Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Borlon" data-source="post: 2624436" data-attributes="member: 27589">Because the attacks are delivered by touch.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Like scorching ray.But players know that a wizard can't make that many touch attacks in a round.&nbsp; That ability would be too far beyond what D&amp;D spells empower them to do, and they are not likely to think that this is what the spell means.&nbsp; The closest thing that makes sense is that chill touch is like shocking grasp, but that it allows multiple touches.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Borlon, post: 2624436, member: 27589"] 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 [I]chill[/I] 1 target/caster level. Like [i]scorching ray[/i]. 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 [i]chill touch[/i] is like [I]shocking grasp[/I], 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 [i]chill touch[/i] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification