Can an object with Node of Blasting cast upon it be used offensively to touch a creature? If so, or if not, what is considered 'touching the object'?
To elaborate:
This is mainly a question as to whether "Touching X" is synonymous with "Being Touched by X" for the purpose of spells.
A variety of spells and abilities can be used to launch objects at other creatures without directly touching the object itself. Node of Blasting is one of many spells that require physical contact with a creature, and one of the fewer spells that are phrased as a creature touching it, not vice versa.
In pathfinder, especially with regards to 'holding a charge' and delivering touch spells, there have been some murky points as to what counts as 'Touching' (Such as when a spell accidentally discharges). There are other spells that explicitly describe they can't be used offensively (such as Antilife Shell) and Node of Blasting is not one. In plain english, Touching something can refer to either putting your hand, fingers, etc, on something, or it can refer to simply being in contact with something. So, what happens?
Some example situations under question:
1) You cast Node of Blasting on a moving object, such as a rolling ball. A potential target chooses to stand idly in the path of the ball, making no other action. The ball and target collide. Does the spell discharge?
2) You cast the spell on a rock at the bottle of a pit. A character jumps (or falls) into the pit, and collides with the object. Does the spell discharge?
3) As part of a needlessly complex system, an object and character are rushing towards one another at the same velocity. They collide. Does the spell discharge?
4) You choose to cast the spell on a coin in your possession. You are not otherwise handling the coin, but it is in direct contact with your being. Does the spell discharge?
5) You cast the spell on a loaded crossbow bolt. The bolt is not directly handled by the shooter, and is fired (via a normal attack roll), hitting a target. Does the spell discharge?
6) You cast the spell on a bucket. A character idly chooses to kick it. Does the spell discharge?
All above examples are of a Node of Blasting clearly coming into physical contact with a target, whether intentionally or not, without the character attempting to handle the object with their hands. Citations or reference to specific rules would be appreciated in any and all responses, and if an argument is to be made based on delivering Touch spells, a solid reason for why these mechanics relate would be appreciated.
Some possible reference material:
Most of these are intended for touch spells, but there seems to be little reference otherwise.
Node of Blasting (duh)
FAQ referencing Magus' Spell Strike, and noting Touch Spells being delivered via the hand.
FAQ regarding Touch Spells and worn equipment
Witch Spell 'Spite', for using touch spells defensively.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can imagine a wizard who casts this on every other floor board just to screw with meddling adventures by making them play extreme hopscotch.
Funny. I imagine casting it on a bunch of tiny constructs or animated objects, and ordering them to go around giving "hugs"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I let a character cast node of blasting on bolts fired from a heavy wrist launcher in an Iron Gods campaign recently. It didn't seem to be OP, not really a major boost in damage. One standard action to cast it on the bolt in one round then launch it on the following round. But I get where RAW it shouldn't work. So at a PFS table most likely NO, home campaign go for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I get where RAW it shouldn't work. So at a PFS table most likely NO, home campaign go for it.
If you wouldn't mind my asking (As it's relevant to the original question), Exactly how do you get that, according to the rules as written, it shouldn't work?
So far the only assertions I've seen saying it wouldn't work are from people claiming that "touching" something and "being in contact" with something aren't the same thing. I looked around, but couldn't find anything in the rules to back that up. Only more assertions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it could. The idea of a creature touching it, while worded for the idea that it is left as an inanimate object, generally conveys "comes in contact with".
Though there exist other circumstances that might make using it difficult: namely, that the caster isn't immune to his own node. The moment he finishes the spell, it isn't safe for him to manipulate.
So to answer my take on the questions:
1, 3) Won't work. Not because of the spell, but because needing to touch the object and impart the charge can't feasibly be done while an object is in motion without disputing said motion.
2, 5, 6) Works. The object comes into contact with a creature with a mind, and immediately detonates.
4) Insufficient information. It depends how much the object is in contact with you. If you are holding it in a bare hand (or gloved hand for that matter), the spell will discharge the round after the casting. If you are holding it in a bag attached to your belt, it isn't sufficiently in contact with you and will not detonate until you reach into the bag and touch it.
|
|
But I get where RAW it shouldn't work. So at a PFS table most likely NO, home campaign go for it.If you wouldn't mind my asking (As it's relevant to the original question), Exactly how do you get that, according to the rules as written, it shouldn't work?
So far the only assertions I've seen saying it wouldn't work are from people claiming that "touching" something and "being in contact" with something aren't the same thing. I looked around, but couldn't find anything in the rules to back that up. Only more assertions.
My reasoning is based on what I see other people say on these blogs (about anything outside the box). If it sounds too good to be true most likely it wasn'the meant to work. Like I said though for my own table at home we all agreed it should work. Our mesmerist would load the bolt in his heavy wrist launcher, cast node of blasting on said bolt, then fire away at target. I role played it that once struck the target instinctively reached for, and grabbed the bolt.
My reasoning is based on what I see other people say on these blogs (about anything outside the box). If it sounds too good to be true most likely it wasn'the meant to work. Like I said though for my own table at home we all agreed it should work. Our mesmerist would load the bolt in his heavy wrist launcher, cast node of blasting on said bolt, then fire away at target. I role played it that once struck the target instinctively reached for, and grabbed the bolt.
Consider that mesmerist cast his Node of Blasting on the ammunition of a Tube Arrow Launcher, or his heavy wrist launcher's bolt, well before battle. Would that not also be a feasible use of the spell, so long as he were careful? If not, why not?
Why does the target need to instinctively reach for the bolt, if he is already touching it?
If you've looked through these forums, I'm sure you've seen the infamous dispelling book bomb of Explosive Runes or some other complex arrangement using Fire Trap. There are legitimate, but cheesy ways to use these spells to great effect. The question isn't whether most GMs would feel comfortable allowing them, but whether they are achievable by the Rules alone. And they are, AFAIK.
1, 3) Won't work. Not because of the spell, but because needing to touch the object and impart the charge can't feasibly be done while an object is in motion without disputing said motion.
Many techniques would work such as: Gust of wind; A second ball; Virtually Any environmental effect that would impart motion, such as the heave, surge or sway of a ship; A complex pulley system; a large slingshot or siege weapon; The gunslinger's utility shot; Telekinetic forces. There are endless ways to impart motion on an object affected by Node of Blasting. The examples are there for people that dispute that the spell wouldn't work if the object is acting on a player, and the third example is to show a clear gray area where it is unsure which of the two is 'initiating' the touch.
EDIT: If your dispute is that it can't be cast on something Already in motion, then note the range of "Touch". Just hold the charge until you can take an action to briefly poke something that's passing by, if you think a standard action would disturb its momentum. Or even kick the ball At the opponent.
I would certainly agree with the notion of imparting motion into the object after or as part of the spell. But a tiny poke just seems like it might disrupt the course of the object, unless it Is so large and heavy that the act of imparting a spell cannot sway it.
Obviously, this whole thing is very much GM discretion, which in turn is based on precise circumstances.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just a thought...But what stops someone from casting the spell on an attended object currently being held or worn by an opponent? It's a touch spell with no spell resistance applicable and a will save upon discharge. Touch the opponent's stuff.