|
| 13 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As seen here.
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
Extra damage from sources that wouldn't normally be multiplied on a critical hit isn't multiplied by this feat.
Bob McFighterson, our 7th level Mythic Fighter is swinging his longsword two handed with a 22 Strength and Vital Strike.
1d8 goes to 2d8 for Vital Strike.
Mythic makes all the critical items multiply as well.
So his 9 from 2 handing strengthing the weapon goes to 18.
The question is, if Bob switches to a scythe that already does 2d4 and goes to 4d4 with Mythic Vital Strike, does him two handing that scythe make his 9 damage from strength go to 18 or 36, as multiplied by the 4 weapon damage dice he is now rolling?
I believe the intent of the Mythic feat is simply to give you static bonuses as if Vital Strike had normally granted static bonuses. The somewhat clunky wording is, IMO, intended to reflect the number of Vital Strike feats you have (so: in addition to the normal static bonuses from your normal weapon damage, you add static bonuses once if you have Vital Strike, twice if you have IVS, and thrice if you have GVS).
It's worth noting that the Vital Strike feats also use the "damage dice" wording:
VS: "Roll the weapon's damage dice for the attack twice"
IVS: "Roll the weapon's damage dice for the attack three times"
GVS: "Roll the weapon's damage dice for the attack four times"
So, to answer the specific question, you'd deal 4d4+18 damage.
[Post edited to include the wordings of the VS feats]
Because bonus precision damage, weapon elemental damage, ect, still isn't multiplied by Mythic Vital Strike. Only the stuff that would be multiplied on a crit is.
By RAW this is how it works
You weapon does say 2D6, vital strike add 2D6 so dice. So if you have +9 damage bonus it goes to +27. That is RAW but I'm quite sure it's not intent. I think they just did not consider weapons that roll two dice to being with when they said "by the number of damage dice you roll with that feat"
I don't think the phrase weapon damage dice == number of dice you roll to get the weapon's damage.
For a greatsword, when you roll the weapon damage dice once, you roll 2d6. Rolling two dice doesn't change that you are rolling the weapon damage dice one time. If you roll the weapon damage dice twice you roll 4d6 (2d6 twice).
so mythic vital strike with vital strike gives you a x2, imp. vital strike is x3, greater vital strike x4.
RAW you get the 4x flat damage for a weapon that deals 2 dice damage normally. Intent, it's pretty clear it should multiply the damage by the same multiplier as the dice. As a DM I would make the ruling that way, but RAW is pretty clear.
A lot of people seem to read this feat wrong. The key thing is all mythic feats adjust the existing feats. Any rules set down by the origonal feat are not changed unless the mythic feat explicitly changes it.
Vital strike defines what weapon damage means.
So with myth vital strike and +9 damage you do +18 damage regardless of your weapon. +27 with imp vital strike and +36 with greater.
A lot of people seem to read this feat wrong. The key thing is all mythic feats adjust the existing feats. Any rules set down by the origonal feat are not changed unless the mythic feat explicitly changes it.
Vital strike defines what weapon damage means.
So with myth vital strike and +9 damage you do +18 damage regardless of your weapon. +27 with imp vital strike and +36 with greater.
Vital Strike
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.Mythic Vital Strike
Benefit: Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
Extra damage from sources that wouldn't normally be multiplied on a critical hit isn't multiplied by this feat.
Emphasis mine.
This seems very clear cut to me. The Mythic feat changes some specific things about vital strike and tells you exactly what to do. With the normal feat you double the dice rolled. With the Mythic feat you double the dice rolled, and multiply the bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical by the number of weapon damage DICE rolled. Not by the same modifier that you modify the dice, but by the NUMBER OF DICE. This is clear cut RAW.
I don't believe that is the intent, but it's obviously how the RAW is worded. The Mythic feat changes the original, and that change is to multiply flat damage by the number of dice.
I disagree that it's RAW (but agree that it's poorly worded). MVS doesn't modify VS by the number of damage dice you roll. It modifies it by the number of damage dice you roll "for that feat".
Vital Strike says you roll damage dice twice, so that's the number used for Mythic Vital Strike.
Number of dice you roll, not number of times you roll dice. There's a difference.
It's ridiculous, of course, but strict RAW often is.
Hrm if I have greater vital strike I am rolling my weapon damage dice 3 more times than normal. If its a rapier this is 4d6 if its a falchion it is 8d4. But if your adding +9 to the roll normally with greather mythic vital strice its +36.
In simpler terms provided all fests etc are the same a falchion and a bastard sword get the same damage bonus for the feat.
|
You multiply by number of dice, thus, I recommend high dice over high multiplier or high anything else.
-----------------------------------
Vital Strike:
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.
Greater Vital Strike:
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 four times 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.
Mythic Vital Strike:
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
------------------------------------------------------
Example: +2 Falchion and 18 Str for a +4 (+6 at 1.5*str) with Mythic Vital Strike and Greater Vital Strike and power attack for -3 to hit +9 to damage:
Step 1: Roll 2d4 four times for a total of eight dice.
Step 2: add your weapon bonus (2) to your str mod (6) to Power Attack (9)
Step 3: Multiply 8 eight and nine for a total of 72.
Thus, a GVS+PA is potent!
Sigh no you don't multiply by the number of dice. If I have a greatsword my weapon damage dice is a single instance of 2d6 damage not 1d6 + 1d6.
When I do a normal hit I apply a single instance of my weapon damage dice of 2d6. Vital strike itself explains what it means by weapon damage dice that definition does not change. You apply weapon damage dice an additional 3x when you use greatee vital strike. You do not do 2x more bonus damage with a falchion over a bastard sword. But at this point I realized I'm repeating myself check out the mythic adventures errata thread I explained it better there.
Ahort verssion is 2d4 +9 damage wity mythic vital strike is 4d4+18 not +36.
"The number of weapon damage dice". That's as clear as crystal.
I'm not arguing that you should play it this way. I recommend you don't. I'm arguing that the author of the feat was sloppy and screwed up the text, just like a decent fraction of the mythic spells were sloppily written. It isn't poorly worded, it's jut plain wrong.
No it is not poorly worded. What i tried explaining at the beginning and everyone ignored :( is how Mythic feats work. They Modify existing feats. Unless the mythic feat explicitly changes how something works the definition provided by the original feat still applies.
So the Vital Strike Feat tells us what it means by weapon damage dice, it makes this abundantly clear and that is the half of the feat people dont ask about every other week:P
Whats happening is people are looking at mythic vital strike and applying a different definition of Weapon damage dice. A definition in fact that does not exist anywhere.
Additionally, The way I have explained it the Feat works /exactly/ the same for every weapon in the game.
Vital Strike does not define the term "weapon damage dice" in such a way that rolling 2d4 is a single damage die. It says to roll the dice--both of them in thus case--twice. 2d4 is a single roll with two dice rolled.
Mythic Vital Strike then references "number of dice rolled". To mean what you're interpreting it to mean, it would have to say "number of dice rolls made" or some equivalent language.
Your "abundantly clear" parsing is far from it. The feat description is bad, and the writer and/or editor should feel bad.
Maybe im missing something. Vital strike tells us to "Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together" mythic vital strike then tells us to multiply the static bonuses by the number of damage dice rolled.
Regardless of how it's been worded (Mythic Adventures as a whole doesn't shine at all on rule precision), I think everybody can honestly understand what the intent was.
It's already an uber-powerful thing as intended, no need to exploit it further.
This
Mythic Vital Strike:
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
Is not the same as this
Mythic Vital Strike:
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of sets of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
The first one is how the feat actually works by RAW, the second one is how you WANT the feat to work by RAW (and likely the intent of the feat).
Sigh, this will me my last attempt to hammer this out then I give up. The rules for what 'weapon damage' is are defined by the normal Vital Strike feat.
This Tells us that when i have the Normal Vital Strike and a damage bonus of +9 that i am rolling my Weapon Damage twice and adding +9. While we record it as 4d6 my damage is in fact 2d6+2d6+9.
This is the quote i used before.
Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together
So With my above character, how many times am i rolling my weapon damage dice with a great sword? Twice Vital Strike /tells me/ how many times i am rolling my weapon damage dice.
Now Mythic Vital Strike modifies Vital strike so that, all damage that is normally rolled on a crit is multiplied by the amount of weapon damage dice i am rolling. So when i use Vital Strike with my great sword how many times am I rolling my weapon damage dice? On look it is twice because again Vital Strike tells me how many times i am rolling it.
hen 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 three times 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.
See in improved vital strike you are rolling your weapon damage dice three times.
Guess what Greater Vital Strike says.
So at the end of the day if you have a +9 damage mod (for some reason still at that level) and you use Greater Vital Strike with mythic you do.. +36 damage because you are rolling your weapon damage dice /four/ times like the feat tells you.
Every Mythic feat works like this they modify existing feats and unless some rule of the origonal feat is explicitly changed then that rule still applies. Every single version of vital strike explicitly states how many times you are rolling your weapon damage dice and mythic vital strike does not change this.
On a side note, sorry if some of my previous posts were less coherent, i often post on my phone and i have fat fingers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed.
Mythic Vital Strike:
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
should be worded as
Mythic Vital Strike:
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of times you roll your weapon damage dice for that feat.
to have the static bonuses be affected by the multipliers Vital Strike and its cousins provide.
As written, the static bonus for a large creature that employs Mythic Vital Strike just goes into overkill (Wildshaped Mythic Druid with Strong Jaw, anyone?)
I would agree with you, Midnight_Angel, if it wasn't for the "for that feat" after "number of weapon damage dice you roll". Stopping after "roll" would certainly give that as the RAW reading, but the last three words can't simply be ignored.
Those three words tell us that we must look at the feat to determine the number of damage dice rolled. And each of the three feats are specific in that number. VS says you roll damage dice "twice", IVS says "three times", and GVS says "four times".
I would agree with you, Midnight_Angel, if it wasn't for the "for that feat" after "number of weapon damage dice you roll". Stopping after "roll" would certainly give that as the RAW reading, but the last three words can't simply be ignored.
Those three words tell us that we must look at the feat to determine the number of damage dice rolled. And each of the three feats are specific in that number. VS says you roll damage dice "twice", IVS says "three times", and GVS says "four times".
This is what i have been trying to emphasize Mythic Vital strike changes how one aspect of Vital strike works. However, it does not change any of Vital strikes other wording or terminology.
Ergo, when Mythic Vital strike says to add all static bonuses bsed on the number of times weapon damage dice is rolled and vital strike tells me how many times I am rolling vital strike; I am then multiplying my static bonuses by the number of times Vital strike is telling me I am rolling my weapon damage.
What i am basically trying to say is that the way the feat is written and how it was intended are identical.
But really at the end of the day it is Mythic it will never be in organized play and players and DMs can use it however they want. If they want to interpret it as a nearly insta kill feat at higher levels that really comes down to them.
It's poorly worded, but I like to think of it as an example of a rarely used but valid English language circumstance: the compound plural. There are two plurals compounded.
The key word is weapon, it doesn't say by the number of damage dice it says the number of weapon damage dice. weapon damage dice is the first plural and should be read like this (weapon damage dice) as a singular. "by the number of" is the second plural and it is modifying the second (yes I realize it comes first chronologically it just helps to think of them in the opposite manner) plural but it doesn't modify the first plural it compounds it and treats it as a singular. This could have been clearer with some punctuation such as a comma, but whatever it still works.
As far as I'm concerned raw it's talking about sets of weapon damage dice, not the number of dice actually rolled.
If my explanation doesn't make sense it's the same as when people use the words moneys or waters. Plurals of plurals.
The key word is weapon, it doesn't say by the number of damage dice it says the number of weapon damage dice.
I think we all understand compound plurals. They aren't "rarely used" at all. They're very frequently encountered in everyday conversation and written communication.
The word "weapon" modifies "damage dice", making a compound plural out of a less-specific compound plural. This means that you don't apply other sorts of damage dice. You still apply each and every weapon damage die.
The root noun is still "dice". Whatever the modifiers to that noun, dice are what you're counting, not pairs or sets of dice.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
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.
Okay here we see the basic feat in action. Notice the term "weapon damage dice" being thrown around.
Now what exactly does it mean?
A Longsword deals 1d8 damage when used.
A Greatsword deals 2d6 damage when used.
So the "weapon damage dice" for a Greatsword is?
Now lets take a look at Mythic Vital Strike.
You can strike your foes with incredible force.
Prerequisite: Vital Strike.
Benefit: Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
Extra damage from sources that wouldn't normally be multiplied on a critical hit isn't multiplied by this feat.
So once again we see the term "weapon damage dice" being used.
If it helps think of "weapon damage dice" as a single term. No matter if the "weapon damage dice" is 2d6, 1d8, 1d4, or 1d12. It simply doesn't matter. It is the same term no matter how many dice the weapon deals.
Example:Greatsword
Benefit: Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of [2d6] you roll for that feat.
Example:Dagger
Benefit: Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of [1d4] you roll for that feat.
The phrase "by the number of weapon damage dice" doesn't refer to how many d6, d4, or dx you have rolled. It matters simply for solving [x] where [x] is how many times you rolled the weapon's damage dice.
This the same argument Hogeyhead attempted to make, but it simply isn't true unless we're speaking a language other than English.
"Weapon damage dice" is plural. A greatsword has two six-sided weapon damage dice. When using mythic vital strike with a greatsword, "the number of weapon damage dice" is the total number of six-sided weapon damage dice rolled--4 for vital strike, 6 for improved vital strike, and 8 for greater vital strike.
There's simply no way to correctly parse the language in the manner you've described.
Thats the part your makinge a mistake blaphers. As i have tried hammering repeatedly. All mythic feats modify an existing feat. Weapon damage dice and how you roll it is defined by vital strike.
The fact that vital strike says yu roll your weapon damage dice twice and then mythic vital strike uses the same wording. But everyone seems to ignore this.
But im sounding like a broken record now repeating myself.
Ill leave you this question i have a great sword and non mythic greater vital strike how any times am i rolling my weapon damage dice?
Your hammer is a non sequitur. Whether a mythic feat modifies a non-mythic feat is immaterial (additional non-sequitur: sometimes they don't).
Yes, the same wording exists in both rule descriptions. It means the same thing in both cases--the (plural) dice rolled for weapon damage. Vital strike rolls those (plural) dice twice. With a greatsword, that's a total of 4 dice. Mythic vital strike multiplies the other damage parts by the number of (plural) dice rolled for vital strike. With a greatsword, that's 4.
To your question: you are rolling your weapon damage dice twice, for a total of four weapon damage dice. We both seem to understand each other, but only one of us is reading the text in English.
Your hammer is a non sequitur. Whether a mythic feat modifies a non-mythic feat is immaterial (additional non-sequitur: sometimes they don't).
Yes, the same wording exists in both rule descriptions. It means the same thing in both cases--the (plural) dice rolled for weapon damage. Vital strike rolls those (plural) dice twice. With a greatsword, that's a total of 4 dice. Mythic vital strike multiplies the other damage parts by the number of (plural) dice rolled for vital strike. With a greatsword, that's 4.
To your question: you are rolling your weapon damage dice twice, for a total of four weapon damage dice. We both seem to understand each other, but only one of us is reading the text in English.
If i roll something twice i have two of it do i not? That said at the end of the day if someone wants to read this feat in a way that a greatsword does 2x the damage of a great axe and insta kills most opponents it is their game.
My point is repeatedl bein ignored as people favour the most permissive reading of mythic vital strike even when it creates rules inconsistancies.
Your point is not ignored. It's simply not a valid point.
Edit: A better point would be "this is clearly not what they intended, we should FAQ this for errata". It's more constructive than the few of us arguing over what the text says when it's most likely that the designer's intent was to multiply everything by 2, 3, or 4 instead of just the weapon damage dice.
So FAQ it already. : D
Your point is not ignored. It's simply not a valid point.
Edit: A better point would be "this is clearly not what they intended, we should FAQ this for errata". It's more constructive than the few of us arguing over what the text says when it's most likely that the designer's intent was to multiply everything by 2, 3, or 4 instead of just the weapon damage dice.
So FAQ it already. : D
I disagree - (2d6) is the weapon damage dice for the greatsword, one instance. You roll the weapon damage dice one extra time.
You're free to play it that way. I do. But it isn't the rules as written.
What is the weapon damage dice - 2d6
How many time are you rolling weapon damage dice with vital strike - 2
What is the multiplier of non precision damage - 2
That is the RAW.
Hey, I'm all for giving vital strike some love but anything else is just ridiculous - especially if you take into account possible size increases. For what it's worth I did hit FAQ but I almost feel that it's not needed.
It doesn't specify to use the number of times. It specifies to use the number of dice. I recognize that it's pretty broken that way, even for mythic, but that's what it says. I happily ignore it, and would love to see an erratum for it, as I'm pretty confident that the editors just let one slip by.
Have fun while you can, munchkins. It's going to be errata'd.
I hope so.
While I still think that the way blahpers is reading the feat is wrong at this point I think it's becoming a 'yes it is no it isn't' thread. Unless something new comes up I don't see the point of continueing the discussion.
As seen here.
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
Extra damage from sources that wouldn't normally be multiplied on a critical hit isn't multiplied by this feat.
Bob McFighterson, our 7th level Mythic Fighter is swinging his longsword two handed with a 22 Strength and Vital Strike.
1d8 goes to 2d8 for Vital Strike.
Mythic makes all the critical items multiply as well.
So his 9 from 2 handing strengthing the weapon goes to 18.
The question is, if Bob switches to a scythe that already does 2d4 and goes to 4d4 with Mythic Vital Strike, does him two handing that scythe make his 9 damage from strength go to 18 or 36, as multiplied by the 4 weapon damage dice he is now rolling?
The damage formula is h(w+s+p)+tch(w+s)
w = Weapon damage. Average damage is assumed
s = Static damage modifiers
h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
p = Precision damage per hit (or other damage that isn't multiplied on a crit). Average damage is again assumed.
t = Chance to roll a critical threat, expressed as a percentage.
c = Critical hit bonus damage. x2 = 1, x3 = 2, x4 = 3.
Vital Strike formula is h(2w+s+p)+tch(2w+s)
Mythic Vital Strike formula is h(2(w+s)+p)+tch2(w+s)
So... Any official decision?
There has been zero support for Mythic since launch.
Basically Mythic is just a launching point for 3rd party products and should be treated as such.
It probably should be errata'd given the number of players who are misinterpreting the term "weapon damage dice"
Weapon damage dice being the plural of weapon damage die
The weapon damage die for a greatsword is 2d6. That's singular. A single 2d6 die. Once you realize that, the feat makes perfect sense exactly as worded.
Still, players will misinterpret unintuitive game terms no matter how they're defined.