by.default's page

You can make a touch attack with any natural weapon, not just those which replace a hand. A touch attack is not a normal attack though and you don't get rider effects like poison on a poisonous bite, or grab/free grapple with it. Sorry, your idea doesn't quite pan out.

Thanks. I couldn't find a source for this.

I guess WHW can deliver touch spells with some reach then, without putting a familiar in danger. That's still cool.

We can make a free Touch Attack on the same turn we cast a Touch Spell.

If we hold a charge, a Touch Spell can also be delivered via Unarmed Strike/Natural Attack.

Is there anything that states the free Touch Attack must be done by hand? Can we, for example, use WHW's hair to deliver it via a Touch Attack (not a Natural Attack, e.g. no damage)?

If yes: would this count as the hair landing an attack and allow WHW to get her free grapple attempt?

I stumbled upon this Archetype that looks terrible on paper but I'd love to theorycraft something workable; without her hexes, WHW still can play a wizard-like role, and if WHW can land an attack with her hair against Touch AC (since she'd have terrible BAB and STR, maybe workable dex+finesse), she can make a grapple attempt from up to 30 feet away, and since she gets Rogue talents at lv. 10 and above, she could get Maneuver Mastery, which would let her apply her Witch level instead of her BAB to her grapple checks. Her archetype also already allows her to use INT instead of STR for grapple checks with her hair. A Crab familiar could also give her another +2.

With more feats from Combat Tricks, she'd definitely be able to get Improved Unarmed Strike=>Improved Grapple=>Greater Grapple for another +2 and the ability to make the check as a Move Action.

With Throat Slicer, she'd be able to deliver a coup de grace as a Standard Action to pinned enemies.

So as a purely theoretical rundown possibility?
Turn 1:
> Standard action-Cast Touch of Fatigue (-2 to enemy STR), deliver with hair up to 30ft away, grapple as a free action.
> Move action-grapple check, if successful, inflict pinned condition.
Turn 2:
> Standard action-Coup de grace with a Warhammer(1d8/x3), ignores -4 from no proficiency since it auto-hits.
> Move action-Profit??

So now we have a caster that still has options like Black Tentacles, Glitterdust, Mage Armor, possibly Haste, etc., but without using up a spell, can set up a grapple from a range and has the feats to back it up while still maintaining full spell progression.

This is purely theoretical, and probably much worse than a normal Witch or Wizard, but seems like it could be a lot of fun if it works.

Wands are weapon-like and explicitly called out as such in the rules on drawing or sheathing a weapon. That’s why QuickDraw has to exclude them. And the FAQ makes it clear weapon-like objects can be drawn as part of a move.

Quote:

Drawing and Sheathing a Weapon-like Object: I know I can draw or sheathe a weapon-like object as a move action using the "Draw or sheathe a weapon" action, but if I have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, can I draw a weapon-like object with a regular move?

Yes. As shown on the chart on page 183, when you have a BAB of +1 or higher, you are combining the regular draw or sheathe a weapon action (to draw a weapon) with a move action. Thus all rules for draw or sheathe a weapon apply, including the ability to draw a weapon-like object.

Thanks. I guess dropping wands is a valid tactic then, if anyone wants to do that.

Quote:

What part is unclear? What you quoted says that you can pull things out as if from a scabbard or quiver. Pulling out ammunition from a quiver is a free action, drawing a weapon from a scabbard is a move action (or can be done as part of a move action).

Okay so which is it?

An arrow is neither a weapon (outside of improvised one anyway, it's ammunition for a weapon) and is not typically stored in a scabbard. As ammo it may be drawn as a Free Action. A wand is also clearly neither although it is physical much closer to an arrow than any of the other choices mentioned. That's what's not clear what are you to treat a wand like ammo or weapon. It's probably shorter and more fragile on average than an arrow to my way of thinking (but not too different in size than a bolt). I'd personally be fine calling it a free action to remove a wand from the Efficient Quiver. I think the main advantage as a free action (having thought on it a bit) would be allowing the user to place an item into its appropriate storage space whether that be a Haversack, Bag of Holding, scabbard, or the Quiver prior to withdrawing the current wand of choice. Essentially using a Full Round (2 move actions) to swap wands seems a bit slower than "quickly" but maybe that's just me.

? I have no clue why you say anything is unclear.

Your current argument is that PERHAPS wands can be treated as ammo, correct?

I see no justification for this at all.

In my earlier post, the rules clearly define ammo as arrows, bolts, darts, and sling bullets. Yes, Shurikens and firearm cartridges aren't listed here, but they weren't in the core rulebook. However, WANDS WERE, so if they were intended to be "ammunition," they would have been included at this point.

Still unconvinced?

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/ammunition/

In addition to arrows, bolts, darts, and sling bullets, there are shurikens, bullets, and cartridges. No wands.

Is a wand a weapon? Well, first of all, wands are nowhere on the weapon's list. You don't need proficiencies for them, and they don't have assigned damage dice. Yes, I feel the need to specifically point out that wands are not weapons.

"Okay but is it a "weapon-like object?" If not, what is a wand then?"

Wands fall under "magic items" in the rulebook. Thus. It is a magic item. Incidentally, retrieving a stored item is a move action. In my earlier post, I mentioned the Quick Draw feat. It's very clear to me that weapons and wands are treated differently. Why else would the feat explicitly mention wands as something you can't draw quickly even with the feat?

If you have any line of the rules and not personal theory you'd like to quote that supports the idea that "wands possibly count as ammunition," I would love to see it.

"Ah, but it's too slow. It doesn't seem fair you can draw an arrow and not a wand."

So are we talking about game balance?

My earlier post touches on this but I'll expand a bit more. Drawing arrows as a free action is an exception to normal "retrieval" rules. If this were not the case, everyone would be severely outdamaging archers, since they would only be able to draw and fire 1 arrow per round. This rule then dramatically helps archers come closer to melee characters in terms of attacks and damage.

Secondly, to me the "longer time" to draw seems fair because you are switching wands.

What does that mean? It means you are using a spell without having it take up any of your slots or daily usages. You don't need to have it prepared, and you don't need to know the spell.

Damn, aren't wands awesome?

Yes. Now, what if drawing wands were a free action or could be part of a move action? Okay. Assuming you use a move action to put the wand in your hand away, by simply giving up a move action and spending a bit of gold, you can now cast any spell on your spell list of 4th level or lower.

Potentially, you could cast unseen servant, and simply drop wands as a free action and have the servant pick them up. You can now move up to your speed and cast any 4th level or lower spell on your spell list almost without cost, and with almost zero short-term cost. That's a lot of utility.

I think being able to cast a spell without burning a daily slot is worth spending a round to swap rounds.

TL;DR Wands are magic items, not weapons or ammunition, and should not be able to be drawn as a free move.

Equipment, Ammunition wrote:

Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading (as noted in their descriptions). Generally speaking, ammunition that hits its target is destroyed or rendered useless, while ammunition that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost.

It appears as said above ... unclear

From my reading I think the RAW states that drawing as a free action only applies to bow ammunition. Although this might not be completely consistent with real-world logic, the clause specifically for arrows is probably there so archers can actually execute full attacks like melee attackers can.

Benefit: You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

A character who has selected this feat may throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow).
Alchemical items, potions, scrolls, and wands cannot be drawn quickly using this feat.

As even the Quick Draw feat doesn't apply to wands, I don't think he should be able to draw a wand as a free action with an item that is for a different purpose entirely.

It seems like something is wrong with this picture. Requiring both touch rolls and saving throws gives the opponents 2 chances for the spells to fail. Normally, most spells have 1 chance to fail.

Yes, there may be two chances to fail, but you are getting an extra melee attack as well. In addition, as Zarius pointed out, you retain the charge if you miss, so you don't immediately lose the spell, so the first "chance to fail" ONLY TAKES PLACE if the spell discharges accidentally.

As for the slow spell, it allows 1 target per level. Does this mean a character with the gloves may make that many touch attacks, or only one?

I think the prudent action is sell the gloves and pick something else.

Three times per day, the gloves allow the wearer to treat a ranged magus spell as a spell with a range of “touch,” allowing him to deliver the spell with his spellstrike ability. The glove can only affect spells that normally affect one or more creatures at a range greater than “touch” (such as slow), not rays or other created effects. The altered spell only affects the creature attacked (any other targets normally allowed by the spell are lost).

As an aside, I think in the discussion here we should also be careful to distinguish between whether we mean to say touch spells or touch attacks.

TL;DR @Ratna

Your melee attack only delivers the spell. Any effects after that shouldn't be affected, so they should still get the saving throw!