Killsmith |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sunder replaces that attack.
It doesn't work the other way, because sunder is still replacing the attack you get from the attack action, so Vital Strike has nothing left to effect.
You use the attack action, sunder replaces the attack, and since that attack doesn't happen, Vital Strike doesn't do anything. It's not about what order it is, it's about what part they effect. The thing that VS does (makes the attack from the attack action deal extra damage) never occurs.
If you use Vital Strike while wielding a melee weapon, wouldn't you be making an attack action in place of a melee attack? In other words, is it possible that we're separating words that should be left together? I've been reading "as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack" with a comma after attack action but there isn't a comma there.
If Vital Strike with a melee weapon is "an attack action in place of a melee attack", then sunder would just be part of that vital strike. You resolve the attack roll and do damage normally, which would be the normal damage for a vital strike.
In that case, the wording as is would be there to prevent a ranged vital strike sunder attempt, but wouldn't prevent the use of vital strike altogether.
Am I way out in left field here?