Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dalimar007 01-21-08, 02:46 AM	Do ray effects such as scorching ray provoke an attack of opportunity for being a ranged weapon attack? Case in point: a caster (sorc) has a rogue hiding in melee range and defensively casts scorching ray succesfully. Does the rogue get an attack of opportunity for the ranged attack, or since the caster made the casting defensively check does it not provoke? Another thought to think about would be does the single action of casting a spell warrent two attacks of opportunity? Thanks in advance for your input.
rambaldi 01-21-08, 03:26 AM	Always thought 1 AoO for the cast therefore if you cast defensively you dont provoke even though it is ranged
kelvinaw273 01-21-08, 04:44 AM	I agree, otherwise defensive casting and combat casting are pointless - why bother avoiding the AoO for casting the spell if you only get hit when directing it? Unlike a ranged weapon, a ray does not require you to go through the mechanics of raising and steadying a weapon to shoot, you just (at most) point your finger at the target, or even just look at them.
Merestil Haye 01-21-08, 07:11 AM	There has been a bit of debate about this. It appears that spells with ranged attacks are subject to all relevant rules regarding ranged weapons, and that this would include provoking an AoO for making a ranged attack in a threatened area. This would not be avoided by defensive casting, because it's not one of the things defensive casting protects against. (My analogy is this : when you multiply two numbers together, is the product odd or even? It's odd if, and only if, both numbers are odd. Similarly you provoke when casting a spell and you provoke when making a ranged attack in a threatened area.) To avoid this AoO, don't cast a spell requiring a ranged attack in a threatened area, or find a way to make such attacks in threatened areas without provoking. (There's a PrC that removes the AoO when firing a bow; maybe you can write up a suitable class?
rambaldi 01-21-08, 07:49 AM	If you read the description in the combat section for "casting on the defensive" it sounds like even though you hae to aim the spell. Attacks of Opportunity: Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a Concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + spell level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don�t provoke attacks of opportunity. Casting on the Defensive: Casting a spell while on the defensive does not provoke an attack of opportunity. It does, however, require a Concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) to pull off. Failure means that you lose the spell. are simplified versions of what is in the PHB, neither mentions actions you need to take about targeting the spell although the phb does say that "if you succeed your concentration check you are no more vulnerable to attack than you would be if you were just standing there, so casting a spell on the defensive does not provoke an attack of opportunity." It might be getting into semantics but i see the provoked AoO for Attack (ranged) being if you use a ranged weapon rather than making a ranged magic attack. What would happen then for spells that dont require you to make that ranged touch attack or ones that require it only some of the time like fireball? would you only provoke (assuming you succeed on the casting defensively) when trying to shoot it through a narrow passage (such as an arrow slit)
Cifer 01-21-08, 08:09 AM	Whatever you're casting: if you cast defensively, you don't provoke.
kelvinaw273 01-21-08, 08:33 AM	Whatever you're casting: if you cast defensively, you don't provoke. I concur. Launching a ray is not a full standard action, it is the very final part of a standard (or longer) action. If you have avoided an AoO for that standard action, it seems silly to me to invoke one for the final part of it.
Merestil Haye 01-21-08, 09:53 AM	If you read the description in the combat section for "casting on the defensive" it sounds like even though you hae to aim the spell.Targeted spells require no attack rolls. Therefore they do not provoke AoOs. Spells where you simply pick the centre point require no attack rolls. Therefore they do not provoke. Only if the spell requires a ranged attack roll does it provoke. Only then. It might be getting into semantics but i see the provoked AoO for Attack (ranged) being if you use a ranged weapon rather than making a ranged magic attack.The designers intent is that all relevant rules for using ranged weapons apply to spells requiring ranged attack rolls. You count as using a ranged weapon for purposes of delivering critical hits, sneak attacks and so on, and for downsides. What would happen then for spells that dont require you to make that ranged touch attack or ones that require it only some of the time like fireball? would you only provoke (assuming you succeed on the casting defensively) when trying to shoot it through a narrow passage (such as an arrow slit)Yes, exactly. If you make a ranged attack, you provoke. If you do not, you don't. It's that simple.
Merestil Haye 01-21-08, 10:01 AM	Whatever you're casting: if you cast defensively, you don't provoke.I can't agree with this. Casting defensively means you do not provoke an AoO for casting the spell. It says nothing about avoiding an AoO for making a ranged attack. Why should that not provoke? I concur. Launching a ray is not a full standard action, it is the very final part of a standard (or longer) action. If you have avoided an AoO for that standard action, it seems silly to me to invoke one for the final part of it.The precedent from the rules is that you provoke an AoO whenever you take any action that provokes. This is so even if you do something that does not provoke itself, but entails doing something that does provoke. Aid Another, for example. Do you consider that you provoke an AoO when using Manyshot? If so, why? According to your argument, you have performed an action that does not provoke (the Use Feat action) and therefore should not provoke just because the last thing you do would otherwise provoke.
Anathema 01-21-08, 10:38 AM	I can definately see the logic of rays (and other ranged touch attacks) provoking an AoO simply because they are treated in most other ways as ranged attacks. However, it just doesn't track with me and I would not really have it in my game. I would advise, though, that if your game does have ranged touch attacks provoke that the damage from the AoO doesn't risk someone losing the spell. They've already made their concentration check to cast, so they should be allowed to get the spell off.
Lemurion 01-21-08, 11:19 AM	It's double dinging and I'd let the defensive casting block the AoO. Otherwise to be fair you'd also have to allow 2 AoO's per spell if one cast such a spell normally. (Provided those threatening had the relevant feats).
BalogTheFierce 01-21-08, 11:28 AM	To those who claim that rays should provoke an AoO because they are 'ranged' weapons, should they also be getting benefits of feats such as Point Blank Shot, Far Shot, etc.? Or do they need to use the standard Empower spell, Extend spell feats? I know that you can already select Weapon Focus (Rays) Can they use both? So Weapon focus & Point Blank will give me a +2 bonus when casting at distances under 30'? If we're going to call rays a ranged attack where do we end of drawing the line of the can of worms? It seems to me this really is just a simple matter of semantics and, personally, doesn't make much sense to me to separate out rays from the other kinds of spells. It adds unneeded confusion and rules lawyering and usually not to the benefit of the players. I'd house-over-rule this one for the sake of my own sanity.
Millet 01-21-08, 01:23 PM	It seems that the ray will provoke an attack of opportunity, if you read from the rules. For a realistic justification, you have to go through the motions of aiming. It's hard to point your finger at someone so that a straight line from the finger will hit that person. Especially when the distance is greater than 10'. If the ray comes from your eyes, well you have to stare at that person to aim the ray. I could see both these things being distracting.
iserith 01-21-08, 01:33 PM	To those who claim that rays should provoke an AoO because they are 'ranged' weapons, should they also be getting benefits of feats such as Point Blank Shot, Far Shot, etc.? Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot can be applied to rays. Far Shot cannot. See "Wepaonlike Spells" in Complete Arcane, page 72. A ray is a ranged touch attack and therefore subject to AOO in my games, even when cast on the defensive. In fact, if you didn't cast on the defensive for whatever reason, you'd could conceivable take two AOOs from the attacker if they had Combat Reflexes since the two AOOs were triggered by separate events (a spell and a ranged attack). In my game, anyway, which as far as I know is in line with the rules as written. It helps if you don't try to apply real world logic to a game involving magic and just do what the books say.
lifeblender 01-21-08, 03:45 PM	No, you do not still provoke an AoO for casting a ray defensively. Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, ... <snip> AIM, not USE. The usage (i.e. casting) of a ray is just like any other spell. Aiming a ranged weapon is not what provokes AoOs. It's the concentration on a distant point during the entire action, momentarily ignoring one's surroundings, which makes ranged weapon attacks provoke AoOs. For spells, you do the same thing, ignore one's surroundings, because you're concentrating on the spell, and the Concentration mechanic already handles that time period. The aiming of a spell, any spell, is momentary compared to the time spent casting it. As an example, note that spells with long casting times like Summon Monster # are aimed at the moment of completion. Only that moment, that tiny sliver of the action, involves aiming.
Cifer 01-21-08, 06:52 PM	Further, please compare the actions: A wizard points a finger. An archer has both his hands on his bow and can only take very few evasive steps without ruining his entire shot.
Crimson_Concerto 01-21-08, 11:56 PM	Casting a spell provokes an AoO. Making a ranged attack provokes an AoO. If you do both, you provoke two AoOs. If you move out of threatened space in that same turn, you provoke another AoO for a total of three. :P
weasel0 01-22-08, 12:12 AM	But there arn't two separate actions here. An attack roll is PART of casting the spell. You can only provoke 1 AoO from a single action. It's the same as running around 1 opponent on the feild. Each time you leave a threatened square, you risk an AoO except that moving as such only provokes 1 AoO by RAW so you can move all your movement around the same enemy(say human 30', double move) 1.5 times(assuming enemy is medium) and you only provoke 1 AoO from him. Now yes, there are 2 different things that can provoke AoOs in the act(singular) of casting a ray spell, however, it is only 1 act and thusly only can provoke 1 AoO and casting on the defensive protects you from AoOs.
Wih 01-22-08, 12:34 AM	Keep in mind that you can only generate one AoO for doing an action - the examlpe given is that you can't generate multiple AoOs for one move action (ie. running circles around someone), but this extends to other actions too. You only generate one AoO for casting a ray spell, even though you technically generate two - casting the spell and firing the ranged attack. If you cast defensively, then there's no one AoO. Simple.
BoMan316 01-22-08, 11:38 PM	Taking that into account then wouldn't you generate the AOO for the attack? you casted defensively so you didn't provoke, but you still generate an AOO it doesn't matter if you can avoid it, as per the example, they only get one, well the attacker is only getting one AOO for the action of casting the ranged spell? And as per an AOO you generate two, BUT who decides which one? could the attacker choose not to take the casting one and then take the ranged attack one? and another question i have is, it says you aim the ray spell as a ranged weapon, where in the rules does it talk about aiming a ranged weapon, it only talks about ranged attacks, i think if there was a clear definition then it would be very useful in interpreting the rules.
Thubby 01-22-08, 11:56 PM	Further, please compare the actions: A wizard points a finger. An archer has both his hands on his bow and can only take very few evasive steps without ruining his entire shot. handguns suck in closed quarters. (military and police procedure is to actually push the attacker away before anything else) any ranged weapon is extremely difficult to use at close range, not because of the weapon itself, but because of the accuracy, an arrow/bullet/ray will only hit a space smaller than a quarter going straight out, now try to hit in any way with that while being attacked and still defending yourself... melee weapons on the other hand hit an area, a sword will hit anything in its swinging arc. ya, i would make it 2 AoOs.
Ayzain 01-23-08, 03:51 AM	Pointing a finger is a free action. I'm sorry, but if you can do a jig and sing a tune (verbal and somatic components) without being attacked (ie, successful defensive casting), one more gesture won't provoke an attack. Many are invisioning a caster reaching their arm out in some dramatic fasion, pointing at the target only once their arm is extended and ready to be hacked off by the advancing orc horde. This is movie cinema bowling over common sense. One need only point for a fraction of a second; the actual duration of the beam is instantaneous. How can one dance and sing without being attacked, then flick towards a target and suddenly be vulnerable?
Cifer 01-23-08, 04:49 AM	melee weapons on the other hand hit an area, a sword will hit anything in its swinging arc. So piercing weapons provoke AoOs now?
Dei 01-23-08, 09:20 AM	Simple answer, no. If you got an AOO for aiming a ray you'd also get an AOO for something like a fireball spell. The spell description specifically states you point your finger as part of casting the spell. Most ray spells don't even go as far as to mention this action and the ray could simply originate from some point in the weave around you while you perform the somatic gestures. The AoO for casting a spell is because you need to steady yourself and focus your attention on your targets rather than to the combat around you. Aiming a spell, be it ray, area effect or single target requires you to focus your attention on that person/point and the ability to do this without drawing attacks of opportunity is what defensive casting is for. If pointing at a point in space and focusing on range, distance and height does not provoke an attack of opportunity then neither does pointing your finger/throwing out your hands/channeling a magic ray through your eyes. Aiming a spell is included in the process of casting it, it states on page 174 of the players handbook that target, range, area, etc are all determined simultaneously with the casting being completed. You can only draw one AoO per action from each target threatening you (phb 137), aiming the spell is not a seperate action and thus cannot provoke another attack of opportunity on top of the one you avoided by casting defensively.
Axiomatic_vampire 01-23-08, 10:23 AM	But there arn't two separate actions here. An attack roll is PART of casting the spell. You can only provoke 1 AoO from a single action. It's the same as running around 1 opponent on the feild. Each time you leave a threatened square, you risk an AoO except that moving as such only provokes 1 AoO by RAW so you can move all your movement around the same enemy(say human 30', double move) 1.5 times(assuming enemy is medium) and you only provoke 1 AoO from him. Now yes, there are 2 different things that can provoke AoOs in the act(singular) of casting a ray spell, however, it is only 1 act and thusly only can provoke 1 AoO and casting on the defensive protects you from AoOs. That's analogous to claiming that taking a protected five foot step would protect a character from taking an attack of opportunity while attempting a grapple (or any other special attack action). Since the five foot step is a free "part" of the grapple attempt, by your reasoning improved grapple isn't needed, just the step avoids the AoO.
Thubby 01-23-08, 10:30 AM	So piercing weapons provoke AoOs now? an attack with a piercing weapon can be any number of actual thrusts (and piercing weapon styles often rely on it) , as shooting only uses 1 ammo, it can only be 1 shot. as to the "its just a finger", its still a projectile weapon, aiming down your arm is the most accurate way to shoot it. there is a reason hip shots don't hit, its because they are a lousy way to aim.
Dei 01-23-08, 10:34 AM	That's analogous to claiming that taking a protected five foot step would protect a character from taking an attack of opportunity while attempting a grapple (or any other special attack action). Since the five foot step is a free "part" of the grapple attempt, by your reasoning improved grapple isn't needed, just the step avoids the AoO. Er, no, it's not analogous at all. The spellcaster makes his attack roll while casting the spell. The grappler takes his five foot step and then attempts to grapple.The five foot step is a completely seperate action. The attack roll on the spell is made as part of the action. The five foot step may be a free action but it is still a seperate action from the grapple and thus has no effect on it at all
Dei 01-23-08, 10:46 AM	an attack with a piercing weapon can be any number of actual thrusts (and piercing weapon styles often rely on it) , as shooting only uses 1 ammo, it can only be 1 shot. as to the "its just a finger", its still a projectile weapon, aiming down your arm is the most accurate way to shoot it. there is a reason hip shots don't hit, its because they are a lousy way to aim. If you want to start using that logic then actually no, that's completely incorrect. Aiming down the arm is actually a very bad way to aim as it starts from the shoulder meaning that your perspective looking down it is always going to be skewed as well as the structure of joints meaning that it is almost impossible to get a perfectly straight line along it. Why do you think sniper scopes are designed to extend from the eye? A far better way to aim something like a ray would be to bring your hand as close to your face as possible and sight down the finger itself as if it were an aforementioned scope. This is a very small movement and would certainly be no more AOO provoking than the ordinary somatic components which have been avoided by casting defensively.
Zombie_Babies 01-23-08, 11:07 AM	Related question: Do rays from Spell Like Abilities provoke AOOs? For instance, if a Beholder is trying to disintigrate you within your reach do you get an AOO?
Axiomatic_vampire 01-23-08, 11:19 AM	Related question: Do rays from Spell Like Abilities provoke AOOs? For instance, if a Beholder is trying to disintigrate you within your reach do you get an AOO? Aren't those Supernatural? As such, no. Actual spell-like abilities, yes.
Zombie_Babies 01-23-08, 11:29 AM	Aren't those Supernatural? As such, no. Actual spell-like abilities, yes. Ahh. Forgot that bit. Thank you.
CrimsonDeath 01-23-08, 11:55 AM	It seems that the ray will provoke an attack of opportunity, if you read from the rules. For a realistic justification, you have to go through the motions of aiming. It's hard to point your finger at someone so that a straight line from the finger will hit that person. Especially when the distance is greater than 10'. If the ray comes from your eyes, well you have to stare at that person to aim the ray. I could see both these things being distracting. What if the guy you're pointing/staring at is right next to you (that is, close enough to threaten you in melee)? What if he's the only guy that close to you? Is pointing at the guy somehow less of a credible threat than attempting to touch him with a held touch spell charge (which explicitly does not provoke AOOs)? Does staring/pointing at the guy somehow distract you from paying attention to the guy you're staring/pointing at? That's analogous to claiming that taking a protected five foot step would protect a character from taking an attack of opportunity while attempting a grapple (or any other special attack action). Since the five foot step is a free "part" of the grapple attempt, by your reasoning improved grapple isn't needed, just the step avoids the AoO. Uh... No, it isn't the same at all. Can you initiate a grapple without taking a 5' step? Yes. Which means the 5' step isn't part of the grapple attack action. Can you cast an Effect: Ray spell without making an attack roll? No. Which means the attack roll is part of the spellcasting action. Aren't those Supernatural? As such, no. Actual spell-like abilities, yes. Wait, what? It may be a Supernatural ability, but a Beholder's Eye Rays are still ranged attacks. If making a ranged attack with a spell effect provokes an AOO (even if the spell is cast defensively), then making a ranged attack with a Supernatural ability provokes an AOO (even though the supernatural ability itself doesn't provoke). What's good for the goose is good for the gander. (I don't think either one provokes an AOO, but you can't argue one way for one situation and the other way for the other.)
Dei 01-23-08, 12:13 PM	Related question: Do rays from Spell Like Abilities provoke AOOs? For instance, if a Beholder is trying to disintigrate you within your reach do you get an AOO? Well the beholder eye rays wouldn't provoke attacks of opportunity because they're free actions. It mentions in the PHB that casting spells that are free actions does not provoke an AoO (it uses feather fall as an example) but can be applied to anything cast as a free action. Any spell like ability that takes a move or standard action will indeed provoke an attack of opportunity though as they require the same focus as casting the spell normally. However the user of the spell like ability can make a concentration check as normal.
BoMan316 01-23-08, 03:53 PM	Dei, your analogy is that me moving around someone provokes only one AOO, because it is all the same action. but casting a ray requires 2 parts part one: casting the spell, which provokes and attack of opportunity Part two: aiming the spell "as a raged weapon" which also provokes. The two parts are separate actions and as such should become two AOO, because they are separate. as per aiming is part of the spell, it specifically says under ray on 175 that you must aim it like a ranged weapon, and doing that provokes as far as i can tell. the only thing i cannot be 100% sure of is if aiming the ranged weapon provokes the AOO, or if it is Firing the weapon which provokes it. as far as i can tell there is nowhere in PHB where it deals with aiming a ranged weapon, only attacking with them, which is what leads me to agree with the second AOO. MY previous i asked if we agree that it provoked 2 AOO as per rules, but only one can be because it is only 1 action, then who decides which one is the one that provokes? because if it is the caster we know which it will be, if it is the melee we know which one it will be, so is it the dm's discretion? or is there a specific order we have to follow?
Dei 01-23-08, 04:19 PM	as per aiming is part of the spell, it specifically says under ray on 175 that you must aim it like a ranged weapon, and doing that provokes as far as i can tell. the only thing i cannot be 100% sure of is if aiming the ranged weapon provokes the AOO, or if it is Firing the weapon which provokes it. as far as i can tell there is nowhere in PHB where it deals with aiming a ranged weapon, only attacking with them, which is what leads me to agree with the second AOO. Yeah, there's no section because aiming is considered part of the action that requires the aiming. I make an attack with my bow, aiming it is included in the act of drawing a fresh arrow, notching it to the string on my bow, pulling the bow taut and letting fly. I aim a spell as if it were my bow, aiming is included in the act of retrieving the material components, chanting the necessary vocal components and is in effect a final somatic gesture. If you were to say aiming was seperate from the act involving you to require aiming then spells such as arrowmind and similar effects that allow you to use ranged weapons in melee without AoOs would be useless. "I shoot at him." "He get's an AoO." "No, I've got arrowmind up, I can attack with ranged weapons in melee without provoking." "Oh he's not AoOing you for attacking, he's AoOing you for aiming." Aiming is a part of any action performed at range and any conditions applying to that action in relation to AoOs apply to its aiming too. As a previous poster said, if I can perform a song and dance routine and not provoke I think I can point my finger at the end of it without provoking.
Anathema 01-23-08, 04:49 PM	After carefully reading and considering the arguments in this thread, I have come to a definitive conclusion for me and my games; it only provokes once. Dei, your analogy is that me moving around someone provokes only one AOO, because it is all the same action. but casting a ray requires 2 parts part one: casting the spell, which provokes and attack of opportunity Part two: aiming the spell "as a raged weapon" which also provokes. The two parts are separate actions and as such should become two AOO, because they are separate. It obviously can be argued that casting a spell has two 'parts', but it's all part of the same action; the standard action you take to cast the spell. We're talking about a game defined term of action here, and not the colloquial definition of what an action is. In D&D, you have a standard action to take during your round, in which you have chosen to cast a spell. Aiming the spell is part of that action. You could have used that standard action to fire a bow, in which aiming is part of that action. The difference here is that in the first example you have used your action to cast a spell, and in the second exampel you have used your action to fire a ranged weapon. Aiming is a part of both (hence the d20 roll), but aiming is not what provokes; what you choose to do with your action is what provokes. In the first case you choose to cast a spell, in the second case you choose to fire a bow. Just because you aim as part of either of the above action examples doesn't mean that they are treated the same when it comes to every rule. Some rules, yes, but not every rule. This particular bit (about how some rules apply and some don't) can be best illustrated when talking of applying ranged weapon feats to ray's and how they are called weapon-like spells; and I see the implication is clear. They're weapons in some ways, and not weapons in other ways. A ray is a way of adjudicating an attack with a spell that doesn't come down to saving throws. Making an attack roll is part of the spell, just as using material components is, or forcing a save. They're all part of the same action that the caster has taken to cast the spell of his choice; and thus, the only action that provokes is the one that he took -- casting a spell. Edit: Put simply, my position is that "Actions provoke. Parts of actions do not."
Urithair 01-23-08, 05:21 PM	So does a 11th level caster provoke 3 AOO when casting scorching ray? :P By RAW there is no AOO, look at table 8-2 on page 141 of the PHB. There is a difference between an attack made by a spell and the 'standard action: attack' listed. Just because you make an attack roll doesn't mean it is the 'standard action: attack (ranged or melee)'. Of course, RAW doesn't make sense, because a strict interpretation also shows that a full attack action doesn't provoke, and a full attack can be ranged, so a ranged full attack doesn't provoke an AAO, while a standard action ranged attack does :eek: This is absurd, but RAW :rolleyes: The real heart of the matter (RAW-wise) is the text for 'Touch Attacks' under the 'Cast a Spell' section, found on the same page. First it says that the touch attacks don't provoke, THEN it divides them between melee and ranged. In order for the ranged attack to provoke the text would have to make another distinction, which it doesn't. Therefore, neither melee nor ranged touch attacks provoke when they are done as part of a spell. RAW, anyway. Everyone knows you can't blindly follow RAW, though. The big difference between shooting someone with a bolt of eldritch energy and shooting them with an arrow or throwing a knife is that the eldritch energy is a touch attack, you don't have to aim around their armor. Makes it a lot easier to aim. It is the difference of throwing a rock at someone in fullplate to do some damage, and throwing a water balloon at someone fullplate to get them wet. Which is going to require more concentration and aim? I would rule that non-spell ranged touch attacks such as acid vials don't provoke AOO.
weasel0 01-23-08, 07:25 PM	That's analogous to claiming that taking a protected five foot step would protect a character from taking an attack of opportunity while attempting a grapple (or any other special attack action). Since the five foot step is a free "part" of the grapple attempt, by your reasoning improved grapple isn't needed, just the step avoids the AoO. While one could interpret the step into a grappled opponents square as a true "5' step", the rules specify that it still provokes for everyone else as an exception to the normal rules. No where does the cast description specify that the attack role still provokes for everyone else around and so remains faithful to the original -can only provoke once per action- ruling.
rambaldi 01-24-08, 01:03 AM	While one could interpret the step into a grappled opponents square as a true "5' step", the rules specify that it still provokes for everyone else as an exception to the normal rules. No where does the cast description specify that the attack role still provokes for everyone else around and so remains faithful to the original -can only provoke once per action- ruling. dont know the grapple rules + improved grapple off by heart and i dont have my books with me but wouldnt 1 of the AoOs be due to moving into a square occupied by an apponent rather than moving out of a threatened square