Several occasions have come up where the rules affect weapons: Ranged into melee "If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll."
and "A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage."
Are ranged touch spells affected by these situations?
This brings up a second question, if a party has no area attacks, how does one fight a swarm?
So far as I know, by RAW the only ranged spells that are literally treated as weapons are rays.
By "treated as weapons" I mean they can be the target of feats such as "weapon focus," "Point Blank Shot" or "Precise shot".
Many GMs allow other ranged touch attack spells to benefit from Point Blank Shot tree feats. Mine does. But I think that's just a common house rule.
Yes, no, and it depends. ;)
a) If you are firing a ray (or other ranged touch spell) into melee, then, yes, you take the -4 to hit -- possibly -8 if your companion is also providing cover.
As a result, ray-builds tend to go for Point Blank and Precise Shot Feats to help them out (And, in fact, Point Bank does give you +1 to hit [and damage, if appropriate] on rays within 30')
b) The swarm would still take damage from the spell -- while you resolve the attack as if it were a ranged weapon vs. touch AC -- at the end of the day, it's spell damage of the appropriate elemental or energy type (eg - Ray of Frost does d3 cold, and swarms aren't immune to cold) that hits the target (in this case, the swarm).
c) So far, in my groups (at low-levels) the answers have been: Oil. Torches. Running away.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So for the instances above they are not weapons so can be used into melee and against swarms?
The "spells" in question are actually the Domain power from the Fire Domain "Fire Bolt." I guess the same could be asked about Water, earth, and weather. they do not indicate that it's a ray.
The fire bolt is a ranged touch attack, so firing into melee is done at -4 if you don't have the Precise Shot Feat (or -8 if you're firing 'past' an ally without also having Improved Precise Shot).
If you have Point Blank, you get +1/+1 on the attack.
The swarm will be affected because the damage type of that attack is Fire, not weapon damage. Same is true of the acid squirt from Earth Domain, or the Electricity of Air, or any other elemental effect that resolves as a ranged touch (including spells like Scorching Ray, Acid Splash and Ray of Frost).
Any ranged attack that requires an attack roll vs AC takes the melee and cover penalties. Attacks which target creatures or areas do not.
Sorry I neglected the swarm question...
My current group was hit by a swarm of swarms by our GM back in our 3.5 days. We learned a valuable lesson.
Swarms are mostly a problem if you rely on direct damage weapon attacks for most of your melee effectiveness. We now make sure we have plenty of alchemist fire, oil flasks, wands of spells like burning hands or flaming sphere, etc.
Also you can use gust of wind or other techniques to blow them back. In many cases your best approach to swarms is just to push them away and move past them.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Many GMs allow other ranged touch attack spells to benefit from Point Blank Shot tree feats. Mine does. But I think that's just a common house rule.
This is the actual rule, Ranged Touch Attacks are actually Ranged Attacks that can benefit from Point Blank Shot etc. You can't choose Ranged Attack for Weapon Focus or Specialization though.
Swarm Traits: A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking. A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage. Reducing a swarm to 0 hit points or less causes it to break up, though damage taken until that point does not degrade its ability to attack or resist attack. Swarms are never staggered or reduced to a dying state by damage. Also, they cannot be tripped, grappled, or bull rushed, and they cannot grapple an opponent.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
IMO because fire bolt targets a single enemy it would not affect a swarm. Rules are pretty specific, has to be an area effect.
So for the instances above they are not weapons so can be used into melee and against swarms?
The spell is still worthless against a swarm.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
And before anyone chimes in on Magic and Targeting issues in d20/ Pathfinder, the Swarm entry is using the word "target" as something being subjecting to the effect, not the "Target" Line of the spell entry. It makes itself perfectly clear on this matter by adressing disintegrate, a spell that doesn't have a Target line entry, but affects a singe target.
Actually, you can ---
Weapon Focus (Combat)
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.
So for the instances above they are not weapons so can be used into melee and against swarms?The spell is still worthless against a swarm.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
Wow, thank you -- I knew something didn't jive -- I was looking at damage types rather than the single-target rule. Apologies -- this is (obviously) the correct response.
Actually, you can ---
Weapon Focus (Combat)
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.
Not sure what this is directed at, but a Ray is a type of Ranged Attack, but you cannot declare the general "Ranged Attack" as your weapon for Weapon Focus/Specialization.
Stynkk:
You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet
You can shoot or throw ranged weapons at an opponent engaged in melee without taking the standard –4 penalty on your attack roll.
By RAW PBS and its associated feats only work with weapons.
OK so... Domain powers (and other ranged touch attacks) suffer from firing into Melee AND they can't be used against swarms.
Sad panda.
Not sure what this is directed at, but a Ray is a type of Ranged Attack, but you cannot declare the general "Ranged Attack" as your weapon for Weapon Focus/Specialization.Actually, you can ---
Weapon Focus (Combat)
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.
Correct, the proper way to do this is to take the feat "Weapon focus: ray"
To clarify, BltzKrg242 is correct.
To the other isue
By RAW PBS and it's associated feats only work with weapons.
So by RAW cover bonuses only apply to not ranged attack rolls for spells?
If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
So everything we just said in this thread was invalidated? *obviously not the case*
To clarify, BltzKrg242 is correct.
To the other isue
By RAW PBS and it's associated feats only work with weapons.So by RAW cover bonuses only apply to not ranged attack rolls for spells?
If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)So everything we just said was invalidated?
Not everything I said anyway. :-)
But it is true I had never noticed that the melee penalties, by RAW apply only to weapon attacks....
Heh... interesting... But it would apply to rays. So "Scorching ray" would take the penalty, but "acid splash" would not. Hmmmm.....
Well, every GM I've ever played with rules that ranged attack spells both take the penalties of melee and cover AND gain the benefits of PBS tree... so at least they've all been consistent.
That is how I rule as a GM too.
So by RAW cover bonuses only apply to not ranged attack rolls for spells?
No. People are confusing soft cover with shooting into melee. They are different things.
Shooting into melee is a penalty on the attack roll.
Soft Cover is a bonus to AC, and it applies to ranged attacks, not just ranged weapon attacks.
Soft Cover: "Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC."
Ah, thanks Grick... but that still leaves us with RAW saying that "ray of frost" takes a -4 for firing into melee but "acid splash" does not...
Makes it a bit easier to pick which cantrip to learn...
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So for the instances above they are not weapons so can be used into melee and against swarms?The spell is still worthless against a swarm.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
And before anyone chimes in on Magic and Targeting issues in d20/ Pathfinder, the Swarm entry is using the word "target" as something being subjecting to the effect, not the "Target" Line of the spell entry. It makes itself perfectly clear on this matter by adressing disintegrate, a spell that doesn't have a Target line entry, but affects a singe target.
*chime*
It doesn't make itself clear on this matter because disintegrate explicitly has text in its spell description about only striking a single target regardless of the target's size. Swarm text could be referencing that rather than implying that all rays and other ranged touch attack spells are useless vs swarms.
Shooting into melee is a penalty on the attack roll.Soft Cover is a bonus to AC, and it applies to ranged attacks, not just ranged weapon attacks.
Soft Cover: "Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC."
Sorry Grick, i botched the terms, but the end result is the same. Both firing into melee and soft cover apply to spells like Ray of Frost & Acid Splash (which are ranged touch attacks).
Sorry Grick, i botched the terms, but the end result is the same. Both firing into melee and soft cover apply to spells like Ray of Frost & Acid Splash (which are ranged touch attacks).
Shooting into melee is a penalty on the attack roll.Soft Cover is a bonus to AC, and it applies to ranged attacks, not just ranged weapon attacks.
Soft Cover: "Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC."
No. By RAW, as I pointed out above, ray of frost IS affected by firing into melee, but "acid splash" which is not a RAY is not. Both, however, are affected by cover.
Nobody plays it that way, but that is how RAW defines it, so long as "ray" spells are treated as "weapon attacks" (which is addresed in the PBS and weapon focus feat tree descriptions).
No. By RAW, as I pointed out above, ray of frost IS affected by firing into melee, but "acid splash" which is not a RAY is not. Both, however, are affected by cover.Nobody plays it that way, but that is how RAW defines it, so long as "ray" spells are treated as "weapon attacks" (which is addresed in the PBS and weapon focus feat tree descriptions).
We disagree, the Ray of Frost manifests itself as a Ray effect, the Acid splash describes itself as a "Missile of Acid" - which is a way of describing a weapon effect.
No. By RAW, as I pointed out above, ray of frost IS affected by firing into melee, but "acid splash" which is not a RAY is not. Both, however, are affected by cover.Nobody plays it that way, but that is how RAW defines it, so long as "ray" spells are treated as "weapon attacks" (which is addresed in the PBS and weapon focus feat tree descriptions).
We disagree, the Ray of Frost manifests itself as a Ray effect, the Acid splash describes itself as a "Missile of Acid" - which is a way of describing a weapon effect.
"missile of acid" is pure fluff. There is no "missile" weapon defined in the game. To read "Rules As Written" ("RAW") means to read the rules AS WRITTEN. As written acid splash is not a weapon attack. If using the word "missile" meant it was a weapon attack, you'd have to make attack rolls with "magic missile."
You are using "RAI" or "Rules As Intended" I agree with you that is the INTENT of the rules, but that is not what is WROTE.
"missile of acid" is pure fluff. There is no "missile" weapon defined in the game. To read "Rules As Written" ("RAW") means to read the rules AS WRITTEN. As written acid splash is not a weapon attack.You are using "RAI" or "Rules As Intended" I agree with you that is the INTENT of the rules, but that is not what is WROTE.
Again, we disagree. While I agree that Missile is not a commonly defined weapon type (see: Ray) it mostly is use to define a grouping of weapons (ranged weapons). Pathfinder uses Missile (sparingly) in the Rules to describe a variety of objects and here is just one of them:
Evocation School
Evokers revel in the raw power of magic, and can use it to create and destroy with shocking ease.
Intense Spells (Su): Whenever you cast an evocation spell that deals hit point damage, add 1/2 your wizard level to the damage (minimum +1). This bonus only applies once to a spell, not once per missile or ray, and cannot be split between multiple missiles or rays. This bonus damage is not increased by Empower Spell or similar effects. This damage is of the same type as the spell. At 20th level, whenever you cast an evocation spell you can roll twice to penetrate a creature's spell resistance and take the better result.
So it seems that Missile is also a valid type of "weapon" in regards to spells. I take back my earlier comment about it not being defined, but I maintain the stance that missile is a flavorful way of saying "ranged weapon".
This has little to do with your point, however, which is to say that what is clearly intended should not be supported.
This has little to do with your point, however, which is to say that what is clearly intended should not be supported.
Heh... you misunderstand my point then. I've said since the second comment in this thread that spell ranged attacks (both normal and touch attacks) should be treated as weapon attacks, and that in fact every GM I've ever played with does so.
But sometimes people are asking "what do the RULES say" Stynkk, such as this specific thread which asked, and I quote "Are ranged touch spells considered weapons?"
The answer, by RAW Stynkk, is "no" except for spells specifically listed as ray spells.
That's what the rules say. You can interpret the rules however you like and claim that "missile" = "ray" or whatever you want to do.
I agree with your interpretation of how it SHOULD work, and I highly recommend to the OP that they do work it that way.
But that's not what the rules say.
But that's not what the rules say.The rules say that ranged weapons function in a certain manner. The rules also utilize the word missile to describe ranged weapons (Missile Shield, Explosive Missile, the Evocation entry). We can also use English to detemine that Missile is a flying object.
I'm not seeing the logical issue you're presenting here.
Acid Splash even lists Missile of Acid in the Effect text of the spell. Which is not where the developers insert fluff text, by the way.
Or is Ray of Frost's Ray effect also fluff?
Acid Arrow's Effect is one "one arrow of acid".
It seems the rules are perhaps a little more complex and nuanced than you are giving them credit for.
Stynkk, it appears that the issue here is that you don't understand the concept of "literal interpretation". When we say "rules as written" we mean "what EXACTLY do the rules SAY?" The rules SAY that the only spells that are treated as weapons are RAY SPELLS.
The fact that you don't get this means there's no point in continuing to converse with you.
Play how you like.
Here's some Rules As Written, just for you.
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.
So Acid Splash and Acid Arrow actually create the things in their effect line, that being a ranged weapon. It is not simply a spell effect or fluff.
I have been giving you exact text from the rules, so I am unsure how this is not what the rules say.
Should you desire to continue this, I will be open to debate, but thus far you have not shown much proof for your side.
Here's some Rules As Written, just for you.
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.
So Acid Splash and Acid Arrow actually create the things in their effect line, that being a ranged weapon. It is not simply a spell effect or fluff.
You continue to confuse how you INTERPRET things with what they actually SAY. You want to apply LOGIC to how the rule SHOULD WORK.
You and I almost certainly agree on all of that LOGIC and INTERPRETATION stuff Stynkk...
But the rules SAY that the only spells that are treated as weapons are RAYS. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?
But the rules SAY that the only spells that are treated as weapons are RAYS. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?
But the rules don't say that the *only* spells to be treated as weapons are rays. The rules say that spells that are rays are treated as weapons.
The difference is you see Ray as the only possibility that excludes all others and I see Ray as one of the possibilities. Indeed, the one that is the most clearly defined.
I invite you to show me the text where it says literally Ray is the only type of ranged weapon possible in spell form. It does not.
But the rules SAY that the only spells that are treated as weapons are RAYS. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?But the rules don't say that the *only* spells to be treated as weapons are rays. The rules say that spells that are rays are treated as weapons.
The difference is you see Ray as the only possibility that excludes all others and I see Ray as one of the possibilities. Indeed, the one that is the most clearly defined.
I invite you to show me the text where it says literally Ray is the only type of ranged weapon possible in spell form. It does not.
Stynkk, as far as I know, the ONLY place this is addressed is in the feat descriptions for PBS and Weapon focus feats.
I am potentially "interpreting" the fact that those feats list rays as "weapons" to mean that the "weapon" reference in the melee combat ranged attack applies to rays.
Someone who really wants to be a total rules lawyer could easily accuse ME of interpreting too much.
But I already acknowledged that I was making that link between the rules in the feat and the rule for melee combat.
Stynkk, as far as I know, the ONLY place this is addressed is in the feat descriptions for PBS and Weapon focus feats.I am potentially "interpreting" the fact that those feats list rays as "weapons" to mean that the "weapon" reference in the melee combat ranged attack applies to rays.
Someone who really wants to be a total rules lawyer could easily accuse ME of interpreting too much.
But I already acknowledged that I was making that link between the rules in the feat and the rule for melee combat.
Ah, the rule book is thick and treacherous my friend. This is also talked about in the Magic Chapter. Here let me link you the full "effect" entry where it discusses rays and etc.
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.
If a ray spell has a duration, it's the duration of the effect that the ray causes, not the length of time the ray itself persists.
If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit.
Notice how it goes at great length to describe rays, but does not say that other effects cannot constitute a Ranged Attack (with a Ranged Weapon). You'd have to say that Acid Spash/Arrow were Ranged Weapons since their effect lines say you specifically summon the effect and fire it at the target. They are not cast on specific creatures as targeted spells, they can also critically hit, etc.
|
Notice how it goes at great length to describe rays, but does not say that other effects cannot constitute a Ranged Attack (with a Ranged Weapon). You'd have to say that Acid Spash/Arrow were Ranged Weapons since their effect lines say you specifically summon the effect and fire it at the target. They are not cast on specific creatures as targeted spells, they can also critically hit, etc.Effect:
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.If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit.
Bolding mine... technically, it specifically says that rays are NOT weapons, but are treated as weapons (I'm not on either side of the argument, just since you quoted it and all...
also, wasn't this issue one of SKR's first FAQ entries... runs off to check
runs back nope, just that rays can be selected for weapon specialization (ect) I will be FAQing the original question because it is the 3rd or fourth time I have seen this debate pop up
Cpt-kirstov, the only real issue to "resolve" from a RAW perspective, in my mind, is the melee -4 penalty and when it applies to spell attacks.
The PBS and Weapon Focus feats very specifically say the only spells they work with are rays.
Now, as a correlary to that, I do think the spell descriptions themselves need to be tightened up since if the rules are going to call out ray spells so specifically, the spells themselves should explicitly state whether they are ray attacks or not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Notice how it goes at great length to describe rays, but does not say that other effects cannot constitute a Ranged Attack (with a Ranged Weapon). You'd have to say that Acid Spash/Arrow were Ranged Weapons since their effect lines say you specifically summon the effect and fire it at the target. They are not cast on specific creatures as targeted spells, they can also critically hit, etc.
I continue to be bemused by your apparent difficulty with understanding the difference between what the rules ACTUALLY SAY and what you decide to INTERPRET THEM TO MEAN.
It's quite a lesson in human cognition I think.
@The Captain:
Yes, you're right sorry.. as if they were weapons... I really should be more careful.
The PBS and Weapon Focus feats very specifically say the only spells they work with are rays.
The issue really is Firing into Melee and Spell Attacks. Just to be a horrible person, I will say PBS actually just specifies ranged weapons and doesn't specify ray per the Rules as Written.
@The Captain:
Yes, you're right sorry.. as if they were weapons... I really should be more careful.The PBS and Weapon Focus feats very specifically say the only spells they work with are rays.The issue really is Firing into Melee and Spell Attacks. Just to be a horrible person, I will say PBS actually just specifies ranged weapons and doesn't specify ray per the Rules as Written.
Oops, right, it's in the Weapon focus feats where rays are called out. Technically extending the "weapon" descriptor to rays in the PBS feat tree is an interpretation itself.
On a related question can vital strike be used with these spells and powers?
No. Vital Strike requires the use of the Attack Action (a standard action to make a single attack). It can't be used on just any form of attack.
These spells require a standard action to cast the spell, the "attack" is combined as a part of the spell, thus it is not possible to vital strike the spell because it doesn't meet the criteria - that is you are not using the Attack Action.
Oops, right, it's in the Weapon focus feats where rays are called out. Technically extending the "weapon" descriptor to rays in the PBS feat tree is an interpretation itself.
*facepalm* Arg. This is where we are always getting into trouble. You need to take into account rules from various sources because in Pathfinder the totality of a rule is often spread over many chapters of the rules.
So eventhough PBS does not specify Ray and only specifies Ranged Weapon, the magic chapter states that rays "as if it were a ranged weapon" so we can make the logical connection between the two.
The problem with your short-sightedly strict RAW is that you aren't using RAW if you don't take into account the entire rulebook.
The reason why I even pointed this out is because some of the rules connections you're using as evidence don't support what you're presenting. The rules do not explicitly state they (Rays)are the only spell attack forms are the only ones to be treated "as if they were ranged weapons" - just that they are.
The reason why I even pointed this out is because some of the rules connections you're using as evidence don't support what you're presenting. The rules do not explicitly state they (Rays)are the only spell attack forms are the only ones to be treated "as if they were ranged weapons" - just that they are.
Stynkk...
OK, so then tell me, OTHER THAN RAYS, what spells are also stated in the rules that they can be treated as weapons?
Note that I am not asking you which other spells YOU BELIEVE can be INTERPRETED to be treated as weapons.
I'm asking you to show me WHAT OTHER SPELLS are EXPLICITLY CALLED OUT that way.
|
These spells require a standard action to cast the spell, the "attack" is combined as a part of the spell, thus it is not possible to vital strike the spell because it doesn't meet the criteria - that is you are not using the Attack Action.
How about the domain powers or attacks where the spell was already cast the round before like produce flame or flame blade.
How about the domain powers or attacks where the spell was already cast the round before like produce flame or flame blade.
From what I've found:
James Jacobs(Creative Director)Nov 6, 2009, 12:17 PM
Vital Strike probably DOES need to be reworded. But yeah... it's not supposed to work with spells. Just weapons. And spells that are functionaly weapons, which are pretty rare. Flame blade counts, since it says it's "wielded as a scimitar," but something like vampiric strike does not count.
Vital strike appears to be ok to use with Flame Blade as it is meant to be used as if it was a Scimitar. The list of spells/powers that work with Vital Strike appears to be very small since there are not many that create pseudo-weapons.
Note that I am not asking you which other spells YOU BELIEVE can be INTERPRETED to be treated as weapons.
I'm asking you to show me WHAT OTHER SPELLS are EXPLICITLY CALLED OUT that way.
There are no other spell types that are explicitly called that way, nor is there any exclusionary language to reinforce the fact that this is a feature solely limited to the Ray.
Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons?
Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)
For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.
The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.
—Sean K Reynolds, 07/29/11
There are no other spell types that are explicitly called that way, nor is there any exclusionary language to reinforce the fact that this is a feature solely limited to the Ray.Note that I am not asking you which other spells YOU BELIEVE can be INTERPRETED to be treated as weapons.
I'm asking you to show me WHAT OTHER SPELLS are EXPLICITLY CALLED OUT that way.
Stynkk, if there are, as you acknowledge no other spell types called out this way, then when I say that rays are singled out, that is literally true, and for you to argue that there is nothing saying rays are the ONLY such spells is pure pedantry, or arguing simply for the sake of arguing.
As it stands rays are the only spells, by raw that can be treated as weapons other than a very rare few which are specifically called out as being treated as weapons (and all of those I know of are melee type spells, not ranged).
So allowing PBS tree feats for non-ray spells is, as I originally stated, a HOUSE RULE. It is a very common house rule, but a house rule nonetheless. I house rule it that way myself.
|
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
You know, I started another thread on this same thing months ago. The majority in that thread agreed that Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot can be used on the cleric Fire Domain's "Fire Bolt" power, but they never did point me to where it says so in the rules, despite specifically asking. That thread was flagged for FAQ treatment by 5 people, but got a response of "Staff response: no reply required". Given that we're still debating the same thing two months later, I have to disagree with that answer from the Paizo staff. This is the definition of a Frequently Asked Question, and we don't have an official Paizo response to it.
Stynkk, if there are, as you acknowledge no other spell types called out this way, then when I say that rays are singled out, that is literally true, and for you to argue that there is nothing saying rays are the ONLY such spells is pure pedantry, or arguing simply for the sake of arguing.
As it stands rays are the only spells, by raw that can be treated as weapons other than a very rare few which are specifically called out as being treated as weapons (and all of those I know of are melee type spells, not ranged).
So allowing PBS tree feats for non-ray spells is, as I originally stated, a HOUSE RULE. It is a very common house rule, but a house rule nonetheless. I house rule it that way myself.
Err... no. House rules go outside of the rules somehow. You were excluding the weapon-like spells because they are not specifically called out like Rays. I was saying they (Paizo Dev Team) didn't feel the need to call them out because they are quite obviously weapon-like. As you can see from the text below, the development position is that other spells can and are to be considered weapon-like in nature... as Grick illustrates using Sean's FAQ. Which is all I've been saying...
Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons?
Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)
For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.
The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.
—Sean K Reynolds, 07/29/11
Thank Gricky, that's basically what I've been saying this whole time. Acid Splash/Arrow/insert ranged attack roll here spell are *mostly* examples of a weapon-like spell.
So you'd treat them as such for Firing into Melee, Cover, Soft Cover, PBS, Concealment etc, by the rules.. not by some zany Half-Orc inspired tirade.