Is this an Attack of Opportunity?

[dcollins]

What is a touch attack spell?

From the PHB glossary:

touch attack: An attack in which the attacker must connect with an opponent but does not need to penetrate armor...

touch spell: A spell that delivers its effect when the caster touches a target creature or object. Touch spells are delivered to unwilling targets by touch attacks.

In the case of cure light wounds on an ally, is it an attack? No. Does the attacker need to connect with an opponent? No. Is it delivered to an unwilling target? No. So it is not a touch attack (on three counts).

 

[Thanee]

Maybe I am misinterpreting the RAW, but don't cure wounds spells have a duration of Instantaneous, ...

Yes, like all (most) touch spells.

But the energy does not go, it stays around your hand indefinitely, until you touch someone or something.

Check the rules about touch spells, they explain the whys and hows.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

From the PHB glossary:



In the case of cure light wounds on an ally, is it an attack? No. Does the attacker need to connect with an opponent? No. Is it delivered to an unwilling target? No. So it is not a touch attack (on three counts).

That's why I defined Cure Light Wounds as a touch spell, and Cure Light Wounds used on an opponent as a touch attack spell.

It's why I said "Now, if you're touching an ally, it's still a touch spell, but it's not a touch attack spell."

-Hyp.

 

[Telas]

Maybe I am misinterpreting the RAW, but don't cure wounds spells have a duration of Instantaneous, ...

Yes, like all (most) touch spells.

But the energy does not go, it stays around your hand indefinitely, until you touch someone or something.

Check the rules about touch spells, they explain the whys and hows.

If you're using an online SRD, search for "Hold the Charge".

Thanee - What modifiers would you give the touch attack? +4 for prone/helpless? -4 for cover? 0 Dex (-5 AC)? Would the defender's BAB/Dex/whatever apply?

Thanks,

Telas

 

[Thanee]

Full modifiers, of course. 0 Dex, helpless, prone, cover sounds right as well.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

No weaseling required - it's a black and white chain of rules.

-Hyp.

If that's how the rules work, fine. I think you are more of an expert on the RAW than I am, so I'll take your word for it.

I still say claiming Cure spells as Touch Attack spells is silly.

I find the idea that if you go to the trouble to heft an unconcious foe onto your person, you get an AoO, but that if you leave him lie at your feet you get nothing.

There are rules. Then there is common sense. The 2 do not always meet.

Better example.

Lets say Bless Weapon (a Touch Spell).

Instead of the Downed Foe, you are standing over a Greatsword (in your square). The evil minion casts his Bless Weapon, and goes over to the Greatsword. Is THAT spell considered a Unarmed "Armed Strike"? After all, the You aren't even a valid target, yet it is a spell with a Object Touched. Or, since it specifies objects, you shouldn't worry.

Or Magic Fang. That's touch, right? Is magic Fang an Unarmed 'Armed' Strike?


Simple.

I don't really care what the rules say. They are just there to aid you, not straightjacket you. You can tell me the Rules Claim Harmless Spells can be used as 'Armed' Strikes all you want, I call it Shenanigins.

By the rules, even if you were a 18th level Cleric with Max Ranks in Spellcraft & KNEW it was a Cure Lights Wounds spell that could NEVER, EVER, DO NO HARM WHATSOEVER TO YOU, you still have to treat it as a threat (by the RAW). That's silly, I'm not going to do it.

At this point I think people are trying to ABUSE the rules rather USE the rules.

I'm still haven't reread all about Sunder & AoO yet, but I read all about Touch Spells. If you want to get down to quoting rules & page number (which I may have started, I admit), it says the reasoning behind a Unarmed 'Armed' Touch attack not drawing an AoO, is that it is a "Credible Threat".

I say a Spell Touch Attack that fails to be a "Credible Threat" is not an 'Armed Strike'.

I think you might be right. At this point, and in the D&D Rules Forum (as opposed to House Rules Forum), my only point of contention (from a RAW standpoint), is the 'Credible Threat' Blurb under "Unarmed 'Armed' Attacks. While a 1st level fight might not know a CLW from a Touch of Death spell, a 5th level Cleric would.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I don't really care what the rules say.

Might I suggest that you stepped into the wrong forum?

 

[Thanee]

And how exactly does the fighter differentiate between Cure Light Wounds and Harm?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

And how exactly does the fighter differentiate between Cure Light Wounds and Harm?

Why, with his intimate knowledge of Spellcr ... Oh..

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Might I suggest that you stepped into the wrong forum?

No Right Forum,

The discussion was about how it should work.

I gave my honest opinion of how it should.

Hypersmurf showed me how the rules 'offically' work.

I think parts of it don't fit my game style & make no real, logical sense to me.

So, I've gotten the correct (D&D Rules Answer, Thanks HS), I just fully plan on ignoring it.

In fact, the only Rules questions I still have is what constitues a "Credible Threat" as far as "Unarmed 'Armed' Touch" Attacks go.

Anything else about How I'd interpret the rules falls into House Rules, so I'm dropping it.