Vampiric Touch and Grappling

[Thunderous Mojo]

The touch can siphon. Not must, not automatically, but can.

This is the simple heart of the matter. As written a Vampiric Touch spell is difficult to perform, needing a spell melee attack.

A rules observation:
A PC that has claws that act as weapons, does not deal automatic claw damage when this PC Grapples, something.

The same is true for Vampiric Touch.

[kazaryu]

I’m not, though. Red blood cells can deliver oxygen throughout my body tissue. I can bold the word “can” there as well, it doesn’t change anything though.

you could bold the words there. but bolding words in an untrue statement, wouldn't help your case, so why would you? red blood cells can transfer oxygen between themselves and nearby tissue cells under the right conditions. but they don't move on their own, and they don't just...constantly exude oxygen. they hold onto it until the appropriate time, until the right conditions are met. kinda like VT. and in VT's case the right conditions are 'the caster uses an action to make a successful spell attack against a target'.

If anything, the designers have stated “can” indicates a choice by the caster (such as with GFB), so it would then imply it’s the caster’s choice if it works or not.

it is the caster's choice, but the rules define how the caster makes that choice...they have to do it via a spell attack that uses their action. if the creators intended for it to happen automatically without using their action, or needing an attack roll, then they would have used language similar to healing spirit or twilight sanctuary. they didn't.

you can't just pull a sentence out of its context and pretend that that is the only thing that matters, English doesn't work like that. sentences aren't always self enclosed ideas. one sentence introduces a concept, the following sentences refine or otherwise extrapolate on that concept. in the case of VT we get the introduction 'the caster has the potential to touch someone and suck some life out of them'. but that sentence doesn't tell us how to do it. Thats the part you're missing. the 'how'. you jump to the conclusion that any physical contact, like grappling, must auto-hit in spite of the follow up sentence that is obviously written to answer that exact question 'make a spell attack roll'.

to put it another way, point to the rules that indicate that the only purpose of the 'spell attack' is to touch the person, and there's nothing else to it. because if thats the case, why is it a spell attack? there's nothing magical about you touching a person, that should, at most, be an unarmed strike. Yet it isn't. its a spell attack. its not just about touching the person.

[RazorChain]

You’re missing the first sentence of VT:

“The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

If your SWH is touching someone, RAW, you can siphon life force from whom you’re touching.

It's also a concentration spell that requires attack. If you need the fluff then you are wrestling around and the other guy is trying to prevent you from sucking out his lifeforce by grabbing your wrist.

Players often think that combat is static, the other guy is just standing there waiting to be grappled.

Maybe you grappled his armor...his shirt or whatever. Or maybe he gets automatic crits with his shiv because he was in prison so your grapple actually gives him advantage in the fight.


Or alternatively the rogue that sneaks up to the guard

PC Rogue "Yeah I stealthily put my knife against his throat from behind and cut it"
DM "Ok roll attack with advantage"
PC Rogue whines "Do I have to roll attack....my blade is literally touching his neck!!!"

[RSP]

If you need the fluff then you are wrestling around and the other guy is trying to prevent you from sucking out his lifeforce by grabbing your wrist.

Except you deciding something is “fluff” is not how the rules work. Nothing in the rules state there’s anything called “fluff”.

The spell effect is, indeed, the spell effect, regardless what you want to houserule or not.

You can try with a handshake, no-one is saying you can't. But you need to make that melee spell attack first if you want to deal any damage. If you miss, then you don't get to deal damage.

Aa for unarmed strikes, no, that would not work. Those aren't Melee Spell Attacks, you get no extra damage from the spell. Plain and simple.

Which is saying your touch does not do what the spell effect says it does. If you need to stop touching some you’re already touching, in order to see if you touch them, then the first sentence isn’t doing what it says it does.

That is, indeed, contrary to common sense.

[Amnestic]

Logically it follows if that touch is made using a different means, that it’ll have that same effect

Simply writing 'Logically' doesn't mean anything when you're using different logic to other people.

A touch might "siphon life and heal your wounds", but without the spell attack this does not reflect as any damage dealt or health restored. It might hurt but that's not reflected in the numbers, until you use your action to specifically channel the magic into a draining touch.

Logically (see, others can do it too, it doesn't mean anything) if the devs wanted every skin contact to deal damage while VT was active, they would have written out a clause for it in the spell text. They didn't. Therefore logically we can deduce that that it doesn't.

[stoutstien]

Nothing stopping someone from using VT on a target that is grappled they just can't be achieved same action.

[RSP]

Simply writing 'Logically' doesn't mean anything when you're using different logic to other people.

A touch might "siphon life and heal your wounds", but without the spell attack this does not reflect as any damage dealt or health restored. It might hurt but that's not reflected in the numbers, until you use your action to specifically channel the magic into a draining touch.

Logically (see, others can do it too, it doesn't mean anything) if the devs wanted every skin contact to deal damage while VT was active, they would have written out a clause for it in the spell text. They didn't. Therefore logically we can deduce that that it doesn't.

Odd, because this has been mentioned before, yet after it’s acknowledged, it then gets abandoned when I point out the RAW doesn’t support “well it “heals” but just doesn’t actually do anything.” RAW states: “When a creature receives healing of any kind, hit points regained are added to its current hit points.” So if the first sentence does what it says it does, it RAW, adds HPs to the caster.

[Amnestic]

Odd, because this has been mentioned before, yet after it’s acknowledged, it then gets abandoned when I point out the RAW doesn’t support “well it “heals” but just doesn’t actually do anything.” RAW states: “When a creature receives healing of any kind, hit points regained are added to its current hit points.” So if the first sentence does what it says it does, it RAW, adds HPs to the caster.

It adds 0 hit points to the caster. Just like it deals 0 damage to the person you touched, because that's what the spell says.

Again: If they wanted a touch to do numerical healing or damage, they would have specified. They didn't. The only time you deal damage is when you make a spell attack, which is when the damage and healing numbers are specified by the spell.

We can, in fact, draw a direct comparison to how the Ravenloft dark gift Touch of Death works, since it has a similar intro text and mechanics.

Your touch is pain, harming whoever you come in contact with. The deathly power within you is beyond your control, afflicting any who touch your bare skin. By the same token, you can deliver death to your enemies with your touch.

Roll on or choose an option from the Deadly Touch table to determine how this Dark Gift presents itself. Additionally, you gain the traits that follow.

Deadly Touch
d6 Manifestation
1 Your body is alchemically or biologically altered, infusing you with deadly chemicals.
2 The magic of a slighted druid or fey makes small plants wither and insects die in your presence.
3 You're the harbinger of a grim prophecy. Any creature your touch damages is marked with a temporary scar of a group, fiend, deity, or other force that takes an interest in you.
4 You survived a near-death experience—but shouldn't have. Ever since, death and ill omens follow you.
5 You are out of sync with time or reality. Anything you touch is warped by the distortion.
6 Every time you touch a creature, you hear the laughter of someone you once harmed.

• Death Touch. You can focus your deadly touch against your foes. As an action, make one unarmed strike. On a hit, the target takes an additional 1d10 necrotic damage. This damage increases by 1d10 when you reach 5th level (2d10), 11th level (3d10), and 17th level (4d10).
  
• Inescapable Death. When you hit a target with an attack roll and deal necrotic damage, you ignore the target's resistance to that damage.
  
• Withering Contact. When you start your turn grappling a creature or grappled by it, the creature takes 1d10 necrotic damage.

And yet, still, even with this updated version the touch=pain deals no damage except on a grapple or on a successful unarmed strike (replacing the spell attack, in this case).

You are, frankly, wrong. Houserule it if you like, but pretending the rules do what they don't is just silly.

[Segev]

Grappling doesn't mean you automatically get to hit/touch your target the way you want to. there is no bonus to hit nor penalty to the defense of a grappled creature.

Vampiric Touch has a somatic component, so you can't even insist you never shift your grip with the hand that is to be "wreathed with shadow."

If you cast the spell while grappling, you still have to make the attack roll. If you grapple after casting, you aren't focusing on bringing your shadowy hand into contact with your target so much as getting an immobilizing grasp on him with any part of your body you can.

Even if you have him Restrained and land a hit with your shadowy hand, they are assumed to be struggling and will pull away from it if you can't or don't successfully make another spell attack next round.

Sure, if you can trick someone into shaking that hand or otherwise allowing you to touch them, you can do it without an attack roll. But that doesn't translate to automatically getting to touch a struggling foe. The increased ease of it by virtue of being just a touch is wrapped up in the fact it is a spell attack roll, so your best mental stat is probably the one you're using to hit instead of having to physically land the blow in a physically meaningful way.

[kazaryu]

Sure, if you can trick someone into shaking that hand or otherwise allowing you to touch them, you can do it without an attack roll. But that doesn't translate to automatically getting to touch a struggling foe. The increased ease of it by virtue of being just a touch is wrapped up in the fact it is a spell attack roll, so your best mental stat is probably the one you're using to hit instead of having to physically land the blow in a physically meaningful way.

even in the case of a handshake, nothing says that shaking a persons hand is enough to trigger the damage. indeed, nothing says that just touching is enough to trigger the damage. its a spell attack roll, operative word being 'spell'. the spell still needs to overcome the targets defenses, whatever they may be. so even in the case of a handshake, its still not guaranteed by RaW. you still need to the attack roll.

[Mellack]

even in the case of a handshake, nothing says that shaking a persons hand is enough to trigger the damage. indeed, nothing says that just touching is enough to trigger the damage. its a spell attack roll, operative word being 'spell'. the spell still needs to overcome the targets defenses, whatever they may be. so even in the case of a handshake, its still not guaranteed by RaW. you still need to the attack roll.

I am quoting you to add my thoughts as you began discussing what I wanted to mention. The spell is triggered by a melee spell attack. That is either an INT check or a CHA check depending on if it is a wizard or warlock. It is not triggered by any physical skill. It is not a dex check, or a reflex save, or an athletics check. That strongly suggests that there is more to triggering the spell than just a physical touch. Something like overcoming the target's life force or having to mentally direct the spell's energy. The touch is merely a small part of using the spell, and from the required roll, not the hardest part.

[stoutstien]

I am quoting you to add my thoughts as you began discussing what I wanted to mention. The spell is triggered by a melee spell attack. That is either an INT check or a CHA check depending on if it is a wizard or warlock. It is not triggered by any physical skill. It is not a dex check, or a reflex save, or an athletics check. That strongly suggests that there is more to triggering the spell than just a physical touch. Something like overcoming the target's life force or having to mentally direct the spell's energy. The touch is merely a small part of using the spell, and from the required roll, not the hardest part.

It's a fool's errand trying to rationalize the immersive properties of a individual mechanical feature. Majority of them are put in the game solely to help tables come to an action resolution faster and with more consistency.

It doesn't really matter who uses vampire touch because it targets armor class rather than any other type of save or check. We could probably reverse engineer a formula where we can put it in relationship with something else but for the most part it's its own subsystem.

[Segev]

even in the case of a handshake, nothing says that shaking a persons hand is enough to trigger the damage. indeed, nothing says that just touching is enough to trigger the damage. its a spell attack roll, operative word being 'spell'. the spell still needs to overcome the targets defenses, whatever they may be. so even in the case of a handshake, its still not guaranteed by RaW. you still need to the attack roll.

If a DM ruled that way, that's fine. However, people who willingly let you touch them don't typically require attack rolls to successfully deliver touch spells. Attack rolls are for when the other party is for some reason actually difficult to meaningfully "hit." So if a DM rules that you can use trickery to get somebody to submit to the touch willingly, I think the RAW (particularly of this spell) agree with that DM. If the DM rules otherwise, I think he has room in the RAW to do so. "Rulings, not rules," and all that.

[RSP]

It adds 0 hit points to the caster. Just like it deals 0 damage to the person you touched, because that's what the spell says.

Also not how healing works, unless the character receiving the healing is already at full health. Again, from the RAW:

“When a creature receives healing of any kind, hit points regained are added to its current hit points. A creature’s hit points can’t exceed its hit point maximum, so any hit points regained in excess of this number are lost.”

So saying “it’s healing, just not for HPs” isn’t how healing works RAW.

even in the case of a handshake, nothing says that shaking a persons hand is enough to trigger the damage. indeed, nothing says that just touching is enough to trigger the damage. its a spell attack roll, operative word being 'spell'. the spell still needs to overcome the targets defenses, whatever they may be. so even in the case of a handshake, its still not guaranteed by RaW. you still need to the attack roll.

I guess if you consider the RAW “nothing” then yes: “nothing” says that shaking the SWH does damage. “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

[JNAProductions]

Also not how healing works, unless the character receiving the healing is already at full health. Again, from the RAW:

“When a creature receives healing of any kind, hit points regained are added to its current hit points. A creature’s hit points can’t exceed its hit point maximum, so any hit points regained in excess of this number are lost.”

So saying “it’s healing, just not for HPs” isn’t how healing works RAW.

You can add 0 to a number. You heal for 0 HP.
If you were at 14/35 HP, you now have 14+0 HP.

Have you tweeted Sage Advice yet?

[Amnestic]

Also not how healing works, unless the character receiving the healing is already at full health. Again, from the RAW:

“When a creature receives healing of any kind, hit points regained are added to its current hit points. A creature’s hit points can’t exceed its hit point maximum, so any hit points regained in excess of this number are lost.”

So saying “it’s healing, just not for HPs” isn’t how healing works RAW.

You received "healing", if we must entertain the reading you're purporting.
The amount of hit points regained is 0 - since no number is specified by the spell outside of doing a successful spell attack.
This number of hit points (0) were added to your current hit points, resulting in no change to your overall total.

What is the alternative reading? That you heal all your wounds from a simple touch and then less from a successful spell attack? Good luck getting that one to fly by your DM.

[RSP]

Sure, if you can trick someone into shaking that hand or otherwise allowing you to touch them, you can do it without an attack roll. But that doesn't translate to automatically getting to touch a struggling foe. The increased ease of it by virtue of being just a touch is wrapped up in the fact it is a spell attack roll, so your best mental stat is probably the one you're using to hit instead of having to physically land the blow in a physically meaningful way.

So if you do get the handshake, wouldn’t it then be a Contest if one person was trying to hold the handshake, while the other trying to break the hold? Would that not then be a situation where you could maintain the handshake and have the same touching situation as the initial shake, over multiple rounds?

And yes, I’d imagine the Spell Attack is going to be the easier way to effectuate the effect, and that any sort of skill check (Grapple or otherwise) will be less likely to land. And, overall, VT isn’t worth a 3rd level slot, even with the touch ability.

[Segev]

So if you do get the handshake, wouldn’t it then be a Contest if one person was trying to hold the handshake, while the other trying to break the hold? Would that not then be a situation where you could maintain the handshake and have the same touching situation as the initial shake, over multiple rounds?

And yes, I’d imagine the Spell Attack is going to be the easier way to effectuate the effect, and that any sort of skill check (Grapple or otherwise) will be less likely to land. And, overall, VT isn’t worth a 3rd level slot, even with the touch ability.

Indeed. If the person being harmed by it is actually trying to avoid your touch (or your touch continuing), resolving it each round as another spell attack is the easiest way to do it. Especially since, if you didn't grapple him, he can just walk away from the handshake.

[kazaryu]

I guess if you consider the RAW “nothing” then yes: “nothing” says that shaking the SWH does damage. “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

again... 'can' not 'is guaranteed to'. so a handshake *could* cause damage/healing. but how? well, after a successful melee spell attack. the fact that it says 'can' just means its possible, it doesn't mean that all that is required is touching. and in fact, it leaves open the possibility that more is needed than simply touching.

for example: a cleric could threaten 'i can kill you with a touch' if they have inflict wounds prepared...that doesn't mean that literally touching them would kill you. they still have to do things besides touch you, like cast the spell, succeed on a melee spell attack...etc.


so...no, nothing states that just touching a person is enough to trigger the damage. the only thing implied by the line you keep quoting is that a touch is required to deal the damage...not that it is the only thing required.

[sithlordnergal]

Which is saying your touch does not do what the spell effect says it does. If you need to stop touching some you’re already touching, in order to see if you touch them, then the first sentence isn’t doing what it says it does.

That is, indeed, contrary to common sense.

That's because touching a person is meaningless when it comes to the mechanics of the spell. On its own, your touch does absolutely nothing at all. Your touch only becomes dangerous if, after you cast the spell, you make a melee spell attack. Again, you could change "The touch of your shadow-wreathed hand" to whatever you like, and the spell will not change. It could say "The scratch of your radiant-glowing hand", "The prod of your frost-coated hand", or "The kick of your flaming foot" and it would remain Vampiric Touch because you're still making a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach to deal 3d6 Necrotic damage while you heal half of what you dealt.

You also don't need to stop touching them. You aren't breaking your grapple to make this melee spell attack, you just need to make a successful melee spell attack. If you're concerned about verisimilitude, then picture it as trying to get through some sort of magical defense. When you're grappling them, you're not focusing on the spell enough to make it deadly. When you make the melee spell attack, you're focusing on the magic enough to try and drain their life force away.


Its not really contrary to common sense if you think of it that way. But then again, this is DnD, where common sense doesn't matter and the rules allow you to:

- Cast a spell that summons four different meteors that hit the ground at the same time in a mile radius from you
- Cast a spell to counter the spell that was going to counter you while you're casting the first one
- Cast a spell that summons a ghostly hand that strangles a person
- Run 30 feet
- Properly close a door behind you
- Explain in detail the current state and positioning of targets in the room you just left to 3 or 4 other people and make a strategy on what to do
- Order the creature you summoned via Summon Draconic Spirit to target one specific foe in the back of the room

All in 6 seconds. You have in that list your Action, Bonus Action, Reaction, Movement, Free Action, and the talking takes 0 Actions or Free Actions to use via RAW. Why bother bringing up common sense at all in this game?

[RSP]

That's because touching a person is meaningless when it comes to the mechanics of the spell. On its own, your touch does absolutely nothing at all.

Disagree, as does what the RAW states in this case.

There’s two things going on here: a story and mechanics to support that story. The first sentence tells us what’s going on in the story, the spell attack tells us how we can mechanically use that. So it’s important to note what the mechanic is representing.

VT’s Melee Spell Attack isn’t the same thing as the Melee Spell Attack of Steel Wind Strike, which isn’t the same as Spiritual Weapon’s Melee Spell Attack.

If you have Spiritual Weapon up, nothing happens if you touch someone with your hand, because the spell doesn’t have any effect that alters your touch. VT, however, does. SW will have a spectral weapon created though, which may be important to the story in ways not covered by the mechanics provided by the spell effect.

VT tells us what happens with your hand. Just because the spell provides a way to use your Spellcasting mod to make an attack, doesn’t mean it throws out the rest of the effect of the spell, which includes what happens on the touch of the SWH.

[JackPhoenix]

VT tells us what happens with your hand. Just because the spell provides a way to use your Spellcasting mod to make an attack, doesn’t mean it throws out the rest of the effect of the spell, which includes what happens on the touch of the SWH.

Indeed, and what it tells us that is that what happens depends on whether you've made the spell attack roll and hit, or not. Well, it also depends on other factors, like the target's immunity to necrotic damage, but let's keep things simple.

"Make a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach. On a hit, the target takes 3d6 necrotic damage, and you regain hit points equal to half the amount of necrotic damage dealt." No attack, no hit. No hit, no damage. No damage, no healing. There's no way to interpret the effect that happens on a hit as happening on anything other than a hit. There's no damage (or healing) listed for anything but a hit anywhere in the spell's description.

[RSP]

"Make a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach. On a hit, the target takes 3d6 necrotic damage, and you regain hit points equal to half the amount of necrotic damage dealt." No attack, no hit. No hit, no damage. No damage, no healing. There's no way to interpret the effect that happens on a hit as happening on anything other than a hit. There's no damage (or healing) listed for anything but a hit anywhere in the spell's description.

You’re welcome to ignore the first sentence, as you’ve clearly done here; but all that is, is ignoring the first sentence.

[Amnestic]

You’re welcome to ignore the first sentence, as you’ve clearly done here; but all that is, is ignoring the first sentence.

People aren't ignoring the first sentence. They acknowledge it. You're ignoring what they're saying because they disagree with you.

The first sentence has no mechanical implication because there is no mechanical statement connected to it - the spell only deals numerical damage, as written on a melee spell attack, because your hand being wreathed in shadow doesn't have any numbers connected to it. The sole specification for damage dealing and healing as part of the spell is connected to a melee spell attack. Any other numbers is just something you made up, which by definition is not RAW.

You might as well argue that Fire Shield causes damage to the person who casts it because being on fire would hurt. That's not how the spell works.

[Mastikator]

To achieve the effect of any spell you need to fulfill all of the requirements of that spell. Vampiric Touch calls for a melee spell attack roll and "touching" isn't that.

If you pick apart the paragraphs and apply any kind of logic to them separately then you're on thin ice and if you use that reasoning to circumvent the next paragraph then it's over.

[RSP]

You might as well argue that Fire Shield causes damage to the person who casts it because being on fire would hurt. That's not how the spell works.

Funny this came up, as Fireshield was just on my mind as I was thinking of the different Melee Spell Attacks.

A Spiritual Weapon can attack someone with Fireshield, causing the Fireshield damage to afflict the SW caster, even though the caster didn’t do the attack, is on the opposite side of the creature with Fireshield, and there are others between the SW caster and the SW.

As to your post, no, arguing Fireshield damages the caster is not the same, as Fireshield does not state it damages the caster. VT, on the other hand, does: “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

Feel free to ignore that, but it clearly is stated in the spell effect. What happens with the “touch of your shadow wreathed hand”? It can siphon life force from others.

If you say: “no, the touch of your SWH doesn’t do that!”, then, you are ignoring that part of the spell effect.

To achieve the effect of any spell you need to fulfill all of the requirements of that spell. Vampiric Touch calls for a melee spell attack roll and "touching" isn't that.

If you pick apart the paragraphs and apply any kind of logic to them separately then you're on thin ice and if you use that reasoning to circumvent the next paragraph then it's over.

One needs to fullfil the casting requirements of a spell, to cast a spell, then it’s effect takes place.

The spell then takes effect. Ignoring parts of that effect, isn’t going to give you the whole effect of the spell. The effect includes “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

It sounds like you’re ignoring that sentence, and only wanting to use the follow on sentences, however, that’s not looking at the entirety of the spell effect.

Further, your assertion that one needs to “fulfill all of the requirements of that spell”, just doesn’t make sense to me. Are you suggestion Fireshield doesn’t provide its Resistance if you aren’t also using the damage dealing portion of the effect, and vice versa? That doesn’t make sense in how I understand the RAW.

[Chronos]

Your touch does the damage. The attack roll is to determine if you successfully touch your opponent. Just because you're grappling them doesn't mean you're automatically touching them.

[Amnestic]

As to your post, no, arguing Fireshield damages the caster is not the same, as Fireshield does not state it damages the caster.

Why would it have to? Is being on fire not damaging anymore?

It's ridiculous logic, but no more ridiculous that the stuff you've put in this thread.

VT, on the other hand, does: “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.

Feel free to ignore that, but it clearly is stated in the spell effect. What happens with the “touch of your shadow wreathed hand”? It can siphon life force from others.

If you say: “no, the touch of your SWH doesn’t do that!”, then, you are ignoring that part of the spell effect.

I'm not ignoring it. I'm saying there's no numerical effect from doing so. Which is accurate, per the spell. Touching someone has no effect on your hit points or the hit points of the person you touch; it only has a numerical effect if you succeed on a melee spell attack. That's what the spell says it does.

If you want to buff Vampiric Touch because you think it's underpowered just...do that. Don't jump through weird hoops.

[Mastikator]

One needs to fullfil the casting requirements of a spell, to cast a spell, then it’s effect takes place.

The spell then takes effect. Ignoring parts of that effect, isn’t going to give you the whole effect of the spell. The effect includes “The touch of your shadow wreathed hand can siphon life force from others to heal your wounds.”

It sounds like you’re ignoring that sentence, and only wanting to use the follow on sentences, however, that’s not looking at the entirety of the spell effect.

Further, your assertion that one needs to “fulfill all of the requirements of that spell”, just doesn’t make sense to me. Are you suggestion Fireshield doesn’t provide its Resistance if you aren’t also using the damage dealing portion of the effect, and vice versa? That doesn’t make sense in how I understand the RAW.

The first part tells us what the spell looks like, where it's located and what the melee spell attack represents. The second part is how the life draining magic is achieved mechanically. If we ignore the first part of the spell then we don't know that the melee spell attack action is in fact a touch, or that the healing heals your wounds. (for example Goodberry does not state that it heals wounds, only that it recovers 1 hp, therefore the DM can say that you still have wounds after fully healing after gorging yourself on all of them berries. The DM can also say they did, either interpretation is RAW).
For vampiric touch there's no way you can achieve the effect of 3d6 necrotic damage and healing half without the aforementioned using your action to make a melee spell attack. No action used to make a melee spell attack, no touching, no damage, no healing.

As for fire shield it states "In addition", it stipulates that both the resistance and the fire/cold damage against melee attackers happen independently. However yes, you can't just have the resistance part, you also return 2d8 damage to melee attackers. If an ally makes an unarmed strike against you for 1 damage you can't not choose to not injure them with fire (warm) or cold (cold). The whole spell happens.
If vampiric touch let you cause damage ever time you touch someone through any other means than using your action to make a melee spell attack, it would say that. It doesn't, therefore it isn't.

[Mjolnirbear]

*casts Vampiric Touch*

"Okay DM, I'm gonna run through this crowd of sports fans and high-five every person I run past. Each one takes damage and heals me, right? Lessee, take the Dash action, I can run 60 feet, so that's like 120 people! Oh and then I'll smack that obnoxious orange mascot's mask right off. What? No, I'm not attacking, just brushing past and reaching my hand out while I do it."

This is the logical conclusion to "I just need to touch".

I actually don't have a problem with using a grapple check *instead* of a melee spell attack. It's not RAW, but RAW doesn't hold any special significance for me. It's just a scaffold to help me run the game. Even if you built a fighter with three attacks and VT, it's a really specific built that still requires you as a caster get in melee contact and suffer a billion concentration saves, and you spent a lot of resources to make this build viable.

But I can't see any DM ruling it as RSP wants, simply because it will break as soon as they take the next step in that particular logic game.