[PEACH] Scalding Spell [Metamagic] [Archive] - Wizards Community

[PEACH] Scalding Spell [Metamagic] [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tuhljin
04-29-07, 10:25 PM SCALDING SPELL [METAMAGIC]

Your fire spells can be channeled into great gouts of scalding steam which clings to your enemies.

[There's a lot to read, so here's the short version for the curious, though the full version is of course what should be "PEACHed." Scalding spells are like fire-only empowered spells that deal half of the extra damage one round later and give affected creatures a -2 penalty on Reflex saves until the end of your next turn. They also ignore some of the special rules for fire being cast into/through water and gain the water descriptor.]

Prerequisite: Steam Magic (feat in Stormwrack).

Benefit: Whether used in or out of water, a scalding spell appears as a superheated cloud of steam. These spells typically start as a small explosion of fire and water that form a rush of hot vapors which rapidly spread to fill the area of effect. On a failed Reflex save, a scalding spell drenches any creatures caught in its area with a boiling film of water that deals fire damage when the spell hits as well as some additional fire damage on the next round as the liquid evaporates. A creature that takes additional damage from this effect during the first round also takes a -2 penalty on Reflex saves until the end of your next turn, at which point the film has dealt all its damage and evaporates. If the creature aborbs all the additional fire damage on the first round, the penalty does not apply. The penalty does not stack with itself, should the creature be subjected to another scalding spell. The amount of damage is equal to half the fire damage dealt by the spell (round down) and is spread evenly over both rounds (divide by two, round up for first round and down on second round). For example, a scalding fireball that deals 23 fire damage to a creature will also deal an additional 11 fire damage to the creature: 6 when the spell first hits and another 5 on the following round. If the spell later deals more fire damage to the creature (beyond that added as described above), the creature is subjected to more boiling water and takes fire damage equal to half of this newly dealt damage, spread again over two rounds.

Unlike most fire spells, the surface of a body of water does not block the line of effect of a scalding spell. Spells that indicate they do not function to full effect (or at all) while underwater to which this metamagic feat is applied will function to full effect underwater. For instance, fire trap will deal full (instead of half) damage while underwater.

A scalding spell does not catch creatures or objects on fire, even if the base spell does. A non-instaneous scalding spell can extinguish non-magical fires and magical fires susceptible to mundane methods of putting them out if a dense cloud of water vapor of the spell's size would do so. Generally, only fires no stronger than a torch's are affected. (Fire strength is a measure of intensity, not size, though a scalding spell of course only puts out portions of a fire it interacts with.)

Scalding Spell can only be applied to spells that allow Reflex saves, affect an area (a cone, cylinder, line, or burst), and that have the fire descriptor - whether it had the descriptor originally or it was applied later, such as through the Energy Substitution feat. In addition to the fire descriptor, a scalding spell is given the water descriptor. A scalding spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.

Special: Scalding Spell cannot be used on a spell that is altered by any effect or ability that would change all of the fire damage dealt into another type of damage or that would remove the spell's fire descriptor. It may still be used in combination with abilities that add additional damage of another type or that change some, but not all, of the damage to another type, but the additional damage caused by this feat is based only on the fire damage dealt.

Normal: The surface of a body of water blocks the line of effect for a fire spell. If the caster has made a Spellcraft check to make the fire spell usable underwater, the surface still blocks the spell's line of effect. For example, a fireball cast underwater cannot be targeted at creatures above the surface. (The feat Steam Magic removes the necessity of the Spellcraft check but does not change this rule.)
tarkin
04-30-07, 11:32 AM It does 50% more damage, it should be +2 levels, like Empower.

The additional restrictions you put in are not enough to lower it to +1 level.
Tuhljin
04-30-07, 04:56 PM If that's the case, then for me the question is whether to move the adjustment to +2 and otherwise leave as is, change something to justify a +1 adjustment, or - if it would still be balanced - change the adjustment to +2 and change something about it so it differentiates itself from Empower Spell a little more. (You may ask why it should get anything more than Empower Spell if it's at +2 - well, maybe it shouldn't, but it does require another generally-not-so-useful feat while empower spell doesn't... if that matters... and Empower Spell is strictly better in some ways since the damage is up front and can be of any type - and it affects other variable effects, not just damage.) Any suggestions? Here are a few things I thought about:

Lower power level:
- Make it require an additional feat. "Any metamagic" probably. But would that, alone or in combination with something else, justify keeping the adjustment at +1? Maybe it could require Empower Spell itself.
- Allow creatures affected by scalding to take a standard action (that provokes attacks of opportunity) to avoid damage from the scalding on the following round.
- Lower additional damage dealt. What would be an appropriate number, down from 50%? 25%?

Raise power level:
- While affected by the scalding liquid, creatures take a small penalty to Reflex saves due to the scalding pain. Creatures immune to pain effects are immune to this additional effect.
- While affected, creatures' movement is hampered. Perhaps half speed. Creatures immune to pain effects are immune to this additional effect.
- If the creature takes any fire damage from the scalding effect, while affected by it, it is considered to have 5 less fire resistance than it normally does.

Either way:
- Make additional damage start on the next round - none at first - and continue on the round after it. (If combined with allowing creatures to remove the scalding liquid as mentioned above, power level lowers as the additional damage can be avoided. If combined with an additional effect such as lowering speed, extra time is a boon.)

A combination of things that lower and raise power could be used, as well. I particularly like this idea:
- Set the adjustment to +2, add movement hampering and perhaps a small penalty to Reflex saves while affected by the scalding liquid, and - if necessary for balance - add "any metamagic feat" as a requirement.

This is just some brainstorming. Input would be appreciated.
Tuhljin
05-01-07, 11:27 PM What do you think of my proposed changes? Any suggestions from anyone?
Tuhljin
05-05-07, 12:40 AM Edited the feat. It now has a +2 spell level adjustment but it also gives a -2 penalty to Reflex saves if enemies take damage from the boiling film. This is a key feat for an upcoming campaign and a prestige class I'm creating, so please let me know what you think.
Tuhljin
05-07-07, 02:31 AM Reworded the "Special" section for clarity. Added "short" description for those that don't want to sift through the wall of text.

I think I'm going to present this feat to players in a week or so, so let me know if anything needs to be changed.
Nehpets
05-07-07, 09:52 PM I beleive it is a very good feat and actually well balanced. My only issue is the requirement to have the spell allow a Reflex Save not really because of balance but mainly because in adding that requirement it bars any of my spellcasters from using it. It wouldn't bother me as much if it forced the spell to require a save but personally I don't like how resticting that is on my casters.
Tuhljin
05-07-07, 11:04 PM The wording for the Reflex save requirement and the requirement that it affect an area was taken from the feat Explosive Spell in Complete Arcane. I'm sort "on the fence" right now as to whether those requirements should be in place, as they do limit it from being used on spells like orb of fire, but I'm leaning toward leaving it as is. Any arguments either way would be appreciated, though.

I wonder though if I should have scalding spells deal extra damage, but not apply the Reflex penalty, when creatures succeed on their Reflex saves (of course, if they have improved evasion, the extra fire damage is 50% of nothing, so it's still nothing). After all, empowered spells are empowered even if a save is made.
Nehpets
05-14-07, 02:31 PM I understand your problem with the orbs as my favorite charachter is a specialist in them that is why I suggested that when this is applied to a spell that spell then gains a reflex save so it would do almost the same thing. This would make the feat more usable but still help balance it out
Tuhljin
05-14-07, 08:50 PM Everyone:
Here is the link to the prestige class I built that uses Scalding Spell as a prerequisite. Comments are more than welcome! Steam Mage (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=844265).

Nehpets:
I understand the concern and I would like to allow an "orb of steam" spell, but there are potential problems if it's opened up like that. (The PrC I just linked to does allow such things, by the way, but without some of the additional benefits of scalding spells.) First, there are many spells that don't make "conceptual sense" as scalding spells. Say you've got a fire spell that internally heats the target's liquids (blood and whatnot). It doesn't make a lot of sense to require a Reflex save at all, even if you could rationalize some way that scalding steam pours onto their skin somehow. Second, the rules for the feat are a bit unwieldy as is and that would only add more, especially if rules to fix the problem in #1 are introduced. How would you deal with that?
AtmaWeapon
05-14-07, 09:30 PM I think at it's current state and flavor, you would be justified in allowing this feat to operate with spells with the Air descriptor as well. I would suggest that a [Fire] spell prepared with this gain the [Air] descriptor, and an [Air] spell gains the [Fire] descriptor.

My main concern would be that the feat doesn't really provide enough of a mechanical advantage to justify taking it over Empower spell, which does all of it's damage upfront and can be used on any spell with variable damage. The ultimate thing that can discourage people from taking new homebrew content is not providing enough incentive for people to take a homebrew feat over a book feat.

Another possible suggestion is to replace "Suffers a -2 penalty to Reflex Saves" with "Suffers a penalty on reflex saves equal to the level of the spell altered with this feat, counting the +2 level adjustment." That way, if you Scalding Spell a fireball, they're looking at bonus damage and a -5 on reflex, which could swing the balance in your favor, despite the limited spell selection.
Tuhljin
05-15-07, 10:49 PM The flavor of the ability is that you're mixing Water with the Fire to create steam, and this ties in with the Steam Mage prestige class I linked. The connection to Air makes sense in some ways, but I don't think I need to add the Air descriptor. Obscuring mist, for instance, doesn't have that descriptor, even though it's vapor floating around in the air. (It doesn't have the Water descriptor either, actually.) Also, I don't think that adding a dash of fire to an Air spell such as whirlwind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/whirlwind.htm) would necessarily make the wind "steamy" - I'd see that as more of a tornado of fire.

(Thinking about this gives me a different idea, though. Isn't the traditional mix of Fire and Air smoke? I could see the creation of a different metamagic feat that combines the two into floating embers and smoke that inflicts some damage, obscures vision, and might make you sickened (or something) if you breathe in the smoke.)

As far as how big the Reflex penalty should be... if -2 is too weak, I'm open to tweaking it. At first examination, though, it seems that setting it at the level of the spell cast might be too much.
AtmaWeapon
05-16-07, 07:31 PM The flavor of the ability is that you're mixing Water with the Fire to create steam, and this ties in with the Steam Mage prestige class I linked. The connection to Air makes sense in some ways, but I don't think I need to add the Air descriptor. Obscuring mist, for instance, doesn't have that descriptor, even though it's vapor floating around in the air. (It doesn't have the Water descriptor either, actually.) Also, I don't think that adding a dash of fire to an Air spell such as whirlwind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/whirlwind.htm) would necessarily make the wind "steamy" - I'd see that as more of a tornado of fire.

I just picked that because there's no [water] descriptor, they all become [cold], which is the antithesis of what you want to do :P

Overall, I guess what I'm trying to say is open it up a bit more. I personally wouldn't take this feat just because the range of spells to which it can be applied is so small.

As far as how big the Reflex penalty should be... if -2 is too weak, I'm open to tweaking it. At first examination, though, it seems that setting it at the level of the spell cast might be too much.

Well, I suggested that cause it's not obscene right away, but scales at high level, where things either have rediculous reflex saves, or poor ones anyway.
Tuhljin
05-16-07, 07:51 PM I just picked that because there's no [water] descriptor, they all become [cold], which is the antithesis of what you want to do :P
But there is a Water descriptor.. Descriptors from the SRD. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#Descriptor) I know that cold damage is often associated with water, but that's not always the case.

Overall, I guess what I'm trying to say is open it up a bit more. I personally wouldn't take this feat just because the range of spells to which it can be applied is so small.
I don't see many ways to open it up to more spells because of the nature of the thing, unfortunately, though I'm thinking about loosening the Reflex requirement to allow ranged touch spells as well.

I'd like to hear more opinions about the Reflex penalty. Anyone else out there have an opinion? -2 too little? Equal to spell level too much or just right? More input would be very helpful.
AtmaWeapon
05-16-07, 08:12 PM But there is a Water descriptor.. Descriptors from the SRD. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#Descriptor) I know that cold damage is often associated with water, but that's not always the case.

Well I'll be damned. I never bothered to check, since I can't think of any spells off the top of my head that use it. Probably for Summon spells and such.

I don't see many ways to open it up to more spells because of the nature of the thing, unfortunately, though I'm thinking about loosening the Reflex requirement to allow ranged touch spells as well.

Seems logical, I mean jet of steam and all that.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tuhljin 04-29-07, 10:25 PM	SCALDING SPELL [METAMAGIC] Your fire spells can be channeled into great gouts of scalding steam which clings to your enemies. [There's a lot to read, so here's the short version for the curious, though the full version is of course what should be "PEACHed." Scalding spells are like fire-only empowered spells that deal half of the extra damage one round later and give affected creatures a -2 penalty on Reflex saves until the end of your next turn. They also ignore some of the special rules for fire being cast into/through water and gain the water descriptor.] Prerequisite: Steam Magic (feat in Stormwrack). Benefit: Whether used in or out of water, a scalding spell appears as a superheated cloud of steam. These spells typically start as a small explosion of fire and water that form a rush of hot vapors which rapidly spread to fill the area of effect. On a failed Reflex save, a scalding spell drenches any creatures caught in its area with a boiling film of water that deals fire damage when the spell hits as well as some additional fire damage on the next round as the liquid evaporates. A creature that takes additional damage from this effect during the first round also takes a -2 penalty on Reflex saves until the end of your next turn, at which point the film has dealt all its damage and evaporates. If the creature aborbs all the additional fire damage on the first round, the penalty does not apply. The penalty does not stack with itself, should the creature be subjected to another scalding spell. The amount of damage is equal to half the fire damage dealt by the spell (round down) and is spread evenly over both rounds (divide by two, round up for first round and down on second round). For example, a scalding fireball that deals 23 fire damage to a creature will also deal an additional 11 fire damage to the creature: 6 when the spell first hits and another 5 on the following round. If the spell later deals more fire damage to the creature (beyond that added as described above), the creature is subjected to more boiling water and takes fire damage equal to half of this newly dealt damage, spread again over two rounds. Unlike most fire spells, the surface of a body of water does not block the line of effect of a scalding spell. Spells that indicate they do not function to full effect (or at all) while underwater to which this metamagic feat is applied will function to full effect underwater. For instance, fire trap will deal full (instead of half) damage while underwater. A scalding spell does not catch creatures or objects on fire, even if the base spell does. A non-instaneous scalding spell can extinguish non-magical fires and magical fires susceptible to mundane methods of putting them out if a dense cloud of water vapor of the spell's size would do so. Generally, only fires no stronger than a torch's are affected. (Fire strength is a measure of intensity, not size, though a scalding spell of course only puts out portions of a fire it interacts with.) Scalding Spell can only be applied to spells that allow Reflex saves, affect an area (a cone, cylinder, line, or burst), and that have the fire descriptor - whether it had the descriptor originally or it was applied later, such as through the Energy Substitution feat. In addition to the fire descriptor, a scalding spell is given the water descriptor. A scalding spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level. Special: Scalding Spell cannot be used on a spell that is altered by any effect or ability that would change all of the fire damage dealt into another type of damage or that would remove the spell's fire descriptor. It may still be used in combination with abilities that add additional damage of another type or that change some, but not all, of the damage to another type, but the additional damage caused by this feat is based only on the fire damage dealt. Normal: The surface of a body of water blocks the line of effect for a fire spell. If the caster has made a Spellcraft check to make the fire spell usable underwater, the surface still blocks the spell's line of effect. For example, a fireball cast underwater cannot be targeted at creatures above the surface. (The feat Steam Magic removes the necessity of the Spellcraft check but does not change this rule.)
tarkin 04-30-07, 11:32 AM	It does 50% more damage, it should be +2 levels, like Empower. The additional restrictions you put in are not enough to lower it to +1 level.
Tuhljin 04-30-07, 04:56 PM	If that's the case, then for me the question is whether to move the adjustment to +2 and otherwise leave as is, change something to justify a +1 adjustment, or - if it would still be balanced - change the adjustment to +2 and change something about it so it differentiates itself from Empower Spell a little more. (You may ask why it should get anything more than Empower Spell if it's at +2 - well, maybe it shouldn't, but it does require another generally-not-so-useful feat while empower spell doesn't... if that matters... and Empower Spell is strictly better in some ways since the damage is up front and can be of any type - and it affects other variable effects, not just damage.) Any suggestions? Here are a few things I thought about: Lower power level: - Make it require an additional feat. "Any metamagic" probably. But would that, alone or in combination with something else, justify keeping the adjustment at +1? Maybe it could require Empower Spell itself. - Allow creatures affected by scalding to take a standard action (that provokes attacks of opportunity) to avoid damage from the scalding on the following round. - Lower additional damage dealt. What would be an appropriate number, down from 50%? 25%? Raise power level: - While affected by the scalding liquid, creatures take a small penalty to Reflex saves due to the scalding pain. Creatures immune to pain effects are immune to this additional effect. - While affected, creatures' movement is hampered. Perhaps half speed. Creatures immune to pain effects are immune to this additional effect. - If the creature takes any fire damage from the scalding effect, while affected by it, it is considered to have 5 less fire resistance than it normally does. Either way: - Make additional damage start on the next round - none at first - and continue on the round after it. (If combined with allowing creatures to remove the scalding liquid as mentioned above, power level lowers as the additional damage can be avoided. If combined with an additional effect such as lowering speed, extra time is a boon.) A combination of things that lower and raise power could be used, as well. I particularly like this idea: - Set the adjustment to +2, add movement hampering and perhaps a small penalty to Reflex saves while affected by the scalding liquid, and - if necessary for balance - add "any metamagic feat" as a requirement. This is just some brainstorming. Input would be appreciated.
Tuhljin 05-01-07, 11:27 PM	What do you think of my proposed changes? Any suggestions from anyone?
Tuhljin 05-05-07, 12:40 AM	Edited the feat. It now has a +2 spell level adjustment but it also gives a -2 penalty to Reflex saves if enemies take damage from the boiling film. This is a key feat for an upcoming campaign and a prestige class I'm creating, so please let me know what you think.
Tuhljin 05-07-07, 02:31 AM	Reworded the "Special" section for clarity. Added "short" description for those that don't want to sift through the wall of text. I think I'm going to present this feat to players in a week or so, so let me know if anything needs to be changed.
Nehpets 05-07-07, 09:52 PM	I beleive it is a very good feat and actually well balanced. My only issue is the requirement to have the spell allow a Reflex Save not really because of balance but mainly because in adding that requirement it bars any of my spellcasters from using it. It wouldn't bother me as much if it forced the spell to require a save but personally I don't like how resticting that is on my casters.
Tuhljin 05-07-07, 11:04 PM	The wording for the Reflex save requirement and the requirement that it affect an area was taken from the feat Explosive Spell in Complete Arcane. I'm sort "on the fence" right now as to whether those requirements should be in place, as they do limit it from being used on spells like orb of fire, but I'm leaning toward leaving it as is. Any arguments either way would be appreciated, though. I wonder though if I should have scalding spells deal extra damage, but not apply the Reflex penalty, when creatures succeed on their Reflex saves (of course, if they have improved evasion, the extra fire damage is 50% of nothing, so it's still nothing). After all, empowered spells are empowered even if a save is made.
Nehpets 05-14-07, 02:31 PM	I understand your problem with the orbs as my favorite charachter is a specialist in them that is why I suggested that when this is applied to a spell that spell then gains a reflex save so it would do almost the same thing. This would make the feat more usable but still help balance it out
Tuhljin 05-14-07, 08:50 PM	Everyone: Here is the link to the prestige class I built that uses Scalding Spell as a prerequisite. Comments are more than welcome! Steam Mage (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=844265). Nehpets: I understand the concern and I would like to allow an "orb of steam" spell, but there are potential problems if it's opened up like that. (The PrC I just linked to does allow such things, by the way, but without some of the additional benefits of scalding spells.) First, there are many spells that don't make "conceptual sense" as scalding spells. Say you've got a fire spell that internally heats the target's liquids (blood and whatnot). It doesn't make a lot of sense to require a Reflex save at all, even if you could rationalize some way that scalding steam pours onto their skin somehow. Second, the rules for the feat are a bit unwieldy as is and that would only add more, especially if rules to fix the problem in #1 are introduced. How would you deal with that?
AtmaWeapon 05-14-07, 09:30 PM	I think at it's current state and flavor, you would be justified in allowing this feat to operate with spells with the Air descriptor as well. I would suggest that a [Fire] spell prepared with this gain the [Air] descriptor, and an [Air] spell gains the [Fire] descriptor. My main concern would be that the feat doesn't really provide enough of a mechanical advantage to justify taking it over Empower spell, which does all of it's damage upfront and can be used on any spell with variable damage. The ultimate thing that can discourage people from taking new homebrew content is not providing enough incentive for people to take a homebrew feat over a book feat. Another possible suggestion is to replace "Suffers a -2 penalty to Reflex Saves" with "Suffers a penalty on reflex saves equal to the level of the spell altered with this feat, counting the +2 level adjustment." That way, if you Scalding Spell a fireball, they're looking at bonus damage and a -5 on reflex, which could swing the balance in your favor, despite the limited spell selection.
Tuhljin 05-15-07, 10:49 PM	The flavor of the ability is that you're mixing Water with the Fire to create steam, and this ties in with the Steam Mage prestige class I linked. The connection to Air makes sense in some ways, but I don't think I need to add the Air descriptor. Obscuring mist, for instance, doesn't have that descriptor, even though it's vapor floating around in the air. (It doesn't have the Water descriptor either, actually.) Also, I don't think that adding a dash of fire to an Air spell such as whirlwind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/whirlwind.htm) would necessarily make the wind "steamy" - I'd see that as more of a tornado of fire. (Thinking about this gives me a different idea, though. Isn't the traditional mix of Fire and Air smoke? I could see the creation of a different metamagic feat that combines the two into floating embers and smoke that inflicts some damage, obscures vision, and might make you sickened (or something) if you breathe in the smoke.) As far as how big the Reflex penalty should be... if -2 is too weak, I'm open to tweaking it. At first examination, though, it seems that setting it at the level of the spell cast might be too much.
AtmaWeapon 05-16-07, 07:31 PM	The flavor of the ability is that you're mixing Water with the Fire to create steam, and this ties in with the Steam Mage prestige class I linked. The connection to Air makes sense in some ways, but I don't think I need to add the Air descriptor. Obscuring mist, for instance, doesn't have that descriptor, even though it's vapor floating around in the air. (It doesn't have the Water descriptor either, actually.) Also, I don't think that adding a dash of fire to an Air spell such as whirlwind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/whirlwind.htm) would necessarily make the wind "steamy" - I'd see that as more of a tornado of fire. I just picked that because there's no [water] descriptor, they all become [cold], which is the antithesis of what you want to do :P Overall, I guess what I'm trying to say is open it up a bit more. I personally wouldn't take this feat just because the range of spells to which it can be applied is so small. As far as how big the Reflex penalty should be... if -2 is too weak, I'm open to tweaking it. At first examination, though, it seems that setting it at the level of the spell cast might be too much. Well, I suggested that cause it's not obscene right away, but scales at high level, where things either have rediculous reflex saves, or poor ones anyway.
Tuhljin 05-16-07, 07:51 PM	I just picked that because there's no [water] descriptor, they all become [cold], which is the antithesis of what you want to do :P But there is a Water descriptor.. Descriptors from the SRD. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#Descriptor) I know that cold damage is often associated with water, but that's not always the case. Overall, I guess what I'm trying to say is open it up a bit more. I personally wouldn't take this feat just because the range of spells to which it can be applied is so small. I don't see many ways to open it up to more spells because of the nature of the thing, unfortunately, though I'm thinking about loosening the Reflex requirement to allow ranged touch spells as well. I'd like to hear more opinions about the Reflex penalty. Anyone else out there have an opinion? -2 too little? Equal to spell level too much or just right? More input would be very helpful.
AtmaWeapon 05-16-07, 08:12 PM	But there is a Water descriptor.. Descriptors from the SRD. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#Descriptor) I know that cold damage is often associated with water, but that's not always the case. Well I'll be damned. I never bothered to check, since I can't think of any spells off the top of my head that use it. Probably for Summon spells and such. I don't see many ways to open it up to more spells because of the nature of the thing, unfortunately, though I'm thinking about loosening the Reflex requirement to allow ranged touch spells as well. Seems logical, I mean jet of steam and all that.