Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FeceMan 05-14-06, 11:53 PM	Was talking to a friend who said the Duskblade had the opportunity to be really, really good. d8 hit dice, full BAB, two good saves, lots of spells/day... But its spell list sucks. TWO fourth level spells and TWO fifth level spells. That's all. So, I'm guessing that it's up to the players to add spells to the list so that the Duskblade doesn't fade into crappiness. What would y'all suggest for this class in order to make it stronger but not overpowered (if you have the PHB II, that'd be extra helpful)? EDIT: HOLY TEH AWESOMENESS NEVERMIND AT ALL My friend was looking only at the "new spells" section when telling me about this. Duskblade is good; beguiler rocks hard solidness sweet must play one.
ressurrector 05-15-06, 01:07 AM	No class that gets so much love on the CO boards should ever be referred to as "sadness" :P
hmmmm 05-15-06, 02:24 PM	Ha Ha, I think that this thread is going to disolve into spam soon.
Crimson_Concerto 05-15-06, 11:50 PM	No class that gets so much love on the CO boards should ever be referred to as "sadness" :P What CO love? I've only seen two or three topic so far, and that's to be expected as the book just cam eout, and peopel are seeing what to do with it. Also, their spell list is longer than that. You're looking in the New Spells section. Their spell list is the very last thing before it starts Dragon Shaman.
Hariman 05-16-06, 01:21 AM	What CO love? I've only seen two or three topic so far, and that's to be expected as the book just cam eout, and peopel are seeing what to do with it. Also, their spell list is longer than that. You're looking in the New Spells section. Their spell list is the very last thing before it starts Dragon Shaman. You mean page 24, just before Knight starts. And I really don't think that Duskblade is broken. Globes of Invulnerability (Minor or Major) will screw their magic over and leave them on par with most melee classes. Although they might get a few too many spells per day.
Archangel62 05-16-06, 01:46 AM	Actually it balances out, most of their stuff is going to go fast, they will be doing swift channels for most of their stuff. They are blitzkrieg strikers, also I'm adding some spells from the spell compendium to their class list, not too much but about 3-5 spells each level.
Hariman 05-16-06, 03:11 AM	Actually it balances out, most of their stuff is going to go fast, they will be doing swift channels for most of their stuff. They are blitzkrieg strikers, also I'm adding some spells from the spell compendium to their class list, not too much but about 3-5 spells each level. The fast burnout has been mentioned on other threads too. I know I'd be burning swift spells as often as I could I'm going to bet that after the initial reaction, Duskblade will become the next Warlock. Overreaction first, then it settles down once the class gets into play. Heck, I bet Warlock is worse than Duskblade in some ways. Are Critical Strike and Wraithstrike on the list of added spells?
Archangel62 05-16-06, 03:21 AM	The fast burnout has been mentioned on other threads too. I know I'd be burning swift spells as often as I could I'm going to bet that after the initial reaction, Duskblade will become the next Warlock. Overreaction first, then it settles down once the class gets into play. Heck, I bet Warlock is worse than Duskblade in some ways. Are Critical Strike and Wraithstrike on the list of added spells? Critical strike Yes, wraithstrike I'm a little more uneasy about because I'm not sure if I want those touch spells striking everything with touch AC and the weapon. That's one that makes me a little unsure. I like the warlock personally and think that it's quite decent but it ends up being rather lacking unless it is played well.
Hariman 05-16-06, 03:40 AM	Critical strike Yes, wraithstrike I'm a little more uneasy about because I'm not sure if I want those touch spells striking everything with touch AC and the weapon. That's one that makes me a little unsure. I like the warlock personally and think that it's quite decent but it ends up being rather lacking unless it is played well. Or spend all of your Warlock's money on scrolls and wands and burn XP to scribe scrolls at later levels. Yeah, Wraithstrike is powerful. Personally, I would leave it off of the Duskblade Spell List. When you combine it with Arcane Channeling: Full Attack, it becomes a nightmare for the Duskblade's enemies. (Not to mention a nightmare for balance.) The key to the balance with Duskblade is that they don't get many long duration buffing spells. All too many are swift actions and one round, so nearly half of the spells will be utility spells. The Duskblade is a new approach to the arcane gish. Just like the Warlock was a new approach to magic.
King_Bulba 05-16-06, 05:06 AM	The Duskblade is a new approach to the arcane gish. Just like the Warlock was a new approach to magic. Yet they are significantly weaker than the original, well warlock more so than the duskblade.
Todd 05-16-06, 12:02 PM	I'm thinking that the class will be "better" in low level play than many current Fighter/Mage builds ... but not so much in the mid to high levels. I like how their spells are thematic though. Lots of swift spells and whatnot ... they will burn through them quick.
Questing GM 05-17-06, 12:22 AM	Please tell me that in page 19, where it says under Class Features : Spells, the duskblade's spell list is found at page 98 is completely a typo and the real spell list is at page 24 ??? They should errata this very soon because the duskblade is like a godsend... :P
Archangel62 05-17-06, 02:15 AM	Real spell list is on page 24, the stuff on page 98 is just the new stuff. I do think that a few other spells from Spell compendium should be on there, critical strike for example.
Flushmaster 05-17-06, 04:06 AM	I just flipped through a PHB II in a store earlier today. I'm seriously considering buying it because of, mainly, the Beguiler and Duskblade classes. As to the Duskblade (the subject of this thread) I think that it is indeed balanced. First, the class is multi-ability dependent (MAD) as it requires a good INT score for casting plus at least two if not all three physical ability scores due to the focus on melee combat. Strength is necessary for hitting and damaging, dexterity is necessary (particularly at low lovels) for defense plus any ranged attacks (including several ranged touch spells), and constitution is obviously necessary for any PC that will regularly be in melee with light armor. On top of this the Duskblade is weaker than standard melee classes (fighter, barbarian, paladin) due to smaller HD and less armor. The spells are a nice benefit, but don't suffice to do much more than compensate for these lackings, particularly in a combat heavy game in which they're more likely to "burn out" as already mentioned; and the spells specifically focus towards combat...obviously requiring moderation in their use lest the PC find themself in deep crap. Short version: from what I've seen I think that a Duskblade is a good class that is well balanced but tricky to use. If the DM includes only one or two encounters per day then they'll be "overpowered" just the same as any arcane caster with combat spells. On the other hand, four or five encounters per day will stretch their limits as casters and quite possibly find them scrambling towards the end. As long as the DM is prepared for both combat oriented characters and dedicated casters (as should be expected) then I don't see the Duskblade class presenting any problems as far as balance goes. I like it.
Hochiu 05-17-06, 08:29 AM	They should errata this very soon because the duskblade is like a godsend... :P ...*hangs his head* Is errata even necessary?
Hariman 05-17-06, 08:19 PM	I just flipped through a PHB II in a store earlier today. I'm seriously considering buying it because of, mainly, the Beguiler and Duskblade classes. As to the Duskblade (the subject of this thread) I think that it is indeed balanced. First, the class is multi-ability dependent (MAD) as it requires a good INT score for casting plus at least two if not all three physical ability scores due to the focus on melee combat. Strength is necessary for hitting and damaging, dexterity is necessary (particularly at low lovels) for defense plus any ranged attacks (including several ranged touch spells), and constitution is obviously necessary for any PC that will regularly be in melee with light armor. On top of this the Duskblade is weaker than standard melee classes (fighter, barbarian, paladin) due to smaller HD and less armor. The spells are a nice benefit, but don't suffice to do much more than compensate for these lackings, particularly in a combat heavy game in which they're more likely to "burn out" as already mentioned; and the spells specifically focus towards combat...obviously requiring moderation in their use lest the PC find themself in deep crap. Short version: from what I've seen I think that a Duskblade is a good class that is well balanced but tricky to use. If the DM includes only one or two encounters per day then they'll be "overpowered" just the same as any arcane caster with combat spells. On the other hand, four or five encounters per day will stretch their limits as casters and quite possibly find them scrambling towards the end. As long as the DM is prepared for both combat oriented characters and dedicated casters (as should be expected) then I don't see the Duskblade class presenting any problems as far as balance goes. I like it. So basically, it's an arcane psychic warrior. Now to convince the haters that the Duskblade isn't broken. ...*hangs his head* Is errata even necessary? I think it is. Just to clear up the controversy caused by the wording for Quick Cast and Arcane Channeling. Mainly the durations after channeling as a standard action and how many times each target can be effected by a single spell during a full attack channeling. And just to add the text "Quick Cast applies to duskblade spells only." or "A multiclassed Duskblade can only apply Quick Cast to Duskblade spells." Also, adding a few lines that confirm that the excess of spell slots is expected to be used up for swift buffing/utility spells would be nice. Plus, correcting the spell list page typo would be helpful too.
Questing GM 05-18-06, 01:29 AM	Plus, correcting the spell list page typo would be helpful too. Yes, it is immensely important to tell readers where the REAL spell list is...i would've have said that the duskblade was useless if i hadn't see this thread and cleared things up... :P
Stuntman 05-19-06, 12:07 AM	I think the Duskblade is OK. I'm just a little disappointed in the spell list, though. There are quite a few spells that are not on the Duskblade list that I would like to have on there. I'm currently playing a Fighter/Sorcerer and soon to be a Spellsword. Spells that I know that are not on the Duskblade list include Wraithstrike, Shield and Enlarge Person. I know I'll surely miss Wraithstrike. Overall, I think it is well balanced. It's got some other goodies that I don't have like the armoured casting. It sucks when you fail to cast a spell 3 times in a row even though your ASF is only 15%. :(
Hariman 05-19-06, 01:27 AM	Yes, it is immensely important to tell readers where the REAL spell list is...i would've have said that the duskblade was useless if i hadn't see this thread and cleared things up... :P Unfortunately, it is a case of power creep. Too many spells per day is the biggest problem. It shouldn't get more than 6 spells per day at each level. Ten Spells per day is just absurd. To those who complain about the short spell list: Duskblade is already nearly broken in the first place. Having any more than it does already would be too much. Think about that. It is a Gish so good that it could probably take on an eldritch knight, spellsword, green star adept or bladesinger and win. Hexblade can't compare. Not even at first level. Duskblade still equals sadness. (Both of my DMs have said NO to it.) Just not because of the spell list. It's because there's a decent number of DMs that won't allow it. Heck, it's never a good sign when the character optimization board has threads that start with: (This is not an exact quote) "Since the Duskblade is already overpowered, let's break it completely."
ressurrector 05-19-06, 03:24 AM	Highly restricted spell list, including some spells which were modified specifically for the Duskblade, usually changing the casting times and durations (shorter) Highly limited spells known (only get 1 additional known per level, A duskblade only ends up with 21 spells known of 1-5th, and 2+int of 0th) MAD (need Str, Dex, Con, Int) Sure they have alot of spells per day for each level, but they only have 5 levels of spells. A 10th Duskblade can cast 18 spells of lvl 1-3, whereas a 10th sorc could cast 26 spells of 1-5, and a wizard would have 16 of 1-5 (including a bigger spell selection, the wizards biggest advantage) It seems that Duskblades just get larger numbers of lower level'd spells. I like what Wotc is doing with the new PHB II classes, specifically making PrCs less usefull, and making a 20 level build a much better option. You may argue that they gain too much benefit from trading in a Fighters bonus feats and hp, but fighters got some new lovin' in the PHB II as well.
starfire311 05-19-06, 09:49 AM	Think about that. It is a Gish so good that it could probably take on an eldritch knight, spellsword, green star adept or bladesinger and win. Hexblade can't compare. Not even at first level. This is where I disagree... after looking at it for awhile... ahevnt ahd a chacne to duel it out... but plan to tonight... I think bladesinger>duskblade Bladesinger, has a much better spell list, that includes wriathstrike... it is just too good. Maybe it is writhstrike, and my personal fav, extended wraithsrike that is broken, but those make traditional Gishes>duskblade my current build is Swashbuckler 3/ Wizard 6/bladesinger 10/duelist 1(yes I knowit is not completly optimal, but I enjoy the flavor) this gives 11th level wizard casting and 17 BAB... I think 11th level wizard casting is better than 20th level duskblade casting. especially since I get my INT to damage and INT+1 to AC... these help the traditional gish last in longer battles... I dont need to be burning spells every round to survive and be effective. My int of 26 gives +8 damage and +9 AC. IMO traditional Gish just has more options.... not to say duskblade is weak... I jsut think it is balanced and fits its role.
Feeb 05-19-06, 10:15 AM	Think about that. It is a Gish so good that it could probably take on an eldritch knight, spellsword, green star adept or bladesinger and win. Hexblade can't compare. Not even at first level. A traditional gish with greater access to the Transmutation school, and self-buffing spells in general, will out perform a Duskblade at mid to high levels of play.
Hariman 05-19-06, 03:58 PM	This is where I disagree... after looking at it for awhile... ahevnt ahd a chacne to duel it out... but plan to tonight... I think bladesinger>duskblade Bladesinger, has a much better spell list, that includes wriathstrike... it is just too good. Maybe it is writhstrike, and my personal fav, extended wraithsrike that is broken, but those make traditional Gishes>duskblade my current build is Swashbuckler 3/ Wizard 6/bladesinger 10/duelist 1(yes I knowit is not completly optimal, but I enjoy the flavor) this gives 11th level wizard casting and 17 BAB... I think 11th level wizard casting is better than 20th level duskblade casting. especially since I get my INT to damage and INT+1 to AC... these help the traditional gish last in longer battles... I dont need to be burning spells every round to survive and be effective. My int of 26 gives +8 damage and +9 AC. IMO traditional Gish just has more options.... not to say duskblade is weak... I jsut think it is balanced and fits its role. You try convincing my DMs of this. Heck, jsut wrap your head around 10 spells per day for levels one two and three, 8 for level 4, and 6 for level 5. NO OTHER CLASS EVER HAS GOTTEN THAT MANY SPELLS PER DAY WITHOUT EITHER BEING A PRIMARY CASTER OR SPENDING ALL OF ITS MONEY ON PEARLS OF POWER. A wizard gets fewer spells than that at 20th level. (4 times nine is 36) Specialist Wizards only get that many at level 13. (And some of those are limited by specialty. This isn't an exact count of spells, just a rough estimate.) The poor wording and lack of "You Can't Do That" sentences in certain class abilities doesn't help the Duskblade either. Arcane Channeling and Quick Cast are the biggest problems here. My only hope right now is that the duskblade gets allowed in Living Greyhawk as is OR there is an Errata for Duskblade to adjust it to a more balanced level. Right now, even I think it is a case of power creep because of the sheer number of spells per day. So the Duskblade still = sadness because it appears broken, when it is merely overpowered. The only good point is that it does have a decent spell list, when you find the real spell list. Hariman
starfire311 05-19-06, 04:31 PM	You try convincing my DMs of this. Heck, jsut wrap your head around 10 spells per day for levels one two and three, 8 for level 4, and 6 for level 5. Wish your DM wouldn't jump to snap judgements and look at it for what it is, trying building one at say 11th-16th level and compare it to a Traditional GISH at those levels, you may be surprised. And all those spells arent that hard to understand... they get a bunch of low level spells big whoop. Yes they are not a primary spell caster that is why it is cool... NO OTHER CLASS EVER HAS GOTTEN THAT MANY SPELLS PER DAY WITHOUT EITHER BEING A PRIMARY CASTER OR SPENDING ALL OF ITS MONEY ON PEARLS OF POWER. Yes it is a new class and it introduces some new concepts, but you don't need to be afriad of it just because it is new and different... prior to warlock no one could blast away all day long. There needs to be a 1st, and all things considored I find it to be quite balanced with existing Gish Builds. A wizard gets fewer spells than that at 20th level. (4 times nine is 36) Specialist Wizards only get that many at level 13. (And some of those are limited by specialty. This isn't an exact count of spells, just a rough estimate.) Please don't compare the power of a wizard and the power of Duskblade... it aint even close... yes I kow it sucks that the DB gets 6 more 1st, 2nd and 3rd level spells than the Wiz, but I think having 4 more 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spells makes up for it The poor wording and lack of "You Can't Do That" sentences in certain class abilities doesn't help the Duskblade either. Arcane Channeling and Quick Cast are the biggest problems here. Some people say there is poor wording... personally, I dont see it... I read it and it looks ok to me. Granted some people don't like the idea of quick cast working on any spell they can cast, but I dont see 5 levels of DB as a solid dip for a primary caster. My only hope right now is that the duskblade gets allowed in Living Greyhawk as is OR there is an Errata for Duskblade to adjust it to a more balanced level. I would love to see it in Living greyhawk as is... they didnt give it any of the truly broken spells, so it should be fine as is. Right now, even I think it is a case of power creep because of the sheer number of spells per day. They get 44 spells at 20th level... you some how think these 44 spells are strong than a wizards 36... I think the fact that the Wizard gets 180 spell levels compared to 122 for the duskblade adn the wizard isnt incredible MAD and the Wizard gets many more powerful spells it is obvious that the wizard is still stronger. So the Duskblade still = sadness because it appears broken, when it is merely overpowered. it is on the high end of the power curve, but when compared to core classes like Wizard, cleric and druid it aint overpowered. The only good point is that it does have a decent spell list, when you find the real spell list. Hariman exactly it is an OK spell list, it aint that great.
Engilbrand 05-19-06, 04:36 PM	I'm always amazed that, within a week or two of a book coming out, there are already a ton of people who have spent numerous sessions playing the new class, PrCs, feats and spells. It's so great that so many people enjoy trying the new things to see what they think of them and to make sure that, in their own game, things are balanced and fun for people. Wait... That's not how it is at all. It's just the opposite. People look at the new stuff and freak. That's just dumb. I come to the table with the idea, as a player and as a DM, that Wizards takes the time to make a good product. Whether or not you like the editing or flavor of something, you must admit that you like the product. If you didn't like it, you wouldn't be here. So, we've established that these people want to make sure that things are fun. Fun includes things being balanced. Not perfectly balanced. That would be rediculous. I don't want a perfectly balanced game. It would take out that little bit of realism that the game needs. People are not equal. They shouldn't be in a game. There's a reason that PCs exist. They're better than everyone else. What commoner can withstand the blast of a dragon's breath weapon? Not a damn one. Nor should they be able to. I thought that the Duskblade was OK. I like the Dragon Shaman a lot more. I'll probably end up DMing for a Duskblade soon when I reset the campaign. I won't make any changes to it. I allow almost everything. The game I'm in now, I restricted psionics just so that the players could get use to Eberron. 2 of them are 13. When we restart, I'm going to allow everything. Races, classes, feats and spells, it's all fine. Over time, some things arise that CAN be broken. They aren't always, but they can be. That's when Wizards erratas them. Though I didn't spend a lot of time with the Duskblade, I don't think that it's overpowered or broken. So it gets 10 first and second level spells per day. I noticed that. It didn't seem like a big thing. They use damage spells while in melee. It's what they do. They'll hit some guys, the guys will fall down, they'll run out of spells, then they're doing less damage than the fighter. My recommendation is always to try something first. If the flavor doesn't appeal, ignore it. If it seems unbalancing for your game, ban it. But the two things you should never do are as follow: 1. Ban something without really thinking about it and comparing it to other things. Even better, don't ban unless you've seen it in play. 2. Come on here and tell people that things are overpowered/broken. And the use of the term "power creep" is pretty stupid, too. If everything is gaining power with all of the new books, then everything stays at an equal level. Every class can be broken. It's not hard. You just have to decide not to. Hell, I don't even optimize, and even I can break the Healer when it comes to undead. Not that hard. Think. Compare. Test. THEN make changes as you deem appropriate.
Engilbrand 05-19-06, 04:43 PM	One more thing: How the hell does everyone keep missing the spell list? Even my quick glance through the book showed me where the spell list was. The same for the Beguiler. The PHB2 includes some new things, including new formats. If people are that interested in the class, I would have thought that they would have read the couple of pages dealing with it. That would have included the page with the spell list. It's not that difficult, people. If you don't find a list back with the other lists, what's the next place you should look? That's right, the description. Sorry if these posts sound a bit mean. Seeing the same complaint over and over just seems rediculous to me.
Hariman 05-19-06, 08:55 PM	Wish your DM wouldn't jump to snap judgements and look at it for what it is, trying building one at say 11th-16th level and compare it to a Traditional GISH at those levels, you may be surprised. Odds are, those 7th and 8th level spells will make all of those extra low level spells mean very little at that high a level. And all those spells arent that hard to understand... they get a bunch of low level spells big whoop. Yes they are not a primary spell caster that is why it is cool... True. Yes it is a new class and it introduces some new concepts, but you don't need to be afraid of it just because it is new and different... prior to warlock no one could blast away all day long. There needs to be a 1st, and all things considored I find it to be quite balanced with existing Gish Builds. Now to convince my DMs of that. Please don't compare the power of a wizard and the power of Duskblade... it aint even close... yes I kow it sucks that the DB gets 6 more 1st, 2nd and 3rd level spells than the Wiz, but I think having 4 more 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spells makes up for it. Point Taken. Some people say there is poor wording... personally, I dont see it... I read it and it looks ok to me. Granted some people don't like the idea of quick cast working on any spell they can cast, but I dont see 5 levels of DB as a solid dip for a primary caster. It's not really poor wording. It's the fact that the text doesn't specifically exclude certain things, so some people assume "because it isn't excluded, it is allowed." Like assuming that Arcane Channeling allows RANGED touch spells even though the text only specifies TOUCH spells. (Thus, no full attack disintegrate cheese) I agree that Quick Cast is a non issue. Except in gestalt games, where most DMs will rule "Duskblade Only" to avoid Duskblade/Spellcaster cheese. I would love to see it in Living greyhawk as is... they didnt give it any of the truly broken spells, so it should be fine as is. Yeah, wraithstrike alone could break Duskblade in half. Then again, wraithstrike is a must have for any gish. So Duskblades actually miss out there. They get 44 spells at 20th level... you some how think these 44 spells are strong than a wizards 36... I think the fact that the Wizard gets 180 spell levels compared to 122 for the duskblade adn the wizard isnt incredible MAD and the Wizard gets many more powerful spells it is obvious that the wizard is still stronger. You have a good point. Although duskblades could be a wizard killer if they get a Disintegrate off. But they'll still be less than a straight wizard or fighter either way. it is on the high end of the power curve, but when compared to core classes like Wizard, cleric and druid it aint overpowered. But it keeps getting compared to melee classes. Not Gish Classes. exactly it is an OK spell list, it aint that great. Nor is it an overpowered spell list. Although Disintegrate is debateable. I'm always amazed that, within a week or two of a book coming out, there are already a ton of people who have spent numerous sessions playing the new class, PrCs, feats and spells. It's so great that so many people enjoy trying the new things to see what they think of them and to make sure that, in their own game, things are balanced and fun for people. Wait... That's not how it is at all. It's just the opposite. People look at the new stuff and freak. That's just dumb. I come to the table with the idea, as a player and as a DM, that Wizards takes the time to make a good product. Whether or not you like the editing or flavor of something, you must admit that you like the product. If you didn't like it, you wouldn't be here. Well, you got me there. The PHB2 is one of my favorite books. So, we've established that these people want to make sure that things are fun. Fun includes things being balanced. Not perfectly balanced. That would be rediculous. I don't want a perfectly balanced game. It would take out that little bit of realism that the game needs. People are not equal. They shouldn't be in a game. There's a reason that PCs exist. They're better than everyone else. What commoner can withstand the blast of a dragon's breath weapon? Not a damn one. Nor should they be able to. And that's why a 5th level character can't beat a 10th level character without stellar planning, excessive luck, and probably DM intervension. I thought that the Duskblade was OK. I like the Dragon Shaman a lot more. I'll probably end up DMing for a Duskblade soon when I reset the campaign. I won't make any changes to it. I allow almost everything. The game I'm in now, I restricted psionics just so that the players could get use to Eberron. 2 of them are 13. When we restart, I'm going to allow everything. Races, classes, feats and spells, it's all fine. Over time, some things arise that CAN be broken. They aren't always, but they can be. That's when Wizards erratas them. Though I didn't spend a lot of time with the Duskblade, I don't think that it's overpowered or broken. So it gets 10 first and second level spells per day. I noticed that. It didn't seem like a big thing. They use damage spells while in melee. It's what they do. They'll hit some guys, the guys will fall down, they'll run out of spells, then they're doing less damage than the fighter. Your group sounds like fun. I wish I could join. My recommendation is always to try something first. If the flavor doesn't appeal, ignore it. If it seems unbalancing for your game, ban it. But the two things you should never do are as follow: 1. Ban something without really thinking about it and comparing it to other things. Even better, don't ban unless you've seen it in play. 2. Come on here and tell people that things are overpowered/broken. And the use of the term "power creep" is pretty stupid, too. If everything is gaining power with all of the new books, then everything stays at an equal level. Every class can be broken. It's not hard. You just have to decide not to. Hell, I don't even optimize, and even I can break the Healer when it comes to undead. Not that hard. Well, one of my DMs compares everything new to Core. (Thus his term of power creep. All of D&D is getting stronger with each new book.) The other DM compares it to the newer books. Like the Complete Line of books. (His example.) Both have said no to a decent amount of material because it is overpowered. And they are both set in their ways. The biggest problem is that they review the material, compare it to whatever they compare it to, and then judge on their own. One of the bigger problems that I've encountered with both of them is that they both view a familiar as a liability. (Which it is, unless you take Improved Familiar.) Thus, just going without a familiar is better than having a familiar. Thereby excluding almost every alternate to a familiar that I brought up. The only exception is the Hexblade "Dark Companion" alternate familiar. Think. Compare. Test. THEN make changes as you deem appropriate. My gut says: "Less spells/day for the duskblade". My brain says: "How does it hold up in play?" I'm missing the test phase. Unfortunately, I'm not the DM. If I were, I'd ask my players if one wanted to play a Duskblade to test it out. One more thing: How the hell does everyone keep missing the spell list? Even my quick glance through the book showed me where the spell list was. The same for the Beguiler. The PHB2 includes some new things, including new formats. If people are that interested in the class, I would have thought that they would have read the couple of pages dealing with it. That would have included the page with the spell list. It's not that difficult, people. If you don't find a list back with the other lists, what's the next place you should look? That's right, the description. Unfortunately, many people skip the "Playing a (class)", "(class) in the world", "(class) In the game", and "(class) Lore" sections. A lot of people don't like the new class format, and thus skip over it. I know I only skimmed each "extra" section in PHB 2. I'm only now going to go back and read each thoroughly because I've had the book long enough to get an overview. There is a fair amount of good advice hidden in those "extra" sections. Like the advice to keep a Duskblade's spell list varied. There's even advice on how to spend a Duskblade's wealth. But you probably already knew that. Sorry if these posts sound a bit mean. Seeing the same complaint over and over just seems ridiculous to me. They don't sound mean at all. Some sections sound like you are annoyed. Or at least fed up with the issue. But never really mean. And I do thank you (Both of you) for your input. It always helps to have more than one perspective on a divided issue. Sincerely, Hariman
FeceMan 05-19-06, 09:53 PM	Yeah, wraithstrike alone could break Duskblade in half. Then again, wraithstrike is a must have for any gish. So Duskblades actually miss out there. Extra Spell. Depending on your GM...
Cadfan 05-19-06, 10:21 PM	Extra Spell. Depending on your GM... And depending on how liberally you want to interpret the feat's wording. Personally, if a duskblade wanted to use Extra Spell to learn a spell not on his spell list, but rather on the wizard/sorceror list, I'd let him do it. The feat seems to suggest that he can, if you read it like Amelia Bedelia. But then I'd tell him that he could freely cast yjat spell with any wizard/sorceror spell slots he happened to have on hand... :rolleyes:
ressurrector 05-20-06, 02:03 AM	I'm actually starting a group this Sunday, hopefully I can get someone to play as a Duskblade. Then we can get some feedback from actual games here, instead of people arguing based just on reading it. I've also got someone who's playing a Beguiler, but nobody's complaining at all about that class.
Feor 05-20-06, 10:14 PM	I don't understand the massive uproar over the 10 spells/day thing. You get 10 first level spells at level 17. So you can cast... what? Burning Hands? 10 times a day. I seriously doubt anything you'll be fighting at level 17 will have trouble resisting Burning Hands, or any first level spell. And even if they do, it's 5d4 damage.. The few creatures that won't outright resist it will just laugh at you. True Strike would be a better bet, all things considered. Even the third level spells. You get them at level 20, so you can do Vampiric Touch, maybe Keen Edge or Energy Surge 10 times a day, meanwhile, as you're closing to do that your opponent's probably hit you with 4 meteor swarms while you wade through his Incendry Wall. (unless he's really mean and decides to hit you with a Maze spell or something equally nasty.
Hariman 05-20-06, 11:42 PM	I don't understand the massive uproar over the 10 spells/day thing. You get 10 first level spells at level 17. So you can cast... what? Burning Hands? 10 times a day. I seriously doubt anything you'll be fighting at level 17 will have trouble resisting Burning Hands, or any first level spell. And even if they do, it's 5d4 damage.. The few creatures that won't outright resist it will just laugh at you. True Strike would be a better bet, all things considered. Even the third level spells. You get them at level 20, so you can do Vampiric Touch, maybe Keen Edge or Energy Surge 10 times a day, meanwhile, as you're closing to do that your opponent's probably hit you with 4 meteor swarms while you wade through his Incendiary Wall. (unless he's really mean and decides to hit you with a Maze spell or something equally nasty. With the Arcane Strike feat that excess of spells becomes +3 to attack and +3d4 to melee damage ten times a day. (Minus any spells cast) At 20th level. With no epic support for the Duskblade. Not to mention that I'd burn all of those extra low level slots on buffs and swift spells. Or swift buff spells. And the bad news is, Globes of Invulnerability still **** a Duskblade over. I'd say they are the equivalent of a Warlock with more power (Impact, damage per round.), but a finite limit to that power. (Hideous Blow vs Arcane Channeling = almost the same thing.) Warlock had a similar reaction when it came out. I just hope the furor dies down. I really do hope that Duskblades are allowed in Living Greyhawk. That might be the only way I get to play one.