None of the above.
1. You're not casting any spells, the weapon is, so Spellstrike doesn't apply. This is completely certain.
2. The wepaon immediately casts the spell on the target. If it's a touch range spell, it just takes effect on the target immediately. Considerations of touch attacks etc. don't apply; you did just hit him. This is an interpretation of how Spell Storing weapons work; for those who disagree, ask them to describe their interpretation - it will usually lead to some blatantly silly places.
3. No, you never made an attack roll for the spell, so it can't crit. Spellstrike's crit spell ability is an exception to how spell riders on critical hits usually work.
4. Nothing in the Spell Storing property negates saves or SR, and it would be insanely OP if it did.
If it is your contention that it automatically hits, how can they still get a save or SR? Unlike other weapon enhancements (i.e. conductive, spellstrike) there is no language in the enhancement to even remotely assist this assumption.
Yes. there is. It's the bolded line from your own quote.
Let me ask you to clarify the consequences of your own interpretation, then.
If you hit a creature, and then have to hit it again with a touch attack, and you miss, what happens? The spell storing property specifically allows the casting of the spell on that target (only); now you're left holding a charge that....can't discharge on anything other than the intended target?
For that matter, how about all those published clerics with a heavy shield and spell storing mace with cause serious wounds - and trust me, over the years, there have been a lot of those. Are they all idiots? Because they sure as sugar can't attempt a melee touch attack after hitting with their spell storing weapon.
Firstly, saves and SR have nothing to do with touching your target. If you had the spell storing weapon hold a fireball, it would still trigger a reflex save.
Secondly, spellstoring is awfully, awfully written. It's almost impossible to discern RAW because there isn't enough information given. We have to try and figure out what is RAI, and of course that will lead to differences of opinion.
In terms of my opinion on the matter: after sifting through the previously gigantic thread on this very issue I'm afraid I have to agree with pupsocket here. Apart from an instant discharge of the spell making the most logical sense, I also think this is the case for an additional two reasons:
a) The fact that the weapon is casting the spell throws conventional logic out the window because there is absolutely no precedent for this normally. Any text where 'you' cast the spell (holding the charge text, spellstrike etc) cannot apply, which rules out getting your free touch attack.
b) Let me pose an example: if you were holding someone's hand and cast shocking grasp, would you still require a touch attack to hit them? RAW the spell requires 'creature or object touched'. Common sense dictates that if you are already touching your target, you do not then need to roll to touch it again. The magic section backs this up:
"Touch:
You must touch a creature or object to affect it."
Not necessarily that you must succeed at a touch attack to affect it, although this is assumed to be the normal situation in most castings.
I can't comment on how this would interact with a critical hit.
|
I tend to use these in combat.
Spellstrike w spell combat. Capable of being critted (if I can roll a hit)
For a key foe I tap in my spell storing weapon with magic missile on a hit. I don't think the targeted spell (like magic missile) can be a touch spell (like shocking grasp)
When I get hit (rarely) I use my spell storing armor (here is your prize) to deliver a stored touch spell like intensified shocking grasp.
The only time you get a roll is on the spell combat/spell strike. The others occur without a roll.
b) Good point. I can agree that if both parties say that they are touching, the one initiating the touch attack shouldn't have to make an attack roll.
Let us break this down into logical points.
a) If both parties are touching, a touch attack shouldn't have to make an attack roll
b) the stored spell is activated when the weapon strikes the opponent
c) you have to touch an opponent in order to 'strike' them with a weapon
Then:
d) a stored touch spell, activated when a spellstoring weapon strikes an opponent, doesn't have to make an attack roll.
Where is the break in logic that does not lead to d), in your mind? Is it b)? It seems faintly odd that the spell is cast after or before the strike in this case, given not only the wording but also the reasonably clear intent of the ability (to cast a spell as you hit an opponent).
As for SR/Saves: there's no text allowing you to circumvent these if you are touching your opponent, like there is with touch attacks. Thus, there is no precedent to bypass them in this case. They aren't really comparable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are treated separately.
With Spellstrike, you cast the spell and then substitute a weapon attack in place of the normal "free" touch attack. If the attack hits, you deal weapon damage and the effect of the spell; if the attack misses, the spell is lost. The main benefit is that a damaging spell rides on the weapon's critical threat range (instead of the 20 for a normal touch attack).
A spell storing weapon allows the wielder to activate the specific stored spell to automatically take effect on a successful attack (barring any save granted by the spell or SR of the target, if applicable). No additional attack roll is granted/required. The spell does not benefit from the weapon's critical statistics (or gain any chance of a critical).
However, you can combine the two: use Spellstrike to cast a spell and make an attack with a spell storing weapon; if the attack hits, you do weapon damage and spell damage from Spellstrike, plus have the option to also activate the spell stored in the weapon.
|
That's a misinterpretation Target creature or object touched works fine for delivering a magic missile in the dark. However it doesn't work in reverse shocking grasp requires a touch rather than simply seeing the creature. Even if you use reach metamagic, it moves to ranged touch.
Hence the very different language for spellstoring armor requires a touch spell.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With Spellstrike, you cast the spell and then substitute a weapon attack in place of the normal "free" touch attack. If the attack hits, you deal weapon damage and the effect of the spell; if the attack misses, the spell is lost. The main benefit is that a damaging spell rides on the weapon's critical threat range (instead of the 20 for a normal touch attack).
One correction: If you miss with the attack, the spell is not lost, it becomes subject to the held charge rules, as for any touch range spell, with the Magus rider from Spellstrike that it can still be delivered via a weapon attack as an additional option.
So, as an example:
Magus casts shocking grasp, then 5' steps into melee range of his target. First attack, technically the free attack from casting the spell, using Spellstrike to try and deliver it with the Magus's weapon, misses. As a touch spell, it becomes a held charge, which can still be delivered via any successful weapon attack done by the Magus later, as long as he has not cast, or tried to cast, another spell in the interim.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You do not get the free attack unless you do it as part of the casting action. Which means you've got to be face up with your target, and make that spell combat roll, not a snide and safe 5 foot away from it.With Spellstrike, you cast the spell and then substitute a weapon attack in place of the normal "free" touch attack. If the attack hits, you deal weapon damage and the effect of the spell; if the attack misses, the spell is lost. The main benefit is that a damaging spell rides on the weapon's critical threat range (instead of the 20 for a normal touch attack).One correction: If you miss with the attack, the spell is not lost, it becomes subject to the held charge rules, as for any touch range spell, with the Magus rider from Spellstrike that it can still be delivered via a weapon attack as an additional option.
So, as an example:
Magus casts shocking grasp, then 5' steps into melee range of his target. First attack, technically the free attack from casting the spell, using Spellstrike to try and deliver it with the Magus's weapon, misses. As a touch spell, it becomes a held charge, which can still be delivered via any successful weapon attack done by the Magus later, as long as he has not cast, or tried to cast, another spell in the interim.
I'm sorry, LazarX, this is wrong.
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of
touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch
the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you
may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You
may take your move before casting the spell, after touching
the target, or between casting the spell and touching the
target.
Kinevon is completely correct in all of what he just said. The magus can even spell combat and get all of his iterative attacks in this situation.
i.e. Cast spell, 5' step up, free touch->melee attack at bab -2, all iteratives at -2.
Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185). So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
Not to viciously attack your post, but just multiple sources stating the opposite.
None of the above.
1. You're not casting any spells, the weapon is, so Spellstrike doesn't apply. This is completely certain.
2. The wepaon immediately casts the spell on the target. If it's a touch range spell, it just takes effect on the target immediately. Considerations of touch attacks etc. don't apply; you did just hit him. This is an interpretation of how Spell Storing weapons work; for those who disagree, ask them to describe their interpretation - it will usually lead to some blatantly silly places.
3. No, you never made an attack roll for the spell, so it can't crit. Spellstrike's crit spell ability is an exception to how spell riders on critical hits usually work.
4. Nothing in the Spell Storing property negates saves or SR, and it would be insanely OP if it did.
This. Pupsocket had it from the very beginning.
Spellstrike doesn't apply. A spell storing weapon cannot critically hit.
You hit the target with your weapon (this counts as the needed touch attack roll, as actually hitting a target with a melee is always at least as hard, plus you've made contact with the weapon) and the spell is cast by the weapon. Affecting it as per the spell only. You don't have to make a touch attack because you've already hit the target. It does still have to overcome spell resistance and does still allow a save because it doesn't make any logical sense for it not to.
Don't be obstinate just because you're not getting your way.