|
Here's what the Rules Clarification said about AoO and ranged touch attack spells:
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.
Go to rule
I bolded the important parts... the attack is part of the spell, and not a separate action. Should a single action ever give the chance to make 2 opportunity attacks from it? I don't feel it should... if it were a separate action, then sure, but not when it's the same action and part of casting the spell.
If an opportunity attack does hit because of the ranged attack, and the ranged attack is part of the casting of the spell, shouldn't that disrupt the casting same as an opportunity attack that hits for spellcasting? You are being injured during the action of casting a spell, whether it's for the ranged attack or spellcasting doesn't matter.
Note: If a single action can't provoke 2 opportunity attacks, then you are better off not casting defensively for rng touch spells. You're going to take a disruptive AoO no matter what, so why cast defensively and risk losing the spell at that step? Better to just hope they miss.
Yay another one of these.
How do you feel about the full-round action charge?
If I were to charge something with reach and combat reflexes and make an unarmed strike, without having Improved unarmed strike, how many AoO would he get one me? I provoke twice from this single action once for moving though a threatened square and once for the unarmed strike.
|
|
Another one? Has this been discussed before?
As for your hypothetical, I see it as a little different. There is a clear order of moving twice, and then being able to make an attack after all movement is done. If the charging person wanted to make a Bull Rush instead of an attack, I would not have damage inflicted during movement reduce his CMB for the Bull Rush, only the AoO during the maneuver would count. In effect, I see it as 2 separate actions that you may do together as a full rd action... movement, and then an attack or maneuver. The spellcasting attack roll, though, is explicitly part of the same action, as I bolded
There are at least 2 threads on this point.
The thing is it is one action not two or vital strike could be done on a charge.
As to the spell casting being one action then, do you force concentraion checks to avoid losing the spell if the caster is attacked for the ranged attack if he was able to cast defensivly?
|
|
There are at least 2 threads on this point.
The thing is it is one action not two or vital strike could be done on a charge.
As to the spell casting being one action then, do you force concentraion checks to avoid losing the spell if the caster is attacked for the ranged attack if he was able to cast defensivly?
We've always allowed vital strike on a charge, I think that was changed later on in errata or something.
Personally, since the attack roll is part of the spellcasting action, we've always ruled that if you successfully cast defensively, casting the spell causes no AoO, whether or not there is an attack roll. If you don't choose to cast defensively, enemies get only 1 AoO for the spellcasting action, and it can disrupt the spell. We've never allowed additional attacks for a ranged touch attack spell, but one of our group just pointed it out today.
This is obviously a point of great confusion, but that rule seems to be very well worded on the subject of whether the casting provokes. It doesn't address the scorching ray question, though, which is probably why this keeps coming up again and again.
Until it's resolved, I'm sticking with the house rule that "simultaneous" ranged touch attacks (e.g., scorching ray) only provoke once, while serial attacks (i.e., those that allow you to resolve the attacks on a reactive basis, similar to multiple weapon attacks; I can't think of one at the moment) provoke for each attack. Mechanically, the extra attacks of opportunity are the trade-off for being able to alter your later attacks according to how the earlier attacks played out. If you lose the perk, you lose the drawback as well. It has the benefit of making sense from a "screw the rules, let's look at it logically" standpoint as well.
I'd do the same if someone fired a magic crossbow that shot three bolts simultaneously (Iolo, anyone?). If they have to pick all the targets beforehand due to the simultaneous nature of the attack, then they shouldn't suffer multiple attacks of opportunity from the same opponent. I fully understand other GMs thinking otherwise (maybe it takes longer to aim, so hey, more time for opportunists to get a few shanks in). But RAW is unclear enough to cause three threads on the subject in as many days.
|
Yay another one of these.
How do you feel about the full-round action charge?
If I were to charge something with reach and combat reflexes and make an unarmed strike, without having Improved unarmed strike, how many AoO would he get one me? I provoke twice from this single action once for moving though a threatened square and once for the unarmed strike.
you are incorrect in my understanding. you are claiming your whole round is an action when in fact you have taken several actions that provoke aos.
ao one you moved through a threaten squareao two you used unamred strike without prerequisite feats. thats like claiming that you can move from one threaten square to another one take the first ao and then you are immune to the second actions provoking effect i.e. the casting of a spell or the useage of a bow. you cannot take multiple aos for the same thing. for instance you cannot take 3 aos for someone who runs in front of you since that is all one action in that the movement is an action. a charge is a full round that combines 2 actions a move action combined with an attack action at the end.
|
|
just cause its called a full round action doesnt mean there are not seperate components that can individually provoke attacks.
as for the casting of a ranged touch spell when in a threatened square. my advice is just dont do it lol but in the case that you have to i read the rule as this.
making the attack roll is part of casting the spell. it happens simultaneously and therefore upon its provocation of an ao would subject you to losing the spell if you take the damage. i believe this rule was worded so elegantly to point out that you do not provoke two aos from casting a ranged touch spell. this is merely my interpretation of the rules as written. there is of course someone who will argue this point but in the end i guess itll be up to a faq and until that is finished it is "best interpretation and table understanding"
No A full round action is a single action redardless of how its made.
Just like if I take a full round to fire 4 arrows while standing next to a guy with combat reflexes and an 18+ dex i better get ready for some pain.
Nothing states you are immune to AoO from the same thing. The rules state you are only allowed to take one AoO per provocation, With movement being called out as an exception that its one AoO per movement period, but if you cast 2 spells in a round or fire 4 arrows or do something as stupid as TWF with unarmed attacks without IUS then you are provoking each and everytime and if you are threatened by something with enough AoO its gonna hurt.
This is one of those a single Action (game term with a big A) [Full Round Charge with an Unarmed Strike] is comprised of many little actions (general description term with a little a) that provoke AoOs [movement, unarmed attack].
You're both right...
Thanks to Talon for trying to migrate the discussion to the other thread, we should try to compile the same topics together.
|
|
No A full round action is a single action redardless of how its made.
Just like if I take a full round to fire 4 arrows while standing next to a guy with combat reflexes and an 18+ dex i better get ready for some pain.
Nothing states you are immune to AoO from the same thing. The rules state you are only allowed to take one AoO per provocation, With movement being called out as an exception that its one AoO per movement period, but if you cast 2 spells in a round or fire 4 arrows or do something as stupid as TWF with unarmed attacks without IUS then you are provoking each and everytime and if you are threatened by something with enough AoO its gonna hurt.
i agree totally with your second statement but not with the first. i reread my post about multiple aos and realize my cursor must have been moved mid type (i was sending it from my tablet) yes i agree and am aware shooting arrows and casting spells provokes each time. this brings up an interesting question though
if i make a "full attack action" with a bow then i provoke everytime. now my one "full attack action" should only provoke one aoo by your previous statements but 4 by your last statement. giving credence to the school of thought that a full x action" is comprised of several smaller actions.i think the best thing to remember in all of this is if you drop your weapon and your only option is charging a guy with a polearm and trying to punch him you should probably just retreat cause your not doing to hot.
For an example of provoking 2 AoOs for 1 action, how about a prone character crawling away?
Relevant rules: "Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity."
So, by crawling, you provoke because you were crawling in a square they threatened. You also provoke for having left a square they threaten. 2 AoOs, One Action.
|
|
That's a good example Tarantula. Unfortunately, it isn't explicitly answered as to whether qualifying for an AoO twice with one action will result in a single AoO or two.
I'm in agreement with blahpers on this one, and thanks to the OP for having answered one of my questions in another thread with this one.
Where's the text about one action not provoking more than 1 AoO?
Vendle,
I think the text in combat for combat reflexes is pretty clear.
"Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus."
Emphasis mine. One opportunity from crawling. One from moving out of a threatened square. It only references provocations, not actions taken. The crawling action itself provokes. As does leaving a threatened square. 2 provocations, 2 AoOs.
|
|
I apologize for the confusion. I'm not arguing as to whether someone with Combat Reflexes can gain the benefits of their feat against a single target. I'm questioning whether a single action provokes two opportunities. The target is crawling out of a threatened square. That's two qualifiers for an AoO. Maybe it'll help to visualize if I hyphenate it. "The target is Crawling-Out-of-a-Threatened-Square." Hence, he provokes.
I'm going to let this subject lay to rest, as most people on both sides have made up their minds on it.
Vendle,
The point made about crawling, is even crawling-INTO-a-threatened-square provokes. What if they just crawled from one threatened square to another? Then they would be both crawling-out-of-a-threatened-square and crawling-into-a-threatened-square. Does that satisfy your requirement for 2 provocations with one action?
Note: As quoted above, crawling provokes from attackers who threaten any point of the crawl.