Pathfinder 1E Is Spring Attack overpowered?

[Steel_Wind]

Just in because this is relevant later, I feel the need to point out that Vital Strike is not a standard action; however, it only activates when when you take the attack action, which is a standard action.

Exactly.

And seeing as the reference to a single melee attack is made in the text of spring attack itself, then it's usable.

The problem here is the suggestion that the errata was intended to prevent the use of vital strike during it. It doesn't say that -- the developers haven't said that. Nobody has said that execept some posters on the forums form time to time. The devs, when they have posted on it, have interpreted it the exact opposite of what is suggested here.

End result: the Errata does not exclude Vital Strike.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Vital Strike would have worked fine with 3.5 Spring Attack. Spring Attack was purposefully changed not to allow it, which is about as official as you can get.

Where is that stated? It's your interpretation of the effect of the errata - but the amended text is not inconsistent with the functioning of Vital Strike, even now.

Sorry. I disagree.

If you can show me where a dev has stated that vital strike is not a "single melee attack" within the meaning of Spring Attack? I'm with you. But to suggest Spriong Attack was clarified to prevent the use of Vital Strike? I don't see that anywhere. If you can show me where Jason has stated that? Please send me the link - I'd be happy to know.

 

[pawsplay]

Exactly.

And seeing as the reference to a single melee attack is made in the text of spring attack itself, then it's usable.

You seem to be missing something very important: the attack action is not a single melee attack. It's a standard action listed in the combat chapter.

The attack action does allow a single melee attack, but not all single melee attacks are the attack action. Attacks of opportunity, attacks as part of a full attack, and special actions that allow a single attack or some other specified number of attacks (such as Cleave or Pinpoint Targeting) are also not the attack action.

The problem here is the suggestion that the errata was intended to prevent the use of vital strike during it. It doesn't say that -- the developers haven't said that. Nobody has said that execept some posters on the forums form time to time. The devs, when they have posted on it, have interpreted it the exact opposite of what is suggested here.

End result: the Errata does not exclude Vital Strike.

Compare Pathfinder Spring Attack to the 3.5 Spring Attack.

Steel_Wind, although this particular issue pertains to a change made to Spring Attack by Paizo, the general issue (the attack action versus single attack) is as ancient as D&D 3.0. History is not on your side.

 

[pawsplay]

If you can show me where a dev has stated that vital strike is not a "single melee attack" within the meaning of Spring Attack? I'm with you.

Show me anywhere in the Pathfinder version of Spring Attack where it says you make a standard attack.

 

[Steel_Wind]

But if you can tell me how a Full Round Action (spring attack) and a Standard action (vital strike) can be used in the same turn, I'd be happy to agree with you. I find nothing to contract this in any of the designers posts.

Because if your interpretation was correct, it wouldn't be possible to make ANY attack during the course of Spring Attack -- as an attack action is, by definition, a "standard action".

And you can't have a full-round action and a standard action at the same time.

Slow down. That can't be right.

Read the text for Spring Attack. It says make a single melee attack. That's what Spring Attack says you can do. You can make a single melee attack because the feat says you can do it.

Now the question is not whether Vital Strike is a swift action, an immediate action, a move action or a standard action. You are becoming distracted here. Read the text again, because it tells you what you can and cannot do.

The question is this: is Vital Strike a single melee attack? Because that is what Spring Attack allows you to do.

Reading the feat description for Vital Strike it is all made very clear. Vital Strike specifically states that it is "a single attack". We're done. It's specifically permissible.

The rest is confusion and distraction.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Show me anywhere in the Pathfinder version of Spring Attack where it says you make a standard attack.

It doesn't. It talks about a single melee attack. THAT is the point.

So let's stop worrying about whether it's a swift, immediate, full, or standard and instead focus upon whether or not the proposed attack is a single attack. Because THAT is what is permitted.

Then read Vital Strike and you will quickly confirm that it is, in fact, a single attack. It says so clearly and plainly. We're done.

 

[sheadunne]

Vital Strike
When you use the attack action . . .

attack action requires the use of a standard action

A full-attack action requires the use of a full-round action

Spring Attack
As a full-round action, you can move up to your speed and make a single melee attack

Spring attack allows you to make a single melee attack which is not an attack action, the same way Attacks of Opportunity are not attack actions, but single melee attacks.

But again, it doesn't really matter because you can always just house rule it any way you like. Official/non-official makes no difference unless you're playing a PFS game. Personally I think Spring Attack is too weak and house rule it in my games to be a better feat and it should work with Vital Strike. I see no reason to limit its use. I changed Spring Attack to mimic flyby attack so you can take a standard action in the middle of it, rather than limited to a single melee attack. It much more interesting that way and can create some really interesting game situations.

 

[Systole]

I've never found it overpowered. Annoying when a character builds towards it - sometimes, but never overpowered.

Ultimately explain how you feel to the DM, let the DM read this thread, but recognize its well within the DM's prerogative to ban a single feat if they feel it to be OP. I'm sorry I know it sucks but I got to side with the DM on this one. If you don't like it, don't play.

I'm aware of what the DM's prerogatives are. Doesn't mean I can't argue with him.

 

[Systole]

@Vital Strike/Spring Attack people:

I'm not part of this argument, but I found http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/pathfinder-faq#TOC-Spring-Attack-8-20-10-
and
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/pathfinder-faq#TOC-Vital-Strike-8-20-10-

Carry on.


EDIT: Links broken.

 

[Steel_Wind]

@Vital Strike/Spring Attack people:

I'm not part of this argument, but I found
and
Pathfinder FAQ - Pathfinder_OGC-

Carry on.

See, this is the part that I'm not getting from the d20pfsrd FAQ you quote (which doesn't appear to be quoting a Paizo dev):

Q: Can you combine the Spring Attack feat with Vital Strike?
A: (Errata 8/20/10) The spring attack feat has been changed in the 8/20/2010 Errata to be a Full-Round action. This prevents one from using Spring Attack and vital strike together. This also includes any of the Standard action feats like Cleave also.

Let us return for a moment to what this might have meant before errata. Because I do not think the errata was necessarily directed at Vital Strike at all.

If the question here comes down to addition of actions, does it matter if Spring attack is a standard action or a full round action? If Spring attack is a standard action, is Vital Strike then permitted?

It doesn't appear to be at first blush. If spring attack was described as a standard action, it still wouldn't allow you to make another attack action (which is a standard action), which is vital strike.

You get only get one standard action per round. So this appears to me to be equivocal. The errata is not clarifying that spring attack and vital strike are mutually exclusive. 1+1 is still equal to 2. If the interpretation of spring attack falls upon that math, then it was illegal before the errata and it's illegal after it, too.

Am I missing something here?

What the errata seems to be making clear is that you can't move, and do a move + attack + another move. (Or do a swift and do a spring attack.)

You move, attack, move. That's it.

That's all that appears to be clarfied by the errata. Is there some other issue out there I am missing?

It appears to me that the issue is whether or not vital strike is a single melee attack. If it is, it's allowable; if it isn't, it's precluded.

One persuasive comment above notes that the single melee attack which forms part of the Spring Attack action is a melee attack which is not part of an attack action. I don't see where that has been stated in the Pathfinder rules -- but I admit that if that were a true characterization of what is going on, then this issue is resolved in favor of "no". Nicely reasoned, but I don't see where that conclusion is necessary or inevitable (though it may well be correct).

I really don't see how the errata was aimed at clarifying this specific issue at all. The fact that I can't find a statement from a Paizo developer that states it clearly just muddles the whole situation further (which is very frustrating).

So. I'll write 'em -- or call em -- and get it clarfiied if I can.