Chill Touch Poll

[FireLance]

It's an instant enchant spell, that enchants your hands so that the next X touches (where X is the caster level) has the spell effect.

Of course, I interpret the instantaneous effect to be the effect of the touch: 1d6 points of negative energy damage and 1 point of Strength damage (Fort save negates) for living creatures. To be absolutely exact, the Duration entry should read "Instantaneous or 1d4 rounds plus 1 round/level", since undead creatures touched flee as if panicked for 1d4 round + 1 round per caster level (Will save negates). Incidentally, this is what the Saving Throw entry of "Fortitude partial or Will negates; see text" refers to. Furthermore, the Range entry of the spell is "Touch" and not "Personal", and the Target entry of the spell is "Creature or creatures touched", not "You".

If it wasn't for the clause of one touch per caster level, I don't think there would be any argument that chill touch instantaneously grants the caster the ability to make one touch attack per level. Take a look at shocking grasp. The Range, Target and Duration entries are practically identical. Would you make the same argument there?

For a 1st-level caster (when it affects a single target creature), chill touch should work like shocking grasp. The spell has its instantaneous effect (if the caster touches a living creature) and ends. For a 2nd-level caster, it should work exactly the same way, except that he can make one more touch attack after he has made the first. And so on, at higher caster levels.

 

[ARandomGod]

...

If it wasn't for the clause of one touch per caster level, I don't think there would be any argument that chill touch instantaneously grants the caster the ability to make one touch attack per level. Take a look at shocking grasp. The Range, Target and Duration entries are practically identical. Would you make the same argument there?

But if it weren't for the clause of one touch per caster level, I'd say that chill touch only allowed you to make one attack at all...

For a 1st-level caster (when it affects a single target creature), chill touch should work like shocking grasp. The spell has its instantaneous effect (if the caster touches a living creature) and ends. For a 2nd-level caster, it should work exactly the same way, except that he can make one more touch attack after he has made the first. And so on, at higher caster levels.

At first level it is practically the same. (Obviously I'm saying it's a little different in mechanics, but effectively the same).

For a second level caster, it still works almost the same, except that, of course, it's allowing two touch attacks, and all the other factors I meantioned above.

It's a very minor difference at first level, when the spell is most useful. The difference is still relatively minor at second level. By third level mages who were dedicated enough to cast the spell in the first place (probably necromancers needing to fill their bonus spell slot, but even they likely memorized Ray of Enfeeblement instead), even those mages have given up on the spell.

It might be revisited by a high level arcane trickster. Since that PrC will get more than "normal" out of the spell (adding sneak attack dice). But as I said, personal experience has shown me that even that is a relative waste of time... and if you're reduced so far in resources as to have that spell as your best alternative, you probably should be more focused on runnin away than attacking.

 

[FireLance]

It might be revisited by a high level arcane trickster. Since that PrC will get more than "normal" out of the spell (adding sneak attack dice). But as I said, personal experience has shown me that even that is a relative waste of time... and if you're reduced so far in resources as to have that spell as your best alternative, you probably should be more focused on runnin away than attacking.

I won't disagree that pure-classed wizards are better off using ray of enfeeblement. However, it works quite nicely for an unarmed strike focused character that uses a bit of arcane ability to boost his attacks. A monk/wizard or an Enlightened Fist (from Complete Arcane) for example.

 

[ARandomGod]

I won't disagree that pure-classed wizards are better off using ray of enfeeblement. However, it works quite nicely for an unarmed strike focused character that uses a bit of arcane ability to boost his attacks. A monk/wizard or an Enlightened Fist (from Complete Arcane) for example.

I've never completely gone over those... so I can't comment. Of course, the character I have tried it with was a thief/wizard (PrC Arcane Trickster), I really did expect that extra sneak attack damage to make a difference.

However, the chill touch having more attacks goes pretty hand in hand with actual caster level. So by default we're talking about someone with a pretty decent caster level by the time we're really concerned about multiple attacks. And, of course, a lower caster level (say one level of wiz) with practiced spellcaster... well for him it's probably a moot point whether or not he can cast other spells in between. This is probably about the only spell he has!

Like I said, I can't comment on the Enlightened Fist (I saw someone planning on taking that PrC, but never saw in actually happen). A plain Monk/Wizard on the other hand... well, both monks and wizards give up a significant amount in multiclassing (although both can be dipped into for utility relatively well)...

I'm imagining a monk who took one level of wizard to access this spell, and then the Practised Spellcaster feat as the greatest 'abuse' level... and even then that's casting as a fifth level wizard (being at least a fifth level character, of course) so five extra d6's... Yea, that could be an effective ploy, and he'd get some utility spells out of it too (mage armor anyone? The arcane spell list...). But I wouldn't call it really overpowered by a long shot.

And even then, you're not really worrying about *that* combo casting another spell while Chill Touch is in effect. He doesn't have many other spells.

 

[FireLance]

But I wouldn't call it really overpowered by a long shot.

I'm not calling it overpowered, either. I'm just pointing out what kind of character would get more use out of this spell.

 

[Dimwhit]

I have a tangential question. (Big word, eh? ) Say chill touch is cast on a Monk. Will it work with his Unarmed Strike? The spell says it's delivered with a touch attack, but Monk's make a melee (unarmed) attack. Can a melee attack also deliver an effect that must be delivered by a touch attack?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Yes - in fact, it's specifically called out that you can deliver touch spells via an unarmed strike or natural weapon.

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.

Note that it's not, "unarmed strike or other natural weapon ... "

 

[Hypersmurf]

Yes - in fact, it's specifically called out that you can deliver touch spells via an unarmed strike or natural weapon.

Those who argue that Chill Touch somehow bypasses the Holding the Charge mechanic would have to maintain, surely, that the quoted paragraph is irrelevant

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

This is some sort of trick question, I know it!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Dimwhit]

Good point, hyp. So if it's a touch attack spell that isn't a 'holding the charge' kind of thing, can it still be delivered with a melee attack?