I've seen it mentioned on some other threads that you can make a build built around optimizing the Vital Strike feat chain, and was wondering what exactly is involved in doing this?
Some of the obvious pros and cons I see are:
Vital Strike
Pros: Only a standard action; uses highest BAB
Cons: Only get damage modifiers once.
Full Attack
Pros: All damage modifiers are multiplied by number of successful attacks
Cons: Requires a full attack action; uses descending BAB across iterative attacks.
So, when it comes down to it, what abilities (feats, class features, etc.) are used to make Vital Strike better and what is used to make Full Attacks better? I see it mentioned a lot that for full attack builds, they tend to care more about damage modifiers, like Weapon Training, Favored Enemy, sneak attack, etc., whereas Vital Strike builds might try to optimize weapon dice, and focus a little less on damage modifiers (though not completely ignoring them).
Which tends to be easier to optimize? Which tends to come out on top, or are they fairly even when both are used in their optimal setting?
Just trying to open a discussion to get some viewpoints on the pros and cons of both builds, as well as some comparison, and what goes into both builds. I understand the basic principles behind each but wouldn't mind some more in-depth analysis from those more familiar with it, so I can increase my own system mastery so I can better help others (both on the boards and in my own play group).
EDIT: Another pro/con I just remembered is that Vital Strike doesn't have to worry as much about DR while Full attack builds do, as they suffer more from it.
Optimizing Vital strike is built completely around increasing the base damage of the weapon used.
This usually begins with a 2H weapon with higher base damage, then coming up with every way possible to increase effective weapon size. Permanent Enlarge Person is usually a good start, but you need multiple weapon size increases to really pack a whollop.
Feats like "Cleave" can also be useful since it is usable as a standard action attack (or is there some dumb ruling that it doesn't work with Vital Strike?)
I would suggest the vital strike route is harder to optimize (and often sillier). Also, there are some very restrictive rulings by the developers on this feat making it a minefield to optimize. (Also be careful with language when stacking size modifiers. Some don't stack the way you might think they do)
It also tends to put your eggs in one basket (often one roll, doing massive damage or nothing)
Generally I would consider Vital Strike optimization builds to be very interesting as thought-experiments, but generally I would recommend full attack builds (preferably with some kind of pouncing option) for actual gameplay.
A big chunk of vital strike builds are with druids, who wildshape into a creature with a natural weapon with really large damage dice. The Arsinoitherium for example is basically aan ice-age rhinoceros with two tusks on his nose, so he makes one attack at double the normal damage dice. Then if you start adding vital strike to it, it really starts to look like something.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Vital strike isn't to replace a full attack and shouldn't be compared to it. Its an option for when you have to move.
The other threads were wrong. If you optimize a vital strike build to the roof you can get it to be ALMOST as good as an above average full attack build. With pounce being so readily available in Pathfinder, vital strike will never stack up for damage.
Having said that, though, there are some really nice vital strike feats in the Advanced Class Guide. I haven't had time to really study it and do the math yet, but they may make vital strike useful for once (though it will be more of a utility build than a damage build that way).
Treantmonk wrote: Feats like "Cleave" can also be useful since it is usable as a standard action attack (or is there some dumb ruling that it doesn't work with Vital Strike?)
Vital strike and cleave are both standard actions, so they can't be used together.
Just to complete the list of pros and cons
Pro Vital Strike: All your damage comes in one hit so DR only applies once
Con Full Attack: DR is multiplied by number of successful hits.
So depending on the comparison of your bonus damage and the target's DR you may be better off vital striking against some enemies.
I think one of the things to look into is how feat intensive Vital strike is while full attacking isn't. Vital has three base feats, then other feats to modify it more and get more use from it. Full attack has nothing you don't want already.
Demoyn wrote: Treantmonk wrote: Feats like "Cleave" can also be useful since it is usable as a standard action attack (or is there some dumb ruling that it doesn't work with Vital Strike?)
Vital strike and cleave are both standard actions, so they can't be used together. except with All-Consuming Swing from the Harrow Handbook
First thing to remember is that most static bonuses are also multiplied on a critical hit; Vital Strike damage is not. Anything that increases your static bonuses (Power Attack, using a two-handed weapon, Weapon Specialization, Weapon training, etc.) will be better for a full-attack build just from the additional chance at a critical hit.
The second thing to remember is that most things that increase your weapon die damage (size changes, Lead Blades, etc.) will also apply to normal attacks, not just Vital Strike.
The most effective Vital Strike build I've seen was a Barbarian with the Furious Finish feat. At 12th level, with an enlarged battle axe (3d6), Improved Vital Strike and Devastating Strike, he was doing 3d6+6 and 6d6 from the Vital Strike tree. With Furious Finish, he could maximize his damage on that one attack, for 70 damage a round.
That took an investment of 4 feats and ending his rage.
For comparison, with the same weapon and bonuses, with no feats invested at all, his full attack would average 28 per round, 43 with Haste or Blessing of Fervor.
Gwen Smith wrote:
The most effective Vital Strike build I've seen was a Barbarian with the Furious Finish feat. At 12th level, with an enlarged battle axe (3d6), Improved Vital Strike and Devastating Strike, he was doing 3d6+6 and 6d6 from the Vital Strike tree. With Furious Finish, he could maximize his damage on that one attack, for 70 damage a round.
That took an investment of 4 feats and ending his rage.
For comparison, with the same weapon and bonuses, with no feats invested at all, his full attack would average 28 per round, 43 with Haste or Blessing of Fervor.
This looks like a very weak barbarian. Only a +6 on the damage while raging at level 12 with a two-hander? I feel this is a very poor example to compare a full attack with.
A barb lv12 could have a str of 4(start) +1(level) +3(rage) SO that's str 8 so +12 per two-handed hit. One feat power attack gives another +12 damage a hit. So with that enlarged battle axe he'd swing for 3d6+24 at least. And with a +20 at least to hit his damage is getting a lot closer to that 60 a round, and he doesn't need to end his rage.
So not saying that it's not a bad vital strike build, just wanting to show a better comparison.
Gwen Smith wrote: First thing to remember is that most static bonuses are also multiplied on a critical hit; Vital Strike damage is not. Anything that increases your static bonuses (Power Attack, using a two-handed weapon, Weapon Specialization, Weapon training, etc.) will be better for a full-attack build just from the additional chance at a critical hit.
The second thing to remember is that most things that increase your weapon die damage (size changes, Lead Blades, etc.) will also apply to normal attacks, not just Vital Strike.
The most effective Vital Strike build I've seen was a Barbarian with the Furious Finish feat. At 12th level, with an enlarged battle axe (3d6), Improved Vital Strike and Devastating Strike, he was doing 3d6+6 and 6d6 from the Vital Strike tree. With Furious Finish, he could maximize his damage on that one attack, for 70 damage a round.
That took an investment of 4 feats and ending his rage.
For comparison, with the same weapon and bonuses, with no feats invested at all, his full attack would average 28 per round, 43 with Haste or Blessing of Fervor.
well a barbarian with only 12 STR and no magic weapon at level 12 is in pretty tough shape to begin with and it is a good thing that the player found a way to make the character effective. A level 12 barbarian should have at least a +15 bonus to damage from STR, feats, weapon & so on in most games.
I've built more than a few vital strike characters (opponents no longer run up to the party to eat full attacks in my games) and the rule of thumb I use for vital strike versus full attack is that if the average weapon damage is higher than 3/4ths of the damage bonus then vital strike is a better choice. The 3/4ths is a fudge factor to account for the higher chance of missing with iterative attacks, DR, power attack, etc - it isn't an accurate value but is close enough and easy to use. If one were anal enough one could build a program to calculate if vital strike were a better option than full attack each round and use that.
My example was from a very poor barbarian with only basic gear, showing how easy it would be to match the barbarian vital striking example given.
Treantmonk wrote:
Feats like "Cleave" can also be useful since it is usable as a standard action attack (or is there some dumb ruling that it doesn't work with Vital Strike?)
Cleave is a standard action. Vital strike is an attack action, which has been clarified by paizo as its own standard action. Both require separate standard actions. You cannot use them together.
An enlarged 1/2 Orc Skulking Slayer/Scout build does lots of damage with vital strike feats. At 13th level you'd be devastating. I'd take Skulking Slayer/Scout 8, Serpent Striker Brawler 1, Slayer 3. Figure out the best order there.
When you move 10ft you get to add your sneak attack damage in there.
Using an Earth Breaker, being enlarged, with Imp.Vital Strike and Devastating Strike, figuring 22 Str & Power Attack, you would hit for 9d6 Earth Breaker damage, plus 9 Strength, plus 9 Power Attack, and plus 6 Devastating Strike. So 9d6 +24 damage not counting sneak attack dice.
Sneak attack would throw in another 6d6 damage. Add in the feats Bludgeoner, Sap Adept and Sap Master if you can, and deal instead nonlethal damage sneak attack of 12d6+24 plus your 9d6+24 weapon damage, all of which is nonlethal.
As was mentioned, Vital Strike is good when you need to move. So, move all the time. Gliding Steps (Ninja dip, or the Perfect Style feat for ki pool) would yet you walk away from combat every round after attacking, forcing your opponent to charge after you, and forsake his full attack. Note - uses a ton of feats.
Shakalaka wrote: As was mentioned, Vital Strike is good when you need to move. So, move all the time. Gliding Steps (Ninja dip, or the Perfect Style feat for ki pool) would yet you walk away from combat every round after attacking, forcing your opponent to charge after you, and forsake his full attack. Note - uses a ton of feats. I did this using the Rogue Talent Slow Reactions. I either charged and dealt a ton of damage or moved 10ft up to him and dealt the same damage and the next round I moved to another target. Forced the enemies to only do 1 attack per round.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nudel says your low numbers bite. (~310 damage in one chomp, every other round)
EDIT: And in the off rounds, she is still dealing ~180 damage a bite! Anybody care to run the DPR calculations on her? :D
Ravingdork wrote: Nudel says your low numbers bite. (~310 in one hit, ever other round) Nice! Your builds have been some of the most interesting and entertaining things I've seen on this forum.
I like vital strike on 3/4 BAB classes because I suspect the chance to hit at -5 on a 3/4 bab irretive attack is very poor. Plus it is always a benifit when you do not have pounch or a straight line to charge for that pounch.
Can someone.please point me to a lust.of all the.ways to get pounce? I am only familiar with: one high level Barbarian rage power, eidolons, druid wild shape and animal companions. I love summoners(over druids for.my personal taste and preferance) but could.never tolorate 10 or so levels of barbarian.
Ravingdork wrote: Nudel says your low numbers bite. (~310 in one hit, ever other round) That's funny, because I was using Nudel as my example of the best vital strike build I've ever seen (though I did it from memory and got the numbers a tad off). That build averages ~185 damage per round with spikes of up to 382. This is at level 15.
An average pouncing barbarian, on the other hand, deals ~177.5 per round with spikes of up to 360. This is at level 12.
This is, of course, assuming the attack hits. The barbarian has a higher attack and doesn't suffer nearly as much from rolling a 1. I don't want to bother doing the DPR for both builds right now, but I feel fully confident in saying that the barbarian will pull ahead significantly since it hit more often, crits more often, and won't get a huge chunk of damage negated 5% of the time.
Vital strike builds allow you to use some class/archetype abilities that use a move action to activate.
Vital strike is only a valid tactic for normal combat if for some reason your damage have very poor static bonuses in the first place.
Ex.
In a low powered game, like 15 or even 10 point build. Where using a Crossbow might actually make sense because you will not have the stat bonus to add strength to damage anyway.
One big strike builds, that don't charge to get it. Wild Shape druid is the most obvious. Plenty of beasts have huge dice pools but only one attack. T-Rex has a 4D6 + double Str mod bit and can swallow hole.
Maybe if you have such poor to hit bonuses that you are not likely to hit on much but the primary attack in the first place.
A foe can be alive for any number of reason after a full attack. You can roll poorly, miss chance, very high AC, mirror image, contingent heal, High HP.
As a DM I allow any standard action stuff to combine together. I am really worried about making cleave better when pouncing and mounted charges exist. At least with HP damage the BBEG will not end up as chicken.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I think that I get the general gist. Vital Strike chain has a use: it's useful for attacking while still being able to make tactical movements, or using your move action for something else, but full-attacking is where the DPR is. It's what I assumed, but I guess when I saw "optimized Vital Strike build" mentioned in other threads, I thought it was meant as "can compete with full-attack builds" and not "as optimized as a build built around Vital Strike can be". I now understand the pros and cons correctly though.
I would add that it does seem like coming by Pounce isn't as easy to do as some people seem to think, but not as hard as others seem to think. If you build around full-attacking, you should be prepared to either a) get Pounce, b) learn to kite enemies effectively, or c) take a hit to your DPR until you an close.
The problem I see with b), though is that some enemies can't be kited. Other "brute" builds, like multi-natural attack animals might fall for it, but higher level threats will have ranged options that they are willing to resort to.
I think I would be more interested in Vital Strike if it wasn't so constricted on its use. As was pointed out, it seems like a minefield of "you can't use Vital Strike with <this>" and "you can't use Vital Strike with <that>". When you get right down to it, it seems like a lot of feats to invest to make your first hit a little better. Because next round, you're already engaged and your full-attacking buddy is going to out perform you, because he spent all his feat slots on making all his attacks better, while you spent them making your one attack better.
As to the "3/4 BABs" can use it: that's more of what I was looking for. Builds that can utilize Vital Strike because they can't full-attack as well. That's the kind of pro/con comparison I was looking for. If the Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger wants to full-attack, what about the Rogue/Bard/Magus? The problem I see with 3/4 BAB builds is they usually have something else they want to be able to do, other than DPR. Rogues want to sneak and stop traps, Bards want to buff and/or heal, Magi want to be better at casting. What I'm getting at is it doesn't seem like even 3/4 BAB builds want to spare all the feats it takes to make Vital Strike useful; they'd rather use those feats on versatility, or whatever their non-DPR related role is. I suppose if you have a player that absolutely want's to use a 3/4 BAB class for some reason, but wants to be able to hit hard as well, maybe Vital Strike becomes a good option? Thoughts?
Also vital strike is great for NPC mooks who often will not hit the high AC front line fighter. At least when the do it hurts.
|
