Chained Rays ?

evermind · Sep 3, 2007

Just wondering because a player ran the question by me for his character plan.

Can you actually use the "chain Spell" feat (From "Complete Arcana" , page 76) to create a chain of rays-spells ?
the feat description states that the feat can be applied to
"Any spell that specifies a single target and has a range greater than touch can be chained so as to affect that primary target normally, then arc to a number of secondary targets equal to your caster level. {snip}"

Nothing else in the feat's descriptipn seems to preclude the use of spells, but neither are they explicitly mentioned. Since far too many rays-spelsl do not allow saving throws in the first place anyway, and several I fear he will try to "chain" deal no damage ( as in "damage to HP" ) either - say "Enervation", "Ray of Enfeeblement" "Targetting Ray" "Ray of Sickening", both redeeming effects applicable to other spells do not apply.

I am loath to forbid this combo as a GM-fiat, but I foresee some dreadful combos lurking in the grass.

Comments ?

shilsen · Sep 3, 2007

Rays do not usually have a "Target" descriptor, and so aren't applicable for the Chain Spell feat, as I read it.

Infiniti2000 · Sep 3, 2007

As shilsen said, "Effect: Ray" is not "Target: (e.g. one creature)". Unless the ray spell is also targeted, which I think is impossible and doesn't happen, then no you cannot chain ray spells. On the other side, I recommend banning enervation and nerfing ray of enfeeblement.

evermind · Sep 3, 2007

hmm, interesting take, but to my mind, a ray is the epitome of a "targeted" spell aimed at a single creature. Shilsen's way of reading the feat sounds a bit too finnicky to me.......

akbearfoot · Sep 3, 2007

It is a finnicky way of reading it...but I believe that is the correct interpretation. From a logic standpoint I agree that rays are pretty much a 'target 1 creature with a range greater than touch' spells. But for exactly the reason you already pointed out I do not believe the developers intended them to be chainable....

Ray of enfeeblement, Scorching Ray (3 rays all chained!), ennervation, and probably a few others would be just tooo ugly if chainable. Ray's are already noteably close to the 'broken' category.

There is a feat called SPlit Ray in one of the books. It is comparatively weak compared to chain spell and only works on rays. FWIW

shilsen · Sep 3, 2007

evermind said:
hmm, interesting take, but to my mind, a ray is the epitome of a "targeted" spell aimed at a single creature. Shilsen's way of reading the feat sounds a bit too finnicky to me.......

Finicky or not, note that the PHB itself puts rays in the category of "effect" spells, separating them from "target" spells. See pg. 175 under Aiming A Spell.

Darklone · Sep 3, 2007

Infiniti2000 said:
On the other side, I recommend banning enervation and nerfing ray of enfeeblement.

I rather prefer to ban necromancy in my gameworld... all those do-goodies like pallies and clercs need something to do. Spanish Inquisition.

And it gives the BBEGs some nice toys while the PCs... usually don't dare to touch these spells with a tongue

evermind · Sep 3, 2007

problem with "finnicky" being, I used the argument on said player in a different context - now it would be biting me in the... posterior.
well, lets reinforce the "debate rules" skill and duke it out Or rather rule it, and then listen to hours of "why ?"

shilsen · Sep 3, 2007

evermind said:
problem with "finnicky" being, I used the argument on said player in a different context - now it would be biting me in the... posterior.
well, lets reinforce the "debate rules" skill and duke it out Or rather rule it, and then listen to hours of "why ?"

Aha

!

Just tell the player you were wrong last time, since you were. And add that you also have concerns about how strong it would be, so you're going with the RAW take on rays and not letting them work with Chain Spell.

evermind · Sep 3, 2007

shilsen said:
Aha !

Just tell the player you were wrong last time, since you were. And add that you also have concerns about how strong it would be, so you're going with the RAW take on rays and not letting them work with Chain Spell.

well, the argument was used in the debate over another topic (untargeted vs. targeted ). Guess he will settle for "Split Ray" anyway, since he intends to debuff "in grand style"......