Is Scorching Ray Too Good?

[RigaMortus]

You can crit on every attack roll, a critical hit would not count as "precision based" damage. That's damage, which is simply added to a damage roll, but requires some sort of precision (usually that damage only applies within 30' for ranged attacks, like sneak attack or weapon specialization).

Bye
Thanee

No you can not crit on every attack roll. You can not crit undead, constructs, oozes and objects (such as a door). Also, there is no definition for "precision based" damage. So if a spell, feat, or other effect prevents you from getting sneak attack, it is explicitly stated, as it is stated in Manyshot.

PHB page 97

Manyshot
Special: Regardless of the number of arrows you fire, you apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) only once. If you score a critical hit, only the first arrow fired deals critical damage; all others deal regular damage.

Also, damage from Weapon Specialization is not considered precision-based, and it is not limited to a mere 30' range (like sneak attack is). I can shoot someone 500 feet away with my Longbow, and if I hit, they will take Weapon Spec. damage. The same thing with damage from the Ranger's Favored Enemy. AND... I can apply Weapon Spec. damage and/or Favored Enemy bonus damage to EVERY arrow I fire using Manyshot, even if I hit someone 500 feet away.

So:

Sneak Attack = precision based damage (as stated in Manyshot, also you need to strike a vital spot for sneak attack to occur)
Critical Hits = precision based damage (my basis on this is... like sneak attack, you stike a vital spot when you score a critical AND enemies that are not subject to sneak attacks are not subject to critical hits, and vice versa)
Weapon Spec = not precision-based damage
Ranger's Favored Enemy = not precision-based damage

 

[Thanee]

Hmm... might be, that they changed Weapon Specialization in 3.5 (in 3.0 it only applied to targets within 30' for sure).

Critical hits are more luck than precision.

Precision-damage is mentioned with Manyshot, but it is nowhere clearly defined, that's right. Not my fault, sorry.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Scion]

creatures that are immune to crits are immune to sneak attack

The reverse is not necissarily true.

Being in concelment kills sneak attack and other precision based damages, but critical hits and other nonprecision based are not stopped.

 

[RigaMortus]

creatures that are immune to crits are immune to sneak attack

The reverse is not necissarily true.

Not doubting you, but can you name me an instance this is true? My mind is on overload at the moment, and I can't think of one. I am sure there is an instance out there (other than a spell/feat/effect that obviously breaks the rule).

Being in concelment kills sneak attack and other precision based damages, but critical hits and other nonprecision based are not stopped.

Hmmm... Ok, I guess agree with this. It says in the glossary that critical hits hit vital spots, but I guess that can be based on luck rather than precision...

Still though, that doesn't preclude the arguement that:

(a) there is no clear definition for precision-based damage
(b) sneak attack IS considered precision-based damage
(c) no where in the Core rules (that I can find) does it state that you only apply precision-based damage to one attack (within a volley of attacks) or anything else to that effect. Please someone find this rule...
(d) Manyshot states this SPECIFICALLY within the text
(e) Scorching Ray, which functions exactly like Manyshot as far as I can tell, does not specifically state this.

What I can find (some of which I stated earlier) is :

(1) The rogue's attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC... (as quoted from the PHB)
(2) "an attack" is different from "an attack roll" and "a ranged touch attack" is different from "a ranged touch attack roll".
(3) Ranged attacks count as sneak attacks, only if the target is within 30' (also quoted from the PHB)
(4) A "ranged touch attack" is still considered a ranged attack, and thus allows the use of sneak attack.
(5) Scorching Ray requires you to make a ranged touch attack for every ray fired, whether it is at the same target or three seperate targets.
(6) Scorching Ray counts as an attack. Each ray counts as an attack. If not, then I could cast Scorching Ray while Invisible and not break invisibility.

Please correct anything I may be off on...

EDIT: In 3.0, this was clearly defined. I beleive it was even in their FAQ. But many things changed in 3.5, and I am not sure that is the case any more, that you only get 1 Sneak Attack on spells like Scorching Ray. Weapon Spec. and Ranger's Favored Enemy was restricted to doing damage if the target was within 30'. But not anymore. Which is why I beleive you are allowed to stack Sneak Attack on each ray. I don't think it is clearly defined one way or the other, but if you add up all the clues (like I did above) they seem to point in favor of allowing Sneak Attack. Just my personal findings. I'd love a clear resolution to this, because I want to building an Arcane Trickster for an upcoming campaign, and if this tactic is truely not viable, I'm going with a different character concept.

Thanks...

 

[Scion]

you alreadyfound the rule, in manyshot.

It may be elsewhere as well, but it is not without precidence that a rule is found only in a single obscure spot such as that.

So, you have the rule, applying it is generally pretty easy.


The scorching ray spell is a single attack. It doesnt matter if it has one ray, two rays or a thousand rays. It is still a single attack. You make an attack roll for each, precission damage is only placed on a single one of them, and all of them can potentially crit.

 

[HellHound]

Scorching Ray is at the Strong end of balanced, IMO - and it's nice to have some non-utility level 2 spells besides Mel's Acrid Arrow.

And yes, as has been said, one sneak attack with the rays, no matter how many rays. The old "Acid Orb" series spells from Tome & Blood (to be reissued in Complete Arcane - the lesser ones were reprinted for 3.5 in the Miniatures Handbook, but don't have the multiple orbs option) was the biggest source of debate on this topic in 3.0 days, and it was quite solidly rules on as being one sneak attack for the batch, no matter how many orbs from the spell.

 

[RigaMortus]

you alreadyfound the rule, in manyshot.

"The rule", in Manyshot, only applies to the feat and effects of Manyshot. It is not a general rule, and it does not state that all similiar effects are like that. This is not a hidden rule like the one found under "Crossbow, Heavy" in the 3.0 PHB.

It may be elsewhere as well,

Great, show me, LOVE to see it...

but it is not without precidence that a rule is found only in a single obscure spot such as that.

Again, the rule only applies to that specific feat, Manyshot. It does not apply to all other instances.

So, you have the rule, applying it is generally pretty easy.

And I will apply that rule whenever my character uses Manyshot.

The scorching ray spell is a single attack.

Not true. According to the chart on page 141 of the PHB, to "Cast a spell" it is not an attack. It is not an attack type (such as Attack (melee), it is not a Special Attack (such as Trip), it isn't any sort of Attack action that I can find. It is in fact a Standard Action. Just as Attack (melee), Attack (range), Attack (unarmed) are all Standard Actions. If I cast Scorching Ray at a wall, that is not an attack. It is a casting of a spell, which is a Standard Action, which happens to deal damage. The "attack" comes in when I aim my Ray(s).

The Scorching Ray spell does NOT have a Target. It has a Range (25 ft +5 ft/2 levels) and it has an Effect. It's Effect is "One or more Rays". This means that, simply casting Scorching Ray (Standard Action) does not qualify as an attack. Here is the order of operation:

You cast Scorching Ray (Standard Action, not at attack)
The effect of the spell occurs (One or more Rays) within the specified range (25 feet +5 feet/2 levels).

Just so we are clear on what a ray is, let's look at the PHB

PHB page 157:

Effect:
Ray: Some effects are rays (for example, ray of enfebblement). You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack...

So where were we? Oh yeah, we fire "One or more rays" at a maximum range of 25 feet +5 feet/2 levels. I can see here we aim a ray just as if I was using a ranged weapon. So I will aim one ray at opponent 1, aim the second ray at opponent 2, and aim the third ray at opponent 3. All of which must (a) be within the spells Range and (b) be within 30 feet of each other, as the spell description tells us.

Now what do we do? Let's look back at the description for "Rays"... I aimed each ray as if I was aiming a ranged weapon. If I was firing a ranged weapon, do you think I could aim at someone's vital spots (as long as they are within 30' of me)? If I was aiming a ranged weapon, do you think Sneak Attack damage would apply? Well since I am aiming each ray as I would a ranged weapon, this would apply as well (unless you found a passage that states otherwise). So I can therefore aim they Rays at the opponents vital spots and apply Sneak Attack damage just like I was aiming a ranged weapon.

Ok, now what? Oh yeah, we have to see if we hit yet. Once again, let's look at our description for "Rays". Says here we make a ranged touch attack. We all know what that is by now. So we resolve the Rays as a ranged touch attack.

Seems pretty cut and dry when you break it down like that, doesn't it?

It doesnt matter if it has one ray, two rays or a thousand rays. It is still a single attack.

Each ray counts as a seperate attack. See the description of "Rays".

You make an attack roll for each,

For once, we agree on this topic!

precission damage is only placed on a single one of them,

Where are you getting this from? As I just showed you above, each Ray is it's own attack. You aim a Ray (singular) as you aim a Ranged Weapon. Since there are three Rays, it is like you are aiming a Ranged Weapon 3 times. If you aim a ranged weapon three times, at three different opponents (and you qualify for Sneak Attack), then the same holds true for each Ray because "you aim a ray like you aim a ranged weapon".

and all of them can potentially crit.

Ok, twice we agree on this topic

 

[RigaMortus]

Scorching Ray is at the Strong end of balanced, IMO - and it's nice to have some non-utility level 2 spells besides Mel's Acrid Arrow.

And yes, as has been said, one sneak attack with the rays, no matter how many rays. The old "Acid Orb" series spells from Tome & Blood (to be reissued in Complete Arcane - the lesser ones were reprinted for 3.5 in the Miniatures Handbook, but don't have the multiple orbs option) was the biggest source of debate on this topic in 3.0 days, and it was quite solidly rules on as being one sneak attack for the batch, no matter how many orbs from the spell.

You are basing this assumption off of 3.0 rules. No where is it specifically stated or defined in 3.5 that precision-based damage (ie Sneak Attack damage) only applies to the first Ray fired from a series of Rays. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE find me this ANYWHERE in the Core Rules! And I am not talking about the one instane it comes up and applies to one specific feat, and only that feat (ie Manyshot).

 

[HellHound]

Yes, you are right, Riga.

I'm basing it entirely on 3.0

The same rules set upon which all of 3.5 is based on.

If you REALLY want to push the issue, instead of just saying "I won't play it that way", then ask the Sage, instead of CAPLOCKING PEOPLE TO FIND IT IN THE CORE RULES.

Hey, guess what, it wasn't specifically in the core rules for 3.0 either. Just chill, and ask the pros if you disagree.

 

[Scion]

If nothing else it can be written off as a balance issue.

It was ruled that way in 3.0 and nothing has changed on that issue for 3.5.

Imagine a 20th level rogue who is able to lob out 3 of those rays for 14d6 each It isnt very abusive, but there were quite a few spells that would cause problems and there are many in other sources as well.

Precision based damage only works in very specific circumstances, generally outlined in the ability but never applied when you do not have a clear shot. Such as from concealment.

Precision based means that exactly. Why it is not defined in the glossary who knows, I guess they assume it should be clear

Check the 3.0 faq's for these answers or tome and blood.. both will support this position. Hopefully the new arcane book will as well.