|
I might be more inclined to go with number 1. as it says under the spell storing quality
Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, [b]the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires.[b]
The weapon doesn't have to cast the spell it can. Which I would kind of assume would need a whole new roll to hit.
I think it should have been:
He hits (a possible critical hit)
He declares to use the spell (cast when enemy is hit)
Roll to confirm critical.
1. The Vampiric Touch spell cast as a free action upon successfully damaging an opponent, but that this spell functions as the spell normally would and thus would require an immediate second touch-attack roll to confirm the hit. The reason I thought this was that the spell functions as if the spell was cast normally, except that it was triggered as a free action through the sword... so since Vampiric Touch still requires an attack roll, then an immediate attack roll should have been made. In the event it was a spell that does not require an attack roll, then the spell goes off normally (e.g. Suggestion or Magic Missile).2. The Vampiric Touch successfully goes off, no further attack roll is needed, but it is considered a normal hit and the normal spell effect is triggered.
3. The attack roll used to deliever the attack is also used to determine if the spell effect is a critical hit. Thus the Vampiric Touch is a critical since the sword hit was a critical... but only if the spell would normally have allowed for a critical hit.
How about option 4 (it's actually option 3, just modified)?
4. The Vampiric Touch spell is cast as a free action upon a successful melee strike against an opponent. The weapon hitting acts as a successful touch attack using the standard rules for touch attacks + critical hits.
Translation: If you rolled a 20 for your critical threat on the weapon and confirmed it, the touch attack will also crit. If you didn't roll a 20 for your critical threat, the weapon will crit but the spell will not (unless you have Improved Critical for touch attacks and the threat was a 19-20).
I might be more inclined to go with number 1. as it says under the spell storing quality
Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, [b]the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires.[b]
The weapon doesn't have to cast the spell it can. Which I would kind of assume would need a whole new roll to hit.
I tend to lean towards this too - mainly because the Spellstrike ability is a special and specific ability provided to the Magus. If anyone can replicate it with a +1 Enhancement bonus weapon property, it seems sort of a lame power to give a class.
I'll probably stick with my Ruling #1 for now.
Thanks for the input
Spellstrike and spell storing are hardly similar. Spell storing has a 3rd level spell limit, must be a targeted spell and once it's discharged, you need to charge it again, taking you a round to do so (or Quicken).
It works on the event that you hit and damage the target, it shouldn't give you an "extra attack" I think the idea is that it hits and it discharges imediatelly (hence the free action) and it benefits from the critical damage done by the weapon.
Furthermore, it stacks with spellstriking, so you could hit a guy with spellstrike, crit and deal both spells as if they were critical hits.
Very powerful, but not an everyround ability.
Hmm, an interesting solution. I like that you're still using the crit range of the Touch-attack to determine if it was critical, as opposed to the weapon and thus potentially getting abuse from a Keen Falchion or something. :)
Exactly. Plus, Spell Storing shouldn't be as powerful as a Magus's Spellstrike, which does actually use the crit range of the weapon.
The benefit of the Spell Storing property lies in that it is not limited to Touch spells only, so a Hold Person, Fear or even Lightning Bolt are legitimate spells to cast from the weapon on a successful hit. This versatility of Spell Storing should outweigh the loss of having to make a second attack roll if the spell cast also requires one, I should imagine?
I agree. If the spell can crit, allow it to crit on a confirmed natural 20 on the attack roll. If it can't crit then it just discharges. The player is getting to perform a melee attack and invoke a spell on the target in a single action, it's powerful enough.
I came here looking at Spell Storing for pretty much the same reason because I had a few questions.
Upon reading this thread, some were answered, but I have new ones.
For Spell Storing: It says "...single targeted spell...", and taking a hard line as to what that means renders part of the argument moot. Only certain spells crit, and Spell Storing seems not to cater for those (Touch, Ray or Ranged Touch) spells by inference.
For example -
1) Do you allow Spell Storing to extend to touch, ranged touch and ray spells or are they excluded?
Targeted (i.e. Hold Person, Reduce Person) is what RAW seem to infer.
Touch (i.e. Vampiric Touch, Frigid Touch or Force Punch) spells usually target a single creature. That could count, right? But the target line does not say "single {creature/target}" so where do you draw the line?
Ranged touch (i.e. Acid Arrow) could also count in the same way that Touch spells operate?
Ray (i.e. Ray Of Frost, Scorching Ray) could therefore count if you allow those, (as long as if it had multiple targets that they all must be targeted at the one creature) seeing as they are/can be targeted at a specific creature?
2) Another weird one - if you allow rays, but disallow Scorching Ray on account of it's multiple target potential, then I cannot cast magic missile (that allows several targeted creatures in the "target" field, so that would disqualify it).
Taking both of these questions into account, the actual candidates for "Spell Storing" can slim down quite a bit if you interpret the RAW.
However, assuming that you MAY include these spells, then I would agree with AerynTahlro. Confirms with the weapon, but only on a 20.
AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
I have a curlier example:
Spell Critical
Here, the spell is cast "separately" as a swift action. Given, however, that he (as above) has the hard bit of hit weapon crushing through the soft bit of the bad guy at the time of casting, I'd still be inclined to make the same ruling as above with Spell Storing. Hard to see that there would be any difference, despite it being a separate action, because it included as part of the same chain of events.
Using some common sense, and drawing some very tenuous conclusions, I believe it would be fairer to award a critical threat as the player has already rolled his to-hit roll along with the weapon. You're already touching the enemy - how could you miss with a spell that discharges through it, or as a direct result of it?
Furthermore, the player has also rolled again to see if it is a critical for the weapon itself, so you've currently got the pointy bit lodged in a tender place (or have the hardest bit crushing the creatures softest bits), so delivering the spell as a critical hit should also pretty much be a given.
It could be legitimate to ask the player to confirm separately from the spell, but now we are going on three separate rolls on one attack to see how much damage we should be doing.
Having
a) three (or four!) attack rolls;
b) generally requiring in the order of 15 to 20 on the die for at least two of them (to cause a threat on a good day with the right magic turned on / right weapon equipped);
c) just for the pleasure of dealing double damage (or adding an effect) with a secondary part of the attack;
d) that is delivered with a prestige class capstone ability...
...is not exactly an easy thing for the player to swallow, especially seeing as they just got extremely lucky to begin with to get the weapon crit in the first place. Even doubly so given that they are slightly squishier than most front-line guys and are probably toe-to-toe with something pretty big, hairy, scary and liable to outright kill them in only a few hits if they lose their defensive spells.
So I agree with AerynTahlro in this case as well: use the weapon critical confirmation roll to apply to the spell as well - therefore, only a 20 would suffice in any case (unless you had Improved Critical {Ray} and it was a Ray spell).