Casting while moving??

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Mike - good example.

 

[irdeggman]

Well let's look at it this way.

If a cleric casts a touch spell, takes a 5 ft step and delivers it to an ally in thretened spell iin the same round - no AoO.

But if the cleric cast the spell and holds it, then in the next round takes a 5 ft step and delivers the spell to an ally in a threatened square he is subject to an AoO.

What has the cleric done differnetly to provoke an AoO in the second case? The rules are pretty specific about the latter case causing an AoO, as has been cited above.

What is the specific action that provokes the AoO. The only thing this falls under is diverting attention from the foe. Picking up an object, retrieving an object ans sheathing a weapon all invoke AoO. Other than the shething which may or may not be complex the other two actions are not really any more complicated than reaching down (or forward) and touching an ally are they?

Care to cite a source for that?

What do you want text for the specific case being mentioned or the RAW I've quoted?

By the same logic, attacking one of the two enemies he threatens requires him to "divert his attention from [one] foe," and that certainly doesn't provoke an AoO.

No they don't. The character threatens both of the foes and can attack eithr of them additionall taking AoO if presented.

Why should making an unarmed touch attack against my ally - which is much, much easier to do than an enemy, because it is always successful - distract me more than an unarmed touch against against an enemy or against one of two or more enemies?

Because you have diverted your attention and are concentrating on touching your ally. Since it is automatic it is assumed the character is not blindly searching around trying to touch his friend while keeping his eyes on the foe.

The rules don't address it specifically but I would apply the cover rules (for shooting into melee with someone in the way) for the AoO if the cleric was attempting to touch his ally when he was fighting, but not when the ally is on the ground.

 

[Vrecknidj]

So, this leads me to this crazy idea. Most casters will not opt for this, because the prerequisites will require too much of the character. But, it could be worthwhile for certain multiclassed casters.

SPRING ATTACK SPELL [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Dodge, Mobility, ability to cast 3rd level spells.

Benefit: When using the cast a spell action, you can move both before and after the casting, provided that your total distance moved is not greater than your speed. Moving in this way does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender of your spell (if it targets one enemy), though it might provoke attacks of opportunity from other creatures, if appropriate. You can’t use this feat if you are wearing heavy or medium armor.

You must move at least 5 feet both before and after you make your attack in order to utilize the benefits of Spring Attack Spell.

Special: A fighter or wizard may select Spring Attack Spell as one of his fighter or wizard bonus feats.

 

[irdeggman]

I like the concept of the feat. I think I'd change it some though. A fighter shouldn't be able to take it as a bonus feat since the class by itself can't meet the prerequisites (a fighter can't cast spells).

I would change some prerequisites too. Maybe drop mobility and add combat casting instead - seems to fit the theme better, IMO. I'd try to focus on feat prerequisites that are more off of the wizard's bonus list, IMO.

 

[mikebr99]

Well let's look at it this way.

If a cleric casts a touch spell, takes a 5 ft step and delivers it to an ally in thretened spell iin the same round - no AoO.

That is correct... you could even move further then 5ft. if you have the movement to do so...

But if the cleric cast the spell and holds it, then in the next round takes a 5 ft step and delivers the spell to an ally in a threatened square he is subject to an AoO.

Please quote something... as I can't find that rule anywhere...

Mike

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Because you have diverted your attention and are concentrating on touching your ally. Since it is automatic it is assumed the character is not blindly searching around trying to touch his friend while keeping his eyes on the foe.

Let's try this again.

I'm holding a touch spell.

I'm currently defending myself from two enemy warriors - Ebert and Roper. Standing next to me is my ally, Frederick. It probably looks a lot like this, where M is "Me":

----
-ER-
-MF-
----

We've all got 5' reach, so we all threaten each other.

If I decide to target Ebert with my touch spell, I make a melee touch attack. If I hit, the spell discharges on him.

If I decide to target Roper with my touch spell, I make a melee touch attack. If I hit, the spell discharges on him.

If I decide to target Frederick with my touch spell, it automatically hits, and the spell discharges on him.

According to you, only the last situation provokes an AoO.

Given that it is easier for me to target my ally, why does touching him provoke an AoO from both Ebert and Roper, when targeting Ebert does not provoke an AoO from Roper?

Do you understand the weirdness of the way you are ruling?

What do you want text for the specific case being mentioned or the RAW I've quoted?

I want the specific text that says that employing a touch spell on an ally provokes an AoO - apart from the normal rule that casting any spell provokes.

If a cleric casts a touch spell, takes a 5 ft step and delivers it to an ally in thretened spell iin the same round - no AoO.

I agree completely. Note, also, that the cleric can cast the spell in a non-threatened area, move up to his movement, and still deliver the touch spell - all in one round! And even target an enemy with it! And none of this will provoke an AoO (unless, of course, he decides to move past some enemies, provoking based on his movement).

But if the cleric cast the spell and holds it, then in the next round takes a 5 ft step and delivers the spell to an ally in a threatened square he is subject to an AoO.

Why?

What has the cleric done differnetly to provoke an AoO in the second case? The rules are pretty specific about the latter case causing an AoO, as has been cited above.

The problem is that they are not pretty specific about the latter case causing an AoO, and I challenge you to find any example, anywhere, of them saying anything remotely like this.

 

[irdeggman]

That is correct... you could even move further then 5ft. if you have the movement to do so...
Please quote something... as I can't find that rule anywhere...

Mike

Table 8-2 pg 141 PHB Actions: Use a touch spell on up to six friends - AoO - yes.

That is the one I've quoted before. The text for holding a charge states you can touch one friend as a standard action or up to 6 friends as a full round action.

 

[mikebr99]

Table 8-2 pg 141 PHB Actions: Use a touch spell on up to six friends - AoO - yes.

That is the one I've quoted before. The text for holding a charge states you can touch one friend as a standard action or up to 6 friends as a full round action.

It's an AoO because you are casting a spell (non-defensively)... not because you are delivering 6 touches.

Delivering a touch spell, means you are armed... being armed means you don't provoke an AoO from delivering that armed attack.

Again... quote text.


Mike

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Table 8-2 pg 141 PHB Actions: Use a touch spell on up to six friends - AoO - yes.

That is the one I've quoted before. The text for holding a charge states you can touch one friend as a standard action or up to 6 friends as a full round action.

I've never seen you quote that before (at least, not in this thread), but thanks for citing it.

Notice that touching up to 6 friends is, in fact, a full round action that provokes an AoO. The better way to read this, however, is that "You can touch up to 6 friends as a full-round action. This provokes an AoO."

Touching one friend need not be a full round action, however:

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 one friend as a standard action, it does not use the "Full Round Actions" entry on the AoO table. Therefore, it does not provoke an AoO.

So, if I decide to use a full-round action to touch my ally, then yes, I provoke an AoO. That's a pretty silly idea, however, as I can touch any single ally with a standard action that does not provoke.

EDIT:

There's also this:

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.

It seems to me, then, that casting a touch spell which affects one ally proceeds as normal. Should you decide to cast a spell which affects "up to X creatures touched," and you want to touch more than one, it requires a full-round action (rather than the spell's normal standard action).

I believe this is on shakier rules grounds, however, and I'd want to look it over a bit more before making a "final" ruling.

 

[irdeggman]

It's an AoO because you are casting a spell (non-defensively)... not because you are delivering 6 touches.

Delivering a touch spell, means you are armed... being armed means you don't provoke an AoO from delivering that armed attack.

Again... quote text.


Mike

I'm sorry but I guess you need to read the text and tables since they go together and are not mutually exclusive. I'm not going to bother quoting things anymore, at least not for you since you don't seem to want to put 2 + 2 together.

Casting a spell is an action that generates an Ao), specifically called out (again check the table that is where it specifies things more concisely than the text). Certain other actions also provoke AoO and aren't specified in the text for instance "picking up an item".

Patryn of Elvenshae - thanks for pointing out that the action in question is specifically under the full round actions portion of the table. While it doesn't make sense for there to be a difference, at least not to me, between delivering a touch spell on a single ally and on a group of allies - I can understand what WotC is trying to do. They really want toenable a player's character to do the heroic that is to rush in and heal a fallen ally by touching him and not suffer an AoO.