[3.5/PF] Are rays one-handed weapons?

[puzzler7]

Slippers of Battledancing: While these slippers are on the wearer’s feet, he moves with unnatural grace and alacrity, gaining an enhancement bonus of +10 feet to his land speed. The slippers also grant him a +5 competence bonus on Tumble checks. A wearer who has at least 5 ranks in Perform (dance) accesses the true benefit of the slippers of battledancing. As long as he uses his base land speed to move (a fly, swim, burrowing, or climb speed), he gains a +2 insight bonus on initiative checks. If he moves at least 10 feet as part of a move action, he can use his Charisma modifier instead of his Strength or Dexterity modifier for attack rolls and damage rolls with one-handed or light weapons (both melee and ranged).

Emphasis mine.

I'm looking to play a caster very heavily based on Charisma, and I found these. However, I couldn't find whether or not rays were considered one-handed ranged weapons, or even an example of a one-handed ranged weapon. However, they are clearly weapons, as specifically noted by Weapon Focus. So by RAW, (either in 3.5 or PF), are rays light, one-handed, two-handed, or none of the above?

[Celestia]

Well, you only need one hand free to cast spells, so logically speaking, yes. However, D&D is anything but logical. "Officially," I don't think they have a category. They are rays and nothing more.

[Bucky]

Properly speaking, "one handed weapons" always refers to melee weapons. RAI ranged one-handed weapons are any ranged weapons you use with one hand, but there's no rule defining any of them as such*, just text like "you can fire, but not load, a sling with one hand".


*except for thrown one-handed melee weapons.

[Domar]

According to Complete Arcane ranged touch attack and melee touch attack spells are weapon like and count as weapons for some purposes.

[puzzler7]

Properly speaking, "one handed weapons" always refers to melee weapons. RAI ranged one-handed weapons are any ranged weapons you use with one hand, but there's no rule defining any of them as such*, just text like "you can fire, but not load, a sling with one hand".


*except for thrown one-handed melee weapons.

Alright, so by RAW, Slippers of Battledancing won't boost my Ray spells? That's a shame.

[Bucky]

By RAW they don't boost slings either.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The sorcerer's hand crossbow, from the Arms & Equipment Guide, can be used to fire rays, with bonuses on attack and damage based on its enhancement bonuses. If it has the aptitude quality, it could count as any number of other weapons (including one-handed melee weapons) for the purposes of feats. I imagine that could be quite useful if done right. Perhaps find a way to add the manyfang quality for x4 damage?

[Eox]

Unfortunately, due to the language used there you won't be able to add your Charisma to damage unless you find a way to add your Strength or Dexterity to damage with a ray spell. For a decent parallel, see the difference between no Constitution score (constructs, undead) and a Constitution score of zero (an exsanguinated corpse).

[Telonius]

In Complete Arcane section on weaponlike spells, touch spells are specifically called out as being treated as Light Weapons for the purpose of Weapon Finesse:


You can treat touch spells as light weapons and use your Dexterity modifier (instead of your Strength modifier) on your touch attack rolls with such spells.

Whether that's intended to be a narrow reading (just for Weapon Finesse), or applicable whenever it would come up for a feat or ability where it matters, isn't clarified. (Unfortunately not helpful with rays either way).

[puzzler7]

Unfortunately, due to the language used there you won't be able to add your Charisma to damage unless you find a way to add your Strength or Dexterity to damage with a ray spell. For a decent parallel, see the difference between no Constitution score (constructs, undead) and a Constitution score of zero (an exsanguinated corpse).

I'm just looking for CHA to hit.


In Complete Arcane section on weaponlike spells, touch spells are specifically called out as being treated as Light Weapons for the purpose of Weapon Finesse:

Whether that's intended to be a narrow reading (just for Weapon Finesse), or applicable whenever it would come up for a feat or ability where it matters, isn't clarified. (Unfortunately not helpful with rays either way).

Thanks! Not helpful with rays, but I can probably present a decent argument to the DM with this.

[malloc]

Complex question. Let's look at whether or not it's a light weapon.

We know that touch attacks are a categorization of unarmed strikes:


"Armed" Unarmed Attacks
Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.

Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity)

...and that unarmed strikes are light weapons:


Unarmed Strike Damage
An unarmed strike from a Medium character deals 1d3 points of damage (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). A Small character’s unarmed strike deals 1d2 points of damage, while a Large character’s unarmed strike deals 1d4 points of damage. All damage from unarmed strikes is nonlethal damage. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on).

"and so on"--the optimizer's wet dream.

But are ranged touch attacks different from melee touch attacks?


An attack in which the attacker must connect with an opponent but does not need to penetrate armor. Touch attacks may be either melee or ranged. The target's armor bonus, shield bonus, and natural armor bonus (including any enhancement bonuses to those values) do not apply to AC against a touch attack.
http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_touchattack&alpha=

No. So your rays are light weapons.

But wait! There are arguments to be had.

The components of a ray could determine whether or not it qualifies as a light weapon:


Light
A light weapon is easier to use in one’s off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and it can be used while grappling.

Spells can be cast with 1 free hand, so no worries on the handedness.


To cast a spell with a somatic (S) component, you must gesture freely with at least one hand. You can’t cast a spell of this type while bound, grappling, or with both your hands full or occupied (swimming, clinging to a cliff, or the like).

Oh, wait a minute, there's something else there...


Grappling or Pinned
The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand. Even so, you must make a Concentration check (DC 20 + the level of the spell you’re casting) or lose the spell.

So any ray with a somatic component is potentially not a light weapon. Does it potentially become a light weapon with still spell?

Arguments can be made towards either side. I'd say that the stronger case is FOR them being light weapons, but as a DM you could use either justification if you need to curtail a player (or empower one).



I can't find any good definition of what a one-handed weapon is.


One-Handed
A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or ½ his or her Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1½ times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls.

So it's super vague and stupid, other than "it can be used in one hand", which rays certainly can be. The strength bits are irrelevant, per the Complete Arcane section that spurred this discussion (pg 85, Weaponlike Spells).

Are there one-handed ranged weapons?

Well, I can't find any one-handed or light (category, not name) crossbows. They all mention that they can be used in one hand, but does that qualify them as one-handed weapons? I'd say no, wording should be specific. They say they can dual-wield as if they were light weapons, which explicitly means they are not light weapons.


Crossbow, Hand
You can draw a hand crossbow back by hand. Loading a hand crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

You can shoot, but not load, a hand crossbow with one hand at no penalty. You can shoot a hand crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons.

Well, there are some ranged weapons that are considered light and one-handed, namely thrown weapons:


Thrown Weapons
Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears, darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents, shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder applies his or her Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons (except for splash weapons). It is possible to throw a weapon that isn’t designed to be thrown (that is, a melee weapon that doesn’t have a numeric entry in the Range Increment column on Table: Weapons), but a character who does so takes a -4 penalty on the attack roll. Throwing a light or one-handed weapon is a standard action, while throwing a two-handed weapon is a full-round action. Regardless of the type of weapon, such an attack scores a threat only on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. Such a weapon has a range increment of 10 feet.

So there's some precedent for it. But the ones that are explicitly light or one-handed are listed in the appropriate melee table. So it's a wash.



I think the most compelling argument is for them to be light weapons.

Anything not sourced is from the SRD, likely from here:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm

[Jowgen]

I'm just looking for CHA to hit.

I suggest trying the "Charming the Arrow" feat (will need Fey typing, which can be tricky); and then using the Sorcerer's Hand crossbow MaxiDuRaritry mentioned. I believe that should work.

[Crake]

~words~

You made an incorrect leap of logic when you conflated unarmed strikes with unarmed attacks. They are not interchangable. Unarmed strikes are a subset of unarmed attacks. Specifically, without the improved unarmed strike feat (or a level in monk), they aren't even "armed" unarmed attacks as per the section you linked

[malloc]

You made an incorrect leap of logic when you conflated unarmed strikes with unarmed attacks. They are not interchangable. Unarmed strikes are a subset of unarmed attacks. Specifically, without the improved unarmed strike feat (or a level in monk), they aren't even "armed" unarmed attacks as per the section you linked

Ah, you're correct on the distinction between strikes and attacks. I'll see if I can find some additional stuff.

On the second point, I am correct. A caster making a touch attack to deliver a spell is considered to be making an "armed" unarmed attack, per the SRD. Unless you have a different source that trumps the SRD, the wording is quite clear.


A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.

Being a monk makes you armed.
Having Improved Unarmed Strike makes you armed.
Being a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell makes you armed (awkward wording to keep the parallelism).
A creature with natural physical weapons makes you armed.

[Crake]

Ah, you're correct on the distinction between strikes and attacks. I'll see if I can find some additional stuff.

On the second point, I am correct. A caster making a touch attack to deliver a spell is considered to be making an "armed" unarmed attack, per the SRD. Unless you have a different source that trumps the SRD, the wording is quite clear.



Being a monk makes you armed.
Having Improved Unarmed Strike makes you armed.
Being a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell makes you armed (awkward wording to keep the parallelism).
A creature with natural physical weapons makes you armed.

I'm not disputing the second point, I'm disputing your leap of logic that led you to claim that touch attacks were one handed/light weapons, which they are not, at least, not by that logic.

Of course, you can deliver a melee touch attack through an unarmed strike, though you must now hit regular AC, and that's not exactly relevant when it comes to rays anyway.

[puzzler7]

Thanks for the help, everyone! The DM ended up ruling that all spells that require an attack roll are one-handed weapons, unless they have no somatic components, in which case they are light weapons.