AS I see it, part of the problem is that you equate hitting an image of Mirror Image to a miss. It isn't. You still hit, but the wrong target.
That isn’t the problem though. The problem is mirror images explicitly calls out that effects that do not require attack rolls ignore all of the images and always hit the real target. Sword of justice explicitly states that it does not require an attack roll. It being labeled as a melee attack with the crusader’s weapon doesn’t change this fact. That labeling simply exists to define the range and damage of the ability as well as what other effects can interact with it.
Other forms of miss chance can still apply against the attack, but mirror images does not (nor do any others with the same limitation as mirror images). Sword of justice is explicitly an effect that does not require an attack roll, and as such it ignores mirror images as per the rules for mirror images. This is not rocket science.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is we have two seemingly contradictory sentences, and we're ascribing different weight as to which sentence is more important.
Whenever you are attacked or are the target of a spell that requires an attack roll, there is a possibility that the attack targets one of your images instead.
...
Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments.
Here's an grammar exercise for you that might help:
A. Elves pay 10gp per night ... children stay for free.
B. Children stay for free ... Elves pay 10gp per night.
How much does an Elven child pay to sleep at the in? Is there a difference between A and B?
At the end of the day, did we all agree or not? Hahaha. So vital strike won't work with this correct?
Vital Strike will not work with this. However, the issue isn't the whole Mirror Image thing, but action economy.
As a standard action he may announce he is bringing Iomedae’s judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment.
This ability is a standard action that incorporates a melee attack, the way casting a touch spell incorporates a melee touch attack (or, for magi using Spellstrike, a melee attack.)
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.
Vital Strike is an attack action. You can't attach it to other types of action even if they incorporate melee attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vital Strike is an attack action. You can't attach it to other types of action even if they incorporate melee attacks.
Unless of course you are also a 6th level Heritor Knight.
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.
But yes... standard RAW, Sword against injustice cannot vital strike.
|
Vital Strike is an attack action. You can't attach it to other types of action even if they incorporate melee attacks.
Unless of course you are also a 6th level Heritor Knight.
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.But yes... standard RAW, Sword against injustice cannot vital strike.
Mighty strike doesn't change how Vital strike works. You still need to take the attack action as a standard action, as normal for Vital strike.
|
wait, are you saying
As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sworddoenst qualify for
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.
?
i read it as you apply the vital strike effect, but dont make the vital strike action, ANYTIME you take a standard action that results in a melee attack you get the vital strike added damage.
not "does nothing" like i think Diego is saying
Mighty strike doesn't change how Vital strike works. You still need to take the attack action as a standard action, as normal for Vital strike.
|
|
wait, are you sayingAs a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sworddoenst qualify forWhenever 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.?
i read it as you apply the vital strike effect, but dont make the vital strike action, ANYTIME you take a standard action that results in a melee attack you get the vital strike added damage.
not "does nothing" like i think Diego is saying
Mighty strike doesn't change how Vital strike works. You still need to take the attack action as a standard action, as normal for Vital strike.
It is the usual problem with Vital strike: you need to make an attack action, that is a specific kind of standard action, isn't an attack as part of another action.
Vital strike isn't an action. Is something you can do when you spend a Standard Action to take the Attack action.
Vital Strike: Can I use this with Spring Attack, or on a charge?
No. Vital Strike can only be used as part of an attack action, which is a specific kind of standard action. Spring Attack is a special kind of full-round action that includes the ability to make one melee attack, not one attack action. Charging uses similar language and can also not be used in combination with Vital Strike.
posted November 2012 | back to top
Mighty Strike simply repeats the base rule, you bolded it too: "makes a melee attack as a standard action".
|
|
wait, are you sayingAs a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sworddoenst qualify forWhenever 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.?
i read it as you apply the vital strike effect, but dont make the vital strike action, ANYTIME you take a standard action that results in a melee attack you get the vital strike added damage.
not "does nothing" like i think Diego is saying
Mighty strike doesn't change how Vital strike works. You still need to take the attack action as a standard action, as normal for Vital strike.It is the usual problem with Vital strike: you need to make an attack action, that is a specific kind of standard action, isn't an attack as part of another action.
Vital strike isn't an action. Is something you can do when you spend a Standard Action to take the Attack action.
Vital Strike: Can I use this with Spring Attack, or on a charge?
No. Vital Strike can only be used as part of an attack action, which is a specific kind of standard action. Spring Attack is a special kind of full-round action that includes the ability to make one melee attack, not one attack action. Charging uses similar language and can also not be used in combination with Vital Strike.
posted November 2012 | back to topMighty Strike simply repeats the base rule, you bolded it too: "makes a melee attack as a standard action".
But the word WHENEVER changes all that. Whenever, as in ANY TIME they make a standard action that makes a melee attack they get the added damage, not just when they use the specific attack action to vital strike.
not on a spring attack, not on a charge, but WHENEVER you make a standard action attack (not vital strike attack action)it also gets vital strike damageyou dont "declare a vital strike" anymore, its a now just automatically applying the damage to every attack thats made as a standard action
|
|
makes a melee attack as a standard action
You bolded it.
It says it clearly: you still need to make a melee attack as a standard action. Makin a standard action that gives you a melee attack isn't the same thing. Iy was clarified in 2012 when the FAQ was written.But the word WHENEVER changes all that. Whenever, as in ANY TIME they make a standard action that makes a melee attack they get the added damage, not just when they use the specific attack action to vital strike.
You are inverting the order of the terms, but that makes a difference. A melee attack as a standard action is the attack action.
We could take the word of author about similar things.
In this case, the question was about several feats that say "as a standard action, make a melee attack" - and the author's response was that Mighty Strike applies to all of them except Double Strike (which is making a dual-wielding pair of attacks with one standard action.) {My comment on this: And even in Double Strike's case, it could be resolved like Surprise Spells Magic Missile, where only one of the strikes gets the bonus.}
The reason Spellstrike is called out as not working is that when casting touch spells, the delivery is a separate free action.
SAI doesn't have that distinction. It makes a melee attack as a standard action, with the effect of that attack (auto-hit if guilty, auto-miss if innocent, and auto-miss with a telltale interaction if the target is divination-shielded) based on whether the target has performed some specified act of injustice / deception / crime.
While it seems strange to imagine a high-level devotee of Iomedae (the combo can't come online before 14th) going full-tilt with an attack that could hit a wall if the the target is innocent or shielded, RAW does seem to allow this interaction.
Mighty Strike's condition (a melee attack as a standard action) is being satisfied.
|
|
Awesome. even the author agrees with the reading i had.
Whenever you make any standard action that results in a melee attack, add the extra damage from vital strike in addition to the standard action attacks effect, such as Sword Against Injustice, cleave, deadly stroke, or any other feat or ability that you use.
|
|
We could take the word of author about similar things.
Authors • Alexander Augunas, John Compton, Jenny Jarzabski, isabelle Lee, Stephen Rowe, and Owen K.C. Stephens
Developers • Adam Daigle, Crystal Frasier, Amanda Hamon Kunz, Mark Moreland, Owen K.C. Stephens, and Linda Zayas-Palmer
Not a developer. It wouldn't be the first time that what was printed was different from what the contributor meant to do. Paizo developers often change what the contributors produce.
Definitely works for all of them except double strike. I'm not sure about that one.
If she was the "ultimate authority" in how it works, that statement would be very strange.
The goal of the author is very clear:
(Vital Strike is one of my favorite parts of Pathfinder, and I'm always looking for ways to make it a more viable or interesting option.)
but the text of the rule doesn't support it.
|
|
Every time he makes the Standard action Melee attack.
The one on page 183 of the CRB, table 8-2, first action: attack (melee).
The one that already works with Vitgal strike.
To do what the author wants it should have written differently, something like:
Whenever the heritor knight makes a standard action that allows a melee attack she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack.
BTW, it is the way in which you rephrased it above.
If the requirement is to make a melee attack that is a standard action the trigger is only the action in the CRB.
If the requirement is a standard action that gives a melee attack, the triggers are all the actions that give melee attacks.
The best way to know what the developers wanted to do (barring a post by one of them) would be to have the original text written by the author and compare it to what was written in the rulebook. If it was changed probably the developers wanted it to work as I read it, if it is the same, probably the developers read it as the author wanted it to work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you're saying the ability does absolutely nothing.
...
I really wish people would stop treating the CRB as a legal document. It's not. It's not written to be 100% loophole proof because otherwise the company can get sued for billions or a murderer gets free or something like that. It's written by humans for humans, and not by lawyers for lawyers.
There're two different possible ways to play this. First, we let the ability do what the author explicitly meant it to do, even if the wording isn't perfect. Second, we interpret the text like a robot, getting hung up on word order and s++%, and have the ability do nothing. Only one of the two makes the game fun.
"Above all, have fun." CRB pg. 9
|
|
èquote]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.So you're saying the ability does absolutely nothing.
...
I really wish people would stop treating the CRB as a legal document. It's not. It's not written to be 100% loophole proof because otherwise the company can get sued for billions or a murderer gets free or something like that. It's written by humans for humans, and not by lawyers for lawyers.
There're two different possible ways to play this. First, we let the ability do what the author explicitly meant it to do, even if the wording isn't perfect. Second, we interpret the text like a robot, getting hung up on word order and s**%, and have the ability do nothing. Only one of the two makes the game fun.
"Above all, have fun." CRB pg. 9
Gaining 2 feats as bonus feats isn't "nothing". What I am saying is that, as written, it doesn't do what the author says she wanted it to do.
The problem with "I really wish people would stop treating the CRB as a legal document." is that, precisely with the feat Vita Strike, people didn't want to read the CRB as a legal document and applied it to all attacks. something that was squashed by the FAQ.
Taking into account the pre-existence of the FAQ, not considering it, and not formatting the text of the ability in a way that explicitly bypasses the limits imposed by the FAQ would have been a blunder on the author part.
It was really easy to do that, as Name Violation rephrasing clearly show.
So either the author blundered and no one noticed that or the ability war rewritten by the developers.
In both instances, the FAQ makes it legal text that says something different from what the author wanted to accomplish.
|
|
Whenever is whenever, not just sometimes.
Whenever
conjunction
at whatever time; on whatever occasion (emphasizing a lack of restriction).
"you can ask for help whenever you need it"
adverb
used for emphasis instead of “when” in questions, typically expressing surprise or confusion.
If under any circumstances you happen to make an attack and it took you a standard action to do you apply the effect of vital strike (in addition to anything else)
Ordinarily vital strike uses the attack action, a specific kind of standard action
This ability over rides the specific attack action usually required to use vital strike with a general "any time they perform a standard action also apply this"
Th heritor Knight prestige class grants a bunch of extra standard action attacks, and mighty strike was written to allow for vital strike with those standard action attacks. The wording is quite clear that it DOES in fact change the rules for vital strike. If it did nothing but give the feats, then it wouldn’t say anything after the first line.
To further emphasize the change here...
When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage.
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.
Attack action and melee attack as a standard action are not the same thing. This has been pointed out numerous times in FAQs and rules clarifications. The ability changes vital strikes rules from attack action, to anytime they make a melee attack as a standard action. This allows them to use vital strike with the new attack options granted by the prestige class as well as some more potent standard action melee attacks from feats and other classes.
If we read attack as a standard action as the same thing as attack action, then there never would have been any dispute or rules clarifications about if cleave can be used with vital strike or not. The answer would have been yes as opposed to the No we all know it is.
|
|
I am partially wrong. The author was very precise in her wording.
Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack.
The feats the author cited all have "As a standard action, you can make a single attack" or something very close to that. (Footslayer: Attacking a foe in this way is a standard action).
All are feat that have you making a melee attack.Sword Against Injustice doesn't do that.
Sword Against Injustice (Su)At 3rd level, a crusader may use his power to judge the guilty and absolve the innocent. As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment.
The standard action isn't making the attack, it is announcing the judgment.
|
|
I am partially wrong. The author was very precise in her wording.
Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack.The feats the author cited all have "As a standard action, you can make a single attack" or something very close to that. (Footslayer: Attacking a foe in this way is a standard action).
All are feat that have you making a melee attack.Sword Against Injustice doesn't do that.
Sword Against Injustice (Su)At 3rd level, a crusader may use his power to judge the guilty and absolve the innocent. As a standard action he may ; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment.
The standard action isn't making the attack, it is announcing the judgment.
What does "announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" do?
Makes a melee attack as a standard action.And thus vital strike applies
|
|
I am partially wrong. The author was very precise in her wording.
Whenever the heritor knight makes a melee attack as a standard action, she can apply the effects of Improved Vital Strike to that attack.The feats the author cited all have "As a standard action, you can make a single attack" or something very close to that. (Footslayer: Attacking a foe in this way is a standard action).
All are feat that have you making a melee attack.Sword Against Injustice doesn't do that.
Sword Against Injustice (Su)At 3rd level, a crusader may use his power to judge the guilty and absolve the innocent. As a standard action he may ; the crusader makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment.
The standard action isn't making the attack, it is announcing the judgment.
What does "announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" do?
Makes a melee attack as a standard action.And thus vital strike applies
No. It calls the judgment. Notice how the judgment works:
As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice;
the crusader makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment.
If the target is innocent of what he is accused, the attack stops just short of striking him, as if hitting an invisible wall; if the target is guilty, the attack automatically hits with a flash of white light.
That isn't a melee attack, it says that the standard action is the judgment, the other things are how it is resolved.
You can't take away pieces of a feat to change hows it works.You ask what a "announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" does?
Let's write the whole feat with your change:
At 3rd level, a crusader may use his power to judge the guilty and absolve the innocent. As a standard action he (cut) makes a melee attack with his sword against the target as part of this judgment (no judgment to refer to, it was cut away) If the target is innocent (of what, there is no declaration of what is judged) of what he is accused, the attack stops just short of striking him, as if hitting an invisible wall; if the target is guilty (of what, there is no declaration of what is judged), the attack automatically hits with a flash of white light.
This attack requires no attack roll and cannot critically hit. If the target is protected by an effect that inhibits divinations (such as mind blank), the attack bounces off the target with an unpleasant metallic hiss, like quenching a red-hot blade in water. The crusader may use this ability once per day; each additional use beyond the first drains him, causing him to become fatigued. He cannot use this class ability if he is exhausted. He may expend a use of channel energy or lay on hands while activating this ability to prevent fatigue. Sometimes people wrongly accused of great crimes beg for the intercession of an Inheritor’s crusader, knowing this power will exonerate them.
If we change it your way it becomes a mele attack that never hits and never misses but stays in undecided status forever, as there is nothing to judge.
Schroedringer melee attack.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know this is the rules forum, but you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay overthinking it.
Yes or no
Is it a standard action that results in a melee attack being made?
If yes, then add extra damage as if vital striking.
Does the ability say it takes a standard action? Yes.
Does the ability result in a melee attack? Yes.
Extra damage applies.
Real simple.
Diego, you are being deliberately obtuse now. Cutting out the declaration of the judgement is no different that cutting out the declaration of a target. The standard action is for the ability in its entirety. “As part of this judgement” doesn’t mean “a separate effect attached to” it means exactly what it says, a part of the action. The standard action is declare a target, declare a crime, make an attack with no roll. It is for all intents and purposes a melee attack as a standard action.
|
|
Diego, you are being deliberately obtuse now. Cutting out the declaration of the judgement is no different that cutting out the declaration of a target. The standard action is for the ability in its entirety. “As part of this judgement” doesn’t mean “a separate effect attached to” it means exactly what it says, a part of the action. The standard action is declare a target, declare a crime, make an attack with no roll. It is for all intents and purposes a melee attack as a standard action.
The judgment is the key of the whole ability, what you call as being judged is what determines if you hit or miss.
If the target is innocent of what he is accused,
So you need to define what the target is accused of. You don't accuse the target of something: the ability doesn't trigger.
As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice;
If you don't accuse the target of something that is "a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" the ability doesn't trigger, so you can't accuse the target of avoiding your attacks or having blond hairs to avoid the need to make a meaningful accusation.
Maybe you want to play it another way, but the ability is based on dispensing justice, not getting a melee attack.
|
|
Diego, you are being deliberately obtuse now. Cutting out the declaration of the judgement is no different that cutting out the declaration of a target. The standard action is for the ability in its entirety. “As part of this judgement” doesn’t mean “a separate effect attached to” it means exactly what it says, a part of the action. The standard action is declare a target, declare a crime, make an attack with no roll. It is for all intents and purposes a melee attack as a standard action.The judgment is the key of the whole ability, what you call as being judged is what determines if you hit or miss.
If the target is innocent of what he is accused,
So you need to define what the target is accused of. You don't accuse the target of something: the ability doesn't trigger.As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice;
If you don't accuse the target of something that is "a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" the ability doesn't trigger, so you can't accuse the target of avoiding your attacks or having blond hairs to avoid the need to make a meaningful accusation.Maybe you want to play it another way, but the ability is based on dispensing justice, not getting a melee attack.
a melee attack is part of that standard action. whether or not it hits, an attack is still made
Diego, you are being deliberately obtuse now. Cutting out the declaration of the judgement is no different that cutting out the declaration of a target. The standard action is for the ability in its entirety. “As part of this judgement” doesn’t mean “a separate effect attached to” it means exactly what it says, a part of the action. The standard action is declare a target, declare a crime, make an attack with no roll. It is for all intents and purposes a melee attack as a standard action.The judgment is the key of the whole ability, what you call as being judged is what determines if you hit or miss.
If the target is innocent of what he is accused,
So you need to define what the target is accused of. You don't accuse the target of something: the ability doesn't trigger.As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice;
If you don't accuse the target of something that is "a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" the ability doesn't trigger, so you can't accuse the target of avoiding your attacks or having blond hairs to avoid the need to make a meaningful accusation.Maybe you want to play it another way, but the ability is based on dispensing justice, not getting a melee attack.
For point of fact if an ability does not list the action it takes to perform it is assumed to be a standard action so separating the judgement from the attack means while the judgement is a standard the attack in question is undefined and thus a second standard action so either it takes 2 turns to work and vital strike applies or it takes one standard and vital strike applies.
|
|
For point of fact if an ability does not list the action it takes to perform it is assumed to be a standard action so separating the judgement from the attack means while the judgement is a standard the attack in question is undefined and thus a second standard action so either it takes 2 turns to work and vital strike applies or it takes one standard and vital strike applies.Diego, you are being deliberately obtuse now. Cutting out the declaration of the judgement is no different that cutting out the declaration of a target. The standard action is for the ability in its entirety. “As part of this judgement” doesn’t mean “a separate effect attached to” it means exactly what it says, a part of the action. The standard action is declare a target, declare a crime, make an attack with no roll. It is for all intents and purposes a melee attack as a standard action.The judgment is the key of the whole ability, what you call as being judged is what determines if you hit or miss.
If the target is innocent of what he is accused,
So you need to define what the target is accused of. You don't accuse the target of something: the ability doesn't trigger.As a standard action he may announce he is bringing divine judgment upon a target who is accused of a crime, lie, or other affront to justice;
If you don't accuse the target of something that is "a crime, lie, or other affront to justice" the ability doesn't trigger, so you can't accuse the target of avoiding your attacks or having blond hairs to avoid the need to make a meaningful accusation.Maybe you want to play it another way, but the ability is based on dispensing justice, not getting a melee attack.
Or it is a free attack you get as a consequence of the standard action, like the ones you get from spell with a range of touch and vital strike doesn't apply.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or it is a free attack you get as a consequence of the standard action, like the ones you get from spell with a range of touch and vital strike doesn't apply.
That touch attack is explicitly called a free action, and can be separated from the casting by your entire move action (but not by another round, as you'd then be holding the charge):
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Spellstrike falls under this, as it allows you to use a melee attack in lieu of the touch attack when using this free action. Sword Against Injustice does not say that the melee attack is a free action; therefore we can't simply assume that it works in a similar manner.
In fact, it can't be a "free attack that you get," since the pronouncement only defines the attack roll for the attack (implicitly, instead of rolling 1d20, you're rolling 1d Iomedae's verdict.) If you didn't make the attack, the pronouncement would literally be just yelling some words that invoke Iomedae as a standard action - something 1st level commoners can do as a free action.
The attack is the central element of the ability. Yes, it hits or misses based on the parameters set by the pronouncement (again, 1d Iomedae's verdict) - but it's a melee attack as a standard action. It's just that the action also has a verbal component.