Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gabrion" data-source="post: 2183323" data-attributes="member: 30779">So I was a part of this discussion with Egres on the other thread and I must say that it is much more civil here! Anyway, I will point out a few of my observations.1) The quote Egres used for defining "target" was specifically for the target of a spell. There is a good argument to be made that the target of this spell is the object being throw, not the thing it hits. The latter is a target however, but in a different way. It is the target of an attack roll, which is very different from the spell target to which Egres referred.2) As has already been pointed out, MotUH is a sub-optimal PrC that should not be used as a basis for rules judgements about other spells.3) Spells like fireball allow us to make attack roles with spell effects that target nothing. Read the thing about an arrow slit. The target is the empty space between the edges of the slit. So the spell effect is being aimed at nothing. Sound familiar?4) Really, this discussion need not happen. I've always found flying familiars to be the most useful, so just get a raven and have him flying overhead during the fight (he shouldn't be in combat anyway). Aim the violent thrust at him and fail your attack roll on purpose. The guy will still fly 200 ft in the air and you bird will be safe.</blockquote>