|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I've been poring over the Concentration rules for a bit trying to understand how it all works together. Something just isn't adding up for me. I thought I understood the rules but after re-reading something stuck out to me.
I guess the confusion starts when looking at the table and seeing the DC for casting defensively (DC 15+double spell level). So far so good...
Then I read the next line about needing a concentration check to keep the spell if injured (DC 10+damage dealt+spell level). Simple enough...
I started to think, why would a caster lose the spell when casting defensively if the purpose of the check is to avoid an Attack of Opportunity (AoO)? Wouldn't the check to lose the spell be made after determining whether or not an AoO succeeds and deals damage?
If casting a spell normally provokes an AoO, how does the act of casting defensively automatically prevent the AoO when the purpose of the check is to avoid it?
Scroll down to the casting a spell section.
It seems to me the proper order of operations here should be,
2) Provokes AoO as normal. Enemy rolls and hits divine caster for 7 damage.
3) Divine Caster rolls a new concentration check to keep spell. DC 19, rolls and succeeds. Spell goes off as normal. or...
4) If roll fails, spell lost.
Compared to,
2) Provokes AoO as normal. Enemy rolls and hits the caster for 7 damage.
While I understand that the latter is quicker and cleaner, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I also understand that the line about injury adding to the DC has been interpreted to take into account readied actions or AoO's as a result of ranged touch spells, which is true enough, but I'm no longer convinced that's all it covers.
Given how the section for Casting Defensively is worded, the last sentence seems out of place to me. Shouldn't it read something like, "You provoke an Attack of Opportunity as normal if you fail"?
What do you guys think?
The enemy may ready an attack to injure you just as you are casting. Another way to make a damage based concentration check is if you are suffering from an ongoing effect such as acid arrow.
Failing the concentration check while casting defensively does not allow an AoO. It just means the spell fizzles(fails).
|
|
The enemy may ready an attack to injure you just as you are casting. Another way to make a damage based concentration check is if you are suffering from an ongoing effect such as acid arrow.
Failing the concentration check while casting defensively does not allow an AoO. It just means the spell fizzles(fails).
I get this, but how does the act of casting defensively, in and of itself, not provoke an AoO? Shouldn't it be a successful check for casting defensively be what avoids the AoO? Perhaps bringing it in line with tumbling (acrobatics)?
|
|
I get this, but how does the act of casting defensively, in and of itself, not provoke an AoO? Shouldn't it be a successful check for casting defensively be what avoids the AoO? Perhaps bringing it in line with tumbling (acrobatics)?The enemy may ready an attack to injure you just as you are casting. Another way to make a damage based concentration check is if you are suffering from an ongoing effect such as acid arrow.
Failing the concentration check while casting defensively does not allow an AoO. It just means the spell fizzles(fails).
Because them's the rules?
More seriously, the caster is spending a lot of effort avoiding provokinig an AoO. If he blows the roll, instead of provoking, he outright loses his spell.
To be honest, the failed Tumbling check has a lesser penalty than a failed Defensive Casting check. If the Casting took an AoO, there is a chance, potentially fairly good, that the caster woudl still get his spell off.
I get this, but how does the act of casting defensively, in and of itself, not provoke an AoO? Shouldn't it be a successful check for casting defensively be what avoids the AoO? Perhaps bringing it in line with tumbling (acrobatics)?The enemy may ready an attack to injure you just as you are casting. Another way to make a damage based concentration check is if you are suffering from an ongoing effect such as acid arrow.
Failing the concentration check while casting defensively does not allow an AoO. It just means the spell fizzles(fails).
Are you asking for a rules clarification or an answer as to why they are the way they are?
|
|
If you do something defensively, you should provoke an AoO is what you seem to be saying. Just pointing out there are other defensive actions that don't.
In this case, this is a comparison of apples to oranges. The text of Casting Defensively says,
"If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed."
Looks to me like it is implying that failure provokes the AoO.
|
The text of Casting Defensively says,"If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed."
Looks to me like it is implying that failure provokes the AoO.
The next sentence is: "You lose the spell if you fail."
Edit: BTW, this is the same way it has worked since 3E. Only the DC changed.
Casting Defensively: If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.
Note that the only penalty is the loss of the spell.
edit:I was ninja'd.
edit 2:
The attack of opportunity rules just tells you what provokes. Casting a spell while threatened does provoke.
If you cast defensively you no longer provoke however you must still now concentrate on the spell so you don't lose it. Casting defensively only means you don't open yourself up to a free attack. The concentration check determines if you can keep your cool.
Casting a spell can involve pulling material components out, moving your fingers in a very precise pattern, and speaking specific words. Doing all of this is hard enough. When someone is trying to stab you in the face it is harder.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your options are;
1) Cast defensively (DC 15 + double spell level).
Succeed and cast, drawing no AoO.
Fail and lose the spell, as you mumble, lose your breath, drop your components, fling your arms in the wrong patterns, while ducking and weaving.
2) Cast normally.
Provoke an AoO, and hope they don't hit you.
If they miss, spell goes off as normal.
If they hit, make Concentration check to keep casting (DC 10 + damage + spell level).
So the downsides are;
Option 1) possibly lose the spell, but at least you don't get hit.
Option 2) possibly get hit, and then possibly lose the spell as well.
And, as Rambler said, this is the exact same sequence as in 3rd Edition.
The DC for the defensive cast has changed, and the caster's modifier has become (caster level check + casting stat), instead of a skill check, so can't be bumped up by Skill Focus, the skill rank cap has been reduced from (level +3), etc.
I know a lot of players who don't bother to cast defensively, except vs the baddest opponents.
The reason being, they believe getting the spell cast is more important than their hp, which if they're a divine caster, they can probably heal anyway.
Even without heavy armour, clerics can trust their armour/deflection/miss chance to protect them against many goons, and even if it doesn't, the DC is only higher if the opponent deals damage equal to (spell level +6).
|
|
Casting Defensively: If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.Note that the only penalty is the loss of the spell.
Once again I'll ask the question,
If casting a spell normally provokes an AoO, how does the act of casting defensively automatically prevent the AoO when the purpose of the check is to avoid it?
|
|
If you like:
Casting Defensively: I choose to not provoke, but lose my spell if I fail the check.
Not Casting Defensively: I choose to provoke, but I lose my spell if I get hit, and then fail the check.
You are suggesting:
Casting Defensively: I try not to provoke, but then take an AoO if I fail the check, and then lose my spell if I am hit, and then fail a second check.
The benefit of the current rules is, the caster never takes damage. If we change it to your suggestion, then the caster can never make a choice between assuredly avoiding damage and assuredly getting the spell off if the enemy misses.
As to why it works that way, the caster is moving and reacting to the enemies actions. Thus, he never provokes an AoO. However, that vigorous action of avoiding leaving the enemy an opening can disrupt his focus on the casting of the spell, which causes it to fizzle, expended without effect.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I started to think, why would a caster lose the spell when casting defensively if the purpose of the check is to avoid an Attack of Opportunity (AoO)? Wouldn't the check to lose the spell be made after determining whether or not an AoO succeeds and deals damage?
Casting defensively means i'm going to pay more attention to that goblin trying to stick a spear into my liver than i am to my spellcasting words and gestures.
Its the difference between typing while looking at the keys and typing while looking at the screen and singing, except the screen is trying to kill you and you can't make a single typo OR get a note wrong or the whole thing falls apart. Thats what failing the roll means: you flubbed something because you weren't paying attention to the spell and the spell fizzles. It makes casting on the defensive somewhat of a choice: do you trust your concentration or armor class more.
Casting Defensively: If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.Note that the only penalty is the loss of the spell.Once again I'll ask the question,
If casting a spell normally provokes an AoO, how does the act of casting defensively automatically prevent the AoO when the purpose of the check is to avoid it?
The purpose of the check is not to avoid it(the AoO). That is what casting defensively is for. The concentration check is so you don't lose the spell which is noted in the rules stating the only penalty is the loss of the spell.
|
|
If you like:
Casting Defensively: I choose to not provoke, but lose my spell if I fail the check.
Not Casting Defensively: I choose to provoke, but I lose my spell if I get hit, and then fail the check.
Casting Defensively then becomes the most punitive action in most circumstances. At least with provoking by not casting defensively, there is a chance the enemy will miss or fumble or not deal enough damage to affect the DC meaningfully. Something doesn't feel right here...
and now the kicker -- if you cast a spell that requires a ranged touch attack you still provoke for the ranged attack after the spell has been completed.
So:
Cast Ray of exhaustion defensively.
Don't provoke for *casting* the spell.
Make concentration check to keep the spell.
Make ranged touch attack which *does* provoke.
Take the AoO then hit with the spell -- spell isn't broken because it's already cast (since you can't make a ranged touch attack unless the spell is complete and if the spell isn't completely you wouldn't provoke since you couldn't be making the ranged touch attack).
Looking at it again, it is badly written, and I only know how it works because I have been playing for almost 10 years.
|
|
Casting Defensively then becomes the most punitive action in most circumstances. At least with provoking by not casting defensively, there is a chance the enemy will miss or fumble or not deal enough damage to affect the DC meaningfully. Something doesn't feel right here...
See my edit. If you have an enemy that hits you on a 2, and does 50 damage a hit, would you rather hope for that 1 on his attack roll, or just roll vs 15+spell level and never worry about his AoO?
|
|
and now the kicker -- if you cast a spell that requires a ranged touch attack you still provoke for the ranged attack after the spell has been completed.
So:
Cast Ray of exhaustion defensively.
Don't provoke for *casting* the spell.
Make concentration check to keep the spell.
Make ranged touch attack which *does* provoke.
Take the AoO then hit with the spell -- spell isn't broken because it's already cast (since you can't make a ranged touch attack unless the spell is complete and if the spell isn't completely you wouldn't provoke since you couldn't be making the ranged touch attack).
Too true. Now if this were carried out as I've put forth, if the spell is successful after all the hurdles have been negotiated, most enemies won't have an additional AoO to prevent the ranged touch attack.
|
|
Once again I'll ask the question,
If casting a spell normally provokes an AoO, how does the act of casting defensively automatically prevent the AoO when the purpose of the check is to avoid it?
The point of casting defensively isn't to avoid the AoO.
You avoid the AoO, by never taking your eyes off your opponent, ducking, weaving, trying to perform the somatic components closer to your body, grabbing your materials and manipulating them hurriedly.The intent is to cast without leaving an opening for your opponent to exploit*.
The purpose of the check is not to avoid the AoO, which you're already doing, but to perform the spell in a rushed and inconvenient manner without messing it up.
*I believe the rules would have more verisimilitude, if the DC were affected by the number and type of spell components. A verbal-only spell should be easier to cast, while running around, than one which requires the caster to stand, crane-style, while ringing finger-cymbals.
|
|
Casting Defensively then becomes the most punitive action in most circumstances. At least with provoking by not casting defensively, there is a chance the enemy will miss or fumble or not deal enough damage to affect the DC meaningfully. Something doesn't feel right here...If you like:
Casting Defensively: I choose to not provoke, but lose my spell if I fail the check.
Not Casting Defensively: I choose to provoke, but I lose my spell if I get hit, and then fail the check.
For small amounts of damage, you are correct.
However, if you're next to a barbarian with a greataxe, or in reach of a giant, the DC quickly becomes more difficult when you take the hit.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The purpose of the check is not to avoid it(the AoO). That is what casting defensively is for. The concentration check is so you don't lose the spell which is noted in the rules stating the only penalty is the loss of the spell.That's not what the first sentence says though...
Sure it does.
Casting Defensively
If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.
to succeed -- at casting the spell -- you automatically succeed at not provoking.
And checking the combat section reinforces this:
Attacks of Opportunity
Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don't provoke attacks of opportunity.
Casting on the DefensiveCasting a spell while on the defensive does not provoke an attack of opportunity. It does, however, require a concentration check (DC 15 + double the spell's level) to successfully cast the spell. Failure means that you lose the spell.
Hope that helps!
The key here is to check in the combat section because it more explicitly states that casting defensively doesn't provoke -- that the concentration check is only for keeping the spell, and that failing the check loses the spell.
|
|
Casting Defensively then becomes the most punitive action in most circumstances. At least with provoking by not casting defensively, there is a chance the enemy will miss or fumble or not deal enough damage to affect the DC meaningfully. Something doesn't feel right here...See my edit. If you have an enemy that hits you on a 2, and does 50 damage a hit, would you rather hope for that 1 on his attack roll, or just roll vs 15+spell level and never worry about his AoO?
I see your point, but if the correct interpretation is the way I've put forth, that would be just the way it is. Casters would just have to adjust tactics to compensate for it. Though in truth, not much would really change from the way it is currently being interpreted, other than melee types become bad asses vs casters the higher level they get.
Casting a spell while on the defensive does not provoke an attack of opportunity. It does, however, require a concentration check (DC 15 + double the spell's level) to successfully cast the spell. Failure means that you lose the spell.Hope that helps!
The key here is to check in the combat section because it more explicitly states that casting defensively doesn't provoke -- that the concentration check is only for keeping the spell, and that failing the check loses the spell.
Thanks. I hate how rules are not all in spot. I knew it was in the book, but I could not find it.
Too true. Now if this were carried out as I've put forth, if the spell is successful after all the hurdles have been negotiated, most enemies won't have an additional AoO to prevent the ranged touch attack.and now the kicker -- if you cast a spell that requires a ranged touch attack you still provoke for the ranged attack after the spell has been completed.
So:
Cast Ray of exhaustion defensively.
Don't provoke for *casting* the spell.
Make concentration check to keep the spell.
Make ranged touch attack which *does* provoke.
Take the AoO then hit with the spell -- spell isn't broken because it's already cast (since you can't make a ranged touch attack unless the spell is complete and if the spell isn't completely you wouldn't provoke since you couldn't be making the ranged touch attack).
You forget one thing -- no action can provoke more than one AoO from an opponent.
So either I will provoke to cast or provoke to hit -- since it's all the same action I can't provoke from the same guy twice with it.
In your case you give another place I could provoke -- but it wouldn't matter once he takes an AoO off of the action he won't get another one from that action no matter how many parts of it provoke.
Too true. Now if this were carried out as I've put forth, if the spell is successful after all the hurdles have been negotiated, most enemies won't have an additional AoO to prevent the ranged touch attack.and now the kicker -- if you cast a spell that requires a ranged touch attack you still provoke for the ranged attack after the spell has been completed.
So:
Cast Ray of exhaustion defensively.
Don't provoke for *casting* the spell.
Make concentration check to keep the spell.
Make ranged touch attack which *does* provoke.
Take the AoO then hit with the spell -- spell isn't broken because it's already cast (since you can't make a ranged touch attack unless the spell is complete and if the spell isn't completely you wouldn't provoke since you couldn't be making the ranged touch attack).You forget one thing -- no action can provoke more than one AoO from an opponent.
So either I will provoke to cast or provoke to hit -- since it's all the same action I can't provoke from the same guy twice with it.
In your case you give another place I could provoke -- but it wouldn't matter once he takes an AoO off of the action he won't get another one from that action no matter how many parts of it provoke.
IIRC the casting and the firing of the spell both provoke.
The casting and the firing are two different actions even if they are in the same turn action(game term).
I was sure there was official input on this.
|
|
I see your point, but if the correct interpretation is the way I've put forth, that would be just the way it is. Casters would just have to adjust tactics to compensate for it. Though in truth, not much would really change from the way it is currently being interpreted, other than melee types become bad asses vs casters the higher level they get.
Indeed, with the current rules you see no reason to cast defensively, while under your interpretation, I see no reason not to cast defensively. Depending on what results you want, your solution is fine.
To return to my fighting defensively example, suppose you had to make a concentration check to get the bonus to AC. Should you take an AoO if you fail, or just not get the bonus to AC? Penalties to attack rolls still apply, of course.
Thus, 'fail check, lose spell' equates to 'fail check, lose bonus, keep penalty'.
I found it.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
|
|
Alternatively you could just use my house rule.
Casting Defensively
You can choose to cast a spell defensively as a standard action. If you do so, you take a –5 penalty on all concentration checks in a round to gain a +2 to AC for the same round.
Modified Feat
----------------
Combat Casting
Add: "In addition you receive a +2 bonus to AC while defensively casting (bringing your total to +4)."
Saves alot of uneccessary die rolls and you dont lose your spell unless your actually hit and fail the check.
Only down side I've seen to this is some players used it to get a free +4 AC on their squishy wizards which I'm not too worried about.
You could always state the +2 AC only applies against attacks of opportunies made against you.
I've also toyed with making it a full round action while doubling the AC boosts (+4/+8).
|
|
Casting Defensively
If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed...
to succeed -- at casting the spell -- you automatically succeed at not provoking.
Read it again, this time without the second sentence and see if you still make that same leap.
And checking the combat section reinforces this: /snip...
Read that section in under Cast A Spell for Attack of Opportunity.
Attacks of Opportunity
Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don't provoke attacks of opportunity.
Clearly, there are contradictory concepts here that imply one thing at one point then say another thing in another area. Something just isn't adding up.
Not at all. It all says the exact same thing. You can continue to insist otherwise -- that is your prerogative... but doing so doesn't actually make you right.
the combat section spells it out explicitly and the regular concentration section leave some words out for the sake of saving space. The developers assume people can think and connect dots.
I found it.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
Which doesn't clarify if a spell that isn't cast defensively provokes twice or not. Please note it specifically states that the attacks are part of the spell and not a separate action -- all it tells us is that if cast defensively you will still provoke for the ranged attack.
Which we already knew from the ranged combat section.
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.
So if I cast a spell without casting defensively and you take your AoO for this opportunity (casting the spell) then any other part of casting the spell won't provide you another AoO since it's still the same opportunity (as it is part of the same action).
Cast the spell defensively but have a ranged attack -- provoke.
Cast the spell and have a ranged attack -- provoke.
Either way you are only getting one swing. The key is if I cast defensively you don't get to disrupt the spell.
Casting Defensively
If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed...
to succeed -- at casting the spell -- you automatically succeed at not provoking.Read it again, this time without the second sentence and see if you still make that same leap.
And checking the combat section reinforces this: /snip...Read that section in under Cast A Spell for Attack of Opportunity.
Clearly, there are contradictory concepts here that imply one thing at one point then say another thing in another area. Something just isn't adding up.Attacks of Opportunity
Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don't provoke attacks of opportunity.
The rules do that to people. Wait until you have to put together 3 different sections of the book to figure out one simple rule. It does get annoying at times.
It does not help that the rules are not always as clear as they should be.
I found it.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.Which doesn't clarify if a spell that isn't cast defensively provokes twice or not. Please note it specifically states that the attacks are part of the spell and not a separate action -- all it tells us is that if cast defensively you will still provoke for the ranged attack.
Which we already knew from the ranged combat section.
I will be back. I actually have developer input. I have to find it again.
edit:Why isn't the above proof that the casting, and the "firing" both provoke?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's muddy the waters a bit more...
What is the difference between Casting Defensively (DC 15+double spell level) and Vigorous Motion (DC 10+spell level) or Violent Motion (DC 15+spell level)? What is inherently different in the stimuli involved?
The sword of the guy in front of you :)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sword of the guy in front of you :)Let's muddy the waters a bit more...
What is the difference between Casting Defensively (DC 15+double spell level) and Vigorous Motion (DC 10+spell level) or Violent Motion (DC 15+spell level)? What is inherently different in the stimuli involved?
Or, to put it differently: there's a tangible difference between trying to tie your shoelaces while singing polka on a rocky boat, and between trying to do the same with a 10 feet tall fire-breathing demon standing next to you with intent to alter your molecular integrity by the way of dismemberment.
Let's muddy the waters a bit more...
What is the difference between Casting Defensively (DC 15+double spell level) and Vigorous Motion (DC 10+spell level) or Violent Motion (DC 15+spell level)? What is inherently different in the stimuli involved?
Mostly that the rocking boat/ rocking horse isn't reacting to you at all. It isn't looking for your weak points, weaving left as you weave left, taking advantage of your motions. It just goes up and down back and forth without deliberately trying to mess you up.
I found it.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.Which doesn't clarify if a spell that isn't cast defensively provokes twice or not. Please note it specifically states that the attacks are part of the spell and not a separate action -- all it tells us is that if cast defensively you will still provoke for the ranged attack.
Which we already knew from the ranged combat section.
I will be back. I actually have developer input. I have to find it again.
edit:Why isn't the above proof that the casting, and the "firing" both provoke?
Because they are the same action -- just like movement only provokes once per move action even if you move through all the squares a guy provokes.
Let's muddy the waters a bit more...
What is the difference between Casting Defensively (DC 15+double spell level) and Vigorous Motion (DC 10+spell level) or Violent Motion (DC 15+spell level)? What is inherently different in the stimuli involved?
Vigorous Motion: If you are riding on a moving mount, taking a bouncy ride in a wagon, on a small boat in rough water, belowdecks in a storm-tossed ship, or simply being jostled in a similar fashion, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + the level of the spell you're casting) or lose the spell.
Violent Motion: If you are on a galloping horse, taking a very rough ride in a wagon, on a small boat in rapids or in a storm, on deck in a storm-tossed ship, or being pitched roughly about in a similar fashion, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + the level of the spell you're casting) or lose the spell. If the motion is extremely violent, such as that caused by an earthquake, the DC is equal to 20 + the level of the spell you're casting.
Because they are the same action -- just like movement only provokes once per move action even if you move through all the squares a guy provokes.I found it.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.Which doesn't clarify if a spell that isn't cast defensively provokes twice or not. Please note it specifically states that the attacks are part of the spell and not a separate action -- all it tells us is that if cast defensively you will still provoke for the ranged attack.
Which we already knew from the ranged combat section.
I will be back. I actually have developer input. I have to find it again.
edit:Why isn't the above proof that the casting, and the "firing" both provoke?
I understand, but I did reopen the case. I guess I need to FAQ it though.