They would work just like any touch attack spell does and are not completely expended until all the touches are used up, the duration is over, or you cast another spell.
Spellstrike would allow you to full attack and apply chill touch to each attack of the full attack provided you have enough uses of chill touch left.
Ok Chill touch question 1: Chill touch lasts indefinitely. Basically until you cast another spell or discharge all of the touches you can hold on to chill touch (provided you do nothing else to cause you to lose the charge).
On the second part of the question on Chill Touch (which is partially a question about spellstrike too) -- Nothing in the spellstrike ability states that it discharges the spell. It simply includes the effects of the spell on a successful hit -- as part of a melee attack. That last part is key -- much like the rogue's sneak attack spellstrike can be done as part of any melee attack that qualifies for it. So chill touch isn't discharged (beyond its normal effects) when used with spellstrike and spellstrike can be used with any and all melee attacks, either as standard actions, AoOs or parts of a full attack.
Spellstrike works with any spell with a range of "touch" -- nothing else about the spell matters when it comes to use with spellstrike. As such it cannot be used with elemental touch (which doesn't have a range of touch) -- produce flame has a range of "0 ft" which means it wouldn't be an option either, while calcific touch could be used (which isn't a magus spell normally but could become such with spell blending).
Honestly I blame a large part of this mess on the lack of clean up in spells when the switch from 3.5 to pathfinder was done. This is a situation that comes up with such regularity (and has come up with such regularity in previous editions) it would seem to have been worth the time to clean -- but it wasn't.
If you have multiple "touches" available, can you continue to use SC to full attack (at -2) and touch attack (as part of SC) until you run out of held "touches"?
If you have multiple touches available then you want to use spellstrike instead of spell combat. So you won't take any penalty on your attack rolls.
Does SS give access to iterative attacks?
It says "a melee attack" -- it doesn't say a standard action attack.
Spell combat is only needed when you want to cast a spell while full attacking.
The problem for me is that both SS and SC reference "cast"-ing a spell, neither deals with the corner case of spells that allow multiple touch attacks like Chill Touch.
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts
a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell
list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is
wielding as part of a melee attack. If successful, this
melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the
effects of the spell. Instead of the free melee touch attack
normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make
one free melee attack with his weapon as part of casting
this spell. If used with spell combat, this does not grant
an additional attack.
Now you can always hold a touch attack spell. So if you hold the charge you can deliver it through the melee attack -- in fact as 'part' of a melee attack -- any melee attack. Chill touch was the spell you cast and it is delivered through the weapon. Now it doesn't say that the attack discharges the spell. Since the spell in this case lasts for more than one attack you can continue delivering it with each attack you make (as part of a melee attack) to continue delivering the spell.
I just had this come up in a game we are playing. I have a 4th level Magus in it.
We ended up doing this.
Round 1: Spellstrike - Cast Chill Touch and deliever it through my sword. 1 "charge" of Chill Touch used up.
Round 2: Sword is still charged with Chill Touch, so Full Attack/Spellcombat, Attack with Chill Touch Sword (uses up 2nd charge of Chill Touch), cast Shocking Grasp with unchilly hand.
Basically since I delievered the Chill Touch with my sword thanks to Spellstrike the chilling remained on my sword until all 4 uses up it were up.
Well, that brings up another issue. Most spells that can be "held" only have one "charge" which is expended on a successful hit. Chill Touch is an exception that grants multiple touch attacks. Does this count as "holding" a charge if you are halfway through the number of attacks that you get?
If so, then Chill Touch ends when another spell is cast.
If not, then how does Chill Touch interact with SS and SC?
I'm not sure the official ruling on this, but we have been playing it as once you use that first attack, you aren't holding it anymore. And in fact, really we have just treated it almost like having 1 use per level sort of spell. At say 4th level, you get 4 attacks with it, hit or miss.
Here is a question that came up, can you Spellstrike and Spellcombat in the same round?
This line has us wondering "If used with spell combat, this does not grant an additional attack."
Here is a question that came up, can you Spellstrike and Spellcombat in the same round?
It's my understanding that you can, but only in very lmtd circumstances.
Rd. 1: Attempt SS (shocking grasp for example), miss, hold charge.
Rd. 2: Declare SC, attack with weapon, channeling held charge, then cast spell.
Well, that brings up another issue. Most spells that can be "held" only have one "charge" which is expended on a successful hit. Chill Touch is an exception that grants multiple touch attacks. Does this count as "holding" a charge if you are halfway through the number of attacks that you get?
If so, then Chill Touch ends when another spell is cast.
This is my understanding of how it works.
The following strategy may very well be suboptimal, but I'm curious as whether it's allowed.
If, after casting chill touch and using SS to deliver the initial attack, the Magus has "touches" left, could he/she use SC to make a full attack with a weapon (with penalties), then make a touch attack with Chill Touch?
My understanding (again) is that you wouldn't need spell combat to make those full attacks with the spell strike chill touch.
I'll use an example from play:
Thomas casts chill touch as part of a spell combat action, five foot steps up and full attacks at level 8 with haste active.
He makes 3 attacks as his full attack, two at his best bonus (due to haste) and one iterative attack. All the attacks suffer a -2 penalty due to spell combat. Chill Touch has 8 'charges' and he is using spell strike to hit with spell and weapon. If all three of his attacks connect then he will use up three charges and the foe will make three fortitude saves for strength damage.
Next round he doesn't want to cast (since he would lose the chill touch spell) so he simply full attacks again with spell strike. This time he doesn't take any penalties since spell strike doesn't give him any. If all three attacks hit again he's down 3 more charges.
On the third round he declares he's going to use spell combat again but he decides to make his attacks first (as to finish using up the chill touch spell) all of which again take the -2 penalty for spell combat. Lets say only 2 of his attacks hit this time -- this finishes using up his chill touch spell, and the foe falls. After he is done making his attacks he casts scorching ray at an enemy in the distance. He rolls his two attack rolls (without the -2 penalty which only affects melee attacks made as part of the spell combat full attack) and deals the damage from his scorching ray spell.
My understanding (again) is that you wouldn't need spell combat to make those full attacks with the spell strike chill touch.
I'll use an example from play:
Thomas casts chill touch as part of a spell combat action, five foot steps up and full attacks at level 8 with haste active.
He makes 3 attacks as his full attack, two at his best bonus (due to haste) and one iterative attack. All the attacks suffer a -2 penalty due to spell combat. Chill Touch has 8 'charges' and he is using spell strike to hit with spell and weapon. If all three of his attacks connect then he will use up three charges and the foe will make three fortitude saves for strength damage.
Next round he doesn't want to cast (since he would lose the chill touch spell) so he simply full attacks again with spell strike. This time he doesn't take any penalties since spell strike doesn't give him any. If all three attacks hit again he's down 3 more charges.
On the third round he declares he's going to use spell combat again but he decides to make his attacks first (as to finish using up the chill touch spell) all of which again take the -2 penalty for spell combat. Lets say only 2 of his attacks hit this time -- this finishes using up his chill touch spell, and the foe falls. After he is done making his attacks he casts scorching ray at an enemy in the distance. He rolls his two attack rolls (without the -2 penalty which only affects melee attacks made as part of the spell combat full attack) and deals the damage from his scorching ray spell.
Yeah... that actually makes sense.
My understanding (again) is that you wouldn't need spell combat to make those full attacks with the spell strike chill touch.
Understood. But my question (again) is whether a "held" charge can be used with Spell Combat to gain an additional touch attack.
Example: With chill touch cast in the previous round and charges remaining, could the Magus then declare both Spell Strike and Spell combat, channel the existing spell through the weapon, then make an additional touch attack (using Spell Combat) to deliver one of the remaining charges.
|
Spell combat casts spells. I don't think you can make a touch attack instead of casting a spell for spell combat. This would be an exception to the spell combat rules. If you can find such an exception, then I am wrong.
I think the answer to your question, Jake, is 'no'. If you use spell combat, you need to cast a new spell. If you want to use last round's chill touch, just use a regular attack.
My understanding (again) is that you wouldn't need spell combat to make those full attacks with the spell strike chill touch.Understood. But my question (again) is whether a "held" charge can be used with Spell Combat to gain an additional touch attack.
Example: With chill touch cast in the previous round and charges remaining, could the Magus then declare both Spell Strike and Spell combat, channel the existing spell through the weapon, then make an additional touch attack (using Spell Combat) to deliver one of the remaining charges.
The last line of spellstrike says no, and spell combat again only allows you to cast a spell while full attacking.
If you full attack and use spellstrike to attack with chill touch through your weapon you are good.
If you use spell combat to full attack and use spellstrike to attack with chill touch then cast another chill touch you do not get another free spellstrike with then new chill touch as per the last line in spellstrike.
If you cast another spell (regardless of how you go about casting it) than you lose chill touch. That's how the touch spell rules work.
If you cast another spell (regardless of how you go about casting it) than you lose chill touch. That's how the touch spell rules work.
Which is why you do it like I posted above -- use spell combat full attack, use up all the chill touch with spell strike then cast the new spell (whatever spell that is).
The last line of spellstrike says no, and spell combat again only allows you to cast a spell while full attacking.
The last line of spellstrike refers to gaining an additional weapon attack is irrelevant to the discussion.
The last line of spellstrike refers to gaining an additional weapon attack is irrelevant to the discussion.
The last line of spellstrike says no, and spell combat again only allows you to cast a spell while full attacking.
I wanted to make sure we were on the same page is all -- I thought you might have meant that you would full attack then cast the spell then get an extra free attack with spellstrike.
Obviously that's not what you meant (from your current comment) but I had to be sure.
Spell combat casts spells. I don't think you can make a touch attack instead of casting a spell for spell combat. This would be an exception to the spell combat rules. If you can find such an exception, then I am wrong.
I think the answer to your question, Jake, is 'no'. If you use spell combat, you need to cast a new spell. If you want to use last round's chill touch, just use a regular attack.
No, no exception that I can find. I'm just trying to explore just how much like "two-weapon fighting" spell combat is actually supposed to be.
As it stands, a magus can declare spell combat, make a weapon attack, cast shocking grasp, and make a free touch attack to deliver the spell. So far, so good, and almost identical to TWF. If the magus misses with the touch attack, however, he or she is then limited to either a single touch attack with the spell -or- using spellstrike with the held spell. Not like TWF at all. I think that much is clearly spelled out in the rules.
What I'm questioning is the intent. Since the intent of spell combat is to mix spells with weapon attacks, delivering a held touch attack as your "off-hand" attack with spell combat would seem to fit into the TWF mold (and, yes, I understand that spell strike is probably the better tactical option in this case).
TL;DR Since you can cast a spell that grants touch attack (normally a standard action in and of itself) with spell combat, it would seem to make sense that you could deliver a held spell (normally a standard action in and of itself) in the same manner.
Oh, so you aren't questioning if you can do it, but should you be able to.
RAI or RAP (read as possible) instead of RAW.
Oh, so you aren't questioning if you can do it, but should you be able to.
RAI or RAP (read as possible) instead of RAW.
Yeah, I suppose I am. It seems to me that attacking with a held spell in the "off hand" is in keeping with how SC is supposed(?) to work, i.e. spell + blade. As above, if you can cast shocking grasp and deliver it with SC, then just being able to deliver it with SC seems to make sense. I agree readily, tho, that by the current wording the answer lies somewhere between "vaguely possible if you squint" and "no." So yeah, RAP.
I'd also add that I think that spells requiring attack rolls that are used in Spell Combat, (not Spell Strike) should take a -2 on the attack roll, just to bring the mechanic more in line with TWF.
I could see an arcana built around that idea without any problem -- or simply taking two weapon fighting so you can do it.
I could see an arcana built around that idea without any problem -- or simply taking two weapon fighting so you can do it.
You'd need IUS as well, wouldn't you?
I could see an arcana built around that idea without any problem -- or simply taking two weapon fighting so you can do it.You'd need IUS as well, wouldn't you?
Nope because it is still a touch attack, which counts as being armed with a light weapon.
So you could attack with your main weapon with a -2 penalty and then touch with the touch attack with the off hand with a -2 penalty.
If you want to punch and touch with the off hand at the same time then you would need IUS.
Oh yeah, forgot about that. Nice catch.
Hmmm. So it turns out TWF is a viable, tho probably not a good option, with Magus. I guess it could come in handy when fighting mooks that you don't want to waste a spell on.
I could see an arcana built around that idea without any problem -- or simply taking two weapon fighting so you can do it.You'd need IUS as well, wouldn't you?Nope because it is still a touch attack, which counts as being armed with a light weapon.
So you could attack with your main weapon with a -2 penalty and then touch with the touch attack with the off hand with a -2 penalty.
If you want to punch and touch with the off hand at the same time then you would need IUS.
Only your melee weapon suffers the -2 penalty, not the spell's touch attack.
SPELL COMBAT: "As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list..."
A spell is not a melee weapon.
Only your melee weapon suffers the -2 penalty, not the spell's touch attack.
SPELL COMBAT: "As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list..."
A spell is not a melee weapon.
Read the last few posts a little more closely.
Most interesting.
This seems pretty clear to me that Chill Touch would remain and expend charges until either the magus casts a new spell or the charges are used up, but FAQ'd anyway just to be sure.