If I was of high enough level to cast a 3rd level spell, selected Apport Object, with the Reach Metamagic feat, and then readied an action, could I apport an object in mid-air to another location?
Im trying to weaponize the ability to stop an on coming attack using something my groups never encountered before. Thanks in advance for the help!
Also assuming a Yes, this BS trick works, what would be the cost of a magic item being able to cast said skill say 5 times a day? Is there a way for a activated magic item to be used as an immediate action?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's no more powerful than the Deflect Arrows feat, so I don't see why it wouldn't work. How do you want to weaponize it?
You can ready an action to do anything you can do with a standard action, including use a magic item.
Um, best way to do pricing is to compare to equivalent items, which would be things that do Deflect Arrows, which I'm failing to remember at the moment. You can always use the table of magic item values, remembering that a double-check with GM common sense is always required after the calculation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose you could teleport the object at max height above their head. But then you enter into a grey area of the rules.
Given a person fires arrow at me. I used readied action to apport object targeting the arrow, I move the arrow to behind the attack who shot it, attacker shoots self in back?? Does the arrow keep momentum? Or does it simply fall to the ground?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
generally you dont want to set the precedent of teleporting things keeping momentum.
This is generally because its in your favour to be able to teleport, dimension door, etc etc while falling, running, and doing other things without smashing into the ground on the other side
Ah, touche, fair point!
Actually, now that I bother to reread apport object, this won't work at all. You have to touch the item before you apport it, and if it's away from you when you apport (i.e. you use the "receive" option) then it comes to you, not some arbitrary place. So unless you can sneak over and fondle the enemy's arrows beforehand, you're out of luck. And then you'd better hope they don't keep momentum or you just shot yourself in the chest :)
So Apport Object is a Touch Spell, meaning it would require a touch attack, everyone just by passes the idea of the touch attack due to it being object in hand. Reach spell changes any spell that requires a touch attack to be changed to a ranged touch attack. So if this doesnt change Apport Object to a range touch attack, does that also mean that Reach Spell cant change Shocking Grasp, or Vampiric Touch into range touch attacks?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Spells modified by this feat that require melee touch attacks instead require ranged touch attacks."
So, if a spell doesn't require a melee touch attack, then it doesn't require a ranged touch attack.
So then the question becomes does a range of touch require a touch attack. I get that the object in hand is touching your hand so its assumed you "hit".
Is this just hand waving the touch attack away
Is there no touch attack required because its in hand
Is there just no touch attack required period.
Apparently, it just hits, though I doubt the designers ever considered it being used against a "non-willing" object.
Apport has a saving throw, and a spell resist, so sounds like all the rules for an offensive attack are in the spell description
So Apport Object is a Touch Spell, meaning it would require a touch attack, everyone just by passes the idea of the touch attack due to it being object in hand. Reach spell changes any spell that requires a touch attack to be changed to a ranged touch attack. So if this doesnt change Apport Object to a range touch attack, does that also mean that Reach Spell cant change Shocking Grasp, or Vampiric Touch into range touch attacks?
No, it means I had a brain-fart when I woke up and forgot about the Reach component! My bad.
My next thought was that casting apport (at a range of close) and using the send/receive option are two distinct standard actions, so you can't ready both at once. But invoking the send/receive is actually a swift action. So your GM could potentially allow you to ready the standard-action casting and then, when it goes off, immediately follow it with an immediate-action send/receive. I don't think the rules mandate that possibility (not all swift actions can be performed as non-readied immediate actions), but I don't think they exclude it, either.
I'd allow a 'receive' apport on the grounds (as before) that it's no more powerful than Deflect/Snatch Arrows. The weaponized 'send' is more problematic. I agree with Weables that having the arrow keep its momentum would be a bad precedent.
FWIW, if you're interested in pursuing a magic item for the purely defensive option, Gloves of Arrow Snaring are priced at 4000 gp for 2/day. The number of daily uses usually factors linearly into price, so your 5/day apport defense would be 4000 * (5/2) = 10,000 gp. You could even build in "the receive option is automatically and immediately invoked," so that you only have to ready the item for use, which you can certainly do.
EDIT: Argh, except only the receive takes a swift action, a send is done as part of the casting! So ignore the complicated bit about a readied action followed by an immediate action; even if you don't want to weaponize it, sending the arrow ten feet up and to the left is an adequate defense.
Wonderful, that's a great amount of information Fuzzy, I appreciate it.
so the long and short of this is...
I have Apport Object with the reach metamagic feat applied.
I ready an action, when my opponent fires his arrow I will Apport Object the arrow in mid-flight and either Send or Receive, sending it off its mark, or receiving it and calling it a day.
Arrow is fired, my readied action goes off, I make my ranged touch attack VS arrow, attack hits, arrow is moved. Target is not hit by arrow.
Sounds right to me!
I haven't seen any proof that a touch attack is required to effect the arrow.
@Melkiador The spells range is touch, under Spells a range of touch "You must touch a creature or object to affect it."
@Melkiador The spells range is touch, under Spells a range of touch "You must touch a creature or object to affect it."
The problem is that the item is not an opponent.
"You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll." So, there is no rule saying you must use a touch attack to touch an unattended object. Admittedly there also isn't a rule saying you can automatically touch it, so it is a bit of a grey area. But if there isn't a rule saying you should do something, then you should usually err on the side of not doing that something, which would be not requiring a ranged touch attack.To be clear, do you think someone has to use a touch attack to touch an item with the normal version? Because the feat is clear you only require a ranged touch attack if you regularly require a melee touch attack.
"Spells modified by this feat that require melee touch attacks instead require ranged touch attacks." "
While I agree the idea of picking up an object from the table shouldn't require a touch attack, its not because it shouldn't, its because we would spend all day rolling touch attacks to get out of a closed room. one to get a key, one to touch the door knob, one to insert a key, etc etc. You automatically touch an ally, this is true, because the ally is willingly allowing you to do so. Your quote also states to touch an opponent you need a touch attack roll. My quote states that any spell with a range of touch you have to touch, creature or object. So with the item in question being an arrow, not a creature, and an arrow fired at you is not your ally you require an attack roll to touch said object.
The spell is assuming your Apport Object'ing a object in your own hand, given the idea we could be in melee I could touch your dagger in your hand, and apport object it. Sure it gets the Will save, and the Spell resist, but that's not the question. Does that mean I can touch it freely, or do I require an attack roll. If I require one to touch an opponents weapon in melee, I require one at range.
A better view of it, an object in flight, being unattended being a grey area. If you played baseball and the ball was throw to the catcher, does the batter always hit? Sounds like an attack roll to me
A better view of it, an object in flight, being unattended being a grey area. If you played baseball and the ball was throw to the catcher, does the batter always hit? Sounds like an attack roll to me
The difference is that magic can do the targeting for you, so you can't use real world logic. When I cast Sleep on a target 100 feet away, I still don't require an attack roll even though it'd be really hard to point in a line that straight and that far away.
Sleep is also a area effect inside a 10' burst. Aiming a 10' burst is much easier then picking an arrow out of the sky
Second, no where in your spell is touching the target mentioned, or required
Second, no where in your spell is touching the target mentioned, or required
Yes, because a spell with Reach Spell no longer has a "touch" component, unless it also required a melee touch attack.
And we're assuming your touching something that doesn't belong to you, so its unfriendly, and unwilling. Given those things, you require an attack.
Cure spells all have touch as the range, no where in the spell does it say it requires an attack roll, however undead are harmed by it. Are you saying you can freely touch undead with it, and deal damage? Are you saying I can freely touch an unwilling target and heal them? If you aren't saying that, your saying theres an attack roll for both those cases. If theres an attack roll you can change a spell to a reach spell, correct?
Cure spells all have touch as the range, no where in the spell does it say it requires an attack roll, however undead are harmed by it. Are you saying you can freely touch undead with it, and deal damage?
Undead can be opponents. To say that your opponent is an inanimate object is a bit existential.
What even is the touch AC of an unattended object?
Edit, I found it:
"Objects are easier to hit than creatures because they don't usually move, but many are tough enough to shrug off some damage from each blow. An object's Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier (see Table: Size and Armor Class of Objects) + its Dexterity modifier. An inanimate object has not only a Dexterity of 0 (–5 penalty to AC), but also an additional –2 penalty to its AC. Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot, you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon."
So, the object has an AC of 3 + its size modifier.
An object's Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier (see Table: Size and Armor Class of Objects) + its Dexterity modifier. An inanimate object has not only a Dexterity of 0 (–5 penalty to AC), but also an additional –2 penalty to its AC. Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot, you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon.
So your skipping over an unwilling ally, does an unwilling ally automatically get hit?
If you can reach out and touch the sword of the enemy fighter about to chop you to bits... and apport it away... and not even need an attack roll... something is very wrong. I would require an attack roll to touch the sword and give the sword/fighter a saving throw.
Right, given the spell has a saving throw listed, as well as spell resistance, that makes perfect sense. Im attempting to make a believer out of Melkiador that you can indeed make Apport Object into a range spell. :-)
If you can reach out and touch the sword of the enemy fighter about to chop you to bits... and apport it away... and not even need an attack roll... something is very wrong. I would require an attack roll to touch the sword and give the sword/fighter a saving throw.
In that case, the sword would be an attended object. Attended objects have different rules.
Right, given the spell has a saving throw listed, as well as spell resistance, that makes perfect sense. Im attempting to make a believer out of Melkiador that you can indeed make Apport Object into a range spell. :-)
Of course you can make it a "ranged" spell. You can give it a range of close with that feat. I just haven't seen any evidence that it would require a touch attack or ranged touch attack.
So your in agreement that Apport Object can be made a range spell, and can target an arrow in mid flight, you just dont believe it requires an attack roll?
I don't believe it requires an attack roll by the current rules. If you wanted to add one as a houserule, then I'd be cool with that. It's a pretty easy to hit AC anyway, so you don't gain or lose much by requiring one.
This is partly because we need a blog post or rules source on what qualifies as an attended or unattended object. Or even what qualifies as an object. Is a speck of dust an object? Is a molecule? What about a puddle of water?