Complex Q&A: Touch Attack Spells

[Fax Celestis]

Q 237 Monks//Wizard and touch attacks

Let's say you build a monk // wizard gestalt character.

a) Are touch attacks handled in any other way? For example Chill Touch: Can I use flurry of blows to do more touch attacks in a round with chill touch? And am I adding my normal unarmed damage to this? Probably not, but I am a bit confused.

b) If I cast chill touch, do I get my first touch attack as part of the casting action? As I always supposed spells with touch attacks to work, like Contagion?

How does this work?

[Dhavaer]

a) If you use unarmed strikes to deliver the spell, you could use flurry of blows, but they wouldn't be touch attacks and you would get your unarmed damage.

b) Yes.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

That's a reasonable conclusion. Since being "part of the casting" runs afoul of the spellcasting concentration rules, we should conclude that "not an action" is the best choice.

There is no conflict with the concentration rules. (See below)
But I am glad that you agree with me, just note that Not an action is a part of another action.


Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don’t take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else.
(My emphasis)


There are no attacks to characterize for this form of touch spell, which is precisely the issue at hand. But that's probably where the FAQ author got the basis for twisting things up into some hybrid "spell plus separate attack standard action" logic that I guess you fell victim to.


Twisting things into some kind of "spell plus separate attack standard action"?
Neither I or the Sage have been talking about granting an extra attack standard action. You are the one that came closest to that and the main reason why I had to correct your initial post on this subject.


Why is it simpler to make up a new type of hybrid standard action that will have weird consequences regarding spellcasting concentration -- like provoking an AoO for moving into a threatened square "as part of casting" the spell when you charged your hands where nobody threatened you?


First of all you do not provoke an AoO for moving into a threatened square....

But anyways, movement is not part of the casting a spell, It is an action you can take in the middle of the action used to cast and deliver the spell. Jut like some feats and abilities allow or the 5 foot step in the middle of a full attack etc.


It's more than hair-splitting; we need to make the distinction because that decision has consequences. If the attack is part of the spellcasting action and we follow the spell concentration rules as written then you can retroactively disrupt the casting after an enemy has charged their hands and even moved. If this attack is just an unspecified bonus, AKA "not an action", then the spell cannot be retroactively aborted.


There is no problem with the concentration rules as there is a clear distinction between the casting and the touch. (with is probably why you decided to go into unspecified bonus attack territory in the first place.)


Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
(My emphasis)


... Snap Kick ...

Fax already dealt with your confusion about Snap Kick in the Q&A thread so I will not delve further into that here.

[Damionte]

Silvanos.... who ... are you replying too? what conversation are the rest of us not seeing in this thread?

Let's say you build a monk // wizard gestalt character.


a) Are touch attacks handled in any other way? For example Chill Touch: Can I use flurry of blows to do more touch attacks in a round with chill touch? And am I adding my normal unarmed damage to this? Probably not, but I am a bit confused.

b) If I cast chill touch, do I get my first touch attack as part of the casting action? As I always supposed spells with touch attacks to work, like Contagion?

A) No. many touch attack spells are discharged once you hit someone with them. So if you had a charge spell ready and has a full attack action to use flurry of blows, only your first sucesful attack would have chill touch on it. That attack though would not resolve as a touch attack. You'd have to roll to hit normally. The chill touch will go off when you hit, but you'll also do your unarmed damage on top of that.

Some GM's may or may not let you do touch attacks in your flurry of blows. There is no definitive RAW ruling on rather you can or not. Some just may see it differently. Personnally I allow it. That touch attack though would not do your unarmed damage, just allow you to deliver the touch effect.

If though you had an effect that stayed on all the time, like you had an item of some kind that gave your firsts the "Flaming" property like a magic weapon, then yes each attack of your flurry of blows would also do fire damage.

b) Yes, you may cast a spell and touch soemone as a single standard action. You though woul dnot get to try and freely touch someone at a later time though if you do not do the touch attack when you cast the spell. For example, say you cast the spell, and decided for whatever reason to hold the charge on your fists for another round or two before delivering the attack. You don't get a free touch attempt later. You'll have to spend another attack later on to deliver the touch attack.

[Lucky]

He's replying to comments made in the Simple Q&A thread.


A) No. chill touch like most touch attack spells are discharged once you hit someone with them.

Chill Touch
Necromancy
Level: Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Targets: Creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial or Will negates; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures. Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage. The touched creature also takes 1 point of Strength damage unless it makes a successful Fortitude saving throw. You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level.

An undead creature you touch takes no damage of either sort, but it must make a successful Will saving throw or flee as if panicked for 1d4 rounds +1 round per caster level.

Just thought I'd point out.

[Damionte]

Ahhh, then yes and no. At first level no you can only use it once. If you have more then you can keep going till you run out of charges.

You get the point though. Or should. That seemed to explain itself right in the spell discription.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Silvanos.... who ... are you replying too? what conversation are the rest of us not seeing in this thread?


Sometimes I just make up counter arguments so I have someone to argue with. :smalltongue:

No, as has already been said this is part of an ongoing discussion from the Q&A thread.

When you use the quote feature a green arrow appears right after the name of the one you are quoting. Pressing this arrow will take you to the relevant thread.

You can of course also provide the green arrow "manually" like this:

[QUOTE=Damionte;2848031]

[Raum]

Why is it simpler to make up a new type of hybrid standard action that will have weird consequences regarding spellcasting concentration -- like provoking an AoO for moving into a threatened square "as part of casting" the spell when you charged your hands where nobody threatened you?
First of all you do not provoke an AoO for moving into a threatened square....

But anyways, movement is not part of the casting a spell, It is an action you can take in the middle of the action used to cast and deliver the spell. Jut like some feats and abilities allow or the 5 foot step in the middle of a full attack etc.I suspect Curmudgeon meant you should draw an AoO for casting a spell once you moved into attack range - if the touch attack "is part of casting the spell."

Over all I think calling it a non-action as you both seem to have suggested is best.

[Golthur]

For (a), I'd probably rule that you would make a regular attack, if it hit normally, you'd do unarmed damage + spell damage. If it missed normally, but hit for a touch attack, you'd do spell damage. This is wholly unofficial, though - I believe the official ruling is that you roll it as a normal attack.

As for (b), I'd probably allow it, but I'm not sure that an actual attack vs. "just a touch" wouldn't require some sort of Concentration check, since you're really trying to do two actions at the same time, somewhat. I certainly would only allow a single attack this way.