natural attacks and touch spells

[Amazing Mumford]

Okay, I think this might have been answered, but I wanted to ask real quick-- say you have a monk/sorcerer with touch spells, or a werewolf/cleric with touch spells-- can you "hold" a touch spell and combine it's effects with an unarmed strike or natural attack? Like can the werewolf attack with claws and cast an "inflict light wounds" at the same time? How about the monk attacking with a flurry of blows and using "chill touch" at the same time??

 

[Deset Gled]

Yes, but it takes two rounds to do it. On the first round, you cast the touch spell as normal (a standard action), and opt not to touch someone with it. Then, on the next round, you make an unarmed or natural attack as normal (another standard or full round action), and discharge the touch spell as you attack.

There are relatively few situations where this is a useful tactic.

 

[Noumenon]

If bull's strength before combat is worth it it would seem like charging up with a touch spell before every combat is equally worth it. You get two attacks the first round for free! Am I wrong?

 

[Amazing Mumford]

Noumenon, I don't think you're wrong, it would certainly be a little better than a normal attack, even if it is just for that one attack. And why not use bull's strength in addition to holding a touch spell? That way there is a better chance to hit and even a bit more damage. Against certain foes the extra "bite" of a certain touch spell could make that first round of combat decisive... at least maybe change what your foe was planning on doing... and if a touch spell was Quickened (or Sudden Quicken)then you could attack with the held spell, and next round cast the spell again (Quickened) and attack-- just being careful that you watch stacking rules, many debilitating effects do not stack. I know many of you probably think this isn't the most efficient set-up, but I am not looking to "munchkin" (Arrghh I HATE the ridiculous terms) here...

 

[frankthedm]

If bull's strength before combat is worth it it would seem like charging up with a touch spell before every combat is equally worth it. You get two attacks the first round for free! Am I wrong?

Yes, i think you are wrong that both are equally worth it. A buff spell is notably different than "Holding the Charge". A held touch limits your options and some touch spells that can't be held at all.

Touch Spells and Holding the Charge

In most cases, if you don’t discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.

Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can’t hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell.


Holding the Charge
f you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.

 

[Noumenon]

If you're arguing it's not as all-purpose as bull's strength, you're right of course. I was assuming you were a monk or werewolf as in the OP and therefore attacking with your natural weapons was your plan anyway. So you don't worry about AoOs, and you wouldn't need to cast spells, unless they had something that made them unhittable. The fact you can't hold the charge on a multi-target spell doesn't mean single-target aren't worth it. The drawback that you can't touch things by accident doesn't mean much; I'd still use bull's strength if I couldn't touch anything till after the first time I hit.

 

[risner]

can you "hold" a touch spell and combine it's effects with an unarmed strike or natural attack?

Unarmed Strike? Yes
Natural Attack? No

You can do it as part of the spell casting unless the spell prohibits doing so explicitly.

 

[Amazing Mumford]

Yes, but it takes two rounds to do it. On the first round, you cast the touch spell as normal (a standard action), and opt not to touch someone with it. Then, on the next round, you make an unarmed or natural attack as normal (another standard or full round action), and discharge the touch spell as you attack.

Unarmed Strike? Yes
Natural Attack? No

Risner and Desert Gled, you have me a bit puzzled... You both seem to agree on the unarmed strike part, why not the natural attack? Does it state somewhere you can't combine a touch spell with a natural attack??

 

[Amazing Mumford]

OK, I think I answered my own question--

From the SRD:

Holding the Charge

If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.

So you can discharge a touch spell in conjunction with an unarmed attack or natural attack... does anyone disagree or know of contradictory rules??

 

[risner]

So you can discharge a touch spell in conjunction with an unarmed attack or natural attack... does anyone disagree or know of contradictory rules??

Ok, it was I that was confused and the other that was unclear.

You can make a touch attack to deal no damage (but deliver the spell) or make a normal (non touch) attack with unarmed strikes or natural weapons.

I had mistakenly thought you could deal a touch attack while still dealing unarmed strike damage. If I had thought about it for a second, I'd understood that can't be right.