Can you coup de grace with an Inflict Wounds spell?

[Bad Paper]

You can score a critical hit with an IXW spell.

You can CDG with one, too.

This is what I thought. It came up in my player-campaign (as opposed to my DM-campaign), where we used a wand of IMW to CdG a couple of trolls. It seemed like a relatively "cheap" way to klll them, even though stored spells aren't actually cheap.

I wanted to run this little tidbit past Those In The Know before I run my DM-campaign tonight.

 

[The Grackle]

Monks don't deliver touch attacks they deliver unarmed attacks - slight difference. They don't get to ignore armor with their flurries, etc.

But they are not "armed w/a melee weapon," so whether it's a touch attack or not is irrelevant.

Is a monk's unarmed attack considered a "weapon?" It's definitely a melee attack, and is considered "armed." But does Armed = Weapon? If it does, than both a monk and someone using a an Inflict spell should both be able to CDG.

“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Does a touch attack count as a "melee weapon"?

Yes, it does. Or, rather, certain spells which use a touch attack mechanic are weapon-like spells, and therefore count as melee weapons - including for such effects as Bard songs.

For the OP, there's a problem with what you did, but it isn't the IXW portion:

Regeneration (Ex): A creature with this ability is difficult to kill. Damage dealt to the creature is treated as nonlethal damage. The creature automatically heals nonlethal damage at a fixed rate per round, as given in the entry. Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, deal lethal damage to the creature, which doesn’t go away. The creature’s descriptive text describes the details. A regenerating creature that has been rendered unconscious through nonlethal damage can be killed with a coup de grace. The attack cannot be of a type that automatically converts to nonlethal damage.

Attack forms that don’t deal hit point damage ignore regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation. Regenerating creatures can regrow lost portions of their bodies and can reattach severed limbs or body parts; details are in the creature’s descriptive text. Severed parts that are not reattached wither and die normally.

A creature must have a Constitution score to have the regeneration ability.

Inflict X Wounds spells are neither fire nor acid, and therefore do nonlethal damage to trolls. Ergo, you cannot perform a CDG on a troll with an IXW spell.

 

[Murrdox]

The Grackle said what I was trying to say better than I did

 

[Infiniti2000]

I would probably say you have to do it as seperate actions though. Round one you cast the spell and hold in the charge, round two you perform the coup.

I agree with this. You cannot perform a full-round action (coup de grace) and a standard action (cast a spell) in the same round. You'd have to cast the spell and then, in the following round, perform the coup de grace. Or, you need to use a quickened/swift weapon-like spell.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I agree with this. You cannot perform a full-round action (coup de grace) and a standard action (cast a spell) in the same round. You'd have to cast the spell and then, in the following round, perform the coup de grace. Or, you need to use a quickened/swift weapon-like spell.

For the record, I agree absolutely with the above, and was operating under that assumption in all of my posts.

 

[irdeggman]

But they are not "armed w/a melee weapon," so whether it's a touch attack or not is irrelevant.

Is a monk's unarmed attack considered a "weapon?" It's definitely a melee attack, and is considered "armed." But does Armed = Weapon? If it does, than both a monk and someone using a an Inflict spell should both be able to CDG.

per the SRD:

Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

Now this doesn't say the monk's unarmed strike is treated as a weapon for all purposes but when put together with the fact they are considered armed and can take AoO it is entirely reasonable to make that conclusion, IMO.

 

[Goolpsy]

Whats the next thing.. a coup de gracing fireball? Really come on.... Monks hands ARE indded a weapon.. and can make a coup de grace... For flavor you could say that he twisted his neck or something...

but really: You inflict the subject with negative energy... and is somehow not dealing damage to the body.. but only the neck? Really... Inflict Cannot in anyway do CDG

 

[IcyCool]

Whats the next thing.. a coup de gracing fireball? Really come on.... Monks hands ARE indded a weapon.. and can make a coup de grace... For flavor you could say that he twisted his neck or something...

but really: You inflict the subject with negative energy... and is somehow not dealing damage to the body.. but only the neck? Really... Inflict Cannot in anyway do CDG

You seem to have this fixation that CDG has something to do with the victim's neck.
Edit #2 - Could you not envision the flood of negative energy stopping the victim's heart?

And for the record, a fireball is not a weapon-like spell.

Edit - I agree with the folks saying that you could cast Inflict, hold the charge until next round, and CDG with it. I would think that the same would be true for all weapon-like spells.

 

[Artoomis]

Absolutely not.

A spell is not a melee weapon unless it specifically says somewhere to treat it as one. The mere fact that you can get a critical hit with one does not make it a melee weapon. This one really should be an easy one, I think.