Short and simple;
When using the spell Storm of Blades, do you provoke Attacks of Opportunity? I am in disagreement over this.
You make the rolls using your stats, but you yourself are not actually throwing or directing them like a ray or anything.
In fact, it says they are magically propelled.
Would you draw an AoO for the attacks made with this spell?
If so, would that be 1, or 1 per sword?
Based on the nature of the spell, I say nay.
Yes, but you actually provoke 2 Attacks of Opportunity. First for casting a spell, and second for making a ranged attack.
Acid Arrow, Scorching Ray, and other spells that use Ranged Touch Attacks also provoke 2 AO's.
Even though Scorching Ray and Storm of Blades make multiple Ranged Attack Rolls, the AO for making a Ranged Attack is still only triggered once.
You also have the option to cast the spell Defensively to avoid one of the AO's, but you'd have to pass a Conc check.
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creatureYou are aiming a spell effect, not firing a Ray, so you don't provoke.
The spell is targeted against a creature, not fire ad it.
Casting a Spell and making a Ranged Touch Attack due to the spell are Two separate triggering events
While I agree with your logic...
Pause your certainty to consider this;
"You make a ranged attack roll [for] each sword"
Emphasis FOR and not WITH.
It's not an early spell ripe with errors.
It has not been errata'd (that I have found).
This appears to be intentional.
Pathfinder recognize the difference between "for" and "with" over it's history.
Attacking with a (thing) might provoke.
Making an attack roll as part of casting might.
Abilities that let you make a roll FOR someone/something do not. That someone/something is what would eat the AoO if susceptible to one.
You are not attacking.
The sword(s) (it/them)self is.
The spell itself is.
It is merely using your values.
Note that not one spell that I can think of off the top ofmy head, that requires a ranged attack roll, even lists a target. They tend reference the ammunition. (Double checked Acid Arrow and Scorching Ray to verify - and it holds)
The target is "one creature."
This places it in a different pool from the start.
Further, the only spells that specify a creature as the target and require an attack roll, are Melee Touch spells, which do not.
Scorching Ray clearly does, by wording.
Storm of Blades does not follow wording.
I argue it is different intentionally, and by design.
Else it would have been worded closer to Scorching Ray, which has existed since Day 1.
My schism is the illogical: FOR vs. WITH
EDIT: Note that even I have an ounce of doubt here, but I'm fairly confident in my assessment. That doubt is eating at me though.
(further - a spell cannot roll for itself. That's literally impossible. That is why it has you roll. You are not attacking. The spell is, as Diego noted.)
The blades are magically propelled at the enemy, but this is fluff text, you still have to aim them via successful Ranged Touch Attacks-- I mean, if you roll low, that means you aimed them poorly, right? It's not an automatic success like Magic Missile, so that takes a few seconds of concentration to aim them properly. Rather than comparing Storm of Blades to Scorching Ray, let's compare it to Acid Arrow because Storm of Blades is essentially the exact same spell as Acid Arrow.
Acid Arrow is Conjuration [Creation] and so is Storm of Blades. Both use a weapon as a material component for the spell. Both are Save: None Spell Resistance: None. Both make Ranged Attack Rolls. Both spells affect a "Creature" or a "Target".
Acid Arrow provokes 2 AO's per the rules. I don't see any reason Storm of Blades should be treated differently.
Both spells affect a "Creature" or a "Target".
Here in, however, is the actual reason for the argument;
Acid Arrow
Range: long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Effect: one arrow of acid
Duration: 1 round + 1 round per three levels
Saving Throw: none; Spell Resistance: no
Storm of Blades
Range close: (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: one creature
Duration: instantaneous
Saving Throw: none; Spell Resistance: no
Acid Arrow (and spells like it) all reference that it creates the ammunition, which you are then responsible for attacking with, hence the AoO. You'll note that NONE of them have a Target entry, as Storm of Blades does.
Storm of Blades does not have an Effect entry referencing the blades it creates, like Acid Arrow and similar spells, and has a Target entry, unlike any of the spells used as a reference to apply their AoO standard to this spell.
Targeted Spells require only that you be able to target them, and the spell handles the rest. Thats been par for pretty much the entire history of Pathfinder, and even back into 3x. This one just happens to require you to make the rolls. I'm sure there are other spells that follow this format, that clearly would not provoke.
If it followed Acid Arrow (or Scorching Ray) logic, it would have;
Effect: 1 sword per 2 levels.
instead of its Target entry, and would specify "at a single creature within range" in the spell text instead, as is tradition (and is precisely how Scorching Ray handles it)
Targeted Spells only require that you target them, and then they get a Save of some kind. And this is clearly not a target spell, because there is no Save, and there are ranged attack rolls that you have to succeed at.
I just realized that the FAQ I linked earlier was broken. This one should work:
Targeted Spells only require that you target them, and then they get a Save of some kind. And this is clearly not a target spell, because there is no Save, and there are ranged attack rolls that you have to succeed at.
You mean like the saving throw I get against magic missiles that target me?
Being a targeted spell and being a spell that allows a save have on relationship with each other.
Conversely, being a spell that has a target specified and being a spell that triggers an AoO for making a ranged attack also have no relationship with each other.
The two spells Firebug points out explicitly state that they do not provoke. Storm of blades has no such language. I feel like storm of blades should not provoke (this feels more like a violent thrust usage of telekinesis), but without that language, then by RAW it does.
On an aside, the FAQ you linked doesn't apply. Storm of blades is a ranged attack. The FAQ talks specifically about ranged TOUCH attacks. But ranged attacks also provoke, so...
It's not a ranged touch attack, so those rules don't apply.
It's less clear if it's a ranged weapon attack. It's a ranged attack that uses conjured weapons. That might be the same thing, but might not. Would point blank shot modify the attack and damage of this spell?
|
On an aside, the FAQ you linked doesn't apply. Storm of blades is a ranged attack. The FAQ talks specifically about ranged TOUCH attacks. But ranged attacks also provoke, so...
Good catch, I hadn't noticed that.
Honestly, I feel that it shouldn't provoke, but I am not sure at all if RAW it will or not.
RAW what provokes is making a ranged attack, and making a ranged attack requires you to "shoot or throw at any target". With Storm of Blades, you do neither, while with Scorching ray you fire it.
On a personal level, I think that if the spell has a Target line in its description it will not provoke, while it provokes if it has an Effect that you target.
RAW, I am really uncertain.
@Melkiador: no, it is not a ranged weapon attack. A ranged weapon attack conjures a weapon and makes the attack with it. You can aim it at a square hoping to hit someone you don't see.
Storm of Blades requires you to target some creature with the spell.
No one is arguing that you can't draw more than 2 AoO for some spells. The argument is whether the ranged attacks from this weird spell provoke, as they are very non standard. Is it the spell making the attack or the caster? Does Point Blank Shot apply?
If this were a summoned monster making ranged attacks, would the caster be drawing AoOs?
Storm of Blades
School conjuration (creation); Level cleric 3, magus 2, sorcerer/wizard 2
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a sword)EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance noDESCRIPTION
You create floating swords of the type used as the material component for this spell (such as a rapier or scimitar) and magically propel them at your target.
Sounds like the Caster is doing the Propelling, not the spell itself.
It would need to say "You create floating swords... and they magically propel themselves at the target." or something to that effect.
|
|
It doesn't matter that it's a spell, ranged attacks provoke as per the rules for combat. The rules don't require the ranged attack to be made with a weapon, therefore it would need an exception saying it doesn't provoke.
Ranged attacks provoke, but they are defined this way:
Ranged Attacks: With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon’s maximum range and in line of sight. The maximum range for a thrown weapon is f ive range increments. For projectile weapons, it is 10 range increments. Some ranged weapons have shorter maximum ranges, as specified in their descriptions.
It is a weapon? Yes.
You are throwing it? No.You are shooting it? Questionable. It says "You create floating swords... and magically propel them at your target."
So t isn't so clear-cut.
Would you make a spiritual weapon attack provoke? If so, then Storm of Blades should provoke. If not, then not. I personally wouldn't.
I think it should work like the Holy Ice (Javelin) spell. The attack rolls seem to be part of the spell's decision mechanic whether such a magical weapon hits, but are not ranged attacks that would provoke as such.
It's not a ranged touch attack, so those rules don't apply.
It's less clear if it's a ranged weapon attack. It's a ranged attack that uses conjured weapons. That might be the same thing, but might not. Would point blank shot modify the attack and damage of this spell?
I don't read that FAQ as "Casting a Spell that uses a Ranged Touch Attack Provokes 2 AO's" and that's that. I read that FAQ as "If you perform a single action, or if some single event occurs, which would provoke multiple AO's from different sources, then 1 AO is provoked from each source for that single action or single event." because each individual AO is treated as a separate event per the rules, and this rule would apply to everything, not just Casting a Spell + Ranged Touch Attacks.
For example, Casting a Spell + Ranged Touch Attack = 2 AO's. Greater Trip + Vicious Stomp = 2 AO's. Failing a Trip attempt by 10+ and falling prone next to someone who has Vicious Stomp + Fortuitous Enchant = 2 AO's. Standing Up from Prone next to someone who has a Fortuitous Enchant = 2 AO's. Scoring a critical hit with Outflank + An Ally with Outflank and Opportunist = 2 AO's. Greater Trip + Vicious Stomp + Fortuitous Enchant = 3 AO's, etc.
So, I think that this FAQ does apply in this case. This is "Casting a Spell + Ranged Attack". Casting a spell provokes 1 AO and a Ranged Attack provokes 1 AO, therefore 2 AO's would be provoked for the single action.
|
|
Actually "casting a spell" and "making the free attacks that come with the spell" are two different actions.
You can cast Scorching ray, provoke, be, make your concentration check, then make the free ranged attacks you get from the spell, provoke again, and be hit again.
If you fail your concentration check you don't cast the spell, you don't get the ranged attacks, and you don't provoke.
And it's about as clear as Mud as to whether the spell Storm of Blades provokes or doesn't provoke per the specific rules of the spell itself, because the fluff text is slightly misleading (can be read ambiguously) and the spell itself doesn't actually say "this does/doesn't provoke an AO".
So now we fall back on the general rule: Ranged Attacks provoke an AO.
I think in order for this Spell to not provoke an AO, you would need specific verbiage in the spell itself stating "this doesn't provoke an AO, because even though you're making Ranged Attacks, the blades propel themselves, the caster does not propel them".
|
|
And it's about as clear as Mud as to whether the spell Storm of Blades provokes or doesn't provoke per the specific rules of the spell itself, because the fluff text is slightly misleading (can be read ambiguously) and the spell itself doesn't actually say "this does/doesn't provoke an AO".
I agree that it is clear as mud.
I am not convinced that it respects the CRB definition of a ranged attack, but that definition was used loosely in other instances.
And it's about as clear as Mud as to whether the spell Storm of Blades provokes or doesn't provoke per the specific rules of the spell itself, because the fluff text is slightly misleading (can be read ambiguously) and the spell itself doesn't actually say "this does/doesn't provoke an AO".I agree that it is clear as mud.
I am not convinced that it respects the CRB definition of a ranged attack, but that definition was used loosely in other instances.
While this doesn't fall under the exact definition of "shooting or throwing" a weapon, you're still making a Ranged Attack roll, and therefore it's a Ranged Attack. It would need specific verbiage in the spell itself stating "even though you're making a Ranged Attack roll, this is not actually a Ranged Attack". The only specific rules it calls out regarding Ranged Attack rules are "no penalties for range increments" and "the material component keeps its weapon critical range/multipliers".