Warlock's Eldritch Blast?

[Saeviomagy]

Yeah, but that's what happens after you finish casting the spell, not as part of casting the spell. You have to finish the spell (and resolve any concentration checks or attempts to interrupt it), before the spell effect is generated. Then you make the attack roll, and resolve that. It's two seperate events that occur on the same initiative count.

I'd disagree - I'd say it's a single event "successfully casting the spell" which encapsulates other sub-events - namely applying all of the effects of the spell, making necessary rolls etc etc.

After all, it's not possible to ready an action for "after he succeeds at casting the spell, but before he resolves it", any more than it's possible to ready an action for "after he makes the attack roll, but before the damage roll is resolved".

 

[Caliban]

Butting in among the rule miesters....

I'd argue that a spell (or blast in this case) may, as a mechanic, require an attack roll. I don't see why melf's acid arrow should provoke 2 AoO while magic missle only one. If the designers had intended that, I have to imagine they would have clearly specified such odd behavior.

Why is it odd that you can provokes more than one AoO on your turn?

If you take a potion out of your pouch and drink it with melee range, you just provoked 2 AoO's.

 

[Caliban]

I'd disagree - I'd say it's a single event "successfully casting the spell" which encapsulates other sub-events - namely applying all of the effects of the spell, making necessary rolls etc etc.

THe Combat section explicitly seperates the act of touching from the act of casting the spell. Explicitly in the case of melee touch spells, and it is implied in the case of ranged touch spells.

 

[Thanee]

Then it provokes. Attacking with a ranged weapon provokes an AoO, as clearly stated in the rules.

Because the PHB says so. Page 137, Provoking an Attack of Opportunity, performing a distracting act, 2nd sentence: "Casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon, for example, are distracting actions."

Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.
Moving: ...
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity.... Casting a spell [Table 8-2: Cast a spell] and attacking with a ranged weapon [Table 8-2: Attack (ranged)], for example, are distracting actions. Table 8-2: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
...

It quite clearly says that the Attack action (as listed in Table 8-2) with a ranged weapon provokes the AoO, not attacking with a ranged weapon.

An Eldritch Blast is fired with the "Use spell-like ability" action, not the "Attack (ranged)" action.

A Touch spell (melee only), however, is IMHO delivered with the Attack action (just that it is not a standard but a free action during the same turn as the spellcasting). But the same does not apply to ranged touch attacks made in conjunction with spells or spell-like abilities, only melee touch attacks.

It sounds like it, but unfortunately that's not what it says.

Not? It says, that the caster has to touch the target. How would that work (except in a rather metaphorical sense) with a ranged touch attack?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

THe Combat section explicitly seperates the act of touching from the act of casting the spell. Explicitly in the case of melee touch spells, and it is implied in the case of ranged touch spells.

That is exactly the tricky part and where I obviously disagree... it nowhere implies, that the Touch spell rules are meant for ranged touch attacks. It just says, that touch attacks can be either melee or ranged.

Touch spell <> Touch attack

Bye
Thanee

 

[Caliban]

It quite clearly says that the Attack action (as listed in Table 8-2) with a ranged weapon provokes the AoO, not attacking with a ranged weapon.

Um, the text you quoted specifically says "attacking with a ranged weapon".

And the table notes "many of the actions that provoke an AoO", but not all of them. It is not exhaustive. If it was, a Full Attack Action with a bow wouldn't provoke any attacks at all.

An Eldritch Blast is fired with the "Use spell-like ability" action, not the "Attack (ranged)" action.

Yes, but the point that I'm trying to make is that the act of attacking with a ranged weapon is what provokes, regardless of what type of action you are using to make that attack. See my previous posts.

A Touch spell (melee only), however, is IMHO delivered with the Attack action (just that it is not a standard but a free action during the same turn as the spellcasting). But the same does not apply to ranged touch attacks made in conjunction with spells or spell-like abilities, only melee touch attacks.

An attack is not an action, in and of itself. It is something you can use an action to do. You can attack as part of casting a spell, as part of using a spell-like ability, as part of a full round action, as part of a standard attack action, or as part of a standard action that isn't an attack action (such as when using the Manyshot feat).

Not? It says, that the caster has to touch the target. How would that work (except in a rather metaphorical sense) with a ranged touch attack?

If you touch someone with a 10' foot pole, you are still touching them, are you not?

 

[Thanee]

Um, the text you quoted specifically says "attacking with a ranged weapon".

I know, and I still say, that it's exactly that way.

Because that is what the text says, when it is put into context.

And the table notes "many of the actions that provoke an AoO", but not all of them. It is not exhaustive.

How could it? There are dozens of books coming out in the future. And even more special cases (like Manyshot, which you list below, which is not an Attack action, but still should provoke an AoO (it really should say so in the feat description, actually)).

But it lists ranged attacks already... so do they then provoke 2 AoO's? One for the action, one for the attack?

No, sorry, "attacking with a ranged weapon" is just a description for the "Attack (ranged)" action there, because it sounds better that way when it is written out in a sentence. The whole paragraphs make very clear, that the action provokes, nothing else.

An attack is not an action, in and of itself. It is something you can use an action to do. You can attack as part of casting a spell, as part of using a spell-like ability, as part of a full round action, as part of a standard attack action, or as part of a standard action that isn't an attack action (such as when using the Manyshot feat).

Right.

Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.

That's all of it. No attacks. Actions.

If you touch someone with a 10' foot pole, you are still touching them, are you not?

No, the pole is.

Or do you want to say, that you can deliver touch spells with melee weapons now?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Besides...

It's even easier...

Regardless of whether you are right or I am...

Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

So, if it applies to both melee and ranged...

Well, you can figure the rest.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Caliban]

I know, and I still say, that it's exactly that way.

Because that is what the text says, when it is put into context.

I disagree with you there. If it was, then a full attack action with a bow would not provoke. Manyshot would not provoke.

You seem to be using that table as the only arbiter of what actions provoke, but then you say the table is wrong when you disagree with part of it.

I think there is a general principle at work: Any ranged weapon attack provokes, unless you have something that specifically states otherwise. That fits the rules without having to declare any part of the table wrong.

Attack (ranged) provokes because it's a Standard Attack Action being used to make a ranged attack. Melee, ranged, or unarmed, it's still a Standard Attack Action. It's the type of attack you use it for that determines if an AoO is provoked.

No, the pole is.

Exactly.

And you are not actually touching them when you hit them with a melee touch spell either. The spell is touching them.

And when you touch them with a ranged touch spell, it is the spell that is touching them.

In each case, you aren't actually touching them, but in the common usage of english, it is phrased as if you are, since you are directing the thing used to touch them.






........


This is why I hate it when discussions focus on the minutae of the rules and language, rather than the principles and intent behind the rules. You can render any sentence meaningless if you parse it close enough, or start bringing in idiomatic uses of the language as if they applied.

I'm just blowing smoke. I agree that a Touch Spell is most reasonabley intended to be a melee touch attack.

However, I still think that any attack with a ranged weapon provokes, whether it is part of a spell, full attack action, or standard action. I was kind of hoping someone would convince me otherwise, because it would be good news for my sorcerer.

 

[Caliban]

Besides...

It's even easier...

Regardless of whether you are right or I am...



So, if it applies to both melee and ranged...

Well, you can figure the rest.

Bye
Thanee

Except that being "armed" doesn't apply to ranged attacks. That's why bows still provoke.