The rules for holding the charge and whatnot pretty much say no.
Though, if there's some sort of alternate explanation (including common sense), I'd be willing to listen to that, too.
Can you use produce flame in conjunction with unarmed strike
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Can you use produce flame in conjunction with unarmed st
Produce Flame (the 3.5 version at least) specifically states that you can make multiple ranged attacks with it (1 per caster level). So you can make multiple ranged attacks with it for sure, even multiple attacks per round.
Now, for melee attacks it does not explicitely say anything about multiple attacks, it just says you can make touch attacks. And as you said, usually touch spells get discharged after one use. However produce flame is not a touch spell - touch spells are defined as having range "touch" while produce flame has range "0".
To me it looks like you can use produce flame in melee for the entire duration, while hurling the flames shorten the duration. You could make an argument for melee attacks also shortening the duration but I can't see why one melee attack should discharge the spell.
Now, for melee attacks it does not explicitely say anything about multiple attacks, it just says you can make touch attacks. And as you said, usually touch spells get discharged after one use. However produce flame is not a touch spell - touch spells are defined as having range "touch" while produce flame has range "0".
To me it looks like you can use produce flame in melee for the entire duration, while hurling the flames shorten the duration. You could make an argument for melee attacks also shortening the duration but I can't see why one melee attack should discharge the spell.
Murtak
Re: Can you use produce flame in conjunction with unarmed st
Produce Flame isn't a touch spell and it specifically states that you can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 +1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Furthermore, no sooner do you hurl the flames than a new set appears in your hand, indicating (to me, at least) that the spell doesn't end because you've discharged the flame by attacking something.
If I recall the rules for using spells in conjunction with unarmed strikes (and probably Frank or someone will correct me if I'm wrong), you have the option of either just dealing the damage from the spell (touch attack just like in the spell description), or the damage from the spell and your unarmed strike (normal melee attack, not the spell's touch attack - because you're delivering the effect of the spell via a normal damage, not spell damage). Based on the description of Produce Flame I see absolutely nothing holding you back from using in conjunction with unarmed strikes or natural attacks.
What really does suck about the spell is that it seems intended to provide light, while having the added bonus of making your natural attacks Flaming (Presumably, though, only attacks carried out by your hands. Because the flames are only described as being generated in your hands, it doesn't seem like the fire damage would be applicable to bite or slam attacks). Unfortunately, the Flaming ability only works on a number of attacks equal to your caster level:
Personally, I'm highly inclined to ditch the spell as first level, make it second level, and tack on a duration of 1 round per level. It's not like a Druid is going to use this spell for illumination purposes when they can cast Light as a 0th level spell. So, I think you're able to afford a flaming weapon at third level, and thus it should be OK for a druid to make a weapon flaming for the spell's duration, right?
But they may not want to waste the combat time...
Hey, look! I can edit my posts again!
If I recall the rules for using spells in conjunction with unarmed strikes (and probably Frank or someone will correct me if I'm wrong), you have the option of either just dealing the damage from the spell (touch attack just like in the spell description), or the damage from the spell and your unarmed strike (normal melee attack, not the spell's touch attack - because you're delivering the effect of the spell via a normal damage, not spell damage). Based on the description of Produce Flame I see absolutely nothing holding you back from using in conjunction with unarmed strikes or natural attacks.
What really does suck about the spell is that it seems intended to provide light, while having the added bonus of making your natural attacks Flaming (Presumably, though, only attacks carried out by your hands. Because the flames are only described as being generated in your hands, it doesn't seem like the fire damage would be applicable to bite or slam attacks). Unfortunately, the Flaming ability only works on a number of attacks equal to your caster level:
3.5 SRD wrote:Duration: 1 min./level (D)
...
Each attack you make reduces the remaining duration by 1 minute.
Personally, I'm highly inclined to ditch the spell as first level, make it second level, and tack on a duration of 1 round per level. It's not like a Druid is going to use this spell for illumination purposes when they can cast Light as a 0th level spell. So, I think you're able to afford a flaming weapon at third level, and thus it should be OK for a druid to make a weapon flaming for the spell's duration, right?
But they may not want to waste the combat time...
Hey, look! I can edit my posts again!
My son makes me laugh. Maybe he'll make you laugh, too.
Re: Can you use produce flame in conjunction with unarmed st
Maj at [unixtime wrote:1109015745[/unixtime]]Unfortunately, the Flaming ability only works on a number of attacks equal to your caster level
As written this limitation seems to only apply to the ranged attacks the spell allows. If that is intentional is debatable I guess.
Murtak