Covering / Harrying Fire and Area Weapons


Rules Questions

51 to 54 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

You can't leave out the datapoint that it is incredibly problematic trying to make this work with harrying fire, derive a higher level of rules understanding in the absense of that rule, and then use that understanding to say it must work with harrying fire. Any honest attempt to derive a deeper meaning of the rules has to include all known datapoints and that is one of them. That is trying to fit your data to the line.

Even then, deriving rules from other rules doesn't always work. That requires a perfectly coherent system and a perfect logician. The rules aren't always perfectly consistent.

edit: you might try to put it all together and the part about a line weapon not working to harry fire two people might be so out of place it doesn't fit... but i don't think thats likely


If "it says one target" is enough, Line and Blast don't work for anything.

It's okay to say "the rule are unclear here, it comes down to a table ruling". It's not a perfect system and will not always produce a clear answer. But if you're going to say that the way that a "single target" statement resolves is going to vary from action to action, there has to be some kind of reason for that.

Or, to put it another way, any interpretation that says that Line and Blast are not compatible with Harrying Fire has to be compatible with the fact that they do work with Attack and Trick Attack, or we immediately know that that interpretation is incorrect.


There is a clear difference in the rules instructions to "make an attack" vs "make an attack roll". Blast and Line refer only to "make an attack" in their descriptions.

I think you are getting confused because Harrying/Covering fire use the term "ranged attack" in the initial description. It's a tricky thing of Paizo's style, but the first sentence of a feat is not rules instructions. If the first sentence of a feat is contradicted by actual rules, such as the following rules instruction to "make an attack roll", the actual rules are the ones that matter.


GM OfAnything wrote:

There is a clear difference in the rules instructions to "make an attack" vs "make an attack roll". Blast and Line refer only to "make an attack" in their descriptions.

I think you are getting confused because Harrying/Covering fire use the term "ranged attack" in the initial description. It's a tricky thing of Paizo's style, but the first sentence of a feat is not rules instructions. If the first sentence of a feat is contradicted by actual rules, such as the following rules instruction to "make an attack roll", the actual rules are the ones that matter.

Right, but if you take the "ranged attack" element out, there isn't actually any rules reason you need a weapon for Harrying Fire - which seems odd. The "ranged attack" part of it is the thing that brings in the need for a weapon.

Unless we're parsing the section further on from there as being a further override?

51 to 54 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Rules Questions / Covering / Harrying Fire and Area Weapons All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions