[Spell Compendium] Ray of Light

[Jarrod]

Like others have said, the no-save part is huge.

We recently finished up Paizo's Shackled City campaign. Not to spoil much, but the BBEG had enormous saves - and we knew it going in. So my mage was packing exclusively no-save spells, or spells where the secondary effect was good enough. (Side note - did you realize that an Empowered Orb of Cold is pretty much completely better than Polar Ray?)

Ray of Light managed to keep the beastie blinded long enough for us to both pile on the damage and regroup.

So as your only 6th level spell - sure, go Disintegrate. But as you get up there in levels and the saves start scaling, it's worth it to keep your mid-level spells around as no-save attack spells. Also, lack of save = scroll bait.

 

[KarinsDad]

Because apparently this spell deflects rays that hit and spells that enhance touch AC stop (or help to stop) rays from hitting?

What do you think a deflection bonus does?

Do you figure out: "Hmmm, he needs a 15, he totaled a 12, and he has a +2 deflection bonus from his ring. So, he did not roll a 13 or 14, so I will not tell him that it got deflected, instead I will tell him it missed.".

 

[KarinsDad]

It's always interesting discussing things with you, KD, because I suspect that our DMing styles are diametrically opposed. I delight in giving my players hints about what's happening in the environment and letting them deduce effective spell effects and tactics from those. For me, it's a lot more fun to say "Made your spot check? The ray strikes his ear and flashes off at a different angle. That's definitely not usual." After all, it's something their characters would actually see, and (with the right spellcraft check) its something their characters would know. Not giving them information their PCs would have, just because the player didn't specifically call it out, is the type of game I personally wouldn't find fun.

Saying that you wouldn't have fun in someone else's game is a backhanded ad hominem. You of all people should know that PC.

Btw, I have a person drive 4 hours round trip to get to my game every weekend. I suspect that if my game was not fun, he would not do that. There is an entire city of over a million people halfway between him and me, but he does not try to find a game in that city where there are probably hundreds of games each week.

And, I also do give out a lot of information. I just do not automatically state why things happen. My players like to be challenged and figure stuff out on their own. When I was a player, it was real annoying if a DM spelled every thing out. There was no mystery. You'd be surprised how much extra information a DM gives out with what he considers a subtle hint and the players consider shouting out the answer. Course, the opposite happens too. The DM practically drops a piano on the player's heads and they still don't get it. It's a balancing act.

 

[shilsen]

Saying that you wouldn't have fun in someone else's game is a backhanded ad hominem. You of all people should know that PC.

Sensitive, much? From reading some of your posts I think I wouldn't have fun in your game either. That's not a criticism of you or your game. It's simply a statement that your approach to the game isn't mine. You would quite likely not have fun in the game(s) I run either. That's not a criticism of you or me, either.

Btw, I have a person drive 4 hours round trip to get to my game every weekend. I suspect that if my game was not fun, he would not do that. There is an entire city of over a million people halfway between him and me, but he does not try to find a game in that city where there are probably hundreds of games each week.

Cool. Not that you need to defend your game's quality here, of course.

And, I also do give out a lot of information. I just do not automatically state why things happen.

I don't think describing a ray bouncing off the target is the same as automatically stating why it happened.

My players like to be challenged and figure stuff out on their own. When I was a player, it was real annoying if a DM spelled every thing out. There was no mystery. You'd be surprised how much extra information a DM gives out with what he considers a subtle hint and the players consider shouting out the answer. Course, the opposite happens too. The DM practically drops a piano on the player's heads and they still don't get it. It's a balancing act.

As you say, it's a balancing act. And where you balance it is different from me. No need to get excited about it or assume I'm (or anyone else is) saying you're having wrongbadfun.

 

[Henry]

It pretty much screws a beholder. In fact, it pretty much screws most anyone, because a ranged touch attack is relatively easy to accomplish vs. most big creatures.

 

[Thanee]

What do you think a deflection bonus does?

Do you figure out: "Hmmm, he needs a 15, he totaled a 12, and he has a +2 deflection bonus from his ring. So, he did not roll a 13 or 14, so I will not tell him that it got deflected, instead I will tell him it missed.".

That's what I do, actually.

In this order: 10->DEX->Deflection/Luck->Shield->Armor->Natural Armor.

Thus a close miss likely got deflected by the armor, etc. It's what I base descriptions in combat off.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Twowolves]

Yep, I also try to make descriptions that give hints about the spells/protections in place (if it makes sense to be able to see them work, of course).

Bye
Thanee

Would it not count as a "spell already in effect" and thus be subject to a Spellcraft check?

 

[HeavyG]

Would it not count as a "spell already in effect" and thus be subject to a Spellcraft check?

That's what I do. It's a spell and you can detect its effect. DC 20+spell level.

Also, as Jarrod said, it's a great spell to have on a scroll. Had not thought about it that way.

 

[KarinsDad]

Would it not count as a "spell already in effect" and thus be subject to a Spellcraft check?

Only if the spell effects are visible. Deflection of a ray could occur from a variety of sources, so how does someone know that it occurred due to this spell, or due to something else the NPC might have up at the same time?

 

[KarinsDad]

That's what I do, actually.

In this order: 10->DEX->Deflection/Luck->Shield->Armor->Natural Armor.

Thus a close miss likely got deflected by the armor, etc. It's what I base descriptions in combat off.

Why did you pick the order this way?

PS. Where do you put a cover bonus in the order?