Am I the only one using this feat for the switch-hitter ranger?
Possibly, what's the advantage? I'd think you'd be losing out, in particular against favored enemies.
Sorry. Thought this was talk about striking foe's vitals.
I found an error in my calculations for including probability. If the probability of hitting on your first swing is P, the formula for how much damage (plain) VS does compared to a 2 swing full-round attack is
0.5(XY/2 + X/2) + (P–0.5)(D–Z)
And THIS equation I can make some comments about! The (XY/2 + X/2) term is just your weapon's average damage, so when using VS you get half again as much weapon damage!
But looking at the last term : again if the creature’s DR is less than your weapon bonus, you incur a reduction in your damage, so only use it when the creature’s DR is close to or higher than your weapon bonus.
Worst case : if D=0, the reduction in damage is (P-0.5)Z.
So if a fighter's chances of hitting are say 75%, the reduction to that "half again as much basic weapon damage" would be 1/4 of the weapon's damage bonus.
NOW it just depends on the particulars. If your weapon's damage is small (d6, d8) and your damage bonus is greater than about 8, then yeah, it makes no sense to use VS.
What about a greatsword (2d6)? Don't bother using VS if your weapon damage is greater than about 14.
I happen to have a barbarian who has a greatsword and a damage bonus of +13 when raging, so the math has shown that even against opponents with DR=0, VS would just about break even. So when she's up against a creature with *ANY* DR, VS will be better than a full-round attack.
Ain't math great? :)
Ain't math great? :)
Well, if you hit with one attack from vital strike its going to be 4D6+13, but if you hit with 2 attacks in your full attack routine its going to be 4D6+26. Wouldn't the trade for -5 to hit be worth a +13 to damage? Especially if you can put resources into just hitting the thing better?(Against a foe with DR5/- it would be 4D6+8 vs. 4D6+16, would a 8 be worth it?) You also haven't calculated critical hit yet. Would more chances to fumble or crit change the math at all?
Edit: My math is bad. I was stating total damage like it took the total -5 to hit...
Anytime the target AC is 10 points or more higher than your highest attack bonus is also a great time to use Vital Strike. Lots of us can't gaurentee a roll over 10 to save our skins.
I've found I do it half the time, dice may vary results slightly though.
Vital strike is also important when the only option you have to deal with DR is to deal as much damage per strike as you can.
When are those times exactly?
Advantage is movement! and Vital strike can be used for both melee and ranged attacks! Most feats apply to one or the other.Am I the only one using this feat for the switch-hitter ranger?Possibly, what's the advantage? I'd think you'd be losing out, in particular against favored enemies.
I thought the point of a switch hitter was that you were already viable at both range and melee? Why are you moving?
Oh come on! Do I have to spell it out? You've NEVER been in a situation where something had DR you couldn't bypass?
As a fighter or barbarian? No. All solutions are solved by brute force. If it isn't working, you just aren't using enough.
Kidding aside, the only times I have are when the GM throws a homebrew monster at us with crazy(and inappropriate) DR. Usually I'm better off just full attacking it and taking the damage with me. I don't think the average 7 damage I get from vital strike is worth giving up my iteratives.
The thing that makes vital strike not worth it is the high cost in feats. 3 feats is too much for what it does. As it is the feat just isn't worth 98% of the time. There are better feats you can take.
We house rule it hat you can use Vital Strike during a Full attacks, charges, spring attack, whirlwind attack, and cleave. You only get to apply the extra damage on your first attack in full attack or whirlwind attack and on the initial attack in Cleave. This makes the feat actually worth taking.
In general: if option A is available without investment and option B costs a feat, shouldn't option B be superior to option A?
Is Vital Strike worth it in any average joe game? No. The damage output just does not compare to a full attack. The static bonuses from hits will outweigh the extra damage dice provided by Vital Strike.
Is Vital Strike worth it in a Mythic game? Hell yes. The level of consistency given with Vital Strike will outweigh the point of having a full attack since the Mythic Vital Strike feat multiplies your static bonuses along with each hit; combine it with an ability that provides additional Standard/Attack Actions, and you will have an option that easily outweighs any form of iteratives.
To be honest, I find that having static bonuses multiply equal to the number of weapon damage dice sets is the best fix to optimizing the feat chain (something which the Mythic Vital Strike feat provides). Unfortunately, Vital Strike is only useful in Mythic games, and in any regular game Vital Strike is about as useful as the Prone Shooter feat.