This came up in my (non-PFS) game recently: a PC purchased an amulet of mighty fists, but instead of +1 it just has the Spell Storing special ability. During the last combat, the PC had shocking grasp stored in it, and then cast shocking grasp as a touch spell on the BBEG... hit the baddie with the free touch attack as part of the casting, and then used that touch attack to discharge the stored shocking grasp. In essence, casting 2 spells in the same round.
So can a touch attack be used to deliver the Spell Storing? Or maybe looking at it another way, does the Amulet of Mighty Fists apply to touch attacks?
Here's what I could find from the rules (emphasis mine):
Spell Storing: 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.
AMULET OF MIGHTY FISTS:
This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks. See Table: Melee Weapon Special Abilities for a list of abilities.
Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is...
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach
Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity
So trying to connect the dots, it sounds like the requirement for spell storing is that the attack with which it is delivered damage the creature on its own. Additionally, the spell storing amulet only modifies unarmed strikes and natural attacks (which becomes the "weapon" for the special ability), both of which are defined in Combat as their own attacks that do damage. Combat then defines a touch attack in its own right, and since the amulet description does not list touch attacks with the Unarmed Strike/Natural Attack, it would then not modify the touch attack (unless there is a held charge that is discharged in subsequent rounds as part of a unarmed strike or natural attack). In addition, the fact that a touch attack is considered armed would also lend weight to the fact that it is not considered an unarmed strike.
However, am I being too literal in how these are defined? Is it supposed to be just common sense that an Amulet of Mighty Fists modifies touch attacks, since they are using hands and not weapons?
Currently, I'm leaning toward ruling that in order for the amulet to discharge the spell, the PC must use an actual unarmed strike or natural attack (against full AC, not touch) but I'd really like to hear from other players on my interpretation of the rules above.
|
"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."
That is more than enough. The weapon (the character unarmed attack) did any damage? No, the damage was done by a spell. So the ability don't trigger.
He could cast shocking grasp, held the charge and the next round make a standard unarmed attack that deliver the held charge and trigger the amulet ability, but he can't do that with a touch attack as the "weapon" don't do any damage.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
The touch attack from the "cast from spell slots" shocking grasp will not trigger the amulet. If they had an ability like the Magus ability to strike with a weapon and deliver the spell, they could strike with unarmed strike and deliver the held spell then it would trigger the spell storing. So the PC has to be a magus and not make touch attacks.
a PC purchased an amulet of mighty fists, but instead of +1 it just has the Spell Storing special ability.
Doesn't the AMF need to have a +1 before it can have other weapon abilities, just as if it was a weapon itself ?
|
a PC purchased an amulet of mighty fists, but instead of +1 it just has the Spell Storing special ability.Doesn't the AMF need to have a +1 before it can have other weapon abilities, just as if it was a weapon itself ?
Nope.
Nope.a PC purchased an amulet of mighty fists, but instead of +1 it just has the Spell Storing special ability.Doesn't the AMF need to have a +1 before it can have other weapon abilities, just as if it was a weapon itself ?
I see it has a special exemption written into the item itself. Thank you. I've never ever encountered an AoMF "in the wild" before, perhaps my GMs have all been stingy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's under "Holding the Charge" section of "Touch Spells in Combat"
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.
However, I don't think this can be done as your "free" touch attack as part of casting the spell, since it can only be done while holding a charge.
Thanks all for your input! I'm glad to have gotten confirmation on the definitions of the attacks required for the amulet (and you probably gave my player new ideas for their dragon-blooded sorcerer).