YuenglingDragon wrote: I think that they both take the penalties but rays are different as regards bonuses. Lets look at some spells.
Acid Splash and Ray of Frost are both 0-level spells. Each do d3 damage. If acid splash was somehow immune to normal penalties for firing into melee, shouldn't it do less damage to balance it?
Ray's get bonuses from feats, I think, because they are typically less powerful than spells with saves and also because they can be specifically noted for their effect section: "ray." Ranged touch spells have a great deal more variety in their effects and would probably add confusion if bonuses were intended to apply to them.
With regard to these two spells, Acid Splash is a Conjuration, and as such could take form at any point between caster and target, possibly bypassing additional targets in between, while Ray of Frost, an Evocation, fires in a line from caster to target.
As to critical hits, Ray of Frost may have struck harder or a vital area, while Acid Splash may have simply been more concentrated/potent conjuration.
While both spells give a definition of the effect, the schools shouldn't be over looked for additional detail if there are questions on how they differ. Being a splash attack, Acid Splash shouldn't benefit from Feats and Precise Damage effects that Ray spells do.
In the end, you may have to give your best judgement between how the source school is defined and how the spell is defined.
Ginglebrix wrote: SCPRedMage wrote: Ginglebrix wrote: Would the Spectral Hand provoke an AoO for it's melee touch attack? Well...
Core Rulebook, Combat wrote: Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Normal melee touch attacks don't provoke, so why should the Spectral Hand? I ask because I read a thread somewhere that a fey sorceress' laughing touch ability provokes an AoA.....
Spectral Hand is a very specific and special case and not the same as the fey sorceress' laughing touch. Really, the only way to directly affect the hand is either by a targeted dispell or hitting the caster's square with an area effecting spell that forces a Reflex save and getting the hand to fail said save (Veeeery difficult given that it's Incorporeal and has a minimum AC of 22 plus the caster's Int modifier).
It's also important to know that the Hand doesn't need to be directed by the caster requiring a Move action (I actually had a GM try to argue that one unsuccessfully). Each time it is used to deliver a touch spell, it's effectively darting out from your square to your target's and back in the same amount of time it would take you to strike them if they were adjacent to you, implying that it's incredibly fast (110+ foot range that it's traveling over twice in your turn).
Also, the to-hit roll used by a Spectral Hand is based off of strength not dex, hence it's inherent +2 to-hit since it's assumed most Wizard's and Sorcerers have dumped their strength.
Scrapper wrote: YuenglingDragon wrote: I think that they both take the penalties but rays are different as regards bonuses. Lets look at some spells.
Acid Splash and Ray of Frost are both 0-level spells. Each do d3 damage. If acid splash was somehow immune to normal penalties for firing into melee, shouldn't it do less damage to balance it?
Ray's get bonuses from feats, I think, because they are typically less powerful than spells with saves and also because they can be specifically noted for their effect section: "ray." Ranged touch spells have a great deal more variety in their effects and would probably add confusion if bonuses were intended to apply to them.
With regard to these two spells, Acid Splash is a Conjuration, and as such could take form at any point between caster and target, possibly bypassing additional targets in between, while Ray of Frost, an Evocation, fires in a line from caster to target.
As to critical hits, Ray of Frost may have struck harder or a vital area, while Acid Splash may have simply been more concentrated/potent conjuration.
While both spells give a definition of the effect, the schools shouldn't be over looked for additional detail if there are questions on how they differ. Being a splash attack, Acid Splash shouldn't benefit from Feats and Precise Damage effects that Ray spells do.
In the end, you may have to give your best judgement between how the source school is defined and how the spell is defined. I don't think "acid splash" is in the same category as as a splash attack, otherwise a dip into alchemist can be obscene for a cantrip. While I recognize the difference in schools I think it is safer to lump it in with "rays and ray-like effects"
Sean K Reynolds wrote: TGMaxMaxer wrote: Ok... so since this is something I have to be able to point to from you Sean or the PDT FAQ in order to use it in PFS, as some GMs have been applying the penalty for firing into melee, but not allowing us to get the bonus to damage for things like point blank shot, Inspire courage, etc.
------------------
If a spell or ability requires an attack or ranged attack roll, even if it is not necessarily a ray, it takes the normal ranged attack penalties for firing into melee/cover, and also recieves any bonuses to damage that would apply (only applicable to hit point damage, not spells like enervation etc).
-------------------
Correct?
Yes, correct. The problem I have with many of Sean's rulings is consistancy.
In one ruling he will point to the specified wording in the rules and state more or less "thats why the rule has to be this way" ie: Brass Knuckles in UE and monks not receiving their own damage but having to use the 1d3, but then like this ruling he completely ignores the specified wording in the books. In the CRB it specifically states that attacks made by ranged <weapons> into close combat receive a -4, not ranged attacks in general but only those made with weapons, and in the case of Point Blank Shot it states the same thing, shooting with or throwing ranged <weapons> receive a +1 bonus etc etc.
The way the rules are specifically worded, the -4 shooting into close combat only occurs with ranged attacks made by weapons, same with PBS.
The flip flop of why a rule is the way it is makes it exptremely difficult to know when to ignore the specific wording and when not to.
Torbyne wrote:
I don't think "acid splash" is in the same category as as a splash attack, otherwise a dip into alchemist can be obscene for a cantrip. While I recognize the difference in schools I think it is safer to lump it in with "rays and ray-like effects"
It really is neither. It is not a splash attack but it isn't a ray either. Rays are special in that they count as weapons and thus benefit from bonuses to damage like from inspire courage, something not true about acid splash which only get the bonus to hit.
To throw another curve into this labyrinthine-esque conversation, I feel we would be remiss if we don't acknowledge the bard/sound striker ability- Weird Words. They all require a ranged touch attack, they all do weapon-like damage (B/P/S). Would the bonus damage being applied from feats be added to the total before the Fort Save or after?
Ok i have read all the posts here but i have gotten confused as to what is the ruling here. Could someone explain it to me and weather the feats and bonus stuff like bards buffs effect spells like acid splash? I ask because I'm thinking of making a Sorcerer.
I can tell you what I do and I think it is what they have said is the intent of the rules as stated above:
If you are making an attack roll then I'm going to treat it as a weapon with all the benefits and penalties of such, it can crit, it can do sneak damage or other precision damage, it can be subject to cover and concealment, you can apply Feats to it, it can auto hit and auto fail to hit, etc., etc..
About the only way magical ranged attacks are different is they do not, by and large, suffer range increment penalties. (so Far Shot is generally not going to matter, for example)
Ranged Touch Attack vs Ranged Attack - changes what modifies the targets AC (no shield, natural armor or armor bonuses) otherwise the same bonuses and penalties are going to apply to the attack roll.
Hopefully I haven't goofed and missed some change between PF and 3.5, I know 3.5 very well and I'm still running into things that are different in PF.
@Denzenaal I'd add the damage then calculate anything based off that damage unless something specifically told me to do otherwise.
|
