No spell resistance vs. Orb spells? Why?

[Rystil Arden]

Fine with the +4 to touch AC for firing into melee, but would a colossal dragon really get +4 cover bonus for fighting medium opponents??

DM fiat?

There's actually a rule somewhere on the SRD (I think!) that says that you can avoid the firing into melee penalty if you shoot at a square of the enemy at least 10 feet from any actual melee. With a colossal dragon, it's hard not to be presented with such a square.

 

[IanB]

There's actually a rule somewhere on the SRD (I think!) that says that you can avoid the firing into melee penalty if you shoot at a square of the enemy at least 10 feet from any actual melee. With a colossal dragon, it's hard not to be presented with such a square.

Specifically:

Big Creatures and Cover
Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.

That's for melee attacks though. I seem to recall a rule like the one you mention, but I couldn't find it. Maybe a 3.0 relic memory?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

That's for melee attacks though. I seem to recall a rule like the one you mention, but I couldn't find it. Maybe a 3.0 relic memory?

PHB p. 140.
"If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the -4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character."

So an enemy using a reach weapon, or a giant, or whatever, often will not provoke the -4 penalty.

 

[Rystil Arden]

PHB p. 140.
"If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the -4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character."

So an enemy using a reach weapon, or a giant, or whatever, often will not provoke the -4 penalty.

It would actually be incredibly hard to provoke the -4 penalty with a colossal dragon--you'd have to line up your guys all around the dragon in a sphere so that there was not a single spot to shoot that was more than 10 feet from an ally

 

[IanB]

PHB p. 140.
"If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the -4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character."

So an enemy using a reach weapon, or a giant, or whatever, often will not provoke the -4 penalty.

Ah yes. This is for the melee penalty, not for cover, mind you.

 

[Notmousse]

Quick and sloppy: "When any dragon is 30' above me or less, Polymorph me into an athach." Or just begin the fight at Huge size.

This is still after being crushed as the conditions are only met after the attack.

Make it a short jump. Then there is CERTAINLY going to be an open location within 100', since the dragon had to have jumped from somewhere.

He could easily have been on a 10' high pile of treasure. Unless you want to get 3D (and find a new die for random direction since the d8 no longer works), which could just as easily shunt you to a lower level.

Only an utter moron would enter a dragon's lair if it had an active Forbiddance effect.

This is a guy walking into a dragon's lair fighting something 9 CR higher. The example mage is already a moron.

Because your projected image is casting the spells, not you. If the dragon crushes the image, you can cast the spell yourself with no penalty.

Now you're stretching things. It's a 7th level spell, lasts a minute and a half, and what kind of 'party' (if there is one) would say ok to being bait while you sit back nice and pretty?

You can use Limited Wish to get a Freedom of Movement effect, but that's subpar.

I agree. That is subpar.

 

[IanB]

It would actually be incredibly hard to provoke the -4 penalty with a colossal dragon--you'd have to line up your guys all around the dragon in a sphere so that there was not a single spot to shoot that was more than 10 feet from an ally

In fact even that wouldn't do it, since the center of the dragon's space can't help but be 10 feet away from your allies (unless the dragon is grappling someone.)

 

[Notmousse]

It would actually be incredibly hard to provoke the -4 penalty with a colossal dragon--you'd have to line up your guys all around the dragon in a sphere so that there was not a single spot to shoot that was more than 10 feet from an ally

Or simply not be able to aim at the parts that aren't behind cover.

I honestly doubt a GM's going to be ok with someone saying 'I aim for the back square' when there's 2-6 squares of monster in the way.

 

[Rystil Arden]

In fact even that wouldn't do it, since the center of the dragon's space can't help but be 10 feet away from your allies (unless the dragon is grappling someone.)

Hmmm...that's a tricky call--I'd rule that either you have to aim for a space on the sides of the dragon, or, if you aim for a central space, it gets soft cover from the spaces in the way (which gives the same -4 penalty), but we're already talking about a ridiculous situation with a sphere of allies positioned exactly to screw our caster over, so it isn't as if it will come up any time soon

 

[Rystil Arden]

Or simply not be able to aim at the parts that aren't behind cover.

I honestly doubt a GM's going to be ok with someone saying 'I aim for the back square' when there's 2-6 squares of monster in the way.

Looks like you and I agree on that--see my simultaneous post

However, even if you only consider the front and not the back, that still requires a highly-improbable three-dimensional hemisphere of allies who are positioned exactly right so that you don't have any space to attack.