# DuskBlades and Prestige Classes



## BadMojo (May 23, 2006)

This is *not* a "the Duskblade is too powerful" thread (I hope), but I was wondering if anyone noticed that there seems to be a lack of synergy between the Duskblade class and a lot of the popular gish prestige classes.

Bladesinger doesn't work well with the Duskblades armored mage ability and the shield usage.

Spellsword seems to be a duplication of abilities too (reduction in ASF)

The only one I can think of that would work fairly well is Raumathari Battlemage - near full spellcaster level progression, ability to use a bastard sword in place of a material component and get a benefit to spell DC for it.

Other than that, I can't really think of any Prestige Classes that fit the Duskblade and still provide some kind of caster level progression.

Am I missing something or does this class not seem to work really well with all the existing "gish-type" prestige classes?


----------



## Caliban (May 23, 2006)

Duskblade is basically a 20 level prestige class.


----------



## IanB (May 23, 2006)

I'm not sure it needs to. The duskblade fills that role pretty well on its own. The other prestige classes were designed with a particular multiclassing path in mind and still work well for that.

To put it another way - why would it be a problem if it doesn't?


----------



## BadMojo (May 23, 2006)

IanB said:
			
		

> To put it another way - why would it be a problem if it doesn't?




I don't necessarily think it's a problem, but it certainly seems to be a shift in design philosophy.

Perhaps the new Complete Mage book will have some PRCs that would work well with the Duskblade.

Edit:  Perhaps a better title for this thread would be "Duskblade builds".  Can you do a lightly armored finesse fighter as well as a tank using the Duskblade?  The class seems more like a 20 level version of the Spellsword than something like the Bladesinger.


----------



## dagger (May 24, 2006)

*Oh really:Harm spell anyone?
*




> duskblade 13 ur priest 2 mystic theurge5
> +16 BAB 5th level duskblade spells 7th level cleric spells.
> rings of wizardry are your friends.
> 
> ...





> Duskblade 10/Ur-Priest 4/Mystic Theurge 6. Sure, I only get 4th level Duskblade spells, but I nab 9th level cleric spells and my saves are better. I suppose you could go Duskblade 11/Ur-Priest 3/Mystic Theurge 6 if you really wanted 5th level Duskblade spells. I just don't think Arcane Channeling is so fantastic the whole character should be built around just that, not to mention that the wording is a little fuzzy on whether or not a target can be affect more than once by the 13th level version.
> 
> Something cool about the class abilities though; Arcane Channeling, Quick Cast and Spell Power work with any spell you cast. I rather like the idea of this fellow as the leader of a group of villians. He's been holding back the entire fight while the heroes lay on a beating, then he suddenly summons a Balor through a Gate spell, casts a Quickened Mass Heal on himself and all his allies. Next turn, he slams on the party meatshield with an Arcane Channeled Harm with Arcane Strike added in, then follows it up with a Quickened Blasphemy.





> DB:13 Bardd: 1 SC: 6 Caster Level: 19
> 
> The sublime chord (SC) works best with a human taking able learner (because of skill requirements) with a dip into bard it is reachable at 11th lvl


----------



## Sejs (May 24, 2006)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Duskblade is basically a 20 level prestige class.




Similar in style to how the Spellthief is a rogue/sorcerer-with-PrC rolled into a base class. *nod*

The Duskblade is the Bladesinger concept done right, no dipping into Spellsword, Eldritch Knight, or whatever to fill out your character, just a straight idea in a single class.


----------



## epicycloid (May 24, 2006)

Is there any other base class or Prestige Class (that doesn't have arcane caster as a requirement) that can cast Arcane spells and gets a full BAB?


----------



## RigaMortus2 (May 24, 2006)

What about Havoc Mage from MiniHandbook?  Might work well with the Duskblade...


----------



## Mistwell (May 24, 2006)

"extra spell wraith strike"

Say what now?  Wraith strike not on spell list.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 24, 2006)

> Something cool about the class abilities though; Arcane Channeling, Quick Cast and Spell Power work with any spell you cast.




I'm not convinced of this. I have no inside knowledge, but I think of the duskblade entry as simply having accidentally failed to specify "These abilities work only with spells you cast as a duskblade," as opposed to intending to allow them to work with spells cast via levels in some other class. That would make it more consistent with precedent, as well as keeping the class from being blatantly overpowered in multiclassing situations.


----------



## BadMojo (May 24, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I'm not convinced of this. I have no inside knowledge, but I think of the duskblade entry as simply having accidentally failed to specify "These abilities work only with spells you cast as a duskblade," as opposed to intending to allow them to work with spells cast via levels in some other class. That would make it more consistent with precedent, as well as keeping the class from being blatantly overpowered in multiclassing situations.




Ari,

I haven't fully read through the class yet, so I actually just assumed that wording was in there.  Didn't realize it was missing.

Do you have personal opinions on the design philosophy behind a class that seems to one-up both the Bladesinger and Spellsword classes?

As it stands right now, from a pure game mechanics point of view I don't see any reason why I *wouldn't* want to take all 20 levels of Duskblade.  I honestly can't think of another base class that I would feel the same about.


----------



## dagger (May 24, 2006)

I got those builds off the Optimization boards over at Wizards....




			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> "extra spell wraith strike"
> 
> Say what now?  Wraith strike not on spell list.






Extra Spell does not say it has to be on your spell list.

You learn an additional Spell.
*Prereq*: Caster Level 3rd.
*Benefit*: You learn one additional spell at any level up to one lower than the highest level of spell you can currently cast. Thus, a 4th-level sorcerer (Maximum spell level 2nd) Gains a new 0-level or 1st-level spell known with which to expand her repertoire. For classes such as wizard that have more options for learning spells, Extra Spell is generally used to learn a specific spell that a character lacks access to and would be unable to research.
*Special:* You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time you learn a new spell at any level up to one level lower than the highest level of spell you can cast.


----------



## shilsen (May 24, 2006)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> As it stands right now, from a pure game mechanics point of view I don't see any reason why I *wouldn't* want to take all 20 levels of Duskblade.  I honestly can't think of another base class that I would feel the same about.




Personally, I think that's a big point in favor of the class. One can always come up with flavor/concept reasons for taking all 20 levels in a particular class, but it's nice to have mechanical reasons to back that up as well.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 24, 2006)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> Ari,
> 
> I haven't fully read through the class yet, so I actually just assumed that wording was in there.  Didn't realize it was missing.
> 
> ...




Honestly, I prefer base classes that encourage you to stick with them through the entire progression. PrCs should be flavor choices or providers of new options, not optimization tools.

As far as other base classes that rarely, if ever, benefit from PrCs, I'd put forth the druid and--if one is including the new feats in PHBII--the fighter.


----------



## IanB (May 24, 2006)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> As it stands right now, from a pure game mechanics point of view I don't see any reason why I *wouldn't* want to take all 20 levels of Duskblade.  I honestly can't think of another base class that I would feel the same about.




It seems to me this *should* be true of all base classes, so having one that works that way is a good start.

As it happens, though, there are others where I think it is worthwhile:

barbarian
druid (at least pre-polymorph changes)
monk
most base classes in a game where I expect to reach epic levels

Moving outside the realm of the player's handbook, I expect there are others as well. Off the top of my head I know the dread necromancer from Heroes of Horror is probably worth taking to 20.


----------



## harmyn (May 24, 2006)

I would say the Duskblade is unique and specific enough that it shouldn't really need prestige classes. I would say the same thing about the Warlock from Complete Arcane and for the most part the Druid class from the PHB. But that's just me.


----------



## ThirdWizard (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Extra Spell does not say it has to be on your spell list.




Doesn't matter. Check this thread.


----------



## Hypersmurf (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Extra Spell does not say it has to be on your spell list.




Out of curiosity, what does the Duskblade's "Spells" entry say?

The Wizard, for example, states "Spells: A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/ wizard spell list."

If the Duskblade states "Spells: A duskblade casts arcane spells which are drawn from the duskblade spell list", then I'd agree that yes, Extra Spell lets him learn Wraithstrike, but it does not say it adds the spell to your spell list... therefore while the Duskblade knows the spell, he cannot cast the spell, since it is not drawn from the duskblade spell list.

-Hyp.


----------



## Sejs (May 25, 2006)

epicycloid said:
			
		

> Is there any other base class or Prestige Class (that doesn't have arcane caster as a requirement) that can cast Arcane spells and gets a full BAB?



 Hexblade.



			
				dagger said:
			
		

> I got those builds off the Optimization boards over at Wizards....



 You don't say.  

Heh, yeah, it being centered around Ur-Priest was kind of a hint there.



			
				BadMojo said:
			
		

> As it stands right now, from a pure game mechanics point of view I don't see any reason why I *wouldn't* want to take all 20 levels of Duskblade. I honestly can't think of another base class that I would feel the same about.



 Druid, Monk, maybe Bard, Spellthief, Warlock.  May be a few others.  Personally, there not being a natural jumping off point in a class where you would want to go to a PrC without a second thought is a sign of good design. 

Picking up a PrC shouldn't be automatic, it should be something you choose to do because it'd be appropriate for what you want the character to be.


----------



## ThirdWizard (May 25, 2006)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Druid, Monk, maybe Bard, Spellthief, Warlock.  May be a few others.




IMO Paladin! *says the person playing a paladin/rogue*  Just ignore that last part.


----------



## dagger (May 25, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what does the Duskblade's "Spells" entry say?
> 
> The Wizard, for example, states "Spells: A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/ wizard spell list."
> 
> ...




Well a lot of folks disagree with this, especially after reading the feat. We need a clarification from Wizards.


----------



## Corsair (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Well a lot of folks disagree with this, especially after reading the feat. We need a clarification from Wizards.




The original version from Tome and Blood specifically said from your spell list.  I would contend that calling it "extra spell" not "extra and very different spell" implies it is only intended to increase how MANY spells you know, not what KIND of spells you know.


----------



## Crothian (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Well a lot of folks disagree with this, especially after reading the feat. We need a clarification from Wizards.




Doesn't matter what a "a lot of people" believe.  All that matters is what the DM thinks.


----------



## Caliban (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Well a lot of folks disagree with this, especially after reading the feat.



  Maybe lots of folk you know.  I've haven't had anyone I know try to claim that it let's them learn and cast spells not on their list.


----------



## Sejs (May 25, 2006)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Maybe lots of folk you know.  I've haven't had anyone I know try to claim that it let's them learn and cast spells not on their list.




*raises a hand*

I used it a couple sessions ago to let a gnomish abjurer NPC have access to Shield Other. I was DMing, mind you, but never the less.


----------



## Glyfair (May 25, 2006)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Maybe lots of folk you know.  I've haven't had anyone I know try to claim that it let's them learn and cast spells not on their list.



I know Keith Baker used it to give a sample Magewright on his site a spell not on the Magewright spell list.  

_However_, Keith points out that's not how the ability actually works, but it's a house rule because he feels it should work this way _for the magewright_.


----------



## Caliban (May 25, 2006)

Sejs said:
			
		

> *raises a hand*
> 
> I used it a couple sessions ago to let a gnomish abjurer NPC have access to Shield Other. I was DMing, mind you, but never the less.




*shrug*  I don't know you.


----------



## Caliban (May 25, 2006)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> I know Keith Baker used it to give a sample Magewright on his site a spell not on the Magewright spell list.
> 
> _However_, Keith points out that's not how the ability actually works, but it's a house rule because he feels it should work this way _for the magewright_.




So, that example supports my position.  Thank you.


----------



## Question (May 25, 2006)

Wouldnt a duskblade be a good choice to get into arcane archer?


----------



## Sejs (May 25, 2006)

Question said:
			
		

> Wouldnt a duskblade be a good choice to get into arcane archer?



Yes indeed.  One of the better ones, as a matter of fact.


----------



## dagger (May 25, 2006)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Maybe lots of folk you know.  I've haven't had anyone I know try to claim that it let's them learn and cast spells not on their list.




No one I 'know' has taken it, but lots of folks on wizards use it that way.

The feat description supports the rulling as well.


----------



## dagger (May 25, 2006)

Corsair said:
			
		

> The original version from Tome and Blood specifically said from your spell list.  I would contend that calling it "extra spell" not "extra and very different spell" implies it is only intended to increase how MANY spells you know, not what KIND of spells you know.




I am just going by what the feat says, and it does not forbid it.


----------



## JiCi (May 25, 2006)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> This is *not* a "the Duskblade is too powerful" thread (I hope), but I was wondering if anyone noticed that there seems to be a lack of synergy between the Duskblade class and a lot of the popular gish prestige classes.
> 
> Bladesinger doesn't work well with the Duskblades armored mage ability and the shield usage.
> 
> ...



You're right about PrCs. The duskblade pretty much fills every level.

The *spellsword from Complete Warrior* is good for the spell channeling features, which extends to ANY spell, not just touch spells. The arcane spell failure ignorance is most useless, since you ignore up to medium armor and heavy shield.

The *arcane archer from DMG* isn't much worthy either. You don't have a  spell progression, but your spell channling can now apply to bows.

The *eldritch knight from DMG* is to forget. No features, except for a single fighter feat.

As for the Extra Spell feat, you can select any spell according to your spell class: arcane & divine. Like the Extra Power feat, which you can choose from Psion and Psychis Warrior powers, you can do the same with Extra Spell.


----------



## Hypersmurf (May 25, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> I am just going by what the feat says, and it does not forbid it.




But again - if you're just going by what the feat says, it doesn't add the spell to your class list, and if you are a member of a class who can cast spells drawn from your class list, the fact that you have learned a spell not on that list does not allow you to cast a spell on that list.

If you're just going by what the feat says, it doesn't say you can cast it just because you've learned it.

-Hyp.


----------



## Question (May 26, 2006)

I made a fighter 4/duskblade 2/arcane archer 10 yesterday. Full bab all the way, very nice saves. The only problem is the dusk blade spells arent really suited to a arcane archer....best choices i managed to get were true strike, ray of enfleeblement and expeditious retreat.


----------



## Diirk (May 26, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what does the Duskblade's "Spells" entry say?
> 
> The Wizard, for example, states "Spells: A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/ wizard spell list."
> 
> ...




I don't have the book the duskblade is in, but if you take for instance the sorceror: "A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. He can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time, the way a wizard or a cleric must (see below)."

Two things stand out. A sorcerer casts _primarily_ sorceror spells, which suggests there's a possibility he can cast others. It also states that he can cast any spell he knows. So it would follow that if a sorcerer managed to somehow learn a non-sorceror spell he could cast it without restriction. Sounds like extra spell would work for a sorcerer, at least.

In comparison, the wizard is lacking that 'primarily' word, and there's no phrasing saying he can prepare any spell he knows. The bard doesn't have the primarily word either, but it does state he can cast any spell he knows.


----------



## Sejs (May 26, 2006)

Diirk said:
			
		

> I don't have the book the duskblade is in, but if you take for instance the sorceror: "A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. He can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time, the way a wizard or a cleric must (see below)."




Just providing the relevent text regarding the duskblade and their spells~

"You can cast spells that are drawn from the duskblade spell list on page 98.  You can cast any spell you know without preparing it ahead of time."

(and)

"You begin play knowing two 0-level spells and two 1st level spells, chosen from the duskblade spell list.  You also know an additional 0-level spell for each point of Intelligence bonus.  Each time you gain a new class level, you learn one additional spell of any level you can cast, chosen from the duskblade spell list."


----------



## Hypersmurf (May 27, 2006)

Diirk said:
			
		

> Two things stand out. A sorcerer casts _primarily_ sorceror spells, which suggests there's a possibility he can cast others. It also states that he can cast any spell he knows. So it would follow that if a sorcerer managed to somehow learn a non-sorceror spell he could cast it without restriction. Sounds like extra spell would work for a sorcerer, at least.




That's why any time Thanee advances the "wizard can cast spells drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list" in an Extra Spell thread, I throw in "Go on, do the sorcerer!"  



			
				Sejs said:
			
		

> You can cast spells that are drawn from the duskblade spell list on page 98. You can cast any spell you know without preparing it ahead of time.




So, the question is whether those are two restrictions, or two allowances.  If they were two allowances, it would mean you could cast a/ any spell you know, or b/ spells drawn from the duskblade list _whether or not you know them_.  This seems unlikely, so they must be restrictions.

Which means that you can cast spells that fulfil both requirements: a/ drawn from the duskblade spell list, and b/ that you know.

A cleric spell learned through the Extra Spell feat is a spell you know, but not a spell drawn from the duskblade spell list, and therefore cannot be cast... any more than you can cast a spell drawn from the duskblade list that you do not know.

-Hyp.


----------



## rgard (May 27, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> I got those builds off the Optimization boards over at Wizards....
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Ok, the above feat aside.  If you had a multi-class Duskblade/Cleric, could the character deliver Divine Touch Spells (ones he/she knows from the Cleric levels) through the sword via Arcane Channeling?  Yes, I know it is called 'Arcane' Channeling, but this Duskblade does 'know and is able to cast' divine touch spells.

I'm tempted to make the ability a new Feat, but what do you all think?

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## rgard (May 27, 2006)

rgard said:
			
		

> Ok, the above feat aside.  If you had a multi-class Duskblade/Cleric, could the character deliver Divine Touch Spells (ones he/she knows from the Cleric levels) through the sword via Arcane Channeling?  Yes, I know it is called 'Arcane' Channeling, but this Duskblade does 'know and is able to cast' divine touch spells.
> 
> I'm tempted to make the ability a new Feat, but what do you all think?
> 
> ...




Here is the feat I have in mind for this:

*DIVINE CHANNELING*

You are able to deliver Divine touch spells through your weapon.

*Prerequisites:* Arcane Channeling (SU), Ability to cast 1st level Divine Spells​*Benefit:* In addition to your Duskblade touch spells, you are able to deliver Divine touch spells you know from your divine class levels through your weapon.​*Normal:* You can only deliver Duskblade touch spells through your weapon.​*Special:* If you have more than one Divine spell casting class you must decide which class you will use with this feat. You can select this feat multiple times, but it applies to a different divine class's touch spells each time you take the feat.​


----------



## Vysirez (May 27, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> So, the question is whether those are two restrictions, or two allowances.  If they were two allowances, it would mean you could cast a/ any spell you know, or b/ spells drawn from the duskblade list _whether or not you know them_.  This seems unlikely, so they must be restrictions.
> 
> Which means that you can cast spells that fulfil both requirements: a/ drawn from the duskblade spell list, and b/ that you know.
> 
> ...




Part of the problem with this sentance, _You can cast spells that are drawn from the duskblade spell list on page 98_, is that the list on pg 98 is actually only the new duskblade spells from PHBII. The actual complete spell list is on page 24. So if you were accepting both statement as restrictions then duskblades could only cast spells from PHBII. Course I think the pg 98 reference is just an error since it throws a lot of people off. I actually havent seen any references to the spell list on pg 24 in the duskblade class descriptions.


----------



## Votan (May 27, 2006)

I think that a lack of prestige class synergy is a good thing.  Prestige classes are slowly doing the opposite of what they were intended to do.  With requirements they make characters more similar because the same set of high powered prestige classes bcomes the best option for everybody!!!

I like Monks, Druids and (now) Duskblades because the class works well and the only reason to prestige class is to alter focus as opposed to build up power and focus.


----------



## rgard (May 27, 2006)

Votan said:
			
		

> I think that a lack of prestige class synergy is a good thing.  Prestige classes are slowly doing the opposite of what they were intended to do.  With requirements they make characters more similar because the same set of high powered prestige classes bcomes the best option for everybody!!!
> 
> I like Monks, Druids and (now) Duskblades because the class works well and the only reason to prestige class is to alter focus as opposed to build up power and focus.




I agree and will second one of the previous posters who said it was like a 20 level prestige class.

Despite some of the nebulous verbage in the class description, I think this is one the best new concepts/classes they've come up with in a long time.  Really does capture the flavor of the OD&D Elf class.

That said, I will probably play a multi-class Duskblade/Cleric or Duskblade/UR Priest (assuming I convince the DM to allow the Divine Channeling feat I posted above) until the character bites the dust before I play a straight Duskblade.

Thanks,
Rich


----------

