Warlock's Eldritch Blast?

[Thanee]

Let's say you want to cast Inflict Light Wounds. Are you allowed to cast the spell, move up to an enemy, then touch attack them all in one round?

Yes.

Now look at something like Scorching Ray. Are you allowed to cast the spell, move into a better position, then fire off the spell?

No.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Terath Ninir]

This is why I use logic instead of the letter of the rules. Years of playing Car Wars has shown me that the letter of the rules is often written to meet a deadline with little thought given to the exact implications of the phrasings.

Eldritch Blast is a ranged attack. Ranged attacks give attacks of opportunity. So eldritch blast should trigger an AoO. Eldritch blast is a single action. As you activate the power, you blastinate your target. Therefor, it is illogical, no matter what the rules say, for it to trigger *two* AoO's.

Logic should always trump the letter of the rules. But I suppose posting in this thread is better than working for y'all, so I'll let you get back to it.

 

[IanB]

So... does fireball provoke a second attack of opportunity in situations when you have fire through a small opening? After all, in those situations it requires a ranged touch attack.

If so, why doesn't it provoke an attack of opportunity for throwing the 'bead' in situations where the ranged attack roll is not necessary? The spell is the same.

If not, why is it different than the other ranged touch spells under the Caliban interpretation?

Also, consider this SRD text, from the magic chapter:

Attacks: Some spell descriptions refer to attacking. All offensive combat actions, even those that don’t damage opponents are considered attacks. Attempts to turn or rebuke undead count as attacks. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don’t harm anyone.

All spells that do damage count as attacks - does this not imply that a magic missile spell is thus a ranged attack, and provokes a second attack of opportunity despite the lack of an attack roll? It does, after all, count as an attack, and it happens at range.

 

[Caliban]

All spells that do damage count as attacks - does this not imply that a magic missile spell is thus a ranged attack, and provokes a second attack of opportunity despite the lack of an attack roll? It does, after all, count as an attack, and it happens at range.

Nope. Your trying to conflate two different meanings of the word "attack" within the rules. The text you quoted is not relevent to the discussion at hand.

 

[IanB]

OK, seems reasonable.

How about the fireball thing?

 

[Abraxas]

Not sure if this helps at all but the main 3.5 FAQ v12102004 has this little bit

Question: "Several spells, such as scorching ray and meteor swarm, require the user to make multiple ranged touch attacks. Does the caster have to use the full attack action to use all the ranged touch attacks these spells allow?"

Answer: "Both of the example spells have a casting time of 1 standard action and an instantaneous duration. The caster uses the cast a spell action (a standard action), and makes all the ranged touch attacks the spell allows as part of that standard action (not as part of the attack or full attack action); making these attacks is not an action at all."

So it would seem that the attacks are not separate and should not provoke an additional AoO - Only the casting of the spell would provoke (or in the case of the Warlock, using the Eldritch blast provokes because it is using a spell like ability not because of the ranged attack used to resolve it)

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Finally!!! Thanks, that's exactly the clarification that I was looking for!

 

[Caliban]

Finally!!! Thanks, that's exactly the clarification that I was looking for!

Except that it doesn't really clarify this issue. That answer is regarding "volley" style spells, which do multiple effects/attacks as a single action (much like manyshot).

You are still making a ranged attack as part of casting the spell.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But if it is not a free action it contradicts the rules for movement and how actions have to be resolved...

No, it's an exception to the rules for movement and how it is resolved.

Just like when you use the Spring Attack feat.

What are you saying, anyways, Hypersmurf? It doesn't really become clear. Do you also think, that something else but actions provoke attacks of opportunity? Or do you just want to point out some errors/vague parts there without presenting an opinion?

I think that when speaking of attacks of opportunity and readied actions, the term 'action' must also be taken to include non-action sub-elements of an action.

For example, "The readied action occurs just before the action that triggered it."

The example given is "you will shoot an arrow at anyone coming through a nearby doorway".

If someone moves fifteen feet up a corridor and through the door with a Move action, then strictly, the 'action that triggered it' is the Move action, so my readied action (shoot them) occurs while they are still fifteen feet up the corridor.

If I ready to 'attack him if he attacks me', and he attacks me on the third iterative attack of his Full Attack action, then strictly, the 'action that triggered it' is his Full Attack action, so my readied action (attack him) occurs before he uses his first two iterative attacks.

But it seems that we can generalise 'action' a little, to include such non-action sub-elements as 'travel the next five feet of a total move of 20 feet', or 'third iterative attack of a full attack'.

That's how I'd read AoOs as well. Making a ranged attack as part of a full attack action is a non-action sub-element of an action, but it can provoke (under the 'attacking with a ranged weapon' definition.

Do you think a ranged touch spell provokes twice?

My inclination is to say no, and that's what I'd rule as DM. But if another DM ruled yes, I wouldn't argue the call

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

So it would seem that the attacks are not separate and should not provoke an additional AoO - Only the casting of the spell would provoke (or in the case of the Warlock, using the Eldritch blast provokes because it is using a spell like ability not because of the ranged attack used to resolve it)

Well, it certainly underlines my "theory" , but it doesn't say a thing about how attacks of opportunity are provoked. As Caliban said, it doesn't really clarify the matter at hand (that is, how attacks of opportunity are provoked).

What it does, is, if you go by what I said (and the definition of AoO ), that only actions provoke AoO, then it indeed clarifies, that spells do not provoke twice.

Bye
Thanee