[gurps] Regular vs Melee type spells question

[Captain Joy]

Thanks for your insight.

On Oct 5, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Eric Funk wrote:

> Assuming gurps 4e

Correct.

>> So, I can see it one of two ways.
>> A. It requires a normal melee attack roll
>> to touch someone who doesn't want to be
>> touched.  A successful melee attack roll
>> is required to successfully cast a Melee
>> type spell.  A successful melee attack roll
>> is not required to successfully cast a
>> Regular type spell, but there will be a -1
>> distance penalty to the effective skill of
>> the spell.
>
> yes, yes and no to your sentances.

Got it: so if I'm close--within a yard--but not touching, then I have  
no penalty.  Touching confers no bonus.

>> B. Casting a spell *and* attacking on
>> the same round is what Melee type spells
>> allow you to do.  Simply touching someone
>> you're close to, for the purposes of a
>> Regular type spell, is a free action that
>> does no damage in and of itself.  The hit
>> location will be of the "whatever target
>> presents itself" (aka randomly selected)
>> nature.  In general, you can't cast a
>> Regular type spell and do damage with a
>> melee attack in the same round.
>
> no.
> read M11, right column, paragraph 2:
> cast the spell, then "On your /next/ turn, hold the spell or attack  
> with it."

Right, for Melee type spells.  But, for a Regular type spell, I don't  
think you can have have you spell go off *and* attack in the same  
round.  Am I wrong about that?
--
"All signs fail in dry weather." -- my dad
captainjoy at mac.com