| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Ok we need a ruling. A recent discussion on reddit has sparked the debate on whether a held charge (from a touch spell) causes the caster to threaten attacks of opportunity. If a spellcaster casts a touch spell, (shocking grasp, for example) and holds the charge, then an opponent does an action which can provoke an attack of opportunity from an armed opponent, is the caster considered armed with the spell, and can he/she then make an attack of opportunity with the spell?
RAW:
Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks). (Core page 182)
Touching an enemy with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however it, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with Either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your Opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, natural armor bonus or. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply Normally. (Core page 185)
If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge. (Core pages 185-186)
In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can’t hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell. (Core page 216)
The majority of people who have chimed in on Reddit seem to interpret the above statements as saying that the caster holding the charged spell is considered armed, and can thus make the AoO (and that interpretation can be found on the messageboards as well).
However, one person points out that both instances point out that the spellcaster is considered armed while attacking, but not necissarilly while holding the charge. Under touch attacks, it states "Touching an enemy" and in the second, it states "delivering a touch attack," but neither mentions a caster who holding the charge, which leads the dissenting voice to determine that a caster who is holding a charged spell is not considered to be armed and can thus not attempt an AoO. So what is the answer? Is there any RAW that clearly states one way or the other?