Cartomancer Witch, Deliver Touch Spells, and missed attacks

[JBurz]

Hey all,

I'm wondering if a Cartomancer Witch essentially loses a spell that they try to deliver via a card if the attack with the card misses.

The Harrow Handbook, p.15 wrote:

Deliver Touch Spells (Su): At 3rd level, when the cartomancer uses the Deadly Dealer feat with a card from her spell deck, the card is not destroyed and gains the returning weapon special ability.

In addition, the cartomancer can deliver a touch spell with a thrown card. This uses the Deadly Dealer feat (see below), except the attack is resolved as a ranged touch attack and the card deals no damage of its own. This ability can be used with any card (not just one from the cartomancer’s spell deck).

I assume not, but I'm not sure. I figure you could choose not to discharge the spell, as you normally would when trying to deliver a spell with a melee touch attack, but it doesn't seem clear to me.

I guess I'm probably seeing too much of Gambit in this, and I'm assuming that the spell is already on the card - whereas mechanically, it seems you choose whether or not to discharge the spell after making the attack.

[Mahtobedis]

It does turn it into a ranged touch attack. Those are expended when you miss. But it is a touch spell and not a ranged touch spell. I could see this reasonably going either way. ETA (expect table variation)

[Tomos]

If you miss, the card returns to you because it has the Returning property.
The charge is held until the next throw.

If you cast a different spell before you throw again, you lose the previously held charge as usual.

[Faelyn]

Originally I was going to argue that the spell would be wasted as most ranged touch attacks are when the attack misses; however, after looking over some of the above posts and reviewing the Spellstrike rules for the magus I would agree the spell is not wasted. Upon the card returning to the caster she could then attempt to the free touch attack again.

[Tomos]

I think it would be totally different if the cards didn't have the Returning property.

[Faelyn]

Tomos wrote:

I think it would be totally different if the cards didn't have the Returning property.

Agreed. Also there is nothing in those specific rules to indicate anything is changed with the way the spell is handled beyond being able to use them at range. Going with the specific trumps general, there is a very apparent lack of specific rule changes on the charges, so I say general rule applies!

[JBurz]

Thanks for your help everyone. Looking forward to playing my Cartomancer tomorrow!

[Torbyne]

The way I read, it doesn't change it from a touch spell so it is not expended on a miss. Flavor wise it could be more of the card creating a link to the charge holder vice imbibing the card with the spell and throwing it. Under that view I'd allow attempts to deliver the charge on subsequent attacks.