I'm assuming you can take this right? As long as you meet all the prerequisites?
|
I'm assuming you can take this right? As long as you meet all the prerequisites?
I would allow it in my game, but it might not be RAW. According to the feat description "When using the weapon you selected, your threat range is doubled." It is relatively easy to say that a ray does not qualify as a weapon.
Yes and no.
If a ray spell deals damage and requires an attack roll (ranged touch attack) then you can score a critical on a 20 and do double damage.
I don't believe the Pathfinder RAW specifies using feats for these ray spells, but 3.5 certainly did and Pathfinder RAW has not explicitly changed that rule, so I see no reason not to carry it forward.
Certain ranged feats, like Rapid Shot, don't work with ray spells. But most ranged feats do. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot are certainly valid candidates.
As for Improved Critical, there seems to be no reason you couldn't take it, but you cannot take the feat one time and apply it to all rays. Just like you cannot take Improved Critical (slashing weapons) or Improved Critical (ranged weapons), you also cannot take Improved Critical (ray spells).
The Improved Critical feat applies to just one weapon when you take the feat. This should also be true of ray spells. So, Improved Critical (longsword), Improved Critical (heavy crossbow), Improved Critical (Searing Light), Improved Critical (Scorching Ray), etc.
|
Yes and no.
If a ray spell deals damage and requires an attack roll (ranged touch attack) then you can score a critical on a 20 and do double damage.
I don't believe the Pathfinder RAW specifies using feats for these ray spells, but 3.5 certainly did and Pathfinder RAW has not explicitly changed that rule, so I see no reason not to carry it forward.
Certain ranged feats, like Rapid Shot, don't work with ray spells. But most ranged feats do. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot are certainly valid candidates.
As for Improved Critical, there seems to be no reason you couldn't take it, but you cannot take the feat one time and apply it to all rays. Just like you cannot take Improved Critical (slashing weapons) or Improved Critical (ranged weapons), you also cannot take Improved Critical (ray spells).
The Improved Critical feta applies to just one weapon when you take the feat. This should also be true of ray spells. So, Improved Critical (longsword), Improved Critical (heavy crossbow), Improved Critical (Searing Light), Improved Critical (Scorching Ray), etc.
Well, you can apply Weapon Focus to Ray, which also only applies to one weapon, so I can't see why you'd say Improved Critical works differently.
Weapon Focus (Combat)
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus on all attack rolls you make using the selected weapon.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.
Yes and no.
If a ray spell deals damage and requires an attack roll (ranged touch attack) then you can score a critical on a 20 and do double damage.
I don't believe the Pathfinder RAW specifies using feats for these ray spells, but 3.5 certainly did and Pathfinder RAW has not explicitly changed that rule, so I see no reason not to carry it forward.
Certain ranged feats, like Rapid Shot, don't work with ray spells. But most ranged feats do. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot are certainly valid candidates.
As for Improved Critical, there seems to be no reason you couldn't take it, but you cannot take the feat one time and apply it to all rays. Just like you cannot take Improved Critical (slashing weapons) or Improved Critical (ranged weapons), you also cannot take Improved Critical (ray spells).
I'd agree with allowing it, but disagree with Blake on the how of it -- and support my disagreement with the example of Weapon Focus --- While you can't take Weapon Focus (slashing weapons), but you can take Weapon Focus (Ray) [says so right in the description]. I'd say Improved Critical would work the same way.
All well and good.
However, I should point out that an allowance in one feat doesn't constitute a blanket allowance in all feats.
Just because Weapon Focus is generous enough to allow all rays because it explicitly says so, doesn't mean that other feats that don't explicitly say so automaticlaly inherit the generosity of Weapon Focus.
You're certainly welcome to read it that way if you wish, of course, but you do run the risk of creating imbalance. Improved Critical is quite powerful; it was limited to require one specific weapon for a reason, and the authors didn't see fit to call out an explicit exception for "all rays" within this feat. Maybe they had a reason for that.
Why should spellcasters who, in many cases, are built around using rays (I don't imagine a general buffer/controller caster would be interested in this feat) get a benefit that fighters and other melee types don't get?
It smacks just a little of cheese:
Mage: Hey, DM, I have built my character around using all kinds of rays. High DEX, lots of ranged feats, etc. Now I want to take Improved Critical that I can use with every serious attack I ever make.
DM: Cool, I'll allow that.
Fighter: Sweet! I use two kinds of swords, and often have to use my bow too. Can I take Improved Critical for every attack I make?
DM: No, that's only allowed for mages who focus their character build to specifically take advantage of this feat. You melee guys have to follow the RAW.
Doesn't seem balanced to me.
Your call though - this is obviously a gray area in the RAW.
|
I don't believe the Pathfinder RAW specifies using feats for these ray spells, but 3.5 certainly did and Pathfinder RAW has not explicitly changed that rule, so I see no reason not to carry it forward.
from the ye olde prd:
Weapon Focus (Combat)
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.
That being said.... I would say yes, since weapon focus has mirrored prerequisites (albeit with 7 BAB lower) and specifically calls out rays and grapples as legal to take.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
The Improved Critical feta applies to just one weapon when you take the feat. This should also be true of ray spells. So, Improved Critical (longsword), Improved Critical (heavy crossbow), Improved Critical (Searing Light), Improved Critical (Scorching Ray), etc.
I'd disagree with this. If the spell creates a ray, then a single feat would apply to it. Not all ranged touch spells are necessarily rays, however. If the "effect" of the spell is listed as a ray, then weapon focus or improved crit ray would apply.
I'd allow Improved Critical (ray) as well. While you can find a variety of different scimitars, for example, that all look different, they are all considered identical in terms of the skill required to wield them (the Martial Weapon feat for scimitar). Rays will look different, quite true, but in the end they're all a line of magical energy going from your finger to the target. No mass, just a beam of magical doom.
Also, the parallel of Weapon Focus would support the idea, as others have noted.
Someone should go pull out their copy of Complete Arcane and see what it says, as that's the best source we currently have on the topic.
DM_Blake's thoughts regarding the difference between a ray specialist and a fighter do have merit, however (ignoring the fact that we often agree on topics:p). But many warriors (as in full BAB types, not the NPC class) have one weapon that is their primary weapon, whether it's a composite longbow, a greatsword, or a scimitar. Any time they wield that weapon, they get the benefits of Improved Critical. Could be an old, serviceable family heirloom, could be Kord's own greatsword, doesn't matter, that PC can also benefit from the feat. So yes, the warrior that wants to survive will have multiple weapons to deal with foes. But given the choice, he'll use just one. Is a caster going to use rays and nothing but rays, forever? Will he never need dispel magic? Or slow? Haste?
|
|
Mage: Hey, DM, I have built my character around using all kinds of rays. High DEX, lots of ranged feats, etc. Now I want to take Improved Critical that I can use with every serious attack I ever make.
DM: Cool, I'll allow that.
Fighter: Sweet! I use two kinds of swords, and often have to use my bow too. Can I take Improved Critical for every attack I make?
DM: No, that's only allowed for mages who focus their character build to specifically take advantage of this feat. You melee guys have to follow the RAW.
I don't think is really a good analogy. The mage can't use it on every attack they make, only rays. So other ranged/touch attacks will not benefit from this feat. Like the fighter is primarily built using a certain weapon. Yes, they will use it more than other weapons in their arsenal, but they likely will use other weapons periodically and those will not benefit from the improved crit range. The fighter also has the option of selecting imp crit for all his weapons, but the arcane caster has a huge list of spells that do not have attack rolls and therefore are no eligible for imp crit.
Also, while I do not like the logic of Weapons Focus = rays, therefore Improved Crit = rays, I would allow it in my campaigns. Just not because of that logic.
EDIT...ninja'd
It smacks just a little of cheese:Mage: Hey, DM, I have built my character around using all kinds of rays. High DEX, lots of ranged feats, etc. Now I want to take Improved Critical that I can use with every serious attack I ever make.
DM: Cool, I'll allow that.
Fighter: Sweet! I use two kinds of swords, and often have to use my bow too. Can I take Improved Critical for every attack I make?
DM: No, that's only allowed for mages who focus their character build to specifically take advantage of this feat. You melee guys have to follow the RAW.Doesn't seem balanced to me.
Everybody knows that a ray of frost handles totally different from a scorching ray. The aiming is all different and all that. You point and click, but in a completely different way!
Only, totally not ;-P
Sure, I do not see a problem if you can sneak attack with a ray you should be able to apply improved critical as well. it is just rays and then only rays that deal damage, they are not all that many..
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
Someone should go pull out their copy of Complete Arcane and see what it says, as that's the best source we currently have on the topic.
Complete Arcane is slightly more generous: It gives Improved Critical (Ranged) and Improved Critical (Touch) as acceptable feats. (Only to Weaponlike spells, of course.)
The following feats can be chosen to enhance the performance of weaponlike spells in combat (for full details on each feat, see Chapter 5 of the Player’s Handbook).
Improved Critical: Choose one category of weaponlike spells (ranged spells or touch spells). When you use a spell of the selected category, its threat range is doubled, so that a spell that normally threatens a critical hit on a roll of 20 has a threat range of 19–20. You can gain this feat a second time, choosing a different category of weaponlike spells.
All well and good.
However, I should point out that an allowance in one feat doesn't constitute a blanket allowance in all feats.
Just because Weapon Focus is generous enough to allow all rays because it explicitly says so, doesn't mean that other feats that don't explicitly say so automaticlaly inherit the generosity of Weapon Focus.
You're certainly welcome to read it that way if you wish, of course, but you do run the risk of creating imbalance. Improved Critical is quite powerful; it was limited to require one specific weapon for a reason, and the authors didn't see fit to call out an explicit exception for "all rays" within this feat. Maybe they had a reason for that.
Why should spellcasters who, in many cases, are built around using rays (I don't imagine a general buffer/controller caster would be interested in this feat) get a benefit that fighters and other melee types don't get?
They don't? A Fighters's Improved Critical (Longsword) doesn't work equally well on the +2 longsword he had when he got the feat and the +3, Holy Demonbane Longsword he lucks into later? Well, that will definately alter my planned feat progression next time I make a fighter.
I mean, yes, your "cheese" description is fine, but we're now talking about a spellcaster who has specialized in rays. To compare with your analogy -- Anytime he casts an area effect/blast spell (which we can compare to the fighter's reach weapon) or a battlefield control spell (which we can compare to the fighter's bow), he gets no benefit from the feat. Seems fair to me.
I have no problem with you not thinking it balanced. Obviously, I disagree.
However, I was merely saying that the restriction of "one weapon" which you're using to justify it can be argued away based on how another feat with the same restriction works (Weapon Focus). So, just like how an archer with improved critical (longbow) gets it with *any* longbow he picks up, so does the mage with any *ray* he can cast.
|
Also, this fighter gets access to this feat at level 8 (+8 BAB) while the wizard/sorc would get it at level 16(!) and the cleric/druid @ level 11. I see no problems if the caster wants to use one of their precious feats for that. The fighter could have improved crit on all attacks by that point, or at least 8 different weapons.
A mage capable of using Disintegrate with Improved Critical is a deadly foe indeed (20th level caster deals 40d6 damage, on a critical 80d6....yeah (thats a range of 80 to 480 points of damage, with a average at 3.5 per die giving 280 points of damage)). Sure you get a save, thats the only thing stopping this spell being stupidly broken...
Scorching Ray is a good candidate, 4d6 fire damage, firing one or more at a time depending on caster level, with a 10% chance of a critical per roll (at 19-20's if you allow Improved Critical).
Personally I allow spellcasters to take Improved Critical (Touch) or Improved Critical (Ray), since alot of spells a Mage casts dont require attack rolls.
A fighter can take Improved Critical for a specific weapon, which is NO different than Rays/Touch Attacks, which is very specific.
|
|
Yeah, I'd say that Improved Critical: Ray compares to a fighter taking Improved Critical: Longbow.
If the fighter pulls out a longsword, he doesn't get the benefit. Similarly, if the caster pulls out a touch attack, cone, area of effect spell, ect.., he doesn't get the benefit.
Yes, Improved critical is a benefit to a specialized type of wizard. It's also a benefit to a specialized type of fighter in the exact same way. The fighter could be going bow, longsword and shortsword, and mix the bonuses up. Or the fighter could go dedicated kukri twf, and avoid the bow as much as possible. Or dedicated archer, avoiding melee weapons as much as possible.
Much as a ray caster would focus with ray spells and avoid non-ray spells.
Actually, a really scary thought here could be an arcane trickster-type caster with the rogue mark and greater rogue mark feats from the undefeatable series. Esh.
Disintegrate ray with a critical range of 15-20? That hurts.
The Complete Arcane book listed improved critical (Either ranged spells or touch spells) as a viable feat choice. Now, obviously, that's not pathfinder core and might not represent the direction pazio wants the game to go.
|
I would allow it, even though the spirit of the Improved Critical was obviously attuned to fighters and the RAW may not support it.
The rules as a whole are meant to be read together, and it should be assumed the designers did not mean to reach incongruent results. When you read "Weapon Focus" the developers specifically note that you may choose "ray" for purposes of this feat. Note the emphasis.
When you read "Improved Critical" there is no exception for rays included in that section. One would think if the exception for weapon feats to apply to rays were to stretch beyond Weapon Focus, it would have been stated so.
However, rays are treated as weapons in their description, and indeed, there is no penalty for non-proficiency with an attack, suggesting wizards are skilled with rays (which are recognized by Weapon Focus as a type of weapon for that feat). Further, as noted, it's a piss-poor alternative for an optimized wizard, though certainly I would rather most games not be designed around the "perfect" combat character.
All in all, it's certainly up for interpretation, but since it's not really a game-breaker at all (at 10% a chance), I'd give it a thumbs up.
All well and good.
However, I should point out that an allowance in one feat doesn't constitute a blanket allowance in all feats.
Just because Weapon Focus is generous enough to allow all rays because it explicitly says so, doesn't mean that other feats that don't explicitly say so automaticlaly inherit the generosity of Weapon Focus.
You're certainly welcome to read it that way if you wish, of course, but you do run the risk of creating imbalance. Improved Critical is quite powerful; it was limited to require one specific weapon for a reason, and the authors didn't see fit to call out an explicit exception for "all rays" within this feat. Maybe they had a reason for that.
Why should spellcasters who, in many cases, are built around using rays (I don't imagine a general buffer/controller caster would be interested in this feat) get a benefit that fighters and other melee types don't get?
It smacks just a little of cheese:
Mage: Hey, DM, I have built my character around using all kinds of rays. High DEX, lots of ranged feats, etc. Now I want to take Improved Critical that I can use with every serious attack I ever make.
DM: Cool, I'll allow that.
Fighter: Sweet! I use two kinds of swords, and often have to use my bow too. Can I take Improved Critical for every attack I make?
DM: No, that's only allowed for mages who focus their character build to specifically take advantage of this feat. You melee guys have to follow the RAW.Doesn't seem balanced to me.
Your call though - this is obviously a gray area in the RAW.
I have to disagree with this. Improved critical longsword, applies to all longswords, including the first mundane one a character gets all the way to the +5keenflamingholy sword he's swinging at level 20. Improved critical scorching ray is essentially pointless after a certain level. Casters dont specialize in a single spell the way martial types do with a weapon, it just isnt a reasonable comparison.
Doesn't seem balanced to me.
I personally believe it's a poor call for a pure wizard/sorcerer to take unless they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for a feat.
How many fighters elect to take improved crit for a bare x2 on a nat 20 weapon??
-James
This isn't the question though. The question is "can the feat be taken" not "is the feat an optimal choice".
All well and good.
However, I should point out that an allowance in one feat doesn't constitute a blanket allowance in all feats.
Just because Weapon Focus is generous enough to allow all rays because it explicitly says so, doesn't mean that other feats that don't explicitly say so automaticlaly inherit the generosity of Weapon Focus.
You're certainly welcome to read it that way if you wish, of course, but you do run the risk of creating imbalance. Improved Critical is quite powerful; it was limited to require one specific weapon for a reason, and the authors didn't see fit to call out an explicit exception for "all rays" within this feat. Maybe they had a reason for that.
Why should spellcasters who, in many cases, are built around using rays (I don't imagine a general buffer/controller caster would be interested in this feat) get a benefit that fighters and other melee types don't get?
It smacks just a little of cheese:
Mage: Hey, DM, I have built my character around using all kinds of rays. High DEX, lots of ranged feats, etc. Now I want to take Improved Critical that I can use with every serious attack I ever make.
DM: Cool, I'll allow that.
Fighter: Sweet! I use two kinds of swords, and often have to use my bow too. Can I take Improved Critical for every attack I make?
DM: No, that's only allowed for mages who focus their character build to specifically take advantage of this feat. You melee guys have to follow the RAW.Doesn't seem balanced to me.
Your call though - this is obviously a gray area in the RAW.
According to Complete Arcane you could take it and apply to either all rays or ranged touch attacks, I forget which. You did not have to pick a spell.
|
|
Ah yes, can you take Improved Critical with rays? I'm for it, especially if you're using the Critical Hit deck. No need to worry about extra damage that way, and there's a 1 in 52 chance that a critical hit will send your opponent to a completely random plane, complete with a massive save to avoid (DC=attack roll).
Paladin got crit on by a ray once and was sent to Elysium. Good times.
Doesn't seem balanced to me.
I personally believe it's a poor call for a pure wizard/sorcerer to take unless they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for a feat.
How many fighters elect to take improved crit for a bare x2 on a nat 20 weapon??
-James
Like every single monstrous humanoid with class levels in Pathfinder Adventure Paths.
WARNING: Completely off-topic reply here:"THE PRINCESS! TOOTH DECAY HAS KIDNAPPED THE PRINCESS!"
Nice off-topic remark...
I am especially impressed that you've made it in a two year old thread ;-)
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
WARNING: Completely off-topic reply here:"THE PRINCESS! TOOTH DECAY HAS KIDNAPPED THE PRINCESS!"
Nice off-topic remark...
I am especially impressed that you've made it in a two year old thread ;-)
Crap... I just deleted it, hoping that no one would post after me and everyone would ignore my thread necro... SORRY GUYS!!
