Smite Evil + Magic Missile


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

FangDragon wrote:
Surely this isn't FAQ worthy. Really can't believe people think smite works on auto hits.

Where does it say this? Where in smite does it say it does not work on auto hits?


Finlanderboy wrote:
FangDragon wrote:
Surely this isn't FAQ worthy. Really can't believe people think smite works on auto hits.
Where does it say this? Where in smite does it say it does not work on auto hits?

Because it would be rather silly to assume you could Smite someone with a Fireball as well.

We could probably agree that it requires an attack roll. Thus, magic missile stops being the contender, and scorching ray may take the cake. "Volley" attacks don't apply for sneak attacks past the 1st, but Smite Evil isn't precision damage.


Full smite rules:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite. If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.

The smite evil effect remains until the target of the smite is dead or the next time the paladin rests and regains her uses of this ability. At 4th level, and at every three levels thereafter, the paladin may smite evil one additional time per day, as indicated on Table: Paladin, to a maximum of seven times per day at 19th level.

I posted the entire smite text.

Your belief alone is not an authority. I am sorry, but I am asking for reference.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

By the time you are Level ten you'll be fighting enemies with Sr, and wands are terrible at getting through sr.

Yes it works, smite evil is clear.


Aranna wrote:

Two thoughts:

1- the spell isn't a physical attack. boiled down it is simply cast spell do xd4+x damage, like a fireball with no save. So no smite.

2- the spell just does xd4+x damage that can be split up between targets. each die isn't a new damage roll it is part of the same one. So if you hit one target with 5d4+5 force damage it is ONE damage roll. Even if you split the damage up it is still one damage roll of 5d4+5, just different targets are taking different pieces of the damage roll.

This is correct.

When targeting a single opponent, the Magic Missile spell is rolled as a single attack, not as multiple attacks.

Smite applies once.

Whether or not you roll to hit isn't relevant.

Shadow Lodge

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

Scarab Sages

alexd1976 wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Two thoughts:

1- the spell isn't a physical attack. boiled down it is simply cast spell do xd4+x damage, like a fireball with no save. So no smite.

2- the spell just does xd4+x damage that can be split up between targets. each die isn't a new damage roll it is part of the same one. So if you hit one target with 5d4+5 force damage it is ONE damage roll. Even if you split the damage up it is still one damage roll of 5d4+5, just different targets are taking different pieces of the damage roll.

This is correct.

When targeting a single opponent, the Magic Missile spell is rolled as a single attack, not as multiple attacks.

Smite applies once.

Whether or not you roll to hit isn't relevant.

Simple question: How is Scorching Ray affected by Fire Resistance?


Master of Shadows wrote:

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?


alexd1976 wrote:
Master of Shadows wrote:

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?

I'm still on the fence about this, but this is a very poor strawman.


CampinCarl9127 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Master of Shadows wrote:

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?
I'm still on the fence about this, but this is a very poor strawman.

It's a question. It's a yes/no question.

Calling it a strawman doesn't make it one, I want to know whether or not five attacks in a single standard action is legal in this case, because Smite is applied to attacks, not to dice.


alexd1976 wrote:
So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?

Technically it's even possible without spells


CampinCarl9127 wrote:
It's very hard to argue rules intents, but I'm pretty certain if they only wanted it to work with physical attacks it would have a line that says so. But perhaps you are right and that is the intent, it's impossible to prove either way without developer commentary.

Hmm, found two older threads (from 2014 and 2009), with no official response. But Kwauss' posting was interesting:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qwfr&page=2?A-paladin-Smite-evil-is-applic able-to-spell#59 wrote:

I think this thread has identified a lot of edge cases it would be good to get clarification on:

1. AoE attacks with instantaneous duration (e.g. fireball)
2. Targeted instantaneous spells with multiple damage packets (e.g. magic missile) with or without a to hit roll (e.g. scorching ray)
3. Multi-round spells with multiple damage packets (produce flame, call lightning, flaming sphere) requiring additional actions
4. Multi-round spells with multiple damage packets that auto-damage (e.g. acid arrow)
5. Continuous effects (e.g. wall of fire)
(...)
21. Spells dealing ability score damage?
22. Offensive spells dealing no damage? (probably easy)

Anything else?

So the problem is probably less about power level than about the bazillion cases...

Thought a bit about VMC paladin and metamagic, but found no specific problems so far.


Entryhazard wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?
Technically it's even possible without spells

Your example link talks about additional attacks against DIFFERENT OPPONENTS, which is fine...

My question remains unchanged.

Shadow Lodge

alexd1976 wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Master of Shadows wrote:

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?
I'm still on the fence about this, but this is a very poor strawman.

It's a question. It's a yes/no question.

Calling it a strawman doesn't make it one, I want to know whether or not five attacks in a single standard action is legal in this case, because Smite is applied to attacks, not to dice.

1st, I made no such assertion. What I'm saying is that at 10th level a paladin built for pure Smite based DPR will out do the wand every time. If you need me too, i'll build you one when i have the time.

2nd I'm not sure i understand the point. a single magic missile spell produces five separate and distinct attacks each of which may be directed at the same or separate targets (and which have the added benefit of not needing to hit).

[Edit]
I think the issue is that You view this spell when cast at 9th level or higher as doing up to 5d4+5 to a single target or you can divide the damage between multiple targets. This is not how the spell works at all. You don't ever do 5d4+5, but you can potentially do 1d4+1 five times.[/edit]


Master of Shadows wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Master of Shadows wrote:

I disagree,

Each Missile is a seperate and distinct effect of the spell which must be targetted seperately from the others even if the target chosen is the same one. There fore Smite damage would be applied to each missile independently. It is the same with scorching ray, if your rays all hit the same target, you add smite damage to each one.

Ultimately I agree aswell that there is just no balance problems with this interpretation. a paladin may get this attack off one time against one target before said target puts up shield, dispells the wand, or sunders it. unless of course the target is mindless, in which case, compared to his physical attack from a full attack action, it should also be fine.

So you are asserting that you can use a standard action to make five attacks against a single opponent, correct?
I'm still on the fence about this, but this is a very poor strawman.

It's a question. It's a yes/no question.

Calling it a strawman doesn't make it one, I want to know whether or not five attacks in a single standard action is legal in this case, because Smite is applied to attacks, not to dice.

1st, I made no such assertion. What I'm saying is that at 10th level a paladin built for pure Smite based DPR will out do the wand every time. If you need me too, i'll build you one when i have the time.

2nd I'm not sure i understand the point. a single magic missile spell produces five separate and distinct attacks each of which may be directed at the same or separate targets (and which have the added benefit of not needing to hit).

It is a yes or no question.

When targeting a single target, would a 5 missile 'Magic Missile' count as five attacks?

Do you roll spell resistance for each missile?

Shadow Lodge

Yes, and answered in my edit above.

Though the question of whether or not spell resistance should apply all five times is maybe a separate debate, to which i would also answer yes.


Master of Shadows wrote:
Yes, and answered in my edit above.

So you would expect to roll against spell resistance five times then?

Shadow Lodge

I would, each missile is a distinct effect from each other missile, so naturally you would test against each.


Master of Shadows wrote:
I would, each missile is a distinct effect from each other missile, so naturally you would test against each.

We do not see this situation the same way at all.

Of course, no one ever plays Paladins using Magic Missile in my group...

Happy hunting!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook, p. 565 wrote:
Check spell resistance only once for any particular casting of a spell or use of a spell-like ability. If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell. Likewise, if the spell resistance succeeds the first time, it always succeeds. If the creature has voluntarily lowered its spell resistance and is then subjected to a spell, the creature still has a single chance to resist that spell later, when its spell resistance is back up.

Shadow Lodge

I'm curious now, How would you handle a scorching ray spell that hits the same target with more than one ray?

I would treat it and magic missile as functionally the same with regard to target selection and spell resistance, the only difference being scorching ray allows a max of 3 rays, and they require attack rolls.

I don't have any paladins throwing magic missiles in my group either, but i don't discount the eventual possibility so rules clarity on how it should be handled is nice.

Shadow Lodge

Zaister wrote:
Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook, p. 565 wrote:
Check spell resistance only once for any particular casting of a spell or use of a spell-like ability. If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell. Likewise, if the spell resistance succeeds the first time, it always succeeds. If the creature has voluntarily lowered its spell resistance and is then subjected to a spell, the creature still has a single chance to resist that spell later, when its spell resistance is back up.

This is a worthwhile note, but doesn't change the fact that it is checked against 5 times, only that it guarantees what the other 4 results will be. ;)


Zaister's quote is why I treat Magic Missile as one attack.

It might target multiple people, but so can Fireball.

Still one attack.

Shadow Lodge

It is 5 attacks generated by one spell, So the first missile that hits its target checks SR and results in either a pass or a fail. Each subsequent missile that hits the same target also checks SR but with a predetermined result that matches that of the prior missile.

Spelled out pretty clearly here:

Quote:
If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell.

that's pretty clear indication that it is checked every time for every missile.


I have no idea how Master of Shadows reached that conclusion.

When you cast a spell, you make a single spell penetration check. It doesn't matter if you're shooting 5 missiles at the same person, 5 missiles at 5 different people, a single target spell against a single target, or a fireball into a crowd. You make one spell penetration check and check it versus each spell resistance present. This is not ambiguous, this is black and white RAW.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Or it means that no further checks are necessary.

Shadow Lodge

CampinCarl9127 wrote:

I have no idea how Master of Shadows reached that conclusion.

When you cast a spell, you make a single spell penetration check. It doesn't matter if you're shooting 5 missiles at the same person, 5 missiles at 5 different people, a single target spell against a single target, or a fireball into a crowd. You make one spell penetration check and check it versus each spell resistance present. This is not ambiguous, this is black and white RAW.

Yes, i have not said otherwise, what i have said is that it is checked multiple times. Although I can see where you might misunderstand based on my earlier reply to Alex's question.

What I mean is this:
I cast the spell and roll Spell Penetration. Each time a missile strikes its target that Spell pen roll is checked against. with subsequent checks always being either a pass or a fail based on the first check.


Ah, your wording confused me. I thought you were saying each missile had its own spell penetration check, each rolled individually. Apologies.


Master of Shadows wrote:

It is 5 attacks generated by one spell, So the first missile that hits its target checks SR and results in either a pass or a fail. Each subsequent missile that hits the same target also checks SR but with a predetermined result that matches that of the prior missile.

Spelled out pretty clearly here:

Quote:
If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell.
that's pretty clear indication that it is checked every time for every missile.

That's not what it says at all... You don't roll, so you aren't checking...

*shrugs* anyway, we are both reading the same text, but interpreting it differently.


No attack, no smite.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
No attack, no smite.

A spell can be an attack though...

I just don't think it's FIVE attacks.

Silver Crusade

BigNorseWolf wrote:
No attack, no smite.

Yes damage roll, yes smite.


Isonaroc wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No attack, no smite.
Yes damage roll, yes smite.

The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.

So why doesn't a rogue sneak attack with magic missiles or a fireball?


Because you cannot strike precisely with magic missile or fireball.

You can with other spells though. They are entire builds built around the idea. There's a prestige class for it.


"If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite."

No mention of requiring an attack roll in Smite.

It only says add Charisma to attack rolls and add Paladin level to all damage rolls.

A Paladin can Smite with a sword, or a pistol, or a bow, or a spell. It doesn't matter. Their is no restriction the only thing that matters is does cause damage.

If Yes, then add appropriate Paladin level to damage.
If No, then don't.

So now we look at Magic Missile.

Magic Missile wrote:

A missile of magical energy darts forth from your fingertip and strikes its target, dealing 1d4+1 points of force damage.

The missile strikes unerringly, even if the target is in melee combat, so long as it has less than total cover or total concealment. Specific parts of a creature can't be singled out. Objects are not damaged by the spell.

For every two caster levels beyond 1st, you gain an additional missile—two at 3rd level, three at 5th, four at 7th, and the maximum of five missiles at 9th level or higher. If you shoot multiple missiles, you can have them strike a single creature or several creatures. A single missile can strike only one creature. You must designate targets before you check for spell resistance or roll damage.

Magic Missile gives you 1 to 5 darts to throw at opponents in range.

Each dart deals 1d4+1 damage.

The only restriction to Magic Missile is the following;

"You must designate targets before you check for spell resistance or roll damage."

Lets look at the Evocation School for help with this.

Evocation School:
Intense Spells (Su): Whenever you cast an evocation spell that deals hit point damage, add 1/2 your wizard level to the damage (minimum +1). This bonus only applies once to a spell, not once per missile or ray, and cannot be split between multiple missiles or rays. This bonus damage is not increased by Empower Spell or similar effects. This damage is of the same type as the spell. At 20th level, whenever you cast an evocation spell you can roll twice to penetrate a creature's spell resistance and take the better result.

OK, so their is a clear indicator in that ability that when adding the bonus damage it is once per spell, not once per missile or ray.

Does Smite Evil have that restriction? No.

I'd say following that a Paladin using Magic Missile would add Smite damage per missile.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Isonaroc wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No attack, no smite.
Yes damage roll, yes smite.

The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.

So why doesn't a rogue sneak attack with magic missiles or a fireball?

They don't because Sneak Attack requires an attack roll. It would work with Acid Arrow or Scorching Ray but not Fireball.

Also this is a thing for Arcane Tricksters.

Surprise Spells: At 10th level, an arcane trickster can add her sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage, if the targets are flat-footed. This additional damage only applies to spells that deal hit point damage, and the additional damage is of the same type as the spell. If the spell allows a saving throw to negate or halve the damage, it also negates or halves the sneak attack damage.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure why people are brining up sneak attack, it's precision damage and follows a completely different set of rule as such. Those rules have no bearing on smite. If you're in the mood to call out straw men, here's one.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

They're bringing it up because we had a previous argument where it was pointed out that sneak attack doesn't actually have wording requiring an attack roll, just an attack. Some tortured twisting of words in the Magic section pointed to all spells being attacks, therefore all spells getting sneak attack. Hence why they are comparing it to Smite damage adding to all damage rolls with no qualifier about needing an attack roll.


I believe sneak attack is being called out because of the FAQ where they make a clarification on an ability that normally modifies physical damage being added to spells. Perhaps they intended the same limitations for smite. Perhaps not. I think it's ambiguous enough to mark for an FAQ candidate [s]even though we'll never get a response[/b] due to how heavily divided the community seems on it.

Shadow Lodge

alexd1976 wrote:
Master of Shadows wrote:

It is 5 attacks generated by one spell, So the first missile that hits its target checks SR and results in either a pass or a fail. Each subsequent missile that hits the same target also checks SR but with a predetermined result that matches that of the prior missile.

Spelled out pretty clearly here:

Quote:
If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell.
that's pretty clear indication that it is checked every time for every missile.

That's not what it says at all... You don't roll, so you aren't checking...

*shrugs* anyway, we are both reading the same text, but interpreting it differently.

It really does say that: "...each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell."

Basically each time a missile strikes, it is an instance of the creature encountering the same casting of the spell. There for a new test of SR but the result is predetermined.


i remember something about sneak attack requiring to be proficient with the weapon used

now, it's assumed to be proficient with all the spell that entail attack rolls, but a spell like fireball it's not covered by this at all.

On the other hand smite doesn't have such limitation

Shadow Lodge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
They're bringing it up because we had a previous argument where it was pointed out that sneak attack doesn't actually have wording requiring an attack roll, just an attack. Some tortured twisting of words in the Magic section pointed to all spells being attacks, therefore all spells getting sneak attack. Hence why they are comparing it to Smite damage adding to all damage rolls with no qualifier about needing an attack roll.

Oh, well, there is a qualifier: All

All means quite explicitly every damage roll. It's unequivocal. The only lack of clarity might be this:
Did they mean all damage rolls made by the paladin against the target of his smite, or all damage rolls against the target of his smite? We all of us understand it to mean rolls by the paladin, but by that wording you would add it to damage dealt by any source even other player characters.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Master of Shadows wrote:
Oh, well, there is a qualifier: All

That doesn't qualify attack rolls, it qualifies damage rolls.

Shadow Lodge

That's my point entirely, smite evil is an interesting ability in that it does 2 different things. It adds cha bonus to the paladin's attack rolls and it adds the paladin's level to all damage rolls. Neither of the abilities is dependent upon the other.

And the usage of 'all' without the qualifier 'of the paladin's' placed before the 'damage rolls' portion of the clause in strictest English would mean that regardless of source, if damage is rolled on the smited enemy (even damage caused by other characters), the paladin adds his level to it.
That's the Rawest possible reading.

I don't play it that way, I don't expect anyone else to either. But I would add it to each missile if the paladin cast it.


How happy would you as players be if the GM broke out an antipaladin with Smite Good and a wand of Magic Missile and decided to take out the whole party because the only effective defense against this is to have the shield spell.

From a balance perspective, I can't see anything other than once per casting being reasonable.


Just out of curiosity, doesn't a wand provoke in melee?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

They actually don't.

Actions in Combat wrote:
Spell Trigger, Command Word, or Use-Activated Items: Activating any of these kinds of items does not require concentration and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Magic wrote:
Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Sczarni

Like BNW said, no attack, no smite.

Shadow Lodge

Dispel magic, and sunder work too. And I have grappled the party with creatures that had a fireball SLA and a rod of Meta-Magic maximize before (back in 3.5). They were sad.
I expect my players to think quickly on their feet and they know it. In my group such a tactic to go off exactly once unless they had trouble closing the distance.

Shadow Lodge

Malag wrote:
Like BNW said, no attack, no smite.

You opinion is noted, but without explanation or citation it is unproductive except as a means of dotting the thread so you can watch for an eventual FAQ.

51 to 100 of 360 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Smite Evil + Magic Missile All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.