|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So...
If I cast frostbite, and then later try to perform a trip attempt, would hitting someone's legs with my sword cause a charge of frostbite to damage said target?
In other words, does spell strike allow the application of spells through non-direct attacks with the weapon that still involves the weapon touching them?
(To be clear, this is not involving the free melee attack granted by spell strike)
Thoughts anyone?
Last time I checked a trip attempt is a melee attack. I'd say you'd let loose a Frostbite charge in that case.
Something to the effect of using a +1 flaming whip doesn't deal fire damage to the target it trips and your weapon won't either.
So no.
Not sure that I agree. If the ability stated you had to deal damage, then I might, but it doesn't:
Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.
And Spell Strike is worded in the same manner - damage is not required, only a hit is.
Is there an FAQ you can quote?
Otherwise, the condition for dealing the fire damage, as I'm reading it, is that you hit; a combat maneuver check that successfully exceeds the target's CMD is still a 'hit', is it not?
|
You don't 'hit' with a combat maneuver, you are either successful or are not successful (or in some cases disastrously unsuccessful) in terms of game mechanics.
If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect. Some maneuvers, such as bull rush, have varying levels of success depending on how much your attack roll exceeds the target's CMD.
You don't 'hit' with a combat maneuver, you are either successful or are not successful (or in some cases disastrously unsuccessful) in terms of game mechanics.
If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect. Some maneuvers, such as bull rush, have varying levels of success depending on how much your attack roll exceeds the target's CMD.
Emphasis mine. A combat maneuver makes an attack roll, which has a specific definition, which is:
An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.
A combat maneuver requires an attack roll; success on an attack roll is considered a 'hit'.
Not seeing a reason why contact with a 'hand' (which is noted as a requirement for discharging a touch spell charge) or weapon (for a Magus) would be different between a combat maneuver and an attack, since they both require attack rolls, and by definition both hit when successful.
|
|
If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.
If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect.
Those are two separate conditions. They use the same fundamental mechanics for ease of play but have different results.
by definition of a touch spell, if you touch ANYTHING, even on accident, you discharge the spell, so (yes i am aware that this forthcoming example doesn't have a rules mechanic, but still) if you attempt to trip someone and fail so badly that you fall instead, but end up falling into your friend, you discharge the spell on them instead.
my point is that according to the rules for touch spells, whenever you touch the enemy it discharges, so even a combat maneuver (if successful) would meet this requirement.
and with all touch spells you get a free melee touch attack to deal the damage which you do not have to use right when you cast (see holding the charge) so you can take it simultaniously when you make the trip attempt if you want to.
If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect.Those are two separate conditions. They use the same fundamental mechanics for ease of play but have different results.
You are making a modified attack roll. They both rely on attack rolls. The combat maneuver section even mentions that you can substitute them for attacks.
But even if we disregard that, the fact remains that as Isil-zha points out, a touch spell discharges if you touch something, and in order to perform a combat maneuver, you're touching the target; in the case of a Magus, his weapon is considered an extension of his person for purposes of delivering touch spells, so tripping with a weapon is still 'touching' the target.
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.emphasis mine
edit: and if somebody wonders, it is from the combat not the magic section
did you just quote the rule i JUST paraphrased right before you posted this?
umm....i think i'll go ahead and say that the emphasis is mine...not yours :-P
If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect.Those are two separate conditions. They use the same fundamental mechanics for ease of play but have different results.You are making a modified attack roll. They both rely on attack rolls. The combat maneuver section even mentions that you can substitute them for attacks.
But even if we disregard that, the fact remains that as Isil-zha points out, a touch spell discharges if you touch something, and in order to perform a combat maneuver, you're touching the target; in the case of a Magus, his weapon is considered an extension of his person for purposes of delivering touch spells, so tripping with a weapon is still 'touching' the target.
The spell is discharged, not delivered. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
|
|
Lets expound this to the fluff ideas...
A simple wizard decides to go monk on his enemies face and attempt to disarm/trip/anything else that uses a hand to touch his opponent, should the spell be delivered at the same time?
Is there some fancy position that the hand needs to be in to deliver the spell? No, a magus uses a sword, and that doesn't change into different positions, so why should a wizard?
Does he need some concentration to send the spell the desired way into the enemy, thus providing a reason why you could smack your friend in the face accidentally and have it simply discharge, not deal it's effects? Maybe, but it's hard to imagine that a Magus, who, in the midst of blocking blows and trying his darn-est to hit his enemy and is still able to deliver the spell is not able to when he simply changes his target from "His face/chest" to "His feet". With this explanation, maybe it might require a little more concentration, so a concentration check would be in order (unless it's DC 15 or above, most spell casters won't care, and I doubt that it'd warrant a DC 15 or above when a normal strike requires none such thing).
But that's using what my mind has created for fluff, which is partly why I posted the question in the first place.
FAQ anyone?
The spell is discharged, not delivered. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.If your attack roll equals or exceeds the CMD of the target, your maneuver is a success and has the listed effect.Those are two separate conditions. They use the same fundamental mechanics for ease of play but have different results.You are making a modified attack roll. They both rely on attack rolls. The combat maneuver section even mentions that you can substitute them for attacks.
But even if we disregard that, the fact remains that as Isil-zha points out, a touch spell discharges if you touch something, and in order to perform a combat maneuver, you're touching the target; in the case of a Magus, his weapon is considered an extension of his person for purposes of delivering touch spells, so tripping with a weapon is still 'touching' the target.
The terms are equivalent in this case. Spellstrike uses the term "deliver" in regards to passing on the effect of a touch spell; the below text from the combat rules on touch spells makes it clear that "discharge" means the same thing, deliver the effect of the touch spell.
Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely.
If you've cast a touch spell, and you touch something (other than those things explicitly stated in various FAQs, like picking up a weapon) with your hand or another valid method of method of delivery (i.e., a Magus's weapon), it takes effect on what you touch.
Please point to something in RAW that argues otherwise. I'm more than willing to admit that I'm wrong, but thus far I see nothing in the rules that makes me believe that for whatever reason, a touch with a hand for the purposes of a combat maneuver is somehow mechanically different from, say, delivering it with an unarmed strike (which is explicitly allowed by RAW\FAQs) or with a simple touch attack.
I'll click FAQ. I think it's honestly clear enough through RAW and will come back "No answer required" but I'm willing to be proven wrong (or right, either way).