MUST you hold a touch spell charge?

[Artoomis]

This is a spin-off of

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12992

When you cast a "touch" range spell you can hold the charge until you either cast another spell or touch something (anything, intentionally or otherwise).

The question, then, is MUST you hold the charge or may you simply choose NOT to hold the charge and let the charge go?

This is, of course, not the same as dismissing a spell - here the spell is in sort of a holding pattern with your hand charged up, ready to deliver the spell effect.

On a related note, does anyone use rules for when the spell caster might accidentally touch something and lose the charge (and thus the spell)?

 

[Voadam]

I say yes, until you touch something or cast another spell you can not discharge the spell. Although I would also say it was a free action to touch something like a wall you are standing next to, depending on the circumstances.

 

[Crothian]

Touching something to discharge it shouldn't be a problem as a free action. Depending on the spell the ground, a wall, or other objsect that is near should be enough to allow the spell to go.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Yeah - but touching the ground is a wee bit of a problem in aerial combat.

 

[Nellisir]

No, I'd say you can dismiss the spell at any time. If a cleric has cast inflict light wounds and, while holding it, a comrade is wounded, the cleric could dismiss the inflict light wounds in order to safely touch his comrade. Having to go through the mechanics of touching "something" seems overly rules-oriented and complicated (does it draw an attack of opportunity? what if you're in the air? Does air count as something? What about water? Can you touch an item without affecting the bearer?)

Nell.

 

[Gromm]

If you have inflict "on hold" and want to cast a cure, it will be replaced by the cure once you cast it, so theres no real need to dismiss the spell. You can only hold one charge, and any new touch spell simply replaces the previous spell.

 

[IceBear]

No, I'd say you can dismiss the spell at any time. If a cleric has cast inflict light wounds and, while holding it, a comrade is wounded, the cleric could dismiss the inflict light wounds in order to safely touch his comrade. Having to go through the mechanics of touching "something" seems overly rules-oriented and complicated (does it draw an attack of opportunity? what if you're in the air? Does air count as something? What about water? Can you touch an item without affecting the bearer?)

Nell.

No, it just requires the caster to think things through. If he thinks that there maybe a problem getting rid of the touch attack safely, then maybe he shouldn't cast it.

It seems that holding a charge can be inconvenient for spellcasters unless we give them a choice to stop holding the charge. Well, it isn't just touch spells that are inconvenient if the spell can't be dismissed. Look at Acid Fog. Let's say it was cast across the entrance to a passageway and then Demogorgon sneaks up behind the PCs causing them to want to run through the acid fog to the passway to escape. Since they added Dismissable to some 3E spell descriptions and not to others, it's logical to conclude that they wanted it this way to force casters to make a choice. In the above case, the caster can't dismiss the spell so he will either have to cast dispell magic to get rid of the effect, or he will have to move through the area of effect. Perhaps a Wall of Force, which is dismissable, was the better choice.

Anyway, they have clearly defined some spells to be dismissible. By default a touch spell isn't, so a caster will have to touch something or cast another spell to "dismiss" that spell (neither of which would normally be a large problem).

IceBear

 

[Artoomis]

I appear to be the ONLY one who appreciates the fact that the rule says you CAN hold the charge until...

Not MUST.

 

[AGGEMAM]

I appear to be the ONLY one who appreciates the fact that the rule says you CAN hold the charge until...

Not MUST.

Well, notice that the rules do not say that do not have to.

They only give two examples of what will end a touch spell.

 

[Artoomis]

Well, notice that the rules do not say that do not have to.

They only give two examples of what will end a touch spell.

Thank you. My point exactly. I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who thought so.