Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 112457" data-attributes="member: 284">I believe it should only matter in those situations where having a physical weapon matters.&nbsp; In those situations where it's only a matter of being able to target your opponent and deliver damage, it shouldn't matter if it's a dagger or shocking grasp.&nbsp; At range it shouldn't matter if it's an arrow or flaming arrow.&nbsp;&nbsp; What matters is that it can hit the target in a vulnerable spot can cause extra damage if you critical.Like I said, double jeopardy.&nbsp; Ranged weapons like bows, crossbows, whips, and slings require you to concentrate on making an attack rather than defending yourself.&nbsp;&nbsp; Spells (melee or ranged) do the same, but defensive casting allows you to overcome it.&nbsp;&nbsp; Having ranged touch spells provoke an AoO a second time would be double jeopardy.A Coup de Grace is targeting your attack so that it hits a very vulnerable part of their anatomy, automatically causing a crit and probably killing them.&nbsp;&nbsp; This is why you also get your sneak attack damage. I haven't seen a logical reason why it matters if the damage comes from a physical weapon or spell energy.&nbsp;&nbsp; Touch attack spells can crit and deliver sneak attack damage.&nbsp;&nbsp; Why would you suddenly be less accurate with a touch attack than a melee attack when your target is helpless? For any purpose that requires posing a credible threat, or an attack roll and the ability to critical, touch spells are weapons.&nbsp;&nbsp; Provoking an AoO doesn't require either, so they don't count as a weapon for that purpose.&nbsp; They only count as spells in that instance.&nbsp; *shrug* It's always seemed pretty clear to me, I just couldn't seem distill it down to a few clear statements until you implied I was being a hypocrite. Sometimes I'm wrong, and occasionally I can't manage to express myself with enough caveats and exceptions listed out to satisfy everyone, but I never lie.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Caliban, post: 112457, member: 284"] I believe it should only matter in those situations where having a physical weapon matters. In those situations where it's only a matter of being able to target your opponent and deliver damage, it shouldn't matter if it's a dagger or shocking grasp. At range it shouldn't matter if it's an arrow or flaming arrow. What matters is that it can hit the target in a vulnerable spot can cause extra damage if you critical. [b][/b] Like I said, double jeopardy. Ranged weapons like bows, crossbows, whips, and slings require you to concentrate on making an attack rather than defending yourself. Spells (melee or ranged) do the same, but defensive casting allows you to overcome it. Having ranged touch spells provoke an AoO a second time would be double jeopardy. [b][/b] A Coup de Grace is targeting your attack so that it hits a very vulnerable part of their anatomy, automatically causing a crit and probably killing them. This is why you also get your sneak attack damage. I haven't seen a logical reason why it matters if the damage comes from a physical weapon or spell energy. Touch attack spells can crit and deliver sneak attack damage. Why would you suddenly be less accurate with a touch attack than a melee attack when your target is helpless? [b][/b] For any purpose that requires posing a credible threat, or an attack roll and the ability to critical, touch spells are weapons. Provoking an AoO doesn't require either, so they don't count as a weapon for that purpose. They only count as spells in that instance. [b][/b] *shrug* It's always seemed pretty clear to me, I just couldn't seem distill it down to a few clear statements until you implied I was being a hypocrite. Sometimes I'm wrong, and occasionally I can't manage to express myself with enough caveats and exceptions listed out to satisfy everyone, but I never lie. [/QUOTE]

Verification