Do Ray Spells suffer -4 "Firing into Melee" penalty?

[Hypersmurf]

Also, the rules for this changed between 3.0E and 3.5E as part of the general changes to Cover. So be wary of which edition people are talking about.

Note that there's a difference between the -4 shooting into melee penalty, and the +4 soft cover AC bonus.

Even if using 3E or the 3.5 "Striking Cover instead of a Missed Target" variant, it's only due to the cover modifier that you can hit the wrong person, never due to the shooting-into-melee penalty.

-Hyp.

 

[rushlight]

Then by extention, Point Blank Shot and it's decendants apply to rays...

Since I'm about to play a Raymage, that sounds neat...

 

[the Jester]

Then by extention, Point Blank Shot and it's decendants apply to rays...

Since I'm about to play a Raymage, that sounds neat...

Correct, although most of the ranged weapon feats won't help with rays (Far Shot, Rapid Shot, etc). You can use Precise Shot, which is a great feat if you're going to be shootin' into melee a lot.

 

[Dingleberry]

Yeah, the -4 isn't really because you're trying not to hit your allies, it's because when you're in melee, you're not really just standing there in your mini's position, waiting for your turn to attack. You're dodging, circling your enemy... which makes people firing at you more likely to miss, because you're constantly dodging and feinting and switching positions with this other guy right next to you.

I disagree, based on the 3.0 PHB language (I don't play 3.5) stating that the penalty is imposed "because you have to aim carefully to avoid hitting your ally".

 

[Derren]

I disagree, based on the 3.0 PHB language (I don't play 3.5) stating that the penalty is imposed "because you have to aim carefully to avoid hitting your ally".

Even if that is so. If your ally is standing between you and the target he still gives an additional +4AC due cover even if he is in melee with the target.

 

[Dingleberry]

Even if that is so. If your ally is standing between you and the target he still gives an additional +4AC due cover even if he is in melee with the target.

Absolutely, but the issue arises when the ally isn't between the attacker and the target. Without that, there's no actual chance of the attacker hitting the ally. (Personally, I think the attacker should be able to disregard the "firing into melee" penalty in exchange for a chance of striking the all (as cover), but that's house rules territory.)

I figure the attacker isn't as concerned about hitting his ally if the ally can't be hurt by the attack AND there's no chance the ally will prevent the attack from hitting the intended target, so I don't apply the penalty in that situation.

Would I rule the same for any other ranged attack that couldn't hurt the ally? Don't know - haven't had to deal with it yet, since most ranged attackers have Precise Shot by the time the situation came up.

 

[Christian]

You know, I sure hope the penalty applies. Or else my old halfling sorcerer wasted a feat on Precise Shot.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Ime the -4 to hit and +4AC regularly pops up with ranged touch attack spells. You hear people harp on about scorching ray but I bet they don't enforce the above rules as they should.

 

[ConspiracyAngel]

Umm...

I hate to be the one to point this out, but... straight off of the Wizards SRD for 3.5...

"RAYS
All ray attacks require the attacker to make a successful ranged touch attack against the target. Rays have varying ranges, which are simple maximums. A ray’s attack roll never takes a range penalty. Even if a ray hits, it usually allows the target to make a saving throw (Fortitude or Will). Rays never allow a Reflex saving throw, but if a character’s Dexterity bonus to AC is high, it might be hard to hit her with the ray in the first place."

I just just pasted this out of the 3.5 SRD entitled "AbilitiesandConditions".

- ConspiracyAngel

 

[ConspiracyAngel]

Here is link

Here, I forgot to add the link...

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35

- ConspiracyAngel