I still think that this is just further restricting vital strike to only melee attacks and not doing anything else.
The only problem I have with that thought is it actually grants the feats which allows you to take greater if you want. Which wouldn't have any limitation due to the ability. So your reasoning is that you get VS and IVS but can only use them on melee, and if you take GVS you can choose to use it on melee (which you already could)?
My read is that it grants the feats, you can only use them as part of a standard action attack OTHER than the specific vital strike attack action if it happens to be a melee attack.
My read is that it grants the feats, you can only use them as part of a standard action attack OTHER than the specific vital strike attack action if it happens to be a melee attack.
Which is how I read it as well. It makes no sense to even mention that GVS can be used if it's a mode GVS already has.
Cleave is a Standard Action that effects one attack, just like it says "As a Standard Action you can make a single attack @FullBAB against foe in reach." That attack has special effect which can trigger other attacks. There was only one attack made "as a Standard Action", other attacks are not inherent to the action as such. Likewise there is abilities which allow free Bullrush or Trip attacks if you Crit with an attack. Those do not mean you are now making multiple attacks "as a Standard Action".
I do read the (singular) "an attack" (as a Standard Action) as flatly barring any Standard Action which DOES inherently effect multiple attacks, e.g. Doublestrike. However, since Cleave does not (per above), I would rule that the single attack actually inherent to Cleave DOES benefit from Mighty Strike, albeit subsequent triggered attacks would not. Certainly is valid FAQ material to clarify though... Perhaps deserves new thread to focus on that FAQ topic, since Mighty Strike only came up part way thru this thread and isn't obvious from thread topic.
All of the FAQ's on Cleave emphasize that all of its parts are a single standard action. So it could probably use the FAQ yes, but there's absolutely no evidence behind the mighty strike not affecting all the attacks in a cleave chain beyond people subconsciously putting the word "single" in the ability mighty strike and reading a word into the line that doesn't exist.
the additional attack is not part of a standard action the trigger is if you hit the target, not the standard action used, and i see no emphasize in the FAQ saying that all the attack of cleave/great cleave are part of a single standard action
Its why you can't 5 foot step between the initial and second.
the FAQ say its a special action that when you initiate the action the feat check for all valid target, that's why you can't take the 5-foot step, it never say its because its a standard actionthe additional attack is not part of a standard action the trigger is if you hit the target, not the standard action used, and i see no emphasize in the FAQ saying that all the attack of cleave/great cleave are part of a single standard actionIts why you can't 5 foot step between the initial and second.
So if the feat checks all the requirements at the beginning when you initiate the action...
Did the attack come as the result of a standard action? Yes
Does Mighty strike have any requirements other than taking a melee attack as a standard action? No.
Does it matter if you take 1 attack or 10 attacks if the action giving attacks is a standard action the way mighty strike is written? No
the extra attack are not the result of a standard action they are the result of a successful hit, they are free extra attack that are triggered by a successful hit
Literally everything cleave does is the result of a standard action man.
if you had mythic vital strike would it work with mighty strike?
Seems like it should as mythic vital strike isn't really anything other than a modifier to your normal/improved/greater vital strikes. Same as whatever that damage boosting one is devastating strike or whatever?
John its not that i didn't read it, is that it didn't matter. The FAQ emphasizes that everything going on during a cleave is happening during the same action. Its occam's razor. In one interpretation, everything works exactly as read, it still manages to not be terribly overpowered, and it revitalizes an old, classic but rarely built with/used feat, exactly the sort of thing new options should do in good game design rather than just piling on new feats that mimic an old one just slightly better/worse.
In the other there's a creation of some sort of new type of non-action attack that isn't swift, immediate, or AoO which already exists and specifically wasn't used in cleave's language, nor is mentioned as a thing that exists anywhere else in the ruleset.
On top of which people have already conceded that it works with Double Strike, from the two weapon warrior archetype and two weapon trick feat. Meaning there's absolutely nothing that limits a standard action on its face being just one attack. This means the hangup has to come from the fact that a cleave attack is conditional makes it different for reasons, and therefore has to create this new non action attack thing instead of just being a part of the standard action the cleave feat has you take. You might begin to see where i find that argument unconvincing here.
Does in fact seem legit, probably limited by how often you can qualify for a standard action charge.
I'd say neither Cleave nor Double Strike (and many others) will work along with Vital Strike due to Action Economy. Vital Strike is a Feat. Cleave is a Feat, DoubleStrike is an (ex) ability or a Feat, depending on where we take it (TWF warrior gets it as an (ex) ability, although we can also take the feat version if we're allowed to use the Path of Iron module).
Finally, there's the Actions in Combat Table.
Checking the table, we find that if we want to use an (ex) ability we have to declare we perform the "Use extraordinary ability" action (found under Standard actions), and to use a feat we have to declare we perform the "Use Feat" action (found under Action Type Varies actions).
To use the Doublestrike ability we refer to the Use Special Ability section. It states that most (Ex) abilities have a "Not an Action" cost, unless the abilities are actually actions, in that case normally having a Standard action cost. Reading Doublestrike, we find it actually has a standard action cost.
Now, to use Cleave, we refer to the Use Feat Section that states that the action cost and effects are written in the feat. Checking Cleave, we find it also has a Standard Action cost
Finally, we have to check Vital Strike (another feat), and we find it has a Not an Action cost ("Other feats do not require actions themselves"), but has a requite to be enabled:
Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage.
So, to "enable" Vital Strike we must explicitly use the attack action (either Attack (melee), Attack (ranged) or Attack (unarmed), all found under Standard Actions in the table). When we declare we use one of those three actions, we can "latch" Vital Strike to it.
Not only we'd require 2+ standard actions to use CL/DS/VS in the same round (CL and DS have a standard action cost, VS needs to be latched to a specific standard action), but also, since neither cleave (use feat) nor Doublestrike (use ex ability) are "THE" Attack action, we can't latch VS to either of them
Mighty Strike (Ex)
At 6th level, a heritor knight gains Vital Strike and Improved Vital Strike as bonus feats.
Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack. If she has Greater Vital Strike, she can apply that feat’s effects instead.
The action cost for Mighty Strike (ex) is "Not an Action", since it's an (ex) ability that has no cost written on it, unlike Doublestrike, for example, that has explicitly written it has a standard action cost.
Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Using an extraordinary ability is usually not an action because most extraordinary abilities...
"Not an Action" actions are no actions themselves, but instead are applied to other actions they're suited to.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.
We were discussing the effects of adding Vital Strike to melee attack actions as per Herito Knight's Mighty Strike. The issue that came up was standard actions that create more than one attack.
It is pretty clear that the Vital Strike affects the first attack in those cases. However there is still one person who thinks the Vital Strike should affect all attacks.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.We were discussing the effects of adding Vital Strike to melee attack actions as per Herito Knight's Mighty Strike. The issue that came up was standard actions that create more than one attack.
It is pretty clear that the Vital Strike affects the first attack in those cases. However there is still one person who thinks the Vital Strike should affect all attacks.
Yeah because people jump on saying they don't affect cleave/other attacks taken in a standard action but there's no rationale provided for that opinion. Thus far its all been implied the second attack is some unnamed action type that these abilities create, but thats backed up basically nowhere else in the ruleset. Free actions are distinctly labeled as free actions everywhere else in the ruleset and the FAQ's surrounding cleave imply that everything that happens during a cleave is all one standard action.
Yeah because people jump on saying they don't affect cleave/other attacks taken in a standard action but there's no rationale provided for that opinion. Thus far its all been implied the second attack is some unnamed action type that these abilities create, but thats backed up basically nowhere else in the ruleset. Free actions are distinctly labeled as free actions everywhere else in the ruleset and the FAQ's surrounding cleave imply that everything that happens during a cleave is all one standard action.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.We were discussing the effects of adding Vital Strike to melee attack actions as per Herito Knight's Mighty Strike. The issue that came up was standard actions that create more than one attack.
It is pretty clear that the Vital Strike affects the first attack in those cases. However there is still one person who thinks the Vital Strike should affect all attacks.
It would be cool if it worked the way you're interpreting it but I think there would need to be something that indicated all attacks made during a standard attack for it to function beyond the first attack. As no such language is there I think we need to fall back to assuming only the first attack.
i am aware but you missed seeing that literally all the things you listed are attacks that are standard actions with which mighty strike modifies
What did I miss?.
OP's question was not about Mighty Strike. OP's question was about Doublestrike (and Cleave) and their interaction with Vital Strike. Those don't work with Vital Strike per action economy and the fact that they're not using the action VS demands to be activated (specifically declaring the "Attack (melee/ranged/unarmed)" standard action).
Mighty strike is a completely diferent thing. MS (ex) is an "Use extraordinary ability" action that doesn't take time at all (doesn't even count as "free action"), and can be applied to any suitable attack under what's written to it (when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action").
How you rule that sentence meaning based on the wording, depends.
Option A) would be that you must actually declare the "Attack (melee)" action to be able to "latch" Mighty Strike, but I think there's no point since MS grants the knight both VS and Improved VS strike feats; having those feats, the knight can directly apply I/G Vital Strike to any attack (Melee/Ranged/Unarmed) action instead of limiting herself to applying MS (ex) to an attack (melee) action
Option B) would be that any melee attack that is performed "inside" any standard action (like Cleave, doublestrike,...) can be modified by Mighty Strike. This would apply to all attacks (as long as they're melee) performed under those feats (something that could lead to some devastating combos when using skills like greater cleave)
It would be cool if it worked the way you're interpreting it but I think there would need to be something that indicated all attacks made during a standard attack for it to function beyond the first attack. As no such language is there I think we need to fall back to assuming only the first attack.Yeah because people jump on saying they don't affect cleave/other attacks taken in a standard action but there's no rationale provided for that opinion. Thus far its all been implied the second attack is some unnamed action type that these abilities create, but thats backed up basically nowhere else in the ruleset. Free actions are distinctly labeled as free actions everywhere else in the ruleset and the FAQ's surrounding cleave imply that everything that happens during a cleave is all one standard action.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.We were discussing the effects of adding Vital Strike to melee attack actions as per Herito Knight's Mighty Strike. The issue that came up was standard actions that create more than one attack.
It is pretty clear that the Vital Strike affects the first attack in those cases. However there is still one person who thinks the Vital Strike should affect all attacks.
You have no rationale for that opinion though, thats the thing. It isn't what the ability says, the authors intent came up in another thread for it to work, for it not to work requires creating a whole new type of non-action attack action.
Beyond which, language to specify all attacks made during a standard action would be redundant when all you have to do is ask two questions as it is written:
1. Is it a melee attack?
2. Is it made during a standard action?
If yes to both, then vital strike.
Space is at a premium in print media and layout of books like this if it works as read without extra language, they aren't going to add it.
You have no rationale for that opinion though, thats the thing. It isn't what the ability says, the authors intent came up in another thread for it to work, for it not to work requires creating a whole new type of non-action attack action.
Beyond which, language to specify all attacks made during a standard action would be redundant when all you have to do is ask two questions as it is written:
1. Is it a melee attack?
2. Is it made during a standard action?
If yes to both, then vital strike.
Space is at a premium in print media and layout of books like this if it works as read...
Think you've mixed up Vital Strike (feat) and Mighty Strike (ex) there...
think you just aren't reading peoples posts and posting replies that don't fit into the conversation that is currently going on he is talking about mighty strike just like how the 1st half of the 1st page of this forum and the entire 2nd page has been talking about mighty strike
I'm actually reading the posts.
On combat you perform actions, as per the Action table. When the GM asks you: "What do you do?" you declare your actions, not the effects those actions have.
On those Heritor Knight's "melee attacks during a standard action" you cannot directly apply Vital Strike since VS has it's own prereqs and you're not fulfilling them... but you do fulfill the prereqs to perform Mighty Strike and, through it, gain the effects of the VS.
Thus, you declare Mighty Strike, not VS.
It would be cool if it worked the way you're interpreting it but I think there would need to be something that indicated all attacks made during a standard attack for it to function beyond the first attack. As no such language is there I think we need to fall back to assuming only the first attack.Yeah because people jump on saying they don't affect cleave/other attacks taken in a standard action but there's no rationale provided for that opinion. Thus far its all been implied the second attack is some unnamed action type that these abilities create, but thats backed up basically nowhere else in the ruleset. Free actions are distinctly labeled as free actions everywhere else in the ruleset and the FAQ's surrounding cleave imply that everything that happens during a cleave is all one standard action.
So, when the Heritor Knight makes a "melee attack as a standard action", you can apply Mighty strike as part of that melee attack.We were discussing the effects of adding Vital Strike to melee attack actions as per Herito Knight's Mighty Strike. The issue that came up was standard actions that create more than one attack.
It is pretty clear that the Vital Strike affects the first attack in those cases. However there is still one person who thinks the Vital Strike should affect all attacks.
You have no rationale for that opinion though, thats the thing. It isn't what the ability says, the authors intent came up in another thread for it to work, for it not to work requires creating a whole new type of non-action attack action.
Beyond which, language to specify all attacks made during a standard action would be redundant when all you have to do is ask two questions as it is written:
1. Is it a melee attack?
2. Is it made during a standard action?
If yes to both, then vital strike.
Space is at a premium in print media and layout of books like this if it works as read...
I do have a rational for my opinion. Cleave is a series of attacks, not one attack. Mighty Strike adds Vital Strike to 1 attack. This may be where we disagree but each cleave attack has a separate to hit and damage roll so it is most definitely is made up of multiple attacks.
As a tangential example, a swift action that has an affect on an attack doesn't generally affect all cleave attacks or all whirlwind attacks unless an exception is specified. For example:
Kirin strike would only affect one cleave attack not all of them
Hex strike would only affect one cleave attack not all of them
Sorcerous Strike would only affect one cleave attack not all of them
Domain Strike would only affect one cleave attack not all of them
etc...
Nothing indicates mighty strike only affects one attack except subconsciously adding the word single to the text of the rule. The word single does not exist in the text of mighty strike anywhere. The second (and third and whatever for great cleave) all fit the parameters of making a melee attack as a standard action, ergo vital strike is applied.
Also all of those things you list have one thing in common that they do not share with Cleave.
They all specify that the rider comes when you take a swift action. Cleave does not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing indicates mighty strike only affects one attack except subconsciously adding the word single to the text of the rule. The word single does not exist in the text of mighty strike anywhere. The second (and third and whatever for great cleave) all fit the parameters of making a melee attack as a standard action, ergo vital strike is applied.
"Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack. If she has Greater Vital Strike, she can apply that feat’s effects instead."
How many attacks is "a melee attack?" Nothing subconscious about the English language.
Also all of those things you list have one thing in common that they do not share with Cleave.They all specify that the rider comes when you take a swift action. Cleave does not.
So you admit that riders only affect one attack in a cleave. Well Vital Strike is added, as a rider, to A MELEE ATTACK (i.e. 1 attack) that is a standard action when using Might Strike.
For your reading to be correct there would need to be language that says it adds to all attacks, not language to specifically exclude all attacks except for one.
No, read the things you listed VERY carefully, look at how the riders ALL SPECIFY THAT THEY TAKE A SWIFT ACTION..then look at how cleave does not.
If i have A golden delicious and A granny smith at the same time, i have two apples, the golden delicious is AN apple, the granny smith is also AN apple
If i take a standard action to use cleave, the initial attack is a melee attack taken as a standard action. The secondary cleave attack is also a melee attack taken as a standard action, the secondary attack is part of that standard action because the ability does not apply any other action type to it and the only rule defining non action attacks is attacks of opportunity, which isn't referenced in the ability.
Literally nothing about mighty strike linguistically implies it only works on single attacks, it provides two conditions: Is it a melee attack? Is it taken as a standard action? Literally the only two conditions for applying mighty strike.
No. Read the question I asked VERY carefully. How many attacks is "a melee attack?"
Vital Strike is the rider, NOT cleave, so no reason to compare my swift action examples to cleave.
Even though the examples I gave above are swift actions they are all riders to attacks just like Vital Strikes are to standard attacks when using a Might Strike.
So once again, how many attacks is "a melee attack?"
Vital strike isn't a rider.
I really get that you don't believe that 2 attacks can come as a single standard action, but they can, there are multiple examples of it.
But since we're devolving to yes/no gotcha hair splitting, let me throw something your way.
Whats the difference between these:
While using Kirin Style against a creature you have identified using that feat, as a swift action after you have hit a creature with a melee or ranged attack, you can add twice your Intelligence modifier in damage (minimum 2).
If you make a successful unarmed strike against an opponent, in addition to dealing your unarmed strike damage, you can use a swift action to deliver the effects of the chosen hex to that opponent.
If you make a successful unarmed strike against an opponent, in addition to dealing your unarmed strike damage, you can spend a swift action to deliver the effects of the chosen bloodline power to that opponent.
If you make a successful unarmed strike against an opponent, in addition to dealing your unarmed strike damage, you can use a swift action to deliver the effects of the chosen granted power to that opponent.
And this:
As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach. If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach. You can only make one additional attack per round with this feat. When you use this feat, you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class until your next turn.
Do you see the difference? I tried to highlight it. So, since its not listed as a swift, free, immediate, full round, or attack of opportunity action, what type of action is that additional attack? The only action type listed is standard. Mighty strike has no wording that indicates it will only modify a single attack. Its only conditions are melee attack, and standard action. Describe to me how in the absence of other wording the additional attack is not a melee attack taken as part of a standard action?
Edit: and please do it without mentally editing mighty strike to read "When you make a single melee attack as a standard action"
DOUBLE EDIT: In fact, mighty strike reads:
Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack. If she has Greater Vital Strike, she can apply that feat’s effects instead.
So..whenever you're making a melee attack as a standard action.
Please stop comparing Cleave to the riders I listed. Mighty Strike says it allows you to add Vital Strike to a standard action. How is Vital Strike not the rider?
How about "whenever I make a cake, I use flour." If I make two cakes do I not use flour? I get that in general, you only get the vital strike damage once to prevent the overpowered death and destruction from something like whirlwind + vital strike. That's the trade off, one big attack that does a crap load of damage. But I really think that if you are making melee attacks as a standard action, then Mighty strike should apply.
Please stop comparing Cleave to the riders I listed. Mighty Strike says it allows you to add Vital Strike to a standard action. How is Vital Strike not the rider?
You don't add vital strike as a swift action either.
Please stop comparing Cleave to the riders I listed. Mighty Strike says it allows you to add Vital Strike to a standard action. How is Vital Strike not the rider?You don't add vital strike as a swift action either.
A rider is an additional provision added to the terms of an article, statement, rule or contract. Mighty Strike says it adds Vital Strike to a standard action attack. So once again, how is Vital Strike not a rider to a standard action attack?
How does it compare to anything you listed when it doesn't require an action to apply it after the attack but instead modifies attacks taken as standard actions?