Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4733871" data-attributes="member: 15538">I have yet to see good evidence that treating a ray as a ranged weapon means it causes an AoO. I see ample evidence it is "aimed" as a ranged weapon (in the rules), that it uses the same modifiers and can crit like an attack, and so forth. I don't see any evidence that working like a ranged attack means it crosses a line on the action table or any of those rules from "casting a spell" into "making an attack."There are many reasons to believe that 2 AoOs incorrect. First of all, it's not a rule, but it's a clear convention and an explicit assumption under which rules questions were answered that any one action can only generate an AoO. Casting a ray spell is one action, which has the effect of a ray. Normal touch spells are explicit (potential) exceptions, when the charge is held. Further, ranged touch spells are defined as a sub-category of touch spells, which in several plays, the RC most notably, appear to be a different category than ranged attacks. It is certainly a judgment call to what extent a ray is like a ranged weapon, but I see no reason to extend that definition beyond the clause that is is aimed like one and attack rolls are made in the same way. They don't require actions to aim, like a ranged weapon; they don't require a full action to attack with multiple times; they are not actually weapons; they do not take place during the course of a an attack action. It is possible to pull a phrase out of context. Would anyone take this bolded phrase to mean you can cast scorching ray such that it begins 25 feet away from you and strike your opponents from the side, avoiding cover?</blockquote>

Verification