| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Reading over the chill touch spell, I've manage to generate quite a few questions regarding it's function; as well as some clarification or expansion on some of the established rules. If at all possible, I'd like an official response to this.
Allow me to list some articles of note:
1) Damage Type
Just to clear up a few points I've seen in other boards, chill touch mentions no where in it's description that it does cold damage. It's actually implied that it does negative energy damage. This might explain it's substitute effect on undead.
2) Targeting
It states that it effects "creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)." So, it's established that chill touch can effect more then one target within a range of touch.
3) Melee Touch Attack/Free Actions
It's explained to us that a melee touch attack is in fact, a free action if used in the same round it's cast. There's no defined limit to how many free actions a character can have, but it's implied there is in fact a limit. Is it possible, for a 10th level caster using chill touch to use all 10 touches of chill touch in a single round? If so, how can they be broken up against multiple targets? Can they be used both before and after moving provided the spell has been already cast that round?
4) Holding the Charge
This is a neat thing that Paizo implemented. There's nothing more frustrating for a character then losing a spell on a failed melee touch attack. The answer? It's called holding the charge; which basically allows the caster to hold a spell that they don't discharge in the round they cast it, indefinitely. Provided you don't accidently touch something, or cast another spell the caster can keep trying till the spell is successfully discharged. Though it's explained that you can make an unarmed attack in conjunction with a held charge and can touch friends as a single action (or six friends as part of a full), it's not explained if continuing to try to make a melee touch attack after the round has been cast is still a free action or not. Additionally, chill touch (it may be unique for this) allows for multiplies touches; therefore, how many of those touches can a caster do in a round once the spell has been held?. Once held does it break after the first touch? If you accidently touch someone does it go away or does just eat up one of the touches allowed? Can you continue to hold the spell until the maximum amount of touches allowed is met?
5) Stacking or Seperate Effects
Let's say it is in fact possible for a caster to effect a single target more then once with chill touch. Is each melee touch attack seperate? Would each attack have to be rolled for individually to bypass spell resistance? If more then one of the melee touch attacks for chill touch land, would the target have to make each fortitude saving throw for the strength damage seperately as well? If they fail more then one save, does the strength damage stack? Would items/feats/class features that may increase the damage of a melee touch attack or spell apply to each touch? In the terms of things, would each melee touch attack used in a round count as a seperate attack?
6) Sneak Attack
I know this was addressed already in the forum; although, no official response has been given, forcing experienced gamers to fall back on 3.0 - 3.5 D&D for clarification. So once again, can a melee touck attack spell be used to do a sneak attack? If the spell allowed for more then one touch attack or employed against multiple targets in a round, would each touch get the sneak attack damage provided they satisfied the criteria of sneak attack (flank or lose of dex)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Damage Type
Totally does negative energy damage, you're right.
2) Targeting
It states that it effects "creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)." So, it's established that chill touch can effect more then one target within a range of touch.
Right.
3) Melee Touch Attack/Free Actions
It's explained to us that a melee touch attack is in fact, a free action if used in the same round it's cast.
I think it's better to say the melee touch is made as part of the casting (though you can cast, move, touch).
There's no defined limit to how many free actions a character can have, but it's implied there is in fact a limit. Is it possible, for a 10th level caster using chill touch to use all 10 touches of chill touch in a single round?
No - casting the spell only gives you one free touch. You have to use your regular attacks in future rounds to use the rest. For instance, a hasted 6th level wizard could make two touch attacks with the spell in a rouch. A hasted12th level wizard could make three attacks (at +6/+6/+1, plus bonuses).
4) Holding the Charge
This is a neat thing that Paizo implemented.
It's actually not new with Paizo, though I believe the language has been cleaned up some.
Stacking effects
Yes - the negative energy damage is just damage, and the strength damage is just ability damage, which stacks. It's not a strength penalty like Ray of Enfeeblement gives (which doesn't stack with itself).
Sneak attacks
Yes, you can sneak attack with Chill Touch. About the only things you can't sneak attack with (IIRC) are splash weapons and touch/ranged-touch spells that don't do hp damage.
1) Damage Type
Despite the name strongly hinting at the spell dealing cold damage, the spell description mentions no energy type (including negative), it would seem to deal untyped damage.
2) Targeting: It states that it effects "creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)." So, it's established that chill touch can effect more then one target within a range of touch.
Correct, melee touch attack spells may have one or more charges, allowing you to hold the charge over multiple rounds, or, if you could normally make multiple attacks per round, use several of the charges each round after the first.
3) Melee Touch Attack/Free Actions: It's explained to us that a melee touch attack is in fact, a free action if used in the same round it's cast. There's no defined limit to how many free actions a character can have, but it's implied there is in fact a limit. Is it possible, for a 10th level caster using chill touch to use all 10 touches of chill touch in a single round? If so, how can they be broken up against multiple targets? Can they be used both before and after moving provided the spell has been already cast that round?
It's strongly implied by the wording in the Touch Spells in combat section that you may make a single touch attack as a free action, in the round in which you cast the spell.
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. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Note that the wording is "you may also touch as a free action" with a singular touch, not "you may make touch attacks"
Also, from earlier in the Combat section:
Multiple Attacks: A character who can make more than one attack per round must use the full-attack action (see Full-Round Actions) in order to get more than one attack.
4) Holding the Charge: This is a neat thing that Paizo implemented. There's nothing more frustrating for a character then losing a spell on a failed melee touch attack. The answer? It's called holding the charge; which basically allows the caster to hold a spell that they don't discharge in the round they cast it, indefinitely. Provided you don't accidently touch something, or cast another spell the caster can keep trying till the spell is successfully discharged.
Hate to break it to you, but Holding the Charge has been around since the changeover to 3rd edition.
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: If the character doesn't discharge a touch spell on the round the character casts the spell, the character can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely.
The character can make touch attacks round after round. The character can touch one friend (or the character can touch his or her self) as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If the character touches anything with the character's hand while holding a charge, the spell discharges. If the character casts another spell, the touch spell dissipates.
Though it's explained that you can make an unarmed attack in conjunction with a held charge and can touch friends as a single action (or six friends as part of a full), it's not explained if continuing to try to make a melee touch attack after the round has been cast is still a free action or not.
On the rounds after the spell has been cast, touch attacks must be made using the normal attack rules (with the exception of touches used on willing targets).
Additionally, chill touch (it may be unique for this) allows for multiplies touches; therefore, how many of those touches can a caster do in a round once the spell has been held?
At least 1 touch as a standard action,
or up to the maximum number of attacks they would normally be able to make unarmed as a full-round action,or up to 6 touches on willing targets.
Once held does it break after the first touch?
No, you may continue to hold the charge until you've touched the maximum number of targets.
If you accidently touch someone does it go away or does just eat up one of the touches allowed?
It eats up one of the touches allowed and, if possible, the spell effects the target normally, even if the touch was accidental.
5) Stacking or Seperate Effects: Let's say it is in fact possible for a caster to effect a single target more then once with chill touch. Is each melee touch attack seperate?
Yes.
Would each attack have to be rolled for individually to bypass spell resistance?
I'd say so, but I may be mistaken on that point.
If more then one of the melee touch attacks for chill touch land, would the target have to make each fortitude saving throw for the strength damage seperately as well?
Yes.
If they fail more then one save, does the strength damage stack?
Yes, strength damage and drain both stack, ability drain applies a permanent negative modifier to an attribute, ability damage applies a -1 to all checks and abilities dependent on that attribute per 2 points of damage taken.
Would items/feats/class features that may increase the damage of a melee touch attack or spell apply to each touch?
Yes, but note that such increases will not increase the Strength Damage, only the untyped hit point damage.
In the terms of things, would each melee touch attack used in a round count as a seperate attack?
Yes.
6) Sneak Attack: I know this was addressed already in the forum; although, no official response has been given, forcing experienced gamers to fall back on 3.0 - 3.5 D&D for clarification. So once again, can a melee touck attack spell be used to do a sneak attack?
Yes, attacks with which it is impossible to make a sneak attack (such as grenade like weapons) specifically note this fact. Otherwise, all ranged and melee attacks that deal damage and require an attack roll gain the benefits of sneak attack, assuming the usual conditions for sneak attack are met (invisibility, flat footed opponent, etc.)
If the spell allowed for more then one touch attack or employed against multiple targets in a round, would each touch get the sneak attack damage provided they satisfied the criteria of sneak attack (flank or lose of dex)?
Yes, unlike a spell such as Magic Missile that can deal damage to multiple targets (or a single target multiple times) as part of a single action, touch attack spells would indeed recieve sneak attack damage on each touch, as each touch is it's own separate attack. (again, assuming the other conditions for using sneak attack are met)
You two offer similar replies. Still waiting to see any differing or official responses. My GM allowed for up to one melee touch attack as a free action in a round, but was confused on expanding it if that's all I wanted to do for the round is make melee touch attacks with chill touch. I wanted to give her a more grounded approach either for or against my favor.
Now, here's the question for you two. By the sounds of it, it would be feasible for a rogue to with major magic, to make an off hand attack in a full round attack on conjunction with their melee touch attack with a held spell, or vice verse. Keeping in mind that for an attack, a melee touch spell is considered armed.
Now, here's the question for you two. By the sounds of it, it would be feasible for a rogue to with major magic, to make an off hand attack in a full round attack on conjunction with their melee touch attack with a held spell, or vice verse. Keeping in mind that for an attack, a melee touch spell is considered armed.
I can see two potential questions you might be asking here, so I'll just try and answer both.
1. Could a rogue, with the Major Magic rogue trick, cast chill touch and then use it as an off hand attack during their normal full attack action?
I don't see why not, alternately I'd be perfectly willing to allow a rogue to use their primary attack routine for the spell touches and use a weapon in their off hand for those attacks.
2. Could a rogue, with the Major Magic rogue trick, cast chill touch and then use it to deliver attacks with both their primary and off hand?
Possibly, there's nothing that explicitly says the touches have to be delivered with a specific hand (that I could find quickly at least), but the chill touch spell does use the singular "hand" not "hands." It's possible your DM might rule that all the chill touch attacks must be delivered with either your main hand or the off-hand.
Quote from the spell description:
"Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage"
Thought that might help.
Now, here's the question for you two. By the sounds of it, it would be feasible for a rogue to with major magic, to make an off hand attack in a full round attack on conjunction with their melee touch attack with a held spell, or vice verse. Keeping in mind that for an attack, a melee touch spell is considered armed.I can see two potential questions you might be asking here, so I'll just try and answer both.
1. Could a rogue, with the Major Magic rogue trick, cast chill touch and then use it as an off hand attack during their normal full attack action?
I don't see why not, alternately I'd be perfectly willing to allow a rogue to use their primary attack routine for the spell touches and use a weapon in their off hand for those attacks.
2. Could a rogue, with the Major Magic rogue trick, cast chill touch and then use it to deliver attacks with both their primary and off hand?
Possibly, there's nothing that explicitly says the touches have to be delivered with a specific hand (that I could find quickly at least), but the chill touch spell does use the singular "hand" not "hands." It's possible your DM might rule that all the chill touch attacks must be delivered with either your main hand or the off-hand.
There was a clarification about produce flame/flame blade made earlier that related to touch spell and weapon-like spells. If a spell creates a weapon-like effect (like flame blade), then you treat it like a weapon -- haste and iterative attacks in a full attack action all apply. Produce flame's melee touch attack (which is not "weapon-like") does not benefit from haste's extra attack and iterative attacks. You can't make more than one touch per round with a chill touch or produce flame. Interestingly, the ranged attack version of produce flame is "like a throwing weapon", so you theoretically could use it with full attack action iterative attacks and haste. However, the clarification pretty much nixes that. . .
The text:
What other rules would it follow instead?It would follow the rules for touch attacks granted by spells, which appear on page 213 of the PRPG under "Range."
It doesn't say that. In fact, it says that the flame regenerates instantly, suggesting that you can use it as rapidly as you can touch your enemy with the flame. This is just like performing unarmed strikes.It's not just like performing unarmed strikes, since a) it doesn't provoke an AoO and b) doesn't require use of Improved Unarmed Strike. It's a spell, and should therefore function similarly to other touch spells like chill touch. Iterative attacks are SOLELY the province of weapons (and of spells that specifically work like weapons)—touch attacks and natural weapons do not work this way. Therefore, one touch per round with a produce flame, or one hurled flame per round.
But again... in your game, feel free to apply the rules as you want. What I explain above is both how I would run things in MY game, and how we assume the spell works for the baseline of the rules themselves as well.
|
Quote from the spell description:
"Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage"
Thought that might help.
I was going to post this too. It explicitly states that it does negative energy damage.
2) Targeting
It states that it effects "creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)." So, it's established that chill touch can effect more then one target within a range of touch.
The spell lasts for one round. During that one round you may touch a number of creatures one per level. So if you have three attacks per round you can use the spell three times, plus attacks of opportunity as long as you have enough levels for all of the attacks.
4) Holding the Charge
Paizo didn't create that. It was already there in 3.5
5) Stacking or Seperate Effects
It describes the effects as DAMAGE so yes it stacks, yes the target makes Saves for each attack, SR applies for each attack, and yes you can make more than one attack on a single target. NASTY!
6) Sneak Attack
Sneak Attack does not specifically state what other affects can add to the Attack. Traditionally you can add sneak attack anytime you must roll to hit and do damage, which is the case with Chill Touch. So I would say yes you can add Sneak Attack damage to a Chill Touch attack. Some people will disagree and that is just fine. It's just the way I would do it for my game.
Some good questions that made me look at the spell all fresh and new. Yep definitely need to use it against my PCs! lol Thanks!
A Monk that somehow has Chill Touch would be NASTY!
There was a clarification about produce flame/flame blade made earlier that related to touch spell and weapon-like spells. If a spell creates a weapon-like effect (like flame blade), then you treat it like a weapon -- haste and iterative attacks in a full attack action all apply. Produce flame's melee touch attack (which is not "weapon-like") does not benefit from haste's extra attack and iterative attacks. You can't make more than one touch per round with a chill touch or produce flame. Interestingly, the ranged attack version of produce flame is "like a throwing weapon", so you theoretically could use it with full attack action iterative attacks and haste. However, the clarification pretty much nixes that.
Is that supported by anything at all in the actual rules, either in 3.5 or in Pathfinder?
Is that supported by anything at all in the actual rules, either in 3.5 or in Pathfinder?
Well, if someone "official" felt compelled to make a clarification about it, there's probably not a lot of support for it in the rules (:
PF gives us
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. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, 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, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.
Holding the Charge: 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.
In the case of holding the charge and making unarmed attacks/attacks with natural weapons, multiple charges of a touch spell can be used on each attack made. However, nothing is mentioned about making more than one touch attack per round. The rules say:
You can continue to make touch attacks round after round
But that doesn't mean you can make multiple touch attacks in one round. In fact, the only case where you can touch more than one subject is up to 6 willing targets as a full-round action. Even touching a single willing target is still a standard action.
I was going to post this too. It explicitly states that it does negative energy damage.Quote from the spell description:
"Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage"
Thought that might help.
Crud, don't know how I missed that...
But that doesn't mean you can make multiple touch attacks in one round. In fact, the only case where you can touch more than one subject is up to 6 willing targets as a full-round action. Even touching a single willing target is still a standard action.
You can never make more than one attack as a standard action.
However, there is nothing there to indicate that touch attacks would work differently from any other armed attack. "Armed attack" means that you get iteritives on a full-attack action unless otherwise specified (or unless those touch attacks are also natural weapons, which have their own rules).
This just seems like another 'clarification' which doesn't actually clarify anything (and in fact pulls an exception out of thin air, creating inconsistencies where there originally weren't any).
I suppose whoever made that call was afraid of chill touch monk/wizard flurries. I think.
But that doesn't mean you can make multiple touch attacks in one round. In fact, the only case where you can touch more than one subject is up to 6 willing targets as a full-round action. Even touching a single willing target is still a standard action.You can never make more than one attack as a standard action.
However, there is nothing there to indicate that touch attacks would work differently from any other armed attack. "Armed attack" means that you get iteritives on a full-attack action unless otherwise specified (or unless those touch attacks are also natural weapons, which have their own rules).
This just seems like another 'clarification' which doesn't actually clarify anything (and in fact pulls an exception out of thin air, creating inconsistencies where there originally weren't any).
I suppose whoever made that call was afraid of chill touch monk/wizard flurries. I think.
(Great) Cleave now lets you make more than one attack as a standard action (-;
Well, a chill touch monk can still deliver touch charges through unarmed strikes, so it's still possible. It's not possible to use touch attacks as a substitution for unarmed strikes.
I originally thought that it would work like it used to -- but based on the rules as written it does seem more design intent than a clarification. Perhaps this will eventually be solved by errata |:
I really think that messageboard "clarifications" are what we're seeing in place of errata, at least with respect to rules that need tweaking (not typos and table flubs and other obvious errors).
On some level that's irritating (especially if they keep calling it "clarifications", when errata is functionally what it is). I'm one of those people who thinks that the text as written is sacred (I'm entirely resistant to retcons, for instance), and many of these posts just strike me as "Jason's houserules". Sure, that may be what you wanted, but it's not what you said.
On the other hand, the whole concept of "errata" is a little pompous, and I can see how some would think this is a better approach. They're not saying "Your book is wrong, this is what it should say, please note the following changes"; instead, they're saying something more like "This is what we meant" or "this is how I would handle that, but it's your game." Which I can kinda respect.
|
|
But that doesn't mean you can make multiple touch attacks in one round. In fact, the only case where you can touch more than one subject is up to 6 willing targets as a full-round action. Even touching a single willing target is still a standard action.You can never make more than one attack as a standard action.
However, there is nothing there to indicate that touch attacks would work differently from any other armed attack. "Armed attack" means that you get iteritives on a full-attack action unless otherwise specified (or unless those touch attacks are also natural weapons, which have their own rules).
This just seems like another 'clarification' which doesn't actually clarify anything (and in fact pulls an exception out of thin air, creating inconsistencies where there originally weren't any).
I suppose whoever made that call was afraid of chill touch monk/wizard flurries. I think.
You can hold a spell that is discharged as a touch attack for multiple rounds until actually used. You can cast the spell in round one then in round 2 make a full attack. Alternatively, you can cast the spell in round 1 and make a standard attack and make an attack of opportunity as well. Attacks of opportunity count as well. I don't think it is saying that you can cast the spell then make a full attack in the same round. There are other ways of doing it. :)
|
|
I really think that messageboard "clarifications" are what we're seeing in place of errata, at least with respect to rules that need tweaking (not typos and table flubs and other obvious errors).
On some level that's irritating (especially if they keep calling it "clarifications", when errata is functionally what it is). I'm one of those people who thinks that the text as written is sacred (I'm entirely resistant to retcons, for instance), and many of these posts just strike me as "Jason's houserules". Sure, that may be what you wanted, but it's not what you said.
On the other hand, the whole concept of "errata" is a little pompous, and I can see how some would think this is a better approach. They're not saying "Your book is wrong, this is what it should say, please note the following changes"; instead, they're saying something more like "This is what we meant" or "this is how I would handle that, but it's your game." Which I can kinda respect.
I really don't think there is much to clarify to this spell. There is nothing at all within this spell that makes an exception to any rule.
It seems very straight forward.
the rules for Touch spells are very clear by the way
Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
As part of the casting of the spell, you can touch up SIX willing targets, or over multiple rounds you can touch unwilling opponents as a Full-round action.
Further it says
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: 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.
So, you cast the spell, hold the touch spell to be discharged next round. Next round you can touch up to 6 opponents as a full round action.
So, since the spell can affect up to caster level opponents, a 20th level wizard can cast Chill Touch and use it 20 times over multiple rounds- as long as he doesn't cast another spell.
See, there is no need for errata. It is all already there in the rules.
I felt like there was enough uncertainty that based on the rules it come to interpretation. So I was looking for interpretation from multiple sources to see what I couldn't and could do. You all have been really helpful. I'm a person whom likes to establish boundaries for doing something new or unusual. I totally missed the part under RANGE where you can touch 6 opponents as a full round action, as it would of TOTALLY answered most of my questions about chill touch.
So, the main focus of my questions are the following:
In using chill touch as a melee touch attack in the off-hand in conjunction with a melee weapon as part of a full attack.
Using solely the chill touch in the off-hand in some rounds. Would that incur some sort of off-hand penalty?
It's been established that we can make a melee touch attack against 6 opponents as a full round action. Could we break that up? 2 touches a piece over 3 targets? 6 touches vs 1?
If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
The most amazingly fun part of "clarifications" is when they're patently incorrect. :(
As part of the casting of the spell, you can touch up SIX willing targets, or over multiple rounds you can touch unwilling opponents as a Full-round action.
I do think this is a misread.
You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
There's nothing that implies that the full-round action to touch 6 creatures per round affects unwilling opponents. I think the idea here was that if you need to touch many willing allies over multiple rounds, the most you can do is 6 per round.
Crud, don't know how I missed that...I was going to post this too. It explicitly states that it does negative energy damage.Quote from the spell description:
"Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage"
Thought that might help.
Same way I did the first seven times I looked at it -- I didn't read it. I actually flipped to it expecting to see that it had the [cold] descriptor only to read it and see that it is actually explicitly stated as negative energy now.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
PRPG Page 216, under Touch Spells and Holding the Charge:
..Some touch spells allow you tot ouch 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.
This throws a big wrench in... and requires more clarification.
The problem:
If you cast the spell you can't take a full round action and get any more attacks than one free one you get with the spell. Excluding attacks of opportunity that occur in the round after you cast. This seems to nuke any reasoning for including the ...up to one creature per level... part of the spell.
Now holding the spell, and using it in later rounds, would make sense if the rule above were not in place.
So it seems to me that that spell descirption is still lacking in an explination as to how these extra touches can occur. Is the intent of the spell to allow the caster to exceed the normal rules for the number of touches it can make in a round or is the intent more that the casting of the spell becomes a free action and the caster can still take a full round action (in the round) therefore giving the oppotunity to use the extra attacks that a higher level mage might have, thus allowing more charges of the spell?
If its the first one, then the spell is much more powerful, as it would allow a wizard of 6th level to make six touch attacks in a round, dealing 1d6 with each (lets not even discuss a sneak attacking rogue. Yet if it is the second one, then the touch/level is not aligned very well with the attack iterations and full round actions. As a wizard will have 12 touches, by the time he can use more than one at 12th level (again excluding attack of oppotunity <and combat relfexes>. Granted a rogue/wizard or simular fighting arcane user could use more earlier, but would still have plenty touches in excess.
Chill touch does specifically indicate that you can use its melee touch attack only once per round.
Actually it says once per level (as in caster level) not once per round.
|
I follow the rule of "if it acts like a weapon, quacks like a weapon, it can do iterative attacks like a weapon." To this end I let full-round attacks occur with Chill Touch, Produce Flame, etc without worrying about the official (and unclear, to some extent) position. Especially since the damage they do isn't exactly game-changing. That and you can't do the full-round on the first round, and if you want to cast a spell other than chill touch/produce flame (and others that don't explicitly say "acts like X weapon") you lose that spell and have to go another round without full attack ability.
This interpretation only really helps gish builds by giving them a unique tactic (since full casters would rather use higher spells anyway), and I'm okay with that.
I follow the rule of "if it acts like a weapon, quacks like a weapon, it can do iterative attacks like a weapon." To this end I let full-round attacks occur with Chill Touch, Produce Flame, etc without worrying about the official (and unclear, to some extent) position. Especially since the damage they do isn't exactly game-changing. That and you can't do the full-round on the first round, and if you want to cast a spell other than chill touch/produce flame (and others that don't explicitly say "acts like X weapon") you lose that spell and have to go another round without full attack ability.
This interpretation only really helps gish builds by giving them a unique tactic (since full casters would rather use higher spells anyway), and I'm okay with that.
I think that is a fine house rule resolution, but I am still curious as to an offical stance? It would be great to know the writers INTENT with the multiple touches per level or even what they were hoping to avoid with the guiding rules of not carrying these types of spells over to the next round (aka holding the charge). I beleive the intent was to add a scaling concept to the spell to allow it to remain more useful even at higher levels, but depending on ones interpretation it can scale in power faster or slower.
A. As per all the rules. This would only allow you to use additional touches in the case of attacks of oppotunity. Low scalability, as you will more often than not only use one charge.
B. Mostly by the rules, but allowing a full round (of attacks) on the same round you cast (provided casting is all you did). This would allow gish and high level arcane casters the ability to use more of the touches. Low-Medium scalability, more usable for gish characters as they may only have a few levels of arcane casting and more fighter levels giving them perhaps the same amount of attacks per round as touches. Mostly pure arcane casters however will generally still waste a high amount of extra touches. As such this method scales better for gish than arcane casters.
C. Ignore the can't hold charge rule. This allows all arcane caster and other types to use the full number of touches spread over several rounds, with the limitation as to what they can do while holding it. Medium scalability. Seems the most fair option, but I would still wonder why the ...can't hold charges for these spells... rule exsist.
D. Break actions per round rule and allow a number of touch attacks in the casting round equal to the touch per level. Very High Scalability. This in effect allows a caster to inflict a (#ofLevels)d6 attack plus possible STR damage <granted you still need to roll for each d6 hit individually>. For a sneak attack gish this would be way overpowered as if other conditions are met each attack could be a sneak attack. Clearly this seems to exceed what the abilities of a level 1 spell should be, scalability or not, and contradicts one to many guiding rules (actions per round, touches per round (6 willing),reason, etc...).
|
In 3.5, the official stance for Chill Touch was that you cast it, got one free attack with it on that first round, and then if you had more rounds left you could use normal iterative attacks to deliver it. As these were unarmed it could provoke, which is why it was popular as a monk. Take a level dip in Wizard, get the feat that increases your caster level by 4 (to a maximum of character level) and a Monk 4/Wizard 1 could use Chill Touch on 5 of his flurrys with each casting. :D
In 3.5, the official stance for Chill Touch was that you cast it, got one free attack with it on that first round, and then if you had more rounds left you could use normal iterative attacks to deliver it. As these were unarmed it could provoke, which is why it was popular as a monk. Take a level dip in Wizard, get the feat that increases your caster level by 4 (to a maximum of character level) and a Monk 4/Wizard 1 could use Chill Touch on 5 of his flurrys with each casting. :D
Again though, that is no longer an option (in PRPG), as this spell is now curbed by the following rule:
"PRPG Page 216, under Touch Spells and Holding the Charge:
..Some touch spells allow you tot ouch 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."
Which means even a monk, whose flurry of blows equates to a full round action, could no longer cast the spell AND do a flurry of blows, as this spell ends at the end of the round it is cast. It does however lead me to beleive that this rule may have been written to prevent this case, but in effect also really reduces any benefit from the additional touch per level increase.
|
|
That isn't new with Pathfinder.
Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell.
And still, Chill Touch was officially allowed to be used past the first round. I think the text in Chill Touch is specifically an exception to the rule.
That, or the rule you quoted isn't intended for it. Some spells, like Dimension Door, affect multiple people right away. In that case, you'd have to touch them all in the same round.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Taking all the rules in stride, as written, first we know that:
A: You can't hold the charge of chill touch, and its entire effect must be completed during your turn in the initiative order.
Which means B: You can't use it to make AoO's,
and C: You can't use it as part of a series of attacks, because it does take a standard action to cast.
That leaves only one logical possibility remaining: you can cast the spell as a standard action and then make touches equal to your caster level, on any number of targets within range. This could mean an 8th level caster would get 8 touches, but is that really any more powerful than fireball?
Certainly not; the strength damage possibility is mitigated by the single target/less damage on multiple targets nature of the spell in conjunction with the fortitude save. And the full normal damage even on a successful save is mitigated by the need of touch attacks.
All in all, the spell seems perfectly balanced and reasonable when seen in light of the above clarifications. A caster casts the spell, and then uses touches equal to their caster level immediately; or after a move if they choose to move during their turn. The fact that you can't hold the charge and you have 1 touch per level makes it so the spell doesn't make sense any other way.
On the subject of rogues doing sneak attack damage, it seems clear that these touches are not 'touch attacks' but rather merely 'touches', which does not meet the Sneak Attack requirement of doing extra damage on a Rogue's 'attacks'.
Edit: Upon further reflection, and reading the rules for touch attacks in the combat section of the Core Rulebook, it seems clear that the chill touch 'touches' are touch attacks, and thus SA would work just fine. This means a 7th level rogue/7th level wizard casting chill touch on the surprise round could do 35d6 points of damage and 7 points of strength damage. Talk about broken and overpowered . . .