Touch spells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Touch spells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
chrobry
07-06-07, 02:08 PM I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity.

Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words.

I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it.

Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+
not Yoda
07-06-07, 02:25 PM I agree with you about touch spells. But I would go about nering them differently. Warlocks and their touchy-feely abilities are too good.

I would change them to attacks. As it is a low level wizard has an easier time hitting an armored foe than a high level fighter. In the case of certain spells such as Melf's Acid Arrow they work fine as would alchemists fire. Scorching ray not so much. Otto's Irresistable Dance also seems cheesy. Why would such attacks ignore armor? A torch doesn't ignore armor a whip does not ignore armor. In the case of a liquid I can understand touch AC. It is also easier to inflict high damage with a touch attack than it is to inflict high damage with an aoe that saves count against.
chrobry
07-06-07, 02:35 PM I agree with you about touch spells. But I would go about nering them differently. Warlocks and their touchy-feely abilities are too good.

I would change them to attacks. As it is a low level wizard has an easier time hitting an armored foe than a high level fighter. In the case of certain spells such as Melf's Acid Arrow they work fine as would alchemists fire. Scorching ray not so much. Otto's Irresistable Dance also seems cheesy. Why would such attacks ignore armor? A torch doesn't ignore armor a whip does not ignore armor. In the case of a liquid I can understand touch AC. It is also easier to inflict high damage with a touch attack than it is to inflict high damage with an aoe that saves count against.

Main issue with that is that it still doesn't answer the question, how does this silly wizard who knows about as much about un-arm combat as I do about casting fireball, gets past the big piece of steel (also know as sword) wielded by highly skilled fighter. I can understand that magic such as shocking grasp cooks you in your plate, but how you touch that aforemention plate is what bothers me. And please don't say he can just touch the sword, personally I rather try to touch someones plate then their sword.
mshea
07-06-07, 02:36 PM In D&D Miniatures they just convert touch spells to spells with a saving throw. I don't really know why this wouldn't work as a simple way to get rid of touch AC.
Thomar_of_Uointer
07-07-07, 11:30 AM I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity.

Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words.

I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it.

Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+

Yes, but where the mage would have to actually put his weight behind a punch in order to do any damage, when he's using a touch spell all he has to do is graze the fighter. In fact, all he has to do is make contact with the fighter's shield. It's much easier to slap someone than it is to hit him (something I've done in sparring to distract or provoke an opponent), and you leave your guard open for a fraction of the time you would when throwing a punch or kick.

Anyways, balance? You made touch attacks provoke AoO, right? I'd say that any AoO involved in a touch attack is incorporated into the casting, which normally provokes AoO.
Arcade
07-09-07, 09:49 AM Main issue with that is that it still doesn't answer the question, how does this silly wizard who knows about as much about un-arm combat as I do about casting fireball, gets past the big piece of steel (also know as sword) wielded by highly skilled fighter. I can understand that magic such as shocking grasp cooks you in your plate, but how you touch that aforemention plate is what bothers me. And please don't say he can just touch the sword, personally I rather try to touch someones plate then their sword.

That has little to do with a touch attack per se as reach weapons in the entire game. How does a gnome with a dagger ever get close enough to a human fighter with a bastard sword? There's probably about 4 feet of reach there. We sacrifice this level of granularity for simplicity, like so many other rules in the game.
Rhialto
07-09-07, 10:12 AM Do you guys allow a wizard to use a wand or staff to make his touch attack, thereby avoiding the attack of opportunity that doing so unarmed would give?
True Cavalier
07-09-07, 06:23 PM How did Tsotha-Lantis reach past Conan's big-ass sword to hit him with his poisonous ring?

Wizards are fast. They can reach past Conan.

(Besides you don't always have to reach past a guy's sword. You can "touch" his shield.)

Anyway I can see how it can make sense for some people. But as these house rules go, you should probably give them something back for compensation, otherwise noone's going to use touch-spells, ever. Getting within melee range is dangerous enough without the added attack.
Thomar_of_Uointer
07-09-07, 11:20 PM Do you guys allow a wizard to use a wand or staff to make his touch attack, thereby avoiding the attack of opportunity that doing so unarmed would give?

No. There's no AoO in the first place (unless he decides to deliver it with an unarmed strike).
Kursk
07-11-07, 12:12 PM I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity.

Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words.

I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it.

Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+

One of my 1st house rules was touch spells provoke AoO's.
HuManBing
07-13-07, 03:17 PM I remember reading somewhere (possibly PHB 3.5? or maybe it was online errata and clarification in Wizards.com) that when a wizard is casting a touch spell, his hand is like a weapon for that period of time and the opponent thus has to take it seriously and defend against it. That's their rationalization for why it doesn't provoke AoOs.
Kursk
07-13-07, 03:50 PM That's their rationalization for why it doesn't provoke AoOs.

Yes, weird. I, (dressed in robes) walk towards the dragon with my hand outstretched... (Don't even need a spell, just bluff) :rofl:
Rhialto
07-13-07, 04:25 PM I wonder if you could bluff that with a mending spell or similar.
Kursk
07-13-07, 04:26 PM I wonder if you could bluff that with a mending spell or similar.

You could bluff it with NO spell, you don't even need to be a spell caster. According to the rules anyway.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
chrobry 07-06-07, 02:08 PM	I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity. Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words. I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it. Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+
not Yoda 07-06-07, 02:25 PM	I agree with you about touch spells. But I would go about nering them differently. Warlocks and their touchy-feely abilities are too good. I would change them to attacks. As it is a low level wizard has an easier time hitting an armored foe than a high level fighter. In the case of certain spells such as Melf's Acid Arrow they work fine as would alchemists fire. Scorching ray not so much. Otto's Irresistable Dance also seems cheesy. Why would such attacks ignore armor? A torch doesn't ignore armor a whip does not ignore armor. In the case of a liquid I can understand touch AC. It is also easier to inflict high damage with a touch attack than it is to inflict high damage with an aoe that saves count against.
chrobry 07-06-07, 02:35 PM	I agree with you about touch spells. But I would go about nering them differently. Warlocks and their touchy-feely abilities are too good. I would change them to attacks. As it is a low level wizard has an easier time hitting an armored foe than a high level fighter. In the case of certain spells such as Melf's Acid Arrow they work fine as would alchemists fire. Scorching ray not so much. Otto's Irresistable Dance also seems cheesy. Why would such attacks ignore armor? A torch doesn't ignore armor a whip does not ignore armor. In the case of a liquid I can understand touch AC. It is also easier to inflict high damage with a touch attack than it is to inflict high damage with an aoe that saves count against. Main issue with that is that it still doesn't answer the question, how does this silly wizard who knows about as much about un-arm combat as I do about casting fireball, gets past the big piece of steel (also know as sword) wielded by highly skilled fighter. I can understand that magic such as shocking grasp cooks you in your plate, but how you touch that aforemention plate is what bothers me. And please don't say he can just touch the sword, personally I rather try to touch someones plate then their sword.
mshea 07-06-07, 02:36 PM	In D&D Miniatures they just convert touch spells to spells with a saving throw. I don't really know why this wouldn't work as a simple way to get rid of touch AC.
Thomar_of_Uointer 07-07-07, 11:30 AM	I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity. Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words. I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it. Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+ Yes, but where the mage would have to actually put his weight behind a punch in order to do any damage, when he's using a touch spell all he has to do is graze the fighter. In fact, all he has to do is make contact with the fighter's shield. It's much easier to slap someone than it is to hit him (something I've done in sparring to distract or provoke an opponent), and you leave your guard open for a fraction of the time you would when throwing a punch or kick. Anyways, balance? You made touch attacks provoke AoO, right? I'd say that any AoO involved in a touch attack is incorporated into the casting, which normally provokes AoO.
Arcade 07-09-07, 09:49 AM	Main issue with that is that it still doesn't answer the question, how does this silly wizard who knows about as much about un-arm combat as I do about casting fireball, gets past the big piece of steel (also know as sword) wielded by highly skilled fighter. I can understand that magic such as shocking grasp cooks you in your plate, but how you touch that aforemention plate is what bothers me. And please don't say he can just touch the sword, personally I rather try to touch someones plate then their sword. That has little to do with a touch attack per se as reach weapons in the entire game. How does a gnome with a dagger ever get close enough to a human fighter with a bastard sword? There's probably about 4 feet of reach there. We sacrifice this level of granularity for simplicity, like so many other rules in the game.
Rhialto 07-09-07, 10:12 AM	Do you guys allow a wizard to use a wand or staff to make his touch attack, thereby avoiding the attack of opportunity that doing so unarmed would give?
True Cavalier 07-09-07, 06:23 PM	How did Tsotha-Lantis reach past Conan's big-ass sword to hit him with his poisonous ring? Wizards are fast. They can reach past Conan. (Besides you don't always have to reach past a guy's sword. You can "touch" his shield.) Anyway I can see how it can make sense for some people. But as these house rules go, you should probably give them something back for compensation, otherwise noone's going to use touch-spells, ever. Getting within melee range is dangerous enough without the added attack.
Thomar_of_Uointer 07-09-07, 11:20 PM	Do you guys allow a wizard to use a wand or staff to make his touch attack, thereby avoiding the attack of opportunity that doing so unarmed would give? No. There's no AoO in the first place (unless he decides to deliver it with an unarmed strike).
Kursk 07-11-07, 12:12 PM	I have an issue with touch spells. They are to my line of thinking a bit too powerful, but that isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that somehow you can reach past someone with the sword, and touch them. To me that screams attack of opportunity. Anyway in my campaign that's what I did, this made warriors stronger, and wizards/cleric more careful. It works, in other words. I am also not much into realism in my fantasy game, but sometimes I see a necessarity of it. Now to the "meat" of my question. The campaign hasn't enter high levels, how much of a balance issue will I be looking at once they are 16th level+ One of my 1st house rules was touch spells provoke AoO's.
HuManBing 07-13-07, 03:17 PM	I remember reading somewhere (possibly PHB 3.5? or maybe it was online errata and clarification in Wizards.com) that when a wizard is casting a touch spell, his hand is like a weapon for that period of time and the opponent thus has to take it seriously and defend against it. That's their rationalization for why it doesn't provoke AoOs.
Kursk 07-13-07, 03:50 PM	That's their rationalization for why it doesn't provoke AoOs. Yes, weird. I, (dressed in robes) walk towards the dragon with my hand outstretched... (Don't even need a spell, just bluff) :rofl:
Rhialto 07-13-07, 04:25 PM	I wonder if you could bluff that with a mending spell or similar.
Kursk 07-13-07, 04:26 PM	I wonder if you could bluff that with a mending spell or similar. You could bluff it with NO spell, you don't even need to be a spell caster. According to the rules anyway.