The 13th level dilemma full duskblade or dip sandshaper?

[CyberThread]

So here is your dilemma , you are making a 13th level character.. what do you do...


A. Go full duskblade so you can fullattack casting

or

B. Dip a level of sandshaper for a much wider spell selection.

[Big Fau]

Those spells still take up spells known IIRC, so Duskblade 13 is more important.

An easier way to get more Duskblade spells would be to weaponize a custom Runestaff (as there are rules for making one).

[Raezeman]

Those spells still take up spells known IIRC, so Duskblade 13 is more important.

Pretty sure you get the spells added to your spells known list. So you can take 1 level dip for the extra spells and go Duskblade 13 next level for the full attack channeling

[Komatik]

Pretty sure you get the spells added to your spells known list. So you can take 1 level dip for the extra spells and go Duskblade 13 next level for the full attack channeling

Seems to be correct.


If you are a spontaneous caster
(such as a sorcerer), these spells are available to you like
any other spell you know. You cannot cast a spell of higher
level than the maximum spell level you can cast. These
spells become options for you when you gain access to the
appropriate spell level.

[Big Fau]

Pretty sure you get the spells added to your spells known list. So you can take 1 level dip for the extra spells and go Duskblade 13 next level for the full attack channeling

Huh, so they are. I still feel a Runestaff is a better option, as Duskblade 12 qualifies for Craft Staff (and the spells can be from scrolls or provided by another spellcaster). Sandshaper gives a nice list, but only a few of the spells it gives are touch spells (and the ones that are aren't very good Arcane Channeling ideas).

Don't get me wrong, 32 spells known is nice. The quality of those spells isn't exactly that good, especially compared to some options like Arcane Disciple or a Runestaff.

[Fax Celestis]

Duskblade 13 is overrated. You don't get to apply your spell once per swing, just once per target you attack. How often do you attack multiple enemies with one full attack, honestly, particularly at higher levels?

[Big Fau]

Duskblade 13 is overrated. You don't get to apply your spell once per swing, just once per target you attack. How often do you attack multiple enemies with one full attack, honestly, particularly at higher levels?

That is very much open to different interpretations Fax. There's never been a good consensus on it.

[Fax Celestis]

That is very much open to different interpretations Fax. There's never been a good consensus on it.

Relevant quote:


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.


I don't see any interpretation of this that says "trigger the spell with each attack": it quite literally says "each target you attack is affected."

[Big Fau]

Relevant quote:



I don't see any interpretation of this that says "trigger the spell with each attack": it quite literally says "each target you attack is affected."

And individual spells have specifications about if they can affect the same target multiple times or not. Chain Lightning can't, but Scorching Ray and Magic Missile can. All three have text clarifying this, and the Duskblade's Arcane Channeling lacks both forms of specification. The question is if a creature can be targeted multiple times by the same spell, and most touch spells do not have such targeting restrictions.

For touch spells that have a duration longer than instantaneous, you'd have a point due to the last line of that quote:


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.

However, an instantaneous-duration touch spell like Shocking Grasp discharges with each hit.

[Komatik]

Uh, the quote is crystal clear.

"The spell affects each target you hit in melee combat" = After full attack is over, game asks "Was this NPC hit by PC Mxyzptlk? Yes, spell affects him. No, too bad".

[Big Fau]

Uh, the quote is crystal clear.

"The spell affects each target you hit in melee combat" = After full attack is over, game asks "Was this NPC hit by PC Mxyzptlk? Yes, spell affects him. No, too bad".

The only time the spell takes effect after the full attack is if the spell has a duration longer than 1 round.

[Fax Celestis]

The only time the spell takes effect after the full attack is if the spell has a duration longer than 1 round.

That is not what "discharge" means. Discharging a spell means its duration ends early because an effect triggered it.

In all instances, the spell goes off after the Duskblade has struck an opponent.


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.

[CyberThread]

is this what we are arguing over?


http://i.imgur.com/Re52wuC.jpg

[Fax Celestis]

Specifically the right branch. Big Fau seems to be under the impression it states that the spell goes off once per attack. It does not: arcane channeling goes off once per full attack, after the full attack is complete, targeting all creatures struck in that full attack.

[CyberThread]

Now in this case, we have a very clear marker


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.


Now that does seem very clear,in two aspects like so

http://i.imgur.com/A5dQlxm.jpg


I think the ability is specifically written to prevent cleave or greater cleave abuse, but some weird feat or likewise ability, that lets you hit two or more targets within a full attack .

[Fax Celestis]

You realize that the regular full attack action lets you multi target? The argument isn't whether or it the spell affects all struck targets: it does. The argument is whether or not a creature struck multiple times by an arcane channeled full attack is affected by the spell each strike.

A careful reading of the ability demonstrates that it goes off after the full attack is complete, targeting each creature struck. It is a binary status: either a creature was struck and is therefore affected by the spell, or the creature was not struck and is not affected.

[CyberThread]

oh I thought we were arguing if things hit multiple targets, or if they just hit one.


Yeah, it doesn't stack .


Think of one of those samurai anime things, the screen turns black, you see a bunch of bright flashes, and then it ends, everyone is shocked wondering what happened. Suddenly body parts fall off, folks are cut in half. That is how duskblade works.

[Fax Celestis]

Right. And what I'm saying is that Duskblade 13 is pretty useless barring specific builds or foci. You're better off going into Sandshaper or something else that gets you more spells known (or even an expanded list. Rainbow dusksnake might be worth looking into).

[DEMON]

I don't see any interpretation of this that says "trigger the spell with each attack": it quite literally says "each target you attack is affected."


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.

It says "it affects each target you hit in melee", not that "it affects each target you hit in melee once". It only means even if you hit more than one target, the channeling works on all of them.

[Larkas]

I'm going to leave this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=286800) here. :smallwink:

[Fax Celestis]

It says "it affects each target you hit in melee", not that "it affects each target you hit in melee once". It only means even if you hit more than one target, the channeling works on all of them.

The FAQ disagrees with your reading. (Abbreviated as I am on my phone)


if you hit the same creature more than once during the full attack action, does the spell affect it each time you hit?

No. The spell affects each target only once.

[Komatik]

The FAQ disagrees with your reading. (Abbreviated as I am on my phone)

Uh, he was saying exactly what the FAQ was saying. The game checks "Was this creature hit by the Duskblade this turn? Yes, apply spell, no, do nothing."

[DEMON]

The FAQ disagrees with your reading. (Abbreviated as I am on my phone)

Okay, the FAQ you quoted is pretty self-explanatory. Original rules text was ambiguous. And while I don't agree with the FAQ, there's no denying that it's clear on this matter.


Uh, he was saying exactly what the FAQ was saying. The game checks "Was this creature hit by the Duskblade this turn? Yes, apply spell, no, do nothing."

Nah, I was saying the opposite of what FAQ says.

[PraxisVetli]

I thought the question here was we were trying to decide that if Duskblade uses his FullAttack Channeling, and in the full attack engages 3 opponents, are they all affected by the spell?

[DEMON]

I thought the question here was we were trying to decide that if Duskblade uses his FullAttack Channeling, and in the full attack engages 3 opponents, are they all affected by the spell?

I don't think anyone questions this. The only part where there are opposing opinions among the players is "if you hit the same opponent several times in a full attack channeling, is that opponent affected by the spell several times?".

[CyberThread]

OP shall answer this easily


For the debate of 13th level dusk or a dip in sandshaper



NO! It does not stack multiple times on a single target, now assuming this , may the conversation please grow back into the flow of answering the question.