No, because you specifically cannot combine an "attack" action (Which Vital Strike is) and a full-round action (Which Master Sniper is.) Plus, Master Sniper specifically states that you make a full attack and then gain a chance to Stealth. You cannot use Master Sniper and say, "I'm only making a single attack so I can use Vital Strike" because you've already used a full-round action which precludes using an attack action.
Vital strike is kinda weird that they call it an attack action, but it is a normal standard action, and basically can't be used with anything else because you can't make more than one standard action per round.
Shhh. We don't talk about that monk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Vital strike is kinda weird that they call it an attack action
Sorry, but this is absolutely wrong! Vital Strike says "When you use the attack action" emphasis mine - that's the action called "Attack", listed under "Standard Actions" in the "Actions in Combat" section, on page 182 of the CRB.
As you can see from the word "when", Vital Strike is a triggered ability, and the trigger is using the standard attack action. Any other kind of action simply does not trigger Vital Strike. Any ability that says either "standard action", " full-attack action"/"full attack", or "full round action" uses a different action and thus doesn't trigger Vital Strike.
You can, however, have multiple triggers effect the same standard attack action, e.g. Greater Weapon of the Chosen and Vital Strike.
I know the terms are confusing and the standard "attack action" should really have a different name - indeed, it's one of the worst written parts of the CRB* (and that says a lot!).
*) The standard 'attack action' is never actually called that in the "actions in combat" section. Indeed, the words "attack action" (outside of "full-attack action") don't appear at all in that section. The next mention of that term is seventeen (in letters: 17) pages later! Under "special attacks", four sections after "actions in combat".
The only time those words do appear is in the term "full-attack action", which is not the attack action. And because that's not confusing enough, the word 'attack' is used in the magic section as any directly offensive action in combat.
So, we got actions that are attacks but not the attack action. Then we have an action that has 'attack and 'action' in it's name but is still not the attack action. And then we have the actual 'attack action', except it's not called that. Whew.