D&D3.5 Duskblades using Arcane Channeling before lvl 13.

[serlex]

Hello to all!
I would like to consult with you a question regarding Duskblades and their ability Arcane Channeling.

This is the original wording:

Arcane Channeling (Su): Beginning at 3rd level, you can use a standard action to cast any touch spell you know and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack. Casting a spell in this manner does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action or less. If the melee attack is successful, the attack deals damage normally; then the effect of the spell is resolved.

At 13th level, you can cast any touch spell you know as part of a full attack action, and the spell affects each target you hit in melee combat that round. Doing so discharges the spell at the end of the round, in the case of a touch spell that would otherwise last longer than 1 round.

My question is:

If playing as a Lv10 Duskblade... Is it forbidden to use Arcane Channeling at all in a full attack round?

My interpretation is that AC is still possible in a full attack round before lvl 13, but the Duskblade would be channelling the spell only for the 1st attack, and not for the consequent ones.

What do you guys think?

Thanks a lot!

[Raezeman]

well, since my first ever character i played is a dusk blade, i have talked about this with me DM on a few occasions. Our conclusions: the part you can use a standard action to cast any touch spell you know and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack seem to say that if you want to channel before level 13, you have to do it with a standard action for a single attack. Meaning, no additional attack from high bab following after a channeled attack since you already used a standard action this turn.

[serlex]

well, since my first ever character i played is a dusk blade, i have talked about this with me DM on a few occasions. Our conclusions: the part you can use a standard action to cast any touch spell you know and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack seem to say that if you want to channel before level 13, you have to do it with a standard action for a single attack. Meaning, no additional attack from high bab following after a channeled attack since you already used a standard action this turn.

I guess it is open to the DM's interpretation then, right?

[Urpriest]

I guess it is open to the DM's interpretation then, right?

It's not open to DM interpretation. The ability explicitly says it takes a standard action to use. Unless you've got some trick that lets you make a full attack and a standard action in the same round, there isn't even any room for confusion there.

[lytokk]

I'd have to agree with the standard action ruling. I've been looking at the duskblade class a lot recently and it takes a whole standard action in order to channel the spell and make a single attack. Basically, you get a spell and a melee attack in the same round, on the same target, but you have the beat the targets full AC, not just touch in order to land the spell. Also, you don't provoke an attack of opportunity.

Its seems to become more of a resource management choice at this point. Do you channel the spell to do a lot of damage with 1 attack, or think that 2 or 3 hits could drop the enemy and save yourself the use of the spell slot. At 13 it doesn't matter anymore and you can hit again and again with the touch spell.

[Urpriest]

Its seems to become more of a resource management choice at this point. Do you channel the spell to do a lot of damage with 1 attack, or think that 2 or 3 hits could drop the enemy and save yourself the use of the spell slot. At 13 it doesn't matter anymore and you can hit again and again with the touch spell.

Even then, my understanding is you still can't hit the same target twice with the same spell.

[lytokk]

I didn't see anything in the ability description for the full attack method to say you couldn't hit the same target twice, but I'll have to check the book when I get the chance to be certain. From the quote, it affects each target you hit that round, and I took that as target of attack, not individual target (enemy). But I could be wrong, and odds are, I am.

[Equinox]

At 13th level, you can cast any touch spell you know as part of a full attack action, and the spell affects each target you hit in melee combat that round. Doing so discharges the spell at the end of the round, in the case of a touch spell that would otherwise last longer than 1 round.
RAW is silent as to what happens to targets you hit more than once. While Urpriest's interpretation is certainly valid, I can still see it going the other way too. Ask your DM, I guess.

[Urpriest]

I didn't see anything in the ability description for the full attack method to say you couldn't hit the same target twice, but I'll have to check the book when I get the chance to be certain. From the quote, it affects each target you hit that round, and I took that as target of attack, not individual target (enemy). But I could be wrong, and odds are, I am.

It's the "each target" language that generally is used. Whether you're making multiple attacks or not, if you're hitting the same enemy those attacks have the same target.

[Vaz]

Its wording agrees with UrPriest. 'Each target you hit' is different from 'each hit'.

You can hit 1 target three times, or 3 targets one time. 1 target is still only one time. There is a magic weapon special ability called whirling, which 3/day lets you hit all in reach once.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I guess it is open to the DM's interpretation then, right?


It's not open to DM interpretation. The ability explicitly says it takes a standard action to use. Unless you've got some trick that lets you make a full attack and a standard action in the same round, there isn't even any room for confusion there.

Everything is open to DM interpretation, seeing as that's what being a DM means, but all anyone works with online is the words on the page.

(Personally, I think requiring a standard action for the single-attack Arcane Channel is fair. Getting off a spell and an attack in a round is one thing; getting off a spell and a full attack makes sense to leave as a high-mid-level ability)

[Coidzor]

Everything is open to DM interpretation, seeing as that's what being a DM means, but all anyone works with online is the words on the page.

If the rules are clear, it's not open to interpretation. Unless the DM is just... bad at reading or something. Deciding to adjudicate that it's modifiable to be kosher with the first attack of a full attack isn't an interpretation of the rules as they're written, it's amending them and/or adding to them.

I could certainly see a modification of the class progression to, say, allow it as a swift action so it can apply to the first attack of a full attack action around level 8 or so(midway between level 3 and level 13) as something that would be generally considered reasonable, especially so that one isn't spending 7 levels deciding between full-attacking or channeling a spell.

[lytokk]

Each attack has a target. That target may be the same target as a previous attack, or may be a completely different target. Each target would be the target of each attack. Otherwise it would say "each creature hit by"

[OOPWER]

Each attack has a target. That target may be the same target as a previous attack, or may be a completely different target. Each target would be the target of each attack. Otherwise it would say "each creature hit by"

I think he's on the right track. IIRC, a full attack simply means you can use all of your iterative attacks right? But each attack has its own target. 1st: Creature A or B. 2nd: Creature A or B. So on and so forth. To quote the d20srd:


If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones. (Emphasis mine.)

By my understanding of the full attack rules, you must consecutively declare the target of each consecutive attack which (Although it's much easier to say "I'm using my full attack on Target X.), in my humble opinion, equates to multiple hits with the channeled touch spell.

[Nerd-o-rama]

If the rules are clear, it's not open to interpretation. Unless the DM is just... bad at reading or something. Deciding to adjudicate that it's modifiable to be kosher with the first attack of a full attack isn't an interpretation of the rules as they're written, it's amending them and/or adding to them.

I could certainly see a modification of the class progression to, say, allow it as a swift action so it can apply to the first attack of a full attack action around level 8 or so(midway between level 3 and level 13) as something that would be generally considered reasonable, especially so that one isn't spending 7 levels deciding between full-attacking or channeling a spell.

I think we're on the verge of a semantic argument about the meaning of "interpret", which I don't care to fight. My only point was that all rules are up to the DM in actual play.

A Swift action to set up an Arcane Channel (then a Standard action or iterative attack to execute it) is actually an interesting idea, though, because it changes the opportunity cost choices. Instead of choosing between Full Attacks and Channels, you have to choose between Channeling and Quick-Casts or Channeling and whatever Swift buff spells you've picked up.

Ultimately, I think I like the ability better as written, though. Cast+Attack as one standard action fits how normal touch spells work, and forcing a choice between Channel and Full Attack until level 13 parallels Maneuvers, too, since the vast majority of Strikes are Standard Actions or otherwise can't be used in a full attack either.