything else.

No, it's not good design logic but that's the design logic anyways. I'd rather they just make it a standard action to perform a full melee attack and be done with it (and consolidate TWF into one feat) but I digress.

[Dienekes]

Does anyone know the rationale behind making vital strike a standard action, and thus incompatible with charging and spring attack? Have the Pathfinder devs ever given a serious answer?

Or am I just stuck with the omnipresent, snarky response of "melee can't have nice things"?

Basically. Pathfinder as a whole seems have cool ideas that could benefit melee and non-magical classes rather well. But they never go far enough with them (look at how many Fighter and Barbarian Archetypes are almost given Pounce, but instead given just a sucky version of it)

What I think they were trying to do is allow for a method of dealing a lot of damage in melee while still being mobile and not being forced to use Charge/Pounce. I approve of that concept. Making powerful standard action attacks is a good idea, but it does not deal enough damage to be worth it.

Also of note, I know at least one of the developers of Pathfinder admitted it's weak and personally allows his players to use the Vital Strike line on a charge or for the first attack of a Cleave, and a few other things.

[subject42]

Also of note, I know at least one of the developers of Pathfinder admitted it's weak and personally allows his players to use the Vital Strike line on a charge or for the first attack of a Cleave, and a few other things.

Interesting. Do you have a source or citation for that?

[JanusThePaladin]

I know what he's referring to. I think i saw it on the paizo forum when i was researching vital strike.

[Person_Man]

One of my closest friends is also a freelance writer who has been published multiple times in Pathfinder. Based on his conversations and my own participation in the Paizo forums under a sock puppet (before being banned for disagreeing with too many people) while Pathfinder was in it's open play test, I would say that when Pathfinder was first written Paizo and the most vocal segment of their online community made a conscious effort to remove high damage melee combos from the game. Power Attack was nerfed, there were few sources of Pounce or free movement for players (making it very difficult to make full attacks), damage bonuses in general were minimized, and melee Feats in general were made broken down into smaller parts and made weaker.

Unfortunately, various magical high damage options remained, and other much better options have crept in the supplements (which is normal for any game). And the net effect of watering down melee Feats while adding more Feats per level was to make the Fighter weaker (since his main class feature is Feats), and make non-melee classes more powerful (since they now have more metamagic Feats).

[StreamOfTheSky]

What Person Man says is absolutely true.
And since this thread has turned into talking about how VS is a bad feat, I would like to add my thoughts on the matter (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?315017-Vital-Strike-changes)

Quoted and updated from original post if you don't wish to follow link:
Current Vital Strike:

Vital Strike (Combat)

You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.

Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.

Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together before adding bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), precision-based damage, and other damage bonuses. These extra weapon damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit, but are added to the total.

Proposed changes to Vital Strike:

Vital Strike (Combat)

You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.

Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.

Benefit: When you use the attack action or the Spring Attack feat, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage equal to your Base Attack Bonus, up to a maximum of +10 damage. This extra damage, unlike most flat (or "non-dice") damage bonuses, is not multiplied on a critical hit, but is merely added to the total damage dealt.

Improved VS: Requires BAB +11, instead add double your BAB in damage, up to a maximum of +30 damage.

Greater VS: Requires BAB +16, instead add triple your BAB in damage up to a maximum of +60 damage.


Why the change?

1. Firstly, not letting Spring Attack combine with it is a great injustice and needs to be fixed. Note that in addition to being better for casters and better in general and w/o two feat pre-reqs, Flyby Attack works with Vital Strike already.

2. Vital Strike tries to make skirmishing viable, but does it based on the worst metric possible: base weapon damage. This is bad because it doesn't work best for the agile guy with a weak weapon darting in and out. It works best for the druid and his animal companion T-Rex with Improved Natural Attack and Strongjaw spell using the biggest, most pumped up gigantic weapon damage possible.

3. Starts out at level 6 being slightly worse than original VS with a greatsword (extra 2d6, average of 7 damage), but gradually gains ground, I think, being pretty scary by the time Greater VS rolls around, and making not full attacking a viable option into the upper levels.

[Starbuck_II]

I submit that Vital Strike should be BAB 3 not 6; it would get more people to use it before it was more weaker (when they get 2 attacks).

But I agree, it should work with either charge or Spring attack.

I do like StreamOfTheSky's changes to damage as well.
Although, the greatsword user has a higher bonus at 6th level (average 7 after all); it is the long sword user that is really behind.

So this:
Vital Strike (Combat)
You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.

Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +3.

Benefit: When you make a single melee attack like the end of a charge or spring attack, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage equal to your Base Attack Bonus, up to a maximum of +10 damage. This extra damage, unlike most flat (or "non-dice") damage bonuses, is not multiplied on a critical hit, but is merely added to the total damage dealt.
Improved VS: Requires BAB +9, instead add double your BAB in damage, up to a maximum of +30 damage.

Greater VS: Requires BAB +14, instead add triple your BAB in damage up to a maximum of +60 damage.

But then again, I've never been a fan of waiting for gaining another attack before I take another feat that doesn't work with more than 1 attack.

[Sayt]

Depending on your point of view, one could actually say that Power Attack got improved, on account of giving better returns on it's penalties (2 for one with one handed, 3 for 1 on two handed.) At level one, PF's version does more damage for the same penalty (Assuming both users are same str, full bab, 1h weapons). At level two, the 3.5 damage catches up in damage for a greater penalty. At level three, PF is at -1/+2, and 3.5 is at -3/+3, level four PF is at -2/+4, 3.5 can go up to -4/+4. At level... 12, say. 3.5 is at up to -12/+12, whereas PF's power attack gives -4/+8.

So, obviously, earlier in the game, PF's power attack gives similar returns for more accuracy, while later in the game, 3.5 power attack can give much greater damage, at a significant chance of whiffing the roll, so you're more likely to make a moderate penalty, in which case you're likely to take a smaller penalty.

Unless you have shock trooper, in which case your argument isn't really that power attack itself got nerfed, but it's utility was diminished when a feat with which it had (crazy amounts of) synergy with, in certain builds, wasn't printed.

[navar100]

Pathfinder sort of has its own version of Shock Trooper, at least the power attack synergy part: Furious Focus. For the first attack in a round you use Power Attack you don't take the penalty to hit. Useful when charging or only getting one attack anyway for whatever reason. Still nice even when full attacking. Sure, your first attack was likely to hit anyway, but it's still nice to have for that off chance of need. A feat doesn't need to be used every round every time all the time to be a good feat. Furious Focus enables 3/4 BAB classes to utilize Power Attack easier. Their non-first attacks aren't as likely to hit anyway.

Hence, my group likes Vital Strike. The fighters have it. My Ancestor Oracle will take it next level. I'm usually only getting one attack anyway. Might as well have the extra 2d6 damage when I call for the greatsword. I can spare the feat, but I got time to reconsider to change tactics a bit with a reach weapon instead. Only trouble is our resident munchkin ranger archer likes it too much and would rather use it and move than full attack from a safe distance. I don't know if he has Deadly Aim. I don't think he does since I've never seen him use it. Sigh.

[Dienekes]

Interesting. Do you have a source or citation for that?

Unfortunately no, just a piece of information that was rustling around in my brain.


Pathfinder sort of has its own version of Shock Trooper, at least the power attack synergy part: Furious Focus. For the first attack in a round you use Power Attack you don't take the penalty to hit. Useful when charging or only getting one attack anyway for whatever reason. Still nice even when full attacking. Sure, your first attack was likely to hit anyway, but it's still nice to have for that off chance of need. A feat doesn't need to be used every round every time all the time to be a good feat. Furious Focus enables 3/4 BAB classes to utilize Power Attack easier. Their non-first attacks aren't as likely to hit anyway.


Unfortunately that doesn't really fix the problem for fighter types. Shock Trooper was good because it allowed melee characters to dump everything into their attack to gain massive amounts of damage. This power attack is still stuck at a specific penalty, the ability to full-attack on a charge is nerfed unless your a shapechanging caster or a barbarian wasting 3 talents for the privilege, and the methods of bumping up the damage to penalty ratio are all pretty limited. I can only think of the Two-Handed Fighter archetype.

[Acanous]

Vital Strike is a trap feat. It is completely worthless, and in any situation you can concieve of where it *Might* help, Power Attack or other Melee feats would be a better investment.

However, my table seems to think it's an OK thing. Mostly because they believe it works on a charge. (I can't seem to convince them otherwise and now treat it as a house rule.)

...Heck, I'm not sure weather to rank it above or below Weapon Specialization, which at least gets multiplied on a crit...

[Starbuck_II]

Vital Strike is a trap feat. It is completely worthless, and in any situation you can concieve of where it *Might* help, Power Attack or other Melee feats would be a better investment.

However, my table seems to think it's an OK thing. Mostly because they believe it works on a charge. (I can't seem to convince them otherwise and now treat it as a house rule.)

...Heck, I'm not sure weather to rank it above or below Weapon Specialization, which at least gets multiplied on a crit...

But you can power attack + furious Focus + Vital strike; it isn't binary PA or VT.

[Certified]

The Vital Strike line is a funny series of feats. If you follow it, the character is able to exercise a single attack on a standard action with what effectively amounts to all the dice you would roll in a full attack action plus the damage bonus of a normal attack.

Alone, there are several instances where the Vital Strike line comes in handy. Perhaps the most obvious being while closing ranks using a Move action and a Stand Action. The other core use is against high AC opponents where in taking a Full Attack Action later attacks would fail. Alternatively, the Vital Strike line works well for overcoming Damage reduction when you do not possess the correct weapon.

To get the most out of the Vital Strike line the Power Attack and Furious Focus feats push the damage of that initial attack and keep the accuracy. Lastly, being able to have Enlarge Person cast on the character also pushes the damage both in the number of dice and damage bonus.

For players that really want to take Vital Strike to the next level there is the Barbarian Archetype Titian Mauler. Note: This assumes RAI, not RAW where the class effectively does nothing. The Titian Mauler allows the character to use progressively larger weapons reducing the penalty for using over-sized weapons every three levels.

[Ravens_cry]

But you can power attack + furious Focus + Vital strike; it isn't binary PA or VT.
I like furious focus for mounted chargers without Pounce, which takes a lot more to get in Pathfinder.

[Person_Man]

Unfortunately that doesn't really fix the problem for fighter types. Shock Trooper was good because it allowed melee characters to dump everything into their attack to gain massive amounts of damage. This power attack is still stuck at a specific penalty, the ability to full-attack on a charge is nerfed unless your a shapechanging caster or a barbarian wasting 3 talents for the privilege, and the methods of bumping up the damage to penalty ratio are all pretty limited. I can only think of the Two-Handed Fighter archetype.

It's also worth mentioning that Shock Trooper also gave you the ability to make directed Bull Rush and added a free Trip when you Bull Rushed enemies into each other. It's basically 3 separate useful Feats for the cost of one Feat. It dramatically helped out full BAB classes (which depended on Power Attack often ended up with a Bull Rush combo anyway), which are almost all Tier 4 or lower (exceptions: Wildshape Ranger, Crusader, and Warblade, all Tier 3). Pathfinder has nothing that's analogous to it.

[Zubrowka74]

For players that really want to take Vital Strike to the next level there is the Barbarian Archetype Titian Mauler. Note: This assumes RAI, not RAW where the class effectively does nothing. The Titian Mauler allows the character to use progressively larger weapons reducing the penalty for using over-sized weapons every three levels.

Titian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titian) Mauler ? He fights with an oversized paintbrush ?

[Certified]

Titian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titian) Mauler ? He fights with an oversized paintbrush ?

The paintbrush is a devastating weapon.

[StreamOfTheSky]

The Vital Strike line is a funny series of feats. If you follow it, the character is able to exercise a single attack on a standard action with what effectively amounts to all the dice you would roll in a full attack action plus the damage bonus of a normal attack.

Alone, there are several instances where the Vital Strike line comes in handy. Perhaps the most obvious being while closing ranks using a Move action and a Stand Action. The other core use is against high AC opponents where in taking a Full Attack Action later attacks would fail. Alternatively, the Vital Strike line works well for overcoming Damage reduction when you do not possess the correct weapon.

To get the most out of the Vital Strike line the Power Attack and Furious Focus feats push the damage of that initial attack and keep the accuracy. Lastly, being able to have Enlarge Person cast on the character also pushes the damage both in the number of dice and damage bonus.

For players that really want to take Vital Strike to the next level there is the Barbarian Archetype Titian Mauler. Note: This assumes RAI, not RAW where the class effectively does nothing. The Titian Mauler allows the character to use progressively larger weapons reducing the penalty for using over-sized weapons every three levels.

I'm sorry. You seem to...
A) Grossly underestimate the sorts of bonus damage beyond base weapon that a martial character can get and thus think VS is ever actually comparable to full attack damage, even against DR you can't beat
B) Believe in the fluff surrounding the feat for how it "works best" rather than the reality. The reality is that to "get the most" out of vital strike, you want to be a druid, a synthesist, or their pet animal/eidolon. You get your natural weapon damage super high (Imp. Natural Attack, improved damage evolution, Strongjaw spell, enlargement magic, etc... ) so that it reaches 8d6 or ideally 12d6, and multiply *that* by Vital Strike feats' effects. It's actually a super mediocre-to-bad feat for actual "martial" characters.

[Zubrowka74]

The paintbrush is a devastating weapon.

A greatclub with bristles will do. At higher levels he gets to use color spray for free.

[subject42]

B) Believe in the fluff surrounding the feat for how it "works best" rather than the reality. The reality is that to "get the most" out of vital strike, you want to be a druid, a synthesist, or their pet animal/eidolon. You get your natural weapon damage super high (Imp. Natural Attack, improved damage evolution, Strongjaw spell, enlargement magic, etc... ) so that it reaches 8d6 or ideally 12d6, and multiply *that* by Vital Strike feats' effects. It's actually a super mediocre-to-bad feat for actual "martial" characters.

Oddly, vital strike can also work well for characters with absolutely rubbish stats. Mathematically, a character with 7 strength and Greater vital strike is better off using an earthbreaker hammer for VS than he is making iteratives. The same also applies for high-level monks.

I'm not saying it's good, only that it can potentially almost shore up a glaring ability-score weakness.

[Certified]

I'm sorry. You seem to...
A) Grossly underestimate the sorts of bonus damage beyond base weapon that a martial character can get and thus think VS is ever actually comparable to full attack damage, even against DR you can't beat
B) Believe in the fluff surrounding the feat for how it "works best" rather than the reality. The reality is that to "get the most" out of vital strike, you want to be a druid, a synthesist, or their pet animal/eidolon. You get your natural weapon damage super high (Imp. Natural Attack, improved damage evolution, Strongjaw spell, enlargement magic, etc... ) so that it reaches 8d6 or ideally 12d6, and multiply *that* by Vital Strike feats' effects. It's actually a super mediocre-to-bad feat for actual "martial" characters.

This reply to my post hits at what I think may be the heart of the perceived issue with Vital Strike. While people may see it is mediocre I believe Vital Strike was intended to be a situational, not a utility feat to be used every turn. The builds outlined above seem to focus on using Vital Strike every turn. This was also my intention with the Titan (see I left out the extra "I" that time) Mauler but I can very must see the strength of the builds outlined.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Such builds wouldn't need to rely solely on Vital Strike. Being very large means having a good reach, and AoOs don't require a different weapon for each one you attempt, so such a build could also easily be made as an AoO build in addition to the VS focus. It could also three-trick pony as a combat maneuver expert, since those *also* benefit from having a good single attack and big size and reach.

[navar100]

No kidding doing a full attack is better than Vital Strike. That's not the point. When you're only getting one attack anyway, and that happens a lot, Vital Strike offers some extra damage which is significant. If you're going to be wielding a short sword or rapier, Vital Strike is not for you. If you're wielding a bastard sword, great axe, greatsword, Vital Strike is nice to have. It's not the Most Awesome Feat Ever You Suck For Not Having It, but it doesn't have to be.

[Dienekes]

No kidding doing a full attack is better than Vital Strike. That's not the point. When you're only getting one attack anyway, and that happens a lot, Vital Strike offers some extra damage which is significant. If you're going to be wielding a short sword or rapier, Vital Strike is not for you. If you're wielding a bastard sword, great axe, greatsword, Vital Strike is nice to have. It's not the Most Awesome Feat Ever You Suck For Not Having It, but it doesn't have to be.

The real problem with the feat is that everything it was supposed to do; deal decent damage while still moving, piercing DR, ect. feats/abilities/items from the original 3.5 which were not ported over could do better. Meaning as a whole it's just another nerf for melee in Pathfinder.

As a Pathfinder feat, it's well, it's nothing special but it can have it's niche uses. When compared to what a Fighter was doing in 3.5 it's laughable.

[Ryulin18]

I found that vital strike with a "titan mauler" barbarian worked well. After following the full progression of VS and wielding a collosal greatsword, I was rolling 48d6 damage.

It might be underpowered, but thats because its a backup feat for when you can't full round attack.