Range: Touch is not a fixed range?

[Akisa]

I have been looking through persistent spell and noticed it doesn't say anything about excluding touch spells. Yet people want to exclude touch spell which is a fixed range of touch or your reach. The best guess I can think of is because large creatures can touch 5 or 10' away but using that logic a spell with fixed range of 30 can not effect 25 or 20 feet away.

[Thespianus]

The FAQ says no to Touch Spell as a fixed range, the FRCS errata says no.

The intention was to create the ability to make a spell permanent that either affects the caster (personal) or is centered on the caster (fixed range).

[Random832]

The fact that the range is 10' for large creatures but 5' for medium creatures is the issue.

[sadi]

nor can spells whose effects are discharged.

A touch spell is discharged when you touch the target.

[Starbuck_II]

I have been looking through persistent spell and noticed it doesn't say anything about excluding touch spells. Yet people want to exclude touch spell which is a fixed range of touch or your reach. The best guess I can think of is because large creatures can touch 5 or 10' away but using that logic a spell with fixed range of 30 can not effect 25 or 20 feet away.

Reach Metamagic lets you effect them since that gibves it a fixed range.

But Touch by itself isn't.

[Fixer]

Reach Metamagic lets you effect them since that gibves it a fixed range.

But Touch by itself isn't.

And some GMs (i.e. most of the sane ones) say this is a no-no too.

[Starbuck_II]

Why 30 feet seems fixed to me.
You can't increase it by levels like spells that are 25 + 5/2 lvs (Ray of Frost).

[Salvonus]

'cause of the cheesiness.

[Doc Roc]

Touch range is not fixed range, unless you hate all that is good and beautiful. Twice Betrayer of Shaar wants to talk to you.


Run! RUN!

[infinitypanda]

So does this mean that you could take Hierophant 1 to be able to turn touch spells into 30 ft. spells to persist them? And if so, is it worth losing the caster level?

[woodenbandman]

^Yes, provided that it is not turned into a ranged touch, which would make it a ray. Yes, it's worth it. again, if it's just range 30 feet and not ranged touch out to 30 feet.

There is some contention that rays can't be persisted. I say phooey to that. I think they should be persistable, but there is a definite RAW argument against that. RAI is unclear, because WotC doesn't think about stuff like that.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Why 30 feet seems fixed to me.
You can't increase it by levels like spells that are 25 + 5/2 lvs (Ray of Frost).

Because the 'range' descriptor of the spell doesn't have a fixed range listed.

You see, all Metamgic feats are applied to the *BASE* spell, not the augmented spell. So because the base spell does not qualify, then it will not qualify even if later augmentations or alterations would make it qualify.

I don't subscribe to this theory, but it is a prevalent one.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Because the 'range' descriptor of the spell doesn't have a fixed range listed.

You see, all Metamgic feats are applied to the *BASE* spell, not the augmented spell. So because the base spell does not qualify, then it will not qualify even if later augmentations or alterations would make it qualify.

I don't subscribe to this theory, but it is a prevalent one.

Locate City would like to have a word with you.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Locate City would like to have a word with you.

Lots of people want to have a few words with Locate City, what's your point?

[sofawall]

If metamagic applies only to the base spell, what happens when you get a twinned, maximized, empowered, split, repeating, quickened scorching ray?

[PinkysBrain]

I don't subscribe to this theory, but it is a prevalent one.

It's also contradictory to the FAQ, head ache inducing and pulled out of thin air. Turning the specific way empower spell works into a general rule without justification is silly (reminds me a bit of all the people who call scorching ray a volley attack just so they can shoehorn it into the existing rules).

Here is the FAQ entry :

If my wizard applies Energy Admixture (CAr, page 78)
and Maximize Spell to the same spell, does he get a spell
that deals double its maximized damage (maximum normal
damage in two different energy types)? If he also applied
the Twin Spell feat (CAr, page 84) to the same spell would it
duplicate the entire effect?

Yes and yes. Assuming your character can cast 13th-level
spells—the slot required by a 2nd-level spell affected by these
metamagic feats—a scorching ray so affected would create two
sets of three rays each, with each ray dealing 24 points of fire
damage (4d6, maximized) and 24 points of a second energy
type (as appropriate for your Energy Substitution feat), for a
grand total of 288 points of damage . . . assuming all six rays
hit their target.

[Glimbur]

So does this mean that you could take Hierophant 1 to be able to turn touch spells into 30 ft. spells to persist them? And if so, is it worth losing the caster level?

You don't lose a caster level, but you do lose a level of casting progression. For example, a Cleric 15/Heirophant 1 casts with spells/day of a Cleric 15 but at a Caster Level of 16. This makes the class much better for Epic, by the way.

[Doc Roc]

If you would like to see what happens when you allow this, I can link you to an exhibition match involving Jemini_Zero's Alita. One of the reasons I okayed it was for discussions like this.

[sadi]

Persistant spell specifically states Spells of instantaneous duration cannot be affected by this feat, nor can spells whose effects are discharged. (per original link to srd submitted)


http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsincombat.htm
Under holding the charge section (when you don't immediately touch someone with a touch spell)
If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell... translates into a touch attack is a charged spell, and is discharged when you touch someone and therefore not valid for persistant spell.