PDA

View Full Version : [3.5e] Using the Spellsword's Channel Spell with Wall of Fire and other area spells.



IserLuick
2013-03-14, 01:20 PM
Hi everyone!

I've looked into the Spellsword prestige class from Complete Warrior and I saw this interesting class feature: Channel Spell.

Here is the whole text of the ability:

Channel Spell (Sp): At 4th level, a spellsword can channel any spell he can cast into his melee weapon. Using this ability requires a move action, and the spellsword uses up the prepared spell or spell slot just as if he had cast the spell. The channeled spell affects the next target that the spellsword successfully attacks with his weapon (saving throws and spell resistance still apply). Even if the spell normally affects an area or is a ray, it affects only the target. The spell is discharged from the weapon, which can then hold another spell. A spellsword can channel his spells into only one weapon at a time. Spells channeled into a weapon are lost if not used in 8 hours.

Seeing this, I thought "WOW! Any spell? really?" And I looked for the best spells to be used with this ability, because we can agree that it's not quite useful if you use it with a Scorching Ray that would have the very same effect and it's more convenient to cast it from a distance.

So I looked for some area spells that would do an interesting effect with the Channel Spell; as we can see, an area spell would only affect the target of my next attack with my weapon; for example, Mordenkaiden's Dinsjunction. I know that almost nobody uses this spell presisely because it could blow up the magic items of some party members and the loot of the enemy attacked... but if the situation is critical, channeling this spell would be awesome as you would only affect the enemy that you want to dispel, and nobody else.

And I thought about the Wall of Fire spell, it surely sounds promising because if it will only affect the next target that I hit, the wall should manifestate on the target and it would deal a very good amount of damage each round until the effect ends; as it does not affect the area of the target but the target itself, the objective should carry the spell with it even if it moves. (I don't know if I explained myself correctly, please tell me if I failed to explain this).

There are other spells like this one; for example, Wall of Coldfire (from Frostburn), Wall of Magma (from Sandstorm), Vortex of Teeth (from Spell Compendium) and Cloudkill (PHB 3.5).

I told my friends about that possibility and they immediately began to tell that that should not be possible because it is an area spell and has duration, that it has to last only for the turn in wich you hit with the weapon and nothing more; otherwise, it sounds too good to be true.

But the description of the Channel Spell ability specifies that it can be used with any spell (that includes spells that have duration, as far as I can tell), the spell would affect the next target that you hit with your weapon (it does not specify that the spell will last only for the turn that you use to hit) and that even if the spell normally affects an area or is a ray, it affects only the target (not the area in which the target stands).

To back up my argument in favor of the Channeled Wall of Fire, I looked in the Rules Compendium book, and I found the folowing text about spells that affect subjects and areas:

SUBJECTS, EFFECTS, AND AREAS
If a spell affects creatures directly, its result travels with the subjects for the spell’s duration. If the spell creates an effect, the effect lasts for the duration. The effect might move or remain still. Such an effect can be dispelled prior to when its duration ends. If a spell affects an area, then the spell stays with that area for its duration. Unless otherwise noted in a spell’s description, creatures become subject to the spell when they enter the area and are no longer subject to it when they leave.

Applying this to the Wall of Fire used with the Channel Spell, we're talking of an area spell, but if it is used with this ability, then it will affect the creature directly, so, the effect of the spell should travel with it for the spell's duration. That should mean that the target would take damage as if it was inside the Wall of Fire, taking 2d6 points of fire damage +1 point of fire damage per caster level (maximum +20) each round for at least 1/CL rounds.

I think that I understood the rules pretty well but I don't know for sure if I'm right, and that's why I'm posting this here.

What do you think? Are the rules well used?

Thanks a lot for your attention! :smallsmile:

LanSlyde
2013-03-14, 01:59 PM
Based on everything you posted, I see no flaw here. The WoF loses its area when you Channel it but keeps its duration. Therefore according to that passage in the Rules Compendium, as soon as you smacked a target with it they would light up like a Christmas tree for rounds per level and could not simply move away from it. That said, I personally would argue that if they dived into water or iced themselves down with cold dmg it would negate it.

IserLuick
2013-03-14, 02:13 PM
Of course! If they dive into water, get 20 points of ice damage or have someone that can cast a dispel magic on them, they can get rid of the effect.

Zilzmaer
2013-03-14, 08:19 PM
IIRC, Wall of Fire specifies that creatures inside the area take 2d6+1/CL. If you channel the spell such that it has no area, how can the creature be inside the area? Yes, they'd be affected as normal; but 'as normal' is no damage when not inside the area. Just my thoughts; I could easily be wrong here.

Edit: That said, I like your thinking here, regardless of whether it works for this particular spell.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2013-03-14, 08:28 PM
Cloudkill.

IserLuick
2013-03-14, 10:12 PM
The Channel Spell specifies that if you use it with an area spell, it will affect only the target, and the Wall of Fire specifies that you can cast it in an area with creatures, so I don't see any problem at all... I could be wrong, if I misunderstood this, please tell me.

There's another little issue that a friend pointed out, he told me that I should check the errata for the Complete Warrior to verify that the Channel Spell works that way, I did so and I didn't find any update refering to that ability.

Later, he came back and told me that he looked at the Complete Champion errata and there is a change in the Channel Spell class feature of the Ordained Champion prestige class that limits the kind of spells that can be channeled and makes it a supernatural ability instead of a spell-like ability, he said that that should affect the ability with the same name in the Complete Warrior, and I argued that it doesn't because of the following reasons:

1.- It has not been specified nor updated in the Complete Warrior errata.

2.- The errata of the Complete Champion does not mention that that change should affect the hability with the same name in the Complete Warrior as well.

3.- That Channel Spell mentioned in the Complete Champion is from the Ordained Champion prestige class, and that class has no limit at all on the number of times that it can use its Channel Spell (The Spellsword has limitations in times per day) and it is a divine spellcasting class.

4.- The fact that the Ordained Champion can do it indefinitely, can justify the nerf pretty well; while the Spellsword, who has a limited number of uses per day, can't abuse a lot of that ability.

5.- The fact that the errata changed the type of ability from spell-like to supernatural, make the Channel Spell from the Ordained Champion and the Channel Spell of the Spellsword different abilities regardless of the name.

What do you think?

Thanks a lot for your attention! :smallsmile:

PD: Please tell me if I didn't explain myself well.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2013-03-14, 10:36 PM
There is absolutely zero RAW support for the Ordained Champion errata to have any affect on Spellsword abilities. Spellsword still works as printed unless the official CW errata or a houserule says otherwise.