ranged touch attacks

[TheNovaLord]

am i reading correct that

1. PBS no longer usable for spells

2..ranged touch attacks provoke even when casting on the defensive?

 

[kitsune9]

am i reading correct that

1. PBS no longer usable for spells

2..ranged touch attacks provoke even when casting on the defensive?

1. I would say yes. A spell is not a weapon.

2. Here's what the Pathfinder SRD states:

Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.

So even if you cast a spell defensively, it's still making the range attack that provokes.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

1. I would say yes. A spell is not a weapon.

To you. I like the weapon-like spell rules. I guess I have another PF houserule.

 

[kitsune9]

To you. I like the weapon-like spell rules. I guess I have another PF houserule.

I saw that on the other thread. Good PF houserule. I can really see some advantages for having spells weapon-like.

 

[Xendria]

Honestly, It is apparent that they are treating ranged touch attacks exactly as ranged attacks with a bow, crossbow, thrown, etc. I think this is an amazing idea since I felt that in 3.5 Ranged touch attacks seemed to be completely over powered against non-magic opponents due to the fact that you could not only avoid all Armor Bonus, but also NOT incur attacks of opportunity due to casting defensively.

On that note, I think that ranged touch spells seem more likely to fall under Pointblank Shot because they indeed are being treated more like a ranged weapon now. With the change to ranged touch attacks a +1 to attack and damage rolls within 30ft is more than fair, and also forces them to play a closer caster game than without it. As a DM I would just play this feat to my advantage with reach weapons/creatures

 

[alleynbard]

To you. I like the weapon-like spell rules. I guess I have another PF houserule.

This is how I am going to do it as well.

Not sure what Jason's actual intent was though. I agree with Xendria. Perhaps he meant for that situation to remain since ranged touch attacks are being treated as weapon attacks in all other ways.

The feat is a bit unclear as it states "ranged attacks" at the beginning and "weapons" in the description.

But even if he did not mean for PBS to work for spells, I am definitely going to houserule it that way.

 

[pawsplay]

It's pretty weird that you can get off a targeted spell but not a ray in melee range. Also, even weirder, it looks like they draw AoOs that do not disrupt the spell. And finally, it implies that we are back to potentially two AoOs per ray spell, one for casting, one for aiming.

EDIT: And anyway, without Precise Shot, why would you shoot a ray this way if you had an alternative anyway?

 

[Micco]

Yeah. I think my houserule will say "You can never provoke more than one AoO from any single action." That would mean a ray spell would only provoke one since it is a single standard action. Only by casting and then moving could you provoke two AoO's in the same round.

Any exception that I'm forgetting where you would want a single action to provoke multiple AoO's from the same threat?

EDIT: Doh...within moments I thought of the most basic of exceptions. Moving through multiple threatened squares.

 

[frankthedm]

Good to hear. It is not changing all RTA into Reflex save negates, but it certainly helps take ranged touch down a peg from it's rules the roost of 3.5's spell delivery vehicles.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Yeah. I think my houserule will say "You can never provoke more than one AoO from any single action." That would mean a ray spell would only provoke one since it is a single standard action. Only by casting and then moving could you provoke two AoO's in the same round.

Yes, that's a good houserule, I will also be following that one, while still allowing for an AoO potentially from either making a ranged atack OR casting a spell.

EDIT: Doh...within moments I thought of the most basic of exceptions. Moving through multiple threatened squares.

Actually, unless PF diverged from the 3E rules, this is not the case.

Attacks Of Opportunity :: d20srd.org

"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent."