Fighting Defensively with Ray Spells


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

So a fellow PFS GM and myself have been having a rather heated debate about whether or not you can Fight Defensively as a Standard action when casting a Ray or other ranged touch attack spell.

My stance is Yes, since Fighting Defensively as a standard action does not make any mention of it needing to be a "weapon attack" simply an "attack" as a standard action. As has been established in the past, a touch attack spell is an attack in every sense of the word, even being able to add sneak attack damage to it. As long as the "attack" and "as a Standard Action" requirements are met, you may fight defensively.

His stance is No, since Fighting Defensively is itself it's own Standard Action and therefore would be unable to be combined with another standard action spell casting, regardless of whether that spell is an "attack" or not.

Both points have validity. Anyone care to weigh in?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

At the very least, I'd impose a concentration check to cast the spell... at the same minus as applied to the attack penalty.

Dark Archive

LazarX, why is that additional penalty necessary when he's already receiving a penalty to the attack roll?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
That Crazy Alchemist wrote:
LazarX, why is that additional penalty necessary when he's already receiving a penalty to the attack roll?

Because it wouldn't be fair to those players who aren't getting the benefit of additional defense when they are making the standard roll. If you are going to throw extra motion beyond the standard casting defensively roll for additonal protection, it justifies upping the DC to do so.

Mind, if the GM says you can't do it at all, it's an equally valid call since the fighting defensively rules were written only for combat, not spellcasting. Quite frankly, I'm more likely to go with the more elegant answer of it simply not being possible, as it wouldn't be possible for a bow or crossbowman to do the same.

Dark Archive

Wait...now why wouldn't a bowman be able to fight defensively? There is no mention of the attack needing to be a melee attack.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Defensive fighting is a tactic which modifies the attack action, not merely actions with attack rolls.

The attack action does not include spellcasting. Spellcasting is a separate action.

Thus, you cannot fight defensively while spellcasting.

You can while shooting a bow or crossbow, however, as they do use the attack action.

The fact you are making an attack roll as part of your spellcasting is immaterial...your action is spellcasting. If it applied while Raycasting, it would apply while touchcasting or simply casting normally.

Note that it takes special actions by classes such as the magus to be able to attack with spells while taking the attack action. If you aren't a magus using spell combat, you're out of luck.

==Aelryinth

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Defensive fighting is a tactic which modifies the attack action, not merely actions with attack rolls.

The attack action does not include spellcasting. Spellcasting is a separate action.

Thus, you cannot fight defensively while spellcasting.

You can while shooting a bow or crossbow, however, as they do use the attack action.

The fact you are making an attack roll as part of your spellcasting is immaterial...your action is spellcasting. If it applied while Raycasting, it would apply while touchcasting or simply casting normally.

Note that it takes special actions by classes such as the magus to be able to attack with spells while taking the attack action. If you aren't a magus using spell combat, you're out of luck.

==Aelryinth

I've never seen a Magus do that as they're already taking a -2 to attacks just for spell combat. If they're taking any more off it's to make the concentration check an auto-succeed.


Aelrynith is correct.

Now, if you cast the spell and then can attack with it on the following round (such as holding the charge or spells like Produce Flame that grant multiple attacks from one casting), then I would let you fight defensively on the subsequent rounds since you're now just attacking. But excluding spell combat, you can't do it on the same round in which you cast the spell.


The attack part is a free action granted by the standard action of casting a spell. Casting a spell as a standard action is not attacking as a standard action.

However, fighting defensively as a full round action can be done when making a full attack action. So the question then becomes: Could a magus using spell combat benefit from fighting defensively as a full round action? Given the magus FAQ on haste and other 'full round action' types of things I'm inclined to say yes.

Given those contexts I'm inclined to say RAI, that you could use a ray spell in a defensive fighting. In context an attack (as opposed to a full-attack) is a standard action. Fighting defensively in and of itself isn't a standard action (else you wouldn't still be able to attack). The limitation seems to be more that you've used your standard action and are making an attack as part of that standard action, but the free ray attack (or touch spell attack) is coming about because of the choice of standard action you chose (as opposed to using your standard to move, or activate a non-attacking SLA, etc).

So all of that to say, RAW, no, I don't think you can.
RAI, I think it fits within the context of what fighting defensively actually means.

Dark Archive

Combat wrote:

Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action.

The bolded text to me is saying that there is no "free action to make a ranged touch attack" like there is with melee touch spells. The spell itself is the attack. I can think of no other reason why they'd add in that sentence without that being its meaning.


Never noticed that difference between spells that grant a free melee touch attack as opposed to spells that give a ranged touch attack. Those really really should be the same IMO. Either both are part of casting the spell, or both grant a free action attack of the appropriate type.


That Crazy Alchemist wrote:

So a fellow PFS GM and myself have been having a rather heated debate about whether or not you can Fight Defensively as a Standard action when casting a Ray or other ranged touch attack spell.

My stance is Yes, since Fighting Defensively as a standard action does not make any mention of it needing to be a "weapon attack" simply an "attack" as a standard action. As has been established in the past, a touch attack spell is an attack in every sense of the word, even being able to add sneak attack damage to it. As long as the "attack" and "as a Standard Action" requirements are met, you may fight defensively.

His stance is No, since Fighting Defensively is itself it's own Standard Action and therefore would be unable to be combined with another standard action spell casting, regardless of whether that spell is an "attack" or not.

Both points have validity. Anyone care to weigh in?

No. Fighting defensively is its own standard action, which you cannot take while casting a spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thorin001 wrote:
Fighting defensively is its own standard action, which you cannot take while casting a spell.

"Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action: You can choose to fight defensively when attacking."

"Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action."
It sounds to me like it's something that modifies attacks, not an action in its own right.

If you make an attack of some kind, and it's a standard action to do so, then you can fight defensively.
The 'cast a touch spell and then make a touch attack as a free action' seems to rule it out for some spells, but I don't know if that applies to rays...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

After reading all the posts above, I'd have to say that Fighting Defensively is not an option for Ray or Melee Touch Spells, because it requires that you have to be physically attacking to do so. Since you're casting a spell, you don't have the attack action available needed to activate the feat.


Gwen Smith wrote:

Aelrynith is correct.

Now, if you cast the spell and then can attack with it on the following round (such as holding the charge or spells like Produce Flame that grant multiple attacks from one casting), then I would let you fight defensively on the subsequent rounds since you're now just attacking. But excluding spell combat, you can't do it on the same round in which you cast the spell.

This.


Just a Guess wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:

Aelrynith is correct.

Now, if you cast the spell and then can attack with it on the following round (such as holding the charge or spells like Produce Flame that grant multiple attacks from one casting), then I would let you fight defensively on the subsequent rounds since you're now just attacking. But excluding spell combat, you can't do it on the same round in which you cast the spell.

This.

Yeah this is how I'm leaning too but I want to think on it more before I outright say such 100%.

Physically attacking or not is non-sense, what matters is if you attack as a standard action or full attack action since those are the action type attacks that state that fighting defensively can be used with them.

Fighting defensively with a touch spell when you cast the spell? Leaning on no.

Fighting defensively on the following round as a standard action to attack with the touch? I'm going with yes since a standard action attack is alright for fighting defensively (regardless of what you are attacking with).

Have a spell that lets you attack at range the round after (say fiery shirukens) as a full or standard attack action? Sure.

Have a spell like scorching ray where it's spell completion fire rays? Again not so much because the action types don't match.


Fight defensively as full-round requires you to make a full-attack action. This is the same as Vital Strike requiring the standard Atack action. Thus, for example, you couldn't fight defensively as a Charge or a Spring Attack. Conversely, fighting defensively as a standard only calls out making an attack. So any attack made as a standard action, including but not limited to standard Attack, Cleave, using a Ray as a standard action, etc. Can be done defensively. However, if you can attack as a free, swift, or move action, none of these can be done defensively.

And all of these only modify their associated action. So you can combine, for instance, Overhand Chop, Vital Strike, and Fight Defensively as Standard.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Just a Guess wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:

Aelrynith is correct.

Now, if you cast the spell and then can attack with it on the following round (such as holding the charge or spells like Produce Flame that grant multiple attacks from one casting), then I would let you fight defensively on the subsequent rounds since you're now just attacking. But excluding spell combat, you can't do it on the same round in which you cast the spell.

This.

Yes, this.

Dark Archive

Ravingdork wrote:
Just a Guess wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:

Aelrynith is correct.

Now, if you cast the spell and then can attack with it on the following round (such as holding the charge or spells like Produce Flame that grant multiple attacks from one casting), then I would let you fight defensively on the subsequent rounds since you're now just attacking. But excluding spell combat, you can't do it on the same round in which you cast the spell.

This.
Yes, this.

yes this +2

otherwise just casting in melee would be casting defensively.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:

[Fighting defensively with a touch spell when you cast the spell? Leaning on no.

Fighting defensively on the following round as a standard action to attack with the touch? I'm going with yes since a standard action attack is alright for fighting defensively (regardless of what you are attacking with).

This assumes that you either foregone your free attack from casting the spell, or missed with it in that round. If the spell is key to bringing your target down, you gave it another round of attacks before doing so.

And if the issue is about ray attack spells, remember kids, even if you do succeed in casting defensively, since the spells are ray attacks you will STILL provoke an AOO from making a ranged attack.


Kazaan wrote:

Fight defensively as full-round requires you to make a full-attack action. This is the same as Vital Strike requiring the standard Atack action. Thus, for example, you couldn't fight defensively as a Charge or a Spring Attack. Conversely, fighting defensively as a standard only calls out making an attack. So any attack made as a standard action, including but not limited to standard Attack, Cleave, using a Ray as a standard action, etc. Can be done defensively. However, if you can attack as a free, swift, or move action, none of these can be done defensively.

And all of these only modify their associated action. So you can combine, for instance, Overhand Chop, Vital Strike, and Fight Defensively as Standard.

This is the joy that is the confusion between the attack action as a standard action, and the attack action. Both are often called "attacks" or "attacking" in the rules. Attack action as a standard action is when I specifically choose to attack as my standard action. Attack action happens every time I make an attack. A full-round attack gives me multiple attack actions.

rules wrote:


Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action

You can choose to fight defensively when attacking. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 to AC until the start of your next turn.

When read in context, the above rules strongly imply that fighting defensively must be done as part of a standard attack action(or full-round action if you read further down in that section), and not just action containing an attack qualifies.


Matthew Downie wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
Fighting defensively is its own standard action, which you cannot take while casting a spell.

"Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action: You can choose to fight defensively when attacking."

"Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action."
It sounds to me like it's something that modifies attacks, not an action in its own right.

If you make an attack of some kind, and it's a standard action to do so, then you can fight defensively.
The 'cast a touch spell and then make a touch attack as a free action' seems to rule it out for some spells, but I don't know if that applies to rays...

I agree that it should work the way you say, but the language does not support that, especially when it is listed as its own specific action type.


LazarX wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:

[Fighting defensively with a touch spell when you cast the spell? Leaning on no.

Fighting defensively on the following round as a standard action to attack with the touch? I'm going with yes since a standard action attack is alright for fighting defensively (regardless of what you are attacking with).

This assumes that you either foregone your free attack from casting the spell, or missed with it in that round. If the spell is key to bringing your target down, you gave it another round of attacks before doing so.

And if the issue is about ray attack spells, remember kids, even if you do succeed in casting defensively, since the spells are ray attacks you will STILL provoke an AOO from making a ranged attack.

Which is a great reason to try and raise your AC at that point -- but yeah ranged attack means you still provoke. On the plus side if it's the ranged attack that grabs the AoO at least your spell gets to go off instead of being disrupted.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

The Ray provokes the AoO before it is cast. You still have to make the concentration check from the damage to get it off.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

The Ray provokes the AoO before it is cast. You still have to make the concentration check from the damage to get it off.

==Aelryinth

Actually...

If you do not cast defensively, then you provoke when casting the spell. If you fail the concentration, you will lose the spell. This is because there are specific rules that state if you take damage while casting, you have to make a concentration check or the casting fails.

If you make a ranged attack, then you provoke as well. There is nothing in the rules that states you lose the ranged attack. So, if I shoot you with a bow in melee, you get to swing at me, but no matter what happens my bow shot still goes off.

If I cast defensively, you do not get an attack of opportunity for me casting a spell. Then, when I make the ranged attack that is part of the spell, then you get the AoO. Now if the attack were a free action that is actually separate from the spellcasting(like touch spells), then you AoO could not disrupt my spellcasting.

You could make an argument that the aiming is a separate thing that happens at the end of the spellcasting and use touch spell resolution as a precedent, because Ranged Touch Spells are a subcategory of Touch Spells. In fact, Ranged Touch Spells in Combat, are a sub category of the larger rule on Touch Spells in Combat.

I am inclined the think the specifics of Ranged Touch spells are meant to override the general touch spell rules, but I can also read it as enhancing and clarifying them.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth


A spell with a ranged attack (such as a ray) provokes twice. Once for casting and again for the ranged attack.

FAQ


Aelryinth wrote:

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth

Read the rules. There are 2 separate triggering actions, so 2 AOOs if you have Combat Reflexes. And usually the first one is obviated bay casting defensively, but the ray (ranged attack) still provokes.


Aelryinth wrote:

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth

It depends on interpretation.

rules wrote:


Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity

If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

Casting a spell provokes, unless I cast defensively.

Making a ranged attack provokes.

1. One interpretation of the bolded section is that one action == one opportunity, so since the casting and the attack are part of the same action, then you would only provoke one attack. Under this interpretation, if I charge someone with a reach weapon and make a trip attempt without improved trip, I would only provoke one AoO because both of those actions are part of the same charge action.

1a. Even if you use the interpretation in a, if you interpret the ranged touch attack rules as giving a separate free action to make the attack with, then the ranged touch attack is actually a separate action from the casting, and thus would provoke separately. If I use a move action to get adjacent to someone with a reach weapon and make a trip attempt without improved trip, I would provoke two AoO because I did 2 separate things in 2 separate actions that provoke.

2. Another interpretation of the bolded section is that each thing you do that provokes grants an AoO, so both the casting and the ranged attack can provoke an AoO. Under this interpretation, if I charge someone with a reach weapon and make a trip attempt without improved trip, I would provoke two AoO because I did 2 separate things that provoke.

Edit: apparent by the FAQ, #2 is the correct interpretation.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:


Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

==Aelryinth

And you're not hearing it this time. Casting a ray attack spelll DOES provide two opportunities for AOO provocation, the first from casting a spell while threathened if for some idiot reason you decide not to cast defensively.

The second is from launching the ray attack itself. Unlike the first, this one can not be avoided.


thorin001 wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth

Read the rules. There are 2 separate triggering actions, so 2 AOOs if you have Combat Reflexes. And usually the first one is obviated bay casting defensively, but the ray (ranged attack) still provokes.

The real question is if the second AoO(from the ranged attack) allows you to disrupt the spell casting. Is the text of of the ranged touch attack overriding the normal touch attack rules(ranged attack is part of the spellcasting) or is it clarifying that the range attack does not require a separate action to shoot it(the range touch attack is a free action separate from the spellcasting)?


Each action can only cause one AoO from a creature though.

So while you have two different provoking parts to the action even if the creature taking the AoO has combat reflexes they only get one AoO from the action.

I.E
Wizard casts a scorching ray spell.

He doesn't cast defensively and the ranged attack provokes. However this is a single action so each creature around him only gets one AoO. If they take the AoO on the casting they might ruin the spell. If they take the AoO on the ranged attack they do not ruin the spell (since you couldn't even make the ranged attack if the spell was ruined).

If the wizard does cast defensively and then makes the ranged attack he still provokes but the spell can't be ruined by the AoO since it's on the ranged attack and not the casting of the spell.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth


Charender wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth

Read the rules. There are 2 separate triggering actions, so 2 AOOs if you have Combat Reflexes. And usually the first one is obviated bay casting defensively, but the ray (ranged attack) still provokes.
The real question is if the second AoO(from the ranged attack) allows you to disrupt the spell casting. Is the text of of the ranged touch attack overriding the normal touch attack rules(ranged attack is part of the spellcasting) or is it clarifying that the range attack does not require a separate action to shoot it(the range touch attack is a free action separate from the spellcasting)?

It isn't a separate action but it doesn't ruin the spell since then you couldn't have provoked.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth

Fireballs and magic missles however don't require the concentration to "aim" as there are no attack rolls involved. On the flip side, you can't crit with them either, the way you can with a ray or bolt attack spell.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Charender wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

wait, what?

Where does it say that making a Ray attack provokes AoO twice? Because that's what you're saying...it would provoke for being a spell, and provoke for being a ranged attack.

Those are two very different things, and they don't stack. I've never heard of Ray attacks triggering two AoO's.

A Ray attack is a cast spell, and provokes as a cast spell. It's not a ranged attack...a ranged attack roll is part of the spellcasting.

Can you point me to where a Ray provokes both ways?

==Aelryinth

Read the rules. There are 2 separate triggering actions, so 2 AOOs if you have Combat Reflexes. And usually the first one is obviated bay casting defensively, but the ray (ranged attack) still provokes.
The real question is if the second AoO(from the ranged attack) allows you to disrupt the spell casting. Is the text of of the ranged touch attack overriding the normal touch attack rules(ranged attack is part of the spellcasting) or is it clarifying that the range attack does not require a separate action to shoot it(the range touch attack is a free action separate from the spellcasting)?
It isn't a separate action but it doesn't ruin the spell since then you couldn't have provoked.

If the ranged attack is part of the spellcasting, then getting hit by an AoO from the ranged attack means you took damage while casting a spell. You have to make a concentration check, and if you fail, it ruins the spell.


Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth

And that one AoO(for a fireball or magic missle) can be avoided by casting defensively.


Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth

Which is why the GMs I know treat the spells that DO require a ranged touch attack (requiring a to hit roll) as "ranged attacks" for things that can be done with "ranged attacks".

Opening Volley, Impact Critical Shot, Fighting Defensively, penalties from Levitate, Arcane Strike, etc. (but not Deadly Aim since it specifically calls out touch attacks).

Trade off for two attacks of opportunities (only one of which can be avoided).


Abraham Spalding, there is no rule that states a single action can only provoke once. What there is a rule against multiple AoOs per opportunity. This is different than action.

Casting a spell with a ranged touch attack is two opportunities even though it is only one action.

CRB p180 wrote:

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity:

If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity bonus to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity. Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

Next, the section on Rays specifically states it provokes separate from the casting.

CRB p186 wrote:
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.

The FAQ confirms that casting a spell with a ranged touch attack provokes twice.


Gauss wrote:

Abraham Spalding, there is no rule that states a single action can only provoke once. What there is a rule against is moving provoking more than one AoO from the same person.

The RAW uses the word opportunity. For a while, there was an interpretation that one action == one opportunity to provoke. According to the FAQ, this is wrong, but this isn't the first time I have seen this interpretation. I suspect that the 3.0/3.5 interpretation of this rule may have been different from the Pathfinder one or that the vagueness of the word opportunity is enough to cause a lot of table variance.


Charender,

The "Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity" section is basically unchanged from 3.5.
If one action = one opportunity then in 3.5 a person could full attack with a bow and only provoke once. That isn't the way I have seen it played. You provoked for each ranged attack back in 3.5 and you still provoke for each ranged attack in PF.

The "Ranged Touch Spells in Combat" section on page 186 did not exist in it's current format in 3.5.
Back in 3.5 it was not explicitly spelled out that Ranged Touch attacks provoke or do not provoke. However, ranged attacks did provoke and so I am *guessing* that there was a question as to whether ranged touch attacks provoked or not. The new section in Pathfinder answers the question.

My guess here is that people conflate the restriction on multiple opportunities during movement with the rest of the rule. Ie: the rule against multiple AoOs during movement gets boiled down to 'you only provoke once (per creature) when moving' which then gets conflated to 'you only provoke once (pre creature) per action'. Not an unreasonable chain of thought, but not one supported by the rules.


Two separate actions then, agreed, with two different attacks of opportunity.

As two separate actions though the provoking from the ranged attack does not ruin the spell since you can't make the ranged attack unless the spell is cast.

If the spell isn't cast then you couldn't have provoked by making a ranged attack.

You didn't take damage while casting the spell, you took damage from making a ranged attack, after the spell is done, since you wouldn't be making the attack if the spell had failed.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth

Fireballs and magic missles however don't require the concentration to "aim" as there are no attack rolls involved. On the flip side, you can't crit with them either, the way you can with a ray or bolt attack spell.

However, a fireball can require an attack roll in certain circumstances. Would it not provoke then?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Yeah, wow. Don't cast Rays in melee range, I guess.

that's actually kind of funny, because a fireball or magic missile or bolt would only trigger one AoO, despite also being a 'ranged attack'.

Ouchies.

==Aelryinth

Fireballs and magic missles however don't require the concentration to "aim" as there are no attack rolls involved. On the flip side, you can't crit with them either, the way you can with a ray or bolt attack spell.
However, a fireball can require an attack roll in certain circumstances. Would it not provoke then?

Depends on what those certain circumstances are, because frankly, I can't think of any. If you're thinking of an Arcane Archer, it's the act of archery which provokes, not the fireball.

Grand Lodge

LazarX wrote:
Depends on what those certain circumstances are, because frankly, I can't think of any. If you're thinking of an Arcane Archer, it's the act of archery which provokes, not the fireball.

From the spell itself:

Quote:
If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Depends on what those certain circumstances are, because frankly, I can't think of any. If you're thinking of an Arcane Archer, it's the act of archery which provokes, not the fireball.

From the spell itself:

Quote:
If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.

Then yes, in such extreme cases launching the fireball will provoke. Still no crit threat though.


LazarX wrote:
Then yes, in such extreme cases launching the fireball will provoke. Still no crit threat though.

You aren't rolling "to hit" a creature in this case, you are rolling "to hit" something that isn't there (the opening).

Success = "missing" the obstacle and failure = "hitting" what you didn't want to. You never roll critical damage when you miss :P


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yes, that's exactly what I meant, Jeff.

Grand Lodge

Charender wrote:
Gauss wrote:

Abraham Spalding, there is no rule that states a single action can only provoke once. What there is a rule against is moving provoking more than one AoO from the same person.

The RAW uses the word opportunity. For a while, there was an interpretation that one action == one opportunity to provoke. According to the FAQ, this is wrong, but this isn't the first time I have seen this interpretation. I suspect that the 3.0/3.5 interpretation of this rule may have been different from the Pathfinder one or that the vagueness of the word opportunity is enough to cause a lot of table variance.

Just to add to the, "This provokes twice, and you can get both AoOs with Combat Reflexes (or equivalent)" camp:

Greater Trip: How does this interact with Vicious Stomp (APG)? Do you get two AOOs or just one?
Using these feats together provokes two AOOs, because the two AOO-triggering acts are similar, but different.
Greater Trip gives you an AOO when you trip a foe. Vicious Stomp gives you an AOO occurs when a foe falls prone.
This answer originally appeared in the 9/11/12 Paizo blog.


Yes, casting a ranged touch attack spell in melee you provoke twice and enemies with multiple AOOs can make two because it is two separate triggers.

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Fighting Defensively with Ray Spells All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.