I understand that Point Blank shot effects Rays, that's all honky-dory.
The problem is with spells that Aren't rays, but use Ranged touch attack mechanics (say like touch spells, modified by metamagic reach), do you get the +1 to hit and Damage (if the spell deals damage) with those?
if so, what if the spell was Harm?
would you blast the target to 1 hp, and then deal another 1 damage for PBS, knocking them Disabled/Unconcious? or does the "can't go below one" negate PBS, unles you don't get them to 1, at which points it's (10*CL)+1.
thanks for your time.
I understand that Point Blank shot effects Rays, that's all honky-dory.
The problem is with spells that Aren't rays, but use Ranged touch attack mechanics (say like touch spells, modified by metamagic reach), do you get the +1 to hit and Damage (if the spell deals damage) with those?
if so, what if the spell was Harm?
would you blast the target to 1 hp, and then deal another 1 damage for PBS, knocking them Disabled/Unconcious? or does the "can't go below one" negate PBS, unles you don't get them to 1, at which points it's (10*CL)+1.thanks for your time.
Actually point blank shot applies to ranged touch attacks, which is what a ray is. The difference is important because by saying it applies to ranged touch attacks it automatically includes rays.
Harm is not ranged touch. It is touch.
PRD:
Harm
School necromancy; Level cleric 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range touch
Target creature touched
Edit: If harm was a ranged touch the pbs would be over ruled by the harm spell. The reason is specific over rules general when rules clash.
Harm is not ranged touch. It is touch.PRD:
HarmSchool necromancy; Level cleric 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range touch
Target creature touched
Edit: If harm was a ranged touch the pbs would be over ruled by the harm spell. The reason is specific over rules general when rules clash.
hense the "if it's modified by Reach spell"
because then it would become a spell with ranged touch (close 25ft + 5ft/2lvls)okay, but that +1 to hit when you have to be within 30 feet for Hexes and stuff anyways makes PBS more than jsut a feat dump to negate Melee combat negatives.
thanks.
Harm is not ranged touch. It is touch.PRD:
HarmSchool necromancy; Level cleric 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range touch
Target creature touched
Edit: If harm was a ranged touch the pbs would be over ruled by the harm spell. The reason is specific over rules general when rules clash.
hense the "if it's modified by Reach spell"
because then it would become a spell with ranged touch (close 25ft + 5ft/2lvls)okay, but that +1 to hit when you have to be within 30 feet for Hexes and stuff anyways makes PBS more than just a feat dump to negate Melee combat negatives.
thanks.
I must be going blind in my old age. I looked for that(reach spell) 3 times before I posted to make sure it was there, and I did not see it until I used the "find" feature in firefox.
hense the "if it's modified by Reach spell"
because then it would become a spell with ranged touch (close 25ft + 5ft/2lvls)okay, but that +1 to hit when you have to be within 30 feet for Hexes and stuff anyways makes PBS more than jsut a feat dump to negate Melee combat negatives.
thanks.
It sounds like the feat allows you to convert a touch spell into a Ray equivalent so I would start there. Apply the mechanics as usual.
I must be going blind in my old age. I looked for that(reach spell) 3 times before I posted to make sure it was there, and I did not see it until I used the "find" feature in firefox.
Metamagic Reach is a beautiful thing for casters that are stuck with a lot of touch spells.
1:1 distance increase. (touch->close->medium->long)Touch to Close to Medium is 2 slots higher.
etc. Definitely worth the 3000 for the Lesser rod, 11k for Medium, and 24.5k for the greater.
but this was just about how metamagic reach works with Point blank (whether PBS is applied before or after the metamagic, and it seems to be after, which is a good thing.)
I must be going blind in my old age. I looked for that(reach spell) 3 times before I posted to make sure it was there, and I did not see it until I used the "find" feature in firefox.Metamagic Reach is a beautiful thing for casters that are stuck with a lot of touch spells.
1:1 distance increase. (touch->close->medium->long)
Touch to Close to Medium is 2 slots higher.
etc. Definitely worth the 3000 for the Lesser rod, 11k for Medium, and 24.5k for the greater.but this was just about how metamagic reach works with Point blank (whether PBS is applied before or after the metamagic, and it seems to be after, which is a good thing.)
It is not really applied before or after. It is a condition of being able to make a ranged touch attack.
I guess so, but I can see the argument against it applying, seeing as it would normally be a touch spell, and thusly PBS wouldn;t apply, but with the feat, sounds like it does.
now to plan ahead to make this level 13 Necro-lord Witch more epicly awesome.
by Necro-lord, i just mean he's a Priest of Urgathoa who can make Zombies and Skeletons.
either way, Minions, Save or Sucks, and a lot of Hexes. this'll be fun.
|
*coughs*
You are especially accurate when making ranged attacks against close targets.
Benefit: You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet.
You don't roll damage on Harm so you don't do 1 extra point of damage with that changed into a ranged spell. You could still get the +1 to hit of course.
*coughs*
You are especially accurate when making ranged attacks against close targets.
Benefit: You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet.
You don't roll damage on Harm so you don't do 1 extra point of damage with that changed into a ranged spell. You could still get the +1 to hit of course.
oooh, good call.
*coughs*
You are especially accurate when making ranged attacks against close targets.
Benefit: You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet.
You don't roll damage on Harm so you don't do 1 extra point of damage with that changed into a ranged spell. You could still get the +1 to hit of course.
Oh hey, Totally missed that. But yay +1 to hit is still decent for something i took just to negate "firing into melee"
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I was going to post this on another thread, but thankfully my search-fu worked. I was asked a question last night and after muddling through the old forum archives and the rulebook I'm still sufficiently confused. Maybe somebody can help me.
I understand how rays work. I know rays follow the rules of ranged weapons because I found the section of the core rulebook that says so. Ray Qualities are: they can cause critical hits, cover may cause penalties to hit, point blank/precise shot function with rays, and you can shoot at a target even if you don't have line of sight (invisible targets).
I have read numerous posts,including this one, saying "ranged touch" abilities also follow these rules and you still have to worry about cover modifiers and you can cause critical hits. Problem is I cannot find this reference anywhere in the core rulebook. In fact, the only ranged touch attacks which specifically mention the effect of cover and critical hits are rays under the "Effects" section of the magic chapter. The way I read the rules is that non-ray ranged touch attack qualities are: they require LOS, they cannot crit, they are not affected by point blank/precise, and cover does not effect them.
Please keep in mind I get how rays work, this question has nothing to do with any spell with the "Effect: Ray" designator. I just want somebody to show me exactly where it states that ranged touch spells work like rays, because I'm not seeing it other than the comments over-and-over which say they do.
|
|
*coughs again*
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.
Now the following section Ranged Touch Spells in Combat (pg 186) only talks about things like attack of opportunities or being unable to hold the charge on them unless specifically noted and doesn't mention anything about cover. However if we go back to the listing for Touch Attacks on page 179 we learn what we need to know.
Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks. These attacks bypass solid objects, such as armor and shields, by passing through them. Incorporeal touch attacks work similarly to normal touch attacks except that they also ignore cover bonuses. Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor.
So there are your sources, though of course there isn't anything in all that which says they work like rays. The do behave similarly it would certainly seem like.
Ranged Touch Attacks are handled like all Touch Attacks are which are subject to all defensive modifiers that aren't Armor, Shield or Natural bonuses (which a Cover bonus certainly doesn't count as) and are capable of critically hitting their target.Hope that helps!
Remember that the index is your friend. :)
(Oh, looks like that range spell metamagic'ed Harm could crit too aside from that 1 hit point remaining thing. Ouch...)
|
|
Okay...so with the rules presented here, this is what I'm seeing.
Ray (Covered on Page 214):
Cover Bonuses to Targets - Yes, specifically referred to in the definition.
Critical Hit Damage - Yes, specifically referred to in the definition.
LOS Requirement - No, specifically referred to in the definition.
Precise Shot/Point Blank Shot - Yes, a ray is referred to as a "weapon attack" therefore those feats can apply since they apply to "ranged weapons".
Non-Ray Ranged Touch Attack:
Cover Bonuses to Targets - Yes, per page 179, all other modifiers apply normally, a cover bonus is a modifier which would apply (this by the way is the specific line I was missing)
Critical Hit Damage - Yes, per page 185, you can score a critical hit with a touch or ranged touch attack.
LOS Requirement - Yes, you must be able to see your target. Now this too could be arguable, but I'm reading about the fact that you normally need both LOS and LOE to the target.
Precise Shot/Point Blank Shot - Not so sure still. The feats specifically refer to "ranged weapons" which spells are not.
I still feel I'm missing something. This all confirms the way we always ran rays, but yesterday a specific player started complaining about the rules and wanted a specific reference, which I couldn't find. This will work out providing some insight to that player.
I love how this was covered in three entirely different sections of the rules though.
|
|
Well if your reading the chapter in order it all makes sense where everything is for the most part.
A majority of the problem with point blank/precise shot is that whole weapon thing. It was the WotC Complete Arcane (I think...) that spelled out that those feats worked with pretty much any d20 attack roll made at range. So there is some residual hangers on from 3.5.
Personally in my games I'd give it to the PC's, I don't feel like it's too overly powerful and there aren't exactly a gigantic pile of ranged touch spells out there that aren't already rays to start with. That said I don't think it'd be unreasonable to not allow them to work either, though as a player I'd probably complain. ;)
complete arcane pg 72 and 73. pbs and precise shot can be applied to ranged spells.
true that. just thought i should include where it was at since i was trying to think of how to post when you beat me to it :)
|
|
Personally in my games I'd give it to the PC's, I don't feel like it's too overly powerful and there aren't exactly a gigantic pile of ranged touch spells out there that aren't already rays to start with. That said I don't think it'd be unreasonable to not allow them to work either, though as a player I'd probably complain. ;)
My group rules that point blank and precise work, so I understand your feelings about that. Yesterday though I got a call out of the blue from a fellow GM. A player at his table was vocally complaining that they didn't think any ranged spells are affected by the whole "friendlies in combat" cover modifiers. He asked for the specific rule because the player kept referring to it as a house rule. Once I actually started digging through the rules, the fact that how spells of this type should be adjudicated is in three sections across two chapters really didn't help. Sure it might make more sense if you're reading the rules through the first time through, but if you're just trying to find a single rule, it was really confusing.
Basically what I'm seeing here is that the whole, "is a spell a weapon" issue is still the crux of things since it wasn't updated in Pathfinder. This would be a nice addition to ultimate magic or an errata for the next edition I think.
|
|
So the difference between "Ray" and "Ranged Touch Attack" is that you can blind-fire a ray? Is that it?
The blind-fire ability of rays is the obvious difference. Depending on how you read the rules, if you do not consider a ranged touch attack as an "attack with a weapon", the point blank/precise shot line won't function either unless somebody can come up with a Pathfinder specific ruling.
Right, which unfortunately isn't a real source for the Pathfinder RPG to people who absolutely must play by the letter of the rules.
It was also handled in the FAQ recently. The FAQ's for any book are under that book.
|
|
Right, which unfortunately isn't a real source for the Pathfinder RPG to people who absolutely must play by the letter of the rules.It was also handled in the FAQ recently. The FAQ's for any book are under that book.
I just went through the FAQ for the Core Rulebook and couldn't find anything. Which FAQ is this in?
|
In my games I just treat all "Ranged Touch" spells as "Ray" since there seems to be no reason for them to be separate concepts.
Then again, I also allow players to deliver a ranged touch spell as a melee touch, but without the ability to hold the charge (i.e. a miss is still a miss). EDIT: Also no "cast, move, touch" ability either.
I just went through the FAQ for the Core Rulebook and couldn't find anything. Which FAQ is this in?Right, which unfortunately isn't a real source for the Pathfinder RPG to people who absolutely must play by the letter of the rules.It was also handled in the FAQ recently. The FAQ's for any book are under that book.
It is there.
Can you take Weapon Specialization (ray) or Improved Critical (ray) as feats? How about Weapon Specialization (bomb) or Improved Critical (bomb)?All four of those are valid choices.
Note that Weapon Specialization (ray) only adds to hit point damage caused by a ray attack that would normally deal hit point damage; it doesn't increase ability score damage (such as from ray of enfeeblement) or drain, negative levels (such as from enervation), or other damage or penalties from rays.
–Sean K Reynolds (10/22/10)
PS: I misread the conversation, thinking it was about rays. I did submit another FAQ though. Saying ranged touch attacks don't work, but spells do seems to be a bit picky to me.
For what it worth, I've always played that the mechanics of making a Ray attack and a Ranged Touch attack are identical. The difference between a Ray and a Ranged Touch in my book was always restricted to the visual thematic effects of the spell - a Ray produces, well, a ray of some sort that links the caster and the target (if the attack is successful) in an obvious visual display of magic, with the specific visual effects as described in the various spells. Ranged Touch spells lack this sort of visual cue, and are therefore much easier to disguise or make from hiding.
As far as the mechanics, even before the publication of Complete Arcane, I considered any spell that required an attack roll to be sufficiently weapon-like to benefit from feats listed as applying to weapons, like PBS and Precise Shot. Similarly, just like a sword or a fist can be swung in an attempt to hit an invisible foe, my notion was that this was a common and inherent property of weapons (they can be directed according to the wielder's desire and do not require a proper target to function) and that if a spellcaster wanted to make the attempt, he/she would enjoy the same 50% miss chance after declaring the correct square as anyone else making an attack roll.
Just my thoughts, but these interpretations make good sense to me...
|
|
For what it worth, I've always played that the mechanics of making a Ray attack and a Ranged Touch attack are identical. The difference between a Ray and a Ranged Touch in my book was always restricted to the visual thematic effects of the spell - a Ray produces, well, a ray of some sort that links the caster and the target (if the attack is successful) in an obvious visual display of magic, with the specific visual effects as described in the various spells. Ranged Touch spells lack this sort of visual cue, and are therefore much easier to disguise or make from hiding.
As far as the mechanics, even before the publication of Complete Arcane, I considered any spell that required an attack roll to be sufficiently weapon-like to benefit from feats listed as applying to weapons, like PBS and Precise Shot. Similarly, just like a sword or a fist can be swung in an attempt to hit an invisible foe, my notion was that this was a common and inherent property of weapons (they can be directed according to the wielder's desire and do not require a proper target to function) and that if a spellcaster wanted to make the attempt, he/she would enjoy the same 50% miss chance after declaring the correct square as anyone else making an attack roll.
Just my thoughts, but these interpretations make good sense to me...
Not much left open except "+1"
For what it worth, I've always played that the mechanics of making a Ray attack and a Ranged Touch attack are identical.
Me too.