[MWillner]

In order to cast a touch-ranged spell on an unwilling target (including combat spells) you need to make an unarmed attack against target, as well as cast the spell. Both of these are Complex Actions (ignoring Reckless Spell-casting). What is the timing?

1. Do they both rolled in the same phase (2 Complex Actions in 1 phase)?
2. Is the attack roll made in the first phase, and then the spell-casting roll in the next phase?
3. Is the spell-casting roll made in the first phase, and then the attack roll in the next phase?

If the 3rd option, can you "hold" the spell if the original target is no longer available? If so, for how long, and does this count as Sustaining a spell?

[Shrazkil]

The unarmed attack is "part" of the same complex action.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

And generally not actually attempting to do damage, just getting the touch in.

[MWillner]

If the 2 complex actions are done in a single action phase, I can see why someone might insist on it being a touch attack, as the character would have no real time to wind up for a full attack.

I think the main reason a touch only attack is most commonly used is the attack is done by a mage with little or no unarmed combat skill, and need the +2 dice to the dice pool. It might be different for a mystic adept.

[faffner]

Didn't Aaron touch on this very topic already directly and indirectly? (pun intended )

2: How does the Indirect Touch spell, Punch, work?

In the specific case of a touch-range combat spell, the Spellcasting test takes the place of the Unarmed attack. So you only need to make the Spellcasting Test, which is defended against by the target's Reaction + Intuition.

I find this answer odd, or a mistake, since on page 282, under Range, the book says "Some spells require you to Touch (T) the target—if the target is unwilling, you’ll need to make an unarmed attack against the target"

And on Page 187, under Touch-Only Attack  "If the intention of an attack is to simply make contact, whether to discharge a spell, plant a RFID tag, or just playing tag, than the attacker gains a +2 dice pool bonus. Additionally, if all that is needed is contact, the attacker and not the defender succeeds on a tie."

So either both of these entries referencing Touch Spells are wrong, and needs serious errata, or As part of casting a touch spell, you first make an unarmed attack +2 dice vs Target, and if you succeed, then you make the spellcasting vs their reaction + Intuition since it's Indirect, then they get to resist damage (which granted is a lot of dice rolls for Punch, as one of the only indirect touch spell).

Which one is actually the correct procedure?

In the specific case of a touch-range combat spell, the Spellcasting test takes the place of the Unarmed attack. So you only need to make the Spellcasting Test, which is defended against by the target's Reaction + Intuition.

Fluffwise, I intepret indirect touch combat spells not as actually touching spells, but point blank shooting spells with a range of about 1m-2m. That way the target of the spell can react to the 'projectile' accordingly.

OT:
What is the purpose of direct touch spells? To hit the limit of those F-6 spells is already almost impossible. So why learn those spells?

[MWillner]

My Matrix Search dice pool is really low (no logic at all and only minor Computer skills).

The bottom statement in the quote box directly contradicts the RAW, which says you have to make an unarmed attack (it never says touch attack).

I don't see how hitting the limit on a direct touch combat spell is any more difficult than hitting the limit on any other type of spell.

[Zar]

In my group, we threw out the need for an Unarmed touch attack.  Indirect Touch attacks already are resisted by a Dodge Roll.  Direct Touch attacks don't do enough damage to worry about the extra roll.

[MWillner]

What if you want to make a real attack, not just a touch attack?

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

RAW is fragmented, MWill; in the part where it talks about unarmed attacks, when all you're going for is contact (a touch), it gives examples - a shock glove, stun baton, or touch spell.  So while the part in the Magic section says 'make an attack', when you refer to how to make an attack, it adds on that if all you're going for is a touch for a spell (which you are), you get the +2 dice.

And if you want to make a real attack, I'd say you don't get the +2 dice.  And because you're really trying to concentrate on both at once, I might penalize both as though you were sustaining a spell.  Probably not so bad as if you were splitting an attack, though.

[Xenon]

What if you want to make a real attack, not just a touch attack?

Sure, you resolve it with unarmed combat and it deal Strength S damage.
You miss on tie and you don't get a positive dice pool modifier of 2 dice.
It also does not need any spell casting test, have no spell effect and it would not cause any drain...


Attacking with a spell that have a range of touch is not a regular unarmed attack. You just use the unarmed combat dice pool to see if you manage to touch an unwilling subject. You are not causing unarmed combat damage, you are dealing spell casting damage. Ohh---- You don't even have to roll dice to see if you manage to touch a subject not engaged in combat that is not aware of your intentions (like bumping into someone in the elevator or on the metro).

[MWillner]

The Wyrm Ouroboros: Under Shock Glove (pg. 423) it says "These electrically insulated gloves have a wire mesh that discharges electric current with a punch or a simple touch" (my emphasis). I assume if you use a punch, you get your normal punch damage plus the electrical damage (while you get just the electrical damage on a grazing hit). For a touch you get just the electrical damage. So you are deciding if you want extra damage or a better chance to hit.

This not totally analogous to the touch-ranged attack, as it involves 2 Complex Actions, rather than 1. 

[Xenon]

you either attack with the glove and deal electric damage or you make an unarmed attack dealing strength based damage. no double dipping. the unarmed dice pool is just there to figure out if your glove manage to physically connect with an unwilling target.

you either attack with the spell and deal spell damage or you make an unarmed attack dealing strength based damage. no double dipping. the unarmed dice pool is just there to figure out if your spell manage to physically connect with an unwilling target.

[Michael Chandra]

The Wyrm Ouroboros: Under Shock Glove (pg. 423) it says "These electrically insulated gloves have a wire mesh that discharges electric current with a punch or a simple touch" (my emphasis). I assume if you use a punch, you get your normal punch damage plus the electrical damage (while you get just the electrical damage on a grazing hit). For a touch you get just the electrical damage. So you are deciding if you want extra damage or a better chance to hit.

This not totally analogous to the touch-ranged attack, as it involves 2 Complex Actions, rather than 1.

Nope, no double-dipping. Don't know many GMs that are willing to let a player rulelawyer that.

[Namikaze]

Yeah the topic of getting both punch damage and shock glove damage has been brought up numerous times.  It's pretty clear from conversations with the devs and the community at large that the majority of GMs don't allow a character to get the effects of both punch damage and shock glove damage.  If you use the shock gloves as your attack, it's a touch only attack even if it takes the form of a punch or slap, grapple, etc.  If you're using an unarmed attack with the punch gloves, you get to do the unarmed attack instead.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Honestly, I personally would allow them to 'double-dip', per se.  But what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and you can bet that for the minor investment of whatever-it-is, security is going to be loading up their personal-ass-kicking personnel with shock gloves and batons, and they'll be swinging for the bleachers.  And making an actual attack with a touch spell rider?  Yeah, I'd penalize you on both.