Does Point Blank Shot apply to Ray Attacks?


Rules Questions


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In D&D 3.5, it clearly did. However, the Pathfinder rulebook says that the benefit of Point Black Shot is,"You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet."

Is this an intentional change or just a slip of the pen?

Sovereign Court

PRD wrote:
Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible creature and hope you hit something. You don't have to see the creature you're trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature at which you're aiming.

Ray is a weapon-like spell, and Point Blank Shot applies to it.


Deussu wrote:
Ray is a weapon-like spell, and Point Blank Shot applies to it.

I would agree.

But where do you get that weapon-like spell term from?
Can you reference that to the rules?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pathfinder_SRD wrote:

"Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible creature and hope you hit something. You don't have to see the creature you're trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature at which you're aiming.

If a ray spell has a duration, it's the duration of the effect that the ray causes, not the length of time the ray itself persists.

If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit."

Emphasis mine.

In any case, Point Blank Shot is perfectly use-able with Rays and an excellent first level feat choice for an arcane caster (or sorcerer with elemental bloodline).


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


In any case, Point Blank Shot is perfectly use-able with Rays and an excellent first level feat choice for an arcane caster (or sorcerer with elemental bloodline).

What about Precise Shot? Would you need that feat to, for example, shoot a scorching ray into a melee? Would you have to take a -4 penalty if you hadn't that feat?


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:


What about Precise Shot? Would you need that feat to, for example, shoot a scorching ray into a melee? Would you have to take a -4 penalty if you hadn't that feat?

I have always played it that way.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


In any case, Point Blank Shot is perfectly use-able with Rays and an excellent first level feat choice for an arcane caster (or sorcerer with elemental bloodline).

What about Precise Shot? Would you need that feat to, for example, shoot a scorching ray into a melee? Would you have to take a -4 penalty if you hadn't that feat?

Yes you would take a penalty for firing a Ray into melee combat, just like any other ranged attack. If you are going to be shooting into melee regularly Precise Shot is highly recommended as well. Also note that it's possible to take Weapon Focus (Ray) to further improve your chances of hitting.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


Yes you would take a penalty for firing a Ray into melee combat, just like any other ranged attack. If you are going to be shooting into melee regularly Precise Shot is highly recommended as well. Also note that it's possible to take Weapon Focus (Ray) to further improve your chances of hitting.

It sounds reasonable, but is it backed up by the rules? I can't remember seeing such a rule.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


Yes you would take a penalty for firing a Ray into melee combat, just like any other ranged attack. If you are going to be shooting into melee regularly Precise Shot is highly recommended as well. Also note that it's possible to take Weapon Focus (Ray) to further improve your chances of hitting.
It sounds reasonable, but is it backed up by the rules? I can't remember seeing such a rule.

A ray attack is treated as any other ranged weapon attack and all feats, penalties, etc. apply to it. I can't point out in the rules the page number at the mo' but it is in there.


Ok, the PRD doesn't say so specifically, but I guess by combining two rules I could get to the result.

Wizards says:

wizards wrote:
Spells: Any spell that requires you to make a ranged attack roll to aim the spell is subject to all the rules that govern ranged attacks, including most feats that improve ranged attacks.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:

Ok, the PRD doesn't say so specifically, but I guess by combining two rules I could get to the result.

Wizards says:

wizards wrote:
Spells: Any spell that requires you to make a ranged attack roll to aim the spell is subject to all the rules that govern ranged attacks, including most feats that improve ranged attacks.

The "most feats" quote would include multi-shot, shot on the run, rapid shot, etc. which wouldn't apply.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If a wizard was "holding the charge" of a Scorching Ray it would be perfectly acceptable to let them use Rapid Shot or Shot on the Run.
If they Quicken a ray of frost they may even use Shot on the Run with that too.


Spacelard wrote:
Cpt. Caboodle wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


Also note that it's possible to take Weapon Focus (Ray) to further improve your chances of hitting.
It sounds reasonable, but is it backed up by the rules? I can't remember seeing such a rule.
A ray attack is treated as any other ranged weapon attack and all feats, penalties, etc. apply to it. I can't point out in the rules the page number at the mo' but it is in there.

Page 136: Weapon Focus feat description says so!


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

If a wizard was "holding the charge" of a Scorching Ray it would be perfectly acceptable to let them use Rapid Shot or Shot on the Run.

If they Quicken a ray of frost they may even use Shot on the Run with that too.

I must disagree.

Page 216: Touch spells and holding the charge, is as far as I can see refering to the Range: touch spells, not to melee touch or ranged touch attacks. Also ranged touch is always described as ranged touch; never just touch.
You cannot hold ray spells or any other ranged touch spell for that matter.

This same description plainly states that a charge you are holding disipates if you cast another spell. So there is no basis for holding multiple spells simultaneously.

Rapid Shot and Shot on the Run are therefore not compatible with ranged spells (Produce Flame being the only exception I can come upon).

As for Quickened Ray of Frost I would agree with you, but remember that it expends a 4th lvl spell slot to prepare/cast.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You might be right about that holding the charge thing.

But a quickened ray would still work.

A quickened Ray of Frost would not be expended, even though it's prepared in a higher level slot due to metamagic it doesn't get expended once cast.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from an opposition school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).

Not that 1d3 damage as a free action is all THAT great lol.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

But a quickened ray would still work.

A quickened Ray of Frost would not be expended, even though it's prepared in a higher level slot due to metamagic it doesn't get expended once cast.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from an opposition school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).
Not that 1d3 damage as a free action is all THAT great lol.

I disagree and must protest vigorously

Quote:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: 3-16 under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again. A wizard can prepare a cantrip from a prohibited school, but it uses up two of his available slots (see below).

I enphasize Table: 3-16 since it is key to interpreting the function of 0-lvl spells.

A 1st lvl wizard has 3 cantrips available, 3 0-lvl spells, 3 0-lvl spell slots. This information is listed on table 3-16, as described in the rules, under the Spells per Day / 0 column.
As soon as you apply a metamagic feat to a 0-lvl spell it takes up a higher level spell slot and is no longer a cantrip, and can therefore not bee cast at will.


Diego Winterborg wrote:

I enphasize Table: 3-16 since it is key to interpreting the function of 0-lvl spells.
A 1st lvl wizard has 3 cantrips available, 3 0-lvl spells, 3 0-lvl spell slots. This information is listed on table 3-16, as described in the rules, under the Spells per Day / 0 column.
As soon as you apply a metamagic feat to a 0-lvl spell it takes up a higher level spell slot and is no longer a cantrip, and can therefore not bee cast at will.

See the discussion in this Thread.


Cpt. Caboodle wrote:


See the discussion in this Thread.

I have and I have posted my views there as well.

I side with Dracon on that issue.
It is quite frustrating actually that the designers have not put a stop to that non-sense.


ok so you use what 2-3 feats and a 4th level spell to do 1d3 cold damage.

then yes you can re-use it. does mean you are not casting say fireball and having spell mastery and focus on it (and that isn't even pushing the limits of 3-4th level spells)

on the other hand try it with a spell not originally 0 level and the resuslts may accidentally fizzle and the god of magic espresses its disaproval.

to be honest with all of these things its the degree to which they are taken, trying to get free 0 level metamagiced spells , i can live with (having played enough 3.5 with spell casters insisting on resting because they ran out of spells, haveing a non useless mage so the fighter caries on a little longer is fine by me) but trying to get unlimited suggestion may result in dissapointment.

back on topic, just run it by a coherency test? does it make sense or does it seem stupid? weapon focus ray makes perfect sense (practiced at targeting with rays) rapid shot : not really when the spells take so long to cast (now quickened ray of frost with a thrown dagger perhaps)

Ben


Can we please talk about metamagiced cantrips in the thread dedicated to it and not here?

Anyway, rapid shot doesn't work on most* spells at all, because unlike arrows and daggers (with quick draw), spells aren't cast as free actions.

Manyshot doesn't work on spells for the same reasons, but also because it states it only works for bows and arrows.

*Most spells, like ray of frost, scorching ray, polar ray and the like. Produce Flame creates an actual thrown weapon and can be used with rapid shot (but not manyshot because it's not bow or arrow)


Lehmuska wrote:

Can we please talk about metamagiced cantrips in the thread dedicated to it and not here?

Anyway, rapid shot doesn't work on most* spells at all, because unlike arrows and daggers (with quick draw), spells aren't cast as free actions.

Manyshot doesn't work on spells for the same reasons, but also because it states it only works for bows and arrows.

*Most spells, like ray of frost, scorching ray, polar ray and the like. Produce Flame creates an actual thrown weapon and can be used with rapid shot (but not manyshot because it's not bow or arrow)

On this we agree :D

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If you have a quickened spell it can be used in conjunction with other ranged weapons (such as daggers).


Here's a crazy question related to ray spells and fighting defensively. In other words, can you do it?

Can you cast a ray, taking -4 to hit and +2 to AC, like you could with a bow?

If you cast a weapon-like spell on the defensive, does that also mean that you are fighting defensively as well?

I am specifically thinking of that fun feat Osyluth Guile, which would give my sorcerer -4 to hit, +crazytown to AC while fighting defensively. La-dee-da...


ohako wrote:

Here's a crazy question related to ray spells and fighting defensively. In other words, can you do it?

Can you cast a ray, taking -4 to hit and +2 to AC, like you could with a bow?

If you cast a weapon-like spell on the defensive, does that also mean that you are fighting defensively as well?

I am specifically thinking of that fun feat Osyluth Guile, which would give my sorcerer -4 to hit, +crazytown to AC while fighting defensively. La-dee-da...

I'd say no, Fighting Defensively is listed under the Attack action in the Combat chapter, as an option available when either using the Attack or Full-Attack actions.

While casting a ray spell allows you to make a ranged touch attack, that's not entirely equivalent to the Attack action. For instance, you couldn't use Vital Strike with a ray.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does Point Blank Shot apply to Ray Attacks? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.