Light cantrip is range "object touched," no save, no SR. Can I cast it on, say, the enemy rogue's hat? If so, does the enemy rogue get a save, and if so, what save? Reflex? I presume a touch attack would be necessary.
Light cantrip is range "object touched," no save, no SR. Can I cast it on, say, the enemy rogue's hat? If so, does the enemy rogue get a save, and if so, what save? Reflex?
Light: "Saving Throw none"
No, the rogue (nor the item) does not get a save.
I presume a touch attack would be necessary.
Correct. Since the hat is being worn (attended) you would use the rogue's touch AC. As with all touch spells, you can make an attack as a free action any time during the turn in which you cast it.
That's about what I thought. Now comes the tougher question.
If a Magus uses spellstrike to deliver a light spell onto an attended object, is that functionally equivalent to a sunder attempt that does not provoke an attack of opportunity? Does Spellstrike, in tandem with the light cantrip, effectively double as Improved Sunder?
If a Magus uses spellstrike to deliver a light spell onto an attended object, is that functionally equivalent to a sunder attempt that does not provoke an attack of opportunity?
I assume that Smashing an Object is generally referring to unattended objects. So for an attended item (even if it's not a weapon or shield), it should probably still use the Sunder mechanic since an object held by an active creature should probably be harder to hit than one laying on the floor.
Otherwise, you end up with oddities like the ability to use a full-round action to auto-hit someone's armor or whatever.
Does Spellstrike, in tandem with the light cantrip, effectively double as Improved Sunder?
Using sunder in place of the melee attack would still provoke.
I'm not sure I was clear. I'm not talking about Smashing an Object. I'm talking about delivering Spellstrike onto an object held by a foe.
SPELLSTRIKE:
"At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell."
With Magus Spellstrike, you deliver a touch spell as an attack, and you do weapon damage. You don't provoke AOOs from delivering that attack to your foe, so why would you provoke AOOs delivering that touch attack to your foe's gear? If I'm allowed to make a touch attack to cast light on my opponent's gear, with no save, and no AOO, then I should by rights be allowed to spellstrike my opponent's gear, with no save, and no AOO delivering damage to the gear if I hit.
Right?
The cleanest way to adjudicate this, it seems to me, is to require someone to have Improved Sunder to cast a light spell on an opponent's gear without provoking an AOO. But that's not the rule as written, is it? It would seem to me, that the rule as written allows you to sunder someone's gear via Spellstrike as long as you're delivering a touch spell to the object.
With Magus Spellstrike, you deliver a touch spell as an attack, and you do weapon damage. You don't provoke AOOs from delivering that attack to your foe, so why would you provoke AOOs delivering that touch attack to your foe's gear?
You provoke if the attack provokes. A magus using spellstrike with a whip, for example, will still provoke, because attacking with the whip provokes. Likewise, a magus using spellstrike with an untrained sunder attempt will provoke, because making an untrained sunder attempt provokes.
If I'm allowed to make a touch attack to cast light on my opponent's gear, with no save, and no AOO, then I should by rights be allowed to spellstrike my opponent's gear, with no save, and no AOO delivering damage to the gear if I hit.
Right?
Stabbing someone with a sword generally doesn't provoke, but stabbing someone's gear with that same sword does. Just like touching with a spell doesn't, but sundering with one does.
Touching his body unarmed provokes. Touching his body to deliver a spell doesn't provoke. Why would this be different with Spellstrike? You're not sundering, you're weapon delivering a spell and doing damage. That's what Spellstrike does. Does it not?
Grick so to be clear , he's trying to use the light cantrip to spell combat and get that extra attack from spell strike, (basically swing his sword twice) can he do it?
You're not sundering, you're weapon delivering a spell and doing damage.
You're targeting and attempting to damage an item held or worn by your opponent, that's a Sunder combat maneuver. If, instead of targeting the item, you just attack the creature wearing it, then that wouldn't provoke. (It also wouldn't cause him to emit light, but that's probably not your real goal anyway)
Grick so to be clear , he's trying to use the light cantrip to spell combat and get that extra attack from spell strike, (basically swing his sword twice) can he do it?
If you cast light, you get to make an attack as a free action during the turn in which you cast it, because light is a touch spell.
Spellstrike gives you the option to deliver that spell with your weapon instead of with a touch. It does not grant you an extra attack.
If you cast light as part of Spell Combat, then it still grants you that attack, just like every other touch spell on the magus spell list.
The convoluted part is that light cannot be cast on creatures, disallowing it's use with a spellstrike targeting a creature.
Since the only valid target for the spell is an object we should use the rules for damaging objects; the sunder maneuver.
Thus:
- Attack the rogue is a no because he is not a valid target.
- Attacking it's hat requires a sunder maneuver.
About beej67's question:
Does spellstriking with the light cantrip double as improved sunder?
My interpretation is no.
To look at a similar situation. Casting defensively allows you to avoid an AoO but if you cast a ranged touch spell you incur nevertheless.
Spellstriking grants a free attack subsumed in the casting of the spell but as any other attack if you try to do anything other than hitting your foe in melee(which in the case above is impossible due to it not being a valid target) you generate AoOs as usual unless you have the right feat.
The convoluted part is that light cannot be cast on creatures, disallowing it's use with a spellstrike targeting a creature.
It's a touch spell, the target is not decided at the time of casting. You cast the spell, it grants you a free attack, and then later you can decide to use that attack.
If you have a held charge of light, that doesn't prevent you from touching living creatures. Likewise, using vampiric touch doesn't prevent you from touching objects. See this thread for discussion on this point.
Spellstriking grants a free attack subsumed in the casting of the spell
Touch spells grant the attack, spellstrike just gives you another option in the delivery of that spell. (weapon instead of touch or unarmed strike or natural attack)
You're targeting and attempting to damage an item held or worn by your opponent, that's a Sunder combat maneuver. If, instead of targeting the item, you just attack the creature wearing it, then that wouldn't provoke. (It also wouldn't cause him to emit light, but that's probably not your real goal anyway)
If I follow, your position is that Spellstrike says you attack (something) to damage it and then also deliver a spell, not you deliver a spell to (something) but use your weapon as the delivery method, and then also do damage. Correct? Lets recheck the rule.
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell.
Seems inconclusive to me, but I don't object to your interpretation because it avoids some silliness with how I originally understood it to work.
The convoluted part is that light cannot be cast on creatures, disallowing it's use with a spellstrike targeting a creature.
That's not true. Check the wording of Spellstrike above. The only requirement is "range of touch." You may absolutely deliver spells that affect objects with spellstrike, thereby doing weapon damage to those objects in the process. Most "object touched" spells would have no real benefit to being delivered via spellstrike, but that's not to say that it's impossible.
In fact, shocking grasp is "creature or object touched," and you gain +3 on your hit roll if you're attacking an object made of metal. You could absolutely sunder someone's weapon with a shocking grasp spellstrike. According to Grick's interpretation, which I believe I'm warming to, you would provoke an AOO by attempting it without the improved sunder feat.
The convoluted part is that light cannot be cast on creatures, disallowing it's use with a spellstrike targeting a creature.That's not true. Check the wording of Spellstrike above. The only requirement is "range of touch." You may absolutely deliver spells that affect objects with spellstrike, thereby doing weapon damage to those objects in the process. Most "object touched" spells would have no real benefit to being delivered via spellstrike, but that's not to say that it's impossible.
In fact, shocking grasp is "creature or object touched," and you gain +3 on your hit roll if you're attacking an object made of metal. You could absolutely sunder someone's weapon with a shocking...
Emphasis the bolded section. You can spellstrike with light, but you cannot target a creature with it. Spellstriking or not.
School evocation [light]; Level bard 0, cleric 0, druid 0, sorcerer/wizard 0
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, M/DF (a firefly)
Range touch
Target object touched
Duration 10 min./level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
It's a touch spell, the target is not decided at the time of casting. You cast the spell, it grants you a free attack, and then later you can decide to use that attack.
If you have a held charge of light, that doesn't prevent you from touching living creatures. Likewise, using vampiric touch doesn't prevent you from touching objects. See this thread for discussion on this point.
On the linked thread:
Option B for the same round you cast the touch spell, but becomes option A on the player's next turn (or next round) if and when the touch spell becomes "held" under Holding a Charge.
If that is the final conclusion, I cannot agree. I think it's C on the player's turn and A on subsequent rounds.
Let me try to convince you.
You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect.
If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform (such as selecting an invalid target), the casting fails and the spell is wasted.
If you failed to cast the spell you do not get to deliver it. Same as if you failed the concentration check to cast defensively.
Since the free attack is an alternate delivery method it does not happen because the spell failed.
You decide to choose an invalid target like the aforementioned rogue? Fine, but then the spell fizzles and you do not get to deliver it.
No free attack as the weapon attack is, as you said a variation on the touch attack (delivery method) granted by the spell, which failed.
You may hold the charge in absence of a valid target?
Absolutely, but whenever you try to deliver it at any time after the round in which it was cast you must spend a standart action to touch, even spellstrike if you want. The A option. The weapon attack is not free anymore.
As I said before, you can still target the rogue's hat with a sunder maneuver spellstrike but then sunder rules apply, including the AoO for not having Improved Sunder.
I'm all for spellstrike sundering as it allows for a lot of interesting options but if what you really want is to spellstrike spellcombat cantrips to get additional weapon attacks on creatures I don't think the light spell is valid.
There are plenty of other RAW valid options;
Arcane Mark, Brand (as a Hexcrafter), Close Range Arcanaed ray of frost, Spell Blended Touch of Fatigue, etc.
I hope to have made sense, english is not my first language but I find it great practice to post on the forums. Though not always with the expected levels of success. :P