|
Well, technically, you can't. Weilding a weapon, or touching anything discharges the spell, including a glove, gauntlet, or whatever. But, it probably will never be a problem to simply handwave that on by.
Per RAW: Pg. 185 PFRPG it states under the heading Touch Spells in Combat, subheading 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.
So in theory a wizard who casts a touch spell while wearing a guantlet of certain types, could channel the magical energy of the spell through the item to deliver a touch attack with the spell and discharge it, dealing the unarmed damage of the guantlet damage and then the spell damage. without provoking attacks of opportunity.
Well, a plain gauntlet is a weird item. It is listed as a weapon, but doesn't actually do any damage. It just converts nonlethal damage to lethal damage. Wearing one doesn't even count as being armed. So if the mage wanted to use a touch attack I'd allow it. If s/he wanted to punch with the gauntlet, to get a little more damage with the touch spell, s/he could, but this would be a regular attack, not a touch attack.
Spiked gauntlets on the other hand, are a weapon in their own right. I would allow the mage in question to make a touch attack while wearing the gauntlets (to discharge a spell), but I wouldn't allow the mage to make a regular attack with the spiked gauntlets and discharge the spell. My reasoning is that you would need a spell storing item to get both weapon damage and spell damage.
Well, technically, you can't. Weilding a weapon, or touching anything discharges the spell, including a glove, gauntlet, or whatever. But, it probably will never be a problem to simply handwave that on by.Per RAW: Pg. 185 PFRPG it states under the heading Touch Spells in Combat, subheading 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.
So in theory a wizard who casts a touch spell while wearing a guantlet of certain types, could channel the magical energy of the spell through the item to deliver a touch attack with the spell and discharge it, dealing the unarmed damage of the guantlet damage and then the spell damage. without provoking attacks of opportunity.
No, this is not correct. You can either touch with the spell, which is considered an armed attack and deals only the spell damgage. Or you can punch and discharge the spell, which does unarmed strike damage and the damage from the spell. This is not a touch attack, however, and is not an armed attack (unless you have imp. unarmed strike). If you look under the description for gauntlet you will see that it does not change an unarmed attack to an armed attack, it just changes the damage to lethal. Only imp. unarmed strike changes an unarmed strike to 'armed.'
Edit: Here's the reference, p186:
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.
|
|
No, this is not correct. You can either touch with the spell, which is considered an armed attack and deals only the spell damgage. Or you can punch and discharge the spell, which does unarmed strike damage and the damage from the spell. This is not a touch attack, however, and is not an armed attack (unless you have imp. unarmed strike). If you look under the description for gauntlet you will see that it does not change an unarmed attack to an armed attack, it just changes the damage to lethal. Only imp. unarmed strike changes an unarmed strike to 'armed.'
Edit: Here's the reference, p186:
...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,
Ok i see where yo are referencing, so if a wizard has improved unarmed attack by taking the feat, then he/she could make the attack with a spiked guantlet as a normal attack and if he/she hits the target then both the guantlet damage and spell damage would take place normally.
|
The Gauntlet and Spiked Gauntelt are weapons, like a Dagger. Improved Unarmed Strike would allow you to punch without Provoking an Attack of Oppertunity and would also "cast te spell". For a human that would be a normal attack (not touch) that dals 1d3 + Str, + the Spell. On a Crit, the Unarmed Strike is x2, not the spell (which I dislike).
@Khell: If the mage had imp. unarmed strike (IUS), he or she would be considered armed even without a spiked gauntlet, so s/he could deal punch damage and spell damage at the same time and not trigger an AoO.
A spiked gauntlet on the other hand, is clearly a weapon in and of itself. You can't combine the spiked gauntlet damage with the spell. You'd need a gauntlet enchanted with spell storing to do that. I would, however, allow a mage who was wearing a spiked gauntlet to make a touch attack, dealing only the spell damage, while wearing a spiked gauntlet. But others would certainly disagree.
A plain gauntlet is a lot more confusing. It has a place on the weapons table, but it is in the same unique area as an unarmed strike, unlike the spiked gauntlet which is treated on the chart like any other weapon. All a gauntlet does is change the damage type of an unarmed strike from nonlethal to lethal. If you check its description, you will note that it doesn't make the attack armed, so punching with a gauntlet still provokes an AoO, just like punching with a fist. So it's kind of a weapon, and kind of not. For that reason, I'd go ahead and allow the spell to be discharged when punching with a gauntlet. It's actually a lot simpler that way, since all the damage (punch + spell) is of the same type (lethal). Such an attack would be a regular attack, tho, not a touch attack.
Hope this helps.
Now here's a weirder question...
Could a Monk/Sorcerer use Flurry of Blows as a part of the Attack with the spell in the same round as he cast it? (The spell in question being Shocking Grasp, for example)
|
|
@Khell: If the mage had imp. unarmed strike (IUS), he or she would be considered armed even without a spiked gauntlet, so s/he could deal punch damage and spell damage at the same time and not trigger an AoO.
A spiked gauntlet on the other hand, is clearly a weapon in and of itself. You can't combine the spiked gauntlet damage with the spell. You'd need a gauntlet enchanted with spell storing to do that. I would, however, allow a mage who was wearing a spiked gauntlet to make a touch attack, dealing only the spell damage, while wearing a spiked gauntlet. But others would certainly disagree.
A plain gauntlet is a lot more confusing. It has a place on the weapons table, but it is in the same unique area as an unarmed strike, unlike the spiked gauntlet which is treated on the chart like any other weapon. All a gauntlet does is change the damage type of an unarmed strike from nonlethal to lethal. If you check its description, you will note that it doesn't make the attack armed, so punching with a gauntlet still provokes an AoO, just like punching with a fist. So it's kind of a weapon, and kind of not. For that reason, I'd go ahead and allow the spell to be discharged when punching with a gauntlet. It's actually a lot simpler that way, since all the damage (punch + spell) is of the same type (lethal). Such an attack would be a regular attack, tho, not a touch attack.
Hope this helps.
Yes it does thanks to all for clarity.
Now here's a weirder question...
Could a Monk/Sorcerer use Flurry of Blows as a part of the Attack with the spell in the same round as he cast it? (The spell in question being Shocking Grasp, for example)
No. FoB is a full attack action. With shocking grasp, you'd get one free touch in the round that you cast it, or part of a regular attack in following rounds. The first successful FoB attack would trigger the shocking grasp.
You, could, however, cast chill touch in one round, then on the following round use it in conjunction with FoB for some serious hp and strength damage, assuming your CL was high enough for multiple touches under the chill touch spell description (1/CL).
Now here's a weirder question...
Could a Monk/Sorcerer use Flurry of Blows as a part of the Attack with the spell in the same round as he cast it? (The spell in question being Shocking Grasp, for example)
No Flurry of Blows is a full round action which means you don't have an action to cast the spell with.
IF you quicken the spell you could flurry but the first hit would discharge the spell as per everything stated above.
Edit: Ninja'd by Jake, and complete agreement with what he said.
Ok... so was my old 3.5 player in error when he used Shocking Grasp through his sword and got the extra damage on -every- attack of a full round attack on his Duskblade (in addition to Blade of Blood I think it was and Crown of Might)?
Ok... so was my old 3.5 player in error when he used Shocking Grasp through his sword and got the extra damage on -every- attack of a full round attack on his Duskblade (in addition to Blade of Blood I think it was and Crown of Might)?
Unless Duskblade has a class ability that makes an exception. It's been awhile since I've read the rules for Duskblade.
Ok... so was my old 3.5 player in error when he used Shocking Grasp through his sword and got the extra damage on -every- attack of a full round attack on his Duskblade (in addition to Blade of Blood I think it was and Crown of Might)?Unless Duskblade has a class ability that makes an exception. It's been awhile since I've read the rules for Duskblade.
Duskblade has some specific exceptions for attacking with a spell active. Specifically at 13th level they gain an ability that allowed them to full attack with a spell through their weapon, in addition to the ability to cast said spell while doing it.
That is a specific exception from the normal rules however, and lead to Duskblades using spiked chains and whirlwind attack to hit lots of creatures with the weapon and a vampiric touch spell or the like.
Well he used the Duskblade abilities/spells along with magic items (including a Belt of Battle) and all of the Two Weapon Fighting feats to get around 9 to 10D6 of extra damage per hit. With the two weapon Fighting feats he was getting like 6 attacks a round at level 15. Weapon damage plus the elemental/holy/whatever damage for 6 hits plus an additional 60D6 or so of damage...
There's a reason I will never allow a player to play a Duskblade ever again in my games. If he was doing something he wasn't supposed to that may change my opinion of the Duskblades.
Sorry for the threadjack, btw.
Well he used the Duskblade abilities/spells along with magic items (including a Belt of Battle) and all of the Two Weapon Fighting feats to get around 9 to 10D6 of extra damage per hit. With the two weapon Fighting feats he was getting like 6 attacks a round at level 15. Weapon damage plus the elemental/holy/whatever damage for 6 hits plus an additional 60D6 or so of damage...
There's a reason I will never allow a player to play a Duskblade ever again in my games. If he was doing something he wasn't supposed to that may change my opinion of the Duskblades.
Sorry for the threadjack, btw.
It's relatively Tangent. The Duskblade like any other class could be "broke"... it did have full BAB and 6 levels of spell progression... but about all it could do was HP damage... it didn't take hits too well, and didn't have great saves. With the magic items involved and two weapon fighting (which has some issues in this case, as you could only do the duskblade's stuff with one weapon at a time) it is possible, but there are other issues too (like how many swift actions you allowed him to have... he couldn't do all that stuff he wanted to in one round).
But no more or less so than the stuff that can be done with core wizards/clerics/druids or splat book anything honestly...
It as always comes down to comfort level and what the players and DM expect from each other and communication about such expectations.
|
|
Ok... so was my old 3.5 player in error when he used Shocking Grasp through his sword and got the extra damage on -every- attack of a full round attack on his Duskblade (in addition to Blade of Blood I think it was and Crown of Might)?
The Duskblade would need to be Level 13 in order to do what is called Arcane Channeling to make a full attack with any touch spell that he/she knows or can cast, also they have what is called Quick Cast X times per day, which would allow a Lvl 13 Duskblade to quickcast Blade of Blood which last 1 round per level or until discharged, then he/she could make a full attack action with another touch spell like Shocking Grasp on all attacks, the Blade of Blood spell and the Shocking Grasp spell could both be used in conjunction with the full attack action per the Arcane Channeling and Quickcast in 1 round, therefore allowing both spells damage to be applied to all attacks (providing they all hit)in a round.
|
|
The Duskblade would need to be Level 13 in order to do what is called Arcane Channeling to make a full attack with any touch spell that he/she knows or can cast, also they have what is called Quick Cast X times per day, which would allow a Lvl 13 Duskblade to quickcast Blade of Blood which last 1 round per level or until discharged, then he/she could make a full attack action with another touch spell like Shocking Grasp on all attacks, the Blade of Blood spell and the Shocking Grasp spell could both be used in conjunction with the full attack action per the Arcane Channeling and Quickcast in 1 round, therefore allowing both spells damage to be applied to all attacks (providing they all hit)in a round.
I stand correct myself on my earlier post about the Duskblade. On Pg.186 of the PFRPG it states under heading Touch Spells in Combat: subheading Holding the Charge: (fourth sentance)If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. So if you cast a touch spell and decided to hold the charge of that spell, casting another spell dissipates the held spell. My corrected response to the Duskblades possible action for the round is this: A Duskblade could cast Crown of Might and then as an immidiate action discharge it to gain a +8 enhancement bonus to Strentgh for 1 round, then as part of the full attack action per Arcane Channeling deliver the attack. You cannot combine a swift action such as Quick Cast and as an immidiate action discharge the spell Crown of Might to get the secondary effect. You can, however, Quick Cast Seeking Ray, then as a full attack action per Arcane Channeling cast Crown of Might to recieve a +2 enhancement bonus to Strength for 1 round to deliver the full attack recieveing the +2 enhancemnt bonus to Strength on all of the attacks channeled through the weapon.
What about spellcasting monsters such as Lamias that have other effects when they touch? I had a Lamia cleric of Lamashtu 11 casting Slay Living spells that also drained 1d4 wisdom with the touch attack.
What about spellcasting monsters such as Lamias that have other effects when they touch? I had a Lamia cleric of Lamashtu 11 casting Slay Living spells that also drained 1d4 wisdom with the touch attack.
I think what you mean is cast slay living, hold the charge, then use the supernatural ability Wisdom Drain -- which is delivered via a melee touch attack. This discharges the charge of slay living that you were holding -- and it does the Wisdom Drain as well. Touch spells normally dissipate if you cast another spell, but the Wisdom Drain ability isn't a spell.
|
|
It's relatively Tangent. The Duskblade like any other class could be "broke"... it did have full BAB and 6 levels of spell progression... but about all it could do was HP damage... it didn't take hits too well, and didn't have great saves. With the magic items involved and two weapon fighting (which has some issues in this case, as you could only do the duskblade's stuff with one weapon at a time) it is possible, but there are other issues too (like how many swift actions you allowed him to have... he couldn't do all that stuff he wanted to in one round).
But no more or less so than the stuff that can be done with core wizards/clerics/druids or splat book anything honestly...
It as always comes down to comfort level and what the players and DM expect from each other and communication about such expectations.
Per the special class ability Arcane Channeling a Duskblade can make a Full Attack action to deliver any touch spell he/she knows to all attacks in a round to include 2 weapons he/she is weilding.
As a GM you could limit a Duskblade who weilds a weapon in each hand to have the Still spell Metamagic feat in order to cast any touch spell, if the Duskblade does not have said feat then they would need a free hand to perform the required somantic gestures to cast spells if required to do so, if the Duskblade has the Quick Draw feat or a +1 attack bonus to be able to draw a weapon as a free action during movement, the Duskblade at that time can only channel the touch spell into his/her Primary weapon only!