Ref:
Target of Opportunity Teamwork feat
Channel Ray feat
As per the FAQ, rays counts as weapons. Being that they are ranged, would they count as a ranged weapon?
Your ranged weapon must be in hand, loaded, and ready to be fired or thrown for you to make the ranged attack.
If an ally with this feat hits a target within 30' of a Cleric who also has the teamwork feat and the Channel Ray feat and the Cleric already has their holy symbol ready, can the Cleric attack the original target with a channel ray?
Thank you for your thoughts.
The ray itself is ephemeral, existing only in the instant it is created and fired. As such, it is never ready and "in hand" when the AoO is triggered even if your holy symbol or focus is.
Technically true, from one standpoint. But just to play devil's advocate, the ray itself is simply the 'ammunition', the holy symbol and the caster could be considered the weapon... So the weapon would be "in hand" and "ready to be fired" by having the holy symbol present already.
Also, I see no way to reduce the activation time of channel (material weapons can make AoO's because the rules say they can). Even Quick Channel can't get around this restriction as it would still require an extra swift action in the moment you are taking the immediate for the AoO.
Those issues aside, I do agree that, in principle, rays would be eligible to make the AoO granted here.
However, I can potentially offer a "workaround", take a look at the Conductive property for ranged weapons. If you absolutely need to target touch AC, I can't help you though.
The conductive property would allow you to bypass the activation time of channeling, which sets precedence that the activation time is not set in stone. Also, keep in mind that the feat isn't actually granting an AoO--it's granting an untyped bonus ranged attack.
Edit: also keep in mind, assuming there are any GM's out there who would consider allowing this combination, while Channeling itself doesn't provoke, the ranged attack granted by Channel Ray still does.
Those GM's would be wrong per RAW... the feat does not change the ability from supernatural, and there is a handy chart indicating that Supernatural abilities never provoke.
As a side-note....
I do wonder what the restrictions are for the "single ranged attack". It does not spell it out as being an identified action type (such as "attack action", "standard attack", etc), so in general it can be read as "anything that counts as a ranged attack". That also opens the door for a Vital Strike with a ranged weapon, does it not?
Okay, for some reason, I glossed over the crunch text in favor of the name.
You wouldn't be the first... I made that mistake at first glance, as did a GM/player that I know.
I wouldn't expect that "loaded" argument to fly for PFS, but I'd also expect a lot of variation across other tables.
While I'm not too familiar with how well that kind of an argument would work at a PFS table, the fact that is can be raised at all should indicate that it needs clarification.
Even in raising the original question, I'm fairly certain that the feat was designed with the intent of allowing a single basic attack as an immediate action. However, open for interpretation is open...
As to Vital Strike: this has be clarified to require "an attack action", not merely "an attack". I do not find the language used for Target of Opportunity to be ambiguous.
Touche, I didn't recall the text for vital strike spelling out the 'attack' action. You can disregard that musing.
I would concede, however, that the rules are a bit unclear in this area between spells getting a specific section and "ranged attack -- provokes:yes" being under the "standard action" section of the chart.The primary issue I see with any argument negating AoOs on ranged (Su) is that it effectively does the same for ranged (Ex), of which...
The trouble here is that all of the FAQ's on ranged attacks, rays, and AoO's specifically call out Spells. There are no specific mentions (that I have found) of whether or not the AoO rules change when involving a Supernatural ability that makes a ranged touch attack. I agree with your assessment that it logically should provoke, but the text does not support that.
I just paged through almost every domain/bloodline to try to find a Supernatural ability that was based on a ranged touch to see if it contained "this ability provokes", but I couldn't find one for precedence.
Activating a ranged spell-like ability provokes 2 attacks of opportunity, one for the spell and one for the ranged attack. Activating a supernatural ability might not in itself provoke, but the ranged attack most certainly can provoke.
EDIT: FAQ
It's a standard action to channel, not an attack action, even if the result is an attack roll. For this reason, it cannot be used as an attack of opportunity.
TLDR: If you couldn't full attack with it, you can't use it for an attack of opportunity...
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If the rules assume that all ranged attacks provoke AoOs by default in every case, I don't think there needs to be a precedent.
The rules have always been written with a general ruling that can be superseded by specific instances if spelled out as such. While you are correct that ranged attacks typically provoke, it is entirely probable that this could be one of those specific exceptions to that standard ruling. We have conflicting statements here:
"All ranged attacks provoke"
"Supernatural abilities do not provoke"
Needs clarification on precedence.
If the referenced chart had a legend that defined the AoO column as "Does activating this ability provoke an AoO", then I could see the ranged attack rule applying. However, the chart's legend has different wording:
"Does using the ability provoke attacks of opportunity the way that casting a spell does?"
Using an ability isn't just activating it, it's using it from start to finish. If the ranged touch attack is part of using it (which it is), then it shouldn't provoke by this verbiage.
Activating a ranged spell-like ability provokes 2 attacks of opportunity, one for the spell and one for the ranged attack. Activating a supernatural ability might not in itself provoke, but the ranged attack most certainly can provoke.
EDIT: FAQ
Once again... that FAQ spells out "casting a spell", not "activating a supernatural ability". It only references spells. The RAW posted above pretty clearly indicates that Supernatural abilities do not provoke. The FAQ needs an update.
TLDR: If you couldn't full attack with it, you can't use it for an attack of opportunity...
It is not an Attack of Opportunity. The feat name definitely causes confusion. Additionally, the feat isn't granting an "attack action". The feat grants an untyped "ranged attack", as noted.
Related note
I am searching for a ruling on whether Arcane Blast provokes.
Edit:
FAQ REQUEST CLARIFICATION
Does the ranged touch attack portion of activating a supernatural ability such as Channel Ray or Arcane Blast provoke an attack of opportunity?
Yes, casting a spell provokes, activating a Su ability doesn't. Ranged attacks provoke. The FAQ makes it perfectly clear that the ranged attack is separate from activating the ability. It really doesn't matter whether that ability is supernatural or spell like - the ranged attack is a separate and distinct part of the action that provokes in and of itself.
For supernatural effects to not provoke at all then the spell-like ability would have to only provoke once, the casting and the ranged attack would have to be considered one inclusive act.
So, as there is nothing in the rules for (Su) abilities that over-rides the rules for ranged attacks, the rules for ranged attacks applies.
So, Arcane Blast itself doesn't provoke, making a ranged attack does. If the blast were (Sp) then it would provoke twice.
The FAQ makes it perfectly clear that the ranged attack is separate from activating the ability.
The FAQ makes it clear that there are two points to provoke AoO's with a ranged spells.
As supernatural abilities are governed by different rules than spells, I don't see a FAQ on magic spells applying to supernatural abilities.
It really doesn't matter whether that ability is supernatural or spell like - the ranged attack is a separate and distinct part of the action that provokes in and of itself.For supernatural effects to not provoke at all then the spell-like ability would have to only provoke once, the casting and the ranged attack would have to be considered one inclusive act.
That may be RAI, but it's not RAW. As I pointed out before, the chart does not state that the "no AoO" only applies for the activation of the ability.
So, as there is nothing in the rules for (Su) abilities that over-rides the rules for ranged attacks, the rules for ranged attacks applies.
Conversely, there's nothing that states that the rules for Supernatural abilities doesn't overrule the rule for ranged attacks.
RAW ranged attacks provoke. That is hard coded here.
Spell like abilities also don't say that the ranged aspect provokes. Really, I think it's far too much of a stretch for them to not be governed by the same rules.
(Su) abilities and (Sp) abilities share a few things in common. One is that neither mentions ranged attacks. It is unrealistic to assume (and it is an assumption) that (Su) acts differently in this respect without something to specifically say it acts differently. The fact the (Su) doesn't say it overrules the ranged attacks rules is quite telling in itself.
That's how rules work. If it doesn't call out an exception then it works the same as the general rules. General rules are ranged attacks provoke.
It is unrealistic to assume (and it is an assumption) that (Su) acts differently in this respect without something to specifically say it acts differently. The fact the (Su) doesn't say it overrules the ranged attacks rules is quite telling in itself.
I do not see why it is unrealistic to speculate that a ruling on one type of ability does apply to a different ability type. It is an assumption that Supernatural doesn't act differently.
That said, I have agreed with your stance at least twice in this thread as being the likely RAI. Unfortunately, my point still stands that it is a gray area. A FAQ on AoO's+Spells+Rays is a good jump point to base unlisted answers such as this one, but it is not final authority on it.
No matter how many times it is said that "ranged attacks provoke", that does not change the fact that specific rules can overrule the general rule, and the only specific rule regarding Supernatural abilities and AoO's indicates that there isn't an AoO. There is a direct conflict of specific vs general here, and typically when that occurs the specific overrules the general.
I understand that you are pushing your stance hard on this, and I appreciate that input because that is partly what I was looking for in this. But we're going in circles on what is clearly a gray area. The rules do not state anywhere in plain text that "ranged attacks granted by a Supernatural ability provoke an AoO". The abilities themselves do not indicate that it provokes at any point. We have a specific rule saying 'no' and a general rule stating 'yes'.
I'm not trying to exploit the rules, mess with a GM, or anything like that. I happened to find something in the rules that opens a gray area that for some reason has not been answered and I would like to know with certainty what that ruling is.
Spell like abilities also don't say that the ranged aspect provokes.
Correct. But Spell-like abilities are also listed in the previously referenced chart as provoking in the first place. The only clarification needed there was how many times it provoked. The difference here is that the Supernatural ability has a hard NO for AoO's, which can be open for interpretation.
tl;dr
If you can say "there is a rule that states that ranged attacks provoke" and I can counter that with "there is a specific rule on this ability type that shows that it doesn't provoke", then a clarification is needed. It bothers me that you can't concede that point.
Your sole point is that supernatural abilities don't provoke. Nobody is arguing otherwise.
You, however, are conflating the supernatural ability itself and the ranged attack aspect. The FAQ clearly clarifies the RAW that ranged abilities consist of two aspects - the ability itself and the ranged attack. That extends logically and RAW to (Su) abilities. The ability itself does not provoke. The ranged attack does.
There is no room for interpretation. That is RAW. A ranged (Su) ability is both a (Su) ability and a ranged attack.