Can non-touch spells be "held"?

FoxWander

Adventurer
Here was the situation...
Combat starts and the wizard goes first. She starts casting Enlarge Person to make the big, buff fighter bigger and buffer. The fighter wasn't paying attention to this plan and charges into combat thus going beyond the range of the wizard's spell. Next round the wizard finishes her spell but her big, dumb target is out of reach. Can she hold the spell until after a move action to get back in range of the fighter?

While the rules for holding a touch spell are easy to find and make perfect sense, there's nothing (that I could find) about holding other types of spells. However it seems like a perfectly plausible idea to allow it using the "holding the charge" rules as a reference.

Thoughts? If you would allow it, what rules would you put in place for it? If you wouldn't allow it, what is your reasoning for that?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Per the rules, you can't do it.

I'm not sure what the balance implications would be of allowing it more generally. I guess, as long as it took another standard action to "release" the spell later on, then it might be pretty much okay.
 

RUMBLETiGER

Adventurer
This sounds like a situation that is an example of "Initiative order vs. realistic action sequence in turns".

I'd rule that, since taking turns in initiative order is really just a mechanical process to play out what are supposed to be a series of actions occurring at the same time, the DM could rule that the Wizard had infact touched the Fighter, before he went of charging. Therefore the spell took effect.

While I don't have any examples off the top of my head, It's no doubt likely that if you rule you can hold non-touch spells until triggering later, somebody could find a way to abuse this to make is super broken.
 

Vegepygmy

First Post
Thoughts? If you would allow it, what rules would you put in place for it? If you wouldn't allow it, what is your reasoning for that?
No, it's not allowed by RAW. No, I wouldn't allow it anyway. Why? Because for me, a lot of the pleasure I get out of playing the game is having to work within the rules. Having to position my archer in the right spot to deprive my enemy of a cover bonus to AC, for example, makes playing an archer more challenging and therefore more satisfying to me when I do it successfully. The same applies to rules for spellcasting.

I like it when the fighter moves out of range of the wizard's enlarge person and wastes the spell. I like it when the cleric moves into the spot where the sorcerer was just about to cast a fireball. It adds a certain "reality" to the game when combat is disorganized and unpredictable.
 

Herzog

Adventurer
This sounds like a situation that is an example of "Initiative order vs. realistic action sequence in turns".

No, it isn't.

Enlarge Person has a 1 round casting time.
While the wizard is casting it, the Fighter moves out of range.
This has nothing to do with initiative order.
 

Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top