Holding the charge?

[raoh]

A dilemma. We fought against a gargantuan purple worm which is a pretty high encounter. Anyway, a cleric cast a charge of Shivering Touch(Frostburn) in his hand, and went after the worm. He provoked an attack of opportunity, and the worm got him with an improved grab and immediatelly swallowed.

The question is, does the spell that you held like that, charged in your hand require a concentration check like usual spells when you don't cast on defense? Or is it still in his hand and can be discharged at his preference?

The fact is that the spell acted as a one shot kill again the said worm and I wonder if that is the case, since he has really low dex and was paralysed, and of course, immediatelly afterwards, butchered.

The idea was good, so I allowed it, but a great idea is one thing, an exploit is another if it's not like that in the rules.

Also, can charging and discharging a spell, with movement, be done in a single round, or must you charge a spell, and move for instance, and you need a new round for discharging the spell?

[WarrenZig]

When you cast a touch spell you retain the charge as long as you choose to and as long as you dont cast another spell.

A touch spell grants a free touch attack during the turn you cast it, so you can cast the spell away from an enemy so they dont get an attack of opportunity against you and then move toward the enemy and use the attack.

It's in the player's handbook under touch spells, but i am currently away from my books so i cant get the exact wording, but it's like how i explained above.

Also, Shivering touch is known to be mighty OP when used against big targets or just in general.

[Curmudgeon]

You can discharge the spell any time you make a successful attack. Unfortunately, being touched doesn't count; the spellcaster has to be the one to initiate the touch, and they've got to succeed on an attack roll.

Anyway, your body is holding the charge from the moment you finish casting the spell, so you're ready to (try to) make your attack from that moment forward. The charge isn't just in your hand, though; a swift kick could deliver it as well as poking the worm with your finger.

Also Shivering Touch, if it drops an enemy down to 0 DEX, isn't a kill; it only causes paralysis, and that DEX damage is temporary (gone after the spell duration). That might (or might not) be enough time for the swallowed spellcaster to escape and finish the worm off.

[KillianHawkeye]

You forgot about this line:

If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.

This basically means that if somebody touches you (like by swallowing you whole, for example) the spell automatically gets discharged on them instead of whoever you were going to try to touch.

[Lord Vukodlak]

You forgot about this line:


This basically means that if somebody touches you (like by swallowing you whole, for example) the spell automatically gets discharged on them instead of whoever you were going to try to touch.

IF YOU touch anything or anyone. As in your the initiator.

[KillianHawkeye]

IF YOU touch anything or anyone. As in your the initiator.

Pardon me for equating "accidentally touching something" to "being unexpectedly touched by something else." You can't unintentionally be the initiator, as that makes no sense. :smallannoyed:

[Marnath]

Pardon me for equating "accidentally touching something" to "being unexpectedly touched by something else." You can't unintentionally be the initiator, as that makes no sense. :smallannoyed:

He's right though, being touched is not the same as touching something.

[KillianHawkeye]

Then explain how you can touch something accidentally when it doesn't count unless you mean it.

[Marnath]

Then explain how you can touch something accidentally when it doesn't count unless you mean it.

Unintentionally touching someone else would be something like walking up to a friend and putting your hand on their shoulder or hugging them because you forgot about the spell. Being touched however, would be the reverse. Just because someone grabs you doesn't mean you touched them back. Or have you never heard of non-consensual hugging? :smallwink:

[Curmudgeon]

Then explain how you can touch something accidentally when it doesn't count unless you mean it.
It's D&D, so it doesn't have to be reasonable ─ just consistent.

You can deliver the touch any time you touch something. If you accidentally pick up an object, and the spell allows an object as a target, then the spell discharges. If you're touched by an enemy, you don't make a successful attack roll and thus the spell doesn't discharge. If that enemy has grappled you, on your turn you can do exactly what you did on the enemy's turn ─ make an opposed grapple check ─ but this time you can discharge the spell. As I said, it's consistent, just not particularly reasonable. :smalltongue:

[Yuki Akuma]

It shouldn't be surprising that Shivering Touch one-shotted a monster - Shivering Touch is well known for being completely overpowered.

[ericgrau]

Casting provokes, releasing a held charge does not. Releasing the charge requires only a touch, and you are considered to be wielding a weapon while holding the charge. Heck he could slap someone and release the charge by accident.

Holding a charge is not broken, shivering touch is. It's already so famous here that it's a bit redundant to call out the book as half the people already know about it. Yet I don't hear much else about frostburn...

[Tiki Snakes]

It's D&D, so it doesn't have to be reasonable ─ just consistent.

You can deliver the touch any time you touch something. If you accidentally pick up an object, and the spell allows an object as a target, then the spell discharges. If you're touched by an enemy, you don't make a successful attack roll and thus the spell doesn't discharge. If that enemy has grappled you, on your turn you can do exactly what you did on the enemy's turn ─ make an opposed grapple check ─ but this time you can discharge the spell. As I said, it's consistent, just not particularly reasonable. :smalltongue:

I don't know. the sentance in question seems to be pretty clear and unambiguous to me.

[Yuki Akuma]

Casting provokes, releasing a held charge does not. Releasing the charge requires only a touch, and you are considered to be wielding a weapon while holding the charge. Heck he could slap someone and release the charge by accident.

I assumed the Cleric moved closer to the monster with fifteen foot reach.

Which would, you know, provoke an attack of opportunity.


Holding a charge is not broken, shivering touch is. It's already so famous here that it's a bit redundant to call out the book as half the people already know about it. Yet I don't hear much else about frostburn...

Hey, Snowflake Wardance is pretty popular around here too!

[Curmudgeon]

I don't know. the sentance in question seems to be pretty clear and unambiguous to me.
Who said it was ambiguous? It seems clear to me, too. It's just that touching, and being touched, aren't symmetric concepts in D&D. That's clear ─ but not necessarily reasonable.

[Tiki Snakes]

Who said it was ambiguous? It seems clear to me, too. It's just that touching, and being touched, aren't symmetric concepts in D&D. That's clear ─ but not necessarily reasonable.

Seems like a pretty obtuse interpretation, to me, and quite counter-intuitive. Unless it defines 'touching' somewhere as being specifically the sense you are using it, rather than the generally understood one, then the common sense reading applies, surely?

Which is to say, "It touched me, therefor we were touching."

If it requires you to initiate the touch, then the same kind of creative interpretation could be applied there anyway;
"I touched the worm, by not moving from it's path."

If it meant you can deliver the charge by taking an action to do so, then that is what it would have said. If you are lucky, it would have listed the appropriate type of action/s or rolls required.

[Curmudgeon]

You can deliver the charge by making a successful attack roll. You're only allowed to do so on your turn, however, so being touched doesn't have the same effect as initiating a touch.

[ericgrau]

I assumed the Cleric moved closer to the monster with fifteen foot reach.

Which would, you know, provoke an attack of opportunity.


Oh that. Yes it would. It still wouldn't fizzle the held touch since you aren't concentrating on the spell. It won't discharge the spell if the attacker touches you either, only because the rules specifically say so IIRC. Otherwise any touch will do it, it really doesn't take any thought to hold nor discharge.

[Eldonauran]

I can agree that being touched and touching someone else are completely different things in D&D. However, as a DM, I would invoke the Rule of Cool and annouce that the wurm bit off more than it could chew. :smallamused:

[DarkEternal]

I can agree that being touched and touching someone else are completely different things in D&D. However, as a DM, I would invoke the Rule of Cool and annouce that the wurm bit off more than it could chew. :smallamused:

That makes perfect sense, and I would agree with you. The thought of a cleric going Kevin "Waterworld" Costner and becoming a meal just to blast the worm from the inside is pretty awesome. However, players are of a different mindset. They don't think of it as an awesome thing, but rather as an exploit to be used over, and over and over again.

Me, I would either ban the spell, or houserule it that in that particular case, you need to make the concentration check against greater baddies or lose the spell.