Vital Strike & Step Up and Strike


Rules Questions

51 to 64 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

bobsayshi wrote:
Dallium wrote:

bobsayshi, my understanding of your confusion is that you think that 'single melee attack' and 'attack action' are or should be synonyms. They are not. They are related, but different things. Not because of an FAQ or special instructions on reading Pathfinder, but because that's how parsing English works.

If this is NOT the source of your confusion, I am in error and apologize in advance.

That I believe is the source of the confusion. Without some outside knowledge, the available 'Actions in Combat' don't define a 'single melee attack' as a term which leaves only really two options, it isn't in the list or it is equivalent to an attack action which is a single attack. As a standalone either are really equivalent, only after considering the weight of balance for each can you start to make assumptions about what is intended or not.

The jump from, it's a term undefined but should be handled separately, is one that is really only found through FAQ and general past interpretations and not any rule set.
It doesn't appear even a direct FAQ tries to correct it, just answers that you can compare to. I still think that they should have just added a line to table8-2 to resolve all the confusion clearly and future questions while keeping with the intent.

I think it's at least possible something is getting lost in translation here. I don't think "single melee attack" needs to be rigorously defined. You are correct, in that it's not listed in the 'Actions in Combat' section, because you can't ever just make a 'single melee attack' in isolation. It's always brought about by something, like a Charge, spell, feat, class feature or magic item. It always in sentences like :

"As an [action type] and/or when you (use) [feat/ability or prerequisite action occurs], make a single melee attack. [Stuff happens]"

Charging wrote:
After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a –2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.
Attacks of Opportunity wrote:
An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round.
Cleave wrote:
As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach

In the case of single (melee) attack, it means what it says: You make one attack. It doesn't require further definition.


Dallium wrote:
bobsayshi wrote:
Dallium wrote:

bobsayshi, my understanding of your confusion is that you think that 'single melee attack' and 'attack action' are or should be synonyms. They are not. They are related, but different things. Not because of an FAQ or special instructions on reading Pathfinder, but because that's how parsing English works.

If this is NOT the source of your confusion, I am in error and apologize in advance.

That I believe is the source of the confusion. Without some outside knowledge, the available 'Actions in Combat' don't define a 'single melee attack' as a term which leaves only really two options, it isn't in the list or it is equivalent to an attack action which is a single attack. As a standalone either are really equivalent, only after considering the weight of balance for each can you start to make assumptions about what is intended or not.

The jump from, it's a term undefined but should be handled separately, is one that is really only found through FAQ and general past interpretations and not any rule set.
It doesn't appear even a direct FAQ tries to correct it, just answers that you can compare to. I still think that they should have just added a line to table8-2 to resolve all the confusion clearly and future questions while keeping with the intent.

I think it's at least possible something is getting lost in translation here. I don't think "single melee attack" needs to be rigorously defined. You are correct, in that it's not listed in the 'Actions in Combat' section, because you can't ever just make a 'single melee attack' in isolation. It's always brought about by something, like a Charge, spell, feat, class feature or magic item. It always in sentences like :

"As an [action type] and/or when you (use) [feat/ability or prerequisite action occurs], make a single melee attack. [Stuff happens]"

Charging wrote:
After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a –2 penalty to your
...

I suppose then that it's just my interpretation that as there is a difference between a 'single melee attack' but not 'attack (melee)' (that only is just a single attack) that it should have been defined and it would have resolved all possible confusion. Then by having indicated that an effectively untyped action exists and could be used, it clearly indicates that 'single melee attack' doesn't fit in other actions, rather than making the leap.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

bobsayshi wrote:
difference between a 'single melee attack' but not 'attack (melee)' (that only is just a single attack)

There is.

Quote:

Standard Actions

Most of the common actions characters take, aside from movement, fall into the realm of standard actions.

Attack
Making an attack is a standard action.

The action called "Attack" is a standard action. It allows one melee or ranged attack. It is much like the action "Move" which allows you to displace your position by your move speed.

Abilities that grant "a single melee attack" are not granting "a standard action which may only be used to do an attack action".

Notice how it is more words to say it the long way.
Notice how Vital Strike is limited to the "Attack" action, which is a standard attack. It's limited this way so as to not combine and enhance other things like Charge, AoO, etc.

All of this is intentional. They are intentionally trying to limit the utility of Vital Strike and other things to the standard action initiated Attack action.


bobsayshi wrote:
Java Man wrote:
bobsayshi wrote:

It's nice to know that in the Rules Question section, barely anyone references the rules or any errata'd or added rules from FAQ, and instead constantly implies i was trying to cheat.

Apparently my sarcasm in my last post was too slight for many here.

Hmm, didn't think the cheating commentary was directed at you, rather another poster who admitted knowing how the rule works, but advocated slipping past the GM if they were less savvy, bit a a siderail from your question.

Some where.

Uhhh no. Everyone was talking about someone else. Even to the point I made a post specifically that he not talk about cheating in the rules forum so you could get real advice.

Wasn't about you.


James Risner wrote:

...

The action called "Attack" is a standard action. It allows one melee or ranged attack. It is much like the action "Move" which allows you to displace your position by your move speed.

Abilities that grant "a single melee attack" are not granting "a standard action which may only be used to do an attack action".

...

I think this is the key point. That what constitutes a 'single melee attack' is not defined within the rules. So any interpretation on how it interacts with the various actions is just RAI and not RAW.

While i do agree on the intent, the event itself is undefined except by name itself.
By RAW it's just an undefined event. This at the core is the reason why any confusion or questioning about the abilities can exist.

And if there's still disagreement with that RAW is unclear, i'll add another approach.

Can Disarm or Trip be used when using the Step Up and Strike ability?


yes, because those can be subbed for any attack.

A single melee attack is just that, a single melee attack. It's the same action as one swing in a full attack. It's a non-action. That's why it's not listed in any action table.


single melee attack (undefined) == melee attack (undefined) != attack(melee) (defined)
That is just annoying and awkward dealing with as it opens it up to RAI instead of making it RAW.

What they effectively did is,
AoO -> defined as single melee attack -> defined as nothing
SUaS -> defined as single melee attack -> defined as nothing

Instead it would have been much cleaner to go
SUaS, you get a free AoO
instead of the convoluted way they wrote the Feat. It still leaves one undefined term, but at least there are less floating RAI having to be used.


bobsayshi wrote:
'Actions in Combat' don't define a 'single melee attack' as a term

Thats because ' single melee attack' is not a term. It is 2 terms. 'Single' 'melee attack'

Single: Means one
Melee attack: An attack in hand-to-hand combat. A basic melee attack is a d20 roll + base attack bonus + Strength modifier + any related or magical bonuses.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

bobsayshi wrote:

That what constitutes a 'single melee attack' is not defined within the rules. So any interpretation on how it interacts with the various actions is just RAI and not RAW.

Can Disarm or Trip be used when using the Step Up and Strike ability?

There should be no doubt about the term. It isn’t defined because it isn’t something you do, it is something you are permitted.

Yes because asunder, trip, and disarm are swapped out meld attacks.


bobsayshi wrote:
That what constitutes a 'single melee attack' is not defined within the rules.

It doesn't need to be, because it's defined in English. A 'single melee attack' is not (in and of itself) a game term, it's an English phrase used to describe what the character may do.

It's the difference between an Attack (which is explicitly defined) and an attack (which has no special definition in Pathfinder).

In a somewhat gross oversimplification, you don't get out a tape measure to decide which enemies are within 5ft of you. You know that when the book reads "you," it means your character. But the book never comes right out and SAYS that, you need to fall back on what you know about reading and interpreting English, and authors in other languages make similar assumptions about their readers.

Liberty's Edge

bobsayshi wrote:

single melee attack (undefined) == melee attack (undefined) != attack(melee) (defined)

That is just annoying and awkward dealing with as it opens it up to RAI instead of making it RAW.

What they effectively did is,
AoO -> defined as single melee attack -> defined as nothing
SUaS -> defined as single melee attack -> defined as nothing

Instead it would have been much cleaner to go
SUaS, you get a free AoO
instead of the convoluted way they wrote the Feat. It still leaves one undefined term, but at least there are less floating RAI having to be used.

You are pissing apart in example, the right way to write it is:

single melee attack (undefined) == melee attack (undefined) != Standard action: attack(melee) (defined)

The heading of the section of the table or the paragraph matter. If you don't include it you will always have problem whit the rule.
Usually it is shortened to Attack action, but the action part is what make the difference.
Abilities that permit attacks without the action qualifier don't allow the use of abilities that require the attack action.


Why does everyone keep saying melee attack is undefined? It is in the glossary, I linked it above...

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

toastedamphibian wrote:
Melee attack: An attack in hand-to-hand combat. A basic melee attack is a d20 roll + base attack bonus + Strength modifier + any related or magical bonuses.

Because that doesn't exist in a paizo publication, which is one of the numerous reasons no one should use d20pfsrd as a rules source.


Interesting. And apologies.

51 to 64 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Vital Strike & Step Up and Strike All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.