Duskblade Handbook, Arcane Strike -- not right?

[aboyd]

I was reading the Duskblade handbook, and I found some perplexing statements. Can you guys help me out?

First, it cites this ridiculous post about stacking as the correct, "by the rules" method of using the Arcane Strike feat. Does anyone have any rules text that stops someone from stacking? I thought of the stacking limitations of spells, but then realized that Arcane Strike is a feat.

Second, in that same cited thread, someone replies as follows: "With the recent production of the rules compendium the action to perform an arcane strike is a swift action now." So I have the RC, and I cannot find such a rule about Arcane Strike anywhere. Would someone clue me in?

Next, hopping back into the handbook thread itself, the author says in multiple posts, "can't channel a swift action spell." I don't understand that. The description of the Duskblade's Arcane Channeling states it can channel any spell with "a casting time of 1 standard action or less." So why are swift spells out?

Next, the author says, "channel resist energy and buff your party." However, the rules for Arcane Channeling state that when you channel a touch spell onto multiple subjects, "Doing so discharges the spell at the end of the round." So no buff would last. Or does "discharges" mean something else?

Finally, he also suggests channeling Blade of Blood (a swift spell, oddly enough) onto all your allies weapons. This seems broken for the reason I just mentioned (it should discharge at the end of the round, before the players have a chance to use it). However, it also seems to fly in the face of the FAQ, which states that when they referred to channeling "touch" spells, what they meant was spells that had a "melee touch attack." I don't know how to conceive of touching your own weapon as a melee touch attack. The spell text certainly doesn't ask the caster to make a melee touch attack in order to apply the spell to the weapon -- it assumes that "range: touch" and "target: weapon" automatically succeeds. How would you adjudicate this?

Thanks gang.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I think the author is pulling stuff out of his tookis...

I don't have the RC with me, but anything that was a free action before in terms of spells (i.e. featherfall) is now considered either a Swift or Immediate action. Featherfall is Immediate since you can cast the spell when it's not your turn. Most spells, though, are Swift Actions. I assume Arcane Strike is listed as being a free action? If so, that at least seems correct in it being a swift action now?

I don't see why a duskblade can't channel a swift action spell - their spell list is pretty limited as is, and limiting the few channel worthy swift action spells would limit the list even further (swift expeditious retreat and swift invisibility aren't really spells to channel onto your sword)

Channelling something to buff the party is incorrect. If you continue on in that sentence about discharges at the end of the round, it then states: in the case of a touch spell that would otherwise last more than one round. So, the spell is done after its one round of melee combat. Oh, and touching in melee combat as part of a full attack action is also specified in the rules as well. Buffing party members is not a full attack the last I checked?

 

[Shin Okada]

Hmm ..I can't yet find any rule regarding extra damage dice stacking. Also I can't find any rule update to make Arcane Strike as a swift action yet.

If I am playing a Duskblade with this interpretation, I will spend one 5th-level spell slot and many lower level spell slots in a same round instead of spending, say, two 5th-level slots. A 20th-level Duskblade with two Ring of Wizardry IV can have 24+ 4th level spell slots.

It seems better to house rule that you can use Arcane Channeling only once per round.

Or, maybe a DM can just claim that he is applying the written rule regarding free action by the name of DM' decree. It says, "Your DM may limit the number of free actions you can perform in a turn". So he may simply say a PC can't use this free action (Arcane Channeling) more than once per round, or using Arcane Channeling feat twice per round is not a free action. It is like speaking a short sentence is a free action but speaking a sentence twice longer may not.

I agree with you that a spell with a casting time of a swift action (or a immediate action) can be channelled if that is a touch spell.

Next, the author says, "channel resist energy and buff your party." However, the rules for Arcane Channeling state that when you channel a touch spell onto multiple subjects, "Doing so discharges the spell at the end of the round." So no buff would last. Or does "discharges" mean something else?

The definition of the word "discharge" is not crystal clear. But,

From SRD "Magicoverview", "Duration",

Discharge: Occasionally a spells lasts for a set duration or until triggered or discharged.

So I say "Discharge" is one of a word which defines the duration of a spell. And the spell ends when it is discharged.

 

[Runestar]

My interpretation of arcane strike was that bonuses from the same source do not stack - you merely use the best of the lot. This applies to both damage and to-hit. So you can never get more than +5 to-hit/+5d4 damage.

As for blades of blood, it is true that it cannot be channeled to your foe (since it targets a weapon), thought certainly not because it is a swift-action spell. Perhaps he means that you shouldn't channel a swift spell, since it can be used as a swift action, and that you standard action may be better used on standard-action spells such as shocking grasp or vampiric touch. I think it is merely a case of poor wording.

However, the rules for Arcane Channeling state that when you channel a touch spell onto multiple subjects, "Doing so discharges the spell at the end of the round." So no buff would last. Or does "discharges" mean something else?

Perhaps he means exactly that? That there might be times you prefer a 1-round buff that affects the entire part?

PS: end of round means right before the start of your next round, right? Or end of your current round?

 

[aboyd]

anything that was a free action before in terms of spells (i.e. featherfall) is now considered either a Swift or Immediate action.

Ah, I see. OK, so that might explain the disagreement some were having in that thread. That is, we're not actually talking about a spell, so the spell text that changed the actions of spells doesn't apply.

Having said that, it makes really good sense (to me) to apply the spell rules anyway. Or maybe take Shin Okada's approach, which has the same effect (that is, by the rules, DMs can decide that a free action occurs only once per round).

Thanks gang. I think I have a better grasp on how the duskblade should function, now.

 

[Shin Okada]

I don't have the RC with me, but anything that was a free action before in terms of spells (i.e. featherfall) is now considered either a Swift or Immediate action.

To clarify, actually, only two things were revised in Complete Arcane　and later supplements such as Spell Compendium.

1. Casting a quickened spell is a swift action.
2. Casting Feather Fall is an immediate action.

Both of them had "once per round" limit before swift and immediate action were invented. So actually, only the words changed. Those revisions did not change the way how Quickened spells and Feather Fall work.

And there still be something which can be done as a free action and related to spells. Many spells in later supplements allow a caster to do something as a free action and thus a caster still do it and take a swift action in a same turn.

IMHO, allowing multiple use of Arcane Strike to gain tens of extra damage dice is clearly broken. But on the other hand, a Duskblade should be allowed to use Arcane Strike in addition to another swift action. One of the class's signature ability (Quick Cast) is a swift action. And the class's spell list has so many swift action spells. If you house rule that Arcane Strike is now a swift action, many of the Duskblade's spells become much less attractive after taking Arcane Strike feat.

By the way, if you allow extra damage dice stacking, that will not be Duskblade who abuses the feat most. Imagine what will happen if a multiclassed sorcerer or similar caster used that tactics. Using a 9th-level slot for gaining +9 attack bonus and then uses up all the other spell slots for piling up damages....

 

[Thanee]

Arcane Strike neither is nor should be a swift action.

It definitely should not stack with itself, however, regardless of what the rules say.

Bye
Thanee

 

[NewJeffCT]

In looking at the text for Arcane Strike, it also says "You must sacrifice one of your spells for the day (of 1st level or higher) to do this..." Then, it goes on to say that you gain a bonus equal to the spell level sacrifice. It does not say "spells" sacrificed or that you can sacrifice multiple spells per arcane strike.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Arcane Strike neither is nor should be a swift action.

It definitely should not stack with itself, however, regardless of what the rules say.

Bye
Thanee

Do you think it should remain a free action? So, the duskblade could use Arcane Strike on an Attack of Opportunity when it is not their turn?

 

[Runestar]

No, if but arcane strike was a free action to use, there is nothing stopping you from activating it as many times as you want in that round, and sacrificing a spell slot each time.

I think the most sane interpretation would be to keep it a free action, but the to-hit/damage bonus would not stack. You may still want to use it more than once (maybe you got a very poor roll on damage, like all ones, and are willing to expend another slot for better damage?).