Have touch spells always kept the charge when missing?

[Li Shenron]

Does anyone have any insight about possible older rules for touch spells, during the development & playtest times of 3ed edition? Any former playtester here remembers if touch spells worked differently?

For the first time, out of nowhere, I wondered if it is possible that at any point a touch spell was meant to discharge even on a failed touch attack. You know, in 3.0 many touch spell seems not to give a saving throw, and same was with ray spells. But if you miss a ranged attack with a ray your spells is gone, while if you miss a melee attack with a touch spell you can still try over and over. Obviously, the touch spell still have the disadvantage that you must get close to the target, but is it enough? After all, we all complained hard about 3.0 Harm and Heal not granting a save for example.

I probably didn't pay enough attention but in some CRPGs I got the impression that when you miss the touch attack for a touch spell, the spell is gone.

Also what about previous editions?

 

[Orichin]

If you don't think having to get within 5 feet of an enemy is enough drawback to allow you to try multiple times, think about what happens when your 15th level cleric with 114 hp gets within heal reach of the evil lich's 20th level vampire monk bodyguard with an amulet of mighty fists +4 that hits for 2d10+18 5 times per round plus up to 10 negative levels, drawing his attention with some nasty touch spell. See that's the thing, sometimes the benefit of being able to hold a touch spell just isn't worth it anyway, I'm sure you can think of plenty of examples where all reason and tactics would shout for your character to stay back and blow a few spell slots on rays and whatnot. Touch spells are designed to entice the casters into dangerous situations, taking risks, and encouraging group cooperation (some touch spells are vicious, a group that learns to take advantage of them well can take down powerful enemies fast )

 

[Plane Sailing]

However, with spectral hand giving wizards a pretty safe way of delivering touch spells from range (and heirophant/archmage abilities allow it completely safely), I can understand how it might seem excessive.

Cheers

 

[Li Shenron]

If you don't think having to get within 5 feet of an enemy is enough drawback to allow you to try multiple times, think about what happens when your 15th level cleric with 114 hp gets within heal reach of the evil lich's 20th level vampire monk bodyguard

Hey you cannot say that with an example of a 15th character against a monster of at least CR 24! That's plain unfair

Anyway, one doesn't have to go as far as using Spectral Hand or Reach Spell. A melee cleric is not as good as a melee fighter of course, but it's still regarded as effective in melee, and since casting Harm/Heal ignores armor he usually doesn't need more than a couple of attempts before touching the target. I think everyone agrees that those 2 spells were too good without a save, that's why I wondered if perhaps in early days of developing 3ed rules those touch spells were supposed to be discharged on a failed attack.

 

[the Jester]

I believe that in earlier editions, you got one shot with your touch spells. If you missed the spell was gone. There may have been a couple of exceptions (vampiric touch, f'rinstance) and I may be misremembering. As to playtesting rules, Piratecat might be able to help you out- his group playtested the 3e rules.

 

[shilsen]

If you don't think having to get within 5 feet of an enemy is enough drawback to allow you to try multiple times, think about what happens when your 15th level cleric with 114 hp gets within heal reach of the evil lich's 20th level vampire monk bodyguard with an amulet of mighty fists +4 that hits for 2d10+18 5 times per round plus up to 10 negative levels, drawing his attention with some nasty touch spell.

Minor hijack. A vampire can only use its energy drain ability once a round, so causing 10 negative levels in a round is impossible.

 

[Li Shenron]

I believe that in earlier editions, you got one shot with your touch spells. If you missed the spell was gone. There may have been a couple of exceptions (vampiric touch, f'rinstance) and I may be misremembering. As to playtesting rules, Piratecat might be able to help you out- his group playtested the 3e rules.

My experience with earlier editions is very limited would be very nice if someone could confirm this, and maybe quote some of the spells which worked this way.

Really I'm not sure, but wasn't the CRPG Baldur's Gate working like this, that it allowed only 1 attack?

 

[d(sqrt(-1))]

I believe that in earlier editions, you got one shot with your touch spells. If you missed the spell was gone. There may have been a couple of exceptions (vampiric touch, f'rinstance) and I may be misremembering.

That sounds about right to me - mind you I don't think it was actually specified either way anywhere, so the general assumption was that they worked like other spells and were one shot. Combined with the fact that there was no touch AC, and as a result they weren't generally very popular!

cheers,

Mark

 

[XO]

1E Touch Spells

Those were indeed "do or die" (charge wise, anyway). Either you managed to deliver or the spell was effectively gone. 1E did not even have a Touch AC, although most campaigns eventually "house ruled" a variant... Having to hit in the same way as a weapon was an incredible deterrent for touch dweomers.

Tha't the word !

 

[ARandomGod]

Those were indeed "do or die" (charge wise, anyway). Either you managed to deliver or the spell was effectively gone. 1E did not even have a Touch AC, although most campaigns eventually "house ruled" a variant... Having to hit in the same way as a weapon was an incredible deterrent for touch dweomers.

Tha't the word !

I confirm, touch spells used to discharge with the attempted touch.