AoO for healing??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

AoO for healing??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Sornfang
12-12-06, 12:43 AM So I am playing in a game, and our DM has ruled that since nothing states that you do not provoke an AoO from touching an ally with a healing spell, that you provoke an AoO. Is it stated anywhere that using a touch spell does not provoke an AoO, or is our DM correct and healing while threatned has just become detrimental to our clerics well being???
Salla
12-12-06, 12:49 AM I'm not sure QUITE what you're asking, so I'll ramble a bit ...

Casting a healing spell is just like casting any other spell, so if you cast it without Casting Defensively, you do indeed provoke an Attack of Opportunity. However, just because an Attack of Opportunity is provoked does not mean it must be taken. If my comrade casts a spell while adjacent to me, I *could* take an AoO on him, but it's a rare day there's a reason to.
TheChilliGod
12-12-06, 12:54 AM If my comrade casts a spell while adjacent to me, I *could* take an AoO on him, but it's a rare day there's a reason to.Cleric: "Hey! You're injured! Cure Light Wounds!
Fighter: "No, you fool! I've taken the Tomb-tainted Soul feat! Get that Cure away from me!"
Cleric: "Too late! I have to cure you now!" :smirk:
Fighter: "That's it!" *Stabbity*
Cleric: "Urk!"

You wouldn't believe how many times this scenario has played itself out in a campaign I play in.
Salla
12-12-06, 12:58 AM Cleric: "Hey! You're injured! Cure Light Wounds!
Fighter: "No, you fool! I've taken the Tomb-tainted Soul feat! Get that Cure away from me!"
Cleric: "Too late! I have to cure you now!" :smirk:
Fighter: "That's it!" *Stabbity*
Cleric: "Urk!"

You wouldn't believe how many times this scenario has played itself out in a campaign I play in.

You're right, I wouldn't. :) But, that's why I said 'a rare day' rather than 'never'. I figure there's an excuse out there somewhere.
Neratos
12-12-06, 12:59 AM No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned. Basically, if your DM wants to be a bastard and rule this way, tell him that all touch spells now provoke when you touch someone. Also, tell him a monk provokes using the same logic. It is a stupid ruling, show him the combat section of the players and instruct him to read it.
Salla
12-12-06, 01:07 AM No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned. Basically, if your DM wants to be a bastard and rule this way, tell him that all touch spells now provoke when you touch someone. Also, tell him a monk provokes using the same logic. It is a stupid ruling, show him the combat section of the players and instruct him to read it.

I wouldn't actually consider Cures to be weapon-like spells, because they don't do damage (which also means you cannot critically hit or sneak attack with them, a silly concept that comes up about once every two weeks). I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure.
Sphyre
12-12-06, 01:07 AM No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned.

Truth.

-Casting the spell non-defensively provokes an AoO
-Using a touch attack against some with a range touch spell charge is considered armed and does not provoke an AoO.
Doc225
12-12-06, 01:40 AM My guess is the OP means that he and the person he is trying to heal are threatened by an enemy.

If this is the case, here are your answers:

1: You do not provoke an AoO for attempting a touch atack with a spell.

2: You do provoke if you cast while threatened.

3: If you cast defensively, you do not provoke, but need to make a concentration check to not lose your spell.

It is that simple.
Toloran
12-12-06, 01:56 AM My guess is the OP means that he and the person he is trying to heal are threatened by an enemy.

If this is the case, here are your answers:

1: You do not provoke an AoO for attempting a touch atack with a spell.

2: You do provoke if you cast while threatened.

3: If you cast defensively, you do not provoke, but need to make a concentration check to not lose your spell.

It is that simple.
This is correct, its the casting of a spell that provokes the attack of oppertunity not the melee touch attack itself.
1hitparry
12-12-06, 01:58 AM I wouldn't actually consider Cures to be weapon-like spells, because they don't do damage (which also means you cannot critically hit or sneak attack with them, a silly concept that comes up about once every two weeks). I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure.

Obviously you haven't fought undead before. XD

Seriously, can you cast, move, then touch to heal?
Neratos
12-12-06, 02:42 AM You can touch allies as a free action with a spell. The ally makes no attempt to avoid the touch, hence no roll vs AC. This is why, you can caste a cure spell, then move, then touch them and cure them.
Sphyre
12-12-06, 03:13 AM You can touch allies as a free action with a spell. The ally makes no attempt to avoid the touch, hence no roll vs AC. This is why, you can caste a cure spell, then move, then touch them and cure them.

Apparently, only in the round you cast it.

Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell.

Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can’t hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell.

Touch attacks don't "become free" if someone's willing to be hit by it, it still takes the time and effort to touch. Even then, the cast, move, and touch is more of a "Well it doesn't say I can't" mentality rather than explained by the rules as that. It does say "within reach."

Being that casting defensively is pretty easy it makes most of my clarification moot. Nor do I see at all that imbalancing to make touches free actions on rounds that you cast them.
Zherog
12-12-06, 08:32 AM AEven then, the cast, move, and touch is more of a "Well it doesn't say I can't" mentality rather than explained by the rules as that. It does say "within reach."

No, the rules explicitly say that somewhere. I'll try and dig out the quote later on.

You absolutely can cast, move up to your speed, and touch your target in one round.

Or you you can deliver the touch as a standard action in another round.
Sphyre
12-12-06, 08:51 AM No, the rules explicitly say that somewhere. I'll try and dig out the quote later on.

You absolutely can cast, move up to your speed, and touch your target in one round.

Or you you can deliver the touch as a standard action in another round.

Thanks, I've probably missed it somewhere, when you have the time I'd appriciate it if you can dig it out, as I've obviously missed it. I don't know why I can't find it.
Zherog
12-12-06, 01:53 PM This comes from the "Standard Actions" section of the combat chapter of the SRD:

Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Sphyre
12-12-06, 08:59 PM Many thanks.
pedro2112
12-12-06, 10:35 PM In a similar vein.. what about the receipient of the healing spell? If he is in melee in a square threatened by an enemy, does his foe get an AoO while he stops what he is doing to receive the touch attack? I recall a previous rule (or perhaps it was a houserule?) from 2nd ed in which the cleric had to make a touch attack against the target of the healing spell if such target was in combat.
Knight9910
12-12-06, 11:33 PM I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure.

You must have never fought undead before. Trying to cast Cure on an undead functions exactly the same way as casting Inflict on a living being. You have to roll to touch.
Sphyre
12-13-06, 12:23 AM In a similar vein.. what about the receipient of the healing spell? If he is in melee in a square threatened by an enemy, does his foe get an AoO while he stops what he is doing to receive the touch attack? I recall a previous rule (or perhaps it was a houserule?) from 2nd ed in which the cleric had to make a touch attack against the target of the healing spell if such target was in combat.

No, he does provoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally.

You can touch allies without attack rolls because they do not attempt to dodge, and actually sometimes attempt to make you touch them.

As for it being 2e? I don't know. I just know no such rule exists in 3.5. (and 3e)
Salla
12-13-06, 12:56 AM You must have never fought undead before. Trying to cast Cure on an undead functions exactly the same way as casting Inflict on a living being. You have to roll to touch.

I have, I've just never tried to use a Cure to damage them before. I prefer the more personal 'mace to the face' approach when I play a cleric. :)

Besides, while it's technically a Cure spell, it's being used as an Inflict due to the inversion there. I'll clarify: I've never seen a DM call for a to-hit roll for a cure on a willing target.
pedro2112
12-13-06, 02:44 AM No, he does provoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally.
(and 3e)

Now you've lost me. What do you mean?
Zherog
12-13-06, 08:43 AM I think Sphyre accidentally forgot the word "not." It should read, "No, he does notprovoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally."
1hitparry
12-13-06, 11:38 AM [W]hile it's technically a Cure spell, it's being used as an Inflict due to the inversion there.

Cure and Inflict are two separate spells, the former uses positive energy, the latter uses negative energy. Just because a cleric uses Cure on a skeleton to damage it with positive energy does not mean the Cure spell suddenly switches to Inflict and the skeleton suddenly takes damage from negative energy normally.

I'll clarify: I've never seen a DM call for a to-hit roll for a cure on a willing target.

I wonder if you can ask your DM to roll to-hit just so you can try to critical a cure.
Zherog
12-13-06, 11:58 AM Nope. In order for a spell to critical it must meet two criteria:

1) Require an attack roll
2) Inflict damage

If you had an ability that allowed you to inflict critical damage on undead, you could absolutely score a critical with a cure light wounds in that situation.
Salla
12-13-06, 01:21 PM Cure and Inflict are two separate spells, the former uses positive energy, the latter uses negative energy. Just because a cleric uses Cure on a skeleton to damage it with positive energy does not mean the Cure spell suddenly switches to Inflict and the skeleton suddenly takes damage from negative energy normally.

Yes, but you're not using it to cure, you're using it as a weapon. You're using it to inflict damage, which is why it requires an attack roll, where as curing someone does not. That's what I was trying to get at.

I wonder if you can ask your DM to roll to-hit just so you can try to critical a cure.

No. Nor can you try to sneak attack them with a cure.
Mindolin
12-13-06, 01:57 PM Sorry if it's getting a little silly here, but say you're a Rogue/Cleric Multiclass or Gestalt. You cast Gravestrike, or whatever that was that allowed you to sneak attack Undead, then cast a Cure Critical Wounds and used it on an undead you took a five foot step towards to flank, can you use the Cure Critical Wounds and get sneak attack from it now?
Zherog
12-13-06, 02:47 PM Yep. The spell requires an attack roll, and it inflicts damage; therefore it qualifies for sneak attack.
Tyler Do'Urden
12-13-06, 02:53 PM This comes from the "Standard Actions" section of the combat chapter of the SRD...
I was just talking about that line a few nights ago. Thank you.
Sphyre
12-13-06, 06:48 PM I think Sphyre accidentally forgot the word "not." It should read, "No, he does notprovoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally."

Once again Zherog saves me in this thread.. :bow:

*Runs away from the evil thread making him prone to error*
Zherog
12-13-06, 09:06 PM If you run away, we get an attack of opportunity. And if you're prone, we get another one when you stand up.

:D
Sphyre
12-13-06, 09:51 PM If you run away, we get an attack of opportunity. And if you're prone, we get another one when you stand up.

:D

Ah, but you'd get the AoO for having me stand up before my moving, if I were already prone. In which case unless you had combat reflexes you wouldn't be able to take the second AoO.

But that doesn't matter because I'm not prone :P

And unless you have reach, I can use the withdrawl action, in which case if you do (I can tell because you're either really big with long arms or weilding a reach weapon) I can cast defensively dimension door, or quickened dimension door. :tongue:

Or better yet I simply can cast dominate person on you and provoke all the AoOs I want from you and you won't take any of them. :evillaugh In fact, you could protect me as I leave the thread!
Zherog
12-13-06, 09:59 PM Must.... protect... sphyre...
Newpaintbrush
12-14-06, 01:13 AM 1. This whole thing about "the book doesn't say you can't" from the first post - no. First, the Player's Handbook DOES say that touch spells don't provoke attacks of opportunity. Second, if that's the logic that's used, the book NEVER says that "Fighters do not get to cast a quickened Wish spell every time they critical." I DEFY anyone to find anything like that in the Player's Handbook. Third, even if your DM is wrong, your DM is always right, and hopefully your DM isn't dumb.

2. Touching an ally is not a problem unless your ally is grappling, or trying to avoid your touch for some reason, or if you just can't reach your ally (i.e. your ally is suspended thirty feet in the air, and you can't jump that high, or if your ally has been swallowed whole or something like that).
Zherog
12-14-06, 08:43 AM First, the Player's Handbook DOES say that touch spells don't provoke attacks of opportunity.

I'm gonna nit pick your statement ever so slightly. The PHB says there's no AoO from delivering a touch spell. Casting the spell itself still provokes as normal.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sornfang 12-12-06, 12:43 AM	So I am playing in a game, and our DM has ruled that since nothing states that you do not provoke an AoO from touching an ally with a healing spell, that you provoke an AoO. Is it stated anywhere that using a touch spell does not provoke an AoO, or is our DM correct and healing while threatned has just become detrimental to our clerics well being???
Salla 12-12-06, 12:49 AM	I'm not sure QUITE what you're asking, so I'll ramble a bit ... Casting a healing spell is just like casting any other spell, so if you cast it without Casting Defensively, you do indeed provoke an Attack of Opportunity. However, just because an Attack of Opportunity is provoked does not mean it must be taken. If my comrade casts a spell while adjacent to me, I could take an AoO on him, but it's a rare day there's a reason to.
TheChilliGod 12-12-06, 12:54 AM	If my comrade casts a spell while adjacent to me, I could take an AoO on him, but it's a rare day there's a reason to.Cleric: "Hey! You're injured! Cure Light Wounds! Fighter: "No, you fool! I've taken the Tomb-tainted Soul feat! Get that Cure away from me!" Cleric: "Too late! I have to cure you now!" :smirk: Fighter: "That's it!" Stabbity Cleric: "Urk!" You wouldn't believe how many times this scenario has played itself out in a campaign I play in.
Salla 12-12-06, 12:58 AM	Cleric: "Hey! You're injured! Cure Light Wounds! Fighter: "No, you fool! I've taken the Tomb-tainted Soul feat! Get that Cure away from me!" Cleric: "Too late! I have to cure you now!" :smirk: Fighter: "That's it!" Stabbity Cleric: "Urk!" You wouldn't believe how many times this scenario has played itself out in a campaign I play in. You're right, I wouldn't. :) But, that's why I said 'a rare day' rather than 'never'. I figure there's an excuse out there somewhere.
Neratos 12-12-06, 12:59 AM	No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned. Basically, if your DM wants to be a bastard and rule this way, tell him that all touch spells now provoke when you touch someone. Also, tell him a monk provokes using the same logic. It is a stupid ruling, show him the combat section of the players and instruct him to read it.
Salla 12-12-06, 01:07 AM	No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned. Basically, if your DM wants to be a bastard and rule this way, tell him that all touch spells now provoke when you touch someone. Also, tell him a monk provokes using the same logic. It is a stupid ruling, show him the combat section of the players and instruct him to read it. I wouldn't actually consider Cures to be weapon-like spells, because they don't do damage (which also means you cannot critically hit or sneak attack with them, a silly concept that comes up about once every two weeks). I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure.
Sphyre 12-12-06, 01:07 AM	No, touching a person with a cure spell does not provoke an attack of oppertunity. A touch range spell (which all cures normally are) are considered weapon like spells, and there in do not provoke when used as such. The casting of the spell provokes, but this is covered by casting on the defensive as previously mentioned. Truth. -Casting the spell non-defensively provokes an AoO -Using a touch attack against some with a range touch spell charge is considered armed and does not provoke an AoO.
Doc225 12-12-06, 01:40 AM	My guess is the OP means that he and the person he is trying to heal are threatened by an enemy. If this is the case, here are your answers: 1: You do not provoke an AoO for attempting a touch atack with a spell. 2: You do provoke if you cast while threatened. 3: If you cast defensively, you do not provoke, but need to make a concentration check to not lose your spell. It is that simple.
Toloran 12-12-06, 01:56 AM	My guess is the OP means that he and the person he is trying to heal are threatened by an enemy. If this is the case, here are your answers: 1: You do not provoke an AoO for attempting a touch atack with a spell. 2: You do provoke if you cast while threatened. 3: If you cast defensively, you do not provoke, but need to make a concentration check to not lose your spell. It is that simple. This is correct, its the casting of a spell that provokes the attack of oppertunity not the melee touch attack itself.
1hitparry 12-12-06, 01:58 AM	I wouldn't actually consider Cures to be weapon-like spells, because they don't do damage (which also means you cannot critically hit or sneak attack with them, a silly concept that comes up about once every two weeks). I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure. Obviously you haven't fought undead before. XD Seriously, can you cast, move, then touch to heal?
Neratos 12-12-06, 02:42 AM	You can touch allies as a free action with a spell. The ally makes no attempt to avoid the touch, hence no roll vs AC. This is why, you can caste a cure spell, then move, then touch them and cure them.
Sphyre 12-12-06, 03:13 AM	You can touch allies as a free action with a spell. The ally makes no attempt to avoid the touch, hence no roll vs AC. This is why, you can caste a cure spell, then move, then touch them and cure them. Apparently, only in the round you cast it. Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can’t hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell. Touch attacks don't "become free" if someone's willing to be hit by it, it still takes the time and effort to touch. Even then, the cast, move, and touch is more of a "Well it doesn't say I can't" mentality rather than explained by the rules as that. It does say "within reach." Being that casting defensively is pretty easy it makes most of my clarification moot. Nor do I see at all that imbalancing to make touches free actions on rounds that you cast them.
Zherog 12-12-06, 08:32 AM	AEven then, the cast, move, and touch is more of a "Well it doesn't say I can't" mentality rather than explained by the rules as that. It does say "within reach." No, the rules explicitly say that somewhere. I'll try and dig out the quote later on. You absolutely can cast, move up to your speed, and touch your target in one round. Or you you can deliver the touch as a standard action in another round.
Sphyre 12-12-06, 08:51 AM	No, the rules explicitly say that somewhere. I'll try and dig out the quote later on. You absolutely can cast, move up to your speed, and touch your target in one round. Or you you can deliver the touch as a standard action in another round. Thanks, I've probably missed it somewhere, when you have the time I'd appriciate it if you can dig it out, as I've obviously missed it. I don't know why I can't find it.
Zherog 12-12-06, 01:53 PM	This comes from the "Standard Actions" section of the combat chapter of the SRD: Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Sphyre 12-12-06, 08:59 PM	Many thanks.
pedro2112 12-12-06, 10:35 PM	In a similar vein.. what about the receipient of the healing spell? If he is in melee in a square threatened by an enemy, does his foe get an AoO while he stops what he is doing to receive the touch attack? I recall a previous rule (or perhaps it was a houserule?) from 2nd ed in which the cleric had to make a touch attack against the target of the healing spell if such target was in combat.
Knight9910 12-12-06, 11:33 PM	I've also never seen a DM require a roll to hit for a Cure. You must have never fought undead before. Trying to cast Cure on an undead functions exactly the same way as casting Inflict on a living being. You have to roll to touch.
Sphyre 12-13-06, 12:23 AM	In a similar vein.. what about the receipient of the healing spell? If he is in melee in a square threatened by an enemy, does his foe get an AoO while he stops what he is doing to receive the touch attack? I recall a previous rule (or perhaps it was a houserule?) from 2nd ed in which the cleric had to make a touch attack against the target of the healing spell if such target was in combat. No, he does provoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally. You can touch allies without attack rolls because they do not attempt to dodge, and actually sometimes attempt to make you touch them. As for it being 2e? I don't know. I just know no such rule exists in 3.5. (and 3e)
Salla 12-13-06, 12:56 AM	You must have never fought undead before. Trying to cast Cure on an undead functions exactly the same way as casting Inflict on a living being. You have to roll to touch. I have, I've just never tried to use a Cure to damage them before. I prefer the more personal 'mace to the face' approach when I play a cleric. :) Besides, while it's technically a Cure spell, it's being used as an Inflict due to the inversion there. I'll clarify: I've never seen a DM call for a to-hit roll for a cure on a willing target.
pedro2112 12-13-06, 02:44 AM	No, he does provoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally. (and 3e) Now you've lost me. What do you mean?
Zherog 12-13-06, 08:43 AM	I think Sphyre accidentally forgot the word "not." It should read, "No, he does notprovoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally."
1hitparry 12-13-06, 11:38 AM	[W]hile it's technically a Cure spell, it's being used as an Inflict due to the inversion there. Cure and Inflict are two separate spells, the former uses positive energy, the latter uses negative energy. Just because a cleric uses Cure on a skeleton to damage it with positive energy does not mean the Cure spell suddenly switches to Inflict and the skeleton suddenly takes damage from negative energy normally. I'll clarify: I've never seen a DM call for a to-hit roll for a cure on a willing target. I wonder if you can ask your DM to roll to-hit just so you can try to critical a cure.
Zherog 12-13-06, 11:58 AM	Nope. In order for a spell to critical it must meet two criteria: 1) Require an attack roll 2) Inflict damage If you had an ability that allowed you to inflict critical damage on undead, you could absolutely score a critical with a cure light wounds in that situation.
Salla 12-13-06, 01:21 PM	Cure and Inflict are two separate spells, the former uses positive energy, the latter uses negative energy. Just because a cleric uses Cure on a skeleton to damage it with positive energy does not mean the Cure spell suddenly switches to Inflict and the skeleton suddenly takes damage from negative energy normally. Yes, but you're not using it to cure, you're using it as a weapon. You're using it to inflict damage, which is why it requires an attack roll, where as curing someone does not. That's what I was trying to get at. I wonder if you can ask your DM to roll to-hit just so you can try to critical a cure. No. Nor can you try to sneak attack them with a cure.
Mindolin 12-13-06, 01:57 PM	Sorry if it's getting a little silly here, but say you're a Rogue/Cleric Multiclass or Gestalt. You cast Gravestrike, or whatever that was that allowed you to sneak attack Undead, then cast a Cure Critical Wounds and used it on an undead you took a five foot step towards to flank, can you use the Cure Critical Wounds and get sneak attack from it now?
Zherog 12-13-06, 02:47 PM	Yep. The spell requires an attack roll, and it inflicts damage; therefore it qualifies for sneak attack.
Tyler Do'Urden 12-13-06, 02:53 PM	This comes from the "Standard Actions" section of the combat chapter of the SRD... I was just talking about that line a few nights ago. Thank you.
Sphyre 12-13-06, 06:48 PM	I think Sphyre accidentally forgot the word "not." It should read, "No, he does notprovoke an AoO by simply declaring someone as his ally." Once again Zherog saves me in this thread.. :bow: Runs away from the evil thread making him prone to error
Zherog 12-13-06, 09:06 PM	If you run away, we get an attack of opportunity. And if you're prone, we get another one when you stand up. :D
Sphyre 12-13-06, 09:51 PM	If you run away, we get an attack of opportunity. And if you're prone, we get another one when you stand up. :D Ah, but you'd get the AoO for having me stand up before my moving, if I were already prone. In which case unless you had combat reflexes you wouldn't be able to take the second AoO. But that doesn't matter because I'm not prone :P And unless you have reach, I can use the withdrawl action, in which case if you do (I can tell because you're either really big with long arms or weilding a reach weapon) I can cast defensively dimension door, or quickened dimension door. :tongue: Or better yet I simply can cast dominate person on you and provoke all the AoOs I want from you and you won't take any of them. :evillaugh In fact, you could protect me as I leave the thread!
Zherog 12-13-06, 09:59 PM	Must.... protect... sphyre...
Newpaintbrush 12-14-06, 01:13 AM	1. This whole thing about "the book doesn't say you can't" from the first post - no. First, the Player's Handbook DOES say that touch spells don't provoke attacks of opportunity. Second, if that's the logic that's used, the book NEVER says that "Fighters do not get to cast a quickened Wish spell every time they critical." I DEFY anyone to find anything like that in the Player's Handbook. Third, even if your DM is wrong, your DM is always right, and hopefully your DM isn't dumb. 2. Touching an ally is not a problem unless your ally is grappling, or trying to avoid your touch for some reason, or if you just can't reach your ally (i.e. your ally is suspended thirty feet in the air, and you can't jump that high, or if your ally has been swallowed whole or something like that).
Zherog 12-14-06, 08:43 AM	First, the Player's Handbook DOES say that touch spells don't provoke attacks of opportunity. I'm gonna nit pick your statement ever so slightly. The PHB says there's no AoO from delivering a touch spell. Casting the spell itself still provokes as normal.