Spell that requires ranged touch attack, ignores SR, and does untyped damage?

[RichardAK]

Can anyone think of a spell that requires a ranged touch attack to hit, ignores spell resistance, and does untyped damage? One that is fourth-level or lower, ideally? It doesn't matter how much damage the spell does, as long as it is untyped. Are there any metamagic feats that would turn a spell's energy damage into untyped damage? As long as that feat raises the spell's level by fewer than four levels, it would be fine.

[Keynub]

You're looking for Orb of Force (found in Complete Arcane and the Spell Compendium).

Ranged touch attack, no save, no SR, medium range.

[Answerer]

A searing lesser orb of fire would deal half-fire, half-untyped damage, and a piercing-cold lesser orb of cold would deal half-cold, half-untyped damage, each at level 2. Searing Spell (+1 metamagic) is in Sandstorm, Piercing Cold (also +1 metamagic) is in Frostburn, and both orb of fire and orb of cold are in Spell Compendium. The not-lesser versions of these orbs are both level 4.

[Zeb]

Orb of force


Edit: Swordsaged

[RichardAK]

Doesn't Orb of Force do force damage, not untyped damage? Is that as close as one can find?

[MesiDoomstalker]

Nitpick: Orb of Force does Force damage, which is typed damage.

[Answerer]

Doesn't Orb of Force do force damage, not untyped damage? Is that as close as one can find?
Again, searing lesser orb of fire and piercing-cold lesser orb of cold both do untyped damage. They just also both do fire or cold damage, respectively.

Oh, also worth mentioning: a Warlock's eldritch blast when modified by Vitriolic Blast is SR: No, does not allow a save, and deals untyped damage.

[RichardAK]

Again, searing lesser orb of fire and piercing-cold lesser orb of cold both do untyped damage. They just also both do fire or cold damage, respectively.
Unfortunately, what I am looking for is completely untyped damage.


Oh, also worth mentioning: a Warlock's eldritch blast when modified by Vitriolic Blast is SR: No, does not allow a save, and deals untyped damage.
This, on the other hand, might be what I'm looking for. What is Vitriolic Blast? In what book would I find it? If it's the Greater Invocation described in Complete Arcane (p. 136), doesn't it do acid damage, not untyped damage?

[Answerer]

Unfortunately, what I am looking for is completely untyped damage.
I cannot fathom why. You already stated it didn't matter how much damage was done; if the fire or cold damage is ignored, who cares?

Anyway, I'd look for an untyped-damage ray, and find some way (Dweormerkeeper, maybe?) of getting it as an Su ability.


This, on the other hand, might be what I'm looking for. What is Vitriolic Blast? In what book would I find it? If it's the Greater Invocation described in Complete Arcane (p. 136), doesn't it do acid damage, not untyped damage?
Ah, you're right; I'd missed that it was switched to acid at the same time. Well that's dumb.

[RichardAK]

Anyway, I'd look for an untyped-damage ray, and find some way (Dweormerkeeper, maybe?) of getting it as an Su ability.
That sounds like a possibility, but I have to confess my ignorance: what is Dweomerkeeper?

[Answerer]

That sounds like a possibility, but I have to confess my ignorance: what is Dweomerkeeper?
A prestige class from the Complete Divine web enhancement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20040522a). It lets you treat spells as Su, which is insane.

[tyckspoon]

Again, searing lesser orb of fire and piercing-cold lesser orb of cold both do untyped damage. They just also both do fire or cold damage, respectively.


That's not actually what Searing and Piercing Cold do. They ignore resistances and partially defeat immunity, but they're still Fire and Cold damage respectively.. it's a fine distinction, but it's relevant if you run into anybody who has special interactions with Fire/Cold beyond simply taking damage.

Consecrate Spell/Corrupt Spell, however, does do what you said; half the spell's damage becomes sourced from 'divine power', similar to Flamestrike.

[Kelb_Panthera]

It's not untyped, but if you using PF a gun can get you bludgeoning and piercing damage against touch ac with no spell resistance. Even works against enemies in an AMF and couldn't care less about energy resistance. DR could be an issue though.

[A_S]

Is the touch attack part crucial? Hail of Stone (SpC, level 1) deals no-attack-roll, no-save, untyped damage. It could be warped (by a Spellwarp Sniper, Complete Scoundrel) into a ray, if the touch attack part is crucial (for sneak attack damage and the like).

[Lapak]

Is the touch attack part crucial? Hail of Stone (SpC, level 1) deals no-attack-roll, no-save, untyped damage. It could be warped (by a Spellwarp Sniper, Complete Scoundrel) into a ray, if the touch attack part is crucial (for sneak attack damage and the like).This is precisely what I was going to suggest. Spellwarp a Hail of Stone.

[RichardAK]

The attack roll part is definitely crucial; it has to be a ranged touch attack. Once I knew about Spellwarp Sniper, I considered using that with Hail of Stone. The only problem with that is that, from how I read the description in Complete Scoundrel, a Spellwarp Sniper can only warp a spell that he is casting from memory. That's definitely not bad, but it would better if one could warp a spell that one was casting from a wand. Otherwise, a Spellwarp Sniper can only do what I want a few times per day. That would be good, but being able to do it many more times would be better. Am I wrong? Can a Spellwarp Sniper warp a spell that he casts from a wand?

[Lapak]

The attack roll part is definitely crucial; it has to be a ranged touch attack. Once I knew about Spellwarp Sniper, I considered using that with Hail of Stone. The only problem with that is that, from how I read the description in Complete Scoundrel, a Spellwarp Sniper can only warp a spell that he is casting from memory. That's definitely not bad, but it would better if one could warp a spell that one was casting from a wand. Otherwise, a Spellwarp Sniper can only do what I want a few times per day. That would be good, but being able to do it many more times would be better. Am I wrong? Can a Spellwarp Sniper warp a spell that he casts from a wand?Wanting to cast this from a wand, and presumably apply this effect many times a day, makes the question much more difficult. :smallyuk:

I was going to suggest Vampiric Touch next, but that's not a *ranged* touch. (EDIT: And most of the ways that you can make it ranged suffer from the same kind of limitations that Spellwarping does.) Is a melee touch acceptable?

[A_S]

Vampiric Touch also doesn't bypass SR. If you can find an SR:No touch damage spell, though, Reach Spell (metamagic) would work with it.

[Douglas]

What are you trying to accomplish with this? That information might help us come up with solutions.

[TuggyNE]

The only problem with that is that, from how I read the description in Complete Scoundrel, a Spellwarp Sniper can only warp a spell that he is casting from memory. That's definitely not bad, but it would better if one could warp a spell that one was casting from a wand. Otherwise, a Spellwarp Sniper can only do what I want a few times per day. That would be good, but being able to do it many more times would be better.

Try getting a lot of pearls of power (recharge after a fight), or perhaps enter with a focused specialist, or both.

[Lapak]

Vampiric Touch also doesn't bypass SR. If you can find an SR:No touch damage spell, though, Reach Spell (metamagic) would work with it.Oh, right. And yes, Reach Spell was what I was thinking of, but most of the objections to Spellwarped apply there too.

[Answerer]

Metamagic Spell Trigger could get Reach Spell applied to a wand. Artificers get that at level 6, but there's also a feat (Complete Arcane, I think?) by the same name. Not sure if the feat does everything the Artificer class feature does.

You could also arguably craft a wand of reach vampire's touch or whatever, maybe. RAW's a little murky on whether or not metamagic'd spells count as a different spell that can be used for items.

[Lord Haart]

A few Wu-Jen spells work almost like requested. Iron scarf (Complete Arcane) deals untyped damage, ignores SR and has no save, but requires ranged attack (not ranged touch attack) to hit. Storm of needles and rain of spines (Complete mage) both are AoE attacks (no SR, untyped damage) that don't require attack roll at all; instead, they allow Reflex save, but still do some damage on succesful save.

Also, Damning Darkness (BoVD) continuously deals damage to every non-evil creature in radius (no attack, no SR, no save, untyped). It targets an object, and with Reach Spell can probably be cast on any object in enemy posession.

[Acanous]

You're asking for quite a bit there. Would Force damage be an acceptable substitute? Untyped is so very rare that you're lucky to have it at all.

[dextercorvia]

Melf's Unicorn Arrow (PHBII)

[RichardAK]

Melf's Unicorn Arrow (PHBII)
We have a winner! Thank you Dextercorvia, and thank you to everyone else who helped me with this. I appreciate it.

[willpell]

Ah, you're right; I'd missed that it was switched to acid at the same time. Well that's dumb.

Am I understanding you right? You're saying it's "dumb" that Vitriolic Blast deals acid damage, when "Vitriolic" is just a fancy word for "Acidic"?

[RichardAK]

Am I understanding you right? You're saying it's "dumb" that Vitriolic Blast deals acid damage, when "Vitriolic" is just a fancy word for "Acidic"?
Strictly speaking, "vitriolic" is a fancy word for "glassy."

[Andreaz]

Strictly speaking, "vitriolic" is a fancy word for "glassy."That would be "Vitreous". Vitriolic comes from Vitriol, acid and corrosion.

[ahenobarbi]

Aw... thread is over and no one mentioned City damage?

[Arcanist]

Aw... thread is over and no one mentioned City damage?

I'm surprised nobody even mentioned Launch Bolt, but in all fairness I'm not even sure if damage from a weapon is even considered typed or untyped :smallsigh:

[RichardAK]

That would be "Vitreous". Vitriolic comes from Vitriol, acid and corrosion.
Ah, yes, but the reason vitriol came to mean that is that vitriol, or sulfuric acid, was the only substance known to pre-modern man that could dissolve glass. But over time, the term that would have been translated as "glass solvent" got shortened, and the rest is history. But yes, I know that, in modern parlance, vitriolic means acidic. I was making a small joke.

[ahenobarbi]

I'm surprised nobody even mentioned Launch Bolt, but in all fairness I'm not even sure if damage from a weapon is even considered typed or untyped :smallsigh:

But you make a regular ranged attack with Launch Bolt, not touch ranged attack.

And city damage is so hilarious :smallbiggrin:

[dextercorvia]

But you make a regular ranged attack with Launch Bolt, not touch ranged attack.

And city damage is so hilarious :smallbiggrin:

It also has a really strange interaction with being wanded since the bolt is both a component and the target of the spell.

[Andreaz]

I was making a small joke.Fatal Error: ERROR CODE AED-09592386: Undeclared Function or mismatched reference.

[Answerer]

Am I understanding you right? You're saying it's "dumb" that Vitriolic Blast deals acid damage, when "Vitriolic" is just a fancy word for "Acidic"?
It's dumb from a gameplay perspective. The Warlock doesn't have all that much going for it; giving it a nigh-irresistable attack would at least be a gimmick.

You are correct that the name is fitting.

[Lord_Gareth]

Metamagic Spell Trigger could get Reach Spell applied to a wand. Artificers get that at level 6, but there's also a feat (Complete Arcane, I think?) by the same name. Not sure if the feat does everything the Artificer class feature does.

You could also arguably craft a wand of reach vampire's touch or whatever, maybe. RAW's a little murky on whether or not metamagic'd spells count as a different spell that can be used for items.

RAW might be murky but precedent isn't; WotC's first-party modules and adventures (including a few in the backs of supplements like Libris Mortis) feature metamagic'd wands and even scrolls.

[willpell]

It's dumb from a gameplay perspective. The Warlock doesn't have all that much going for it.

Being able to blast at-will when virtually every ranged attack in the game has some form of charges seems more than sufficient to me. You might not be able to take a dragon down fast, but if you hide and snipe, you can spent eight solid hours whittling him down while he tries to figure out why he's wet and itchy.

[Lord_Gareth]

Being able to blast at-will when virtually every ranged attack in the game has some form of charges seems more than sufficient to me. You might not be able to take a dragon down fast, but if you hide and snipe, you can spent eight solid hours whittling him down while he tries to figure out why he's wet and itchy.

Hi. This is me. This is me pointing at the Warlock's listing at Tier 4. This is that listing not changing.

You see, the line of thought I just quoted is exactly what Wizards of the Coast thought when they designed Warlock. And they were wrong, and this line of reasoning is also wrong (at least from a balance perspective). Warlock suffers from the fact that their 'unlimited blasts a day' aren't just short range, but consistently lackluster for their level and wildly swingy when it comes to actual damage dealt.

It took Wizards of the Coast awhile to learn from that mistake, but learn they did - Incarnum, Tome of Battle and Tome of Magic all reintroduced unlimited-use powers at a proper balance level (well, not Truenamers) and, surprise of all surprises, the game did not crack in half, nor did the Monster Manual suddenly become obsolete.

[Spuddles]

Try getting a lot of pearls of power (recharge after a fight), or perhaps enter with a focused specialist, or both.

A wand of that wizard only spell that gives up a 4th level slot for 3 lower level slots would be great. 150 castings of a 1st level spell.

[dextercorvia]

A wand of that wizard only spell that gives up a 4th level slot for 3 lower level slots would be great. 150 castings of a 1st level spell.

For that price you can just buy 21 pearls of power.

[Kelb_Panthera]

For that price you can just buy 21 pearls of power.

Think about what you just said.

21 first level spells per day V 150 first level spells. You'd have to use every one of those pearls every day for a week to make the wand a poor choice. When have you ever seen anyone use 21 1st level slots in one day?

[Zombulian]

Spellfire Wielder Feat

[dextercorvia]

Think about what you just said.

21 first level spells per day V 150 first level spells. You'd have to use every one of those pearls every day for a week to make the wand a poor choice. When have you ever seen anyone use 21 1st level slots in one day?

So, now think about what you said. If I don't need that many pearls of power to fully power my ability every day, then why would I spend as much as 21 pearls to get a wand?

[Kelb_Panthera]

So, now think about what you said. If I don't need that many pearls of power to fully power my ability every day, then why would I spend as much as 21 pearls to get a wand?

I'm saying both options are reasonably equivalent, unless you're burning through first level spell-slots like a mad-man.

The wand has the advantage of being spammable if you have some means of using the extra slots in a hurry now and again, while the pearls have the advantage of never running dry ever, but needing to be individually manipulated for use.

Realistically, you wouldn't really need either except in some strange corner cases. You'd rather have just one pearl of power 4 and the extra 5000-ish gold.

[willpell]

Warlock suffers from the fact that their 'unlimited blasts a day' aren't just short range

Eldritch Spear, 250 feet.


but consistently lackluster for their level

Again, compared to spells that can only be cast once, or arrows that can run out, or melee that requires you to get dangerously close to your target.


and wildly swingy when it comes to actual damage dealt.

I see that as a feature, not a bug. I'd rather have 2d6 damage than a flat 7 every time, because that way I get to have some fun seeing what I roll, which will usually be 7 but could sometimes be 12 ("woohoo, maximum damage!") or 2 ("Aw crap, now what am I gonna do, think, think, need clever plan to get out of this one").


It took Wizards of the Coast awhile to learn from that mistake, but learn they did - Incarnum, Tome of Battle and Tome of Magic all reintroduced unlimited-use powers at a proper balance level (well, not Truenamers) and, surprise of all surprises, the game did not crack in half, nor did the Monster Manual suddenly become obsolete.

By Incarnum I assume you mean Totemist, given that Incarnates suck at dishing out damage. I'm not too familiar with the Totemist's damage capabilities, but I do know that the Binder's direct damage abilities are impressive, but a lot of them can only be used every fifth round (or is it six rounds, with five being the delay?). Tome of Battle I've only barely touched, but since its focus is on melee I hardly think it compares.


The wand has the advantage of being spammable if you have some means of using the extra slots in a hurry now and again, while the pearls have the advantage of never running dry ever, but needing to be individually manipulated for use.

Where exactly is it established that the pearls need to be manipulated? As far as I can see from what it says in the book, they just need to be on your person somewhere.

[Kumori]

A wand of that wizard only spell that gives up a 4th level slot for 3 lower level slots would be great. 150 castings of a 1st level spell.

Which spell is this?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Which spell is this?

I may be wrong since I'm going from memory, but I think it's mage's lucuburation. I'm pretty sure I misspelled that, but it's close.

[dextercorvia]

Which spell is this?

(Rary's) Mnemonic Enhancer. Mage's (Mordenkainen's) Lucubration is the higher level analog.

[Kumori]

(Rary's) Mnemonic Enhancer. Mage's (Mordenkainen's) Lucubration is the higher level analog.

I guess I missed that about Mnemonic Enhancer where you could prepare more than one spell. I knew about Lucubration, which only does one spell, and I think I kind of lumped the two effects together as being just limited to recalling just the one.... I don't generally play wizards, so I never looked into those enough to differentiate.

[TuggyNE]

Where exactly is it established that the pearls need to be manipulated? As far as I can see from what it says in the book, they just need to be on your person somewhere.

"Once per day on command..." the bolded part is important, as command words take a standard action to say.

[willpell]

"Once per day on command..." the bolded part is important, as command words take a standard action to say.

Okay, but couldn't you say the command word 21 times while the 21 pearls are in your pocket, and each one activates the not-yet-activated pearl closest to the opening of your pocket (randomly in the case of a tie)?

(Also the fact that you can give a two-page speech as a free action but need a standard action to say a command word is making me think of "Power Word: Annoy".)

[Spuddles]

Okay, but couldn't you say the command word 21 times while the 21 pearls are in your pocket, and each one activates the not-yet-activated pearl closest to the opening of your pocket (randomly in the case of a tie)?

(Also the fact that you can give a two-page speech as a free action but need a standard action to say a command word is making me think of "Power Word: Annoy".)

What's keeping someone else from saying the command word 21 times?

[TuggyNE]

Okay, but couldn't you say the command word 21 times while the 21 pearls are in your pocket, and each one activates the not-yet-activated pearl closest to the opening of your pocket (randomly in the case of a tie)?

There's no particular reason to assume they all have the same command word (that I know of), so this probably isn't necessary. Regardless, it's action-economy cost, and that's the main point.


(Also the fact that you can give a two-page speech as a free action but need a standard action to say a command word is making me think of "Power Word: Annoy".)

Yeah, seriously. Of course, if you think of it as a voice recognition system it might make a bit more sense....

[willpell]

What's keeping someone else from saying the command word 21 times?

But they're on your person. Thusly, in the same way your opponent can't stand behind you and get the +1 enhancement bonus from your armor (you probably give them 20% cover but that's about it, and your armor probably has no effect on whether they get hit, only whether you do), the pearls in your pocket can hear your voice (assuming they even need to hear the sound, it might be more like Truenaming where the fact that you spoke is what matters, regardless of whether it's audible, though of course Silence calls that into question), but not the voice of any person who isn't wearing the clothing with the pocket in it.

One of the reasons I love Magic of Incarnum is that the concept of Chakras is a great explanation for the effects of "person" status on magic items. You have a subtle energy body, or "soul", coexistent with your material body (the way the Ethereal plane is coexistent with the material, though your soul is probably not actually in the Ethereal since nobody can reach in there and grab it). It has a certain number of "gates" on it called Chakras which are especially good places for a permanent-item-enhancement "spell" to plug in and draw the mystic energies necessary to keep your Flaming Armor burning without fuel indefinitely. But even without a chakra, your subtle energy deliniates a murky shape of the person that is you, which can shift in accordance with your self-perception as you don or doff clothing, gain and lose weight, wiggle around this way and that way, polymorph yourself, whatever. Someone else's hand in your pocket, purloining your Pearls for punitive purposes, is within the physical space occupied by your material body's immediate surroundings, but not within the conceptual space which matters for defining your subtle energy body. Therefore, that person is still not "you", and until they at least take hold of the Pearl and more likely remove it fully from your pocket, it's still yours and not theirs, so you can command it and they can't.


There's no particular reason to assume they all have the same command word (that I know of), so this probably isn't necessary. Regardless, it's action-economy cost, and that's the main point.

Well not for what I was saying. I was just thinking about the physical and roleplay annoyance of having to handle the pearl to make it work, or the convenience of not having to.


Yeah, seriously. Of course, if you think of it as a voice recognition system it might make a bit more sense....

Genius! You spend your standard action speaking slowly and clearly with perfect enunciation while hopefully not being interrupted by an Announcement of Opportunity.

[TuggyNE]

Genius! You spend your standard action speaking slowly and clearly with perfect enunciation while hopefully not being interrupted by an Announcement of Opportunity.

And if you fail a Use Magic Technology Device check by more than 5, you have to spend a full-round action correcting it. :smalltongue: