Chill Touch

[amethal]

At times like these, this always makes me chuckle.

D&D is precise and consistent. This precision makes the game-stalling and argument provoking questions of other games and previous editions a thing of the past.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Interestingly enough, I used the exact same data to come up with the exact opposite conclusion. The fact that it's instantanious means that it doesn't allow you to "hold the charge", sure, but that's because it instead creates an effect wherein your next X touches do Y... they're not considered "charged" like other spells which do use that mechanic (say shocking grasp), instead they've explicitly spelled out that this spell uses a completely different mechanic, which is lightly similiar in form.

You keep using 'explicit'. That word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Let me draw your attention to what I think is the important point. When you touch the target(s), the spell discharges. The rules on 'holding the charge' clarify this. There are no multi-charge 'holding the charge' rules and the spell description is not explicit on how it works except that it's instantaneous. Does the spell description say that you can touch multiple opponents in the round you cast the spell (assume not quickened)? Does any rule say you can touch multiple opponents in a single round besides having a high BAB and taking a full attack action? Most importantly, does anything say that once you touch the first target, the spell doesn't discharge like all other 'hold the charge' spells (i.e. the rules you are quoting all over the place)?

 

[Pinotage]

There are no other multi-hold-the-charge spells. That's what I meant.

Produce Flame? Although it's not instantaneous, but has a duration, you can still hold the charge and attack multiple times.

Pinotage

 

[Camarath]

The rule is that you can make one touch attack in the same round that you cast a touch spell;.... PHB, pp.140-141.

There is no stated limit on pages 140 or 141 about the number of touch attacks one may make while casting a spell. The rules only say "In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target.". The Target in this case is "Creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)". So barring a specific rule stating that one may not make more than one touch attack as part of the same action as casting a spell I see no reason why one could not attempt to make touch attack against every target specified in the target line of the spell.

I can. Full Attack Action.

The rules are simple: you get one "free" touch attack during the same round you cast a touch spell. If you have any "charges" left after that, you can make touch attacks with them as you would any other weapon; to make more than one per round, you must use the Full Attack action.

I believe that spell's description and the rules on PHB page 176 should be considered the primary rule source in this case over the Full Attack limitation page 143 "If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks.".

PHB page 176 clearly states "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.". I believe this rule applies directly to the Chill Touch spell and other Instantaneous duration Touch spells. (If this is not so could someone please point out the spell to which this rule refers.)

You have already stated that you believe that the Touch Spell rule page 140 "In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target." trumps the Attack Action rule page 139 "Making an attack is a standard action." allowing one to preform an attack as part of the same action as casting a spell without an additional standard action.

I think if anything, the rules on page 176 show clearer precedence over the Full Attack rule that the rules on page 140 do over the Attack Action rule. After all it is conceivably be possible use a standard action to touch the target of a spell (assuming the spell has a single target) in the same round you cast the spell. But the rules on page 176 clearly stated that the touch attacks allowed are part of the spell while the Full Attack rule states you must make them as part of a Full Attack Action. This is a clear contradiction.

Thus one rule must be given precedence and I believe that the spell's description and the rules on PHB page 176 deal far more directly with the issue in question and Chill Touch should be assumed to work as stated by those rules.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Produce Flame? Although it's not instantaneous, but has a duration, you can still hold the charge and attack multiple times.

Pinotage

So, you realize you're proving my point, right? That example shows that chill touch must therefore not function the same way. Or, it's a mistake like I pointed out earlier.

 

[ARandomGod]

You keep using 'explicit'. That word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

You may be right. I mean that it does spell out that the spell operates in a specific manner, and therefore instead of there being an implication (implicit?) operation in a different manner, there is a confirmed one, to indicate this I used the word Explicit. (Now I'll look it up on Dictionary.Com

"Fully and clearly expressed; leaving nothing implied. "

Well, I'll agree that it can't be "fully and clearly" expressed if some people are disagreeing as to the interpretation.

"Readily observable"

I'll use that definition... of course in doing so I'm being arrogant and stating that it's "readily observable" that you're wrong. (I'll hold to my arrogance for a bit and stick by that statement on the outside, but in these parenthesis I acknowledge your point).

Let me draw your attention to what I think is the important point. When you touch the target(s), the spell discharges. The rules on 'holding the charge' clarify this. There are no multi-charge 'holding the charge' rules and the spell description is not explicit on how it works except that it's instantaneous. Does the spell description say that you can touch multiple opponents in the round you cast the spell (assume not quickened)? Does any rule say you can touch multiple opponents in a single round besides having a high BAB and taking a full attack action?

Emphasis mine:

Here I'm going to go back to the dictionary:

Discharge:
"To relieve of a burden or of contents; unload.
To unload or empty (contents). "

And disagree with your statement. It clearly (and it is pretty clear this time I think) does not discharge, in that the spell's still active after a touch... It may seem like I'm splitting hairs here, but it's a pertenent part of my point of view, that it does not act like other touch attack spells act, it's not the same, and doesn't use the same mechanic. You're not holding a charge with this spell, instead this spell enchants your hands so that your next X touch attacks will have the specified effect.

Most importantly, does anything say that once you touch the first target, the spell doesn't discharge like all other 'hold the charge' spells (i.e. the rules you are quoting all over the place)?

No, it doesn't. However my point that it's not a 'hold the charge' spell invalidates this particular line of arguement, and instead turns this most important point to "does it say anywhere that it DOES "discharge"?

And, of course, a reading of the definition of the word discharge will reveal that it does not.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No, it doesn't. However my point that it's not a 'hold the charge' spell invalidates this particular line of arguement, and instead turns this most important point to "does it say anywhere that it DOES "discharge"?

And, of course, a reading of the definition of the word discharge will reveal that it does not.

Since you said that this is the most important point, I'll concentrate on it. In fact, the rules under Duration give a "clear" definition of discharge.

Discharge
Occasionally a spells lasts for a set duration or until triggered or discharged.

So, what's the duration? Instantaneous. Unlike any other multi-touch spell.

So, when is it triggered or discharged? For one thing, it sucks that the definition uses the same word. I think you'll agree, though, that the spell ends when either condition holds true. To beg the question (and I beg your pardon), doesn't the spell trigger when you touch the first opponent?

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Produce Flame? Although it's not instantaneous, but has a duration, you can still hold the charge and attack multiple times.

Produce flame is not a Touch spell; it has a range of 0 ft. Therefore, the "hold the charge" rules do not apply.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

There is no stated limit on pages 140 or 141 about the number of touch attacks one may make while casting a spell. The rules only say "In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target.". The Target in this case is "Creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)". So barring a specific rule stating that one may not make more than one touch attack as part of the same action as casting a spell I see no reason why one could not attempt to make touch attack against every target specified in the target line of the spell.

You need to read the rules more carefully, my friend.

On page 141, it says (in the context of touching targets in the same round you cast the spell): "You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll." This clearly limits the number of touches you get to make in the same round that you cast the spell to ONE.

Look, it's really quite simple: there's one interpretation that is consistent with all of the known rules, and it's not the one you're making.

 

[Pinotage]

So, you realize you're proving my point, right? That example shows that chill touch must therefore not function the same way. Or, it's a mistake like I pointed out earlier.

I don't know. I was merely pointing out that there are other spells that are also mult-hold-the-charge. If that proves your point - yay!

Pinotage