The Duskblade and Arcane Channeling

[Desthro]

What this post is about:
Arcane Channeling is a very unique ability in the 3.5 world because it doesn't merely grant a specific ability. Rather, it modifies an existing, and well documented, action with specific wording. It is an attempt to analyze this ability on a step-by-step basis. Hopefully, it will dispel some deeply entrenched and generally accepted myths about the ability, or at the very least cast a new light on this fascinating class ability and open minds to the possibilities therein. I hope that this thread can lead to an eye-opening and constructive dialogue about this ability and the class that wields it.

What this post is not about:
Trolls, flamers, enraged nerds, and/or generally people who cannot contribute to a meaningful analysis or discussion. Yes, we know you exist, take your problems elsewhere.

About me:
I am a dedicated RPG fan and have been playing, analyzing, breaking, and theorycrafting with various RPG systems for nearly 20 years. Sometimes I disagree with the community at large, and I end up having a very heated discussion with a trusted friend of mine who maintains a web blog detailing his experiences in the gaming community. He suggested I bring this discussion here to the wonderful people who share a common interest in such things.

-=[]=-
Arcane Channeling
First, let's take the text of the ability directly out of Players' Handbook 2 (PH2) on page 20:

Spoiler

Show

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.

Arcane Channeling is a complex, and difficult ability to analyze due to its compound nature. Due to that aspect of the ability, we must break it down sentence by sentence, and proceed given the information we obtain from our analysis.

The first sentence of the Arcane Channeling ability states that "you can use a standard action to cast any touch spell you know and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack." This part of the sentence tells us what kind of standard action it is (as defined in the SRD under Standard Actions.) It also brings us to our first myth.

Myth #1: Arcane Channeling is an Attack Action
Reality: Arcane Channeling is a Cast a Spell Action

According to the SRD, Standard Actions are broken down in to groups of common actions, each of which has specific rules on how these actions interact with the various mechanics of the game. The types of Standard Actions are: Attack, Cast a Spell, Activate Magic Item, Use Special Ability, Total Defense, and Start/Complete Full-Round Action. Arcane Channeling is a "Cast a Spell" action, because of the words, "...cast a touch spell you know..." This part of the sentence also tells us what necessary rules apply to the casting of this spell, which is in this case: touch spells.

Normally, casting a spell does not require any form of an attack for it to resolve unless it falls into the category of touch or ranged-touch spells. However, touch spells have specific clauses related to making touch attacks as a part of casting the spell (taken directly from the d20 SRD):

Spoiler

Show

Touch Spells in Combat
Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Any touch spell you cast in a round also allows you to attempt to touch your target to deliver the spell in the same round. It does not cost you an action, and this rule is parallel to the wording contained within the first sentence of Arcane Channeling, "...cast any touch spell you know AND deliver the spell..." The next part of the sentence in question is where a large portion of many arguments arise. This is due, likely, to the removal of the touch attack wording as it is replaced with melee attack wording instead.

The first substitution that deviates from the Standard Action of "Cast a Spell: Touch Spells" is the language: "...and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack." First, we will discuss the nature of touch attacks and the ramifications of substituting the touch attack with a melee attack. Keep in mind, that despite the fact that it is no longer a touch attack, we are still resolving the action of: "Cast a Spell " and are not making an "Attack" as defined by the SRD.

Spoiler

Show

Touch Attacks
Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. However, the act of casting a spell does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack. Your opponent’s AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

Touch Attacks are very similar to Melee Attacks in that they require an attack roll, and are defended by AC with the noted modifications. This also brings us to the second myth.

Myth #2: Spells cast via Arcane Channeling cannot score critical hits
Reality: Any spell that requires an attack roll can score a critical hit

According to the Players' Handbook (PH) page 140:

Spoiler

Show

Spells and Critical Hits: A spell that requires an attack roll, such as shocking grasp or Melf’s acid arrow, can score a critical hit. A spell attack that requires no attack roll, such as lightning bolt, cannot score a critical hit.

Since we are casting a touch spell that requires an attack roll (touch or otherwise!), the spell can and will crit if the attack roll threatens a critical and is backed accordingly. Touch attacks have a threat/modifier of 20/x2, and that would be used if we were making a touch attack to deliver our spell. Since we are attacking with a melee weapon to deliver the spell, the threat range of the weapon and the critical modifier of the weapon apply to the attack made, as is with all attacks made with weapons. This is a strong assertion and will likely incur some lively and lengthy discussion. Holding the Charge (see below) also contains some wording that aligns with unarmed attacks and attacks made with natural weapons. Naturally, if you crit on those attack rolls, your spell will crit accordingly. The same applies to Arcane Channeling.

Myth #3: Missing your attack with Arcane Channeling causes your touch spell to become lost
Reality: If it misses, you can Hold the Charge because it is a touch spell.

Spoiler

Show

Holding the Charge
If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.

Holding the charge states that if the attack misses, you are still holding the charge. This applies to unarmed attacks and natural weapon attacks, and with Arcane Channeling, melee weapon attacks. It is a natural and smooth application of the touch spell rules thus far.

The next few sentences in the Arcane Channeling ability are fairly clear and unambiguous.

"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."

I feel those do not need explanation.

However, the very next sentence is also a source of dissent amongst players and DMs alike. "If the melee attack is successful, the attack deals damage normally; then the effect of the spell is resolved." It is also a part of our next myth.

Myth #4: The spell is "bonus damage" like sneak attack and/or weapon enchantments like flaming, shocking, or unholy burst.
Reality: The spell is being delivered by the attack as outlined under Holding the Charge. It is not bonus damage of any sort.

Fortunately for us, we have already gone over an extremely similar piece of language with Holding the Charge: "If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges." The similarity in the language is unmistakable. This also corroborates with the reality of Myth #3.

The last sentences are related to a further enhancement of the Arcane Channelling ability: "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."

By extrapolating the analysis we have made prior, you can take a full attack action to cast the touch spell instead of a standard action, gain a full attack progression, and have the spell affect each target you hit in melee combat that round. Unfortunately there are no specific hard and fast examples regarding whether or not you can affect the same target multiple times, or if you have to hit separate targets to gain the bonus spell duplication. However, there is one touch spell and one pseudo-touch spell that allows you to discharge it multiple times over its duration, Chill Touch and Produce Flame. The description of Chill Touch suggests that you can affect the same target multiple times with multiple touch attacks, and is the only core example of this effect that I could locate easily. Produce flame grants you a touch attack that deals damage. It's not a stretch, but there are no core examples unfortunately. The second problem is the XP cost and/or expensive material component costs. Duplicating the spell effects of such spells almost ALWAYS requires one to pay the XP/Material costs again, and I do not feel that this ability would work any differently. If its possible to work out a hard, reasoned path to the truth regarding the level 13 upgrade, I would be more than happy if we could do so.

Thank you for reading!

[A_S]

Welcome to the playground !

First, to your specific posts:

#1 I think your analysis of trying to categorize standard actions here is nonsensical. Although the SRD page you mention lists many types of standard actions, it's not an exhaustive list; for instance, the ready action and many skill uses are also standard actions, despite not being listed there. Rather than saying "Arcane Channeling must fit into one of these categories, and it's not (Attack), it's (Cast A Spell)," I think it's better to think of Arcane Channeling as simply its own new type of standard action that does exactly what it says: It casts a spell, then makes an attack to deliver it. Thus, it triggers abilities that happen whenever you cast a spell, but also triggers abilities that happen whenever you make an attack (because it specifically says that you both cast a spell and make an attack as part of the standard action).

#2 I think this is widely acknowledged as correct. Have you played with people who disagree?

#3 This is interesting, and not something I've seen discussed before. At first glance, I agree with your reading here; you definitely cast a touch spell as part of the Arcane Channeling action, and that bit of text is just describing what happens if you cast a touch spell and fail to deliver it. By strict RAW, though, I'm not sure you can deliver the held charge with your weapon on subsequent rounds; you might have to actually touch the target.

#4 As far as I know, "bonus damage" isn't really a well-defined term in the rules (although it does get thrown around a lot). What rules would this interact with depending on whether damage from a channeled spell were or were not "bonus damage?" Are you talking about stuff like Sneak Attack damage not being multiplied on a critical hit? I'd say you get to multiply it because, as you say, the text of Arcane Channeling specifies that you're delivering the spell, that the rule that "spells you deliver with an attack roll can crit" is more specific than "don't multiply bonus damage dice on crit," especially since it's unclear whether channeled spell damage is bonus damage in the first place.

-----

On a more general note, I wanna ask: What made you want to make this post? Have you read things here that make you think this community has misconceptions about how Arcane Channeling works? Are these misconceptions your own gaming group has or had, and you wanna talk about them with others and see if they're widespread? As a general rule, most bits of rules text in 3.5 have been pored over, argued about, used in cute ways for CharOp, read again, argued about some more, etc. for 10+ years on these boards. You might get more feedback and discussion of the kind you want if you ask a few specific followup questions to your analysis, or give a few discussion points, rather than taking the "everyone is wrong about this, let me dispense my wisdom and correct you all" tone of your first couple paragraphs .

[Desthro]

Thanks for your reply and your welcome! =)

#1 I think your analysis of trying to categorize standard actions here is nonsensical. Although the SRD page you mention lists many types of standard actions, it's not an exhaustive list; for instance, the ready action and many skill uses are also standard actions, despite not being listed there. Rather than saying "Arcane Channeling must fit into one of these categories, and it's not (Attack), it's (Cast A Spell)," I think it's better to think of Arcane Channeling as simply its own new type of standard action that does exactly what it says: It casts a spell, then makes an attack to deliver it. Thus, it triggers abilities that happen whenever you cast a spell, but also triggers abilities that happen whenever you make an attack (because it specifically says that you both cast a spell and make an attack as part of the standard action).

It's actually pretty important because each grouping of actions contains its own rules and how they relate to the mechanics within the game. While the melee attack replacement will definitely be resolved with the rules governing attacks, (ie the Attack group of actions), the entire (Su) ability is mostly related to spellcasting. I was merely trying to explain that the rules that would apply most closely would be the ones under "Cast a Spell." My friend and I agreed to disagree, and here we are! =D

#2 I think this is widely acknowledged as correct. Have you played with people who disagree?

My good friend disagrees with me, and he's my DM regarding a game where this has come up in. We disagree on a lot of things actually, and we have very interesting discussions, so I figured I would post it here and see if my arguments are solid and well-reasoned. My research has shown that people do flop on this one from time to time. If that's not the case, then awesomeness!

#3 This is interesting, and not something I've seen discussed before. At first glance, I agree with your reading here; you definitely cast a touch spell as part of the Arcane Channeling action, and that bit of text is just describing what happens if you cast a touch spell and fail to deliver it. By strict RAW, though, I'm not sure you can deliver the held charge with your weapon on subsequent rounds; you might have to actually touch the target.

I would say you can still deliver the spell through the weapon since you technically haven't completed the ability yet in its entirety, and if you chose to channel a different spell, you lose the one you are holding. If anything, Arcane Channeling just allows for the use of a melee weapon to deliver touch-range spells (extending the ruleset found under Hold the Charge) and you don't suffer from AoOs and the casting time must be one SA or less. It would have been much easier to word it that way, but hey, that's just me. Ofc I think Hold the Charge is insane, and that's the risk of using a touch spell that has no save, but it is what it is no?

b]#4[/b] As far as I know, "bonus damage" isn't really a well-defined term in the rules (although it does get thrown around a lot). What rules would this interact with depending on whether damage from a channeled spell were or were not "bonus damage?" Are you talking about stuff like Sneak Attack damage not being multiplied on a critical hit? I'd say you get to multiply it because, as you say, the text of Arcane Channeling specifies that you're delivering the spell, that the rule that "spells you deliver with an attack roll can crit" is more specific than "don't multiply bonus damage dice on crit," especially since it's unclear whether channeled spell damage is bonus damage in the first place.

Yeah, the rules regarding bonus damage aren't very clear in general, I'd agree with that for sure. And the big problem lies where people change what the ability does based on preconceived notions, or partial interpretations of the ability. Just as an example, you said "channeled spell damage", and it's not really channeled anything, it's casting a touch spell this way, which specifically classified as a touch attack. Some people have argued that it is bonus damage on an attack, which is quite obviously not the case. (Unlike the Arcane Strike feat for example.) So I figured it was worth mentioning. Probably a bit unclear though.

On a more general note, I wanna ask: What made you want to make this post? Have you read things here that make you think this community has misconceptions about how Arcane Channeling works? Are these misconceptions your own gaming group has or had, and you wanna talk about them with others and see if they're widespread? As a general rule, most bits of rules text in 3.5 have been pored over, argued about, used in cute ways for CharOp, read again, argued about some more, etc. for 10+ years on these boards. You might get more feedback and discussion of the kind you want if you ask a few specific followup questions to your analysis, or give a few discussion points, rather than taking the "everyone is wrong about this, let me dispense my wisdom and correct you all" tone of your first couple paragraphs .

Actually, it was to settle a question between my friend and I. I have read things in various communities and each one of these has come up in the conversations read over the years. So I figured why not post about it, list my reasoning, and see what the response is like. (I admit I do not post in forums too often! Obviously! ) And not everyone is wrong, it's just common misconceptions I have seen.

All in all, I appreciate the time you took to take a look at it. =)

Now if you have some insight regarding the level 13 extension of this ability. . . I am still all ears =D

[A_S]

It's actually pretty important because each grouping of actions contains its own rules and how they relate to the mechanics within the game. While the melee attack replacement will definitely be resolved with the rules governing attacks, (ie the Attack group of actions), the entire (Su) ability is mostly related to spellcasting. I was merely trying to explain that the rules that would apply most closely would be the ones under "Cast a Spell." My friend and I agreed to disagree, and here we are! =D

Hm. I'm not sure we're actually disagreeing on anything substantive w/r/t the actual rules, just the usefulness of action categories.

Here's how I see it: The Arcane Channeling ability (paraphrased) says you cast a spell, then make an attack to deliver it, and that whole thing takes a standard action. You should resolve the part of that action that's casting a spell using the rules for casting a spell (it takes components if it the spell has components, etc.), and you should resolve the part that's an attack using the rules for making an attack (has a range of your reach because it's a melee attack, roll 1d20+AB to determine if it hits, etc.). Saying "most of the text for this ability is about the part where you cast a spell, so it's a 'cast a spell'-type action" doesn't really make any sense.

Is there a specific in-game outcome where you and your friend disagree about what should happen when you use the ability that depends on which category the action belongs to?

I would say you can still deliver the spell through the weapon since you technically haven't completed the ability yet in its entirety, and if you chose to channel a different spell, you lose the one you are holding. If anything, Arcane Channeling just allows for the use of a melee weapon to deliver touch-range spells (extending the ruleset found under Hold the Charge) and you don't suffer from AoOs and the casting time must be one SA or less. It would have been much easier to word it that way, but hey, that's just me. Ofc I think Hold the Charge is insane, and that's the risk of using a touch spell that has no save, but it is what it is no?

Having read the ability more closely, I disagree. The exact wording is (emphasis mine), "you can use a standard action to cast any touch spell you know and deliver the spell through your weapon with a melee attack." By my reading, once you've used your standard action, you're done using the Arcane Channeling ability. If you've failed to deliver the spell at the end of that action (because your melee attack missed), then you default to the general rules for what happens when you cast a spell (which you did as part of Arcane Channeling) but don't deliver it, which is that you have to touch your opponent to deliver the spell.

Using your weapon to deliver the spell on a subsequent action would no longer be "us[ing] a standard action to cast...and deliver..." and therefore is not something that Arcane Channeling allows you to do.

I'd be interested in hearing what others think on this though; this is actually the first time I've heard it suggested that you can hold the charge when using Arcane Channeling.

Now if you have some insight regarding the level 13 extension of this ability. . . I am still all ears =D

The things I've seen confusion about on that front are:

• You only get to deliver the spell to each opponent you strike once. Note the wording (emphasis mine): "the spell affects each target you hit in melee combat that round." No slamming the same person with Night's Caress five times in a round.
• Once you take a full attack action to use Arcane Channeling once in a round, the spell gets delivered by all the melee attacks you make that round, even if they're not part of that full attack action: "each target you hit in melee combat that round." So, if you have some way of making additional attacks after that full attack action (say, Shadow Pounce + swift action teleportation, or even just AoO's you make later in the round), they deliver your spell too.
• There's at least one type of full attack action, the Whirlwind Attack feat, that isn't just the standard full attack routine. Because it's explicitly a full attack action, you can use Whirlwind Attack with Arcane Channeling at level 13. Probably not worth the massive feat investment, but cool.

That's all the insight I have on the subject.

*edit* Oh yeah, and if you're looking to win the critical hit argument with your friend, show him the rules on page 72 of Complete Arcane for "weaponlike spells." They're defined as "any spell that requires an attack roll and deals damage," and it's specified that the Improved Critical feat works on them...so it's pretty clear that they can crit.

[Gwendol]

Other classes can deliver spells through melee weapons. Here's the Ordained Champion channel spell ability:

Channel Spell (Su): At 3rd level, you can channel any spell available to you that has one creature or more as its target into your melee weapon. Doing so requires a move action and uses up a spell slot or prepared spell of casting time no greater than one standard action. The channeled spell affects the next target you successfully attack with that weapon, though saving throws and spell resistance still apply normally. Even if the spell normally affects an area or is a ray, it still affects only the target in this case. On a successful hit, the spell is discharged from the weapon, which can then hold another spell. You can channel your spells into only one weapon at a time. A spell channeled into a weapon is lost if not used within 8 hours.

Here the meaning is clear: once channeled the spell remains in the weapon until discharged, or is lost after eight hours. The weapon must successfully hit a target for the spell to discharge.

Arcane channeling works somewhat differently: if the melee attack hits successfully, the effect of the spell is resolved. Thus what that means depends on the spell in question. If the attack does not hit, the spell must still be stored in the weapon, just like a held charge. Some spells (Chill Touch) may allow for multiple attacks. Stored in a weapon that would mean attacking multiple targets if BAB (and CL) allows it.

[Troacctid]

Can you channel through a grapple or trip attempt?

[Gwendol]

Grapple: I don't see how as you channel the spell into a weapon. Just cast the spell and deliver it through a touch attack normally while making a hold to establish the grapple.

Trip: If you trip through the use of a weapon, yes.

[Fax Celestis]

Argument I had with my local group a while back: can a duskblade channel ranged touch/ray spells? They're technically "touch". Ray spells are a definite no from me, as they are "Effect: Ray", not "Target: One Creature", but a ranged touch spell that isn't a ray is a little more vague.

[Skyrender]

I think the primary distinction that most people disagree over is whether arcane channeling represents a modification of the process of casting and delivering a touch spell, or as an alteration of an attack.

I think the problem most people have in understanding this ability lies in how people envision it. For some (myself included), you're taking a spell that already requires you to make contact with the target, and adding the ability to touch the target with a swing of your sword, instead of your hand (or fist, foot, claws, fangs, horns, tentacles, or whatever-else-have-you). Others view it primarily as making the attack, and then rushing to release the spell in that one single moment when the weapon is making contact. Still others view it as a temporary enchantment upon the weapon, altering it for that one attack that you can make.

Let's get something straight: This is not a temporary weapon enchantment, and any damage done by the spell is NOT bonus dice of damage for the attack! This is an attack PLUS a spell. As such, it is not treated the same as bonus dice of damage from the fire damage of a flaming sword, or the precision damage from a rogue's sneak attack.

Critical Characteristics: I've heard the arguments for using the critical characteristics of a weapon, and the ones for a spell, and I have to say the critical for the weapon is handled normally and the spell critical is, too. If you're using a scimitar, you'll threaten on 18-20, and do double damage upon confirmation. If you're using a heavy pick, you'll threaten on a 20, and do quadruple damage when you confirm. On the other hand, no matter what weapon you use, your spell will threaten on 20 and do double damage.

If you're gishing, try a duskblade 13/warlock 6-9/duskblade 14-16//warlock 1-5/enlightened spirit 1-10/divine oracle 2/warlock 10-12. With an average of just under a d8 for hit points, he's a bit too fragile to take the big hits. On the other hand, as soon as he gets transform magic at level 14 you can save your cleric from having to waste precious spells healing everybody up after every fight! Please note that this idea does, however, require a non-instantaneous at-will spell or spell-like ability, not including one of your own invocations (I recommend having another character with a level of warlock). What's more, in the middle of the fight you can use your eldritch blast o arcane channeling, and if you take battle caster, you can even use medium armor with no chance of invocation failure... and the two levels of divine oracle give you prescient sense, so you gain evasion no matter what kind of armor you're using! Be sure to pick up Improved Critical for both melee touch and ranged touch spells, if you can manage to fit them into your feat progression.

On a personal note, I like going into battle with a brilliant-energy rapier in one hand and a sorcerer's hand in the other. I like imagining that I'm using a lightsaber and a blaster. So I'm a Star Wars fan. Sue me.

[Khedrac]

Argument I had with my local group a while back: can a duskblade channel ranged touch/ray spells? They're technically "touch". Ray spells are a definite no from me, as they are "Effect: Ray", not "Target: One Creature", but a ranged touch spell that isn't a ray is a little more vague.

The general rules interpretation (and I don't think it gets disputed on the simple RAW thread) is that "ranged touch" and "touch" are very different types of spell so no, the duskblade cannot channel ranged touch spells.

If you do allow Ranged Touch spells to be channeled, do they get lost on a miss or held for the next attack? Unlike the touch spells they are normally lost on a miss so surely they should still be which means the miss behavior is now spell dependent - Ugh.

That said, the fact that they don't get any touch spells at 3rd level or above does raise the question of what the designers intended. I think it actually makes the high-level duskblade a ray specialist who is also very capable in melee.

Oh - and looking back to the original post, my interpretation for criticals is as follows.
No matter what weapon you deliver the spell with the spell's critical properties remain 20(x2).
Now I don't think the rules are remotely clear enough to work out an actual RAW position (I know others disagree - this is simply my opinion) but I do think this does a nice job of balancing the ability to channel, and it removes the "bonus dice v bonus damage" argument totally.

[Skyrender]

Khedrac, who told you ray spells aren't touch spells? Every ray spell I know of requires a ranged touch roll.

Ray spells DO seem to make up the preponderance of ranged touch spells (not including melee touch spells modified to be used at range, by any of several means). On the other hand, there are spells like Melf's acid arrow, which creates a projectile, and all you hafta do is point and shoot (so to speak).

Look at it this way: a ray is a subtype of ranged touch. In turn, ranged touch is a subtype of touch (alongside melee touch, which you seem to think is simply called touch). The wording of the arcane channeling ability says that you can use any touch spell you know, which would include any spell you have access to from the duskblade class...

...or any other.

To put it as simply as possible, if the spell requires a touch attack roll, or a ranged touch attack roll, a range of 'touch,' or has a target that includes 'creature (or object) touched,' or in any way mentions touching the intended target to get it to work, it's a touch spell.

Shocking grasp is a good example of a melee touch spell. Physically resisting the spell is worse than useless, whether it's a knight in a clunky metal suit, or a dragon with layers and layers of big, thick scales. All it takes is touching the knight's armor, and the metal conducts it straight into the hapless warrior's body, ignoring the armor bonus of the armor completely. The dragon's scales are actually part of the dragon, so natural armor is ignored, too (of course, several kinds of dragons are flat-out immune to electricity, but you get the idea).

A ranged touch spell is like pointing a gun at a particular opponent in the middle of a fight scene in an action movie, while working through a complex polynomial equation in your head (hence the concentration required, and the attack of opportunity that it generally provokes). If you can't keep the little red dot pointed at the bad guy as he dodges out of the way, the shot (spell) goes off without harming him. Worst-case scenario, it hits your friend standing behind him, instead. (That's why you should grab precise shot if you're a ranged spell specialist!)

In point of fact, the OP already answered this point, more eloquently and diplomatically than I just did.

[IAmTehDave]

Argument I had with my local group a while back: can a duskblade channel ranged touch/ray spells? They're technically "touch". Ray spells are a definite no from me, as they are "Effect: Ray", not "Target: One Creature", but a ranged touch spell that isn't a ray is a little more vague.

IIRC the only ranged touch spells that aren't rays are Conjuration ranged touch attacks (orbs, etc.)

I think a way to simplify the Duskblade's arcane channeling ability would be to word it thusly:

Spoiler: Language cleaned up maybe?

Show

Arcane Channeling (su): A Duskblade of at least 3rd level can use a melee weapon attack or natural weapon attack to deliver a touch spell, similar to the rules regarding Unarmed Strikes and Touch Spells. (See page <insert reference here> of the Player's Handbook) The spell attack uses the standard rules for weaponlike spells (See Complete Arcane page <whatever>) regarding critical strikes.

Spoiler: From a "rules of the Game" article

Show

Unarmed Attacks and Touch Spells
As Rules of the Game has noted before, you can use an unarmed attack to deliver a spell with touch range. You make the unarmed attack as you would normally. Your unarmed attack does not provoke an attack of opportunity because you're delivering a touch spell. If your attack roll is high enough to hit your target's regular Armor Class (not just its touch Armor Class), you deal unarmed strike damage and you also deliver the spell. If your attack roll fails to hit your target's regular Armor Class, the attack fails. It deals no damage and you don't deliver the spell either. You are, however, still holding the spell, just as if you failed with a touch attack.

At level 13, a Duskblade can use this ability as a full-round action to cast a spell with a range of Touch and deliver that spell with each melee weapon attack of a full attack action. If the spell's effects would normally last longer than one round, those effects end at the end of the Duskblade's current turn. If the Duskblade misses with all attacks, the spell is lost.

That should strip any ambiguity out of it, huh? It says the same thing, but referencing existing understandable rules.
(Also, the full round action doesn't get to keep the charge on misses. It's the trade-off of being able to hit multiple times, and that's kind of how it's worded now anyway.)

[Desthro]

Just a clarification: Touch spells are not spells that require a touch attack, but spells that have a RANGE of "touch." Rays do not have a range of "touch" so they are by definition not touch spells.

[Snowbluff]

• You only get to deliver the spell to each opponent you strike once. Note the wording (emphasis mine): "the spell affects each target you hit in melee combat that round." No slamming the same person with Night's Caress five times in a round.
• Once you take a full attack action to use Arcane Channeling once in a round, the spell gets delivered by all the melee attacks you make that round, even if they're not part of that full attack action: "each target you hit in melee combat that round." So, if you have some way of making additional attacks after that full attack action (say, Shadow Pounce + swift action teleportation, or even just AoO's you make later in the round), they deliver your spell too.
• There's at least one type of full attack action, the Whirlwind Attack feat, that isn't just the standard full attack routine. Because it's explicitly a full attack action, you can use Whirlwind Attack with Arcane Channeling at level 13. Probably not worth the massive feat investment, but cool.

That's all the insight I have on the subject.

1) There's no consensus here. A person hit would not longer be the target but the subject. The point is that Night's Caress isn't a great spell to be using, especially consider their are better ways for a DB to have effective damage and they can't crank DCs.

2) You channel DHop. Shoulder check yourself with your armor spikes. Commence shadow pounce. You channel DHop....

This is the real argument as to why you shouldn't be able to hit the same subject multiple times.

[IAmTehDave]

2) You channel DHop. Shoulder check yourself with your armor spikes. Commence shadow pounce. You channel DHop....
This is the real argument as to why you shouldn't be able to hit the same subject multiple times.

Actually IIRC the only way to get shadow pounce is via FR specific prestige classes, which means the first time you do this, Mystra appears and eats you. Alternatively, your DM says "No you're not allowed to do that."

Also, how is a Duskblade 13 getting Wiz/Sor 5 spells known, for Night's Caress, other than Gestalt? And if it's Gestalt, the DM should have been more leery of allowing a Duskblade//Also Caster

The things I've seen confusion about on <the full attack channel> are:

• You only get to deliver the spell to each opponent you strike once. Note the wording (emphasis mine): "the spell affects each target you hit in melee combat that round." No slamming the same person with Night's Caress five times in a round.
• Once you take a full attack action to use Arcane Channeling once in a round, the spell gets delivered by all the melee attacks you make that round, even if they're not part of that full attack action: "each target you hit in melee combat that round." So, if you have some way of making additional attacks after that full attack action (say, Shadow Pounce + swift action teleportation, or even just AoO's you make later in the round), they deliver your spell too.
• There's at least one type of full attack action, the Whirlwind Attack feat, that isn't just the standard full attack routine. Because it's explicitly a full attack action, you can use Whirlwind Attack with Arcane Channeling at level 13. Probably not worth the massive feat investment, but cool.

1) The ability doesn't specify that restriction. If I hit someone, then hit them again, then he was 2 of my targets for attacks that round. There's precedent with other spells that allow multiple charges of a touch spell (earlier in this thread) so my reading is basically that Arcane Channeling² turns every touch spell into a multi-hit touch spell, as long as you use your weapon attacks to make the attacks.

Spoiler: Aside, slight rant.

Show

I don't know why people read this as "You can't affect the same person more than once with the spell" when it's not spelled out in the text. All that reading does is lessen the coolness of the ability. And I, for one, think that allowing PCs to do Cool Things™ should trump supposed balance issues.*

*-Barring, of course, spotlight hogging. But that's a different matter.

2) The spell is discharged at the end of your turn. So no AoO Arcane Channeling. As for Shadow Pounce: That's up to the DM to say "No" to.
3) Uhh...yeah that's just an awesome idea. I've got nothing to add there. (Maybe keep a +1 Whirling (MIC) Spiked Chain on your person in case you get surrounded?)

[A_S]

I know this stuff has been argued before, so spoilered re: channeling on the same target multiple times:

Spoiler

Show

1) There's no consensus here. A person hit would not longer be the target but the subject. The point is that Night's Caress isn't a great spell to be using, especially consider their are better ways for a DB to have effective damage and they can't crank DCs.

1) The ability doesn't specify that restriction. If I hit someone, then hit them again, then he was 2 of my targets for attacks that round. There's precedent with other spells that allow multiple charges of a touch spell (earlier in this thread) so my reading is basically that Arcane Channeling² turns every touch spell into a multi-hit touch spell, as long as you use your weapon attacks to make the attacks.

Spoiler: Aside, slight rant.

Show

I don't know why people read this as "You can't affect the same person more than once with the spell" when it's not spelled out in the text. All that reading does is lessen the coolness of the ability. And I, for one, think that allowing PCs to do Cool Things™ should trump supposed balance issues.*

*-Barring, of course, spotlight hogging. But that's a different matter.

It seems pretty obvious to me that if the "spell affects each target you hit," then people you hit are, indeed, targets. And one person is 2 targets if you hit him twice? No he isn't, he's the same person, and you targeted him twice. He's still the same target. We would need some rules text to the effect of "if an ability targets a character more than once, consider him a separate target each time you resolve the ability" in order to override the basic English use of "each target."

This isn't a balance issue thing for me (I'd be perfectly fine allowing it to hit the same target multiple times), it's just what seems to be the literal reading of the text. People you hit with your channeled spell are targets (it says so right in the ability). You get to affect each target with the spell. To make it work the way you're suggesting, it could have been written "the spell takes effect each time you hit a target in melee combat this round." But it wasn't.

More relevant:

2) The spell is discharged at the end of your turn. So no AoO Arcane Channeling.

The spell is discharged "at the end of the round." I was under the impression that meant at the end of the initiative round (so when the last person in initiative order takes their turn, the spell ends). Have I missed something that makes "the end of the round" mean "the end of your turn?"

[nedz]

Myth #1: Arcane Channeling is an Attack Action
Reality: Arcane Channeling is a Cast a Spell Action

Myth #2: Spells cast via Arcane Channeling cannot score critical hits
Reality: Any spell that requires an attack roll can score a critical hit

Myth #3: Missing your attack with Arcane Channeling causes your touch spell to become lost
Reality: If it misses, you can Hold the Charge because it is a touch spell.

Myth #4: The spell is "bonus damage" like sneak attack and/or weapon enchantments like flaming, shocking, or unholy burst.
Reality: The spell is being delivered by the attack as outlined under Holding the Charge. It is not bonus damage of any sort.

Hi, welcome to the Playground. This is how I view your four points.

#1 Arcane Channeling is a Standard Action, period. Your distinctions are meaningless. Also, is there any relevance to this question ?

#2 The spell does not require an attack role, the weapon does: so the weapon can Crit, but not the spell.

#3 The rules are silent on this because you are not casting a Touch spell in the usual manner - you are Channeling it through your weapon. Spells like Chill touch are interesting because they allow for multiple touches, but again the rules are silent on how this works.

#4 CArc defines Weaponlike spells, which can have sneak damage etc. applied. This is not a Weaponlike spell, it is a Weapon through which a spell has been channelled. The weapon damage may therefore have sneak attack damage added, but not the spell. I think that your conclusion is right, though your reasoning seems slightly awry — simply because you are not casting a touch spell in the usual manner.

[IAmTehDave]

I know this stuff has been argued before, so spoilered re: channeling on the same target multiple times:

Spoiler

Show

It seems pretty obvious to me that if the "spell affects each target you hit," then people you hit are, indeed, targets. And one person is 2 targets if you hit him twice? No he isn't, he's the same person, and you targeted him twice. He's still the same target. We would need some rules text to the effect of "if an ability targets a character more than once, consider him a separate target each time you resolve the ability" in order to override the basic English use of "each target."

This isn't a balance issue thing for me (I'd be perfectly fine allowing it to hit the same target multiple times), it's just what seems to be the literal reading of the text. People you hit with your channeled spell are targets (it says so right in the ability). You get to affect each target with the spell. To make it work the way you're suggesting, it could have been written "the spell takes effect each time you hit a target in melee combat this round." But it wasn't.

More relevant:
The spell is discharged "at the end of the round." I was under the impression that meant at the end of the initiative round (so when the last person in initiative order takes their turn, the spell ends). Have I missed something that makes "the end of the round" mean "the end of your turn?"

AFAIK You haven't missed anything. I must have misread something re:end of round/turn. The wording seems to imply that it only affects targets hit during the full attack action you take as part of casting the spell, but it's rather ambiguous. Man Wizards could use better editing...

Spoiler: each target, since it's slightly off topic as stated

Show

Every time you attack a creature, it becomes the target of that attack. It doesn't matter whether it was also the target of another attack in that round. If I attack a creature twice, that creature is the target of two of my attacks, so yes, it is two targets. If it has DR, the DR applies to each attack individually. If I have riders on my attacks, (Sneak attack damage, Skirmish damage, DFI damage, etc.) the riders apply to the individual attacks. It doesn't matter that the same creature was already a target of one of my attacks, it is now also the target of the next attack. The game, in general, doesn't differentiate between making an attack against the same target or making an attack against different targets. This ability doesn't have a specific rule about that, so why would it be different?
(And that's the crux of my mechanical argument here, as opposed to the cool-and-or-fun factor argument.

And in response to nedz, who I can't quote since I only saw his post as part of the topic review while previewing:
1) As far as which sort of standard action it is: It is Cast a Spell. This might be important for things like readied actions, or feats which interact with specific standard actions. It is not, for instance, attacking as a standard action with a spell attached.

2) Touch spells are weaponlike spells. Weaponlike spells are "Spells which require an attack roll". A Duskblade's Arcane Channeling is an extension of the Delivering a Touch Spell rule; namely, that you can use a melee weapon attack to deliver the touch spell. (Much the same way that you can punch someone with an unarmed strike and deliver a touch spell also)

edit:
3) You are, in fact, casting a touch spell in the normal manner. You are simply delivering it through a unique delivery system. The Duskblade's Arcane Channeling works almost exactly the same as a touch spell being delivered via an unarmed strike, as the rules already cover. The only difference is that you are allowed to use a weapon to do the delivery.

[Desthro]

Critical Characteristics: I've heard the arguments for using the critical characteristics of a weapon, and the ones for a spell, and I have to say the critical for the weapon is handled normally and the spell critical is, too. If you're using a scimitar, you'll threaten on 18-20, and do double damage upon confirmation. If you're using a heavy pick, you'll threaten on a 20, and do quadruple damage when you confirm. On the other hand, no matter what weapon you use, your spell will threaten on 20 and do double damage.

This was actually something I wanted to lay out specifically, but either forgot about it or didn't think it through completely. The reasoning behind using the weapon modifier for threat range and multiplier is because only weapons have threat ranges and multipliers for criticals. Hold the Touch, discussed earlier, states that touch spells can be delivered via unarmed strikes and natural weapon attacks (both of which have a 20/x2 threat/multiplier), "weapon-like spells," when treated as a weapon, have 20/x2. When you deliver the touch spell via a touch, you use "weapon-like spells" because that is your "weapon" in this case and has the 20/x2 range/modifier; if its delivered via a natural attack, the natural attack is your "weapon" and uses 20/x2 for natural weapons, and if it is delivered via an unarmed strike, that is your "weapon" and it uses 20/x2. Spells in and of themselves do not have a threat range or critical damage modifier specified. Only their methods of delivery do, and they are (for the most part), all 20/x2. The only exception to this would be in arcane channeling, where an alternative to the above is used, a melee weapon.

It is much, much, much simpler in application, avoids unnecessary complication and difficult house-ruling, and makes sense.

It's not specified, but analysis of the underlying factors usually reveals a strong, pertinent method of consistency.

[Desthro]

Hi, welcome to the Playground. This is how I view your four points.
#1 Arcane Channeling is a Standard Action, period. Your distinctions are meaningless. Also, is there any relevance to this question ?

It's the TYPE of standard action that matters. Please read thoroughly and the material therein.

#2 The spell does not require an attack role, the weapon does: so the weapon can Crit, but not the spell.

You are pretty incorrect here and need to read everything in its entirety. If there are specific points you would like to discuss, please let me know.

#3 The rules are silent on this because you are not casting a Touch spell in the usual manner - you are Channeling it through your weapon. Spells like Chill touch are interesting because they allow for multiple touches, but again the rules are silent on how this works.

It still is casting a touch spell and follows the rules for touch spells, unless you feel like anything that slightly modifies the rules completely abolishes the rules that are already stated. That's completely and utterly nonsensical. Comparatively: if I make an attack (ie with a weapon) in an unusual manner (IE: arcane channeling, smiting, etc.), then by your reasoning, those attacks shouldn't follow the rules for other "normal" attacks because they are making attacks in an unusual manner. Also, you can "channel" (code word for deliver), the touch spell through an unarmed attack or a natural attack per the Hold the Charge rules. You do not have to use a melee touch attack all the time to deliver the spell, and this ability lets you extend that ruling into melee weapons.

#4 CArc defines Weaponlike spells, which can have sneak damage etc. applied. This is not a Weaponlike spell, it is a Weapon through which a spell has been channelled. The weapon damage may therefore have sneak attack damage added, but not the spell. I think that your conclusion is right, though your reasoning seems slightly awry — simply because you are not casting a touch spell in the usual manner.

Please read the above rebuttal, it is very similar and covers this.
Also: Weapon-like spells are a type of weapon. The weapon is the spell itself. If you use an alternative method of delivery, IE: unarmed strike or natural weapon, you are choosing a different weapon to deliver your spell with.

[Khedrac]

is because only weapons have threat ranges and multipliers for criticals.

Ignoring the rest of the argument for the moment, the above statement is flat out wrong. Any "weapon-like spell"(e.g. Shocking Grasp) has a critical range of 20 and a multiplier of ×2, it's just that the WotC convention is not to print the critical range if it is 20. See Complete Arcane pages 85 & 86 for the rules of spells and criticals.

[Fax Celestis]

FWIW, from the FAQ:

If a duskblade scores a critical hit when channeling a spell through a melee attack, is the spell’s damage multiplied just like the weapon’s?

The rules aren’t as clear as they could be, but the Sage is inclined to say no. Here’s the key sentence, from the PHB II, page 20: “If the attack is successful, the attack deals damage normally; then the effect of the spell is resolved.” If you score a critical hit, the attack deals the normal (critical) damage. Then the spell resolves normally, but it’s just a rider effect applied due to the successful attack roll—you’re not actually using the spell in the normal manner, so it can’t score a critical hit.

When a duskblade (PH2 20) uses arcane channeling to deliver a spell but misses with the weapon attack, is the spell discharged or can he try to deliver the spell again on his next turn?

This follows the normal rule for touch spells; that is, a melee touch spell that misses its target is not discharged. However, when using the improved version of this class feature gained at 13th level, the spell is discharged at the end of the round regardless of whether you hit or not (as described on page 20).

At 13th level, the duskblade’s arcane channeling class feature (PH2 20) says “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.” 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.

[Fax Celestis]

Ignoring the rest of the argument for the moment, the above statement is flat out wrong. Any "weapon-like spell"(e.g. Shocking Grasp) has a critical range of 20 and a multiplier of ×2, it's just that the WotC convention is not to print the critical range if it is 20. See Complete Arcane pages 85 & 86 for the rules of spells and criticals.

On this note, I would also like to indicate the text of a few spells:

You must make a ranged attack to hit the target. If you hit, the splinterbolt deals 4d6 points of piercing damage. A splinterbolt threatens a critical hit on a roll of 18-20.

You can fire one additional splinterbolt for every four levels beyond 3rd (to a maximum of three at 11th level). You can fire these splinterbolts at the same or different targets, but all splinterbolts must be aimed at targets within 30 feet of each other and fired simultaneously.

A creature's damage reduction, if any, applies to the damage from this spell. The damage from splinterbolt is treated as magic and piercing for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

You conjure a cloud of sharp knives around you.

The knives float in the air around your upper body, pointing in the direction you look.

Each round as a free action at the beginning of your turn, you can release one of these knives at any target within 30 feet that you can see.

This is a ranged attack that uses an attack bonus equal to your caster level + your key ability modifier.

Each successful hit deals 1d6 points of damage +1 per three caster levels (maximum +5) and threatens a critical hit on a roll of 19-20.

Damage reduction applies to knife attacks from this spell.

A shimmering green beam of light springs forth from your outstretched hand.

You can direct this ray at any target in range.

If you hit the target, the ray deals 1d6 points of force damage.

Against undead and constructs, the ray deals 2d8 points of force damage.

Against aberrations, the ray deals 5d6 points of force damage and threatens a critical hit on a roll of 19-20.

An aberration slain by this damage is immediately transformed into pungent-smelling inert plant matter.

You can generate one additional ray for every four levels above 5th (to a maximum of four rays at 17th level).

The rays can be fired at the same or different targets, but all rays must be aimed at targets within 30 feet of each other and fired simultaneously.

A lance-wielding rider of pure force, bearing the symbol of your deity, springs into being and immediately makes one attack against a target you designate within range.

The rider's attack bonus is equal to your base attack bonus plus your Wisdom modifier.

If the rider appears in a location at least 10 feet distant from its target, the spiritual charger gains an additional +2 bonus on the attack roll because it is able to make a charge before attacking.

A spiritual charger deals 2d8 points of force damage, +1 point per three caster levels (up to a maximum of 2d8+5 at 15th level).

A spiritual charger threatens a critical hit on a natural 20 and deals triple damage on a successful critical hit.

...which confirms that the standard held for weapons and monsters (that is, don't list it if it's 20/x2) also holds true for spells.

[Desthro]

Ignoring the rest of the argument for the moment, the above statement is flat out wrong. Any "weapon-like spell"(e.g. Shocking Grasp) has a critical range of 20 and a multiplier of ×2, it's just that the WotC convention is not to print the critical range if it is 20. See Complete Arcane pages 85 & 86 for the rules of spells and criticals.

Thanks for letting me know this, I will take a look at it.

[nedz]

#1
The Type of Standard Action is Arcane Channelling. It is not an attack type action, nor is it a cast a spell type action, it is something else.

#2
With a Weaponlike spell you are using the spell as a weapon and so you can crit. With AC you are channelling that spell through a weapon — you do not make a separate attack role for the spell and so the spell cannot Crit. There is no RAW justification for any other interpretation. If you were to make an attack with your weapon, without Channelling, and then cast a quickened touch spell you would need to make two attack roles — either of which could crit.

#3
You are not casting the spell normally, otherwise it would provoke, you are channelling the spell through your weapon. As I said the rules are silent on what happens if you miss.

#4
See #2

Ed:
Further
Look at Intimidating Strike ( Player's Handbook II, p79)
As a standard action you get to make an attack and an intimidate check. This is quite similar to AC and again is a different type of standard action which they hadn't even thought of when they wrote the PH. IS is not an Attack type standard action, nor is it an Intimidate type standard action, it is another new type of standard action.

Also, please read the relevant section on Weaponlike spells from CArc.

[Desthro]

So I took a deeper look into this, and I still feel that my analysis is mostly correct, though the conclusion may be incorrect, and warrants further discussion.

Ignoring the rest of the argument for the moment, the above statement is flat out wrong. Any "weapon-like spell"(e.g. Shocking Grasp) has a critical range of 20 and a multiplier of ×2, it's just that the WotC convention is not to print the critical range if it is 20. See Complete Arcane pages 85 & 86 for the rules of spells and criticals.

The actual wording is:

Spoiler

Show

Unless the spell description says otherwise, a weaponlike spell threatens a critical hit on a roll of 20 and deals double damage with a critical hit.

When combined with the wording from PH140:

Spoiler

Show

Spells and Critical Hits: A spell that requires an attack roll, such as shocking grasp or Melf’s acid arrow, can score a critical hit. A spell attack that requires no attack roll, such as lightning bolt, cannot score a critical hit.

This leads us to the conclusion that a weapon-like spell is a "weapon" for the purpose of adjudicating effects that are weapon-related with spells. This is why feats can affect your "weapon" when using weapon-like spells. It is also why you can deal precision damage with them, because they are for all intents and purposes, weapons.

You make an attack with this "weapon" and if the attack succeeds, the target suffers the effects accordingly. We all know this is how touch spells work. The question then becomes whether or not attacks made with other weapons to deliver the touch spell's effects take the place of the "weapon" that the spell creates for you. I would say yes, since you are now making an attack roll with a different weapon for that purpose, and not the "weapon" created for you by the spell itself.

[nedz]

What happens when you channel through a weapon with a different Crit range or multiplier ?

[Desthro]

What happens when you channel through a weapon with a different Crit range or multiplier ?

That's the 100$ question.

There are a lot of possible options that could be poured through. We know that the touch spell can crit because it requires an attack to be delivered. They type of weapon or attack is unimportant for that purpose.

The easiest and least complicated route is to just use whatever your used weapon's threat range and modifier are, and call it a day. This is nice because it flows very, very well with all of the current feats and applications of them.

The most difficult would be imposing a binary critical system for this purpose, and creating a weird, if this then that situation. Multiple feats from different sources would be required to scale it, (like weapon focus (longsword) and improved critical (touch spells)) which is somewhat counter-intuitive and difficult to play with.

[Snowbluff]

What happens when you channel through a weapon with a different Crit range or multiplier ?

If it says the attack would threaten, so I say it would threaten. Since they share an attack roll, they are the same attack. Not sure about multipliers, though.

[Desthro]

If it says the attack would threaten, so I say it would threaten. Since they share an attack roll, they are the same attack. Not sure about multipliers, though.

That's actually a very fair interpretation, I'm inclined to agree with the shared attack roll part. I wouldn't be against having split modifiers, but for simplicity just saying use your current weapon's threat range and crit modifier is easy.