Spellcasting and Grapples

[thecrimsondawn]

So I see the rules on the ability to cast a spell while grappling/being grappled, but I am curious if a spell with the range of touch would be an auto hit under such situations.

Thinking about a grapple caster concept with many touch spells and what not

[Necroticplague]

So I see the rules on the ability to cast a spell while grappling/being grappled, but I am curious if a spell with the range of touch would be an auto hit under such situations.

Thinking about a grapple caster concept with many touch spells and what not

Nope. Still need to succeed on a touch attack. Doesn't say anywhere in the grappling rules that touch spells auto hit, so they don't.

[Troacctid]

If you are holding the charge for a touch attack, it automatically discharges when you touch anyone. So if you're already touching them with your hand for some other reason, simply elect to hold the charge instead of making a touch attack, and it will automatically discharge against them on the next round. Alternately, if you make the touch attack and miss, you'll automatically hold the charge, and it will, again, automatically discharge when you touch them.

This assumes, of course, that the spell doesn't have somatic components that would require you to move your hand off of them.

Similarly, if you are holding the charge for a touch spell before you make a grapple attempt, the initial touch attack to start the grapple can discharge the touch spell.

[Curmudgeon]

If you are holding the charge for a touch attack, it automatically discharges when you touch anyone.
Nope; that's only the case for willing target touch spells. From page 141 of Player's Handbook:
You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll. It doesn't matter if you've got them pinned in a grapple; you're still not touching them for the purposes of delivering a touch attack spell.

[charcoalninja]

Nope; that's only the case for willing target touch spells. From page 141 of Player's Handbook: It doesn't matter if you've got them pinned in a grapple; you're still not touching them for the purposes of delivering a touch attack spell.

Specific beats general. The rules for charging a spell say they discharge if you touch anything with very few exceptions. Thus the normal rules for touch attacks on such spells do not apply.

Relevant text: Combat, Holding the Charge.
"If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. "

Thus since you are touching someone in order to grapple them, the spell discharges and you auto hit. Since you made no attack roll however the spell cannot crit.

[Curmudgeon]

Specific beats general.
What makes you think that one of these is any more general than the other? Both the rules for touch attacks and the rules for grappling are in the PH Combat chapter. They don't have any difference in specificity.

The rules for charging a spell say they discharge if you touch anything with very few exceptions.
... and I just quoted the exception, from 2 paragraphs before the rule you're referring to.

[thecrimsondawn]

Ok so by the argument presented by both of yall, this is what I have gathered

You can cast a spell while grappling, being grappled, or while pinned, so long as it has no somatic motion, and any material you need to cast the spell is in hand with a rather steep casting DC.

and

After you cast the spell, you have the charge in hand. In most cases, that would mean a free attack roll the same round to deliver the touch.

Once you have the charge in hand, anything you touch causes the spell to go off, intentional or otherwise.

So a still spell eschewed materials touch spell action would allow me to cast the spell, and hold the charge. the charge I am holding is not touching someone and thus, would go off if I wanted it to or not.


By that logic it sounds to me like it would work

[charcoalninja]

What makes you think that one of these is any more general than the other? Both the rules for touch attacks and the rules for grappling are in the PH Combat chapter. They don't have any difference in specificity.

... and I just quoted the exception, from 2 paragraphs before the rule you're referring to.

No you didn't quote an exception, you quoted the standard process for dealing with touch attacks.

I quoted the specific sequence and restrictions involved with the action of holding a charge.

General:
This is what happens when you cast a touch spell.

Specific: touch range spells allow you to perform something called 'Holding a Charge'. This is what happens if you do this particular thing with your touch spells.

Seems clear to me that Holding a Charge is a specific subset of using a touch range spell with its own rules and therefore your ruling is incorrect.

A specific excemption to the Holding the Charge rules are the Magus' Spellstrike ability which allows you to hold a weapon and not discharge the spell.

[Troacctid]

Oh, I think Curmudgeon's interpretation is totally valid here too. It makes logical sense that an unwilling target would be able to pull away, even if you were grappling them. (Remember, it takes a full round before the charge becomes properly "held".) And if they're winning the grapple, they'd logically be able to grapple your arm away from them so you can't touch them with your hand.

If your opponent grappled you first, then they probably didn't grab you by the hand, so you can't say that you're automatically touching them. Whereas if you were the one who initiated the grapple, then sure, you can say you did it with your hand--but that also removes the contradiction, because it means you succeeded on an attack roll to touch them, satisfying the condition, and both rules are happy.

Ask your DM.

[thecrimsondawn]

I think it was said earlier, that a touch attack does not have to be done with the hands. Any part of your body should be able to deliver the spell.

If the caster is on the defensive, I would agree at first that it would give the grappler a change to back away, however if you think about how most of the touch spells work, they are little more then just a word when still spelled, and that would not give anyone much time at all to react since its not there turn.

Now if you put Sorc into the picture with full round spells when you use metamagic, then I can see that come into play. I still think it would require a skill check of some sort tho to tell (maybe sense motive if not spellcraft?)

[Troacctid]

Actually, cross-referencing with the Rules Compendium, there is this additional relevant line of text:

If you don’t discharge a touch spell during the turn when you cast it, you can hold the charge of the spell indefi nitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round until you successfully discharge the spell. If you touch anything while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. Intentionally touching anything, even a figment that isn’t really present, discharges the spell as well. You continue holding the charge if something touches you.
So it looks like you do need to actively touch the opponent with an attack. Something that is passively touching you won't discharge the spell.

[ace rooster]

I think it was said earlier, that a touch attack does not have to be done with the hands. Any part of your body should be able to deliver the spell.

If the caster is on the defensive, I would agree at first that it would give the grappler a change to back away, however if you think about how most of the touch spells work, they are little more then just a word when still spelled, and that would not give anyone much time at all to react since its not there turn.

Now if you put Sorc into the picture with full round spells when you use metamagic, then I can see that come into play. I still think it would require a skill check of some sort tho to tell (maybe sense motive if not spellcraft?)

Well if any part of the body can deliver touch spells then all casters have to be flying to avoid their touch spells automatically earthing. As for still spells being little more than a word, they take a standard action, which means a little over 3 seconds. That is quite a few words, and plenty time to react. Depending on how magic behaves in your universe, it could result in the caster's hand starting to glow. At that point not letting them touch you with that hand is reasonable.

The AoO rules on touch spells are relevant here. Characters know if they are leaving a threatened square (could be wrong, but pretty sure), and a caster holding a touch spell threatens squares while an unarmed caster does not. From this I would rule that characters know if a caster is holding a touch spell, even without spellcraft. Concealing a held spell would work similarly to concealing any other weapon.

As for whether any part of your body can deliver touch spells, I would rule that it can be anywhere, but is fixed when you learn or prepare the spell. If you really want to deliver touch spells with your teeth then that is fine, but you can't do it on the fly. Don't know if there is RAW on it, and wouldn't have a problem with a DM doing it differently though. I certainly don't know of any reason it "should" be any particular way.


My interpretation on the initial question would be that touch spells are weapon like spells, and as such should be treated like a weapon. Daggers don't auto hit in a grapple, so neither do touch spells. As a DM I might allow you a free feint attempt while casting to deny dex (as I might if you drew a dagger from glove of storing), but no more than that. Given that touch spells take a standard action to manifest I probably wouldn't even go that far without other factors.

Just a few thoughts, but very open to interpretation.

[Curmudgeon]

Characters know if they are leaving a threatened square (could be wrong, but pretty sure)
I'm afraid you are wrong. You could be leaving a square threatened by an invisible foe, and the first you'll know about it is when their AoO hits. Provoking an AoO is you letting your guard down (less awareness); you certainly don't develop danger sense (more awareness) in the process.

[thecrimsondawn]

If you don’t discharge a touch spell during the turn when you cast it, you can hold the charge of the spell indefi nitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round until you successfully discharge the spell. If you touch anything while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. Intentionally touching anything, even a figment that isn’t really present, discharges the spell as well. You continue holding the charge if something touches you.

This is good information here! I did not notice that last line.
However that makes me really think, what is a touch.
Technically, unless you are flying, you are touching the ground (unless you want to go really into science and say that standing is really matter repelling you from the ground, but then that would make touching things much much harder, if possible at all) So since the ground does not discharge the spell, and the spell is a weapon like thing that you make, it makes me think that you choose the part of your body as the place to charge the spell, and touching that glowing part of the body is akin to touching a bladed weapon and asking to be hurt. The statement "If someone else touches you it does not discharge the spell" mixes badly with "If you touch anything the spell is discharged". I feel that someone touching you does not discharge the spell because the person grappling/touching you knows that that energy is there, thus allowing them to avoid it.

Edit: A question: Did the Pathfinder class Magus not have something about being able to move the charge? Is that class specific?

[Troacctid]

Also potentially of interest is the equivalent passage for psionics, which specifies that it must be with your hand.

In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch power on the round you manifest it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the power) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything with your hand while holding a charge, the power discharges. If you manifest another power, the touch power dissipates.
I'm not sure why the language is different. I would have expected it to be a copy-and-paste job. I haven't compared it to the actual books, so maybe the discrepancy was introduced by the SRD? *shrug*

[thecrimsondawn]

Also potentially of interest is the equivalent passage for psionics, which specifies that it must be with your hand.

I'm not sure why the language is different. I would have expected it to be a copy-and-paste job. I haven't compared it to the actual books, so maybe the discrepancy was introduced by the SRD? *shrug*

Ok lets use age then.

Did any books come out after that psionics handbook talking about the method of touch spells? If they did, and the wording is the same as the older books, then we can only use that for psionics