Chill Touch

[Infiniti2000]

Basically any living thing that you touch takes 1d6 negative energy damage. If that doesn't allow for accidental discharge, I don't know what does.

The rules on holding the charge is the only thing that allows for accidental discharge, unless something else clearly states it (that I have not seen, and chill touch does not). It is this sentence (from the SRD): "If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges."

 

[Murrdox]

The rules on holding the charge is the only thing that allows for accidental discharge, unless something else clearly states it (that I have not seen, and chill touch does not). It is this sentence (from the SRD): "If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges."

Chill Touch text specifies "Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage". "Each Touch" does not discriminate between intentional OR unintentional touches. You must merely touch. Rules for accidental discharge are thus already included in the spell.

If you say that "Each Touch" only includes intentional touches, then you're reading something into the spell that is not there.

 

[Camarath]

But that other rule quote (p175 as you note) specifically only applies to willing targets. So, unless the targets of the chill touch are willing, then it's totally irrelevant..

To Chill Touch it is irrelevant but not to the issue on if you may touch more that one target as part of casting a spell.

More importantly, what rule allows you to touch multiple targets? Is it your contention that this sentence indirectly (it's clearly not direct) allows someone to touch multiple targets in the same round as part of casting the spell?

It is the following rule that explicitly allows you to touch multiple targets when using Chill Touch. You will note this rule makes no mention of willing targets.

PHB p176 "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.".

If so, please explain the descrepancy with regard to the rule "...up to six friends as a full-round action."

The "You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action." only applies when you are Holding the Charge of a Touch Spell. It does not apply if you "discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell".

Taken by itself, you have a point. But, it still violates other rules, specifically "You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll." You touch one friend as part of the spell. You have to make an attack roll versus enemies. How many attack rolls do you get per round, especially in a round that you take a standard action to cast spell (or even consider a quickened chill touch)?

As many as are specified in the text or Target line of the spell in the case of Chill Touch one per level.

Also, keep in mind that this rule (you mention p176) is specifically about "Touch Spells and Holding the Charge." If you utilize this rule and choose the interpretation that you'll be holding the charge on a chill touch, then you must abide by the rules on holding the charge.

The rule while under a section about "Touch Spells and Holding the Charge" is specifically about touch spells with which you can not hold the charge. You can not hold the charge and use these rules because the rule states "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.". These rules apply to Chill Touch because it allows multiple targets as is trigger specified in the preceding sentence "Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell.". Furthermore if this section of rule applies to Chill Touch then "you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell." and I think the spell allows you to do so.

Two more quotes on that regard:

"If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges."

"If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates."

Both of these rules apply when Holding the Charge which I do not think one can do with Chill Touch.

 

[ARandomGod]

I still say that a level 20 Wizard gets 20 chill touch attacks, even if those attacks are hours apart. Also I don't see anything to indicate that casting another spell disrupts Chill Touch, just like casting another spell doesn't disrupt Bull's Strength.

Since it's not dismissable, you not only get 20 chill touch attacks, but your next 20 touches WILL be chill touch attacks whether you want it or not. It's really kind of a shame that you can't cast this spell targeting someone other than yourself ... That would be a mean and interesting curse to put on a commoner.

Hours? Why not days or weeks or years? By your interpretation, a wizard should always have chill touch active. Since you're not following the rules for 'holding the charge' you don't have any of the downsides, such as accidentally discharging it on an ally. Just cast chill touch on an 'off' day and then you're always considered armed.

Right?

Apparently so. I've already thought of this. Be careful not to touch yourself at night though. And I won't even go into the difficulties around urinating while standing under the influence of this spell...


Camarath:

I'm not sure I completely understand what you're stating... but I am sure I disagree with you.

I think you might be saying that this spell allows you to touch up to 20 unwilling people in a round (for a 20th level wizard)... an interesting interpretation, and one that would negate or significantly alter your attack roll, as far as I can interpret it.

 

[Camarath]

Camarath:

I'm not sure I completely understand what you're stating... but I am sure I disagree with you.

I think you might be saying that this spell allows you to touch up to 20 unwilling people in a round (for a 20th level wizard)... an interesting interpretation, and one that would negate or significantly alter your attack roll, as far as I can interpret it.

I am not saying that you can automatically touch an unwilling target. I am saying that you get to make one touch attack per level and that doing so does not require addition actions. So a 20th level wizard would get to make 20 touch attacks as part of the spell.

 

[Infiniti2000]

It is the following rule that explicitly allows you to touch multiple targets when using Chill Touch. You will note this rule makes no mention of willing targets.

PHB p176 "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 think your point here is pretty good. As long as you don't reat it like holding the charge and that the spell totally expires in the round you cast it, then you have a valid interpretation. I suppose you could still touch people until your initiative next turn, too, because it would still be the same round. You'd threaten with it. Interesting....

 

[helium3]

God I hate this part of the bulletin board. I don't know why I keep reading it. It literally makes my brain hurt.

You ALL know how chill touch works, regardless of RAW. The wizard casts the spell and gets a number of touch attacks equal to his level. He gets one touch attack the same round he casts the spell and can make as many attacks per round after that as his BAB allows using the normal combat rules. He can keep the spell active for as long as he wants, as long as he does not cast another spell. Touching anything once the spell is cast causes one charge to dissipate, so picking his nose (which would be more productive than reading all the way through this post, btw), shaking someones hand or picking up an object would also discharge one of the charges.

Any other interpretation of the spell (especially the one that allows you to make exactly one attack unless you quicken it and get a full attack regardless of level) makes the spell not worth the paper its printed on.

You guys should lay off the RAW and start actually trying to help people with their questions.

 

[Borlon]

What I would love to see is an OGL text, gone over by the experts in this forum, that would be what 3.5 was supposed to be: third edition D&D without the errors, ambiguities and internal contradictions.

Of course, since we have 3.5, it would have to be 3.5 without the errors. Call it 3.75. It would give clear rules for chill touch, you could tell at a glance if a monk could qualify for INA, it would specify that humans are humanoids, and need to sleep every night, and so on.

Doesn't that sound like fun?

I nominate Hypersmurf to be in charge of it. He could give areas where rules are wonky, we could vote some rules down, (or in, if the area was unspecified) and then rewrite them as needed.

 

[ChefOrc]

Chill touch

you ALL know how chill touch works, regardless of RAW

I fully agree with you that this is how chill touch should be handled, and I think many of those who posted here would agree. I personnally use it that way in my games.

However, the point of this thread is to discuss the RAW and understand exactly how the spell works according to the rules. It may be futile in a sense, but it sure is fun and instructive. And we have apparently not reached a concensus, so we need to dig deeper into this!

 

[ChefOrc]

Chill touch

So a 20th level wizard would get to make 20 touch attacks as part of the spell

But how is that more in line with the rules? What you suggest does sound like an intuitive way to handle the spell, but then it completely ignores all the touch spells conventions (such as: touching 6 willing targets is a full round action, a touch spell gives 1 free attack) and also all the combat conventions. A wizard that can make 5 times more attacks in a round than a fighter could ever hope to do? And how does it affect your attack roll modifier? You certainly realize that in D&D you always (or almost always) get negative attack roll modifiers for making more than 1 attack. If you applied here the -5 per attack rule, it would again completely kill the spell, so how would you handle it in a way that's consistent with combat rules?

Can you explain why this spell should be interpreted in a way that's so contradictory to the conventions, both touch spell and combat, when that spell does not explicitely say so? Some spells do say something like "this is an exception to rule X", or whatever, but chill touch does not say that.