Duskblades & Spell Channelling

[KoDT69]

I find it odd that the Duskblade's Channel Spell ability only works on the first attack, but they can Channel on a gull-attack at level 13. Any ideas why level 13? Is there any way to get that option earlier?

[daremetoidareyo]

Enlightened fist, ordained champion, and spellsword all allow limited channeling.

[Gruftzwerg]

Yeah, to make a full attack with Arcane Channeling you need to get 13 lvls of Duskblade.
IIRC it's unique in the way it works (the lvl 13 full attack channel).
Sure it kick in late, but is very strong on the other hand and can lead into strong builds.

If you are interested, have a look at my Shivering Touch - Arcane Channeling Optimization build (see signature). It combines full attack channeling with Bloodstorm Blades ability to turn melee attacks into ranged (and let em count as melee back again) and Whirlwind Attack to attack all enemies in up to 50ft range.

[KoDT69]

Thanks guys. I had a look at the alternative class options and none have the same effect exactly. The Spellsword class seems to have that type of fail where they started with good intentions but then missed the goal completely on implementation.
The tornado storm build looks interesting tho not suited for this particular build (not a thrower) but interesting and useful. I may have to just Homebrew redesign the Duskblade's or just make a whole new class from scratch to offer a little more non-combat utility. As designed it's somewhat of a one trick pony as written.

[Fizban]

Beware: there is some dispute over weather the channeled full attack lets you hit the same creature multiple times with a single casting, or weather "each target" means each creature is affected once. Check with your DM.

[Gruftzwerg]

Beware: there is some dispute over weather the channeled full attack lets you hit the same creature multiple times with a single casting, or weather "each target" means each creature is affected once. Check with your DM.
Imho it's the latter one. That's why Whirlwind Attack is a nice option. It's a single Full Attack which just hits anything in your range once (@full BaB).

[Kurald Galain]

If you're considering rewriting, look into playing a Magus instead, they get better channeling at level 2. It strikes me that a lot of campaigns will never get to level 13 anyway.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus/

[KoDT69]

I am the DAM and building NPC's.

I would assume the full attack allows the spell to affect the same creature multiple times for a few reasons. 1 why would it be a 13th level ability that's not fully replicated elsewhere? 2 It would make sense that it was intended to work that way just worded poorly. 3 it's still a limited class in many ways so allowing it doesn't unbalance the game. 4 why is the class starved of feats if it takes stacking combos of feats to make use of a granted ability?

[Kurald Galain]

I would assume the full attack allows the spell to affect the same creature multiple times for a few reasons.
The FAQ says that it doesn't. But since you're the DM anyway, point 3 applies. Yes the duskblade is written to be extremely limited (particularly its extremely narrow spell list); I am not sure why though.

[Crake]

If you are interested, have a look at my Shivering Touch - Arcane Channeling Optimization build (see signature). It combines full attack channeling with Bloodstorm Blades ability to turn melee attacks into ranged (and let em count as melee back again) and Whirlwind Attack to attack all enemies in up to 50ft range.

The problem with that combo is that whirlwind attack only lets you make one attack against each opponent within reach. Sure you can throw your axe or whatever 50ft, but that's not within your reach, as bloodstorm blade never actually specifies that it extends your reach in any way.

[Gruftzwerg]

The problem with that combo is that whirlwind attack only lets you make one attack against each opponent within reach. Sure you can throw your axe or whatever 50ft, but that's not within your reach, as bloodstorm blade never actually specifies that it extends your reach in any way.

the sole point in the rules where sole "reach" is defined is in the rules compendium. And actually they are talking about natural reach:


Reach
Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of
only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks
only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However,
Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons might
threaten more squares than a typical creature. Creatures larger
than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more, so they
threaten all squares within that reach, including diagonal ones.
Creatures smaller than Small typically have a natural reach of
0 feet, meaning they can’t reach into adjacent squares. Since
they have no natural reach, such creatures don’t threaten the
squares around them at all. See Size, page 116.

"...so they threaten all squares within that reach..."
is the sole rule you could extrapolate out of the text.
Cause the other part just talks about "most creatures" (= no strict rule) and natural reach.

so lets look how you "threaten squares"..:


If you’re considered armed, you threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack,...

Since BSB allows me to make melee attacks into squares up to 50ft away, I threaten them. Note that the "Thunderous Throw" ability only last until "end of your turn", which means once your actions end, you don't threaten them anymore and enemies are free to move there.
But it still affects your reach in your turn. So, to make it clear: Thunderous Throw increases your range until end of your turn. Enough to let it work with Whirlwind. No point left to debate imho. But I am still open for discussion if you can disprove my argument somehow ;)

[Mr Adventurer]

the sole point in the rules where sole "reach" is defined is in the rules compendium. And actually they are talking about natural reach:



"...so they threaten all squares within that reach..."
is the sole rule you could extrapolate out of the text.
Cause the other part just talks about "most creatures" (= no strict rule) and natural reach.

so lets look how you "threaten squares"..:



Since BSB allows me to make melee attacks into squares up to 50ft away, I threaten them. Note that the "Thunderous Throw" ability only last until "end of your turn", which means once your actions end, you don't threaten them anymore and enemies are free to move there.
But it still affects your reach in your turn. So, to make it clear: Thunderous Throw increases your range until end of your turn. Enough to let it work with Whirlwind. No point left to debate imho. But I am still open for discussion if you can disprove my argument somehow ;)

So with your build and the epic feat that gives unlimited range you can attack every creature (you have line of effect to I guess) on your turn? Neat.

Also an edge interaction with creatures that do move or otherwise provoke on your turn, such as with a readied action.

[Kurald Galain]

the sole point in the rules where sole "reach" is defined is in the rules compendium. And actually they are talking about natural reach:

Your logic is reversed. The quote from the RC defines reach, and bases threatened squares on that. This means that increasing your reach gives you more threatened squares. It does not follow that getting more threatened squares also increases your reach. In formal terms, that's the fallacy of affirming the consequent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent).

[Gruftzwerg]

Your logic is reversed. The quote from the RC defines reach, and bases threatened squares on that. This means that increasing your reach gives you more threatened squares. It does not follow that getting more threatened squares also increases your reach. In formal terms, that's the fallacy of affirming the consequent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent).

It's just extrapolated. But without that, there is no strict rule left for "reach".
1. The rules compendium is actually defining "natural reach" and not "reach" as in the PHB. The text even later talks about natural reach when talking about creatures with with extra "natural reach".
2. The entire text is talking about either "most creatures" (= not restricting in any way) or reach weapons.
3. there ain't any strict rule given in the text at all.

So whats left is to fall back to regular english definition and that covers that well up.


we could also look how reach weapons work:

A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren’t adjacent to him or her.
Since Thunderous Throw allows me to strike targets not adjacent to me (up to 50ft.), it even lets my weapon count as reach weapon.

Either way you look at it. It works imho.
(btw, I also used the TT and WW combo in my ranged ubercharger build if you are interested: ShurikeNado (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?526875))

[Kurald Galain]

It's just extrapolated. But without that, there is no strict rule left for "reach".
Sure there is. As the RC specifies, it's five feet for a medium creature - very straightforward.


So whats left is to fall back to regular english definition
What you're doing here is not "regular english" but a legalese / bureaucratese interpretation. Many DMs don't consider those valid.

[Gruftzwerg]

Sure there is. As the RC specifies, it's five feet for a medium creature - very straightforward.


What you're doing here is not "regular english" but a legalese / bureaucratese interpretation. Many DMs don't consider those valid.

"5feet for a medium creature" is its Natural Reach, not its Reach!, RC is missleading here with the "Reach" title of the paragraph.
Your "reach" is your natural reach (due to size + racial bonuses) + maybe a reach weapon + any other reach bonuses.

The text is talking about natural reach and reach weapons. But there is no rule text beside that (for reach itself). So, reach is still undefined.
IIRC only RC defines "Reach"(as paragraph title) while PHB only defines "Natural Reach" and "Reach Weapons". Imho RC is missleading here.

But even then, there is still the argument that TT lets your weapon qualify as reach weapon.

[Jack_McSnatch]

I see where you're coming from, but you should reconsider, especially if you intend to use them against players. Yes, Duskblade is limited... But it's absurdly good at its limited role, which is damage. There's a good reason full attack channeling doesn't come online til 13th level. It applies the spell to every attack at the cost of a single spell slot. (ignore what the FAQ says. Everybody else does unless it caters to their opinions, in which case it's gospel.) Even with the class's limited list and low level spells, that's going to be devastating. Especially to players. I tried this once with a large group of decent optimizers, and it was very nearly a tpk. The only reason they survived was because I pulled my punches at the end.

[Thurbane]

Enlightened fist, ordained champion, and spellsword all allow limited channeling.

Also Raumathari Battlemage (UE p.19).

[KoDT69]

So would it be too unbalanced to let the full attack option be obtained in place of the single attack version and open up spell selection to the full Arcane list? I figure the Duskblade could be less limited to just damage if they could pick more spells. Maybe even make Divine spells open so they could have some more non-combat options.

[Kurald Galain]

So would it be too unbalanced to let the full attack option be obtained in place of the single attack version and open up spell selection to the full Arcane list?
I'd say either of these is fine, but both together is overkill. The primary problem with the duskblade is its ridiculously short spell list (and the fact that easily half of the spells on that list are crap).

[DEMON]

So would it be too unbalanced to let the full attack option be obtained in place of the single attack version and open up spell selection to the full Arcane list? I figure the Duskblade could be less limited to just damage if they could pick more spells. Maybe even make Divine spells open so they could have some more non-combat options.

I'd say yes to both. Or at least partly yes.

I'm of the opinion, that the full attack channeling should apply to the same enemy more than once per round (and I am aware that I disagree with the FAQ), which is a boost in and of itself. But I also understand the power of the ability and giving it at 3rd level is mighty strong. Unless the group is matching the power-level of this improved ability (or the power level is so low, the Duskblade won't be able to fully benefit from it, not having enough full attacks anyway), this will be unbalancing.

A Duskblade should sure use more spell options, their list is very limited and they don't have many spells known either. In my opinion, a Duskblade needs more option for their channeling just for the sake of versatility, so their bread and butter isn't just Shocking Grasp and Vampiric Touch most of the time, but one should be careful with what other spells they open up for them. For example, tossing out Shivering Touch, like it's nobody's business, could be a killer in many games. So can be allowing cure spells to be channeled with ease.

On the other hand, players of the higher powered games won't give a damn one way or another. So it all boils down to what you want to accomplish with this, but remember that the same options should be available to your players, since you're doing this for an NPC.

[ExLibrisMortis]

If you want to improve duskblades' versatility, I'd suggest adding a few additional buff and utility spells, and increasing their skill points. 2+INT is basically never enough to rely on skills (some classes simply ignore skills and use magic, but that's a different matter). Buff/utility magic along the lines of haste (yes, duskblades don't get this one, but beguilers do--go figure) and bite of the were-animal line of spells are naturally synergistic, but stuff like dispel magic on-level (as 2nd, ECL 5, instead of 4th, ECL 13) and teleport and greater dispel magic (as 4ths, ECL 13) are more important. And stuff like death ward, mind blank, freedom of movement. Stuff that makes you the invulnerable magic knight you're supposed to be.

[DEMON]

If you want to improve duskblades' versatility, I'd suggest adding a few additional buff and utility spells, and increasing their skill points. 2+INT is basically never enough to rely on skills (some classes simply ignore skills and use magic, but that's a different matter).

Even though not "full-9-casters", Duskblades are INT-based casters, so the 2+INT isn't entirely cripling. Not saying they couldn't use a buff, but there are other classes that should come first (e.g. Fighter, Warmage, Psychic Warrior, Sorcerer). They can make do with the 4-5-6 skill points they get, all things considered.


Buff/utility magic along the lines of haste (yes, duskblades don't get this one, but beguilers do--go figure) and bite of the were-animal line of spells are naturally synergistic, but stuff like dispel magic on-level (as 2nd, ECL 5, instead of 4th, ECL 13) and teleport and greater dispel magic (as 4ths, ECL 13) are more important. And stuff like death ward, mind blank, freedom of movement. Stuff that makes you the invulnerable magic knight you're supposed to be.

Agreed on haste and the dispel magic needs to be at worst 3rd level, with greater dispel magic available at 4th of 5th caster level. But what I would love for the Dusky to get, combat-wise, would be shield at 1st level and harm and 5th level, offering a nice defense boost from the get go and another offensive (channeling) alternative at high level.

In short, if you want to expand the Duskblade's spell list, look at what Knight of the Weave (Cov) gets and consider the option for the Duskblade.

[KoDT69]

Ok I got some good insight and refresher info thanks everyone. One last musing before I let this thread fall to the archives though.

What do you all think about allowing Arcane Channelling as an Epic Level feat for a Sorcerer for example?

[ExLibrisMortis]

Epic feats are so irrelevant I don't really have any thoughts on them at all. But, if you must have more coherent feedback: epic feats rarely grant abilities that you didn't already have, at least fluff-wise. So you might grant duskblade-style arcane channeling to epic Spellswords, but I wouldn't grant it to any old sorcerer.