Catching Wands?

I've got a wand-happy Magus running around who has a monkey familiar with a bag of wands. The monkey digs out and throws whatever wand the Magus wants at him, he snags it with snatch arrows, casts his spell as a part of spell combat, and drops it. The monkey retrieves it later.

I was just curious if this was totally legit. I don't really care because it's hilarious but does it work RAW (aside from being somewhat silly and probably non-optimal)? Does he even need snatch arrows? If the monkey just tries to hand it to him does it take an action to retrieve it or is that free?

Switching hands (such as going from one to two hands on a weapon) is a free action, so I don't see why a familiar using its own action to hand him something would take more than that. I don't think he needs Snatch Arrows, either, but it's impressive that the idea is important enough to him that he took the feat to make sure one could not object.

It could be worse. The Monkey could use whatever ranks in UMD the Magus has and just use the wands on it's own.

Yeah, he loves that monkey... So it is legit then. Nothing wrong with throwing a wand, or the monkey having the knowledge to dig out the right wand, or anything like that?

A familiar can use his masters skills? I didn't know that. The monkey using the wands himself would be ridiculous. That just seems wrong. It's really legal? Would the monkey be able to share spells with the Magus the same way the Magus shares with the monkey? Could the monkey let the Magus deliver the touch attack for a spell he cast in this way in the same manner the Magus could have the monkey deliver it?

A familiar can use his masters skills?

He uses his master's ranks (or his own, whichever is better), but his own stats and other modifiers.

The monkey using the wands himself would be ridiculous. That just seems wrong. It's really legal?

No. Familiars can use wands, but monkeys cannot. You need to be able to speak a command word and monkeys cannot speak. Ravens, Parrots, Thrushes, and most, if not all, of the Improved Familiars absolutely can use wands.

Could the monkey let the Magus deliver the touch attack for a spell he cast in this way in the same manner the Magus could have the monkey deliver it?

No, the Magus can share spells with the monkey, not the other way around. He could not allow the magus to deliver a charge, it does not go both ways.

Whew. I had this mental image of him spelling up at a 2x speed and doing 2 touch spells a round. Scary stuff.

That's an amusing and creative idea, I like it.

Also completely not what I thought of when I saw the topic. "Who would be throwing wands? Are they fired like bolts?"

Snatch Arrows (Combat): "When using the Deflect Arrows feat..."

Deflect Arrows (Combat): "Once per round when you would normally be hit with an attack from a ranged weapon..."

Melee and Ranged Weapons: "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

If a wand being thrown as an improvised weapon is considered 'not effective in melee', it would count as a ranged weapon. Even though it's exactly as effective in melee as at range, nothing says the ranged weapons must be effective at range, just not effective in melee.

So as long as the monkey is able to hit the magus with the thrown wand, then the magus could probably snatch it. The monkey would provoke by making a ranged attack, so if he's sharing the magus' space, that could have consequences.

Also, assuming the magus has the Wand Wielder arcana, Spell Combat still requires his spell-hand to be either free or holding the wand, he can't use both hands on his weapon, even if he drops the wand. Further, if the wand contains a touch spell, the magus can't use Spellstrike to deliver it, since he's not actually casting a spell.

Using most/all of the actions of the monkey to basically quick draw a wand isn't a problem, IMO. Especially with the three feat and ability score investment.

Cool. Thanks for the detail.

The Magus can always choose to not AoO the monkey even if he provokes it right? You're just saying a nearby enemy might get to AoO him?

You're also saying that the Magus can't catch it if the Monkey doesn't successfully hit him? Can the Magus just choose to be hit (like turning down a harmless save) or can the monkey just aim for the square like a splash weapon (AC 5) and then the Magus deflect?

He's not trying to two-handed fight or anything. He just wants the hand open to catch a new wand next round. He doesn't always drop it.

Magus' can't SS with a touch spell from a wand? I didn't know that. Are you saying you a Magus can't use Spellstrike to deliver a touch attack cast using a wand because he didn't actually cast the spell, the wand did? Doesn't that seem counter to the intent of Wand Wielder? If the wand is casting the touch spell not you does nobody get a free attack either? It's the act of casting a touch spell that gives the freebee not the spell itself right?

The Magus can always choose to not AoO the monkey even if he provokes it right?

Yes.

You're just saying a nearby enemy might get to AoO him?

Yes. Throwing the wand provokes just like throwing a dart. If anything threatens the monkey, then it could take an attack of opportunity.

You're also saying that the Magus can't catch it if the Monkey doesn't successfully hit him?

Snatch/Deflect Arrows only works "when you would normally be hit" so if the attack roll misses, the feat doesn't work.

Can the Magus just choose to be hit (like turning down a harmless save) or can the monkey just aim for the square like a splash weapon (AC 5) and then the Magus deflect?

No. It's possible the magus could do things to increase his chance of being hit, but it would all require some amount of GM intervention. (using Acrobatics to balance on an imaginary line to be flat-footed, closing eyes to get the Blinded condition for -2 AC and denied dex, etc.)

If you're getting GM intervention anyway, it's a lot easier to just get a house rule on the monkey using a standard action to hand you the wand.

Magus' can't SS with a touch spell from a wand?

Spellstrike (Su): "At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack."

FAQ - Items as Spells: "Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcasting, not using magic items that emulate spellcasting or work like spellcasting."

Activating a wand is not casting a spell, so it doesn't fulfill the requirements of Spellstrike.

Doesn't that seem counter to the intent of Wand Wielder?

Wand Wielder (Su): "The magus can activate a wand or staff in place of casting a spell when using spell combat."

Wand Wielder works with Spell Combat, not Spellstrike. Using a wand of shield and still making your attacks is pretty great.

If the wand is casting the touch spell not you does nobody get a free attack either?

Touch Spells in Combat: "In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action."

Technically, either nobody gets it, or the wand gets it. Most people treat delivering wand touches as poking someone with the wand anyway. It's almost certainly not intended to take two standard actions to heal someone with a wand of cure light wounds (nor for the wand to auto-discharge on the bearer if the charge is held).

Gotcha. I see what you're saying about the GM ruling. I'm not going to make the Monkey not be able to hit him since he dumped 3 feats for something so trivial anyway but it's good to know how the real rules work.

So if the wand gets it... could a Magus do sword attacks, frigid touch wand, poke with wand? Would that make him two-weapon fighting and give more -'s to hit or is spell combat different type of two-weapon fighting anyway so the -2 is already there?

Also (quasi-related), that "Items as spells" clause would stop the dimensional dervish chain from working with a wand of dimension door as well right (Not that anybody is high enough to take it)?

So if the wand gets it... could a Magus do sword attacks, frigid touch wand, poke with wand?

If you mean activate the wand as part of spell combat, using the wand wielder arcana, and delivering a normal touch attack, sure. As long as he doesn't use Spellstrike to deliver the spell he's fine.

Though, given the goofy wording and a strict reading not allowing any free touch from a wand, you could certainly let him spellstrike with a wand, it probably wouldn't break anything. (Basically, with touch spells in wands, there needs to be some kind of GM interpretation, since they don't really work otherwise)

I think a really reasonable compromise would be to let held charges from wands work with spellstrike. This lets magi have a bit more spell power to work with during the day, but limits 'magus burst' and prevents weirdness like getting extra attacks via spell-storing weapons.

Would that make him two-weapon fighting and give more -'s to hit or is spell combat different type of two-weapon fighting anyway so the -2 is already there?

No further penalties. The normal penalties from Spell Combat already replicate any that are needed for doing some kind of magical thing with one hand, and attacking with a weapon in the other.

Also (quasi-related), that "Items as spells" clause would stop the dimensional dervish chain from working with a wand of dimension door as well right (Not that anybody is high enough to take it)?

Probably.

Thanks!