3
\$\begingroup\$

I was reading the Magus class and using the spell strike class ability it lets you channel a touch spell with your melee weapon. If there is a spell which meets the requirements could it be applied to each hit of the weapon once you have a high enough bab (or if the spell combat feature works when you multi-class and the new class gives you an ability to make more attacks like flurry of blows)?

The requirements for the spell would that it needs to be touch (not sure if ranged touch works) and can be applied multiple times, often this is seen as creatures/level.

\$\endgroup\$
3
\$\begingroup\$

To all of them.

Spellstrike At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack.

Note that this part does not mention the free touch attack granted by casting a touch spell. Meaning that even if your free touch attack miss, or you decide to hold the charge, you can still attempt to deliver the spell with future melee attacks.

The spell will be discharged on the first attack that hits, just like it happens with the normal touch attacks. This could even be an attack of opportunity.

If you are a wizard and you cast Shocking Grasp and miss your target, you can keep trying again, if you have multiple attacks, you can attempt to touch with each of those attacks. The same is valid for the magus. Spellstrike allows you to deliver touch spells with melee attacks.

In the case of Chill Touch, you can discharge it once per attack, limited to one discharge per level. But keep in mind that this spell is vague and the Duration can be either until all charges are used or all attacks you can make this round. And the Effect can be either you can deliver a charge per attack or you can attempt one attack per level as part of the casting, allowing you to deliver 14 attacks in a single cast if you happen to be 14th level. So be careful when applying RaW to this spell, check with your GM how he would rule it.

Example

To be clearer, say you are a 9th level magus, which has a +6/+1 BAB, you just got your secondary attack. With Spell Combat, you can cast a spell on one hand, while still attacking with the other, just as if you had an offhand weapon and were two-weapon fighting.

So, if you cast a spell during a full round attack, it can be cast either before or after the attacks (but not between them). Also, with Spell Strike, you are allowed to deliver your melee touch spells with melee attacks instead. Replacing a non-damaging touch with something that will hurt.

You could:

  • Cast Shocking Grasp, and then deliver it with a free melee strike.
  • First attack from your full-attack.
  • Second attack form your full-attack.

For a total of three melee attacks. If the free attack misses, you could use the Hold Charge option and try again on the next possible attack, meaning you could attempt to discharge it three times in a round. All of these attacks suffer -2 due to you casting and attacking with spell combat, just like happens with two-weapon fighting.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I agree that my attempted usage of this is a special case and the DM would have to rule for it each time. But I just wanted to see if it was logically sound. \$\endgroup\$ – Fering Jun 3 '15 at 16:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ Are you talking about chill touch? The spell isnt clearly written, that is all. The intent though is to allow something along the lines of Druid's Produce Flame or Flame Blade. Allowing you use a single spell to help in combat over an extended duration. \$\endgroup\$ – ShadowKras Jun 3 '15 at 16:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ Back in second edition, Chill Touch was 3 rounds + 1 round per level. \$\endgroup\$ – ShadowKras Jun 3 '15 at 16:25
3
\$\begingroup\$

The spell Chill Touch does exactly what you want.

The duration is instantaneous and it specifically states

Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage. The touched creature also takes 1 point of Strength damage unless it makes a successful Fortitude saving throw. You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level.

This is the only spell that is capable of this as far as I am aware.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ It’s probably worth noting that Spell Strike is compatible with this usage, and perhaps also whether or not Spell Strike is compatible with Flurry of Blows or similar. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 2 '15 at 21:30
0
\$\begingroup\$

All spell strike allows you to do is make an armed melee attack instead of a touch attack when you cast the spell. If the spell in question would allow you to make multiple free touch attacks, then I think it would allow you to make the same number of free melee attacks, but I don't think such a spell exists (EDIT: Chill touch as stated above).

Most multi-target touch spells are harmless (water breathing), but the rules state that you can make affect hostile targets by making touch attacks, but only 1 as part of the spell.

You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

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.

Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.

About holding the charge:

If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges.

So I don't think you can make multiple hostile touch attacks post-casting normally.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I switched your quotes to using quote boxes, to make them clearer, but you should indicate where these quotes are coming from. Also, your own “About holding the charge:” appears to precede the wrong quote; I didn’t change that in case I misunderstood, but that seems like it goes with the quote two prior. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 2 '15 at 21:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for?Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.