Imbue Weapon Feat

[MercuryLA]

Hi All,
I'm using the feat described below and my question is - Do I have a second attack if I use this feat?

IMBUE WEAPON [METAMAGIC]
You may transfer the power of your touch spells through
a melee weapon.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (any), base attack bonus
+3 or higher, spellcaster level1st+.
Benefit: When casting a spell with a range of touch,
you may instead cast it through a melee weapon to deliver
the spell effect. The effect is instantaneous allowing you
to cast the spell and attack in the same round. If the attack
hits, you deal normal damage and the spell effect. If you
miss, compare your attack result to your opponent's touch
armor class. If you hit their touch AC, the effect is
triggered, but weapon damage is not. This feat only works
on spells that require you to physically touch a target, not
ones that require a ranged touch attack.
An imbued weapon spell used up a spell slot one level
higher than the spell's actual level.

Aviad

[Raphir]

Well, I'm not entirely sure about this one, but due to the phrasing given here, I'm guessing the answer is no. In my understanding, he says that the effect of feat, that is, the transferring of the spell to the weapon, as being instantaneous, so that what you're doing in effect is trading the touch attack you're normally allowed to make as part of the casting for a regular melee weapon attack. Since you don't get to make any extra attacks to hit a touch spell, you don't receive that advantage when using a weapon to do so. In other words: you're still casting the spell as a standard action, and the attack you get to make is part of that standard action to cast the spell.

Bare in mind, this is different from having a weapon that has a spell storing ability: with those kinds of weapons, you cast the spell previously, and you just trigger it during any attack you make in a round. This, by the way, allows for a fun combo: with this feat and a spell storing weapon, you could hit an enemy with two spells in one round, as well as an attack! Fun for the whole family!

I'm also inclined to say that allowing a second attack with that feat makes it way too powerful.

[Jayef]

I agree with Raphir except I am completely sure that you only get one attack with this. The feat allows you - in a single Standard Action - to cast a melee touch attack spell and do a regular melee attack with a weapon. If the attack hits, the weapon does its normal damage AND the spell is discharged. If the attack "misses" because of a shield or armor, but the weapon still *touches* the opponent (i.e. you beat their touch AC), then the weapon does not do damage but the spell is still discharged as if you had done a regular touch attack.

Although this isn't covered by the Feat description, if you have multiple attacks from a high BAB and a melee touch spell that has multiple charges (like Chill Touch), I'd allow you to take a Full Round Action to do multiple weapon+spell attacks in a single round. I would only allow this to happen on rounds AFTER the spell was cast however, since casting the spell itself (plus the single attack) is a Standard Action. If you have multiple attacks but only a single charge spell (like Shocking Grasp) that was cast in a previous round but not discharged, the first attack that touches will discharge the spell, even if subsequent attacks hit later. Extra attacks could only do normal damage.

In my home games I already allow monks to deliver their melee touch spells through unarmed attacks, using the full monk damage. The same rule about missing the full AC but hitting their touch AC applies.

[Raphir]

I'm not sure I understood that additional rule of yours jayef... Do you get to make more than one attack in a single round? Or do you simply get the benefit of having your weapon still charged with the extra touch attacks from the spell on the following round? I'd argue that allowing the weapon to remain charged with the spell until they're all discharged is pretty fair, so that you're not using a higher-level spell slot to effectively make the spell weaker.

If you do get to make your extra attacks in the same round, I'd like to warn you against it: you'd be basically allowing the character to either use a full-round action to make all the attacks he's entitled to make, or to use a full-round action to make all the attacks he's entitled to make AND cast a spell simulteneously. You could conceivably allow only one extra attack, as opposed to all the extra attacks he's normally allowed, so as to still keep some interest in making a full-attack with three or more attacks, rather than a full-round action with two attacks and a spell.

[Jayef]

The way I do it:

Cast spell + 1 attack = Standard Action
As many attacks as you have = Full Round Action

As long as your spell has charges remaining, all those attacks are attacks using the spell. When your charges run out, then the remaining attacks are just regular attacks.

In order to make multiple attacks with a spell, you'd need to have cast the spell in a previous round. For example I would NOT allow casting of the spell AND multiple attacks in a single round.

I think we agree, it's just confusing because we use the word attack so many times.