loftura's page

And what I mean by spellcaster is the more 'squishy' type. Not one that is stronger or has a good Escape Artist. At higher levels, you have means to fly and be invisible, which really lessens your chance, but it seems the last couple of sessions my lowly 3rd level Sorcerer has been grabbed. I usually in the past have done a good job of keeping away.

So what are suggestions? Are there options once you are grappled? Like with an item? Or a worthwhile spell to cast that doesn’t have Somatic components?

And for higher levels, in that chance you do get grappled, what are the best means of escape with a spell/item?

Trying to figure out a decent low level option for this myself. The most cheap and lowest level option I can find so far, that will work regardless of a die roll, is Ring of Minor Spell Storing with Gaseous Form. Later on, Contingency with Dimension Door (or Gaseous Form). If you have found a clever solution let me know.

Love the guide although I am sometimes confused about all the non-Core stuff in there (fairly new at this). Our group is core only and our GM has houseruled that Quicken Spell Feat is a no no for Sorcerers and Bards (spontaneous casters).
Any suggestions for Core only DD builds. I really like the idea of maxing out DD for FotD2 and Wings.

Again great guide.

"Edit: Oh and forgot the best part, immunity to fatigue starts at the next level gain (character level 5), can't wait!"

Your effective "oracle curse level" is 3 with your current build of barb 2 oracle 2.
Page 43 in APG sais: " An Oracle's Curse is based on her oracle level plus one for every two levels or Hit Dice other than oracle.

When my players ask why they get a -4 penalty for shooting into combat, I explain that the combat obviously isn't turn-based, nor is it nice and ordered with everyone standing in their squares. Both enemies and allies are actively engaged and moving when you fire into they're melee. It's tough to predict where their next move will take them.

So why should a spell (or any ranged touch) ignore the -4 to hit from the simulated melee?

One reason is that it doesn't say so in the rules. It would have been so easy to include spells in the shooting into melee description and avoid all this confusion. It says "If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target...." All it needs in there is cast a spell. We shoot with a bow, throw an axe and cast a spell. Then, in a the subchapter after this named "Cast a Spell" it explaines the mechanics of casting spells. Not one post has connected the dots on this. I know that a ranged touch attack is a ranged attack, but the shooting into melee description doesn't say "if you make a ranged attack at a target" it specifically says if you are shooting or throwing a weapon into melee then you get the -4 penalty.

Another reason could be that magic does not neccessarily have to be in a straight line like an arrow. I am no expert on the subject though but the nature of magic is completely different from the nature of physical weapons.

In general I can understand the argument regarding the into melee penalty, I agree with it to a certain point, but that doesn't mean that it is so by default.

Is it unfair to enforce these penalties on spell casters because they have less feats?

No.

A -4 penalty on a ranged touch attack brings the target back closer to the AC of the foe. I know sometimes there isn't a difference of 4 between their Touch AC and their full AC, but often it is much bigger than 4.

If you were building a spell caster knowing that you would regularly use Rays you should have a high Dex, and you should consider taking as many feats as you can to help it along, such as Weapon Focus (Ray), Precise Shot and Point Blank Shot.

You forgot to mention that spellcasters usually have lower BA, fewer feats (well you did mention this), can't put enhancement bonuses on their "weapons", have limits on how often they can use their "weapons" and usually have lower stats in dex and str. Lets not forget concentration, spell resistance and saves when they apply.

After reading all the posts online about this I am sure that most groups use the -4 "rule" in their games and I really don't care if they do. It's just I can't find anything in the literature to support this and it annoys me that this is presented as clear cut.

Right now I am playing an Oracle with the Reach metamagic feat. Mainly a healer but has Inflict Critical Wounds which it dishes out if there is nothing else to do. By using the Reach feat I change the range from touch to close and make a ranged touch attack. I can't find anything that says I should get a shooting into melee -4 penalty on my attack roll. And I've been trying hard to find it.

Thanks for your reply though

nidho wrote:

PFRPG p.185 Touch Spells in Combat.

this is the relevant text from the PRD:

Quote:

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

edit: Not the same wording certainly, but armed attacks and weapons are synonyms mechanically.

Thanks to you both for the references!

This is gray area at best. After reading all this thru and other places in the PFRPG I can't find any clear place where it says that range touch attacks get a -4 penalty when shooting into melee. Every section that has been pointed out here does not answer it. That the "touch" part of the spell is considered an armed attack is just telling us that there is no AoO when you "touch" your target vs unamred attack. Getting: casting a spell is the same as firing a bow, from that is a strech imo.

Also if we accept this logic then spellcasters should also be able to get more feats from this tree, like rapid shot (extra ranged attack if using the full round action - not a problem for sorcs using metamagic feats).

So, I think the -4 shooting into melee penalty should not apply for ranged touch attacks.