Shocking Grasp with an unarmed strike

[Gloombunny]

I'm with Nifft on this one.

Although the "he already wasted a round, so why not let him have the bonus" part of the argument ceases to apply when you consider a duskblade channeling shocking grasp through her weapon. That +3 along with the electrical damage would make it a pretty sweet 1st-level spell.

 

[Arkhandus]

Right. It doesn't make sense that if the spell's bonus on attack rolls applies for some reason toward striking targets with metal armor, that it would just cease to apply if you made a normal unarmed attack with it instead of a touch attack. The only difference between the two anyway is that a normal attack usually means hitting the opponent's armor and glancing off of it. The spell says nothing of the "only applies with touch attacks" sort.

And Duskblades are broken because of their overpowered design, not because of Shocking Grasp. A Wizard's Shocking Grasp is just him roughly matching up with the Fighter's normal attack in accuracy and damage for 1 round, before he goes back to running for cover behind the Fighter.

 

[Kyle Zimmer1]

If you apply the +3, then I think it has to be only for the electricity damage. They only get the punch or magus stab off if they beat the AC without the +3. I know there aren't exactly rules for that, but that's what actually makes sense to me.