RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So you missed the FAQ that rays count as weapons?
Top-right corner of the page, there's a "Help/FAQ" link. That goes to a list of all FAQs; the box on the right lists all the different categories, such as individual books. Click "Core Rulebook" from that box to get all the FAQs related to content in the Core Rulebook.
There is no way to push them to answer the question because it is so basic. IIRC I think a dev spoke on it. I will try to find the quote later.
Thanks. I indeed missed that FAQ since I searched on "precise shot". However I still see an ambiguity specifically with respect to the Precise Shot feat. Even if a "ray" is treated as a "weapon", it is still cast and neither shot nor thrown. And the omission of the Precise Shot feat from the Lantern Archon is still unexplained. Did whoever wrote the rule (and the FAQ) intend for the archon to have the penalty when attacking an enemy in melee? Or did whoever wrote the FAQ answer on rays as weapons overlook the implications for Precise Shot? If this question has been answered at that level of detail, I'm still not seeing it. I'd like to get an answer from paizo on this. Can anyone reading this topic advise me what needs to be done to request an answer to a specific question to be posted in a FAQ?
Actually the spell is cast, which allows you to make the ranged attack, just like some spells allow you to make melee attacks.
Since the ray is an ranged attack it is subject to ranged attack rules such as provoking an AoO if you fire it while someone threatens you in melee, even if you make the concentration check to cast the spell defensively. Since it is still subject to ranged attack rule you need precise shot.
id say since ray spells are considered a weapon for weapon focus and such.and are obviusly ranged then "shoot or throw ranged weapons"
apply here perfectly.
It's highly improbable that anyone considered the lantern archon when writing FAQS or even original rules.
Ranged touch attacks are definitely ranged attacks (it's in the name for pete's sake!) and follow all normal rules as such. This FAQ makes that clear:
When you cast a spell that allows you to make a ranged touch attack (such as scorching ray), and an enemy is within reach, do you provoke two attacks of opportunity?
Yes, you provoke two attacks of opportunity: one for casting the spell and one for making a ranged attack, since these are two separate events.
(Note that a spell that fires multiple simultaneous rays, such as scorching ray, only provokes one AOO for making the ranged attack instead of one AOO for each ranged attack. It still provokes for casting the spell.)
Monsters commonly have extremely poor or even useless feat choices. There's no grand mystery here. Most importantly: lantern archons have only one feat, and precise shot has point blank shot as a prerequisite. Lantern archons don't have precise shot because they can't legally take it.
I'd say that it is neither "basic" nor "obvious" the reason why the Lantern Archon, whose only attack is a ranged touch, is at a disadvantage attacking a target in melee when the designer(s) COULD have simply given the creature Precise Shot. Rather it is "suspicious" to me that the person who wrote the FAQ answer did not think this scenario through with respect to the RAW. I also question whether the designer(s) really desired to require casters to take Precise Shot and Point Blank, the prereq, in order to avoid the shooting into melee penalty. In any case, I don't want to make this a "he said, she said" among players and would still rather find a way, if it exists, to get the publisher to review this question.
It s not he said she said. Rays are ranged attacks and ranged attacks follow certain rules. There is nothing in rules that says ranged attacks that come from spells, sla's, or supernatural abilities is an exception.
You can press the FAQ button but it most likely be met with "no reply required" which is what they use for basic answers.
I'd say that it is neither "basic" nor "obvious" the reason why the Lantern Archon, whose only attack is a ranged touch, is at a disadvantage attacking a target in melee when the designer(s) COULD have simply given the creature Precise Shot. Rather it is "suspicious" to me that the person who wrote the FAQ answer did not think this scenario through with respect to the RAW. I also question whether the designer(s) really desired to require casters to take Precise Shot and Point Blank, the prereq, in order to avoid the shooting into melee penalty. In any case, I don't want to make this a "he said, she said" among players and would still rather find a way, if it exists, to get the publisher to review this question.
You have not cited any rules to support your opinion. The FAQ already know precedent of them not getting an exception by making them provoke AoO's. What do you have that says they get anything for free?
The rule has been this way for over 10 years since most of them were copied from 3.5. There is nothing to "not think through" in this case, and it is not just one person. It is an entire team of devs who knew how the rules worked before they were converted to Pathfinder.
PS: RAW is not an issue, neither is the RAI. You just don't want to agree, but you should also be aware that to 99% of the posters this is common knowledge so do not be surprised if nobody official addresses it again. However if you really insist you can try going to Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here thread and asking him directly. He is a rules dev.
The tzitzimitl has Precise Shot, and its only ranged weapon is a ranged touch attack.
As Blakmane points out, the Lantern Archon simply does not have enough feats to take Precise Shot.
Also, don't forget that ranges spells which make attack rolls (and are therefore generally considered to be attacks) usually target Touch AC, meaning it is easier for the spell caster to hit, despite firing into melee.
And why should it be any less difficult for a wizard to shoot a magical arrow into a desperate fray than it is for an archer to shoot a mundane arrow? It's about targeting. Same circumstances apply to both.
So no, I don't see what the issue is here. It seems perfectly logical to require casters to take PBS and Precise Shot to avoid penalties for firing into melee. And not to throw you for another loop, but casters also have to overcome the same potential issue with cover for firing into melee as archers do.
Here is Mark's answer xx 342.
He says we are correct, but you can click the link to read his exact words.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wich spells beside the "rays" can be used with precise shot ?
scorching ray can use it since is a "ray" ?
If it requires a ranged touch attack roll it should benefit from precise shot/PBS.