Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="radmod" data-source="post: 5360993" data-attributes="member: 93008">How dare you quote something I really haven't read that much!(Though I thought this had been covered in the PHB, hadn't it? Or is it simply that I'm such a genius I already did it this way<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />)Now to be serious.The crux of the situation:You're not going to like this, I guarantee it. Very few people here have (though strangely everyone I've spoken to, face to face, agrees with me. Maybe it's just my personal charm.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" />). From the <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_action&alpha=A" target="_blank">glossary</a>:Under strict RAW, a single ranged attack is a standard action that provokes an AoO.Likewise, casting a spell with a casting time of a standard action provokes an AoO.Therefore, casting a spell, with a casting time of a standard action, that has the effect of a ranged attack is two standard actions. Yet, a creature may not (usually) perform two standard actions in a given round.This basically means only three things:1) Either the creature cannot perform both actions in a single round.2) Or, one of the actions is not a standard action, such as a free action.3) Else, a creature can cast a spell with the effect of a ranged attack as a single action.So for there to be two AoOs provoked, then either #1 or #2 applies. If #3 applies then there must be some rule, somewhere, that says that either casting a spell, or making a ranged attack that is not an action by iteself provokes an AoO. For example, one provokes by making a move action, yet one can also provoke for movement not specifically addressed as an action (e.g. as part of a move action).I prefer a literal, strict gamist perspective on the rules as I believe the writers intended (hence, specific keywords and the like). So, to me, it must be a single action (#3). Therefore, it provokes a single AoO since AoOs are (usually) provoked for actions.I have an answer for this, but I want to see what you say about the rest first.Yes, but any rules lawyer would point out that in none of the rules you mentioned does it ever say that a ray and the like are ranged weapons, simply that they are weapon-like, "as if a ranged weapon", and "function as ... in certain respects." What I would prefer from the rules is a more specific contextual based explanation of how they are similar. For example, the "as if" is clear because you aim "as if" meaning, contextually, they are talking about LOE, etc. (and they address LOS subsequently).In the end, though, as everyone agrees, no seems to play it that way. To me, this seems to give a strong indication that perhaps, just perhaps it isn't RAW. Then again, it used to be pre-3.x RAW that dead was 0 (-1?) hps, yet no-one, generally speaking, ever played it that way.</blockquote>

Verification