|
So, one random night after a late game, a couple of friends and I were talking about some rules at a Waffle House (I know) and discovered an interesting issue. We first noticed the issue after a battle mage in our group did obscene amounts of damage in a single round. He had used a touch spell, and scored a critical hit with it.
Now, I know its in the rules that touch spells can score a critical hit with a natural 20. BUT WHY? I personally don't think it should and here's a few reasons why:
1 - spells deal multiple dice worth of damage (typically more than or equal to a full-round from a fighter)
2 - sneak attack deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by a critical.
3 - burst effects (such as shocking burst) deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by the critical.
4 - All precision based damage is not multiplied by a critical.
5 - spells that add dice to base damage are not multiplied by a critical.
________
Things that do critical
- base weapon damage
- solid bonus from ability scores
- solid bonus from enhancements
- solid bonus from buffs (such as bardic music)
________
So again I come back around and ask...WHY are touch spells allowed to critical? I always figured that the benefit behind a touch spell was that there was no save usually (like scorching ray) with the exception of a hand-full of powerful saves (like disintegrate).
Tell me, not from a stand point of RAW, but from your own personal opinion, do you think its fair if I can get a critical hit with a ray of disintegration) and deal (by 20th level) 80d6 damage that destroys force effects and cannot be resisted with energy resistance?
What do you guys think? In my groups we've already houseruled this out.
PS: This is not a gripe/complaint, but merely a realization and a curiosity if anyone else noticed this or feels this way. Nor is this a "why didn't Pathfinder do this...or why didn't they do that", but a just wondering why this was even a rule in the first place?
Ok lets cover this a bit at a time.
First off on your starting points:
1. Weapons do multiple dice worth of damage and still get multiplied. Greatswords for example, or large greatswords... or claw attacks from dragons. So this argument is dead in the water.
2. sneak attack is precision damage. Precision damage is not multiplied. Again dead in the water as you aren't comparing like things. Sneak attack also applies to every attack that qualifies in a round which is not the case with touch attacks.
3. Burst effects do not generally have attack rolls. Without an attack roll you can't critical. Again a case of not comparing like things. Also please note that burst effects generally affect more than one creature at a time unlike touch attacks.
4. Doesn't matter as spell damage isn't precision damage. There isn't even an argument where you could say it is.
5. Effects that add dice to base damage are not multiplied. Again not like things (effects that add dice are NOT like touch attack which have a based damage of several dice). This goes for vital strike, holy weapon enhancments, sneak attack, elemental damage on weapons and so on.
*******
So out of your five points you have only one that actually compares to what you are complaining of and in that one case the rules work exactly the same for both mundane attacks as they do for magical attacks.
As to your last bit of hyperbole:
Why shouldn't that disintegrate do more damage? I can do it an extremely limited number of times per day, and even then I have to:
1. Hit
2. Beat SR
3. Have a foe fail a save through
Before I get the full damage. In addition to the fact that just casting the spell can provoke, and if I'm threatened and cast defensively the fact I'm making a ranged attack still provokes.
Compare this to a fighter that can swing (or shoot) every round without limit all day long, and gets more multipliers, and an easier time increasing the chances that he'll critical and is already dealing more damage per single hit than I will do with that disintegrate in total. In addition he has less checks to make to succeed than I do, he must:
1. Hit
2. Check for concealment.
After that he deals damage.
The rogue will get his sneak attack damage on every attack that qualifies which means if he is flanking he'll get it on every single swing of his full attack.
****
In closing you are saying that IF I get a hit in with a spell, and get lucky and get the critical and confirm it and I beat the SR and they fail the save throw that after jumping through all those hurdles, with the lowest HP and BAB in the game, without armor, without skills, and with two bad save throws, in addition to having to drag my spells with me in easily destroyable format after levels of having piddly nothing to do as the fighter rampages through room after room you won't let me have my one shining moment in the spotlight?
So, one random night after a late game, a couple of friends and I were talking about some rules at a Waffle House (I know) and discovered an interesting issue. We first noticed the issue after a battle mage in our group did obscene amounts of damage in a single round. He had used a touch spell, and scored a critical hit with it.
Now, I know its in the rules that touch spells can score a critical hit with a natural 20. BUT WHY? I personally don't think it should and here's a few reasons why:
1 - spells deal multiple dice worth of damage (typically more than or equal to a full-round from a fighter)
2 - sneak attack deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by a critical.
3 - burst effects (such as shocking burst) deals multiple dice worth of damage and is not multiplied by the critical.
4 - All precision based damage is not multiplied by a critical.
5 - spells that add dice to base damage are not multiplied by a critical.
________Things that do critical
- base weapon damage
- solid bonus from ability scores
- solid bonus from enhancements
- solid bonus from buffs (such as bardic music)________
So again I come back around and ask...WHY are touch spells allowed to critical? I always figured that the benefit behind a touch spell was that there was no save usually (like scorching ray) with the exception of a hand-full of powerful saves (like disintegrate).
Tell me, not from a stand point of RAW, but from your own personal opinion, do you think its fair if I can get a critical hit with a ray of disintegration) and deal (by 20th level) 80d6 damage that destroys force effects and cannot be resisted with energy resistance?
What do you guys think? In my groups we've already houseruled this out.
PS: This is not a gripe/complaint, but merely a realization and a curiosity if anyone else noticed this or feels this way. Nor is this a "why didn't Pathfinder do this...or why didn't they do that", but a just wondering why this was even a rule in the first place?
rambling follows:
Why not? All base damage is multiplied. The sneak attack damage is not base damage.
1. Wnat spells do more damage than a fighter, except a low level fighter? You can probably make a blaster that does it, but it will be a very specialized build, and overall weaker than a caster that does not concentrate on blasting.
2. Sneak attack damage is not base damage, and the amount of dice rolled if all those dice were multiplied by a multicrit weapon would be basically an instakill.
Enough with the questions what issues do you have with a spell critting? I dont see an issue with how the crit system works. Yeah Disintegrate can do a lot of damage, but you have to hit the touch AC, and get them to fail a fort save. I am assuming shocking grasp was the critting touch spell. If a caster is brave/stupid enough to be in melee he deserves to get a crit if he can land it. In many DM's games it would be the last thing he did.
The way the game works is that attack rolls crit, and it is really not an issue.
It is a gripe. If it was not a gripe or complaint it would not have been changed by your group. I see no reason why it should not be a rule. Gripe and complaints are not necessarily bad by the way, but it is what it is.
Ok lets cover this a bit at a time.
First off on your starting points:
1. Weapons do multiple dice worth of damage and still get multiplied. Greatswords for example, or large greatswords... or claw attacks from dragons. So this argument is dead in the water.
2. sneak attack is precision damage. Precision damage is not multiplied. Again dead in the water as you aren't comparing like things. Sneak attack also applies to every attack that qualifies in a round which is not the case with touch attacks.
3. Burst effects do not generally have attack rolls. Without an attack roll you can't critical. Again a case of not comparing like things. Also please note that burst effects generally affect more than one creature at a time unlike touch attacks.
4. Doesn't matter as spell damage isn't precision damage. There isn't even an argument where you could say it is.
5. Effects that add dice to base damage are not multiplied. Again not like things (effects that add dice are NOT like touch attack which have a based damage of several dice). This goes for vital strike, holy weapon enhancments, sneak attack, elemental damage on weapons and so on.
*******
So out of your five points you have only one that actually compares to what you are complaining of and in that one case the rules work exactly the same for both mundane attacks as they do for magical attacks.
As to your last bit of hyperbole:
Why shouldn't that disintegrate do more damage? I can do it an extremely limited number of times per day, and even then I have to:
1. Hit
2. Beat SR
3. Have a foe fail a save throughBefore I get the full damage. In addition to the fact that just casting the spell can provoke, and if I'm threatened and cast defensively the fact I'm making a ranged attack still provokes.
Compare this to a fighter that can swing (or shoot) every round without limit all day long, and gets more multipliers, and an easier time increasing the chances that he'll critical and is already ...
thanks. I was too lazy to post a good counter, but not too lazy to not post at all.
In closing you are saying that IF I get a hit in with a spell, and get lucky and get the critical and confirm it and I beat the SR and they fail the save throw that after jumping through all those hurdles, with the lowest HP and BAB in the game, without armor, without skills, and with two bad save throws, in addition to having to drag my spells with me in easily destroyable format after levels of having piddly nothing to do as the fighter rampages through room after room you won't let me have my one shining moment in the spotlight?
This brought a tear to my colossal armored eye...
|
|
snip...
So out of your five points you have only one that actually compares to what you are complaining of and in that one case the rules work exactly the same for both mundane attacks as they do for magical attacks.
As to your last bit of hyperbole:
Why shouldn't that disintegrate do more damage? I can do it an extremely limited number of times per day, and even then I have to:
1. Hit
2. Beat SR
3. Have a foe fail a save through
...
so ray of disintegration may have not been the best example, as most spells I've seen that require touch don't require saves...I was just using that spell as the most ridiculous example.
And to counter argue...here's a few points.
To hit most standard monsters touch AC (even at high levels) is ridiculously easy. Most monsters have touch AC's between 8 and 13...still pretty easy, even for a mage.
Second...SR is easy for any encounter of equal or lesser CR. Common...SR 18 for an 8th level is still only rolling a 10...maybe and 8 (or even lower) with a feat or special ability.
Third...as I said above...with the exception of RoD, most touch spells/range touch spells have no save or even no SR.
Forth...you can't say its dangerous to get in and hit an opponent with a range touch because most of those spells have a range or medium or long...even a 1st level caster with a long range spell could safely stand back and blast away.
PS: again...not trying to say anything bad or complain...just curious.
In closing you are saying that IF I get a hit in with a spell, and get lucky and get the critical and confirm it and I beat the SR and they fail the save throw that after jumping through all those hurdles, with the lowest HP and BAB in the game, without armor, without skills, and with two bad save throws, in addition to having to drag my spells with me in easily destroyable format after levels of having piddly nothing to do as the fighter rampages through room after room you won't let me have my one shining moment in the spotlight?This brought a tear to my colossal armored eye...
OOOOOOH hold still! I need that tear for a spell component! Yet another thing I have to have in order to do something that if it is missing I can't do anything...
Unlike mister fancy pants cleric over there with his "I can raise the dead, while wearing armor with more class features than you, better save throws, more HP and BAB... oh did I mention the channel energy?"
Yes yes I know the gods love you more than me so you get all the cheat codes -- BUT I MADE IT ON MY OWN -- without fawning all over some overgrown self absorbed egomanic with self esteem issues that has to get things less than itself to tell it how great it supposedly is!
</wizardrage>
snip...
So out of your five points you have only one that actually compares to what you are complaining of and in that one case the rules work exactly the same for both mundane attacks as they do for magical attacks.
As to your last bit of hyperbole:
Why shouldn't that disintegrate do more damage? I can do it an extremely limited number of times per day, and even then I have to:
1. Hit
2. Beat SR
3. Have a foe fail a save through
...so ray of disintegration may have not been the best example, as most spells I've seen that require touch don't require saves...I was just using that spell as the most ridiculous example.
And to counter argue...here's a few points.
To hit most standard monsters touch AC (even at high levels) is ridiculously easy. Most monsters have touch AC's between 8 and 13...still pretty easy, even for a mage.
Second...SR is easy for any encounter of equal or lesser CR. Common...SR 18 for an 8th level is still only rolling a 10...maybe and 8 (or even lower) with a feat or special ability.
Third...as I said above...with the exception of RoD, most touch spells/range touch spells have no save or even no SR.
Forth...you can't say its dangerous to get in and hit an opponent with a range touch because most of those spells have a range or medium or long...even a 1st level caster with a long range spell could safely stand back and blast away.
PS: again...not trying to say anything bad or complain...just curious.
So again. I'm using a limited use ability to do less than the fighter and I can't have a critical?
Lets not forget all the penalties I'll take for shooting that ray if they are in melee, or have cover -- with both I'm looking at a +8 effective to their touch AC -- IF they don't have a ring of protection, aura of some sort, or any other nifty little "FAIL WIZARD" ability.
SR is generally CR+13. That means I'm generally looking at needing at least an 11 on the dice or my limited use (did I mention that part yet?) ability is completely wasted leaving me with less to do for the day to NO EFFECT while the fighter just takes another shot -- for the fifth time this round -- all of which are going to do more damage than my touch spell did.
Oh and lets not start on melee touch spells. After all like I said I'm just super squishy it makes all sorts of sense for me to get as close as possible to something that wants to eat me (and not in the good sense) so that I can again -- do less than the fighter (or rogue).
Besides most rays don't do damage, and aren't actually subject to criticals (same with most touch attacks).
Finally might as well bring up energy resistance too -- or worse out right immunity.
The fighter finds something his sword won't cut, fine he picks up the great club. No biggie. I find something the spells I got for the day won't affect what do I do? Sit in the back and hope for something I can affect next fight.
Lets not forget the entire school of magic that is generally useless or as most people know it enchantment. A great school that doesn't affect over 1/3 of the monsters in the game. Wonderful idea that. In all while the fighter swings and ignores DR, and shoots and ignores DR and continues to do so for the entire day with no rest, and without stopping for more damage than I can hope to do with a critical hit on a touch attack I'll just wait for 9 hours hoping that in the morning I actually come across something I can hurt with my spells -- no don't talk to me I'm resting and I got 30 minutes... darn it now I need another hour because I did something other than sit here and be bored for 8 hours straight just so I can spend another hour reading this book I read everyday for at least an hour while everyone else goes, "Come on mage, aren't you ready yet? We want to go hack and slash again! -- By the way prepare some teleports so we can sell our swag and by those extra scrolls you need just so you can have a chance to learn those spells so you actually have something to cast."
|
|
yes...while spells are indeed limited...they are not dealing less damage than a fighter.
For a single action at 3rd level...a mage can deal scorching ray 4d6 (or 14 fire damage...that can crit.
A fighter could deal with a great sword and 18 str (2d6 + 6) so 11. As I said originally above...about the same or more than a full-attack fighter of equal level.
Also...not trying to fight here. I just don't think its very fair, and I play mages more than anyone else in my group. (sorcerers, wizards, bards, clerics)
For a single action at 3rd level...a mage can deal scorching ray 4d6 (or 14 fire damage...that can crit.
A fighter could deal with a great sword and 18 str (2d6 + 6) so 11.
Uh, 2d6+11 averages to 13, not 11. Also, that greatsword wielding Fighter probably has Power Attack, so it's 2d6+9, or 16 average damage ... that crits twice as often as the scorching ray.
For touch spells the spells database shows 172 spells with a range of "touch." The database only shows 38 spells with a range of "touch" with "none" for their savings throw entry.
Not a perfect measurement though, and it leaves out Ranged Touch spells.
And to counter argue...here's a few points.
To hit most standard monsters touch AC (even at high levels) is ridiculously easy. Most monsters have touch AC's between 8 and 13...still pretty easy, even for a mage.
Second...SR is easy for any encounter of equal or lesser CR. Common...SR 18 for an 8th level is still only rolling a 10...maybe and 8 (or even lower) with a feat or special ability.
Third...as I said above...with the exception of RoD, most touch spells/range touch spells have no save or even no SR.
Forth...you can't say its dangerous to get in and hit an opponent with a range touch because most of those spells have a range or medium or long...even a 1st level caster with a long range spell could safely stand back and blast away.
PS: again...not trying to say anything bad or complain...just curious.
did you take point blank and precise shot to avoid the penalty for shooting into melee. Did you take improved precise shot to avoid soft cover from your buddy. If the answer is no then the AC is effectively an 12 to 21.
If you kill a creature of a lesser CR with one crit so what, and if you had a feat to help you bypass SR then that is one more reason casters should not be excluded and you can add it to all the things abraham said.Most ranged touch spells have to deal with issues we have already mentioned, and they don't do a lot of damage unless you are a dedicated blaster.
Scorching Ray has a short range 25+ (5ft/2 levels)
Disintegrate has a range of 100 + 10 per caster level which is not bad
They also both have SR
Polar ray the strongest ray spell, or at least highest level has medium range, and SR but not save.
At 20th level it does 20d6 so on a crit it does 40d6
40 X 3.5(average damage) = 140
I am sure taking 140 is possible at level 20.
I power attacking fight will have at least a + 8 strength that gives him 12 damage from strength. If he is built for damage he will be power attacking with a -6 penalty for 18 points of damage. He will probably have a +5 weapon for 5 more points of damage. Weapon spec gives + 2
12+18+5+2=37 point of damage before the weapon is counted in.
He should be reliable for 3 of his 5 attacks to hit. Yes 5.
How?
He should be hasted or have an item that grants him the extra attack
3 x 37=111, not including the weapon or anything another player might come up with to increase damage such as increasing strength. If you crit can do what I do on a regular basis I say let the man crit.
PS: I am far from the best chracter builder on these boards. I am sure somewhere someone is laughing at my 111.
PS:Polar ray also has SR
|
In general spellcasters doing ray attacks don't out-damage their fighter counterparts. If you want to make a ranged guy who does lots of damage make an archer. If doing it with fire is important make an alchemist. Wizards are way down the list of folks who can do lots of damage from arms length.
If they occasionally crit and get to shine, it's uncommon enough that it's not a huge balance issue.
yes...while spells are indeed limited...they are not dealing less damage than a fighter.
For a single action at 3rd level...a mage can deal scorching ray 4d6 (or 14 fire damage...that can crit.
A fighter could deal with a great sword and 18 str (2d6 + 6) so 11. As I said originally above...about the same or more than a full-attack fighter of equal level.
Also...not trying to fight here. I just don't think its very fair, and I play mages more than anyone else in my group. (sorcerers, wizards, bards, clerics)
When people get into the fighter vs caster damage remember there is no more warlock in Pathfinder as opposed to 3.5. A wizard/sorc/bard/inquistor/oracle/cleric cannot continually blast with impunity each round or make multiple strikes like the other classes. Yes, scorching ray is good. Yes, if you critical with a spell it is silly. But, then again the range and outside modifiers on getting those planets to align is not as average as you'd think.
with both I'm looking at a +8 effective to their touch AC ]...
Stop ninjaing me. I am the ninja on these boards.
|
|
Uh, 2d6+11 averages to 13, not 11. Also, that greatsword wielding Fighter probably has Power Attack, so it's 2d6+9, or 16 average damage ... that crits twice as often as the scorching ray.For a single action at 3rd level...a mage can deal scorching ray 4d6 (or 14 fire damage...that can crit.
A fighter could deal with a great sword and 18 str (2d6 + 6) so 11.
ah...math issues...your right about that. it is 12:15 am where I am...starting to get sleepy. any hows, like I said earlier, not trying to start a war or say anything is unbalanced I just don't really see how any effect that adds multiple dice cannot get a critical but spells can. I just don't really agree to say that their exclusive enough or limited enough to warrant such a deviation in the trend of rules.
Spells like vampiric touch, scorching ray, shocking grasp, etc. Even these ranges are made moot with the new metamagic feat in the apg (what it is called, ranged spell i think?).
I do agree that it does seem like it is uncommon enough, but it still just seems like a huge deviation. Read the book from chapter to chapter and you get hit with rule after rule about added dice don't crit, but added solid bonus' do...but spells do. really? It would seem though that no one else (except my group) agrees with me on this one. I guess were just missing something...
ah...math issues...your right about that. it is 12:15 am where I am...starting to get sleepy. any hows, like I said earlier, not trying to start a war or say anything is unbalanced I just don't really see how any effect that adds multiple dice cannot get a critical but spells can. I just don't really agree to say that their exclusive enough or limited enough to warrant such a deviation in the trend of rules.Spells like vampiric touch, scorching ray, shocking grasp, etc. Even these ranges are made moot with the new metamagic feat in the apg (what it is called, ranged spell i think?).
I do agree that it does seem like it is uncommon enough, but it still just seems like a huge deviation. Read the book from chapter to chapter and you get hit with rule after rule about added dice don't crit, but added solid bonus' do...but spells do. really? It would seem though that no one else (except my group) agrees with me on this one. I guess were just missing something...
We aint warring yet. :)
If it is not unbalanced then why mess with it. If it aint broke...
The spells dont add multiple dice. Those dice whether they be 4 or 400 are the base damage dice and base damage is what gets multiplied.
Sneak attack as an example does add multiple dice that are not base damage, and therefore does not get multiplied.
All that feat does is give you more range.
I think you are focusing too much on the number of damage dice a spell does as opposed to whether they are base damage or not.
Because it is more fun.
Because it is more fun.
+1
|
Did they get rid of the critical hits for enervate and energy drain? I'd be a little sad if they did... I only see something about critical ability damage or drain. Maybe they never were? Ah well.
EDIT: "This attack saps a living opponent’s
vital energy and happens automatically when a melee or
ranged attack hits. Each successful energy drain bestows
one or more negative levels (the creature’s description
specif ies how many). If an attack that includes an energy
drain scores a critical hit, it bestows twice the listed
number of negative levels." pg 299 of bestiary... which since a ranged touch attack is an attack that includes energy drain... Hoorah!
Oh you'll miss being able to critically drain your enemy of its life force! My suggestion btw is avoid vampire fighters with multiattack and improved critical(slam attack).
Spells that require a touch attack roll have a different mechanic than "normal" spells.
The touch attack adds another chance to fail. Thus Touch spells SHOULD be better than other spells in other areas (damage, saves, etc..), and the designers also decided to balance it giving the critical range to touch spells. IMHO it adds an unnecessary complexity to spells, but it's how it works since 3rd Edition (and there were optional rules for Spell Critical in some AD&D2E Accesory).
Uh, 2d6+11 averages to 13, not 11. Also, that greatsword wielding Fighter probably has Power Attack, so it's 2d6+9, or 16 average damage ... that crits twice as often as the scorching ray.For a single action at 3rd level...a mage can deal scorching ray 4d6 (or 14 fire damage...that can crit.
A fighter could deal with a great sword and 18 str (2d6 + 6) so 11.
ah...math issues...your right about that. it is 12:15 am where I am...starting to get sleepy. any hows, like I said earlier, not trying to start a war or say anything is unbalanced I just don't really see how any effect that adds multiple dice cannot get a critical but spells can. I just don't really agree to say that their exclusive enough or limited enough to warrant such a deviation in the trend of rules.
Spells like vampiric touch, scorching ray, shocking grasp, etc. Even these ranges are made moot with the new metamagic feat in the apg (what it is called, ranged spell i think?).
I do agree that it does seem like it is uncommon enough, but it still just seems like a huge deviation. Read the book from chapter to chapter and you get hit with rule after rule about added dice don't crit, but added solid bonus' do...but spells do. really? It would seem though that no one else (except my group) agrees with me on this one. I guess were just missing something...
The spells are base damage. At lvl 5 you do 5d6 damage with schocking grasp. Period. Scorching Ray you do 4d6 damage. Period. If you have some feat or ability or item that added 1d6 fire damage to any fire spell you cast, then that would not be doubled like the original 4d6 fire damage would in the event of a crit.
When you gain levels in a spell caster class, you don't get "bonus damage" you get an increase in "base damage." That's just how the class works.
No different than a fighter taking weapon specialization or increasing his strength modifier.
Can you point me to the rule that states an enemy in melee combat gets "soft cover" from my buddies? I know I get a -4 to hit them, but I'm looking for the rule that states the penalty is specifically the result of "soft cover".
Did you take improved precise shot to avoid soft cover from your buddy.
Two different things.
You suffer -4 when attacking people fighting in mele (there are a few exceptions). Precise shot helps here.
AND
You may suffer another -4 due to cover if any creature stands between you and your target. Improved precise shot prevents this an other things.
page 195 (Cover) and page 184 (Shooting or Throwing into a Melee)
And to counter argue...here's a few points.
To hit most standard monsters touch AC (even at high levels) is ridiculously easy. Most monsters have touch AC's between 8 and 13...still pretty easy, even for a mage.
Second...SR is easy for any encounter of equal or lesser CR. Common...SR 18 for an 8th level is still only rolling a 10...maybe and 8 (or even lower) with a feat or special ability.
Third...as I said above...with the exception of RoD, most touch spells/range touch spells have no save or even no SR.
Forth...you can't say its dangerous to get in and hit an opponent with a range touch because most of those spells have a range or medium or long...even a 1st level caster with a long range spell could safely stand back and blast away.
Counter-counter-points:
First - fighter-types get pretty high attack bonuses and hit normal or dire critters (without huge ACs) ridiculously easily. Should they lose their crits?
Besides, hitting easily is one thing, but getting the crit threat (natural 20) isn't so common. It has a relatively low chance of occurring even if it happens to be spectacular when it does.
Fourth - archers fire away from safety, should they not get crits?
Can you point me to the rule that states an enemy in melee combat gets "soft cover" from my buddies? I know I get a -4 to hit them, but I'm looking for the rule that states the penalty is specifically the result of "soft cover".
Did you take improved precise shot to avoid soft cover from your buddy.
Two different things.
You suffer -4 when attacking people fighting in mele (there are a few exceptions). Precise shot helps here.
AND
You may suffer another -4 due to cover if any creature stands between you and your target. Improved precise shot prevents this an other things.page 195 (Cover) and page 184 (Shooting or Throwing into a Melee)
Actually soft cover gives a +4 to their AC, which is still an effective -8 to your attack, but the wording is important because if you say they are both penalties people will think they don't stack.
We agree. I just wanted to clarify why it was a +8. To the OP soft cover is handled under cover in the combat chapter.