Interesting Arcane Archer question...

[LightPhoenix]

The Fireball spell itself involves a small bead which bursts when it reaches its target point or when it hits an obstacle. Do you allow a wizard to make a ranged touch attack to hit someone with the bead, thus negating the reflex save?

The difference being, you've already made a roll to hit. You've tagged him or gotten damn near close enough (same square/hex).

And according to the Imbue Arrow description, the effect is cenetered where the arrow lands. It's obvious that the meaning is that the true point of origin is the arrow itself. [EDIT] And I think you're splitting hairs deciding what part of the arrow it centers on. It doesn't really matter.

Even so, I'd allow a Reflex save - as someone pointed out in Wulf's SH thread, how many times can you feasibly be denied a Fort or Will save when you would normally get one? Reflex should the same way. Unless something specifically denies you a save, you should always get one.

 

[Kai Lord]

Re: Hmm...

Actually, you sort of have a point, but incorrectly assume that just because an arrow damages its target, the arrow is embedded in the target. D&D combat and hit points do not work that way.

Well what do you assume? That the arrow flies through the air, freezes right in front of you, then grows arms and slaps you in the face?

The PHB clearly states that you lose hit points when you take "damage" and divides damage into three subtypes; injury, illness, and magical effect.

Arrows can injure you one of two ways, embedding themselves in you or grazing you. I suppose you could say that Imbued Arrows always do the latter but that sure is a stretch just to allow a Reflex save for a uniquely obscure class ability.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Hmm...

Well what do you assume? That the arrow flies through the air, freezes right in front of you, then grows arms and slaps you in the face?

Actually, it grows arms, pulls out a quarterstaff, and hits you with an off-hand attack.

The PHB clearly states that you lose hit points when you take "damage" and divides damage into three subtypes; injury, illness, and magical effect.

So? Nothing about that requires that every successful attack roll in D&D is a solid hit.

Arrows can injure you one of two ways, embedding themselves in you or grazing you. I suppose you could say that Imbued Arrows always do the latter but that sure is a stretch just to allow a Reflex save for a uniquely obscure class ability.

Why?

 

[Kai Lord]

Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

Actually, it grows arms, pulls out a quarterstaff, and hits you with an off-hand attack.

Ah, the dreaded Imbued Dancing Leprechaun....

So? Nothing about that requires that every successful attack roll in D&D is a solid hit.

What are suggesting? That the arrow doesn't hit you but you instead sustain injury through dodging the arrow and banging your head on a branch?

Why?

Because how often is a Master Archer going to graze somebody? Ironically, I would tend to describe hit point loss as more ambiguous and cinematic (battle fatigue, luck, karma, what have you, etc.) like I'm sure many people here do I just find it funny that the letter of the rules actually do suggest that weapons that do damage do indeed connect with the target. Or else what are they injuring, your pride?

"A better man wouldn't have let it get so close...."

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

What are suggesting? That the arrow doesn't hit you but you instead sustain injury through dodging the arrow and banging your head on a branch?

Possibly. However, if that's the best you can come up with, you shouldn't be playing D&D.

Because how often is a Master Archer going to graze somebody?

Not many times at all, if the Master Archer is trying to hit a dumb mook. A lot of times, if they're trying to hit a Master Swordsman. This is exactly what having 100 as opposed to 10 hit points is supposed to represent: skill at turning a solid hit into a glancing blow.

Ironically, I would tend to describe hit point loss as more ambiguous and cinematic (battle fatigue, luck, karma, what have you, etc.) like I'm sure many people here do I just find it funny that the letter of the rules actually do suggest that weapons that do damage do indeed connect with the target.

They do?

Or else what are they injuring, your pride?

Your dude factor.

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14101

 

[Chun-tzu]

I was almost convinced. But denying the Reflex save would be a huge mistake. Think about it: you're adding, as a side-benefit, a more powerful ability than the intended ability! Cast any area effect spell and deny the main target any save. That's the kind of power that's even too good to be a feat.

How can we describe it? Here's one: a glancing blow that doesn't penetrate the armor. The reflex save means (in this case) the target manages to protect his exposed areas or take the brunt of the blast in a less vulnerable area, and thus isn't singed too badly.

An interesting question, though.

 

[Kai Lord]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

Possibly. However, if that's the best you can come up with, you shouldn't be playing D&D.

Why? Last session instead of having the players get paid by the king to go on an adventure I masterfully set the mood and cinematic tone by having a mysterious wizard approach them in a bar and promise them...platinum pieces if they went on a quest. A lesser DM would have had something cliche like gold or silver but I like my adventures to be a little more creative.

Anyway, I hadn't decided which way I would rule on the issue when I asked the question (I've neither played in or DM'd a campaign featuring an Arcane Archer), I was just curious as to what people thought of it.

Half of my follow-ups have been for the sake of playing Devil's Advocate and the other half just for my own amusement. So there you go.

I don't really feel like perusing that link you cited, mind to sum up what the "dude factor" is?

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

I don't really feel like perusing that link you cited, mind to sum up what the "dude factor" is?

No.

 

[Kai Lord]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

No.

It was that interesting, huh?

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

It was that interesting, huh?

You are very boring. Say something funny.