Do ranged touch attacks (rays, etc.) provoke AoO's?

[dcollins]

I can see how the argument got started on the other boards: technically, the SRD just specifies "Full attack [Full][AoO: No]", with no extra mention of the action possibly being used with a ranged weapon. There are some other curious action-definitions, as well, such as "Charge [Full][AoO: Yes]", which contradicts the PH in both parts.

I would absolutely not force two AOOs from casting a ray-type spell. The ray is part of the casting and targeting of the spell... it simply happens to use a "touch attack" mechanic for resolution. There is no separate attack apart from the spell casting itself.

 

[0-hr]

Concentration still matters. If you cast defensively (and make the roll), then you have sucessfully completed the spell. Now you shoot out the ray and draw an AoO for making a ranged attack. But no matter how much damage the AoO does to you, you've still cast the spell and shot the ray.

When an archer takes an AoO for shooting his bow, he does not lose the shot. Likewise, a mage that takes an AoO for shooting a ray does not lose the ray (but taking an AoO for casting a spell can very easily interrupt the spell).

 

[jontherev]

Concentration still matters. If you cast defensively (and make the roll), then you have sucessfully completed the spell. Now you shoot out the ray and draw an AoO for making a ranged attack. But no matter how much damage the AoO does to you, you've still cast the spell and shot the ray.

When an archer takes an AoO for shooting his bow, he does not lose the shot. Likewise, a mage that takes an AoO for shooting a ray does not lose the ray (but taking an AoO for casting a spell can very easily interrupt the spell).

Ok, ya got me there. That makes sense. But, is there an official ruling on this? I was fairly adamant before, but now I'm on the fence. It seems like this should have come up on these boards by now. Maybe it did and I missed it. The more I think about it, the more confused I get. However, using my idea of the 'spirit of the rules', I think it should be considered all one action and only provoke one AoO.

 

[kreynolds]

Know what the spirit of the rules tells me? Making an attack with a ranged weapon triggers an AoO. Making a ranged attack does not.

EDIT: For crying-out-loud I can't type this morning!

 

[IceBear]

That's what I feel too.

IceBear

 

[jontherev]

Know what the spirit of the rules tells me? Making an attack with a ranged weapon triggers an AoO. Making a ranged attack does not.

EDIT: For crying-out-loud I can't type this morning!

Hope you don't mind, but I just quoted you on the WotC board, giving you props of course. If you'd like to read the thread, it's under the PHB section titled Ranged touch spells/AoO's. Aw hell, here it is:http://boards.wizards.com/rpg/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=109;t=003386;p=1

 

[Caliban]

Know what the spirit of the rules tells me? Making an attack with a ranged weapon triggers an AoO. Making a ranged attack does not.

EDIT: For crying-out-loud I can't type this morning!

I agree.

 

[Bill Muench]

On a similar note, has anyone found anything saying that a ranged touch attack (like a disintegrate, ray of frost, etc.) ignores the -4 penalty for shooting into melee? Since it is a ranged attack, I believe you would have to take a -4, but one player I had insisted otherwise. Any ideas?

 

[Caliban]

On a similar note, has anyone found anything saying that a ranged touch attack (like a disintegrate, ray of frost, etc.) ignores the -4 penalty for shooting into melee? Since it is a ranged attack, I believe you would have to take a -4, but one player I had insisted otherwise. Any ideas?

You still get the -4 unless you have Precise Shot. And you can still hit the Cover instead of your intended target, if something is providing Cover.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

I agree with the ruling of getting the ranged touch attack for "free" (no AoO). Same logic as delivering a regular touch attack as part of the spell.