D&D 5E Rays

Ainamacar

Adventurer
Not gonna lie: I love rays and I love treating them as attack rolls -- pointing a finger at the baddie and trying not to miss. Furthermore, critting with a ray is just about the greatest thing ever. I think 3e was where the designers settled on using ranged [touch] attacks for everything described as a ray (with some then requiring a save), and as I started playing in that era I readily admit that is where my formative sympathies lie.

The ray spells currently in 5B are Disintegrate and Ray of Frost. Others from the last play test include Scorching Ray and Ray of Enfeeblement. Prismatic Spray is described as many rays in the playtest, although as an area affect it occupies a quite different mechanical space. Setting Prismatic Spray aside for a moment, all the other ray spells involve an attack, while Disintegrate involves a Dex save. I have to admit, I'm a little disappointed that Disintegrate made it through the playtest in that form.

In 1e/2e very few spells used attack rolls, and I'm not aware that any rays were among them. Disintegrate was not described as a ray in 1e, and involved a save in both 1e/2e. It involved a save in 3.5 as well, of course, but only after a successful attack. Prismatic Spray has been an area effect forever, and in 3/3.5 the designers changed its description to "beams", probably to avoid confusion with the written rules for rays. Ray of Enfeeblement in 1e/2e involved only a save. I'm not certain if Ray of Frost existed prior to 3e. Scorching Ray also seems to have originated in 3e, although it may have evolved from the non-ray Aganazzar's Scorcher. In 4e basically everything was an attack and saves played a much different role, so an attack vs. save distinction for rays isn't really applicable to that edition.

I don't really want special written rules for rays, just a tacit guideline that things called rays have one small mechanical correspondence. Am I the only one? Even with crits, it would be possible to write a balanced version of disintegrate by adjusting how much damage comes from dice and how much from the flat bonus.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are no touch attacks in 5e.

When someone shoots a ray of frost at you, you can imagine blocking it with your shield, or glancing off your armor. Hence, attack vs. AC.

Disintegration doesn't work like that. Armor will not help you against a disintegration ray. The only thing you can do is avoid it. Hence, Dex save.
 

I also like rays a lot. There were a number of things in the play test that I regularly gave feedback on, but on the end they weren't implemented.

1. I wanted rays to require a Dex roll rather than a spellcasting-stat roll.
2. I wanted a cleric cantrip to require an attack, not be a save against. (go go laser clerics)

The first was not included, and I expect the second won't be either (though the PHB can always prove me wrong.

3. The third thing that I wanted (and it was really the SA threads today that made me realize this) was that I wanted cantrip-rays to count as a weapon for purposes of Sneak attack. Yes, I know damage with rays scale, but you lose the added damage from abilities. Given that it's requiring a secondary stat for a rogue (see 1 above!) it would be neat to have a ray-shooting rogue. I expect to be disappointed here too.

That won't stop me liking my rays.
 

There are no touch attacks in 5e.

When someone shoots a ray of frost at you, you can imagine blocking it with your shield, or glancing off your armor. Hence, attack vs. AC.
That seems at first glance like a significant nerf to ray spells.

Also, what mechanic will incorporeal creatures use for attack and-or what mechanic gets used when you really *are* just trying to touch someone e.g. deliver a touch-range spell to an ally who is otherwise busy dodging and weaving in front-line combat?

Disintegration doesn't work like that. Armor will not help you against a disintegration ray. The only thing you can do is avoid it. Hence, Dex save.
Should still need a roll to hit of some sort, though; casters can miss too, and even fumble - and fumbling with a Disintegrate isn't always pretty.

Lanefan
 

3. The third thing that I wanted (and it was really the SA threads today that made me realize this) was that I wanted cantrip-rays to count as a weapon for purposes of Sneak attack. Yes, I know damage with rays scale, but you lose the added damage from abilities. Given that it's requiring a secondary stat for a rogue (see 1 above!) it would be neat to have a ray-shooting rogue. I expect to be disappointed here too.

I hope the arcane trickster subclass covers that, but this is the kind of thing I'll have no problem houseruling.
 

When I first saw this thread I thought you were talking about rays in the water because how often do you get to fight those right?! Anyways enough trollin :)

I would have to agree with Kobold Stew here: I think rays should of been an atk roll instead of a save roll. The wizard/cleric are attacking you with something that you could dodge in my mind so it makes sense.
 


I would have to agree with Kobold Stew here: I think rays should of been an atk roll instead of a save roll. The wizard/cleric are attacking you with something that you could dodge in my mind so it makes sense.

That's the way t is for wizards. It's only clerics who lack the ray-ing goodness.

I hope the arcane trickster subclass covers that, but this is the kind of thing I'll have no problem houseruling.

Yes, or I'd even be cool with a feat.
 

There are no touch attacks in 5e.

When someone shoots a ray of frost at you, you can imagine blocking it with your shield, or glancing off your armor. Hence, attack vs. AC.

Disintegration doesn't work like that. Armor will not help you against a disintegration ray. The only thing you can do is avoid it. Hence, Dex save.

All true, and I'm quite happy that there is such a smooth integration of that narrative within 5e's mechanical framework, don't get me wrong. I'm just wistful that those mechanics also conflict with the narrative of agency I much prefer for rays...they're my sentimental favorite. :) As a mechanic touch attacks didn't always pay off in 3/3.5, but for rays they were the right tool for the job.
 

But OTOH, rays now use your primary casting stat in the attack roll. I haven't played, yet, but it seems to me that should make up at least a good chunk of the difference.

This. Also, fighters and wizards now have the same "base attack bonus". In 2E, wizards would make attack rolls with a THAC0 equal to a fighter of their level. In 3E, touch attacks replaced that.

Using your caster stat and having a good attack bonus is more than enough to compensate not having touch attacks. There's no nerf.

One day I'll tell my children that creatures used to have a base AC, a touch AC and a flat-footed AC and they'll probably look at me with that "wtf!" face. :D
 

Remove ads

Top