| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
xmaxx
Acolyte
France
39 Posts |
 Posted - 01 Aug 2014 : 14:54:22
|
Except "Magic Missile" (that is said to always hit), what is the rule concerning distance attack spells like "Flame", "Melf arrow" or "Fireeyes"?
Is there a specific die to cast in order to hit a target? Or is hitting automatic?
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4689 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2014 : 15:51:28
|
Most spells have saving throws.
Flame arrow requires a to hit roll by the archer.
Melf's Acid Arrow no saving throw it hits.
"Fireeyes" and "Flame" are not listed in PHB or ToM so I can not answer quickly. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
 |
|
|
The Masked Mage
Great Reader
USA
2420 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2014 : 16:44:04
|
There are others that are automatic to hit. Others roll THAC0 attacks, I think Snilloc's is an example. Some are automatic if in area of effect and saves just determine damage.
Fire eyes is one of the automatic hits. Save for half damage.
I don't know a "Flame" spell. I'm guessing you meant flame arrow or maybe even flame ray...
Flame Arrow pretty much just lights arrows on fire. Someone still has to fire them normally so it is a THAC0 attack.
Flame Ray is a area of effect save for half situation. Think smaller, hot version of cone of cold :P |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2014 : 22:42:39
|
Can a wizard allocate apply THAC0 bonus from, say, spending Weapon Proficiency slots on Throwing Weapons Style? Is such an option available to multi-classed Fighter/Mage, Thief/Mage, etc?
My gaming groups always allowed THAC0 bonuses from Unarmed Combat or Martial Arts for Touch-targeted spells - although close examination of the rules does not explicitly mention these little details. It seems like TSR/WotC simply assume that Wizards have hopelessly sucky to-hit odds. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4689 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2014 : 23:31:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Can a wizard allocate apply THAC0 bonus from, say, spending Weapon Proficiency slots on Throwing Weapons Style? Is such an option available to multi-classed Fighter/Mage, Thief/Mage, etc?
My gaming groups always allowed THAC0 bonuses from Unarmed Combat or Martial Arts for Touch-targeted spells - although close examination of the rules does not explicitly mention these little details. It seems like TSR/WotC simply assume that Wizards have hopelessly sucky to-hit odds.
A Wizard needs to be level 6 before even having weapon slots. They start with one.
As far as it goes, unless a splat book is out there, no way to use slots to just improve THAC0.
Further note, WotC had little or nothing to do with 2nd Edition. Most of that was under TSR. WotC came in at the end when TSR was "having problems with the printers." |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
The Masked Mage
Great Reader
USA
2420 Posts |
Posted - 02 Aug 2014 : 09:06:34
|
In any case, unless you are talking about a fighter/wizard, wizards can be proficient but not specialize so they get no bonuses, only attack penalties for nonproficiency.
Fighter/mages can specialize. special examples, like bladesingers, can actually get a large bonus.
In general the assumption IS that wizards are non-melee fighers... they are limited to the staff and dagger, after all. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 02 Aug 2014 : 22:42:02
|
True mages are not as entirely limited as all that. They can also use darts! And boy do I have tall tales about a 1st-level adventuring party which included three wizards with poisoned darts. But I won't tell them here, aside from saying other PCs were quite unhappy with repeated critical fumble rolls.
And it's true that no additional WP slots become available until levels 6, 12, etc.
Multi-classed mages do fare better. And a Fighter/Mage can obtain Specialization (or at least "Expertise") at most 2E gaming tables. (Although, technically, a multi-classed Fighter - or even a Fighter subclass like Ranger or Paladin - cannot Specialize! Fortunately, I've never met any 2E DM's who interpret the rules so literally. A position apparently implicitly adopted by later 2E products.)
So I ask again: can single-classed Wizards spend WPs (one way or another) to somehow improve their THAC0 with touch or distance spells? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4689 Posts |
Posted - 02 Aug 2014 : 22:57:58
|
quote:
A weapon proficiency measures a character's knowledge and training with a specific weapon. When a character is created, the player checks Table 34 to see how many weapon proficiency slots the character has. These initial slots must be filled immediately, before the character embarks on his first adventure. Any slots that aren't filled by then are lost.
Each weapon proficiency slot must be assigned to a particular weapon, not just a class of weapons. Each weapon listed in Table 44 (Weapons) requires its own proficiency; each has its own special tricks and quirks that must be mastered before the weapon can be handled properly and effectively. A fencer who is master of the epee, for example, is not necessarily skilled with a saber; the two weapons look similar, but the
fighting styles they are designed for are entirely different. A player character could become proficient with a long bow or a short bow, but not with all bows in general (unless he devotes a proficiency slot to each individually). Furthermore, a character can assign weapon proficiency slots only to those weapons allowed to his character class.
Nothing in table 44 lists magic as a weapon, range or touch. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
The Masked Mage
Great Reader
USA
2420 Posts |
Posted - 03 Aug 2014 : 02:30:47
|
| When spells use THAC0 - it is not the magic that is a weapon. There are really only 2 kinds of spells like that. The first CREATE weapons to use: arrows, bullets, etc. The second are touch attacks empowered with magic. |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1847 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 22:54:43
|
quote:
Although, technically, a multi-classed Fighter - or even a Fighter subclass like Ranger or Paladin - cannot Specialize! Fortunately, I've never met any 2E DM's who interpret the rules so literally.
I have, quiet recently in fact, from this very site. He knows who he is. 
I've really come to appreciate 3e over the years (as a rules system) even if it gets to powerful at later levels. It really allows wizards far more options than 2e. All classes for that matter. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 23:58:53
|
2E encompassed a lot of products and a lot of evolution in terms of rules and game mechanics. Most 2E people seem to embrace the entire package, favouring late-2E rules and options and expansions. I have met very few purists who use nothing published outside the PHB and DMG core rules - in fact, those I have met all tend to stick with pure AD&D (1E), they think of 2E as an ugly collection of compromises.
I can understand the attitude, since I am a 2E diehard who thinks of 3E as a ridiculously inflated Monty Hall (and Monty Haul) munchkin manga system. Not 3E bashing, I still play it from time to time, its just that 2E evokes more of what (to me) *real* D&D is all about. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2014 : 00:24:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
2E encompassed a lot of products and a lot of evolution in terms of rules and game mechanics. Most 2E people seem to embrace the entire package, favouring late-2E rules and options and expansions. I have met very few purists who use nothing published outside the PHB and DMG core rules - in fact, those I have met all tend to stick with pure AD&D (1E), they think of 2E as an ugly collection of compromises.
I can understand the attitude, since I am a 2E diehard who thinks of 3E as a ridiculously inflated Monty Hall (and Monty Haul) munchkin manga system. Not 3E bashing, I still play it from time to time, its just that 2E evokes more of what (to me) *real* D&D is all about.
I was once invited to join a 1E game... But then the guy told me about some house rule his DM had, allowing for magic missile spells to be cast and held, while more magic missile spells were cast and held... And then later, unleashing a "missile rack" and killing a dragon in one salvo.
He also told me about his like 10th-level paladin being able to mop the floor with pit fiends.
Needless to say, I did not join that game. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 06 Mar 2015 : 15:22:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
2E encompassed a lot of products and a lot of evolution in terms of rules and game mechanics. Most 2E people seem to embrace the entire package, favouring late-2E rules and options and expansions. I have met very few purists who use nothing published outside the PHB and DMG core rules - in fact, those I have met all tend to stick with pure AD&D (1E), they think of 2E as an ugly collection of compromises.
I can understand the attitude, since I am a 2E diehard who thinks of 3E as a ridiculously inflated Monty Hall (and Monty Haul) munchkin manga system. Not 3E bashing, I still play it from time to time, its just that 2E evokes more of what (to me) *real* D&D is all about.
I was once invited to join a 1E game... But then the guy told me about some house rule his DM had, allowing for magic missile spells to be cast and held, while more magic missile spells were cast and held... And then later, unleashing a "missile rack" and killing a dragon in one salvo.
He also told me about his like 10th-level paladin being able to mop the floor with pit fiends.
Needless to say, I did not join that game.
I guess some players like to play over-powered characters but it's not my cup of tea. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2428 Posts |
Posted - 06 Mar 2015 : 23:57:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Melf's Acid Arrow no saving throw it hits.
"as if fired from the bow of a fighter of the same level as the wizard. No modifiers for range, nonproficiency, or specialization are used. The arrow has no attack or damage bonus".
That is, attack roll. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4689 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2015 : 02:56:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Melf's Acid Arrow no saving throw it hits.
"as if fired from the bow of a fighter of the same level as the wizard. No modifiers for range, nonproficiency, or specialization are used. The arrow has no attack or damage bonus".
That is, attack roll.
Not sure why you picked this, however the use of quotes clearly interesting.
The full sentence is "By means of this spell, the wizard creates a magical arrow that speeds to its target as if fired from the bow of a fighter of the same level as the wizard."
The language as to magic missile is different, however even cover can make that spell ineffective. There is nothing in the spell description that requires a to hit roll, though it certainly might be implied because of references to no modifies apply to the attack. There though are other things, like the saving throw. The saving throw is special: "The arrow has no attack or damage bonus, but it inflicts 2d4 points of acid damage(with saving throws for items on the target)."
Maybe the Sage (Skip Williams) answered this, certainly should have been asked. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2015 : 15:04:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
quote:
Although, technically, a multi-classed Fighter - or even a Fighter subclass like Ranger or Paladin - cannot Specialize! Fortunately, I've never met any 2E DM's who interpret the rules so literally.
I have, quiet recently in fact, from this very site. He knows who he is.
I've really come to appreciate 3e over the years (as a rules system) even if it gets to powerful at later levels. It really allows wizards far more options than 2e. All classes for that matter.
Same... I really appreciate the 3.5 rules, and now the pathfinder rules as well. What gets me though is when people say that the power levels of wizards in 3.5/pathfinder is MORE than it was in 2e. I can go back to my notes of some of the stuff I did in 2e, and those rules were ENORMOUSLY broken in 2e when it came to wizards. What I could do with triggering spells, spell storing spells, contingencies, etc.... and how effective some of those spells were..... dude, 3.5 came a long way towards lessening that power. There were so many spells that gave you absolute immunity to certain types of attacks, it became near impossible to hurt a defensive caster. I remember once detailing a drow lich... simple enough... and once I started putting on his spells, I literally was having problems trying to figure out HOW I could (if I were a player) hurt the guy.
Now, don't get me wrong, I love the richness of 2nd edition magic, and I think it was having these concepts developed, reviewed, and then later worked on in 3rd edition that made them VIABLE. For instance, I love the persistent spell feat. I love the craft contingent spell feat, as well as the attune gem feat. The fact that you have to spend feats (or class levels in some odd class) to get those abilities basically enforces some power controls on wizards. What we need to not do in 3.5 is invent spells that duplicate the abilities of spells with the effects of those feats applied, such that someone taking those feats really can appreciate what he can do with them.
So, spells like the Simbul's spells that let you hold multiple spells.... okay, I can see this as a spell, but unless you have say the craft contingent spell feat, perhaps you shouldn't be able to learn it. Similarly, the "sash of spells" spell from Volo's Guide tatMagical, perhaps its only learnable to someone with the spell mantle feat (which requires craft contingent spell first). The rainbow shield spell, perhaps its only learnable to someone with both (stress both) the retributive spell (from Comp. Mage) and the persistent spell feat. Imbue undead with spell ability might be usable by someone with (craft contingent spell OR attune gem) AND the Destruction Retribution feat (from Libris Mortis).
I'd love to see someone actually go through a lot of these old 2e spells and list out these definitely overpowered magics, so that we could then assign them out as possibilities still for people with just the right "specializations" to bring them about. I'd also stress that these "spells" shouldn't be recreatable even by someone employing magics that can duplicate "any spell" such as a wish, an anyspell spell, etc.... Of course, the spells would have to be updated for 3.5, and there might be different variations of each spell (for instance and lesser and greater imbue undead with spell ability, or a lesser and greater rainbow shield, or a lesser and greater sash of spells).
Hmmm, in fact, I might start a new topic on this very idea. Let me think on it a bit. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2015 : 16:52:22
|
Magic missile requires no attack roll in AD&D 1E/2E, its an automatic hit, no save. Melfs acid arrow can miss with a bad attack roll:
The 2E PHB spells did a fair job of balancing combat magics, I think. Largely by capping maximum possible damage/effect for higher level wizards (presumably encouraging them to favour higher level spells). Later additions and spells scattered across dozens of sourcebooks are what threw it all back out of whack. What wizard would memorize magic missile when he could cast chromatic orb?
Many of the imba spells were intended to be exotic and restricted to very specific wizards/races/regions/cultures within the setting at large, most were not designed for the Realms setting. Players usually assume they should have anything written anywhere in the rulebooks. And the usual auctorial inflation keeps on pushing each new piece of print to higher limits than anything printed before. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2015 : 17:03:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
chromatic orb
Ahh, great spell! One of my favs. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Distance attack spells (2nd ed)
