newb question reguarding touch spells, holding the charge and wild shape.

[shadowseve]

Ok so I'm trying to wrap my head around produce flame and how it interacts with touch spell holding charge from phb 176 and wild shape?

if I'm reading this correct if I cast something like produce flame, hold the charge, then go into wild shape then the spells apply to my natural attacks until I shift back? Am I reading this correctly or what?

how does hold touch spells interact with wild shape?

[weckar]

From "Holding the charge"

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

I think most natural attacks would fall in that category.

[Deophaun]

This is most definitely not a newb question. Produce flame is an odd duck in that it's a spell that primarily exists to give melee touch or ranged touch attacks, and yet it's not a Range: Touch spell. Instead, it's Range: 0 and Effect: Flame in your palm. So how it interacts with touch attack rules is not clear cut.

Do you lose the charge from touching things? Well, technically, you aren't holding a charge. You're holding a flame in your palm. So as long as you aren't touching anything with the flame, you should be fine.

Can you make NA attacks and add the fire damage on top of it? Unclear. You have a flame that you can make melee touch attacks with, but your body itself is not conducting the magical energy. At the same time, though, we don't have the clear language of a spell like flame blade, which says "attacks with the flame blade are..." Instead, we get "you can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack."

It's a real mess, is what. How I interpret it is you've got this one flame that's held in hand; what a "hand" is I'll treat loosely as including things like claws and tentacles, but it is just one flame, so at most you're only going to get the fire damage applied once on an attack routine. Finally, I'll take the choice of the "strike an opponent with a melee touch attack" language over something like "attacks with the flame are..." to mean that it can be incorporated into a natural attack.

That leaves me with a single natural attack a round that does an additional +1d6 fire damage. Not unreasonable for a 1st level spell to do. Otherwise, it's possible for druids to have ten or more natural attacks, which, if produce flame applied to all of them, would make the spell a major outlier in damage potential.

[weckar]

True. Produce Flame is not a touch spell, thus holding the charge does not actually apply. Furthermore, it will still fizzle after it's reduced duration ticks out, which at levels where the damage actually matters will be after at most three strikes or so. Multiple attacks per round will make it fizzle even quicker.

[shadowseve]

This is most definitely not a newb question. Produce flame is an odd duck in that it's a spell that primarily exists to give melee touch or ranged touch attacks, and yet it's not a Range: Touch spell. Instead, it's Range: 0 and Effect: Flame in your palm. So how it interacts with touch attack rules is not clear cut.

Do you lose the charge from touching things? Well, technically, you aren't holding a charge. You're holding a flame in your palm. So as long as you aren't touching anything with the flame, you should be fine.

Can you make NA attacks and add the fire damage on top of it? Unclear. You have a flame that you can make melee touch attacks with, but your body itself is not conducting the magical energy. At the same time, though, we don't have the clear language of a spell like flame blade, which says "attacks with the flame blade are..." Instead, we get "you can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack."

It's a real mess, is what. How I interpret it is you've got this one flame that's held in hand; what a "hand" is I'll treat loosely as including things like claws and tentacles, but it is just one flame, so at most you're only going to get the fire damage applied once on an attack routine. Finally, I'll take the choice of the "strike an opponent with a melee touch attack" language over something like "attacks with the flame are..." to mean that it can be incorporated into a natural attack.

That leaves me with a single natural attack a round that does an additional +1d6 fire damage. Not unreasonable for a 1st level spell to do. Otherwise, it's possible for druids to have ten or more natural attacks, which, if produce flame applied to all of them, would make the spell a major outlier in damage potential.

This makes sense to me. This is my first druid I'm playing, I know clerics and rogues much better, I was reading this bit

Produce Flame: Fairly powerful attack spell. You'll probably be relying on this to attack until you get Wild Shape, and makes a decent buff (due to the way holding touch spells works) after you get Wild Shape.

This was from this link
http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=940.0

and this link

http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1087841


so from my reading from the players hand book it didn't make sense on how it was a great buff so I was hoping for some clarity.

[weckar]

The fact that it is an attack spell that can be used over multiple rounds already sets it apart. For a low-shift druid it is also the first spell that becomes an excellent target for Extend Spell (by far the most useful metamagic feat for Druids in general).

[shadowseve]

The fact that it is an attack spell that can be used over multiple rounds already sets it apart. For a low-shift druid it is also the first spell that becomes an excellent target for Extend Spell (by far the most useful metamagic feat for Druids in general).

I will be a high shifting druid so then I guess it's not that big of a buff at all. yeah I knew about the fact is can be used over multiple rounds, however I was thinking there was something specific to it and wild shape with the way that both guides worded it.

I do have a few other questions regarding.

Assume Supernatural Ability- I can see the synergy with both this and frozen wild shape, however wouldn't these feats be situational at best? Most of the monsters, (that I know of) that have a SU are magical beasts and or other creatures that I can't shape into unless I take Aberration Wild Shape (which I don't plan to take)
or other prc's and such.
and
Frozen Wild Shape-the "Cryohydra Wild Shape" assuming I ever fight or meet a cyro so I can learn to shape into it.

My question is Assume Supernatural worth taking on it's own with out aberration or frost? and is frost worth it on the hopes that I "might" find a cyrohydra?

I know lots of questions.

Looking to plan my feats a head.

[weckar]

ASA mostly comes into play when you extend your range of forms beyond what a normal Wild Shape will offer you. There are PrCs that facilitate this. There is a catch, however, that the wording on ASA is a little ambiguous. I've seen DMs rule it literally, and that you learn to use ONE Ability. Not one per transformation, not one per form, ONE ability. Keep this in mind.

[shadowseve]

ASA mostly comes into play when you extend your range of forms beyond what a normal Wild Shape will offer you. There are PrCs that facilitate this. There is a catch, however, that the wording on ASA is a little ambiguous. I've seen DMs rule it literally, and that you learn to use ONE Ability. Not one per transformation, not one per form, ONE ability. Keep this in mind.



Yup figured that was the case,

Thanks for the advice.

so now I'll need one feat to supplement. I'm playing a strait druid no multi-classing.

so far I've got these feats planned

LV 1-Sacred Vow, Vow of Poverty, (low gold and low magic item campaign)

LV 3- Improved Natural Attack,

LV 6- Natural Spell,

LV 9- extend spell

LV 12- Dragon Wild Shape,

LV 15- Quicken Spell

LV 18-

any other advice would be welcome.

[weckar]

You don't qualify that early for improved natural attack, and one can debate whether you ever will. Furthermore, You may also want to add the metric ton of feats VoP gives you to that list.

[shadowseve]

You don't qualify that early for improved natural attack, and one can debate whether you ever will. Furthermore, You may also want to add the metric ton of feats VoP gives you to that list.

Yeah I know improved natural attack is in the monsters manual, however, dm will allow it. though your right I can't grab that at three so I'll swap out extend and improved natural attack


Exalted feats I haven't planned yet except for Nymph’s Kiss and Touch of Golden Ice, maybe Exalted Wild Shape, haven't really looked at them all that much.

[weckar]

Unless there's an errata I don't know of, only the first feat offered by Vow of Poverty needs to be an Exalted feat. Also, for Improved Natural Attack it can be argued you don't actually HAVE a natural attack to enhance when you get it, but if your DM allows it that's fine. Also, what type of attack will you make it apply to?

[shadowseve]

Unless there's an errata I don't know of, only the first feat offered by Vow of Poverty needs to be an Exalted feat. Also, for Improved Natural Attack it can be argued you don't actually HAVE a natural attack to enhance when you get it, but if your DM allows it that's fine. Also, what type of attack will you make it apply to?

from the book

A character who swears a vow of poverty and takes the appropriate
feats, Sacred Vow and Vow of Poverty. I took sacred vow at level one with vow of poverty.

Since, due to RP reasons I will mostly be playing bears, couldn't convince her of a fleshraker :smallbiggrin: it will apply to claw attacks, however there def could be issues when I do take other forms. Yet another very good point.

what would you suggest in it's place?

[weckar]

Slam attacks are generally the most common, I find. Depends on your style though.

Anyway, I looked up the VoP, because I had to know now. Here is what I found, with emphasis:

Bonus Exalted Feats: At 1st level, an ascetic gets a bonus exalted feat, and another bonus feat at 2nd level and every 2 levels thereafter. Unlike the other benefits of a vow of poverty, a character does not gain these bonus feats retroactively when he takes the Vow of Poverty feat; he only gains those bonus feats that apply for the levels he gains after swearing his vow. Thus, the bonus feat gained at 1st level is available only to humans who take both Sacred Vow and Vow of Poverty at 1st level.
Notice how it doesn't say "Bonus Exalted Feat" for levels beyond 1st, it says "Bonus Feat". By the text, you would be allowed to take any feat (you qualify for), not just Exalted Feats. Have fun with that one. Maybe more Improved Natural Attacks?

[shadowseve]

Slam attacks are generally the most common, I find. Depends on your style though.

Anyway, I looked up the VoP, because I had to know now. Here is what I found, with emphasis:

Notice how it doesn't say "Bonus Exalted Feat" for levels beyond 1st, it says "Bonus Feat". By the text, you would be allowed to take any feat (you qualify for), not just Exalted Feats. Have fun with that one. Maybe more Improved Natural Attacks?


I think that would be a tricky one that would be dm call. I think it implies exalted feats but would be interesting to see what the dm would rule. RAW vs RAI.

If the dm would allow the " bonus" feats to anything that will be a bit op. def improved nat attack for bite as well as claw.

[weckar]

You can throw it both ways, honestly, but ruling it this way (by the text, not by the table) makes VoP actually a defendable choice in most games. If not, I'd at least take the Exalted Feat Intuitive Attack (especially useful once you get to wildshape into tiny animals). Sanctify Natural Attack might also be interesting.

[shadowseve]

You can throw it both ways, honestly, but ruling it this way (by the text, not by the table) makes VoP actually a defendable choice in most games. If not, I'd at least take the Exalted Feat Intuitive Attack (especially useful once you get to wildshape into tiny animals). Sanctify Natural Attack might also be interesting.


if it wasn't a low magic low money game I prob wouldn't take VOP, however as a druid it makes sense. If I was going to rule that as a dm I would have to go with the chart.

thing about intuitive attack as a dire bear my str (31) will be higher than my wis. So will def have to be looking into things.

[weckar]

Text trumps Table, Specific trumps General. It works either way, depending on the type of game. Still, you may want to get some feats or general tricks for when wildshaping doesn't work. It happens, and you'll hate it.

You do get dire bear at lv 8, true. Won't work for every situation though (squeezing rules hurt).