I honestly can't think of any ranged touch spells that aren't rays. For instance Disintegrate has "ray" under the effect line and the description is "a thin green ray".
If by chance there are any range touch spells that are not rays, as a GM i would let any feats/abilities apply to those spells. After all, if a spell reads like a ray and the mechanics are like a ray.....
Supernatural abilities are not ray spells, so the feats would not apply. (Su) abilities already have their own benefits in that they generally do not provoke AOOs and they completely ignore spell resistance!
Acid Arrow is an awful, awful spell. First, it can be "neutralized". I'm not sure how, but it's in the spell description. Secondly, it is a damage spell, but not a burst damage spell, and a low damage spell at that. Consider that Scorching Ray does 4d6 damage per ray and maxes out at 3 rays for 12d6 damage at level 11. Acid arrow maxes out at 12d4 damage, but not until level 18, and it's only 2d4 damage per round. Anything that has resistance 5/acid won't even notice it. Conversely, a creature with resistance 20/fire will still take some damage from a 12d6 Scorching Ray most of the time.
On top of that, Acid Arrow is a conjuration spell, which means it summons forth an actual physical acid-shaped blob of acid. (It's the reason it ignores spell resistance: you are not shooting magical acid at someone, you have actual acid from the "Plane of Acid" or wherever it comes from, and you magically mold it into an arrow form. Nothing magical about the acid itself, it's only magically propelled from your hand.) Since Acid Arrow is not a ray, I would be hesistant to give it a bonus from Wpn Focus: Rays if i were the GM. On the other hand, with a spell that awful you need all the help you can get =)
Actually a ray does not have to come from a spell so it would apply. Rays from spells was just used an an example in the FAQ. The game makes no distinction between the source of the ray for the purpose of this feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, it doesn't matter if the 'ray' is from a SP or SU type ability (as long as it refers back to a spell with the ray descriptor).
Also, if the spell doesn't mention 'ray' it doesn't gain the benefits of WF (Ray) or the likes.
Actually a ray does not have to come from a spell so it would apply. Rays from spells was just used an an example in the FAQ. The game makes no distinction between the source of the ray for the purpose of this feat.
so by this ruling, Acid Arrow would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it is not a ray. similarly, Telekinetic Fist would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it, too, is not a ray.
I suppose there's not an FAQ or Errata on whether you can take "Weapon Focus: Non-Ray SP & SU Ranged Touch Attacks"
Actually a ray does not have to come from a spell so it would apply. Rays from spells was just used an an example in the FAQ. The game makes no distinction between the source of the ray for the purpose of this feat.so by this ruling, Acid Arrow would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it is not a ray. similarly, Telekinetic Fist would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it, too, is not a ray.
I suppose there's not an FAQ or Errata on whether you can take "Weapon Focus: Non-Ray SP & SU Ranged Touch Attacks"
Correct on both accounts.
The quick and dirty answer is No and neither FAQ or Errata is needed. Spells are spells, not weapons (unless otherwise noted). If the spell doesn't have a line like "this spell is treated like a scimitar" or "ray" than there isn't a way to get WF tagged on to it [WF (unarmed strike) works for melee touch attacks though I believe].
To clarify, it doesn't matter if the 'ray' is from a SP or SU type ability (as long as it refers back to a spell with the ray descriptor).
Also, if the spell doesn't mention 'ray' it doesn't gain the benefits of WF (Ray) or the likes.
I agree that if the spell doesn't mention 'ray' then it shouldn't gain the benefits of feats SPECIFIC to rays, such as WF: Rays, BUT, what about feats that affect ranged attacks in general?
Feats like PBS and Precise Shot affect ranged attacks as a whole, and so is a ranged touch (from a spell) considered attacking with a ranged weapon, thus benefiting from such feats?
I never said they didn't, it is a given they do what they say they do.
When I said "the likes" it was in reference to feats that require a 'weapon' to be selected. Improved Crit, etc.
Actually a ray does not have to come from a spell so it would apply. Rays from spells was just used an an example in the FAQ. The game makes no distinction between the source of the ray for the purpose of this feat.so by this ruling, Acid Arrow would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it is not a ray. similarly, Telekinetic Fist would not be affected by Weapon Focus: Ray as it, too, is not a ray.
I suppose there's not an FAQ or Errata on whether you can take "Weapon Focus: Non-Ray SP & SU Ranged Touch Attacks"
Correct. If ranged touch attacks was allowed it would just be "ranged touch" without the SU or SP. The weapon is still the same no matter the source.
Yes Seng, PBS and PS do affect those attacks since they are still ranged attacks. It is often suggested to take Precise Shot if you are a ray or ranged attack specialist. Touch AC is not normally that high, but if the enemy is in combat with a party member and has soft cover he effectively has a +8 to his AC.
Sorry, I interpreted the question beyond what you were actually asking. I concur with Concerro, Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot would both apply to any ranged attack, whether it be a ray or another form of a ranged touch attack.