Chill Touch

[Philip]

I think RAW is just about the only type of rule debate with which you can have any certainty. I find it rather futile to debate subjective things like common sense, what the rules were intended to mean, or how someone else should play the game. Everyone has their own opinions about what the game is and how it should be played, as they are entitled to. But RAW is much less subjective, being a limited body of writings, and thus can actually be discussed with some hope of proving one's interpitations or having them disproved.

You must always interpret, there is just no way around it. You can go looking up exact definitions of each term used, and look up their definitions until you end up where you start.

The RAW never says you can stand on one foot, does that mean you can't?
The RAW never says you cannot do 20d6 damage by blinking at someone, does this mean you can?

Intepretation of the RAW is always neccessary, really it is. The RAW is not about the words, its about what they mean.

 

[glass]

Since this is so obviously the way the spell should be handled could you please explain what this rule means? And if this rule does not apply to Chill Touch what spell does it apply to?

"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."

Your argument begs the question. If Chill Touch works as I described, then it is not a 'touch spell [that allows] you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell', so that rule is irrelevant.

FWIW, unlike most of the debates I get involved with here, I don't think in this case the RAW is explicit enough in this case for there to be a definitive answer. I believe my answer is the most consistant interpretation, but not the only consistant one.


glass.

 

[Borlon]

Teleport affects multiple targets simultaneously; chill touch affects multiple targets consecutively. So each touch attack is treated according to the rules for holding the charge, and when one charge is used up, you go on to the next one, until 1 touch/level has been used up.

That's how people interpret it, I think. Although it is odd that "everyone" would play it that way if that is not the way that the RAW would have you play it. Just like it would be odd if everyone played Chess with White's player going second, despite the fact that the rules of Chess say that White's player goes first.

I wonder how people learn it the one way, when the rules say to do it a different way? I don't think it is necessarily that they learn it from other players; lots of folks learn that spell from the books. And if everybody would naturally play it one way, why would the people who wrote the rules have written it differently?

Very strange.

 

[ARandomGod]

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.

Ah. Communication. I do agree with that. Of course, it does require you to make a touch attack for each one, but now I'm pretty sure you are including that. (As opposed to absolutely no additional actions.)

Bah,

Everybody realizes how Chill Touch is supposed to work, it's just that the text is unclear and does not unequivocally support it. They should have written it like they did with produce flame....

You know, I don't actually see it as unclear. Even on a second (third, etc) reading inspired by the realization that other people clearly do. I think they're confused by how OTHER spells work, and wanting to apply some of the way those spells work to this spell... but I don't think that this spell is really written all that poorly.

Of course, the very fact that a number of people are disagreeing means that it could be written more clearly.

 

[Murrdox]

"Chill Touch" mechanically works exactly the same as "Shocking Grasp" in terms of how the spell is phrased. The only difference is that Chill Touch has the added mechanic of:

"You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level."

This mechanic breaks a lot of rules, and not enough detail is provided by it. If we interpret "Chill Touch" we end up with the following:

1) Chill Touch is not Dismissable (even though the words "can" and "up to" in the sentence above indicate that it should be) thus a 20th level wizard who casts Chill Touch must touch 20 things before the spell will leave him. The Wizard need not make all these attacks in the round that the spell is cast.

2) Chill Touch is Instantaneous in duration, but at the same time allows you to make 1 touch per level. Although the spell itself is instantaneous, if the touches are never discharged, the effects of the spell potentially last forever.

3) Chill Touch is not dispellable, since the spell itself is instantanous.

4) While Chill Touch allows for multiple attacks, it does NOT require the caster to "Hold the Charge". Thus the "Hold the Charge" rules that specify that the spell is lost if another spell is cast do not apply. A Wizard can cast "Chill Touch" and keep casting other spells, even other touch spells.

By the RAW, this is how the spell works.

If we would add in the following:

"The wizard can dismiss the effects of Chill Touch at will. Casting any other spell erases any additional Chill Touch attacks the caster has not made."

Then we end up with Chill Touch as I believe most people use it.

The other alternative we could do is to FORCE casters who cast "Chill Touch" to hold the charge. What this would mean is that if a level 20 Wizard casts Chill Touch, then he can hold the charge, and next round make as many melee attacks as he can, making them all Chill Touches. He could continue doing this for as many rounds as he likes. As long as the wizard continues to "Hold the Charge" then the spell will never fully discharge until the wizard has used up all the attacks with the spell that he is granted. Thus, the wizard could volunarily stop "Holding the Charge" or he could cast another spell to cancel the effect.

 

[Camarath]

Your argument begs the question. If Chill Touch works as I described, then it is not a 'touch spell [that allows] you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell', so that rule is irrelevant.

I think that Chill Touch is very clearly a touch spell that allow you to touch multiple targets. Its target line is "Creature or creatures touched (up to one/level)". Its text states "You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level.". If that is true then the second part of that rule must apply (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.). You yourself asserted that Chill Touch allowed you to touch multiple targets.

On subsequent rounds, you can attack with the spell again for each attack you have, and continue to do so until you run out of uses.

I do not think the spell can work as you assert. You have a contradiction either the spell does not allow you to touch multiple targets in which case you can Hold the Charge or the spell does allow you to touch multiple targets in which case you can not Hold the Charge.

 

[Camarath]

Teleport affects multiple targets simultaneously; chill touch affects multiple targets consecutively.

Why does Chill Touch function in a different manner from Scorching Ray and Telekinesis?

 

[Borlon]

Why does Chill Touch function in a different manner from Scorching Ray and Telekinesis?

Because the attacks are delivered by touch. If they were ranged touch attacks, people would probably play the spell as being over in 1 round; you choose your targets and chill 1 target/caster level. Like scorching ray.

But players know that a wizard can't make that many touch attacks in a round. That ability would be too far beyond what D&D spells empower them to do, and they are not likely to think that this is what the spell means. The closest thing that makes sense is that chill touch is like shocking grasp, but that it allows multiple touches. You still make touch attacks in the normal way (once when you cast the spell, and in subsequent rounds according to your BAB and the type of attack actions you choose) but consecutive touches are empowered with the chill touch spell.

I think there is a bias to playing spells according to a (fairly small) set of paradigms, and that when the wording of the spell is wonky, the spell will be read as if it fit a nearby paradigm. I wonder if this shows up in playtesting? If ambiguous spell descriptions were sent to different playtest groups, and the interpretations analyzed, I bet that many spells that are written as X would be played as if they were written as Y, unless the description is very, very clear that the designer meant X and not Y.

 

[Camarath]

Because the attacks are delivered by touch. If they were ranged touch attacks, people would probably play the spell as being over in 1 round; you choose your targets and chill 1 target/caster level. Like scorching ray.

Why does this rule not apply?

"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."

 

[Borlon]

If it was a friendly spell (like planeshift) it would probably be played that way, although folks might balk if the numbers got much higher than 6; then they would probably try to have the targets all be linked by touch, instead of touched. But they wouldn't think that the spell gives them a whirlwind attack mode unless it was called out.

I am not arguing that the RAW does not support you, BTW. I think your rules citations are right on. I am just speculating as to why people don't play it that way.