Warlock's Eldritch Blast?

[Caliban]

It actually is. Caliban isn't often wrong, but here he is.

"Attack (ranged)" only refers to the Attack action, not to making a ranged touch attack, which does not provoke an AoO as part of a "Cast a spell" action but only, if you used the Attack action to make it, which of course you can't, since it is not a simple ranged attack, but a spell-like ability. The action provokes the AoO, not the attack.

So, only one AoO for throwing out an Eldritch Blast ("Use a spell-like ability" action).

Bye
Thanee

I don't believe that I'm wrong on this one.

Using your reading of the rules, if you take a full attack action to shoot your bow multiple times it doesn't provoke any AoO's, because the Full Attack Action isn't listed as provoking an AoO, only the standard Attack (ranged) action is on the table.

I don't believe that is correct. I believe that making a ranged attack is what provokes, however you are making that attack (whether it is a Standard Attack (ranged), as part of a full attack, or as part of casting a spell.)

The touch spells in combat section on page 140 makes a provision for touch spells not provoking when you make the attack roll because you count as "armed" (indicating that if you didn't count as "armed" you would provoke an AoO), but that is something that applies to melee attacks, not ranged attacks.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

For what it's worth, I don't think the designers intended spells such as Melf's acid arrow to provoke 2 AoOs from threatening opponents.

 

[Caliban]

For what it's worth, I don't think the designers intended spells such as Melf's acid arrow to provoke 2 AoOs from threatening opponents.

I'm not making that assumption. This is how it's always been played in the groups I play in. Since one of my characters is a Ray focused sorcerer, it can be a bit of a pain, but no more so than for an archer based character.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I don't believe that is correct. I believe that making a ranged attack is what provokes...

Strictly, 'attacking with a ranged weapon'.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Strictly, 'attacking with a ranged weapon'.

-Hyp.

I know that.

 

[Thanee]

The touch spell clarification concerning AoO is also needed for holding the charge and making touch attacks (as Attack or Full-Attack action) during the rounds after the spellcasting.

Also touch spells are only melee touch attacks, and there the touch attack is explicitly seperate from the spellcasting, altho it's not really spelled out, it seems to be a Free Action to make a touch attack with a spell during the round where you cast that spell.

The ranged touch attack, however, is usually part of the spellcasting (or using spell-like ability) and no action by itself.

The Full-Attack action is just wrong in the table, it should have the same split-up as the standard Attack action does, obviously. Makes very little sense the way it is written there, which effectively says, that full attacks never provoke attacks of opportunity, armed, unarmed or ranged. That just can't be right.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

I know that.

Right. So then it comes down to the definition of 'ranged weapon'.

Is a ray, an energy missile, or an Eldritch Blast a 'ranged weapon'? Or is it a ranged attack that doesn't involve a weapon?

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The Full-Attack action is just wrong in the table, it should have the same split-up as the standard Attack action does, obviously. Makes very little sense the way it is written there, which effectively says, that full attacks never provoke attacks of opportunity, armed, unarmed or ranged. That just can't be right.

Given that you can mix ranged and melee attacks in a Full Attack action, having "Full Attack (ranged)" and "Full Attack (melee)" would be misleading.

The Charge action doesn't provoke an AoO; however, if you leave a threatened square while performing that action, you still provoke. If you Grapple or Disarm while performing that action, you still provoke.

The Attack (melee) action doesn't provoke an AoO; however, if you Grapple or Disarm while performing that action, you still provoke.

The Full Attack action doesn't provoke an AoO; however, if you Grapple, Disarm, or attack with a ranged weapon while performing that action, you still provoke.

-----

I personally think a better idea would be to unsplit the Attack action, leaving just the standard action Attack [AoO: No]; then include 'melee attack [No]', 'ranged attack [Yes]', and possibly 'unarmed attack [Yes]' under Action Type: Varies. Melee attack and unarmed attack would get footnote 7 (with a slight wording change, perhaps); ranged attack would get a similar-but-different footnote, since it can't be used on a Charge action or AoO.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

The touch spell clarification concerning AoO is also needed for holding the charge and making touch attacks (as Attack or Full-Attack action) during the rounds after the spellcasting.

I'm not sure what your point is here. So what if it is needed for multiple things?

Also touch spells are only melee touch attacks, and there the touch attack is explicitly seperate from the spellcasting, altho it's not really spelled out, it seems to be a Free Action to make a touch attack with a spell during the round where you cast that spell.

Ah, no that is incorrect. Touch spells are not only melee touch attacks. From that same section, on page 141: "Touch Attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks ... and ranged touch attacks (for touches made with magic rays, for example)."

The ranged touch attack, however, is usually part of the spellcasting (or using spell-like ability) and no action by itself.

Where does it state this? It would seem to me that the ranged touch attack has to come after you are done casting the spell, since the spell is what generates the effect you are making the attack with.

The Full-Attack action is just wrong in the table, it should have the same split-up as the standard Attack action does, obviously. Makes very little sense the way it is written there, which effectively says, that full attacks never provoke attacks of opportunity, armed, unarmed or ranged. That just can't be right.

Bye
Thanee

So you feel that the most reasonable possibility is that you are right and the rules as written are wrong? Interesting.

 

[Thanee]

Yes, but those are specifically mentioned as "special cases".

Bye
Thanee