3.5 Wands and touch spells vs bad consequences for touching rules question

[gadren]

This came up last session, and I'm surprised I've never thought of this issue before in the 22 years since 3e came out.
The players have been avoiding using touch spells in the current "chapter" because there is a disease going around that spreads via touch. I've been rolling fortitude saves whenever they cast a touch spell on an afflicted character (which I believe is RAW?), and so far two PCs are afflicted.

One of the characters asked if casting a touch spell from a wand would still risk transmitting the disease.

I never really thought about this before... I admit I always imagined touch spells delivered from a wand to be delivered by touching the wand to the target, so logically it'd make sense that this would circumvent touch diseases or other effects that specifically occur when you touch a monster (such as with certain slimes). But by RAW, wouldn't this still count as "touching"?

What do you guys think?

[Saintheart]

I don't think the wand is the delivery system for the spell at all, ridiculous as that sounds (but hey, RAW stands for Ridiculous Awkward Workings, amirite?). The wand just contains the power of the spell and requires you to cast it, so even if you're casting a touch spell from a wand, you still have to touch the target, not the wand. This seems consistent with the fact there's (relatively) limited options for channelling touch spells through stuff like weapons, e.g. Duskblade, Raumathari Battlemage and so on.

[gadren]

I don't think the wand is the delivery system for the spell at all, ridiculous as that sounds (but hey, RAW stands for Ridiculous Awkward Workings, amirite?). The wand just contains the power of the spell and requires you to cast it, so even if you're casting a touch spell from a wand, you still have to touch the target, not the wand. This seems consistent with the fact there's (relatively) limited options for channelling touch spells through stuff like weapons, e.g. Duskblade, Raumathari Battlemage and so on.
So does that mean, by RAW, if you’re wielding a sword in one hand and a wand of shocking grasp in the other, that’d you have to drop/stow your weapon in order to actually use the wand?

[Gruftzwerg]

So does that mean, by RAW, if you’re wielding a sword in one hand and a wand of shocking grasp in the other, that’d you have to drop/stow your weapon in order to actually use the wand?

sadly yes.

Most people use Gloves/Kimono of Storing or similar items to bypass this limitation.

A wand chamber (IIRC only +100g) on your weapon can store a wand and also helps to deal with these kind of problems.


edit: I would suggest these options to your players. Either outside of the game, or via an Intelligence check and let the PC with the highest score "come up with this idea/conclusion".

[Fizban]

So does that mean, by RAW, if you’re wielding a sword in one hand and a wand of shocking grasp in the other, that’d you have to drop/stow your weapon in order to actually use the wand?

Nope. While the fluff of touch spells often suggest they are localized only to your hand, I'm not aware of any rules text that actually says so. Creatures without arms or even distinct appendages which can cast spells are not barred from delivering them. Much like an unarmed strike, nothing actually says touch spells must be delivered with the hand, and in fact "touching" anyone, or even anything that you weren't touching when you cast the spell causes it to discharge*.

So if you've got your hands full, you can just backhand them, if you're not willing to go full RAW absurd and headbutt or bootie bump.

*One must still presume that in order to be able to walk to deliver a spell, the ground does not count- though likely you were in contact with it when you cast, so that could be why it's exempt.

[KillianHawkeye]

Friendly reminder that the spectral hand spell exists.

[Paragon]

Also, I'm pretty sure D&D touch rules don't have intrinsic reciprocity.
I can touch you without you touching me (imagine 2 mages holding the charges of touch spells, one attacking the other doesn't release the defender's) so maybe it's the same with disease and you shouldn't overthink it :)

[Telonius]

From the Wands (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wands.htm) section:


Activation
Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast, however, has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used while grappling or while swallowed whole.

So, point it in the general direction of the target, with no limitation on whether it's self, touch, or ranged. The target of the Cure line (other than Mass Cures) is "creature touched." If you're not touching a creature, there's no valid target. So you've got to be touching the creature to deliver the spell.