Need confirmation on number of AoOs for ranged touch spells

[Jeff Wilder]

Triggering an AoO is specifically tied to a type of action.

Yes, a type of action in the English language usage. One of which is "ranged attack."

If you're claiming that one must be taking an action (in the rules sense of the word) to provoke an AoO, well, you're simply incorrect. It's well established, for instance, that an attempt to sunder a weapon can itself be made as an AoO. Yet that sunder AoO is not, itself, an action (in the rules sense of the word).

Yet "sunder" -- whether an action (rules) or not -- provokes an AoO, because "sunder" is an action (English usage) that provokes an AoO.

As is "make a ranged attack."

If you continue claiming that only Standard, Move, or Full actions provoke AoOs, and basing your argument on that claim, you are wrong. I suspect very strongly that you're aware, by now, that you're wrong. I also suspect it'll make no difference to whether you choose to continue with the argument.

 

[pawsplay]

Saying you don't provoke with a melee touch does NOT mean you do provoke with a ranged touch. That's a logical error.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Saying you don't provoke with a melee touch does NOT mean you do provoke with a ranged touch. That's a logical error.

Yes, it is. It's also not what I said. Which isn't a coincidence.

You provoke with an unarmed melee attack because the rules say so. However, there is an exception for melee touch attacks, because you are treated as armed, and armed attacks do not provoke AoOs.

You provoke an AoO with a ranged attack because the rules say so. Whether you are armed or not makes no difference in the provocation of AoOs with ranged attacks. Therefore there is no exception for ranged touch attacks.

 

[aboyd]

Your argument -- including the "long fingers as a ranged touch attack" interpretation -- hinges on this line in the text.

That line obviously applies to melee touch attacks.

Not obvious, especially when right in the same paragraph it defines two kinds of touch attacks, including the "ranged touch attack" under the touch attack category that was under discussion.

 

[pawsplay]

Yes, a type of action in the English language usage. One of which is "ranged attack."

If you're claiming that one must be taking an action (in the rules sense of the word) to provoke an AoO, well, you're simply incorrect.

Why? I can't find a reference to any other kind of attacks in the rules.

It's well established, for instance, that an attempt to sunder a weapon can itself be made as an AoO. Yet that sunder AoO is not, itself, an action (in the rules sense of the word).

Sure it is. The AoO rules specifically call out that you make an attack. See rules for attack. Ding. Done.

Yet "sunder" -- whether an action (rules) or not -- provokes an AoO, because "sunder" is an action (English usage) that provokes an AoO.

As is "make a ranged attack."

This is where you are slipping. I agree there is a standard usage of the word action, and there is a rules usage of the word action. "Ranged attack" is specifically an action, in the rules sense, that draws an AoO. That rule, however, only applies to using actions to make attacks. That rule does not apply to using actions to cast spells. Just as the rule that you must use full round actions to make multiple attacks does not apply to the multiple rays caused by scorching ray.

If you continue claiming that only Standard, Move, or Full actions provoke AoOs, and basing your argument on that claim, you are wrong.

Technically, I am not basing it on that. There are also some free, immediate, swift, and reaction actions that cause them. But that is not the crux of the matter.

What I am saying is that AoOs are caused by specific actions laid out in the rules. One of those conditions is casting a spell, and another one of those conditions is making a ranged attack in combat as an action. The ranged attack that occurs from a ray is incidental to aiming the spell; it is not an action, certain not under the heading on p.135 which is the only place that rule is ever stated generally.

You are trying to say that making a ranged attack (in the English sense) provokes an AoO become you provoke an AoO when you make a ranged attack (in the rules sense). Obviously, those terms are not interchangeable uses, so you have a problem right there. But that's not the larger issue. As the rules are laid out, it's more like this:

1. There are actions in combat
2. Combat is an action in combat
3. I can make a standard or full attack
4. One of those options is to make a ranged attack.
5. Making a ranged attack causes an AoO.

Step #5 there is not part of the decision tree for spell-casting.

1. There are actions in combat
2. Spellcasting is an action in combat
3. I can cast a spell that is a standard or full round action
4. Casting a spell provokes an AoO unless I cast defensively
5. There are different types of spell
6. If the spell is a ray, aim it as though it were an attack with a ranged weapon.


Let me ask you this: what if I cast scorching ray and refuse to aim the spell? Do I not draw an AoO? What happens to the ray?

Now, conversely, is there a way to fire a bow that does not draw an AoO?

 

[aboyd]

However, there is an exception for melee touch attacks

No, there is not. There is an exception for "touch attacks" which are then defined as both "ranged touch attacks" and "melee touch attacks." The rules do not say that the exception is only for melee touch attacks -- we can see that the word "melee" is not there, as we just quoted the text a few posts back.

You provoke an AoO with a ranged attack because the rules say so.

Yes, but the rules make it clear that "ranged touch attacks" are classified as "touch attacks" not "ranged attacks." So whatever the rules say about ranged attacks have no bearing. Whatever the rules say about touch attacks do have bearing. Quit trying to miscategorize the action.

 

[pawsplay]

I just checked the Rules Compendium. Touch attacks are a different category than ranged or melee attacks, and ranged touch attacks are classified as touch attacks. Drawing AoOs is listed under ranged attacks. That would seem to settle the matter.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Why? I can't find a reference to any other kind of attacks in the rules.

You aren't aware that there are attacks in the rules that aren't "actions" (in the rules sense)?

Sure it is. The AoO rules specifically call out that you make an attack. See rules for attack. Ding. Done.

Scorching ray: "Each ray requires a ranged touch attack to hit and deals 4d6 points of fire damage."

Ranged touch attack. Not "attack roll" (which is a silly distinction anyway), but ranged touch attack.

You are trying to say that making a ranged attack (in the English sense) provokes an AoO become you provoke an AoO when you make a ranged attack (in the rules sense).

No, I'm saying that making a ranged attack provokes an AoO because it is one of the actions (in the English language usage of that word) that provokes an AoO.

Obviously, those terms are not interchangeable uses, so you have a problem right there.

The problem is that you are neither quoting me correctly, nor paraphrasing me correctly. I assume it's not deliberate, but rather that you don't understand the argument.

5. Making a ranged attack causes an AoO.

Yes. Which has nothing to do with whether it is a free, swift, immediate, move, standard, or full action, or even not an action at all, except in the English sense of the word.

It also has nothing to do with the "steps." Making a ranged attack provokes an AoO.

Let me ask you this: what if I cast scorching ray and refuse to aim the spell? Do I not draw an AoO? What happens to the ray?

Scorching ray: "Each ray requires a ranged touch attack to hit and deals 4d6 points of fire damage."

Now, conversely, is there a way to fire a bow that does not draw an AoO?

As far as the core rules go, there's no way to make a ranged attack without provoking an AoO from threatening enemies. An attack with a bow is a ranged attack. An attack with a scorching ray is a ranged attack.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

The rules do not say that the exception is only for melee touch attacks -- we can see that the word "melee" is not there, as we just quoted the text a few posts back.

The rules say that the exception is because the target is treated as armed.

You do understand that "X, therefore no Y" is logically equivalent to "because X, no Y," right?

"The target is treated as armed, therefore no AoO" is the same as "because the target is treated as armed, no AoO."

There is no exception for being armed when a ranged attack provokes an AoO. The "therefore" clause is thus meaningless when it comes to ranged attacks.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I just checked the Rules Compendium. Touch attacks are a different category than ranged or melee attacks, and ranged touch attacks are classified as touch attacks. Drawing AoOs is listed under ranged attacks. That would seem to settle the matter.

So I'll ask again: you'd claim that throwing a flask of alchemist's fire does not provoke AoOs, right?

A ranged touch attack is a ranged attack that uses the targeting rules for touch attacks. A ranged touch attack is of course a ranged attack. The claim otherwise is absurd. As is the implicit claim that an attack can't be both a ranged attack and a touch attack.

Just to illustrate, here are the rules for splash weapons:

Throw Splash Weapon

A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects. To attack with a splash weapon, make a ranged touch attack against the target. Splash weapons require no weapon proficiency, so you don’t take the -4 nonproficiency penalty. A hit deals direct hit damage to the target, and splash damage to all creatures within 5 feet of the target.

You can instead target a specific grid intersection. Treat this as a ranged attack against AC 5. However, if you target a grid intersection, creatures in all adjacent squares are dealt the splash damage, and the direct hit damage is not dealt to any creature. (You can’t target a grid intersection occupied by a creature, such as a Large or larger creature; in this case, you’re aiming at the creature.)

Note that a splash weapon is a "ranged weapon." Note that when throwing at a creature, you use a "ranged touch attack." Note that when throwing at an intersection, you use a "ranged attack."

Note that if it were true -- as others are arguing -- that "ranged touch attack" is not a subset of "ranged attack," then throwing a splash weapon provokes an AoO if you're throwing it at a grid intersection, but doesn't provoke an AoO if you're throwing it at a creature.

If you believe that's the way the rules are intended to operate, more power to you. Have fun.

Me, I think it's beyond obvious that a "ranged touch attack" is a subset of "ranged attack." And ranged attacks provoke AoOs.