1. Do touch attacks reduce the spells length as do ranged touch attacks?
The spell says each attack reduces the duration. It does not specify only ranged touch attacks do so, so all attacks with Produce Flame reduce the duration.
In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled or used to touch enemies. You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage as with the melee attack. No sooner do you hurl the flames than a new set appears in your hand. Each attack you make reduces the remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves.
|
The way the spell works is you cast it, and for the length of the duration you can produce flames which you use to attack enemies (usually by throwing it). The duration is X minutes/rounds (can't remember) OR until you used it offensively X times. The difference between it and most touch spells is that you used up the charge even if you missed. Unlike Inflict Light Wounds, which only uses the charge up when you actually hit the enemy (or accidentally touch an ally or yourself with that hand).
Ranged touch attacks to my knowledge can't hold a charge if you miss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Produce Flame is not a touch spell. It is a spell that conjures a flame in your hands that sheds light as a torch. The effect lasts for a duration of 10 minutes per level. It also has the neat function to let you spend 10 minutes of this duration to make an attack that targets touch AC (ranged or melee), and deal fire damage.
There is no charge to hold. There is no concentration to maintain. Making the attack costs 10 minutes of the spells duration. Hit or not, you use 10 minutes.
Produce Flame is not a touch spell. It is a spell that conjures a flame in your hands that sheds light as a torch. The effect lasts for a duration of 10 minutes per level. It also has the neat function to let you spend 10 minutes of this duration to make an attack that targets touch AC (ranged or melee), and deal fire damage.
There is no charge to hold. There is no concentration to maintain. Making the attack costs 10 minutes of the spells duration. Hit or not, you use 10 minutes.
The spell only lasts 1 minute per level not 10, and each attack consumes 1 minute of the duration not 10 minutes.
This is nothing more than conjecture...where's your proof? If it is a touch spell(which it seems like it can be) the FAQ..
It isn't a touch spell. Compare Shocking Grasp (A touch spell):
Range touch
Target creature or object touched
To Produce Flame:
Range 0 ft.
Effect flame in your palm
Produce Flame is not a touch spell. You can attack with it, but that does not make it a touch spell. Having a range of "Touch" is what makes a spell a touch spell.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Produce Flame is not a touch spell. It is a spell that conjures a flame in your hands that sheds light as a torch. The effect lasts for a duration of 10 minutes per level. It also has the neat function to let you spend 10 minutes of this duration to make an attack that targets touch AC (ranged or melee), and deal fire damage.
There is no charge to hold. There is no concentration to maintain. Making the attack costs 10 minutes of the spells duration. Hit or not, you use 10 minutes.
This is nothing more than conjecture...where's your proof? If it is a touch spell(which it seems like it can be) the FAQ..
Touch Spells: If a spell allows multiple touches, are you considered to be holding the charge until all charges are expended?
Yes....says you are holding a charge. Is there a definition somewhere that ONLY spells that have a "range:touch" in their description are actually touch spells? Maybe there is, but i haven't found it.
The opening line of the touch spell rules introduces the section as referring to spells with a range of "touch".
|
|
When you cast Produce Flames it creates the flames in your hand. You may then as a free action make ONE attack (ranged or melee touch) with the flames. Each attack costs one minute from the duration of the spell. So a level 3 druid could make 3 attacks, or have a light source for 3 minutes, or make 2 attacks and have a light source for one minute...
Unless you cast the spell while underwater. In which case you just wasted your spell since the water doused the flames instantly.
I read that also...but it isn't worded in a way that says ONLY spells that have the "range: touch" are touch spells..."Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action." It SEEMS obvious that a spell that can be delivered by touch would follow the same rules...What other rules would they follow??
Many spells have a range of touch.
Does
Range 0 ft.
Say
Range: touch??
No? Then it is not a touch spell. It is a spell with a range of 0 ft. That also means you do not get a free attack with it in the round you cast the spell that touch spells normally grant.
As to your question on iteratives. Whether you are making multiple touch attacks or multiple ranged attacks, you get your normal iteratives.
When you cast Produce Flames it creates the flames in your hand. You may then as a free action make ONE attack (ranged or melee touch) with the flames. Each attack costs one minute from the duration of the spell. So a level 3 druid could make 3 attacks, or have a light source for 3 minutes, or make 2 attacks and have a light source for one minute...
No where in the spell does it say you get to make a free attack with it in the round you cast it. And as it is not a touch spell it doesn't get one granted by the general rule of casting a touch spell either.
|
...
I read that also...but it isn't worded in a way that says ONLY spells that have the "range: touch" are touch spells..."Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action." It SEEMS obvious that a spell that can be delivered by touch would follow the same rules...What other rules would they follow??
Produce Flame
School evocation [fire]; Level druid 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range 0 ft.
Effect flame in your palm
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yesFlames as bright as a torch appear in your open hand. The flames harm neither you nor your equipment.
Vs.
Range
Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
and
Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.
You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile, after it appears it can move regardless of the spell's range.
Produce flame isn't a touch spell, it is a spell that produce an effect. The effect is a flame on the palm of your hand.
You can use that effect to make attacks but that don't make it a touch spell, it make an effect that deliver damage with a touch attack, either ranged or melee.As it isn't a touch attack you don't get to attack with it in the round in which you cast the spell.
As the flame reappear in your hand as soon as you hurl it you can make iterative attacks with it.
As it can be used for melee attacks it threatens and can be used for attack of opportunity.
It is not much different from wielding a burning torch and using it as a weapon.
Edit:
to better address your objection, you say "but it isn't worded in a way that says ONLY spells that have the "range: touch" are touch spells". Check under what section is the piece of text about touch spells.
It is under Range; Touch.
So if it is under that section, where you get the idea that it refer to something different?
|
|
In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled
or used to touch enemies. You can strike an opponent with a melee
touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120
feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged
touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage
as with the melee attack. No sooner do you hurl the flames than a
new set appears in your hand. Each attack you make reduces the
remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining
duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves.
This spell does not function underwater.
I've yet to see a gamemaster rule you can't attack immediately with produce flames. The bolded part is why. While the basic use is to create light (thus range: 0, palm of hand) it is ALSO an offensive spell used to make a ranged or touch attack.
Touch spells like Shocking Grasp have two distinct components that are not directly linked. The spell it's self imbues your hand with the energy. Then you're able to make an attack as a free action to try discharging the energy.
Ray spells work similarly. First you cast the spell. THEN you make the attack roll. This is why you can still provoke an AoO with a ray spell even if you cast defensively. You're stil making a ranged attack.
The only real difference is that with Produce Flames the spell is (technically) an illumination spell that also can be used to attack. Not that anyone uses it for a light source.
EDIT: Edited for clarification and after double checking the ranged touch rules
I've yet to see a gamemaster rule you can't attack immediately with produce flames. The bolded part is why. While the basic use is to create light (thus range: 0, palm of hand) it is ALSO an offensive spell used to make a ranged or touch attack.
How people play it, and what the rules actually are, are different discussions.
|
|
In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled
or used to touch enemies. You can strike an opponent with a melee
touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120
feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged
touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage
as with the melee attack. No sooner do you hurl the flames than a
new set appears in your hand. Each attack you make reduces the
remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining
duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves.
This spell does not function underwater.I've yet to see a gamemaster rule you can't attack immediately with produce flames. The bolded part is why. While the basic use is to create light (thus range: 0, palm of hand) it is ALSO an offensive spell used to make a ranged or touch attack.
Touch spells like Shocking Grasp have two distinct components that are not directly linked. The spell it's self imbues your hand with the energy. Then you're able to make an attack as a free action to try discharging the energy.
Ray spells work similarly. First you cast the spell. THEN you make the attack roll. This is why you can still provoke an AoO with a ray spell even if you cast defensively. You're stil making a ranged attack.
The only real difference is that with Produce Flames the spell is (technically) an illumination spell that also can be used to attack. Not that anyone uses it for a light source.
EDIT: Edited for clarification and after double checking the ranged touch rules
It is a touch spell that give you a free attack when you cast it? No.
It is a targeted spell that target a different creature? No, so you don't get to resolve an attack that way when you cast it.
It is a spell that produce a ray? No
It is a ranged spell, like Acid arrow, wher eyou get to select a target? No
It is a spell that produce an effect that you can hurl or use for melee attacks. Hurling or making melee attacks aren't part of the spellcasting so you don't get free attacks.
Let's look a different spell:
Magic Stone
School transmutation; Level cleric 1, druid 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Targets up to three pebbles touched
Duration 30 minutes or until discharged
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless, object); Spell Resistance yes (harmless, object)You transmute as many as three pebbles, which can be no larger than sling bullets, so that they strike with great force when thrown or slung. If hurled, they have a range increment of 20 feet. If slung, treat them as sling bullets (range increment 50 feet). The spell gives them a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. The user of the stones makes a normal ranged attack. Each stone that hits deals 1d6+1 points of damage (including the spell's enhancement bonus), or 2d6+2 points against undead.
It give you a free attack when cast? If not, what is the difference with produce flame, as both produce something that can be hurled?
...get iteratives on full rounds attacks...
Just a note on this. If you have a held charge for a touch spell you may also take iteratives with your held charge as a full round attack if you wish. Normally you deliver the spell as part of the free touch attack when you cast it, so it never comes up. But with a spell like chill touch, or an enemy with a high touch AC, there are no rules that stipulate you may only attempt one touch attack per round.
|
|
So its not a touch spell...but it is a touch attack?? Well... no wonder its so confusing.
It shouldn't be so confusing. There are a number of things that can make touch attacks that are not touch spells. Splash weapons for example. You're making a weapon that can make touch attacks, not casting a touch attack spell.
There is also a similar spell: link
Gozreh's Trident
Source Inner Sea Gods pg. 235 (Amazon), Gods and Magic pg. 19 (Amazon)
School evocation [electricity]; Level bloodrager 2, cleric/oracle 2, druid 2, hunter 2, warpriest 2, witch 2 (Gozreh)
Casting
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Effect
Range 0 ft.
Effect trident-like bolt of electricity
Duration 1 minute/level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes
Description
A 4-foot-long, blazing, forked bolt of electricity springs forth from your hand. You wield this spear-like bolt as if it were a trident (you are considered proficient with the bolt). Attacks with Gozreh’s trident are melee touch attacks. The bolt deals 1d8 points of electricity damage + 1 point per 2 caster levels (maximum +10). Since the bolt is immaterial, your Strength modifier does not apply to the damage. The bolt can ignite combustible materials such as parchment, straw, dry sticks, and cloth.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's an oversimplification...the confusion is how it "should" be considered different in it's rules application than true touch spells with multiple attacks(chill touch or frostbite). Mechanically...explain the difference between casting multiple charges and delivering them with your hand and casting a flame and delivering it right above your hand...there is no OBVIOUS reason why the rules should apply differently. Why for example should one allow a free attack and not the other? Visually it is hard to imagine a difference. Not that there shouldn't be a difference, due to other reasons like game balance and spell categorization.So its not a touch spell...but it is a touch attack?? Well... no wonder its so confusing.It shouldn't be so confusing. There are a number of things that can make touch attacks that are not touch spells. Splash weapons for example. You're making a weapon that can make touch attacks, not casting a touch attack spell.
I don't think it is an oversimplification. Touch attack =/= touch spell. It's like flame blade, it's a spell that makes a weapon for you that can be used to make a touch attacks. It is not a touch spell, and so doesn't work like a touch spell.
|
|
Just a note on this. If you have a held charge for a touch spell you may also take iteratives with your held charge as a full round attack if you wish. Normally you deliver the spell as part of the free touch attack when you cast it, so it never comes up. But with a spell like chill touch, or an enemy with a high touch AC, there are no rules that stipulate you may only attempt one touch attack per round.
...get iteratives on full rounds attacks...
There is one o two spells spells and several monster touch attacks that are limited to 1 touch per round, so it is worth specifing that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is not confusing because all those touch spells that grant a free touch attack in the spell description say range touch and the target is a creature or object as part of the spell. Produce flame does not have those descriptors so people trying to add them because its similar is trying to game the system and get more then they should out of their turn
This spell is not like shocking grasp or chill touch, it is more like flame blade and gozreh trident, if you are using those spells like shocking grasp then you are also doing it wrong
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
Yes it helps to think of produce flame as a splash weapon, but that IS NOT the first thing the vast majority of people unfamiliar with a spell are going to compare it to, in order to understand how it works. They are(like me) going to compare it to other spells they have experience with. And confusion is all but unavoidable, since for many that will mean touch spells. Saying it shouldn't be confusing...is basically saying we are all idiots, i reject that statement(because it IS confusing at first) and resent it.
I you compare it to another spell, you should compare it to this:
Flame Blade
School evocation [fire]; Level druid 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range 0 ft.
Effect sword-like beam
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yesA 3-foot-long, blazing beam of red-hot fire springs forth from your hand. You wield this blade-like beam as if it were a scimitar. Attacks with the flame blade are melee touch attacks. The blade deals 1d8 points of fire damage + 1 point per two caster levels (maximum +10). Since the blade is immaterial, your Strength modifier does not apply to the damage. A flame blade can ignite combustible materials such as parchment, straw, dry sticks, and cloth.
You aren't an idiot, you are uninformed, and that is curable asking information (what you did) and processing them. The problem is that now you are resentful for the help received.
When you look a spell stat block you should look the whole statblock, if you only read part of it and assume what is in the other parts you will incur in several errors.
Consider touch spell and armed touch attacks.
Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.
When I first came to these boards I participated in a a long discussion as I was convinced there was something like a "offensive touch spell" and that only those spells counted as armed attacks.
After a while the posts of the people explaining how it work clarified to me that any touch spell count as an armed attack. Even if you are casting (for whatever reason) invisibility on your opponent.And I had already played the 3rd edition of D&D for 10 years at that point.
Sometime we use mental shortcuts and we miss crucial information.
I think the problem is that for most of us, the confusion has the appearance of willful complication. As in, when we read the spell, it seems exceedingly clear how it works and what it does, and it is confusing to us that anyone else doesn't see it as we do. Think of it like the "magic" 3D illusions. Either you see the thing or you don't, and if you see it, everyone who doesn't are... weird... because it's right there! <Grin>
Let's break down the spell.
School evocation [fire]; Level druid 1, shaman 1; Domain fire 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range 0 ft.
Effect flame in your palm
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes
Okay, so far all we've got is a fire in our hand that lasts for a few minutes, and isn't real (it's not a conjuration spell).
Flames as bright as a torch appear in your open hand. The flames harm neither you nor your equipment.
Now we know what the fire does. It makes light as a torch. So 20 feet of normal light and another 20 feet increased by one step. Straightforward.
In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled or used to touch enemies.
Okay, bonus ability. We can throw fire or smear it on people. How does that work?
You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage as with the melee attack.
So we can smear it as a melee touch attack or a I can throw it as a ranged touch attack.
No sooner do you hurl the flames than a new set appears in your hand.
That helps when we throw the stuff.
Each attack you make reduces the remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves.
Now we know how many times we can do it.
This spell does not function underwater.
Someone always wants to ask this about fire spells, so let's just head the argument off at the pass.
That's it. We're done. We know exactly what we can, and can't do. We know how it works, because it says how it works. Questions like "is it a touch spell?" don't even occur to most of us because it's already written what the spell does. You don't deliver the spell to someone else. It's on your hand. Yes, you can do stuff with it afterwards, but that's no different from using beast shape to turn into a monster and using a slam attack on someone. beast shape doesn't become a touch spell just because you touched someone after you cast it. Same with this.
I'm just offering this up to explain how it looks from the other side. We don't see confusion as a comprehensible result of how this is written. We don't mean to be rude or unhelpful. We're just confused how anyone would be confused.
Since you aren't holding a charge (since not a touch spell): this means you can full attack with it using the Produce flame with multiple attacks (each lowering duration).
Since you aren't holding a charge (since not a touch spell): this means you can full attack with it using the Produce flame with multiple attacks (each lowering duration).
What does holding a charge (or not) have to do with making a full attack? You can make a full attack with a touch spell as well (in rounds after the round you cast it), just normally after the first hit you'd want to stop as you are no longer armed after that (unless using chill touch or something else with multiple charges).
From the combat chapter:
"Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject"
The spell Produce Flame does not have a range of touch and so is not a touch spell.
I've been playing this game since it came out, and it's precursor for as long as it was in print...
Never before today did I realize that both ranged AND melee attacks lowered the duration of this spell.
Decades of use.
Just realized today.
Wow.
That being said, range is 0, not touch.
Duration isn't affected by concentration (has a listed duration).
Doesn't talk about AoO because it doesn't have to, it uses the rules for that normally.
Hadn't thought about it too much but it also appears that the caster can't make an unarmed attack against AC (not touch) and add produce flame damage to the attack like they could with a touch spell (say chill touch) (or stack it with a natural claw attack).
Also, since they are not holding a charge and the duration/spell says nothing about concentration it looks like they can cast another spell while produce flame continues.
Hadn't thought about it too much but it also appears that the caster can't make an unarmed attack against AC (not touch) and add produce flame damage to the attack like they could with a touch spell (say chill touch) (or stack it with a natural claw attack).
Also, since they are not holding a charge and the duration/spell says nothing about concentration it looks like they can cast another spell while produce flame continues.
You should be able to cast produce flame, then cast a touch spell and hold the charge. And then deliver the charge while attacking with produce flame. But the reverse doesn't hold. If you attack with the held charge, produce flame won't cause damage by default like an actual held charge would.
|
|
Since you can use the spell as a touch attack (lowering it's duration when using the attack), this would consider the character armed and able to use AoO with Produce Flame when the spell is active.
It would be the same as wielding a dagger or having a natural attack (like a bite or a claw).
If the character has iterative attacks, that character can use the spell's attack as many times as he has, as long as the spell has uses left to effect the attacks.
That it isn't a "touch attack" by itself, meaning that the spell isn't simply just a touch attack, simply means that one can not use a free action to attack in the round that it is cast. The rules for AoO's still apply.
I also believe that this and other spells like it (where you would roll a D20) would be under the effects of moral bonuses such as Inspire Courage, the bard ability. This is something that is contested in other threads.
Why do people keep insisting the description answers all the questions of the spell's useage?
Since you're asking, it's because between the spell's description and the rules in general, it does.
does it say we threaten/do not?
It doesn't need to. The fireball spell also doesn't specify anything about threatening. Why? Because it doesn't. That's the default. Spells don't threaten. The exception to that are melee touch spells, which this one is not. << I'm referencing that the spell puts fire on your hand (clearly stated), not "creature touched".
does it say we provoke/do not provoke when we touch attack?
It doesn't need to. Touch attacks don't provoke. (As has been mentioned before, ranged touch do but only because they're ranged attacks, not because they're touch attacks.)
does it say we can cast other spells while it is up, without losing it?
It doesn't need to. While you might get some table variance where some DMs don't remember where a rule comes from, "holding a charge" is a feature of touch spells, which this isn't. You'd no more lose this spell by casting another than you would if you cast another spell while under the effect of mage armor.
does it say in an undebatable manner, that the minutes go down on BOTH the touch and range touch usage? NO,no,no,and no.
Friend, people are still debating the moon landings. That said, yes, it is very clear what this spell does. "Each attack" reduces the duration. Melee attacks are attacks, ranged attacks are attacks. This is clear.
Only a sure understanding of it (being or not being) a touch spell answers some of this..which the spell doesn't specifically address and "Range:0" does not make immediately clear to most players(if not all) until they have researched it.
The range here could just as easily have been personal. But it could also have been "Range: avacado" because it's not touch. The trick in reading Pathfinder rules is not to worry about what things don't say, but rather what they do say.
Again I am not debating HOW the spell works...just that it is unreasonable to expect everyone(or even most) to understand it immediately. I think someone experienced with a spell, class ability, etc. should hesitate to judge how quickly someone else, new to it should figure it out.
Now we're getting somewhere. I've said that I'm just trying to show you how it looks from the other side. When someone asks how a light switch works, most people are going to tilt their head and ask "is this a joke?" That said, we shouldn't judge anyone for asking the question. There's NOTHING wrong with asking questions. We should be embracing those who haven't got the weight of a decade of playing the game on our shoulders, and helping to see the how and why of things. That's what I'm trying to do.
You CANNOT know what comparable spells they are familiar with, what things they have found concrete answers on, etc. For example someone said it works like flameblade...great how does flameblade work?? I've never had a PC with that spell on its list. Some else said it was obviously not a touch spell, REALLY? how is that obvious?? Obvious is "this counts as a touch spell when used as a touch spell"(or vise versa)...there is no line resembling that in the spell's description. There isn't any definition anywhere i can find that says"touch spells are ONLY spells with range touch" only a oblique reference in the core rule book that might easily have been trumped by a FAQ or an official PF employee comment/ruling, which are often hard to find.
You're right. The interaction should be "what does this mean", followed by "it means this", followed by "how do you know that", followed by "because of this reference", followed by "oh, thanks." I'm not entirely sure this thread went that way.
I witness VERY experienced Players in PFS getting stuff wrong all the time..are they dumb?...trying to cheat? Or is it maybe:
the game is very complicated
and we like trying new things
and new rulings are always coming out all the time
and there is stuff copied from 3.5 that doesn't translate well to PF and...and...AND...
Five hundred pages of stuff in Core alone. I've been playing this since 3.0e and a couple times a year I still get surprised to discover things don't work the way I remember them working. Time goes by, recollection drifts.
That said, some things are sort of fundamental. If someone shows up questioning the meaning of a spell with Range: Close, I'll be able to answer it with confidence. Point is, there's a difference between edge conditions on rarely used game features and common concepts.
Game on.
|
|
does it say we threaten/do not?It doesn't need to. The fireball spell also doesn't specify anything about threatening. Why? Because it doesn't. That's the default. Spells don't threaten. The exception to that are melee touch spells, which this one is not. << I'm referencing that the spell puts fire on your hand (clearly stated), not "creature touched".
The spell don't threaten. The armed touch attack you get from the spell threaten.
You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5)
You have a melee touch attack. It threaten.
|
|
As an aside...
Recently had someone cast Inflict Light Wounds during a fight. Missed every single attempt to touch the troll we were fighting. After the troll dropped he clasped my character on the shoulder and said "Good job". At which point the GM asked which hand was used to clasp my shoulder. Unthinking, the player said "Left hand". That was the hand with the Inflict spell still active on it.
Ouch.
|
|
yes i know...i am simply saying it is possible to read the spell and have questions about it. Not every detail is spelled out. Nor should it be, but it SHOULD be easier to reference material quickly to find those details...don't you think?
does it say we threaten/do not?It doesn't need to. The fireball spell also doesn't specify anything about threatening. Why? Because it doesn't. That's the default. Spells don't threaten. The exception to that are melee touch spells, which this one is not. << I'm referencing that the spell puts fire on your hand (clearly stated), not "creature touched".
The spell don't threaten. The armed touch attack you get from the spell threaten.
You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5)You have a melee touch attack. It threaten.
It was for Anguish that seem to think that you don't threaten with your touch attack.