Vital Strike, being tied to weapon base damage, leads to strange consequences. It works best on druids with minimal investment, or requires specific optimization including actual and virtual weapon size increases.
It's not feasible for anyone else.
I'm not fond of this. I would like to allow all martials (not just the pouncing ones, or those wielding unreasonably big swords) to achieve acceptable damage without completely scarificing their mobility.
I was thinking of a variant that wouldn't work like the Vital Strike we know at all.
I mean, the basic idea is the same, but the means for optimizing it would be completely different; this is intended, this is the goal.
Here's the variant:
Vital Strike
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.
Add your Base Attack Bonus to the damage roll.
This extra damage is not multiplied on a critical hit, but is added to the total.
---
I'm not sure if the following feats should increase the damage further, up to BaBx3,
or apply the extra damage in more situations
IE: Spring Attack, Cleave?
or both.
What do you think of this, balance-wise? Would you consider it for your character?
How much is too weak, and how much is too strong?
I like it.
But perhaps remove the prerequisite for the base vital strike? As it's benifits scale with bab. So there is no need for a prereq really.
Otherwise add a bab prereq but have it scale with character level. At lvl 20 you then have a +20 to damage on a single attack which is not overpowering against single targets by then. It is still best for martial classes as they have the highest chance of hitting.
Maybe have improved allow it to be used with any other feat that enables an attack. So cleave, spring attack, etc.
Or if you go the bab to damage route, allow the improved to treat charavters level as baby for the feat. Maybe even allow it to use level as bab to hit for the vital strike.
Greater. You only really need a greater if you go the second route on improved.
Have it allow the damage to crit with weapon. Allow the ability to mesh with other feats.
Or actually you could allow it to affect 1 Aoo per round if improved gives it feat synergy.
Spit balling here is all.
You would need to lock the improved and greater behind prereqs. You could limit it to non spell casting classes or lock it behind fighter levels so the weapon master handbook feat can allow cess maybe
Normal Vital Strike with a Greatsword adds 7 damage. Until level 8, your version of Vital Strike is a lateral move. However, Vital Strike with a normal Greatsword is terrible. I would be aiming for the feat to be somewhat less effective than a full attack at the same level with the same build sans vital strike
Off the top of my head, I would guess that the feat should probably add double your BAB with normal Vital Strike, increasing to x4 and x6 with further feats.
Vital Strike, being tied to weapon base damage, leads to strange consequences. It works best on druids with minimal investment, or requires specific optimization including actual and virtual weapon size increases.
It's not feasible for anyone else.
I'm not fond of this. I would like to allow all martials (not just the pouncing ones, or those wielding unreasonably big swords) to achieve acceptable damage without completely scarificing their mobility.I was thinking of a variant that wouldn't work like the Vital Strike we know at all.
I mean, the basic idea is the same, but the means for optimizing it would be completely different; this is intended, this is the goal.Here's the variant:
Vital Strike
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.
Add your Base Attack Bonus to the damage roll.
This extra damage is not multiplied on a critical hit, but is added to the total.---
I'm not sure if the following feats should increase the damage further, up to BaBx3,
or apply the extra damage in more situations
IE: Spring Attack, Cleave?
or both.What do you think of this, balance-wise? Would you consider it for your character?
How much is too weak, and how much is too strong?
Personal opinion is that if you're not multiplying the damage on any damage multiplying effects (like crits), it should probably be more like BAB x2 or x3 and just let it scale naturally. It wouldn't be overpowered. If anything, you could very well scale it up to x6 BAB and not break anything.
For example, 1 attack at base damage + 120 at 20th level isn't OP. Enemies at this level can have 200+ HP easily.
Well yes, in order to work well VS requires dedicated builds that are very restrictive (in order to charge and use vital strike you need a feat and to be a CN fighter or barbarian worshipping Gorum and wielding a greatsword...), but they can be effective: vital striking with a large impact bastard sword while enlarged nets you 4d8 dmg per hit, so 8d8 on VS, 12d8 on IVS and 16d8 on GVS which is pretty good considering you can move and use it.
Personally the thing I would change about VS is allowing it to be used on charge too otherwise the feat chain is good as long as you build your character correctly.
|
Well yes, in order to work well VS requires dedicated builds that are very restrictive (in order to charge and use vital strike you need a feat and to be a CN fighter or barbarian worshipping Gorum and wielding a greatsword...), but they can be effective: vital striking with a large impact bastard sword while enlarged nets you 4d8 dmg per hit, so 8d8 on VS, 12d8 on IVS and 16d8 on GVS which is pretty good considering you can move and use it.
Personally the thing I would change about VS is allowing it to be used on charge too otherwise the feat chain is good as long as you build your character correctly.
That's kind of the point the OP eas making though, that Vital Strike is basically limited in effectiveness to a small subset of characters and combat types that are able to leverage large damage dice to make the attack worthwhile. But if you're not a druid who can turn into a hippopotamus or a THF wielding a large bastard sword, you're looking at adding maybe 12 damage or less on average with 3 feats with increasingly high prereqs. Power Attack + Furious Focus will consistently be a better investment with stronger returns, and works whether you make a single attack or a full attack.
I like the concept for the Vital Strike change; it makes the feat favor the more martially oriented characters, as it should. As others have noted though, it should probably be double BAB to damage or multiply on a crit.
Well yes, in order to work well VS requires dedicated builds that are very restrictive (in order to charge and use vital strike you need a feat and to be a CN fighter or barbarian worshipping Gorum and wielding a greatsword...), but they can be effective: vital striking with a large impact bastard sword while enlarged nets you 4d8 dmg per hit, so 8d8 on VS, 12d8 on IVS and 16d8 on GVS which is pretty good considering you can move and use it.
Personally the thing I would change about VS is allowing it to be used on charge too otherwise the feat chain is good as long as you build your character correctly.
When you set your norm by the people who cheese the mechanics the most, that's going to skew your perspective.
|
|
When you set your norm by the people who cheese the mechanics the most, that's going to skew your perspective.Well yes, in order to work well VS requires dedicated builds that are very restrictive (in order to charge and use vital strike you need a feat and to be a CN fighter or barbarian worshipping Gorum and wielding a greatsword...), but they can be effective: vital striking with a large impact bastard sword while enlarged nets you 4d8 dmg per hit, so 8d8 on VS, 12d8 on IVS and 16d8 on GVS which is pretty good considering you can move and use it.
Personally the thing I would change about VS is allowing it to be used on charge too otherwise the feat chain is good as long as you build your character correctly.
It's largely bad by any norm, a consolation prize that works best for those who need it least. It has nothing to do with "cheesing the mechanics", it's a function of math in a game full of equations.
Who loses the most by having to move and make a full attack? Two-weapon fighting classes that rely on wider crit ranges and typically have smaller damage die. These are the same people who gain the least by using Vital Strike. It actually follows a very predictable line from there- the less you need Vital Strike, the more you're going to be able to get out of it.
Thank you for your feedback, all.
In order:
1) I cannot remove the +6 BaB requirement: The feat is intended to always be a lesser option compared to your standard attack routine, in exchange for more mobility; not an overall DpR enhancer. At BaB1-5 most classes only attack once anyway, this would make the feat behave in unintended ways before the second attack becomes available.
2) I like that it's tied to BaB rather than Character Level, because it makes it more powerful on full BaB classes.
3) Overall opinion seems to be that the damage is now too low. How about:
Vital Strike:
Roll weapon damage twice OR add your BaB, player choice
Improved Vital Strike:
Roll weapon damage 3 times OR add your BaBx3, player choice.
You can combine Vital Strike (but not improved vital strike) with a non-pouncing charge or with a Spring Attack
Greater Vital Strike:
Roll weapon damage 4 times OR add your BaBx5, player choice.
You can combine Improved Vital Strike (but not Greater vital strike) with a non-pouncing charge or with a Spring Attack
Note: Cleave is already covered by Weapon Trick and All-Consuming Swing
Mythic Vital Strike feat is what Vital Strike should be for it to be taken seriously, and the Devastating Strike feat chain should already be incorporated into the Vital Strike base feat chain. Full Attacks offer more consistent damage, whereas Vital Strikes offer an "all or nothing" option.
I already made an answer in relation to Vital Strike and how strong it should be as a feat chain: here.
The only thing I'd change from my original post is make Greater Vital Strike also usable with Charge (not Pounce), Spring Attack, and any other action which allows you one attack only (not Attacks of Opportunity).
I already made an answer in relation to Vital Strike and how strong it should be as a feat chain: here.
The only thing I'd change from my original post is make Greater Vital Strike also usable with Charge (not Pounce), Spring Attack, and any other action which allows you one attack only (not Attacks of Opportunity).
Looks like we think alike on most parts.
My goal is slightly different from yours tho: I want to raise the floor of Vital Strike for all non-dedicated builds (i.e. a sword n board halfling)
without increasing the ceiling.
That's the main difference between our approaches
Knowing that, what do you think of my own attempt? (see the post above yours)
Wow, that is ludicrous to my mind. Fix Vital Strike by making it a flat 2d6 bonus. No scaling, 4d6 for improved, 6d6 for greater. Done.
Putting distance between you and a full attacking creature (PC or monster) *Should* significantly lessen the damage. +120, or even +60 damage is way way too much to add to what is likely an automatic hit.
For example, an ancient red dragon (CR 19) would go from 12d6+21 on a greater vital strike, to 4d6+141. From 63 to 162. 63, or 84 power attacking is enough. It doesn't need to be *more* of a rocket tag game.
Thank you Majuba, it's good to recieve feedback on both sides of the spectrum.
I wasn't thinking of monsters with BaB above 20. I'll try to find a solution.
I'm not fond of this. I would like to allow all martials (not just the pouncing ones, or those wielding unreasonably big swords) to achieve acceptable damage without completely scarificing their mobility.
Lateral question, does this have to be done through vital strike? Basically, what other character builds are you trying to improve off of this? And do you still want there to be a power difference between the guy wielding a greatsword, and the guy wielding a dagger? Or is it okay if that gap lessens?
For example, this would decrease the difference between using a greatsword & using a dagger. Is that okay? In Pathfinder as is, there's a lot of emphasis on static modifiers to damage (power attack, enhancements, rage, 1.5x str, etc.), where as in a system like D&D 5e there are far fewer static bonuses to damage, and more focus is placed on the weapon being used and its damage die.
I've been doing it like that (+BAB) for a long time; there's then no need for the Improved and Greater versions. It makes it useful but not extreme for lots of people and it eliminates the stupidly broken dinosaur druid builds.
But I do multiply it on criticals. Then again I also multiply extra dice from sneak attacks, flaming weapons and whatever on crits as well, and I haven't found any problems there either.
And I let you use it on a charge. And with Cleave.
Hmm this one is tricky vital strike works well with two handed weapon because of the die. how about instead of makeing vital strike good for two weapon figthers why not make a second set of feats that work diffrently too help the other small weapon die types
something like
(unamed) strike 1
may attack with both weapons as part or a single attack action when doing so add an additional die from each weapon to the damage roll
strike 2 well you get the idea