In getting a ranger (archery style) character ready I took a closer look at the Vital Strike tree. I can see nothing in the wording which would prevent a ranged character from using Vital Strike with a ranged attack. What am I missing or did I just find a loop hole?
Doug
It should work just fine with a ranged attack.
It should work fine and why would it be a loop hole? All it does is allow you to make up some of the damage you lose from moving in place of a full attack.
Full attack still does more damage if everything hits
Works great with Shot on the Run.
|
It works, but I'd advise against it. As a ranged attacker, you have a much better chance of getting a full attack. And with the changes to Manyshout, the first arrow on a full attack already deals damage twice, which is in most instances better than one extra d8.
Ah... this is possibly a bit of a threadjack... but what if the ranged ranger is using crossbow instead of a bow? Reloading takes actions in that case...
Works great with Shot on the Run.And Deadly Aim? By the wording of the feat, Deadly Aim bonus damage would be multiplied ...
Added, but not multiplied. The only thing Vital Strike adds is additional base weapon damage dice. There is no multiplication. This has been clarified through Jason.
|
A full attack is not always better, anyways. Take Mr. Shotty McShoterson, a level 6 Ranger with +6 base attack, a +1 bow, and a +4 dexterity. Ignoring other feats except Vital Strike for the purposes of this example.
On a full attack, he gets one attack at +11 and one attack at +5. If he attacks a creature with AC 20, he has a 60% chance to hit with the first shot and a 30% chance to hit with the second shot.
This means he has a 72% chance to hit with either attack, but only an 18% chance to hit with both attacks.
Vital Strike, on the other hand, will effectively do double (weapon) damage on one attack. This means it has a 60% chance of hitting.
In short:
You have the highest chance of getting one attack in for normal damage at 72% with a full attack.
You have the highest chance of getting one attack in for double (weapon) damage at 60% with a Vital Strike attack.
The chance of doing double damage with a full attack is relatively low, at 18%.
Remember that this is all based off of the above AC and attack rolls, so it is subject to change. The only other real difference is that with Vital Strike your static modifiers (favored enemy, strength bonus, magic bonus, etc.) aren't doubled, while they would be on a full attack.
In the end, if you want to hit at least once for any damage, use a full attack. If you want to hit once for double (weapon) damage, use a single Vital Strike attack. The odds of getting that with a full attack are quite low.
There are a lot of variables, but the above usually holds true. Full attacks tend to be better overall just because the chance of hitting once is much higher, and there is the (albeit small) possibility of getting extra hits. Vital Strike does have its usefulness though.
Something many people aren't mentioning about Vital Strike is that it gives you an option to increase your damage while slowed (as the slow spell). DMs really should use slow more often -- it's quite infuriating to PCs who expect full attack actions left and right (:
Something many people aren't mentioning about Vital Strike is that it gives you an option to increase your damage while slowed (as the slow spell). DMs really should use slow more often -- it's quite infuriating to PCs who expect full attack actions left and right (:
A very good point - also if staggered, which is much more common a condition than it used to be.
As for full ranged-attacks - Vital strike could be better for ranged, but for actual archers (as opposed to mixed melee/ranged user), Manyshot is far far better. I could see taking Vital strike before Rapid Reload though, except Rapid reload available earlier.
Works great with Shot on the Run.And Deadly Aim? By the wording of the feat, Deadly Aim bonus damage would be multiplied ...
Does not work w/ Shot on the run. Vital Strike needs a Attack Action (A Standard Action), & Shot on the run use a Full-Round Action. Deadly Aim does not get multiplied by Vital Strike, not die damage.
IF you are using the older 3.5 Scout, or the APG Scout build Rogue, or even the Skirmisher Ranger build (some of it's hunter tricks apply only to an attack (standard) action), then the vital strike is a HUGE bonus.
Think of a rogue/scout, moves 10 feet, does sneak attack damage + vital strike damage. Probably with a rapier or other high-crit weapon.
If I'm reading it correctly, vital strike should work on rays and other spells, it says attack, not weapon.
If I'm reading it correctly, vital strike should work on rays and other spells, it says attack, not weapon.
You have to make an attack action which casting a spell is not, even casting a spell that requires an attack roll.
IF you are using the older 3.5 Scout, or the APG Scout build Rogue, or even the Skirmisher Ranger build (some of it's hunter tricks apply only to an attack (standard) action), then the vital strike is a HUGE bonus.
Think of a rogue/scout, moves 10 feet, does sneak attack damage + vital strike damage. Probably with a rapier or other high-crit weapon.
If you're using a rapier then all you're adding is another d6 to the damage, that's not huge. The Vital Strike only applies to the weapon damage.
IF you are using the older 3.5 Scout, or the APG Scout build Rogue, or even the Skirmisher Ranger build (some of it's hunter tricks apply only to an attack (standard) action), then the vital strike is a HUGE bonus.
Think of a rogue/scout, moves 10 feet, does sneak attack damage + vital strike damage. Probably with a rapier or other high-crit weapon.
If you're using a rapier then all you're adding is another d6 to the damage, that's not huge. The Vital Strike only applies to the weapon damage.
It's still another dice of damage. Most scout builds I've seen were dex based, and went for as much crit damage as possible. Primarily because they only get one attack per round.
It's huge in that it will apply to most of the attacks the character makes, since he's rarely going to be doing full attack actions (his abilities are designed around NOT doing a full attack).
Also, Vital Strike is better than multiple attacks against monsters with Damage Reduction.
Also, Vital Strike is better than multiple attacks against monsters with Damage Reduction.That depends on the creatures DR and your bonuses.
Then, let's just say : Vital Strike is better than multiple attacks against monsters with a Damage Reduction that is significant for your level. :)
Against monsters with high levels of DR particularly stuff like DR/- and DR/Epic VS and Archery is okay. It's very situational though and I'd never really make the investment in the feats needed.
A heavy crossbow, vital strike, sneak attack, ranged fighter/rogue might be a doable concept especially if you play with death by massive damage rules but that's a very situational build as well.
In general though VS chain is pretty underpowered for melee types and is not a great investment for archer types at all.
I never post, but this one concerns me. I read about the "attack action" of vital strike, would you say that can or cannot be combined with the Pinpoint targeting feat?
Another use of Vital Strike is prepared actions (say, you want to distrupt a spellcaster...)
I love it all the same./Do you get the punch line?
I'm not sure how you got such weird numbers, I think you spend to much time crunching number and not enough time role playing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure how you got such weird numbers, I think you spend to much time crunching number and not enough time role playing.
Math and RP are not enemies.
|
I'm not sure how you got such weird numbers, I think you spend to much time crunching number and not enough time role playing.
dpr calculations can be confusing. Effectively a bonus to hit equates to more damage than a bonus to damage. The math takes into account the fact that hitting for even 1 damage is better than missing for a million damage.
Its a combination of damage and likelyhood to hit that determines dpr.
Of course, my explanation doesn't do justice to the theory, but it does sum it up in a nutshell
|
|
I never post, but this one concerns me. I read about the "attack action" of vital strike, would you say that can or cannot be combined with the Pinpoint targeting feat?
If it takes a standard (aka attack,) action, they can't be combined. If something can be done as part of an attack then its ok.
Since pinpoint targeting takes a standard action, you can't do both.
I'm not sure how you got such weird numbers, I think you spend to much time crunching number and not enough time role playing.
DPR is not everything when is the case of deciding if something works or not in the gameworld BUT is unfair dismiss these calculation in this way.
World (any) is math, math is a great tool to understand world.
"Math is the language in which god (the gods?) has written the universe." Some Greek mathematician.
"Math is the language in which god (the gods?) has written the universe." Some Greek mathematician.
IIRC, that's Galileo Galilei ;) but the point remains valid
|
Lets assume strength 14 with a composite bow.
AC 20, deadly aim + manyshot ...
0.5 * 11.5 * 2.1 + 0.25 * 11.5 * 1.1 = 12.1 + 3.2 = 15.3 damage
AC 20, deadly aim + vital strike
0.5 * (11.5 * 1.1 + 4.5) = 8.6
As I said above, vital strike is a joke.
PS. just for reference ...
AC 20, vital strike without deadly aim
0.6 * (7.5 * 1.1 + 4.5) = 7.65
AC 20, deadly aim + manyshot + rapidshot ...
0.4 * 11.5 * 3.2 + 0.15 * 11.5 * 1.1 = 14.7 + 1.9 = 16.6 ... a little better still.
In this build, a non-human ranger is in for 4/5 feats. I would think it's safe to say that his last feat should be precise shot for most adventuring groups (the effective +4 is better when it's most important compared to the +1 from weapon focus). If he's an optimized human arrow monkey, he gets both, changing the results a little:
0.45 * 11.5 * 3.2 + 0.2 * 11.5 * 1.1 = 16.56 + 2.53 = 19.1
Much much better yet is to make Mr. McShoterson a fighter instead of a Ranger (add weapon training 1, weapon focus, precise shot, weapon specialization to the mix for 7/7 non-human feats spoken for and a +1 to hit and +3 to damage difference over the human ranger with just weapon focus):
0.5 * 14.5 * 3.2 + 0.25 * 14.5 * 1.1 = 23.2 + 3.99 = 27.3!
And, he can do it in a breastplate for a 19AC (6 armour, 3 dex) with no movement penalty and the human has an extra feat for those times when Vital Strike is the best option (shooting on the move, shooting in the surprise round). Sure, he's not as good as the ranger against his main favoured enemy but it's a wash against his secondary one and crushing against everything else.
Well the feat is surely a choice to consider for every zombie out there...
I for one are happy that the system has consideration of the many zombie-only campaigns out there ;-)
I'd say no. Hell, even if the feat scaled it would be barely worth taking ...
Considering massive damage rules, hardness + sundering, DR, move + attack, prepared action out of the box thinking, IMHO a scaling version of the feat could even be a no-brainer for full BAB classes.
|
|
VS works a hell of a lot better for getting the most out of your movement. I made a VS-focused Barbarian build, and posted it around here somewhere. T'was quite awesome til that player dropped out.
Well the feat is surely a choice to consider for every zombie out there...
I for one are happy that the system has consideration of the many zombie-only campaigns out there ;-)
This made my day, night, weekend, and possible next-campaign.
Considering massive damage rules, hardness + sundering, DR, move + attack, prepared action out of the box thinking, IMHO a scaling version of the feat could even be a no-brainer for full BAB classes.
I'd say no. Hell, even if the feat scaled it would be barely worth taking ...
Speaking of which, I can't find the massive damage rules in pathfinder, can anybody give me a page number? I've looked through the combat section twice and the index 3 times...
|
|
Vital strike can only be the best option in a situation if you actually have it. Is vital strike ever not a terrible option to actually take (compared to the usefulness of a decent feat) is the question.
I'd say no. Hell, even if the feat scaled it would be barely worth taking ...
Granted, it's not better than deadly aimed rapid manyshot but you can't always take a full attack. It's not worthless when you want to:
1) Ready an action (take that, Mr. Spellcaster!)2) Shoot in the Surprise round
3) Move and shoot or shoot and move (both of which happen if you are in dynamic fights in a dungeon or with/against battlefield controller types, especially in tight dungeons).
4) Shoot when Slowed
The extra d8 is better than no extra d8 in those situations, plus if you're a fighter instead of a sissy ranger, you have more than enough slots to burn for sometimes-helpful feats.
The massive damage rules are under "Injury and Death" on page 189.
How did I miss that? Thank you!
|
Considering massive damage rules, hardness + sundering, DR, move + attack, prepared action out of the box thinking, IMHO a scaling version of the feat could even be a no-brainer for full BAB classes.
I'd say no. Hell, even if the feat scaled it would be barely worth taking ...
Interestingly, Massive Damage is an optional rule.