Targeting into Concealment

[IcyCool]

What is the difference between a spell that can be delivered by touch (close spells) or a spell that can only be delivered by touch (touch range spells)?

If it helps, the spell isn't being delivered by touch, it's being targeted by touch.

 

[Hypersmurf]

What is the difference between a spell that can be delivered by touch (close spells) or a spell that can only be delivered by touch (touch range spells)?

I'd rephrase that - the difference between a spell that can be delivered to a creature you are touching (or anyone you can see within 25+ feet), or a spell that can only be delivered by touch.

The Close spell is not delivered by touch; it's delivered to a creature within range whom you can target.

Can a wizard "hold" his charm person spell? You can with any spell delivered by touch.

No, you can with any touch spell. Which is a spell with a range of touch.

Charm Person, yet again, has a range of 'Close', not 'Touch'.

So where does the line get drawn?

If the range is 'Touch', it's a touch spell. If the range isn't 'Touch', it's not a touch spell.

If your spell is not a touch spell, that restricts you from holding the charge, from delivering via Spectral Hand, from delivering via familiar. It doesn't restrict you from targeting a creature you are touching.

And if the range is read such that "ranged" spells are not "touch" spells it eliminates a whole lot of potential inconsisitencies in the rules - which leads me to believe that is the intent.

Ranged spells are not touch spells. I agree completely.

But there's nothing to stop you targeting a creature whom you are touching with a ranged spell. Other things are only available to touch spells. This isn't one of them.

-Hyp.

 

[Jhulae]

Makes perfect sense to me, especialy the way Hyp broke it down.

 

[irdeggman]

From Questions of the day at the WotC site.



05/31/2006

Q: A question came up where an invisible sorcerer under greater invisibility cast a cone of cold on the party. On my turn I tried to cast hold person on him, and we were unsure of what would happen -- whether or not I could target him because the cone originated from his square, or if just the square he was standing in was too vague for the hold person to work?
--Ryan

A: Actually, if you cannot see your target for a spell such as hold person, you cannot target them with the spell. Simply knowing the location they happened to inhabit upon casting a cone of cold wouldn’t be good enough for this purpose.
--Chris Lindsay

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/ask

This seems to be an almost exact comparison to charm person spell.

 

[Hypersmurf]

From Questions of the day at the WotC site.

Just knowing the square isn't enough, true.

We know from the rules for targeted spells that you must be able to see or touch the target.

When Chris says "if you cannot see, you cannot target", he's almost right. If he'd said "if you cannot see or touch, you cannot target", he would have been following what's written in the rules for targeted spells.

If you had to answer Ryan's question just using the PHB, you can quite happily say "No, you can't target him". And you can show the rule that prevents it - "You must be able to see or touch the target".

But if Ryan comes back with "I'm holding the invisible sorcerer's hand", there is no longer a rule in the PHB that prevents him targeting the sorcerer. He fulfils the requirement than "You must be able to see or touch the target".

-Hyp.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Here's my way of putting it:

Hold person when targetted in the dark because you can touch the person is no more a touch spell than hold person is a "gaze" spell when cast in the light because you can see them.

 

[durza120]

Or you could just use a spell like fire storm or flame strike and hit the entire concealed area.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Or you could just use a spell like fire storm or flame strike and hit the entire concealed area.

Right, 'cause firestorm's always my backup attack plan to charm person.

 

[green slime]

Does the enchantment cause her to view the caster as her friend, or only someone she thinks is the caster?

IMO, it is obvious that when the WWotE (posing as the WWotW) turns up and asks Dorothy to do something, Dorothy is under no compunction whatsoever to do as she is bid. Then when the monkey turns up, Dorothy finds herself compelled to view the monkey as her very best friend. This may cause Dorothy to question her reality somewhat.

 

[Hypersmurf]

IMO, it is obvious that when the WWotE (posing as the WWotW) turns up and asks Dorothy to do something, Dorothy is under no compunction whatsoever to do as she is bid. Then when the monkey turns up, Dorothy finds herself compelled to view the monkey as her very best friend. This may cause Dorothy to question her reality somewhat.

Now, under this ruling, we don't have the problem irdeggman outlined, namely "If the targeted creature is not affected by the darkness then it is possible for this to work since it could discern which creature is specifically 'its new friend'."

You can discern which creature is your new friend, because it's the voice you feel the strange compulsion to agree with...

Otherwise, you've got a defence against Charm Person. If you fail your save, close your eyes!

"I command you to tell me the secret password!"
"I don't know who you are."
"But you're my friend!"
"How do I know that?"
"Open your eyes! I command you to open your eyes!"
"I don't know who you are."

-Hyp.