| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey everyone.
Right now I'm in the midst of reading through the Pathfinder rules (and loving them, for the most part) and I came across an old, badly worded rule that has left me wondering how to treat it since the dawn of 3.5e.
Let me recount it so we're all on the same page here.
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.
The section I've bolded appears to explicitly specify that a caster can hold the charge on a touch spell and then perform touch attacks or willing touches with it round after round, indefinitely, then goes on to explicitly specify that touching ANYTHING or ANYONE intentionally or otherwise, discharges the spell. Furthermore, why even go on to detail the act of touching 6 allies as a full-round action if the first ally you touch will discharge the spell?
Am I missing something here? It appears to me that the rule makes itself impossible. Could it be that the word "discharge" is not defined as the spell's charge being lost but rather that the spell's effect takes place but the charge remains held?
So my question to you all is simple... What's going on here, and how should this rule be adjudicated in-game?
|
You need to distinguish between an attack and a successful attack or hit.
You may make unlimited touch attacks but as soon as you are successful, the spell is discharged unless it allows for multiples hits.
For example, you cast inflict serious wounds and try to touch the enemy fighter. You could theoretically miss him 100 times in a row without losing the spell and then succeed with a hit and the spell would still affect the target.
You need to distinguish between an attack and a successful attack or hit.
You may make unlimited touch attacks but as soon as you are successful, the spell is discharged unless it allows for multiples hits.
For example, you cast inflict serious wounds and try to touch the enemy fighter. You could theoretically miss him 100 times in a row without losing the spell and then succeed with a hit and the spell would still affect the target.
Then what's the point in specifying the circumstance of touching 6 willing allies as a full-round action? Such an action is guaranteed to connect in every case.
Edit:
And if you happen to think "There are touch spells that clearly state that you can touch multiple targets"... Why put the sentence talking about touching multiple allies in the paragraph about holding the charge instead of in the more general one about touch spells?
I hope you can see why I'm pretty tangled about this one... ^^;
It is indeed because of spells that allow multiple touches.
Personally, I think it makes more sense in the paragraphs about "touching people over the course of several rounds" than it does in the paragraphs dealing more generally with one-touch-wonders as well as multi-touch spells.
I've always figured that they meant exactly that.
If you cast a touch spell then miss the attack, you can choose to keep holding the charge until next round and try again. And again. Until you hit.
However, there are issues with holding the charge, such as the inability to cast something else next round - you can, but that dissipates the charge you are holding. I don't remember if getting hit while holding a charge requires a concentration check to maintain the held charge or not - I have always played that it does, but that might be a houserule.
Seems a bit unfair to ranged touch attack spells. You cast Inflict Serious Wounds, and miss, you can try again next round. But you cast Scorching Ray and miss, your spell is gone.
But, on the other hand, if your spell is ranged touch, you can use it from a safe distance, without fear of AoO or simply getting clobbered next round, you can use it for hunting, for shooting enemies who try to flee, for shooting enemies that you can't reach with your bare hand, for shooting enemies you don't want to touch (like gelatinous cubes, for example, or barbed devils, etc.), etc. Safer and more versatile. Maybe it's a fair trade-off.
But, on the other hand, if your spell is ranged touch, you can use it from a safe distance, without fear of AoO or simply getting clobbered next round, you can use it for hunting, for shooting enemies who try to flee, for shooting enemies that you can't reach with your bare hand, for shooting enemies you don't want to touch (like gelatinous cubes, for example, or barbed devils, etc.), etc. Safer and more versatile. Maybe it's a fair trade-off.
Ahh but that's the beauty of touch attack spells. Casting the spell threatens but actually attacking does not. You can cast a touch attack spell move 20' then as a free action discharge it and you don't prvoke.
Ahh but that's the beauty of touch attack spells. Casting the spell threatens but actually attacking does not. You can cast a touch attack spell move 20' then as a free action discharge it and you don't prvoke.
Note that this works for healing spells, too. You don't have to move, then cast while in a threatened square. You can cast first, then move.
|
Note that this works for healing spells, too. You don't have to move, then cast while in a threatened square. You can cast first, then move.
That sounds like it would be useful, but I'm confused if by the RAW that would work or not. Here's my thinking . . .
Standard Action: Cast a Cure Spell
Move Action: Move up to an ally
Another Standard Action: Touch your ally.
Wouldn't this take two rounds? Or should the 'casting' part of a cure spell be considered a free action, and the touching part a standard action? Or would this be a 'split' standard action, that you do part of and then move and then do the other part of?
The rules don't seem to take any of these creative interpretations into account, so I am left thinking that doing this would take Two Rounds, minus a move action.
I'd be curious to hear any rules that make what Zurai is talking about work in a single round if they exist.
But, on the other hand, if your spell is ranged touch, you can use it from a safe distance, without fear of AoO or simply getting clobbered next round, you can use it for hunting, for shooting enemies who try to flee, for shooting enemies that you can't reach with your bare hand, for shooting enemies you don't want to touch (like gelatinous cubes, for example, or barbed devils, etc.), etc. Safer and more versatile. Maybe it's a fair trade-off.Ahh but that's the beauty of touch attack spells. Casting the spell threatens but actually attacking does not. You can cast a touch attack spell move 20' then as a free action discharge it and you don't prvoke.
Exactly.
Which is why I said "without fear of AoO or simply getting clobbered next round" - unless your touch attack kills your opponent, you're going to be in range of his touch attacks next round - and if he's, say, a big old mean Tarrasque like me, those touch attacks are quite scary indeed.
I touch your liver with this claw, I touch your spleen with that claw, I touch your jugular vein with this tooth...
So, cast, move, touch, then wait for retaliation, or cast (provoke or defensively), touch, then move away (provoke again). Either way, you're exposing yourself to danger with every touch attack.
Not so with ranged touch attacks. Especially the ones with ranges longer than 30 feet.
Here's my thinking . . .
Standard Action: Cast a Cure Spell
Move Action: Move up to an ally
Another Standard Action: Touch your ally.I'd be curious to hear any rules that make what Zurai is talking about work in a single round if they exist.
As you wish.
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.
As you can see, your example is incorrect where it assumes delivering the touch attack is "another standard action". Instead, delivering the touch attack is a free action - but only when you deliver that touch attack in the same round as you cast the spell.
If you miss, then next round you may try another touch attack to deliver it, assuming you hold the charge as the rules describe, but deliving the touch attack next round (or any round except the one in which you cast the spell) must follow all the normal rules for mkaing an attack, such as doing so as a standard action.
I'd be curious to hear any rules that make what Zurai is talking about work in a single round if they exist.
LinkIn the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action.
So standard action to cast, move action, free action to touch.
Which is why I said "without fear of AoO or simply getting clobbered next round" - unless your touch attack kills your opponent, you're going to be in range of his touch attacks next round - and if he's, say, a big old mean Tarrasque like me, those touch attacks are quite scary indeed.
Misunderstood you. Regardless
Cast->Move->Touch then get attackedis a world better than
Move->Cast(provoke AoO)->Touch then get attacked.
I was thinking of this for my Arcane Trickster in training who will likely be on the blunt end of things a lot anyhow. I am starting to think Spring attack will be in my future. Too many feats, I need, too few slots.
|
|
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.As you can see, your example is incorrect where it assumes delivering the touch attack is "another standard action". Instead, delivering the touch attack is a free action - but only when you deliver that touch attack in the same round as you cast the spell.
Must have missed that. Thanks for the clarification :)
|
You need to distinguish between an attack and a successful attack or hit.
You may make unlimited touch attacks but as soon as you are successful, the spell is discharged unless it allows for multiples hits.
For example, you cast inflict serious wounds and try to touch the enemy fighter. You could theoretically miss him 100 times in a row without losing the spell and then succeed with a hit and the spell would still affect the target.
Then what's the point in specifying the circumstance of touching 6 willing allies as a full-round action? Such an action is guaranteed to connect in every case.
Edit:
And if you happen to think "There are touch spells that clearly state that you can touch multiple targets"... Why put the sentence talking about touching multiple allies in the paragraph about holding the charge instead of in the more general one about touch spells?I hope you can see why I'm pretty tangled about this one... ^^;
Its in there for if you have a spell that can affect many people. Example, breath water can affect any number of people, as you a lot time to them on a touch basis. By the rules, you can only bestow water breathing to six people a round, so they better hurry their asses into the water if they're going to get max benefit.
Holding the Charge: If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
Hey guys...this part of the OP's boldfaced quote hasn't gotten any discussion, and frankly, that was the part I was most hoping for some ideas.
I KNOW I don't want another load of rules addressing every conceivable possibility that a PC might happen to "unintentionally" touch something while his hand is glowing. But, as a DM, I cannot come up with a good rule of thumb to apply this. When I try, it always seems contrived, as if I'm specifically trying to rob the player of his spell.There are some very obvious cases (like when he casts a touch spell, doesn't hit his target, and then climbs a rope), but that doesn't help with the whole idea of "unintentionally" touching something and losing the spell.
Any ideas to help a fellow out?
|
|
I think "unintentionally" is meant as a catch all for out-of-character intent. Say a player casts the spell, then reaches into his pack for a potion the next round. They forgot they had the spell, so they discharged it. Depends on how strict your DM is about remembering/reminding about active effects.
Now, a particularly picky DM could argue that if you are tripped, the natural inclination is to brace against the fall and therefore you would likely lose a touch spell in this case (or if you are grappled/pushed). Kind of harsh, but would be effective in a game with experienced players.
|
It means that if something happens to the hand that is holding the charge, the spell goes off on that, (not literally if you touch anything). Inadvertantly might mean if someone tries to grapple you, you climb a rope, maybe you have to catch the ceiling as the giant tries to smash down the building. Maybe you are using a two handed weapon, were trying to heal cast a touch spell, fail, and now the enemy is to close to try again, so you melee it, grabbing your weapon in both hands and losing the touch spell.
|
Note that this works for healing spells, too. You don't have to move, then cast while in a threatened square. You can cast first, then move.That sounds like it would be useful, but I'm confused if by the RAW that would work or not. Here's my thinking . . .
Standard Action: Cast a Cure Spell
Move Action: Move up to an ally
Another Standard Action: Touch your ally.Wouldn't this take two rounds? Or should the 'casting' part of a cure spell be considered a free action, and the touching part a standard action? Or would this be a 'split' standard action, that you do part of and then move and then do the other part of?
The rules don't seem to take any of these creative interpretations into account, so I am left thinking that doing this would take Two Rounds, minus a move action.
I'd be curious to hear any rules that make what Zurai is talking about work in a single round if they exist.
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.
So the touch is part of the casting, not a separate action itself. The tricky part is that normally your standard action and move action are handled independently. So you could move to be in position to touch 6 targets then cast the spell and touch them as part of the spell.
However under discharge it says,
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."
So you could cast the spell and move. The next round take a 5 ft step and use full attack to touch 6 targets.
The next part gets confusing for me.
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.
So I think this means that even if the 20th level Wizard can potentially touch 6 targets per round, up to 20 targets, he has to touch everyone to be affected within the round he casts the spell and cannot choose to hold the spell and touch someone the next turn. So he could touch 6 targets as part of the spell, and any AoO until his turn comes back around. But then the spell is gone. If he didn't get all the touches off or even no touches it is still gone.
I think.
But then combine this stuff with Spectral Hand and it gets crazy!
|
|
Krome, I believe your last statement is correct. If in the case of a spell like Teleport that allows multiple touched recipients, you must touch all 6 creatures in the same round. That would mean all but one of them would need to be grouped together (touch 1 or 5, move 30 feet, touch the remainder) or they get left behind.
Spectral Hand is a much underutilized spell in my opinion.
|
|
Krome, I believe your last statement is correct. If in the case of a spell like Teleport that allows multiple touched recipients, you must touch all 6 creatures in the same round. That would mean all but one of them would need to be grouped together (touch 1 or 5, move 30 feet, touch the remainder) or they get left behind.
Spectral Hand is a much underutilized spell in my opinion.
Oh yeah, we use Spectral Hand like crazy. I wish I could get it for clerics...
Maybe invent a divine version called Touch of the Holy Spirit!
Touch spells rules are ones that seem darn clear, then I read them again and start wondering what if... then my head hurts.
Touch spells rules are ones that seem darn clear, then I read them again and start wondering what if... then my head hurts.
Perhaps this is more clearly formulated (or not). From WotC's FAQ:
"Touch Spells: The duration for a touch spell doesn't begin until the caster touches a subject and delivers the spell to a recipient. Attempting to touch a recipient requires a melee touch attack and that is part of the action used to cast the spell during the round when the spell is completed. If the recipient is willing to be touched, it's usually best to just assume the caster touches the recipient.
If the caster does not touch a recipient then (either because she doesn't try to or the melee touch attack fails), she must use an action (usually the attack or full attack action) to touch a recipient during a later round. This is called "holding the charge." A caster holding a charge is considered armed and can use an attack of opportunity to make a melee touch attack and deliver the spell.
Whenever the caster touches anything, the held charge is discharged, even if what the caster touches isn't a valid target for the spell (in that case, the spell is wasted). The charge also is lost (and wasted) if the caster casts another spell. Otherwise, a caster can hold a charge indefinitely. DMs should feel free to set some reasonable limit to how long a character can hold a charge, perhaps 1 hour or until the caster has to go to sleep (or trance in the case of elves).
A very few touch spells (water breathing, for example) can be partially discharged. If so, this will be mentioned in the spell's target entry and its descriptive text, or both.
As a full-round action you can touch up to six friends willing creatures, object that willing creatures hold, or objects just lying round by themselves), provided that all the recipients are within the caster's reach. (The caster can extend her reach a little by taking a 5-foot step during the process.) To use this option, you must first cast the spell and hold the charge. Because the recipients are willing, no melee touch attack is required. You must decide how to distribute the spell's effect before touching anything."
|
|
Whoops. My previous post actually doesn't work, as the 6-friends option is a full-round action and must be done in one round.
@Krome: I designed an entire class around the concept of a stealthy divine character that gained the assistance of a "divine hand" that would pick locks, deliver spells, or even absorb energy and hold/block items.