So why don't the books have any touch range elemental spells. At first I thought it was because they were indirect and they did not want to deal with the rules(# of dice rolls) of unarmed combat to hit, a reaction+unarmed to avoid, a spellcasting test to attack, the a reaction test to dodge, and then a damage resistance test.(I think that is right) Then I noticed the punch spell and its an indirect touch spell just no elemental damage.

You can just whip one up by reducing the drain on a ranged version, right? I've always thought the listed spells should be illustrative, not exhaustive.

I agree with Yerameyahu.

Perhaps the reason is to distance yourself from the dangerous element? If you put your hands on a person you were electrocuting, there's no reason why you wouldn't receive the same punishment. The same goes for splashing acid on someone.

Hmm. Honestly, I have no idea what the rules are for that; you're technically creating a real element (fire, etc.), so you might need protection. On the other hand, it's magic, and *sometimes* magic Just Works™ . Hmm.

Sure I guess I can whip one up. But given that every other attack spell came with one it makes me wonder if there is a reason elemental spells do not have one. Is the clout line of spells off and it should not have a touch spell perhaps. Even street magic avoids them except in the case of object targeting spells which avoids at least some of the extra dodging issues I'd think. Like I said it seems like a bear of a rule, roll to hit, they dodge, roll to hit again, they dodge again, and now they resist. Maybe it aint that bad though, I just described shooting someone twice, which is fairly common with guns.

Why do you think they get to dodge twice? Or do you mean dodge and then damage resistance. If the magician hits with the unarmed combat attack then the spell goes off. I wouldn't allow a second dodge against the spell. Just resist the damage and hope you have elemental protection of some sort in your armor.

Because that is how you resist indirect spells. They get to dodge the spellcasting test. Touch spells you use unarmed combat to see if you touch them, and only touch them. Other than that the spell is resolved normally. And the normal thing for a indirect spell is a reaction test to dodge it. If they don't get to dodge the spellcasting part, touch indirect spells are dang potent.

I would suggest that the caster also subject to possible secondary effects, and not allow two avoidance rolls. The caster getting hit with a secondary effect off-sets the positive damage that could be made.

It's also somewhat unrealistic that the target could duck a spell that hits based on touch when you're already being touched.

Also, to clarify, rolling REA or REA + Dodge is NOT how your RESIST indirect spells, that's how you AVOID them. RESISTING is with BOD + 1/2 Armor. They are separate mechanics. If the caster is touching you you've already failed the avoidance part.

Does "elemental aura" count?

Ditto: the Dodge is to *dodge* the fireball/lightning bolt/etc., because it's a ranged attack.

I feel like Street Magic/etc. are just *hinting* that you shouldn't be in melee.

i would recommend leaving the flaming fists to the adepts.

I would say that the magic that brings the element into being, doesn't also protect you from it. So then how do you touch someone with flames? For that matter, how does a touch attack work with sand or metal? Or water? Shocking Grasp sounds like your best bet, but you ever shuffle your feet on the floor, and then touch someone to give them a shock? You get a shock too. I think writing insulation into the spell's effects would raise the drain code.

I'd thought of going with that as a fix, but you need to actually have a decent strength to make the most of it, it is sustained so minus 2 dice on your unarmed combat test and its not a touch attack so no bonus dice for that. Just trying to work out a touch range infiltration based mage, I wanted 1 elemental touch spell for his one flashy spell. I might go mystic adept and put 1 point into killing hands/elemental strike, but its not what I wanted.

I think this is the 3rd time this thought was brought up and I guess I don't get it. Why when you instantly discharge fire into someone from touch it hurts yourself, but instantly throwing it from your hands does not?

If someone could further explain why they see touch as different I'd appreciate it.

I agree. There should be no backlash damage upon the caster for using a touch spell - and if you need a RAWdogged answer, then unless the Touch spell is an Area spell, it's limited to a single target (and that's not going to be the magician unless he wants it to be).

The way I see it, with Flamethrower, you're creating a stream of flame heading away from your hand. You don't get hurt by it because it's moving away. When you cast fireball, you will get burned if you're in it's AoE.

Now what sort of effect do you have in mind for a touch fire spell? Your hand enveloped in flame?

AFAIK, Flamethrower and Fireball never actually touch your hands anyway. You don't have to use/have hands to cast them, right? *shrug*

I'm inclined, as I said above, for any mage crazy enough to use a touch Indirect to be safe, because magic Just Works™. There are plenty of other things to nerf for mages.

I direct you to a spell from the game that causes cancer...

Shocking Hands (might be Shocking Touch. It's been a while). Creates an aura of electricity on your hand and you touch someone to finish the spell. The lightning damage doesn't hurt you in any way, shape, or form. Certainly hurts your opponent though.

Sooo… that's an 'I agree'?

Kind of Looked that way didn't it?

Keep the Faith

aside from reducing drain, can't you flamethrower someone at point blank range? do you want to touch the person thats on fire? I'm not opposed to the idea. but it seems a little odd. how much damage does flamethrower do vs a physadd's flaming fist? I'd take that into consideration as well

Yeah, I would agree that the caster doesn't become a spell target as well, but the possibility of just secondary effects alone seems reasonable.

I direct you to the picture from the SR1 & SR2 mainbooks (also found in the SR4A BBB) of Sally Tsung. She has a clearly glowing hand of a spell. Looks like a flaming hand IMO. Having an elemental effect touch range spell doesn't make you the target unless it somehow splashes back on you from the target. Simply touching your opponent shouldn't make you subject to secondary effects.

Would you really want to be at pointblank range of an indirect elemental attack??? If you had a vial of acid in your hands would you want to walk up and slap someone with it instead of toss it??? These spells create elemental effects and then deliver then which is different from most spells which attack the target directly.

Darthmord - that's precisely what I was saying. I didn't say secondary effects were a given, but that they could be subject to. Emphasis on "possibility" in my statement.

I would not mind being at point blank range since its magic and its just discharging the element into the target. And for those who ask, yes sure ranged is generally better in all ways, but I'd rather have a touch range spell if that is what fits the character concept better. Not everything has to be min-maxed.