|
wands are spell trigger items: they never provoke AoOs
from core book:
Spell Trigger, Command Word, or Use-Activated Items:
Activating any of these kinds of items does not require
concentration and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell
completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell
finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting
that an appropriate character would know, and a single word
that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone
whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case
even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a
3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is
stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell
trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks
of opportunity.
This came up in my game and I would like to know what the rule is. The Gnoll Sorceror had a Wand of Acid Arrow and used one charge next to the Cleric. He said he would get an AoO due to the spell being a ranged touch attack and per RAW, that would get a AoO. However, also to RAW wands never provoke said I. Which is correct?
The use of a wand itself does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Using the spell as a ranged weapon would, IMHO.
This came up in my game and I would like to know what the rule is. The Gnoll Sorceror had a Wand of Acid Arrow and used one charge next to the Cleric. He said he would get an AoO due to the spell being a ranged touch attack and per RAW, that would get a AoO. However, also to RAW wands never provoke said I. Which is correct?The use of a wand itself does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Using the spell as a ranged weapon would, IMHO.
Correct. Just like if you successfully cast a ranged touch spell on the defensive, the fact that it's a ranged attack still provokes an AoO.
BigNorseWolf is right. Wands, being spell trigger items, do not provoke. However, making a ranged attack within the threatened area of an enemy does.
So your player is right. He would indeed be entitled to an attack of opportunity against the gnoll NPC.
EDIT: Ninja'd!
It has nothing to do with the spell coming from a wand. The rule is that ranged attacks generally provoke attacks of opportunity (see table Actions in Combat here. What kind of ranged attack or where the attack comes from is of no relevance to that rule.
|
Reasoning: While you make a missile attack, you cannot defend yourself against melee attacks. So using a missile weapon provokes an AoO.
If the Gnoll had cast Acid Arrow from 5' away, he would have provoked TWO attacks of opportunity. One from casting a spell, and another from using a missile weapon. Using a wand prevented one of those, but not the other.
Reasoning: While you make a missile attack, you cannot defend yourself against melee attacks. So using a missile weapon provokes an AoO.
If the Gnoll had cast Acid Arrow from 5' away, he would have provoked TWO attacks of opportunity. One from casting a spell, and another from using a missile weapon. Using a wand prevented one of those, but not the other.
And it's worth noting at this point that most enemies would only be able to take advantage of one of those AoO's. Someone with Combat Reflexes however would be able to take both. Unlike, say, moving through two threatened squares, there are two very distinct conditions causing an AoO and thus both apply.
And it's worth noting at this point that most enemies would only be able to take advantage of one of those AoO's. Someone with Combat Reflexes however would be able to take both. Unlike, say, moving through two threatened squares, there are two very distinct conditions causing an AoO and thus both apply.Reasoning: While you make a missile attack, you cannot defend yourself against melee attacks. So using a missile weapon provokes an AoO.
If the Gnoll had cast Acid Arrow from 5' away, he would have provoked TWO attacks of opportunity. One from casting a spell, and another from using a missile weapon. Using a wand prevented one of those, but not the other.
1 action = 1 AoO maximum. Same as movement.
Both parts might provoke but you only get one AoO for the action.
1 action = 1 AoO maximum. Same as movement.
Both parts might provoke but you only get one AoO for the action.
That is not what the rule says. The actual text is as follows:
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
Nowhere does it talk about actions, but about opportunities. Casting first and then making ranged attacks provide two such opportunities.
Ok I agree, I see that.
Spell Trigger, Command Word, or Use-Activated Items:
Activating any of these kinds of items does not require
concentration and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Yes, we understand that. The fact that it's a ranged attack still provokes though, as stated multiple times.
|
|
Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method,
so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action
that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell
being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however,
it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) To activate
a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes
for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the
general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used
while grappling or while swallowed whole.
Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method,
so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action
that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell
being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however,
it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) To activate
a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes
for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the
general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used
while grappling or while swallowed whole.
All good. But the wand in question makes a ranged attack -- all ranged attacks provoke -- unless you have something that specifically allows you to make ranged attacks without provoking (point blank mastery I'm looking at you).
|
|
Yes, we understand that. The fact that it's a ranged attack still provokes though, as stated multiple times.Spell Trigger, Command Word, or Use-Activated Items:
Activating any of these kinds of items does not require
concentration and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Using that logic, items activated by command word (rings, armor, shields, weapon) would also provoke an AoO if emulating a ranged touch spell? I wholeheartedly disagree. When you have a rule that says "using X does not provoke AoO," I for one tends to run with it. When you multiply house rules or "consequence rules" such as the one in question here, things tend to get ugly and unplayable real fast. There's a reason why you can point a want at someone's face and not suffer an AoO: ever shot a wand past level 8 or 9? the save DCs are ridiculously low and the 4th level cap takes care of any potential "no save" spells abuse...
|
|
Right. So the argument for an AoO is this:
If you want to cast Acid Arrow from a wand, that's cool. No attack of opportunity. But when you want to actually shoot that weapon-like spell at somebody, that's a missile attack. Missile attacks provoke attacks of opportunity.
Now as far as I'm aware, nothing explicitly says that ranged touch attack spells provoke when the ranged touch attack roll is made. I would just assume they do, because all the other ranged weapons do. If they don't, that would make them different from all the other ranged weapons. But I can kinda see why you might treat them differently, since the attack is made as part of a spell and not as a separate standard action.
|
|
Two examples of command word items which have never triggered AoOs but that by your logic, would:
Crown of Blasting, Minor
Aura moderate evocation; CL 6th
Slot head; Weight 1 lb.; Price 6,480 gp
Description
On command, this simple golden crown projects a blast of searing
light (3d8 points of damage) once per day.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, searing light; Cost 3,240 gp
Crown of Blasting , Major
Aura strong evocation; CL 17th
Slot head; Weight 1 lb.; Price 23,760 gp
Description
On command, this elaborate golden crown projects a blast of
searing light (5d8 maximized for 40 points of damage) once per day.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Maximize Spell, searing light;
Cost 11,880 gp
|
|
the point is that wands are "boom sticks" that simply require pointing and shooting... going through the intricate motions of spellcasting or drawing/nocking/shooting an arrow takes time (which a melee attacker can exploit by shiving you between ribs as you fumble around...)
the texts which says that you can fire wands in a grapple or AFTER BEING SWALLOWED WHOLE says it all IMO.
Two examples of command word items which have never triggered AoOs but that by your logic, would:
Crown of Blasting, Minor
Aura moderate evocation; CL 6th
Slot head; Weight 1 lb.; Price 6,480 gp
Description
On command, this simple golden crown projects a blast of searing
light (3d8 points of damage) once per day.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, searing light; Cost 3,240 gpCrown of Blasting , Major
Aura strong evocation; CL 17th
Slot head; Weight 1 lb.; Price 23,760 gp
Description
On command, this elaborate golden crown projects a blast of
searing light (5d8 maximized for 40 points of damage) once per day.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Maximize Spell, searing light;
Cost 11,880 gp
When you say "never triggered AoOs", whatever game you were playing in was not following RAW. It's quite simple. Look at the Table Actions in Combat. Right next to Attack (ranged), it says Yes for AoO. Note that it does not say "Attack with a ranged weapon". If you need to roll a d20 to hit, and it's not a melee attack, it provokes an attack of opportunity.
Edit (you realize you can do that, right?):
the texts which says that you can fire wands in a grapple or AFTER BEING SWALLOWED WHOLE says it all IMO.
And if you were in a threatened square while being grappled or swallowed whole, you'd still provoke for the ranged attack. Note that grapplers themselves cannot take AoO's, as specified in the Grappled condition. I'm not sure what you expect the creature who has you in its stomach to do...
|
Two examples of command word items which have never triggered AoOs but that by your logic, would:
Crown of Blasting, Minor
Aura moderate evocation; CL 6th
Slot head; Weight 1 lb.; Price 6,480 gp
Description
On command, this simple golden crown projects a blast of searing
light (3d8 points of damage) once per day.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, searing light; Cost 3,240 gp
Of course they would. The crowns emulate the searing light spell (the rulebook formatting and PDF hyperlinks make this clear) which is a ranged touch attack and says nothing in its description about not provoking AoO for a ranged attack. The text is identical to the 3.0 and 3.5 circlets of blasting. What's your basis for saying they "have never" provoked?
Yep, PDK is wrong I'm afraid. Wand of acid arrow and crowns of blasting all provoke when fired in melee.
Two examples of command word items which have never triggered AoOs but that by your logic, would:
For what it's worth, I've played in games where a Circlet of Blasting would provoke an AoO and I've played in games where it wouldn't. It depends on how the GM interprets the rules.
Similarly, we can consider the unrelated situation where a Tiny creature takes a 5' step into an opponent's square. In one place, it says that entering an opponent's square always provokes an attack of opportunity and in one place it says a 5' step never provokes. So which overrides the other? (Answer: Ask your GM.)
the point is that wands are "boom sticks" that simply require pointing and shooting... (...)
So your saying a loaded crossbow or firearm should not cause AoO either ?
There has been a lot of references in this thread, which I think is entirely wrong. Namely the connection between Attack(ranged) from the table and Ranged Touch Attacks, where the former refers directly to the entry that specifies Ranged Weapons in terms of projectile and thrown weapons.
But that does change the fact that the ranged touch attack itself provokes an AoO, which is stated directly at page 186:
"Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunityy, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively."
|
Two examples of command word items which have never triggered AoOs but that by your logic, would:For what it's worth, I've played in games where a Circlet of Blasting would provoke an AoO and I've played in games where it wouldn't. It depends on how the GM interprets the rules.
Heh. I had a creature in a 3.5 game who was immune to fire (and invisible at the time) take an AOO against a PC who was using a necklace of fireballs. The creature used the Disarm attack and the bead fell to the ground and burst at his feet!! rotfl
The player and another spellcaster (party member) weren't too happy about that. :)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
AoO due to the spell being a ranged touch attack and per RAW, that would get a AoO. However, also to RAW wands never provoke said I. Which is correct?
You are both 100% right.
Wands never provoke for use, ever.
Casting a Ranged Touch spell provokes regardless from source (including from a wand.)
|
|
the point is that wands are "boom sticks" that simply require pointing and shooting... (...)So your saying a loaded crossbow or firearm should not cause AoO either ?
by RAW they do, but I think that what you propose would be perfectly reasonable... it would make for an interesting optional rule (i.e. the Equipment Tricks feat would be a perfect candidate to allow for this IMO, and such a feature would go a long way in making crossbows and firearms suck a little less...)
Great suggestion if you ask me. I hope the developpers are listening! :)