| 16 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I know everybody on this forum agrees that the spell elemental touch is not available with spellstrike, RAW.
But did the devs intended for elemental touch to work with spellstrike or did they not?
(Maybe it's "us" being too picky with grammar, tenses, and such and not enough common sense?)
Because in the end the text is pretty obvious about the touching part and it's only a matter of semantics/tables/headers?
On other forums the arguments for/against are not so clear-cut and I know a few people who (like me) believe spell-text > heading... so the fact that elemental touch provides you with touch attacks means that the intention was for elemental touch to work with spellstrike... so I was hoping to get an answer/faq about this.
Elemental Touch
[...]
Range personal
Target you
Duration 1 round/level (D)
Saving Throw see text; Spell Resistance no
Upon completing the casting of this spell, elemental energy infuses your hands. Choose an energy type: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. You gain a melee touch attack causing 1d6 points of damage of that energy type, along with a special effect described below. You also deal energy damage and the related special effect when you attack with your hands using an unarmed strike, a single claw, or a single slam attack. This bonus damage can never apply to multiple weapons.
[...]
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. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell.[...]
Little side-question: are there any other spells with a similar dilemma?
It's because they never bothered to set up a uniformed method of handing what each range and target meant and then of course didn't stick to that standard.
I don't see the dilemma. You cast the spell on yourself and It's a touch spell so the magus can deliver through a weapon.
I could link you to at least 5-6 threads on this forum where pretty much everybody told me: no!
:-)
I got the RAW reading from this forum... I'd like to have the intention from the dev's :-) hence the title.
The header for the spell is very important and is used to categorize the type of spell. As far as how the spell is categorized, it is the definitive answer, full stop, ride over. Whatever the spell does, as shown in its description doesn't change the category of the spell.
What is a touch spell? Generally, it meets the following requirements: 'Range: Touch', 'charge' can be delivered with a touch attach or held indefinitely, the spell is discharged once delivered and (usually) the duration is instantaneous.
The spell Elemental Touch fulfills none of the criteria. It is a spell that you cast upon yourself (Range: Personal), there is no charge that can be delivered, the spell can not be held indefinitely (it has a duration) and it does not discharge/end once delivered. The spell merely grants you the ability to deal elemental damage with a touch.
As a house-rule, I might be pursuaded to allow spells similar to Elemental Touch to have their spell effects delivered through a weapon, but that would be for anyone, not just a Magus.
As a house-rule, I might be pursuaded to allow spells similar to Elemental Touch to have their spell effects delivered through a weapon, but that would be for anyone, not just a Magus.
So you intend to "take away" what makes the magus different: channel spells through his weapon and give this to all classes? wow... why have a magus class then?
It's the magus' main trick to channel/deliver touch attacks through his weapon...
I am just wondering why paizo made a spell like elemental touch that is written as if it could, but RAW doesn't not allow the magus to channel/deliver that spell through his weapon when he can channel others that are similar/close but not exactly the same (chill touch, frostbite, ...).
So you intend to "take away" what makes the magus different: channel spells through his weapon and give this to all classes? wow... why have a magus class then?
Negative. I meant for spells similar to Elemental Touch (ie, non-touch spells that grant touch attacks), I would allow everyone to deliver the effect with their weapon. I never said I'd grant all classes the spellstrike ability.
I am just wondering why paizo made a spell like elemental touch that is written as if it could, but RAW doesn't not allow the magus to channel/deliver that spell through his weapon when he can channel others that are similar/close but not exactly the same (chill touch, frostbite, ...).
Unarmed strikes. A multiclassed Monk/Magus isn't unheard of, a Ninja/Magus might be better. I've seen third party feats that blend the Ki Pool and the Arcane Pool together.
It's a touch spellExcept it's not.
Go back and read the quoted rules; the OP even bolded the important parts. Spellstrike only works on spells with a range of "touch", while the spell in question has a range of "personal".
I stand corrected.
Seems silly as its a touch attack, but it is what is is.
I am just wondering why paizo made a spell like elemental touch that is written as if it could, but RAW doesn't not allow the magus to channel/deliver that spell through his weapon when he can channel others that are similar/close but not exactly the same (chill touch, frostbite, ...).Unarmed strikes. A multiclassed Monk/Magus isn't unheard of, a Ninja/Magus might be better. I've seen third party feats that blend the Ki Pool and the Arcane Pool together.
Better be Monk/Empyreal-WB-Sorcerer then...
I still believe the devs intended for elemental touch to work through the magus' weapon... I just want confirmation it's a matter of oversight/common sense not applied to a spell that has "touch" in it's name and description.
Abe has it on this one.
I would say this probably SHOULD work with Magus, but RAW = no because it is not "range: touch" (which is even more explicit than 'touch spell').
Funnily enough, they just FAQ'd/Stealth Errata'd spells that allow multiple touches over a duration but which aren't technically 'holding the charge' (like Calcific Touch) to in fact be considered 'holding the charge'. All these fiddly different ways of doing almost the same thing really should have been consolidated, and any differences should have been clear and had a clear purpose. Blame it on "A Wizard did it".
It's a touch spellExcept it's not.
Go back and read the quoted rules; the OP even bolded the important parts. Spellstrike only works on spells with a range of "touch", while the spell in question has a range of "personal".I stand corrected.
Seems silly as its a touch attack, but it is what is is.
By RAW, I agree it appears this cannot be used. But by the power of GM fiat I would allow it. It is not game breaking and remains in line of what the magus should be able to do. Poorly worded rules and rules lawyering shouldn't get in the way of having a fun time.
Although there could be something said for certain spells to be 'arbitrarily defective/wonky' in-game-world.
In-game-world, every casters knows that by magical theory they should be able to cast some effect that doesn't have that defect,
but they just haven't managed to discover a way to do so better than the wonky spell, that is still useful even with it's defect.
|
All these fiddly different ways of doing almost the same thing really should have been consolidated, and any differences should have been clear and had a clear purpose. Blame it on "A Wizard did it".
Fully agreed. sadly it would require a Pathfinder 2.0 version or at least a complete rewrithing of the CRB.
no more people agreeing to vote "faq" for this question? especially since this thread just reinforced the text/meaning/intention > header for rules in general?
no more people agreeing to vote "faq" for this question? especially since this thread just reinforced the text/meaning/intention > header for rules in general?
No, the rules seem pretty clear to me, you'd need an errata instead of an FAQ for that. When you do not have a question but instead just wish to have something changed, that is not the aim of the FAQ button.
It's the same with acid splash and ray of frost. Both are level-0-cantrips that make a ranged touch attack to deal 1d3 points of damage, both from the Core Rulebook. You'd expect them to work the same, but one of them is a ray, one is not, so e.g. a magus can Close Combat Spellstrike one of them but not the other.
Does that make sense? Not really, but there you have it. Elemental Touch comes from the Advanced Players Guide, the Magus wasn't designed when that came out, so the spell mechanics do not mesh well with the magus.
That is far from ideal, but those are the published rules. Since there is no balance issue here, I wouldn't expect an errata to change that, nice though that would be. Elemental Touch is still a nice spell, even if you cannot spellstrike it.
no more people agreeing to vote "faq" for this question? especially since this thread just reinforced the text/meaning/intention > header for rules in general?
No, that did not reinforce intention>RAW "in general", only for actions which achieve the same thing as a full attack but with a different action type (and other extra features). If "intention">RAW "in general", then FAQs would descend to a (un)popularity contest, with people requesting clarification for every bit of RAW that interferes with their preferences or may not coincide with their preferred visualization. It was never stated as a "general rule", it applied to actions similar to the full attack action.
But I did hit the FAQ.
I have a question. First of all it seems totally clear to me that elementale strike is not a spellstrike friendly spell. That said move on: elemental touch give you multiple touch, but it's not a touch spell. The FAQ about holding the charge says that a spell that allow you to make multiple touches consider as you're holding the charge until the last touch (or until you cast anything else, obviously). But the rules for holding the charge says that's possible only with touch range spells. So, what I'm asking is: if I cast elementale touch and then frostbite, can I stack them?
The FAQ for "holding the charge" and multiple touch spells is expressly to apply the "holding the charge" rules to spells which don't actually qualify for that rule by RAW, it is Stealth Errata that over-rules RAW, it is not something that you can derive from RAW so pointing to RAW that conflicts with it is pointless: that's exactly the RAW it is over-riding.
Yup, but holding the charge specifically apply to touch range spells. And elemental touch, though it provide multiple touch, don't fall into touch spells. Frostbite and chill touch are expressly touch spells. For what I can recall, elemental touch would be almost the only personal spell influenced by the faq this way. I still have the doubt. Maybe it's really a stealth errata, but in this case I'd like an errata or a faq on this specific topic.
I was going over Elemental Touch again and would like to check up with you guys if I got everything right.
1) Elemental Touch has a range of personal, so it is not a "Touch" spell.
1a) It is not viable for use with spellstrike, neither in the round it is being cast (the free attack) nor in later rounds.
1b) It is creating no charge and thus is not discharged when another spell is cast.
2) You gain a touch attack from Elemental Touch. Using that Touch Attack is a Standard Action.
2a) You can also deliver the attack with a full-attack action to get more than one attack, but only using an unarmed strike or a single natural attack, and targeting AC, not Touch AC.
2b) You would count as armed after casting the spell (not 100% clear, as Core Rulebook p. 182 refers to "touch attack spells", but likely), so you threaten and can actually make Opportunity Touch Attacks.
Now we get into murky waters, rules-wise:
3) A spellcaster is under the effect of Elemental Touch. Now he casts a Touch Attack Spell.
3a) Say he hits with the free touch attack of the Touch spell. Does the opponents get affected by both the Touch Spell and Elemental Touch?
3b) Say he holds the Touch spell charge and decides to make an unarmed strike or a natural attack and hits. Does the enemy suffer the Weapon damage, Touch Spell and Elemental Touch?
4) 3) A spellcaster is under the effect of Elemental Touch. Now he trips an opponent. Does the Opponent suffer the effect of Elemental Touch?
5) The spell says "This spell grants no special protection to anything held in or worn on your hands". Does that mean if he is wearing magical gloves or wields a weapon, they start to take damage? Most items would probably not be affected too much, as elemental damage vs. objects is halved, and even 3 points of damage is less than even the hardness of wood of 5. But gloves made from cloth would have too little hardness to be immune I guess.
As far as I can tell, the disadvantage of Elemental Touch vs. serial touch spells like Frostbite is:
- It does not work with spellstrike.
- If you hit less than 1x/round, you get less effect from ET, because it ends regardless of whether you hit. You also cannot cast it before combat and just walk around with it.
But it has a number of advantages, as well:
- Later spells do not discharge it and may add to the damage.
- As is has a fixed duration, if you get more than one attack per round with it (through AoOs or use with Unarmed Strike or Natural weapon), you may get more effects out of it. Hit 2x/round, you still have the same duration.
- As a spell with a duration other than instaneous, Elemental Touch can be extened by spell or metamagic rod, so it's possible to double the number of effects you get.
It can be cast as part of Spell Combat. It cannot be used with Spellstrike as presently written.
Argh, stupid me, mixing up the terms again. I'll edit that for better understandability.
you have to think critically about how the spell works... the spell itself doesn't do damage- it causes your hand to be surrounded in energy (which allows you to use your hand to deal that type of damage with later touches).
if you used spellstrike to apply this spell to an enemy you would not damage them- you would cause their hand to be surrounded in energy (allowing them to make elemental touch attacks)!
now, if the question were "can i use the touch attack granted to me by elemental touch to deliver another spell with spellstrike?" my understanding would be that you can use it this way- making an unarmed strike (counting as being armed, and dealing elemental damage) against regular AC, not touch AC, to deliver the (new) touch spell.
if you used spellstrike to apply this spell to an enemy you would not damage them- you would cause their hand to be surrounded in energy (allowing them to make elemental touch attacks)!
No, a personal spell cannot be cast on someone else.
now, if the question were "can i use the touch attack granted to me by elemental touch to deliver another spell with spellstrike?" my understanding would be that you can use it this way- making an unarmed strike (counting as being armed, and dealing elemental damage) against regular AC, not touch AC, to deliver the (new) touch spell.
You are right: You could spellstrike with an unarmed strike or claw or slam attack to deliver the touch spell and deal weapon, Touch spell and ET damage, and use your weapon threat range. So that is at least one way in which elemental touch can be used with spellstrike.
Sadly, unarmed strikes and claws/slams tend to have not much of a threat range.
Well, if you had an ability, feat, or bonus that increased your threat range, that would extend to spellstrike. For example, if you are not using Spellstrike, and had Improved Critical (Unarmed), your Unarmed Strike would crit on 19-20, but the touch spell would still only crit on a roll of 20. By contrast, if you are using Spellstrike, the 19-20 crit range on your unarmed strike now extends to the touch spell delivery.
Yes, a couple of the UC style feats also change the damage type of unarmed strike, so the keen enchantment becomes an option. But of course spellstrike really shines when you have the threat range of a rapier...
except:
since you cannot (by RAW reading of this forum) use spellstrike with elemental touch and only spells with a "range : touch" can crit...
that means elemental touch will never crit unless the faq allows elemental touch to count as a "range : touch" spell
because the rules saying that touch spells crit on a 20 is in the MAGIC -> RANGE -> TOUCH section... which doesn't apply to elemental touch.
except:
since you cannot (by RAW reading of this forum) use spellstrike with elemental touch and only spells with a "range : touch" can crit...
Incorrect:
If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit.
Magic -> Aiming a Spell -> Effect -> Ray.
that means elemental touch will never crit unless the faq allows elemental touch to count as a "range : touch" spell
because the rules saying that touch spells crit on a 20 is in the MAGIC -> RANGE -> TOUCH section... which doesn't apply to elemental touch.
That's because Elemental Touch is not a touch spell, instead it gives you a melle touch attack. If you read in the combat section, it says that touch attacks works just like normal attacks, but you target Touch Ac instead normal AC. As this part is in combat section, you can see in the same part that if you attack and score a critical, you actually do a crit if you confirm. It says regard to attacks, even touch attacks, as they works like normal attacks (in other words, they're attacks). Further more, one can argue that ET is a spell, that made you roll to hit, and in the same section, about the spell, it says:
Spells and Critical Hits
A spell that requires an attack roll can score a critical hit. A spell attack that requires no attack roll cannot score a critical hit. If a spell causes ability damage or drain (see Special Abilities), the damage or drain is doubled on a critical hit.
So I don't see how you can say that ET never crit.
a ray is a very specific kind of ranged touch attack... qualified by "effect : ray"...
compare ray of frost and acid splash you'll see one is a ray, the other is not (Effect : one missile of acid)
rays are special in that you can take weapon focus (ray) and improved critical (ray)... also point blank shot/precise shot/... work with rays, too => thus they are considered thrown weapons as far as weapon-feats go.
This does not extend to ET which is not even considered a "range : touch" by RAW. It just makes your hands glow and hurt people when you touch them... that does not mean you can crit with it.
I can understand people who argue, that since it's not a "touch range spell", that it's not holding charges and thus can be stacked with frostbite or chill touch for a double hurt effect.
The frostbite/chill touch or even the fist punch can crit, but ET has no crit chance or damage multipliers... only "Range : Touch" or "Effect : Ray" spells have a crit chance and a crit multiplier...
Elemental Touch has no such thing...
hence why I asked for this faq, to clear up whether the touch ability in the spell's text is to be treated like a "range : touch", with magus spell-channeling through weapons or not.
hit the FAQ button and we might get an answer :-)
Also, here is the FAQ specifically saying that ET damage does NOT multiply on a crit:
Bonus Dice: Do bonus dice from Channel Smite or spells such as elemental touch or flame arrow multiply on a critical hit?
No. [...]
ET is considered BONUS damage dice by the dev's.
|
|
Kyoni, you are mixing things.
What the FAQ say it isn't that Elemental Touch is a bonus damage, what it say is that when Elemental Touch give you a bonus damage, it is not multiplied.
The two statements are different.
Situation 1:
you attack with a touch attack and the only damage is dealt by Elemental touch. It follow the normal rules for touch attacks. Critical on a natural 20, x2 multiplier.
Situation 2:
You use a unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack. You attack is the unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack while the damage from Elemental Touch is a bonus dice.
In that situation your unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack follow the normal rules for its type of attack, get a critical on whatever it get it and use whatever multiplier it use. Elemental Touch is a rider on that attack and deliver bonus damage that is not multiplied.
What the FAQ say it isn't that Elemental Touch is a bonus damage, what it say is that when Elemental Touch give you a bonus damage, it is not multiplied.
The two statements are different.Situation 1:
you attack with a touch attack and the only damage is dealt by Elemental touch. It follow the normal rules for touch attacks. Critical on a natural 20, x2 multiplier.Situation 2:
You use a unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack. You attack is the unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack while the damage from Elemental Touch is a bonus dice.
In that situation your unarmed attack or slam attack or claw attack follow the normal rules for its type of attack, get a critical on whatever it get it and use whatever multiplier it use. Elemental Touch is a rider on that attack and deliver bonus damage that is not multiplied.
This seems awfully complicated and unnecessary rules-bloat... It makes no sense that it can crit sometimes and not crit other times.
Especially since an entire class was designed to actually make bonus damage dice from spells crit with their weapon's crit range: Magus.