I'd say no. The act of aiming the ray and provoking happens after the spellcasting is complete so no concentration check, just damage. I think that's most balanced and fair, but maybe it's not most realistic.
No. If the caster passes the concentration check from taking damage while casting, then the ranged attack is treated as just a ranged attack. It's no different from shooting a bow or throwing a splash weapon once the concentration check is passed.
|
Targeting does not happen until spell completion(as in, it produces its effect), thus if you are targeting the ray then the spell is complete and can not be interrupted.
"You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect."
Now I know that both ranged touch spells such as scorching ray and range spell-likes such as the kineticists kinetic blast both provoke two AoO, one for casting the spell and one for the actual ranged attack.
What I want to know is does the ranged attack component also require a concentration check if the AoO is successful in doing damage?
If you cast a ranged touch where threatened by someone at melee range, you are subject to two AOO's.
While still taking a single action (casting a spell) that actually "includes" a free attack as part of it, the "One action, one opportunity" cannot be used but instead the action must be broken in parts:
1-. AOO from casting a spell when threatened. You can nullify this AOO by casting defensively.
2-. AOO from using a ranged attack when threatened in melee.
Once you get past #1 the spell is successfully cast, so while you may be subject to another AOO in #2, the ray will be thrown.
|
|
Intriguing point Lorewalker, I was convinced it was the other way... but that one is making me wonder.
The part that gives me pause is that the rules for making a ranged touch spell say it's part of the casting of the spell:
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.Combined with the interrupt rule saying while you cast:
If you take damage while trying to cast a spellMade me assume it would need a concentration check (as it suggests you're hit during the casting of the spell).
However I'm not sure how you can make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting if the targets are chosen when the spell effect occurs... so I'm no long as confident in my interpretation. They seem to contradict.
Not really. While it is part of the spell, the FAQ and other things make it clear that the spell is completed at the time you are actually performing the attack and thus would not be able to be interrupted. Kind of like how throwing a fireball is part of casting a spell too... but the spell is already complete by the time you throw the fireball.
"Ranged Touch Attack Spells and AOOs: 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 at 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.
This answer originally appeared in the 9/11/12 Paizo blog."
You can only interrupt the spell casting by reacting to the spell being cast which is a separate event from the ranged touch attack.
|
|
The FAQ says they're two separate events, true, but what makes you say that both events aren't during the spell cast? It seems you're interpreting it as saying the other one isn't during the casting of the spell, which seems to require assuming only 1 event can occur within a spell cast & I see no reason to think that's true (And spells that have longer than a full round cast time make it strange to suggest).
I do see the part about when it comes into effect as meaningful, given obviously things that are part of the spell effect (like being in your own fireball's blast) can't cause you to need a concentration check on that spell (given it ends very paradoxically)...
I guess the thing I'm still hung up on is that the rules for concentration checks say any injury "while trying to cast a spell". To say something which is defined as "part of casting the spell" doesn't happen "while trying to cast a spell" seems counter-intuitive at best.
What makes me say it is that the first event in the FAQ is the actual casting of the spell... and the second is firing the spell. Because firing the spell(which requires targeting and follows the rule I previously quoted) comes after casting the spell and the same event does not provoke twice, though in this case the two events take place in the same action. Since actions and events are not the same thing.
You will also note that the FAQ specifically calls them separate events, that casting the spell happens separately from the effect of the spell being targeted.
I mean... do you not find it also paradoxical that in your interpretation that the spell effect happens before the spell has completed casting? And that targeting is happening while a spell is being cast... which is counter to the spell variable rules?
Tim, it specifically says they are two different events.
...one for casting the spell and one for making a ranged attack, since these are two separate events.
It can't be a separate event and also not be a separate event at the same time. It either is part of the same event as spellcasting or it is not.
If you think they just used bad wording by accident then you can go to the "Ask Mark" thread in the off-topic section and have him clear it up for you.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
K, everyone else seems to have reached a conclusion, and as per my earlier remark I can see how you might interpret it that way & after seeing the contradictory rule I don't really have a confident interpretation anymore so I'll assume you guys are right.
In the interest of trying to understand how you reach that interpretation rather than questioning whether it's right... I just still don't see why you're so confident in your interpretation.
I do agree that the Spell Variables rule does support that interpretation, I just don't know why the ranged spell attack rule is deemed a lesser rule and ignored (Given it states the opposite). One rule says it's part of it, one rule says it's after it, and everyone else seems to somehow implicitly know which rule to ignored.
I'm not entirely sure the FAQ applies as "event" isn't clearly defined but as I read the AoO rules it appears to be based on causes not timings. It takes a very contrived scenario for it to actually occur, but an example that comes to mind is double-moving - if you provoke with your move action then use your standard to move again you still can't provoke a second time by moving out of the same creature's threatened squares. It's a different action, so timing-wise it's about as far from the same time as you can be in 1 round, but it's the same "event". So I had not included any concept of timing / concurrency in my interpreting of an "event" for an AoO.
While poorly defined, events are fairly intuitive. Drawing an arrow is part of the action to fire an arrow. So, firing an arrow has two events. One is drawing an arrow the other is firing the arrow. Each event is something you could, for instance, ready an action against.
"I ready to use a repel wood ability if creature x draws an arrow", is something you can do. Basically, each time your character does something new it is a separate event. Like, if you had to use the word 'and' when describing what your character did it is more than one event. "Character x drew a weapon and attacked", "Character x pointed a finger and laughed", "Character x moved as part of a charge to a space adjacent to character y and attacked them". "Character x attacked character y and Character x attacked character y and Character x attacked character y."(Had three attacks during a full round attack)Action Used and Events that happen during that action are not one for one. The rule you are talking about that lists firing the spell as part of the spell is very likely to be only referring to that event occurring as part of the action to cast the spell. Viewed in that light there is zero contradiction between it and other rules for spells. That lack of contradiction and several rules which relate to clarifying how actions, events, readying, AoOing and spell casting work are what make me sure.