Let's say my wizard/rogue character has an Elven branched spear, wonderful threat range, especially for flanking and casting spells without attacks of opportunity.
It is however a two handed weapon, so during the casting he would only hold the spear in one hand, no longer threatening a 10 feet radius and therefore no longer flanking the enemy, so no sneak attack?
How about with a regular one handed weapon in hand while under the long arm spell?
Removing and replacing a hand on a weapon is a free action, so you can cast a spell and then hold the weapon again.
Edit: As we have the same avatar it looks like you had answered your own question xD
I'm confused.
Did you think that if you flanked the enemy you could get sneak attack damage on the spell that you can't reach them with (assuming you have only 5ft reach normally).
Unless you're a magus you can't deliver spells through your weapon, so the Elven branched spear didn't matter.
If you thought that you could do soemthing like flank with a melee weapon while using a spell for a ranged attack to get sneak attack...that just simply doesn't work.
You only count as flanking with the weapon you're threatening with, and ranged attacks don't benefit from flanking.
Right, I was under the assumption that it may be different, hence the question.
Now then, the case with the "long arm" (or enlarge person alternatively) and your regular one handed weapon. Your reach increases, so do your threatened squares.
Once again you cast a spell, let's say Chill touch. Would that grant a sneak attack?
What about if you casted scorching ray instead?
What if you casted scorching ray while also having the spell combat class feature?
Right, I was under the assumption that it may be different, hence the question.
Now then, the case with the "long arm" (or enlarge person alternatively) and your regular one handed weapon. Your reach increases, so do your threatened squares.
Once again you cast a spell, let's say Chill touch. Would that grant a sneak attack?
What about if you casted scorching ray instead?
What if you casted scorching ray while also having the spell combat class feature?
If you cast chill touch and make a touch attack with your enlarged arms, you would get sneak attack damage. If you cast chill touch and bonk someone with your longsword, you would not get sneak attack unless you were a magus using the appropriate abilities.
If you cast scorching ray, you would not get the benefit of flanking (including sneak attack) because you are not using a melee weapon (a ray is a ranged attack). And because scorching ray is a ranged attack, it cannot be cast through your melee weapon.
I am cautious with all that irregular verbs but my English is a bit irregular too, I guess ;-D
If you're armed, your counted at threatening all the squares you can reach. Long arm, reach weapon (with exceptions for pole arms).
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don't discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged.
a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity).
I'm not sure where it's written atm (I'm trying to work), but in your scenario, to clarify, only touch spells that do actual damage (piercing, slashing, bludgeoning) would qualify for sneak attack damage.
Regardless, you'd still get the flanking bonus from your attack.A side note, not to throw a wrench in your game, but your arcane bond isn't your weapon is it?
Unless you were wearing gauntlets or had unarmed strike. The held charge allows you to threaten for purposes of AoO, and it's not written that you have to use the "weapon" that grants you that threatened square for the attack (unless it's with reach, then obviously...) SO, at that point, sure you could punch the person with chill touch either with a -4 if you don't have unarmed strike or wearing a gauntlet, then you'll get sneak damage.
It's always easier just to touch them, and in order for precision damage to apply, it has to do physical damage (piercing, slashing, bludgeoning).
@Orfamay Quest
On that notion, is it possible to cast a ranged touch spell attack as a regular spell attack?
Also let's say, with spell combat, you're not only threatening that square, you're attacking it, so why wouldn't you be able to get a ranged
Also wouldn't a sword just get sneak attack, because weapon attacks can?
Thanks for pointing this out, casted sounded kind of wrong, even to me as a non native speaker (writer?). Also, lucky you, didn't have to learn, German or French. The more common a word, the more irregular it is, seems to be a good rule of thumb.
Ich bin, du bist, er ist, wir sind, ihr seid, sie sind...
@Koi Eokei
My character hasn't really been created yet, so no, he doesn't have an arcane bond.
As far as I understand, you can get an elemental sneak attack damage (acid, cold, electricity etc). At least you could in 3.5 and I don't see anywhere stated, that you couldn't in Pathfinder.
@Orfamay Quest
On that notion, is it possible to cast a ranged touch spell attack as a regular spell attack?
There's a magus arcana that lets (some) magi do it for some spells.
Also let's say, with spell combat, you're not only threatening that square, you're attacking it, so why wouldn't you be able to get a ranged
Because, per FAQ, flanking applies only to melee attacks.
Also wouldn't a sword just get sneak attack, because weapon attacks can?
Hitting someone with a sword would allow you to get sneak attack damage with your sword, and even with a spell that a magus cast through her sword, but not with a spell that was not cast through the sword.
As far as I understand, you can get an elemental sneak attack damage (acid, cold, electricity etc).
You get sneak attack damage when you attack someone with a melee weapon when you are flanking them. The italicized terms are the key ones and derive from the FAW cited above.
If you have a melee weapon that does elemental damage, including a touch spell, that's fine.
If you have a ranged attack that does elemental damage, it's not a melee attack so you don't get sneak attack damage.
Ummm... I think some things are getting confused here.
You can get sneak attack with a ranged weapon, but only within 30ft. However, ranged attacks do not qualify for flanking so they cannot sneak attack using flanking. You must deny the enemy their dexterity to AC in order to sneak attack with a ranged attack.
You can also sneak attack using spells, whether touch or ranged spells. It deals additional damage as the same type the spell originally dealt, but can only do HP damage. So for instance a spell that did ability damage wouldn't do extra ability damage for sneak attack. What kind of damage it would do is left up to the GM, but probably should be thematically related.
My character hasn't really been created yet, so no, he doesn't have an arcane bond.
Wizards need like 3 hands to cast spells. Material component, somatic component, and arcane bond if it's your weapon. If your arcane bond is a ring, then your good to go. If you plan on being in the thick of it, pick up quick draw. So you can do your stuff and still arm yourself as a free action.
As far as I understand, you can get an elemental sneak attack damage (acid, cold, electricity etc). At least you could in 3.5 and I don't see anywhere stated, that you couldn't in Pathfinder.
Not that I've ever been aware of.
Somatic and material components can be provided by the same hand. Otherwise you couldn't use metamagic rods with spells with both components.
Somatic and material components can be provided by the same hand.
Where is that written?
A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.
Exactly. Eschew materials helps. The wizard in my party had to permanently alter himself into a kasatha just to have 4 hands so he could hold his weapon (arcane bond) use a rod and hold a wand and still have a free hand. It was the only way to not slow combat and have to drop his wand (tied to a lanyard). Spells with a focus or expensive component still cause him grief.
@Koi Eokei
Granted, this is specifically written for the Arcane Trickster class feature Surprise Spells, but why wouldn't it work like that when you get sneak attack from an elemental attack?
At 10th level, an arcane trickster can add her sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage, if the targets are flat-footed. This additional damage only applies to spells that deal hit point damage, and the additional damage is of the same type as the spell. If the spell allows a saving throw to negate or halve the damage, it also negates or halves the sneak attack damage.
It's like I said. Physical damage. Prestige classes and special abilities and feats of course change things.
Somatic and material components can be provided by the same hand.Where is that written?
A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.Exactly. Eschew materials helps. The wizard in my party had to permanently alter himself into a kasatha just to have 4 hands so he could hold his weapon (arcane bond) use a rod and hold a wand and still have a free hand. It was the only way to not slow combat and have to drop his wand (tied to a lanyard). Spells with a focus or expensive component still cause him grief.
Because that is exactly the absurd thing the rules aren't trying to force you to do.
Admittedly, any character with an arcane weapon bond is screwed (or any hand-held item) but those using a ring or amulet can totally use a rod and use their other free hand to provide both somatic and material components.
It's not explicitly written anywhere, but that is the assumption.
As mentioned, otherwise you need at least 3 hands to cast if you have a an arcane bonded handheld item, or to take still spell or eschew materials. Which I can assure you is not what the developers had it mind. If such a thing were intended, don't you think it would explicitly mentioned that if you don't take one of those options you basically can't cast your spells?
There are comments about it on the forums here, but it's not explicitly explained within the rules.
@Koi Eokei
Granted, this is specifically written for the Arcane Trickster class feature Surprise Spells, but why wouldn't it work like that when you get sneak attack from an elemental attack?At 10th level, an arcane trickster can add her sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage, if the targets are flat-footed. This additional damage only applies to spells that deal hit point damage, and the additional damage is of the same type as the spell. If the spell allows a saving throw to negate or halve the damage, it also negates or halves the sneak attack damage.
What the Arcane Trickster ability does it allows you to add sneak on spells that wouldn't normally allow sneak attack.
Such as fireball or magic missile. Sneak attack requires an attack roll to be made. Those spells don't have attack rolls. Normally you can't sneak attack with them.
But you can sneak attack with scorching ray without any special abilities, assuming your opponent is flat-footed. And it will deal extra fire damage.
Just like a sneak attack with shocking grasp will deal extra electricity damage.
Saying that only physical damage can be combined with Sneak Attack is blatantly incorrect.
@Claxon.
I don't know how I assumed otherwise. Just always seemed broken to me. But you're right, why would the arcane trickster ability apply that ability to all damage spells if it weren't already possible for touch attack spells. A little line (literally anywhere) would clarify that perfectly. There's plenty of threads citing 3.5 where it was explained in text.
Anyway, to get back to the original question. A person with the spell combat feature, threatening another square, and therefore flanking it (because one of your allies is on the other side), why wouldn't it give you a flanking attack with a ranged (touch spell) weapon? Regardless of ranged attacks not flanking (save for a 3pp feat) that enemy is still flanked by you. With your weapon.
Am I getting this wrong?
What about if he's not using the spell combat feature?
By now I think we have established, that this wouldn't work without it, right?
Trish, I think you might find your question easier to answer if you take magic out of the equation.
Imagine a PC holding a dagger in one hand and a loaded, hand crossbow in the other.
Our friendly PC is flanking a foe with another party member. Very clear. They both have daggers. They both threaten with them. The enemy isn't denied dex.
The enemy has already exhausted his AoO for the round.
Does our new friend get sneak attack if he fires his hand crossbow at the enemy?
I believe this scenario hits the same rules question you're asking.
On the Rogue page, under Sneak Attack it says (among other things).
or when the rogue flanks her target.
It doesn't say anything about a flanking attack, it says that you have to be flanking the enemy, which the character in this scenario is. As I understand it anyway.
Trish, this is the exact argument that caused the PDT to confirm that flanking is only with melee attacks and only benefits melee attacks. If you make a ranged attack, for that attack your aren't flanking. Flanking isn't a state of being as it is a modifier to your MELEE attack.
Yeah, literally the same sort of argument that lead the devs to declare that flanking applied only to melee attacks, and that ranged attacks could not benefit from it.
It was basically "understood" by a majority that flanking meant melee attacks only, but people pressed the issue enough that it has since be further developed.
You the rogue may be flanking with your dagger, but flanking only applies to weapons that can threaten the creature. Which ranged attacks don't do.
And the argument was further developed after Snap Shot, in which people argued "Hey, I can threaten them now! So I can flank and get Sneak Attack!".
And then the devs said "Actually, no. Flanking was never intended to be allowed for ranged attacks."
I see.
Thank you for all your patience, I guess I should have started with that. Might have saved us all some time.