Shooting a spell in the distance

[Palagast]

I was wondering: If I shoot a ranged touch spell (e.g. Acid Arrow) as a -say- 10th level wizard, it has a maximum range of 800 feet. That surely is a long distance to target something, isn't there something like a range increment for such spells?

 

[dcollins]

No, not at all. By the core rules, a spellcaster can put a spell where they want, period. Variation on that would require House Rules on the issue.

 

[Liquidsabre]

And yet being able to see your target clearly at such distances becomes increasingly difficult at these greater ranges. So it's a practicality issue really.

 

[Len]

Practicality, shmacticality.

If you want a rationalization, how about this: Rays go in perfectly straight lines, unlike arrows or rocks. Thus it's easy to target a ray exactly where you want.

 

[welby]

Practicality, shmacticality.

If you want a rationalization, how about this: Rays go in perfectly straight lines, unlike arrows or rocks. Thus it's easy to target a ray exactly where you want.

Then how come I have to roll to hit?

 

[rrealm]

Then how come I have to roll to hit?

Presumably the rays come from a casters hand (palms or fingers sound plausible to me) and their hand or finger – maybe even their whole arm - might not be “in the right alignment” to shoot a ray spell precise. And the fact that the opponent might be moving or just appear small as hell from such a great distance.

And as for this:

I was wondering: If I shoot a ranged touch spell (e.g. Acid Arrow) as a -say- 10th level wizard, it has a maximum range of 800 feet. That surely is a long distance to target something, isn't there something like a range increment for such spells?

It makes perfect sense that there would be a range increment but then the wizard would never be able to hit anything after the penalties because their BAB is so low. The way I see spellcasters using magic is they have a “sixth sense” and so they “just know” how to release their spells accurately without having to factor in distance or (to an extent) creature size.

One thing that their “sixth sense” doesn’t help against is cover and concealment though.


Welby: BTW, I already know you are aware why there is a required attack roll.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Then how come I have to roll to hit?

Because your target can dodge (hence the touch attack- armor doesn't make any difference), and you have to still be aimed correctly. I can point in something's general direction, and given a minute or so, I can make sure that my finger is pointed directly at an inanimate object- but it takes time. If I were given six seconds to move and point my finger directly at something, so that it's perfectly pointed directly at it, perfectly, I wouldn't be able to do it. I doubt many other people would. If I guessed at it, sure- there's a chance- and if I practiced, chances are I'd get better at my guesses too. So there's an aspect of chance involved, and the ability to improve it through training.

Hence the attack roll and BAB. The fact that a ray is a perfectly straight line (and thus not subject to gravity, like throwing a rock might be) only means it has no Range Increment.

 

[Len]

Then how come I have to roll to hit?

*shrug* 'Cuz it's easier but yet not guaranteed to hit?
That's all the mental effort I'm willing to spend justifying the rules on a "realistic" basis.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If I were given six seconds to move and point my finger directly at something, so that it's perfectly pointed directly at it, perfectly, I wouldn't be able to do it. I doubt many other people would.

And you think there'd be no difference between your ability to point accurately at something five feet away, and something five hundred feet away?

-Hyp.

 

[shilsen]

Sing it with me: It's a kind of magic.