|
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
Can a Will-o-wisp use Vital Strike when attacking?
And if yes what damage will it do?
I guess this comes down to is a Will-o-wisps attack a "natural Attack" in which case it can.
My guess is that if it can use vital Strike the base damage for it's natural attack is 2d8 so a Vital Strike Attack would be 4d8.
Thanks
OFFENSE
Speed fly 50 ft. (perfect)
Melee shock +16 touch (2d8 electricity)
Vital Strike (Combat)
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.
Are you sure a touch attack is considered the same as a 'natural attack', given that it doesn't do B, S, or P damage?
Also, natural attacks apply str modifiers to damage, and there is no str modifier applied to that touch attack damage.
There is no Supernatural or Spell Like ability called shock, so we are left with Shock being default to a natural weapon. A strange one that is touch. Ultimately it could be an Ask your GM issue.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
PRD wrote: Vital Strike (Combat)
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.
I don't see any "natural attack" requirement.
You are required to use an attack action. Not a weapon or natural attack. And you can take a attack action with any kind of attack.
The "weapon's damage dice", it taken literally, would make it useless, but there are a few creatures using energy attacks that benefit from it (at least reading their tactics in the modules). The lesser Jabberwock is an example.
Can you expand on the lesser Jabberwock example?
How does the 'weapon's damage dice', taken literally, make it useless?
Would you allow someone holding a charge of Vampiric Touch to use the vital strike feat?
_Ozy_ wrote: How does the 'weapon's damage dice', taken literally, make it useless?
Would you allow someone holding a charge of Vampiric Touch to use the vital strike feat?
Because it's not "a weapon", if you look at it like a touch attack spell-like ability.
I would think it works with Vital Strike, as well as Vampiric Touch as per your question.
Saethori wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: How does the 'weapon's damage dice', taken literally, make it useless?
Would you allow someone holding a charge of Vampiric Touch to use the vital strike feat?
Because it's not "a weapon", if you look at it like a touch attack spell-like ability.
I would think it works with Vital Strike, as well as Vampiric Touch as per your question.
Ah, if he means it would be useless for the Will o'Wisp, I agree. That would be a wasted feat. I thought he meant the feat would be useless for the Jabberwock, or in general.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
_Ozy_ wrote: Can you expand on the lesser Jabberwock example?
How does the 'weapon's damage dice', taken literally, make it useless?
Would you allow someone holding a charge of Vampiric Touch to use the vital strike feat?
The tactic suggested in the module for the lesser Jabberwock is to use it on the eye rays.
It work perfectly on its bite. The eye rays ... well, it all depend on your definition of "weapon's damage dice".
Vampiric touch is a problem. I see it as a touch attack that deliver 0 damage plus a rider. So the damage from the Vampiric touch spell wouldn't be multiplied by vital strike, like precision damage and other form of added damage aren't multiplied.
Can an Annihilator Robot use VS on its plasma lance? It's a standard action attack that isn't magical... Take the full feat chain for 80d6 every three rounds.
Diego Rossi wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: Can you expand on the lesser Jabberwock example?
How does the 'weapon's damage dice', taken literally, make it useless?
Would you allow someone holding a charge of Vampiric Touch to use the vital strike feat?
The tactic suggested in the module for the lesser Jabberwock is to use it on the eye rays.
It work perfectly on its bite. The eye rays ... well, it all depend on your definition of "weapon's damage dice". Well, the module is wrong (it wouldn't be the first time).
Using the eye rays is not an 'attack action', it's an SU ability which uses a standard action to make a ranged touch attack. The bite can be used as an attack action during a full attack sequence. The eye rays can't, as they aren't a standard attack action.
Vital strike definitely does not apply.
Quote: Vampiric touch is a problem. I see it as a touch attack that deliver 0 damage plus a rider. So the damage from the Vampiric touch spell wouldn't be multiplied by vital strike, like precision damage and other form of added damage aren't multiplied.
Naturally, I agree. Of course, this is the same as the Will o' Wisp. They touch for 0 damage, plus an electricity rider. That's why you don't see any STR modifier on the damage.
Plausible Pseudonym wrote: Can an Annihilator Robot use VS on its plasma lance? It's a standard action attack that isn't magical... Take the full feat chain for 80d6 every three rounds. It's a standard action to activate, not an attack action. I vote no.
Normal chain gun ranged attack. Yes. Suppressing fire which uses a standard action to fire the chain guns in a cone? No.
I would note that the Will-o-wisps attack isn't a spll-like ability. Indeed it's unidentified.
As regards the weapon - it tells you what it is - "Shock" and the Shock eapon damage is 2d8 electricity damage.
I don't see how you can argue that the 2d8 damage is rider damage to a "Shock" attack. A "Shock" attack by it's description is going to do Electricity damage.
The argument that if it isn't modified by Str then it's not a Weapon Attack is an interesting one but is based on assumptions. I don't recall any rule specifying that if it doesn't add a Str bonus to damage it's not a weapon although I wouldn't claim to know every rule (such a rule would need some interesting wording or run afoul of the ability to add Dex bonus to damage rather than Strength).
Regarding trying to use Vital Strike with spells such as Vampiric Touch, I would point out that the basic damage with Vampiric Touch is 1d6. Everything else is multipliers. So if it was decided that Vampiric Touch and other such things worked with Vital Strike then it wouldn't have a significant effect. Feats that add a single d6 of damage per attack round are not what is generally considered powerful feats.
Shock isn't a 'weapon' it's damage. The reason I argue that it is a rider is because weapon damage is modified by STR.
"When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result."
If the will o' wisp touch attack is a melee weapon, it should be modified by STR. Since it is not modified by STR, it is not a melee weapon.
Held charges can't be vital strike'd, because they aren't the attack. You touch to deliver, or you can punch (or spellstrike for a magus) to deliver. The spell isn't the attack/weapon. "Shock" *is* the weapon for a will o' wisp.
If you could hold the charge on a ranged spell (like scorching ray), then you actually could use vital strike with it. Fortunately, that's not possible (yet?). Alchemist bombs are a weird in-between, especially if you separate the action of pulling ingredients, creating the bomb from the act of throwing it. Regardless they would only add one die (same as critting with a bomb), so it's not a big issue. Also by the time you can take Vital Strike, most alchemists want to throw multiple bombs, not one slightly stronger one.
It may be worth noting that in Hell's Vengeance, a ghost is explicitly noted as being able to use Vital Strike when using its corrupting touch.
Belltrap wrote: It may be worth noting that in Hell's Vengeance, a ghost is explicitly noted as being able to use Vital Strike when using its corrupting touch. Yes, it's a good point, unfortunately balanced by the module that has a Creature using Vital Strike with Gaze attacks.
Sadly I think all we can take out of it is that Module designers aren't reliable guides for how rules work. :-(
_Ozy_ wrote: Shock isn't a 'weapon' it's damage. The reason I argue that it is a rider is because weapon damage is modified by STR.
"When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result."
If the will o' wisp touch attack is a melee weapon, it should be modified by STR. Since it is not modified by STR, it is not a melee weapon.
No "Shock" is not damage. Electricity is a type of Damage - and in the case it's quite specific that the Will-o-wisps Shock Attack does Electricity damage (not Shock damage).
Of course the Will-o-wisp is a legacy monster going back to at least 2nd Ed with no significant changes. So we can't leap to any conclusions as to how they work. The language has been tidied up and some clarifications added but that's all.
James Jacobs noted on the boards somewhere that the Jabberwock can't vital strike with its eye rays. As for the feat, it says an attack at your highest bonus, which could be derived as creatures only having one attack not being able to vital strike, or it just requires a +6 bonus and you can vital strike with anything that is an attack. I would probably go with yes in this point. Also I found an unofficial FAQ on pfsrd20 which mentions that spells can't be used with vital strike (pfsrd20.com/pathfinder/extras) from James Jacobs back in 2009, but I'm not sure if that was ever added into the official FAQ.
Stephen Ede wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: Shock isn't a 'weapon' it's damage. The reason I argue that it is a rider is because weapon damage is modified by STR.
"When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result."
If the will o' wisp touch attack is a melee weapon, it should be modified by STR. Since it is not modified by STR, it is not a melee weapon.
No "Shock" is not damage. Electricity is a type of Damage - and in the case it's quite specific that the Will-o-wisps Shock Attack does Electricity damage (not Shock damage).
Of course the Will-o-wisp is a legacy monster going back to at least 2nd Ed with no significant changes. So we can't leap to any conclusions as to how they work. The language has been tidied up and some clarifications added but that's all. Once again, melee weapons add str modifiers.
There is no STR modifier to the 'shock' damage, therefore shock isn't a melee weapon.
_Ozy_ wrote: Once again, melee weapons add str modifiers.
There is no STR modifier to the 'shock' damage, therefore shock isn't a melee weapon.
Except nowhere in Vital Strike does the word 'melee' appear. Hence why one can Vital Strike with range weapons such as bows, crossbows and thrown weapons and bows and crossbows normally do not add strength damage either.
Vital strikes only limitation is using the 'attack action' and in the rules there are three 'attack' actions: Melee, Ranged and Unarmed.
Since the Wisps ability is an attack and is not defined as a supernatural or spell like ability it is not the 'use spell like ability' or 'use a supernatural ability' actions listed in the standard actions list. It is a melee attack and in fact in the Wisp listing it is listed as such.
The fact that it's melee attack is electricity damage should be no matter. It's weapon is called Shock. It just happens to do electricity damage and be integral to the wisp. One could go so far to say it is a natural attack for the wisp but that would still be an attack action.
IMO Vital Strike should work fine. Just as a hoof or horn is a weapon for an animal the shock is a weapon for the wisp since it is not classified as a supernatural or SLA.
What about the Corrupting Touch attack of a Ghost?
cause that could get ugly
Gilfalas wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: Once again, melee weapons add str modifiers.
There is no STR modifier to the 'shock' damage, therefore shock isn't a melee weapon.
Except nowhere in Vital Strike does the word 'melee' appear. Hence why one can Vital Strike with range weapons such as bows, crossbows and thrown weapons and bows and crossbows normally do not add strength damage either.
Vital strikes only limitation is using the 'attack action' and in the rules there are three 'attack' actions: Melee, Ranged and Unarmed.
Since the Wisps ability is an attack and is not defined as a supernatural or spell like ability it is not the 'use spell like ability' or 'use a supernatural ability' actions listed in the standard actions list. It is a melee attack and in fact in the Wisp listing it is listed as such.
The fact that it's melee attack is electricity damage should be no matter. It's weapon is called Shock. It just happens to do electricity damage and be integral to the wisp. One could go so far to say it is a natural attack for the wisp but that would still be an attack action.
IMO Vital Strike should work fine. Just as a hoof or horn is a weapon for an animal the shock is a weapon for the wisp since it is not classified as a supernatural or SLA. Wait, are you trying to tell me that the Will o' Wisp is not using a melee attack?
Because if he's making a melee attack, and he's using a weapon, then why the heck wouldn't it be a melee weapon?
I mean, other than it not actually being a weapon.
Greylurker wrote: What about the Corrupting Touch attack of a Ghost?
cause that could get ugly
Well, Belltrap half a page up says a ghost in an AP does just that.
Corrupting Touch is an interesting case because the question becomes "What is the base damage of corrupting Touch".
Looking at the Templates for Ghost and Dread Ghosts the damage done is 1d6 or 1d8 per CR of the creature.
Therefore the base damage could be read as 1d6 or 1d8.
Vital Strike says you do additional amounts of the base damage.
So a Ghost with Vital Strike should gain an additional 1d6 or 1d8 in the case of a Dread Ghost.
Does that make sense?
No, Vital strike says you do additional amounts of the WEAPON damage. If it's not a weapon, vital strike is useless.
"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."
Also, like the Jabberwock, the Ghost's "corrupting touch" is a SU standard action, not an attack action. So it fails on two counts.
_Ozy_ wrote: Wait, are you trying to tell me that the Will o' Wisp is not using a melee attack?
Because if he's making a melee attack, and he's using a weapon, then why the heck wouldn't it be a melee weapon?
I mean, other than it not actually being a weapon.
No I am not saying that at all. I am saying to use Vital Strike you have to use the attack action. It is not tied to what KIND of attack action. It does not say you have to do the MELEE ATTACK ACTION.
Vital strike it not irrevocably tied to melee in any way.
Gilfalas wrote: _Ozy_ wrote: Wait, are you trying to tell me that the Will o' Wisp is not using a melee attack?
Because if he's making a melee attack, and he's using a weapon, then why the heck wouldn't it be a melee weapon?
I mean, other than it not actually being a weapon.
No I am not saying that at all. I am saying to use Vital Strike you have to use the attack action. It is not tied to what KIND of attack action. It does not say you have to do the MELEE ATTACK ACTION.
Vital strike it not irrevocably tied to melee in any way. You completely misread my argument. It's not tied to a melee attack, it's tied to WEAPON damage, any weapon, melee or otherwise.
The Will o' Wisp does no weapon damage. How do we know this? Because it doesn't add a STR modifier to the damage. But wait, you say, some weapon attacks don't add STR modifiers to damage.
True, but MELEE weapon attacks (and natural weapons) DO add STR modifiers to damage. Therefore, since the Will o' Wisp is making a melee attack, it can't be using a weapon to do so since it adds no STR modifier. See the chain of logic? It's like this:
Extra damage from vital strike requires WEAPON damage and using an attack action:
Is the Will o' Wisp using the attack action? Yes.
Is the Will o' Wisp using a melee attack? Yes.
Do melee weapons apply STR modifiers to damage? Yes.
Does the Will o' Wisp apply a STR modifier to it's melee attack damage? No.
Therefore, a Will o' Wisp does not do weapon damage with its attack and does no extra damage with Vital Strike.
The Will-o-wisps natural attack is a Shock Weapon that is a natural Touch Attack that does electricity damage. Touch Attacks don't add Strength Damage.
Stephen Ede wrote: The Will-o-wisps natural attack is a Shock Weapon that is a natural Touch Attack that does electricity damage. Touch Attacks don't add Strength Damage. Natural weapons are not touch attacks.
Natural weapon damage adds STR modifiers.
"Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal)."
You are correct that the Will o' Wisp uses a touch attack. You are incorrect in stating that that is a weapon, natural or otherwise.
Why do you keep insisting that it's a weapon? What rules lead you to believe that is the case?
The fact that it is its natural attack.
The Weapon is "Shock"
Natural attacks are by definition weapons.
Most Natural attacks add their Strength bonus or 1/2 their strength bonus to damage but some natural attacks are treated differently -
"Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently, such as Dragons, which always receive 1-1/2 times their Strength bonus on damage rolls with their bite attack. These exceptions are noted in the creature’s description."
The Will-o-wisp is noted as doing 2d8 electricity damage in it's description. Energy damage doesn't get a Strength bonus added to it normally.
Where does it say that shock is a natural attack? It is listed nowhere in the natural attack chart.
Energy damage doesn't get a STR bonus added to it normally because it is normally a rider on an attack. Just like how it is a rider on the Will o' Wisp's touch attack.
In addition if it was not a naturla attack it would say "Spell-like" or "Su" or "Ex" but instead it just says
Melee shock +16 touch (2d8 electricity)
So it Melee Attack, Shock Weapon, Touch Attack +16 to hit doing 2d8 electricity as it's damage.
Note if the Electricity was rider damage it would say "0 + 2d8 electricity". That's how rider damage is written.
It doesn't, so it's not.
Stephen Ede wrote: In addition if it was not a naturla attack it would say "Spell-like" or "Su" or "Ex" but instead it just says
Melee shock +16 touch (2d8 electricity)
So it Melee Attack, Shock Weapon, Touch Attack +16 to hit doing 2d8 electricity as it's damage.
Note if the Electricity was rider damage it would say "0 + 2d8 electricity". That's how rider damage is written.
It doesn't, so it's not.
Where in the rules does it say that any attack not listed with an Sp or Su is a 'natural attack'? The Universal Monster rules has a chart with natural attacks. Natural attacks do S, B, or P damage, and they have a size associated with them.
There is no 'size' associated with the Will o' Wisp touch attack, it doesn't do S, B, or P damage, it is not listed in the chart of natural attacks, it doesn't add STR damage.
The evidence is pretty clear.
"Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do."
Lets look at other attack stats for comparison
Wolf
Melee bite +2 (1d6+1 plus trip)
Brute Wight
Melee slam +8 (1d6+5 plus energy drain)
Purple Worm
Melee bite +25 (4d8+12/19–20 plus grab), sting +25 (2d8+12 plus poison)
Wraith
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
Constitution Drain (Su)
They use the same format.
Rider damage is always + "rider damage"
If Pathfinder want to decide otherwise they can but TTBOMK they haven't done so yet. At least you haven't pointed to them doing so and I haven't seen it.
And note with the wraith that it's not 0 + 1d6 negative energy + 1d6 con drain. So it looks like the just go ahead and skip the 0 hp damage associated with a touch attack.
Just like the Will o' Wisp.
Once again, where is the rule that says any attack not listed with a Sp or Su is automatically considered a natural attack?
_Ozy_ wrote:
Where in the rules does it say that any attack not listed with an Sp or Su is a 'natural attack'? The Universal Monster rules has a chart with natural attacks. Natural attacks do S, B, or P damage, and they have a size associated with them.
There is no 'size' associated with the Will o' Wisp touch attack, it doesn't do S, B, or P damage, it is not listed in the chart of natural attacks, it doesn't add STR damage.
The evidence is pretty clear.
"Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do."
The Will-o-wisp doesn't do unarmed strikes. It says what it does in the stat block which you clearly ignore.
The universal monster rules also make clear that there are exceptions to the universal monster rules for attacks.
By your own point Monster do natural attacks or unarmed strikes. Since the Will-o-wisp doesn't do an unarmed strike by your own definition it must be doing a natural attack.
Bad logic. That statement means that even creatures without natural attacks can make unarmed strikes, because any creature (corporeal) can make an unarmed strike.
What would you call the Will o Wisp's attack then?
There is no natural attack 'shock'. All MELEE WEAPON and NATURAL attacks apply a STR modifier to their weapon damage, I already quoted the RAW. The Will o' Wisp is not using a ranged attack, so your critique is irrelevant.
The arc pistol is a ranged attack, irrelevant.
Once again, where in the rules does it say that every attack listed in a monster's description counts as a 'natural weapon' attack if it's not a Su or SP ability?
You guys are making an assumption that is not found in the rules.
EDIT: weird, I definitely replied to a post about an arc pistol that is now gone.
Squiggit wrote: What would you call the Will o Wisp's attack then? A melee touch attack.
Stephen Ede wrote:
The Will-o-wisp doesn't do unarmed strikes. It says what it does in the stat block which you clearly ignore.
The universal monster rules also make clear that there are exceptions to the universal monster rules for attacks.
By your own point Monster do natural attacks or unarmed strikes. Since the Will-o-wisp doesn't do an unarmed strike by your own definition it must be doing a natural attack.
Well, the only example they provide (dragons) specifically mentions the changes to the natural attack. The giant whiptail centipede's tail whip is also specifically pointed out to differ from the standard rules.
The Will o' Wisp's attack does sorta look like the Vampiric Mist's attack which I'd say isn't a natural attack.
EDIT: Found another one... the Blue Whale's tail slap. My point is if it were a natural attack, there should be a line that clarifies how Shock behaves. The fact that it doesn't, implicates (to me at least) that it is just an (probably (Ex)) ability that is treated like an attack, the effect of which is 2d8 electricity damage.
I guess this only holds up as long as there isn't a counterexample of a bestiary monster which attacks differ from the universal monster rules and aren't pointed out.
If the Will-o-wisps attack is an extraordinary ability it should say so. It doesn't.
Basically attacks in PF are Manufactured Weapons (Melee or Ranged) Natural Weapons, Unarmed Strikes, Extraordinary abilities, Supernatural abilities, Spell-like abilities and Spells.
The Will=o=wisp Shock attack isn't a Manufactured Weapon, an Unarmed Strike, Ex, Su or Spell-like ability or a Spell. That leaves Natural Attack.
If you want to say it's not a natural Attack then you have to define what it is within PF rules. And not simply by hand waving and say "it's something else but I don't know what".
You can claim that they made an error, and you may even be right, but until they produce errata we have to work with the rules we have.
And please do not claim again that Natural attacks must fit the universal Monster rules for Natural Attacks, when those general rules make quite clear that there are exceptions to those general rules.
Here are the examples of where they have Energy attacks that are defined as Ex or Su and Attacks attacks that make no such definition. The ones that don't are the 1st attack given. The Natural Attack.
For example -
Electric Eel
OFFENSE
Speed 5 ft., swim 30 ft.
Melee bite +3 (1d6+1) and tail –2 touch (1d6 electricity)
SPECIAL ABILITIES
Electricity (Ex)
An electric eel can produce a powerful jolt of electricity from its tail, delivering the jolt with a successful touch attack. On a critical hit, the creature struck must make a DC 15 Fortitude save or be stunned for 1d4 rounds. The save DC is Constitution-based.
And another example -
Shocker Lizard
OFFENSE
Speed 40 ft., climb 20 ft., swim 20 ft.
Melee bite +4 (1d4)
Special Attacks shock
Shock (Su)
Shocker lizards can deliver an electrical shock to a single opponent within 5 feet. This attack deals 1d8 points of nonlethal electricity damage to living opponents (Reflex DC 12 half). This save DC is Constitution-based. Additionally, if two or more shocker lizards are within 20 feet of each other, they can work together to create a lethal shock once every 1d4 rounds. This effect has a radius of 20 feet, centered on any one contributing lizard. All creatures within that radius take 2d8 points of lethal electricity damage for each lizard contributing to the shock, to a maximum of 12d8. A Reflex save (DC 10 + the number of lizards contributing) halves the damage.
And we see with the Wraith it's natural attack - Negative Energy is not given the description of Ex, Su, or Spell-like but the Con Drain "+ damage" is.
Wraith CR 5
OFFENSE
Speed fly 60 ft. (good)
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
Special Attack create spawn
Constitution Drain (Su)
Creatures hit by a wraith's touch attack must succeed on a DC 17 Fortitude save or take 1d6 points of Constitution drain. On each successful attack, the wraith gains 5 temporary hit points. The save DC is Charisma-based.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
