Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
Spells like that chain from one target to another, don't they? So I'd think that it could be possible to use spell turning on it when it gets to you. If the spell is bouncing in a chain-like fashion, then a successful spell turning would probably end the spell for anyone left to be targeted after you.
Of course, that's all theory...I could be 100% wrong.
Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
Spell Turning works against slow or spells like mass hold person. They are still single-target spells, but they are able to effect multiple targets. So it is even possible for a mass hold person to be turned multiple times back on the caster if he casts it on multiple targets with spell turning active.
Because a spell says "targets within 30 feet of each other" does not make it an AoE spell. In general, AoE spells affect everyone, friend or enemy, within a given area. Mass single target spells can affect multiple targets within a given range of each other, but you get to pick and and choose because it is still a single target spell even though you can affect multiple targets.
Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
I don't think it stops disintegrate.
The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.
DisintegrateSchool transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a lodestone and a pinch of dust)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect ray
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Fortitude partial (object); Spell Resistance yes
A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit.
Aiming a SpellYou must make choices about whom a spell is to affect or where an effect is to originate, depending on a spell's type. The next entry in a spell description defines the spell's target (or targets), its effect, or its area, as appropriate.
Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.
You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile, after it appears it can move regardless of the spell's range.
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.
Notice that disintegrate has effect where the target line would be if it was a target based spell.
First, spells like that don't chain. The typical language is "1 creature/lvl, no two of which can be more than 30 ft apart."
So it doesn't chain from one to the next, but hits each simultaneously. Chain lightning is the exception, but even it isn't a true "chain." Rather, it hits one primary target, and then a number of secondary targets using the language above. The bolt hits the first then sort of scatters out to all the rest, rather than jumping from one to the next.
As far as spell turning affecting these, I would say it does, and it turns them completely (assuming you have the turning levels left).
Spell turning "turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected." Notice it doesn't say "you as the only target" or "you as the target", but rather "you as a target."
Since you are a named target of slow, and it isn't an area or effect spell, I would say it turns. Since there is nothing saying it only turns the section of the spell affecting you, it turns it all.
Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
The only person protected by spell turning is the person that has spell turning cast on them. Now if everyone has spell turning cast one them then the caster better be prepared to make a lot of saves.
The only person protected by spell turning is the person that has spell turning cast on them. Now if everyone has spell turning cast one them then the caster better be prepared to make a lot of saves.
Can you back that up by the rules, though? It seems like a completely reasonable reading of the spell, but then so does the reading which says that a spell with a protected target among it's several named targets is turned completely from all targets back against the caster.
There is no language in the spell text itself to indicate how it operates in this situation, so instead all we have is the general description:
Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.
It doesn't say "Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you have the effect which targets you alone turned back on the original caster" but rather that the spell or spell-like effect, which means the spell as a whole. So RAW seems to be that the ENTIRE spell or spell-like effect is turned since nothing says otherwise.
If multiple protected people are targeted, then I'd say only one of them has to burn levels from their turning to reflect the spell, and they are all then protected. The caster only has to make 1 save in response.
Your reading makes logical sense, but doesn't seem to be held up by the actual wording.
The only person protected by spell turning is the person that has spell turning cast on them. Now if everyone has spell turning cast one them then the caster better be prepared to make a lot of saves.Can you back that up by the rules, though? It seems like a completely reasonable reading of the spell, but then so does the reading which says that a spell with a protected target among it's several named targets is turned completely from all targets back against the caster.
There is no language in the spell text itself to indicate how it operates in this situation, so instead all we have is the general description:
Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.It doesn't say "Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you have the effect which targets you alone turned back on the original caster" but rather that the spell or spell-like effect, which means the spell as a whole. So RAW seems to be that the ENTIRE spell or spell-like effect is turned since nothing says otherwise.
If multiple protected people are targeted, then I'd say only one of them has to burn levels from their turning to reflect the spell, and they are all then protected. The caster only has to make 1 save in response.
Your reading makes logical sense, but doesn't seem to be held up by the actual wording.
The spell is cast on everyone so each person is on their own. If one person reflecting the spell helped everyone then one person making the save would negate the spell for everyone.
The spell is basically casting the spell on everyone, and each person is a separate target. It is like if I have a shotgun with pellets I can guide individually. One person having shotgun repellant armor is not going to save everyone.
The only person protected by spell turning is the person that has spell turning cast on them. Now if everyone has spell turning cast one them then the caster better be prepared to make a lot of saves.Can you back that up by the rules, though? It seems like a completely reasonable reading of the spell, but then so does the reading which says that a spell with a protected target among it's several named targets is turned completely from all targets back against the caster.
There is no language in the spell text itself to indicate how it operates in this situation, so instead all we have is the general description:
Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.It doesn't say "Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you have the effect which targets you alone turned back on the original caster" but rather that the spell or spell-like effect, which means the spell as a whole. So RAW seems to be that the ENTIRE spell or spell-like effect is turned since nothing says otherwise.
If multiple protected people are targeted, then I'd say only one of them has to burn levels from their turning to reflect the spell, and they are all then protected. The caster only has to make 1 save in response.
Your reading makes logical sense, but doesn't seem to be held up by the actual wording.
Similarly, if only a portion of the spell is turned (say a Horrid Wilting spell), ALL the damage to ALL the targets is divided between you and the target.
The spell is cast on everyone so each person is on their own. If one person reflecting the spell helped everyone then one person making the save would negate the spell for everyone.
The spell is basically casting the spell on everyone, and each person is a separate target. It is like if I have a shotgun with pellets I can guide individually. One...
But that isn't what the rules say. There is only 1 spell. Yes, each person saves individually against it, but it is still only 1 spell affecting multiple people. If the spell is turned, then the spell is turned.
Similarly, if only a portion of the spell is turned (say a Horrid Wilting spell), ALL the damage to ALL the targets is divided between you and the target.
This is an interesting point, and potential counter to my caster only saves once against a turned slow...
If a Horrid Wilting is fully turned, does the caster take CL D6 damage or CL x (# of targets) D6 damage? If the latter, does he save individually against each set of CL D6? If so, then shouldn't he have to save against every turned slow effect. Yeah, I guess he should.
The spell is cast and it targets several individuals. Spell Turning does turn spells back against you, but since each person is targeted individually as if they had their own personal slow spell.
Another example to go by is SR. If SR is not bypassed a spell fails. If you cast slow on a bunch of monsters and one of them is the SR King do the minor monsters get to avoid a save also?
Every monsters SR is checked individually. Everyone targeted has to save individually. This area is not at all unclear. It is not unclear for spell turning either.
If a caster targets multiple targets with spell turning with a spell that affects an individual target separately, the caster will have to save multiple times as each target reflects the spell effect back back on him. I think it is pretty clear how it would work.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Obviously, a spell, such as Spell Turning works against Disintegrate, as it targets a single target. Also, obviously, it won't work against Fireball, as it targets no one.
Believe it or not, this question has never come up in my games...but what about multi-target spells, such as "Slow"? Although someone has to be named a target, so are other people. Does Spell Turning allow one person to "counter" the spell for everyone?
Thanks!
I don't think it stops disintegrate.
The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells. From seven to ten (1d4+6) spell levels are affected by the turning. The exact number is rolled secretly.
DisintegrateSchool transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a lodestone and a pinch of dust)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect ray
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Fortitude partial (object); Spell Resistance yes
A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit.
...
Aiming a SpellYou must make choices about whom a spell is to affect or where an effect is to originate, depending on a spell's type. The next entry in a spell description defines the spell's target (or targets), its effect, or its area, as appropriate.
Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.
You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or
I brought the ray issue up in another thread. Diego Rossi received word from James Jacobs that in-house Paizo allows spell turning to reflect rays. That leads me to believe that the effect spells that spell turning isn't intended to work against are spells like wall spells or aqueous orb.
James often gives advice on how he does things, not on what the rules are. As an example there is a feat which allows you to bypass the dice damage dice on spells such as the 10d6 on fireball. James would allow it to be applied to magic missile even though it is not rules legal. He also allows Vital Strike to work differently than what the rules team said it does. By the rules disintegrate bypasses spell turing. I am sure the way Sean is working the FAQ section the change will be made if it is intended to be played that way officially.
Disintegrate bypasses it on the effect level and ranged touched level.
Note that DR asked James how it worked in his games, not what the actual rule was. If you read his Ask James thread you will see there is a difference between the two.
PS:James if you read this that does not mean I don't appreciate your advice. I am just noting a difference between "how I do it" and "how it is".
James often gives advice on how he does things, not on what the rules are. As an example there is a feat which allows you to bypass the dice damage dice on spells such as the 10d6 on fireball. James would allow it to be applied to magic missile even though it is not rules legal. He also allows Vital Strike to work differently than what the rules team said it does. By the rules disintegrate bypasses spell turing. I am sure the way Sean is working the FAQ section the change will be made if it is intended to be played that way officially.
Disintegrate bypasses it on the effect level and ranged touched level.
Note that DR asked James how it worked in his games, not what the actual rule was. If you read his Ask James thread you will see there is a difference between the two.
PS:James if you read this that does not mean I don't appreciate your advice. I am just noting a difference between "how I do it" and "how it is".
I prefer to play by intent rather than RAW. I agree with you that that RAW, it does not work. Though by RAW I disagree with your interpretation of spell turning not working because it is a ranged touch attack. The wording of the spell indicates otherwise by a RAW reading.
The way the spell is written, it seems to mean Range: Touch spells and not ranged touch attacks.The text says "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells, not ranged touch attacks. I think this specifically means it works against Range: Touch spells like Cause Light Wounds or Vampiric Touch and not ranged touch attacks like scorching ray. That is how I read it.
Now the effect: ray spells you are correct about. The language is not ambiguous or open to interpretation. But I do not believe the designer ever intended spell turning to not work against rays. I believe spell turning was designed with rays in mind.
They intended for it to not work against area effect spells like wall of fire or odd effect spells that don't target an individual directly, but target them indirectly, like aqueous orb.
So I am letting it work against ray attacks. If it is good enough for James Jacobs and the other Paizo designers and developers he plays with, it is good enough for my game. I think it also is intended that spell turning work against rays. But as has been the case with spells such as spell turning and freedom of movement, it is hard to word them because there are so many different effects in the game that might or might not fall under the province of both those spells that catching all of them is nearly impossible.
I don't think it stops disintegrate.
Probably just a bad example randomly pulled from my mind. Feel free to substitute Acid Splash. :)
I guess basically that the question is can one person turn the whole spell or not?
|
I don't think it stops disintegrate.
There is a difference between 'touch range spells' and 'ranged touch spells' - the former refers to spells with a range of 'touch' like cure light wounds while the latter refers to spells that are resolved by making a successful ranged touch attack like disintegrate. As such. spell turning would not turn, say, inflict light wounds, but would stop disintegrate and other ray spells.
I prefer to play by intent rather than RAW. I agree with you that that RAW, it does not work. Though by RAW I disagree with your interpretation of spell turning not working because it is a ranged touch attack. The wording of the spell indicates otherwise by a RAW reading.
The way the spell is written, it seems to mean Range: Touch spells and not ranged touch attacks.The text says "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells, not ranged touch attacks. I think this specifically means it works against Range: Touch spells like Cause Light Wounds or Vampiric Touch and not ranged touch attacks like scorching ray. That is how I read it.
Now the effect: ray spells you are correct about. The language is not ambiguous or open to interpretation. But I do not believe the designer ever intended spell turning to not work against rays. I believe spell turning was designed with rays in mind.
They intended for it to not work against area effect spells like wall of fire or odd effect spells that don't target an individual directly, but target them indirectly, like aqueous orb.
So I am letting it work against ray attacks. If it is good enough for James Jacobs and the other Paizo designers and developers he plays with, it is good enough for my game. I think it also is intended that spell turning work against rays. But as has been the case with spells such as spell turning and freedom of movement, it is hard to word them because there are so many different effects in the game that might or might not fall under the province of both those spells that catching all of them is nearly impossible.
I never said Jame's way was the intended way. You misread me. I am saying if James does not like a rule he and his buddies ignore the rule and do their own thing. That is why I brought up the feat that increases cap damage on a spell, and how James applies it to a spell it can't really affect.
That is also why I said asking James how he does it, and how the rules work are not the same thing. How James does it and the intent are not synonymous.I will say that how James does it, and what is the most fun normally are synonymous. All those guys don't have the same rules either. One of them has strange falling rules that James does not like. I am not saying don't do it James's way because I normally like how he does things also. I just want you to be aware of what the rule is.
I don't think it stops disintegrate.There is a difference between 'touch range spells' and 'ranged touch spells' - the former refers to spells with a range of 'touch' like cure light wounds while the latter refers to spells that are resolved by making a successful ranged touch attack like disintegrate. As such. spell turning would not turn, say, inflict light wounds, but would stop disintegrate and other ray spells.
Good catch with the touch. I wish they had worded it differently, but it is still an effect spell, and not a target spell so it still does not work barring errata or an FAQ.
I prefer to play by intent rather than RAW. I agree with you that that RAW, it does not work. Though by RAW I disagree with your interpretation of spell turning not working because it is a ranged touch attack. The wording of the spell indicates otherwise by a RAW reading.
The way the spell is written, it seems to mean Range: Touch spells and not ranged touch attacks.The text says "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells, not ranged touch attacks. I think this specifically means it works against Range: Touch spells like Cause Light Wounds or Vampiric Touch and not ranged touch attacks like scorching ray. That is how I read it.
Now the effect: ray spells you are correct about. The language is not ambiguous or open to interpretation. But I do not believe the designer ever intended spell turning to not work against rays. I believe spell turning was designed with rays in mind.
They intended for it to not work against area effect spells like wall of fire or odd effect spells that don't target an individual directly, but target them indirectly, like aqueous orb.
So I am letting it work against ray attacks. If it is good enough for James Jacobs and the other Paizo designers and developers he plays with, it is good enough for my game. I think it also is intended that spell turning work against rays. But as has been the case with spells such as spell turning and freedom of movement, it is hard to word them because there are so many different effects in the game that might or might not fall under the province of both those spells that catching all of them is nearly impossible.
I never said Jame's way was the intended way. You misread me. I am saying if James does not like a rule he and his buddies ignore the rule and do their own thing. That is why I brought up the feat that increases cap damage on a spell, and how James applies it to a spell it can't really affect.
That is also why I said asking James how he does it, and how the rules work are not the same thing. How...
I'm already aware of what the rule is. Did you not read my entire post? I see in the post just below you acknowledged what was posted about the wording for touch range spells, when I posted exactly the same thing.
Yeah. An exact reading of the rules indicates it doesn't work against effect: ray spells. I have my doubts that is how it intended. I'm glad to hear James Jacobs chime in that in-house they seem to run spell turning otherise. When they say in-house, I'm assuming he and other Paizo designers and developers.
Spell Turning affecting rays just makes sense even if an exact interpretration of the RAW says otherwise.
I already had this discussion with in another thread. Not sure why you are trying to tell me something I already know and have acknowledged.
...I prefer to play by intent rather than RAW. I agree with you that that RAW, it does not work. Though by RAW I disagree with your interpretation of spell turning not working because it is a ranged touch attack. The wording of the spell indicates otherwise by a RAW reading.
The way the spell is written, it seems to mean Range: Touch spells and not ranged touch attacks.The text says "Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells, not ranged touch attacks. I think this specifically means it works against Range: Touch spells like Cause Light Wounds or Vampiric Touch and not ranged touch attacks like scorching ray. That is how I read it.
Now the effect: ray spells you are correct about. The language is not ambiguous or open to interpretation. But I do not believe the designer ever intended spell turning to not work against rays. I believe spell turning was designed with rays in mind.
They intended for it to not work against area effect spells like wall of fire or odd effect spells that don't target an individual directly, but target them indirectly, like aqueous orb.
So I am letting it work against ray attacks. If it is good enough for James Jacobs and the other Paizo designers and developers he plays with, it is good enough for my game. I think it also is intended that spell turning work against rays. But as has been the case with spells such as spell turning and freedom of movement, it is hard to word them because there are so many different effects in the game that might or might not fall under the province of both those spells that catching all of them is nearly impossible.
I never said Jame's way was the intended way. You misread me. I am saying if James does not like a rule he and his buddies ignore the rule and do their own thing. That is why I brought up the feat that increases cap damage on a spell, and how James applies it to a spell it can't really affect.
That is also why I said asking James how he does it, and how the rules work are not
I saw you say the RAW was correct, but the RAI was different*. I was arguing RAI with RAW support so to say RAI is different is still saying I was not right. I don't really care for RAW as much as RAI, just like most players.
*
I prefer to play by intent rather than RAW.
<--linked to post.
Now if you are saying that the the RAI and the RAW are one in the same, but you just don't like it then we agree.
I don't get the point of this discussion.
Premises:
1) Ray spells target a person in specific.
2) Spell turning turns spells that target the caster directly, except if they have a range of 'touch'.
3) Ray spells do not have a range of 'touch'.Conclusion: Spell turning turns rays.
Wrong.
1.Spell Turing is bypassed by effects, AoE's.2.Rays are effects.
3.Rays bypass spell turning.
Conclusion: Spell Turning does not do anything for Rays.
In case you missed it the first 2 or 3 times, the short version of my earlier post follows.
PRD=Effect and area spells are not affected.
PRD=Ray: Some effects are rays.
PRD=
Disintegrate
School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a lodestone and a pinch of dust)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: ray
The spell does not say all effects except rays. Without language indicating an exception to the rule there is no exception.
|
|
I don't get the point of this discussion.
Premises:
1) Ray spells target a person in specific.
2) Spell turning turns spells that target the caster directly, except if they have a range of 'touch'.
3) Ray spells do not have a range of 'touch'.Conclusion: Spell turning turns rays.
Wrong.
1.Spell Turing is bypassed by effects, AoE's.
2.Rays are effects.
3.Rays bypass spell turning.
Conclusion: Spell Turning does not do anything for Rays.In case you missed it the first 2 or 3 times, the short version of my earlier post follows.
PRD=Effect and area spells are not affected.
PRD=Ray: Some effects are rays.
PRD=
The spell does not say all effects except rays. Without language indicating an exception to the rule there is no exception.Disintegrate
School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a lodestone and a pinch of dust)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: ray
Interesting. What exactly constitutes an 'effect spell'? Is it just a spell with the 'effect' line? So, for instance, it WOULD stop magic missile since it doesn't have an Effect entry, right?
Interesting. What exactly constitutes an 'effect spell'? Is it just a spell with the 'effect' line? So, for instance, it WOULD stop magic missile since it doesn't have an Effect entry, right?
When you look at a spell it generally either has a target or effect tag.
From my earlier post
Aiming a SpellYou must make choices about whom a spell is to affect or where an effect is to originate, depending on a spell's type. The next entry in a spell description defines the spell's target (or targets), its effect, or its area, as appropriate.
Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.
You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile, after it appears it can move regardless of the spell's range.
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.
Magic MissileSchool evocation [force]; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Targets up to five creatures, no two of which can be more than 15 ft. apart
Magic missile has the target entry so it can be reflected/turned.
Most target based spells are auto hit such as magic missile or charm person.
Most effects cover a wide area such as a fog spell or they require an attack roll such as disintigrate or acid arrow
Acid ArrowSchool conjuration (creation) [acid]; Level sorcerer/wizard 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (rhubarb leaf and an adder's stomach), F (a dart)
Range long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Effect one arrow of acid
Duration 1 round + 1 round per three levels
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
An arrow of acid springs from your hand and speeds to its target. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. The arrow deals 2d4 points of acid damage with no splash damage. For every three caster levels you possess, the acid, unless neutralized, lasts for another round (to a maximum of 6 additional rounds at 18th level), dealing another 2d4 points of damage in each round.
If a spell is an effect they it bypasses Spell Turning, and it will be labeled with an effect line.
@concerro: Oh, okay, I see. Thanks for the clarification. Per RAW, then, spell turning wouldn't stop rays.
No problem. I did not know it until I GM'ed a high level game recently, and I decided to step out of my comfort zone to try a few new spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Darn all these confusing spells.
When I first discovered rays weren't turned, I was kind of surprised and annoyed. Didn't seem right. But by RAW no rays turned.
Still love to hear why the designers chose not to allow rays to be turned, but I imagine they would probably answer "We missed that one".