If a spell storing weapon casts a touch spell can it hold the charge? My idiot would like to know.
so everyone is clear: i am the idiot in question.
the issue is with putting a spell such as Chill Touch or Frostbite into a Spell Storing Weapon.
if you do this, what happens to the remaining charges after the initial hit? (assume the orriginal caster is a 5th level Sorcerer)
the character holding the weapon is NOT the caster according to the Spell Storing enchantment entry, the weapon is. but the weapon is touching the wielder when the spell is cast, so would the wielder of the weapon get hit by subsequent charges, or does the count as the weapons "equipment" for the purposes of holding the charge?
A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon. (The spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action.) Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires. (This special ability is an exception to the general rule that casting a spell from an item takes at least as long as casting that spell normally.) Once the spell has been cast from the weapon, a spellcaster can cast any other targeted spell of up to 3rd level into it. The weapon magically imparts to the wielder the name of the spell currently stored within it. A randomly rolled spell storing weapon has a 50% chance of having a spell stored in it already. This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons.A spell storing weapon emits a strong aura of the evocation school, plus the aura of the spell currently stored.
Nothing in the Spell Storing weapon ability says you can do that. However, I'd personally allow it as a GM to deliver the touch spell that's stored in it.
Nothing in the Spell Storing weapon ability says you can do that. However, I'd personally allow it as a GM to deliver the touch spell that's stored in it.
A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon. (The spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action.) Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires. (This special ability is an exception to the general rule that casting a spell from an item takes at least as long as casting that spell normally.) Once the spell has been cast from the weapon, a spellcaster can cast any other targeted spell of up to 3rd level into it. The weapon magically imparts to the wielder the name of the spell currently stored within it. A randomly rolled spell storing weapon has a 50% chance of having a spell stored in it already. This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons.A spell storing weapon emits a strong aura of the evocation school, plus the aura of the spell currently stored.
im confused by what you mean. nothing in the ability says you can do what?
He's saying there's nothing to support the weapons ability to hold a charge.
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. 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.
thats where it says it, not in the enchantment, because its a rule about casting spells, not the enchantment itself.
its clear that the caster IS the weapon. so whats stopping the weapon from holding subsequent charges from a spell that IT cast?
If the weapon doesn't hit, it can't cast the spell, so there's no charge to hold.
A Spell being able to discharge multiple times over it's duration is not the same as Holding the Charge, mechanically. Admittedly, Chill Touch is worded wonky, in that it is Duration:Instantaneous, while also having verbiage "up to one touch/level"
It has to be a spell that can target someone. The target is usually an ally. The Spell Storing will only cast the spell on a target it damages. So, here's what would happen. You would hit a monster, then cast Chill Touch on them, now they can Chill Touch you.
ahhh...i understand now....thats.....hilarious...
so essentially, its not that the weapon CANT hold a charge, its that it casts the spell on the target, and it cant target "self" as the spell requires normally...so does this mean if i put a spell like "cure light wounds" in a spell storing weapon, i would have to deal damage to the target i wanted to use that spell on?
Yes. Works best with non-lethal damage weapons(for hitting allies/yourself) or against undead.
Actually, upon further reading of the frostbite and chill touch spells I noticed that the above assumption that the target is the caster is incorrect. The spells state that the target is one enemy(s) touched. Holding the charge only keeps the charge attached to the caster, it doesn't change the target, so a spell storing weapon is NOT targeting itself if it holds the charge, and would also NOT put the extra charges on the enemy it hits. So now we are back to square one. Can an item hold a charge?
Also, does the restriction in spell storing mean that subsequent charges can only be used on the original target, or would each hit with the weapon make a new target for the spell just like a normal touch attack with that spell allows?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Spell being able to discharge multiple times over it's duration is not the same as Holding the Charge, mechanically. Admittedly, Chill Touch is worded wonky, in that it is Duration:Instantaneous, while also having verbiage "up to one touch/level"
There's a FAQ on this:
Touch Spells: If a spell allows multiple touches, are you considered to be holding the charge until all charges are expended?
Yes.
Can an item hold the charge?
Personally, I don't think the weapon should be considered the caster, but I'd let it work for chill touch, but certainly not frostbite (A VERY powerful first level spell, especially if you don't have to hold the charge yourself and continue to cast spells).
But, as for the RAW, there are several arguements for, and against this.
-Can Spellstoring weapons even hold touch spells? If you break it down enough, a touch spell is an effect added to your melee touch attack. Doesn't actually target a creature, it targets you. But that's a far fetched theory.
-Already mentioned, but since the weapon is casting the spell, not the owner, then the weapon uses all the rules of being the caster. So yes it can hold charges, just like a caster could. But then you would also have to say that using vampiric touch in a spell storing weapon would give the weapon temporary hit points, since it is the caster.
So bleh...
If a spell storing weapon casts a touch spell can it hold the charge? My idiot would like to know.
It's against messageboard rules to be a jerk, please don't refer to people as "idiots". This question has been asked before by several people (including myself). It's rude and unfair to call him an idiot.
I call him troll but never would even I call him an idiot :P
As long as we're asking dumb questions: After casting Chill Touch, can I full attack to deliver all the touch attacks in one round?
On subsequent rounds you can deliver as many attacks as you want with Chill Touch (up to your normal allotment), but none of them would be Touch attacks (you'd have to deliver them with an unarmed strike).
Delivering a Touch spell is a Standard action on round after it is cast (when it is a Free action) unless I'm vastly mistaken.
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. 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.
Do you really want your weapon to hold the charge? It is sorta touching a creature... you.
Anyway... I don't think a weapon can hold a charge. The spellstoring only says that the spell is cast on a specific target, not that it can be used on that target multiple times or even on multiple targets. You get only the one time use out of the spell stored within the weapon.
I'd assume that particular bit would fall under the Magus FAQ that a Magus can indeed touch his weapon when casting touch spells.
I'd assume that particular bit would fall under the Magus FAQ that a Magus can indeed touch his weapon when casting touch spells.
But the weapon is touching you! You are not a weapon >.>
Look at this face. That's the face of a Monk.
So yes I am. =)
Anywho... the Magus FAQ is specifically referring to the additional benefits of having the spellstrike ability...
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
This shouldn't apply to anyone else.
|
By assumption this piece: "If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges." don't applies to objects that you were already touching when you did cast the spell.
Reading it otherwise:
- your rings, magical or not, would discharge the touch spell;
- same thing for a pair of gloves, your shield or weapon and so on.
The magus FAQ has this text in it: "and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster.", that implies very strongly that the charge is held in a specific appendage and that the accidental discharge happen only when that specific appendage touch something.
There is a problem with Chill touch and related spells as they say "A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures." instead of speaking of a melee touch attack. From a strict and narrow reading of the rules you can't cast the spell with a spell storing weapon. I think almost any GM will allow it and at that point the weapon will become the appendage holding the charge.
By assumption this piece: "If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges." don't applies to objects that you were already touching when you did cast the spell.
Reading it otherwise:
- your rings, magical or not, would discharge the touch spell;
- same thing for a pair of gloves, your shield or weapon and so on.The magus FAQ has this text in it: "and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster.", that implies very strongly that the charge is held in a specific appendage and that the accidental discharge happen only when that specific appendage touch something.
There is a problem with Chill touch and related spells as they say "A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures." instead of speaking of a melee touch attack. From a strict and narrow reading of the rules you can't cast the spell with a spell storing weapon. I think almost any GM will allow it and at that point the weapon will become the appendage holding the charge.
i've brought this up in MANY threads: when holding the charge, it is NOT held in a specific location on the body. every description within a spell or ability that says "hand" or "finger" or anything like that is not meant to be taken as "this is the only part of your body you can hold a charge in". its basically flavor text. point and case: you can cast a ray spell without even having hands. you can cast a magic missile with your foot if you wish, or you can shoot rays from your eyes like superman if you want. point and case - an unarmed strike can deliver a touch spell, an unarmed strike can also be made with any part of your body. so if i (for flavor sake) decide to kick my opponent in the face instead of punch him, i STILL deliver my held charge.
i've brought this up in MANY threads: when holding the charge, it is NOT held in a specific location on the body. every description within a spell or ability that says "hand" or "finger" or anything like that is not meant to be taken as "this is the only part of your body you can hold a charge in". its basically flavor text. point and case: you can cast a ray spell without even having hands. you can cast a magic missile with your foot if you wish, or you can shoot rays from your eyes like superman if you want. point and case - an unarmed strike can deliver a touch spell, an unarmed strike can also be made with any part of your body. so if i (for flavor sake) decide to kick my opponent in the face instead of punch him, i STILL deliver my held charge.
And I dispute that, but not in so many threads. I won't do it here, because it would be a derail.
i've brought this up in MANY threads: when holding the charge, it is NOT held in a specific location on the body. every description within a spell or ability that says "hand" or "finger" or anything like that is not meant to be taken as "this is the only part of your body you can hold a charge in". its basically flavor text. point and case: you can cast a ray spell without even having hands. you can cast a magic missile with your foot if you wish, or you can shoot rays from your eyes like superman if you want. point and case - an unarmed strike can deliver a touch spell, an unarmed strike can also be made with any part of your body. so if i (for flavor sake) decide to kick my opponent in the face instead of punch him, i STILL deliver my held charge.And I dispute that, but not in so many threads. I won't do it here, because it would be a derail.
There's nothing to dispute. Its in the rules, and has 2 desperate FAQs to support it. Its fine to use a house rule to say otherwise, but that doesn't change the actual rules.
If a spell storing weapon casts a touch spell can it hold the charge? My idiot would like to know.If you put chill touch in a spell storing weapon. You get ONE strike with it when the weapon hits. That fully discharges the stored spell. Which makes Chill Touch a less than optimal choice.
i would like to see some sort of rules quote or FAQ that states that the rest of the charges arn't held. perhaps you should read everything in the thread before posting. every rule thus far that has been cited in this thread goes against what you've said. if that is just your personal opinion, then you should probably state that, otherwise (because this is the RULES section of the forums) people assume that you know this to be within the rules, in which case it is often required to prove (meaning show the rule you are citing) that what you are saying it legal.
to elaborate on why i believe you to be incorrect: a spell storing weapon does not get "one strike" with the spell as you have said, it gets to cast the spell one time. a spell such as chill touch or frostbite is only cast one time, but subsequent charges are "held" as per the holding the charge FAQ. every other time after the initial cast that you attempt to touch someone is NOT another casting of the spell. so while the weapon only casts once, it would still have "charges left held" after that hit unless you have proof that the weapon is incapable of "holding a charge". so far, no one on this thread has shown proof that the weapon cannot whereas i (and a few others) have shown quite a bit that it CAN.