There are some spells that are attack spells that have a range of touch that do NOT explicitly say that they need a melee or a ranged touch attack to succeed.
For example - the new UM spell fungal infestation - sounds very cool - range is touch...
...so does that mean I can make EITHER a melee or ranged attack roll to hit (depending on what my character does best)?
In contrast, the new UM spell frostbite clearly says 'melee attack roll', and the new UM spell spit venom says 'ranged attack roll'.
Love to hear your opinions...ESPECIALLY if they come with citations. When I read the section of the SRD 'touch spells in combat', this question isn't answered. Ditto in the archives.
thanks in advance
There are some spells that are attack spells that have a range of touch that do NOT explicitly say that they need a melee or a ranged touch attack to succeed.
For example - the new UM spell fungal infestation - sounds very cool - range is touch...
...so does that mean I can make EITHER a melee or ranged attack roll to hit (depending on what my character does best)?In contrast, the new UM spell frostbite clearly says 'melee attack roll', and the new UM spell spit venom says 'ranged attack roll'.
Love to hear your opinions...ESPECIALLY if they come with citations. When I read the section of the SRD 'touch spells in combat', this question isn't answered. Ditto in the archives.
thanks in advance
All touch spells require melee touch attacks. If ranged touch attacks are allowed then a range would be listed instead.
|
Ranged touch spells list a range type (close,medium,long) in the range field. Melee touch have a range of touch. If it says "range- touch", it is literally arms length. Ranged touch attacks are just ranged spells that just need to hit the target, not penetrate armor to have an effect. It doesn't matter how well made and protective that plate armor is, that scorching ray is HOT
Inflict Light Wounds
School necromancy; Level cleric/oracle 1, inquisitor 1, witch 1
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
EFFECT
Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Will half; Spell Resistance yes
Scorching Ray
School evocation [fire]; Level sorcerer/wizard 2
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect one or more rays
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes
DESCRIPTION
You blast your enemies with a searing beam of fire. You may fire one ray, plus one additional ray for every four levels beyond 3rd (to a maximum of three rays at 11th level). Each ray requires a ranged touch attack to hit and deals 4d6 points of fire damage. The rays may be fired at the same or different targets, but all rays must be aimed at targets within 30 feet of each other and fired simultaneously.
There are some spells that are attack spells that have a range of touch that do NOT explicitly say that they need a melee or a ranged touch attack to succeed.
I'd say if left unspecified it would default to a melee touch.
But we live in an imperfect world- so I would still cautiously read the description of the attack/creature/spell to see what makes sense in the particular scenario. For the same reason I wouldn't drive right through a mislabeled 'spot sign' when it technically was only telling me not to blink.
In addition, if left unspecified, it is likely implying that the effect not only occurs when it touches actively, but passively as well. If something did acid damage 'on touch', it bears to reason that it also deals acid damage when touched. If the spell/creature specifically only did acid damage 'on melee touch', it would not effect passively (unless sated by some other ability in the entry).
|
Shar is correct. Ignore the descriptive text of the spells. If the header block says "Range touch", then the range is literally what you can touch with your hand.
If the range is something longer -- for example, "Range close" -- then the text will say whether it requires a ranged touch attack in its description or not.