Arcane Strike Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Arcane Strike Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
greylix
11-26-07, 09:56 PM I am sorry if this question has been asked...
I am playing a Duskblade with Arcane Strike Feat from the Complete Warrior Book and my DM ruled that I could only burn one spell at a time... (I of course want to burn many spells at a time as long as I don't exceed my BAB as per the feat description)
I have poured through the FAQ Pages and Erratta Pages and found no mention either way... The feat description is vague ...
I was wondering if anyone could point me in the right direction?
How do you play it?
dman11235
11-26-07, 10:51 PM It should have been a swift action. That's what it is in my games. But, it doesn't matter much since you don't gain a benifit of buring more than one spell at a time. Bonuses from the same sorce don't stack. Oh, and it has been asked before. It's lower on this page I believe.
Merestil Haye
11-27-07, 07:21 AM It's utterly pointless burning more than one spell per round.

The standard stacking rules state that unnamed bonuses from the same source don't stack with each other. The feat gives a +1 bonus to hit each time you use it, and two activations of the feat do not stack.

Whether you treat the extra damage dice as bonuses or not is up to you. But bear in mind that it is worded exactly the same way as the Flaming property, so you should probably only allow it if you allow a flaming flaming sword to deal +2d6 fire damage.

And no, it was not meant to be a swift action; if it was they would have used the same wording as you find in the PHB printing of Quicken Spell. They may want it to have been retroactively, but it was not at the time of writing and has never been errata'ed.
jaelis
11-27-07, 12:17 PM No one really knows how the stacking is supposed to work. I've read that Customer Service is now telling people it is supposed to be a swift action, so that is one solution.

I would have said prior to that recent change that most people played you could burn more than one spell, but only the damage stacked. I'd say that is balanced fine for any class except the duskblade, but the duskblade's combination of martial ability and large numbers of spells would make me tempted to follow the Cust Serv recommendation and limit it to 1/round.

What you'll need to do though is talk to your DM about it.
Merestil Haye
11-27-07, 12:51 PM The thing is that making it a swift action is a functional change; if using the feat is a free action you can cast a swift action spell in the same round, whereas if it's a swift action to use you can't.

I really think that if the designer's intent had been to prevent it working with a quickened spell, he would have said so at the time. Consequently I'm of the opinion that such a change would require formal errata, and not "what Customer Service says."
Tordak
11-27-07, 01:32 PM The stacking rules from SRD (PHB, DMG) should be enough to solve that issue : bonus from the same source don't stack (unless they are dodge or circumstance bonuses). Would it not prove convincing with someone, remember that there is one important thing about free action : DM can limit the number of same free actions you can make in a round. Any sensible DM could rule that you cannot spend more than one spell slot in this fashion (using that feat).
greylix
11-27-07, 04:14 PM thanks for the input...

I had not even thought about stacking bonuses... my bad...

Too All those who answered... I thank you...
dman11235
11-27-07, 04:29 PM And no, it was not meant to be a swift action; if it was they would have used the same wording as you find in the PHB printing of Quicken Spell. They may want it to have been retroactively, but it was not at the time of writing and has never been errata'ed.

Note how I said "should have been" not "meant to have been". It should have been a swift action (spending more effort than a normal free action? YES.) Also, I do believe it was in something more prominent than CustServ (who's opinions and rulings go for jack here). Like an FAQ or Rules of the Game or something. Not Errata, I don't think, but better than CustServ. i may change my view if having it at a swift action nerfs people a little too much, but if I do, then it's a free action taken 1/round.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
greylix 11-26-07, 09:56 PM	I am sorry if this question has been asked... I am playing a Duskblade with Arcane Strike Feat from the Complete Warrior Book and my DM ruled that I could only burn one spell at a time... (I of course want to burn many spells at a time as long as I don't exceed my BAB as per the feat description) I have poured through the FAQ Pages and Erratta Pages and found no mention either way... The feat description is vague ... I was wondering if anyone could point me in the right direction? How do you play it?
dman11235 11-26-07, 10:51 PM	It should have been a swift action. That's what it is in my games. But, it doesn't matter much since you don't gain a benifit of buring more than one spell at a time. Bonuses from the same sorce don't stack. Oh, and it has been asked before. It's lower on this page I believe.
Merestil Haye 11-27-07, 07:21 AM	It's utterly pointless burning more than one spell per round. The standard stacking rules state that unnamed bonuses from the same source don't stack with each other. The feat gives a +1 bonus to hit each time you use it, and two activations of the feat do not stack. Whether you treat the extra damage dice as bonuses or not is up to you. But bear in mind that it is worded exactly the same way as the Flaming property, so you should probably only allow it if you allow a flaming flaming sword to deal +2d6 fire damage. And no, it was not meant to be a swift action; if it was they would have used the same wording as you find in the PHB printing of Quicken Spell. They may want it to have been retroactively, but it was not at the time of writing and has never been errata'ed.
jaelis 11-27-07, 12:17 PM	No one really knows how the stacking is supposed to work. I've read that Customer Service is now telling people it is supposed to be a swift action, so that is one solution. I would have said prior to that recent change that most people played you could burn more than one spell, but only the damage stacked. I'd say that is balanced fine for any class except the duskblade, but the duskblade's combination of martial ability and large numbers of spells would make me tempted to follow the Cust Serv recommendation and limit it to 1/round. What you'll need to do though is talk to your DM about it.
Merestil Haye 11-27-07, 12:51 PM	The thing is that making it a swift action is a functional change; if using the feat is a free action you can cast a swift action spell in the same round, whereas if it's a swift action to use you can't. I really think that if the designer's intent had been to prevent it working with a quickened spell, he would have said so at the time. Consequently I'm of the opinion that such a change would require formal errata, and not "what Customer Service says."
Tordak 11-27-07, 01:32 PM	The stacking rules from SRD (PHB, DMG) should be enough to solve that issue : bonus from the same source don't stack (unless they are dodge or circumstance bonuses). Would it not prove convincing with someone, remember that there is one important thing about free action : DM can limit the number of same free actions you can make in a round. Any sensible DM could rule that you cannot spend more than one spell slot in this fashion (using that feat).
greylix 11-27-07, 04:14 PM	thanks for the input... I had not even thought about stacking bonuses... my bad... Too All those who answered... I thank you...
dman11235 11-27-07, 04:29 PM	And no, it was not meant to be a swift action; if it was they would have used the same wording as you find in the PHB printing of Quicken Spell. They may want it to have been retroactively, but it was not at the time of writing and has never been errata'ed. Note how I said "should have been" not "meant to have been". It should have been a swift action (spending more effort than a normal free action? YES.) Also, I do believe it was in something more prominent than CustServ (who's opinions and rulings go for jack here). Like an FAQ or Rules of the Game or something. Not Errata, I don't think, but better than CustServ. i may change my view if having it at a swift action nerfs people a little too much, but if I do, then it's a free action taken 1/round.