Sorcerous Blade Channelling

[Herschel]

That's more of a consequence than a bonus. It's pretty rare that a caster can't just shift out of melee range.

You're kidding right? Either that or you're subject to soft DMing or playing with three defenders and two leaders.

Spellchuckers will occasionally get pinned down.

Sometimes the spellchuckers need to step up and take some damage. They have surges and hit points for a reason. It's poor resource management to expect certain characters to take basically all the damage. In difficult encounters/days this simply doesn't work. Even if they have the surges to spend there may not be enough triggers so spreading teh damage is imperitive to party survival, let alone success.

Also, being able to set up a credible flank can be quite useful instead of in name only.

 

[Blackbrrd]

There is a big advantage to the party when the defender can flank with for instance the sorcerer. +2 to hit to two characters is REALLY good. One extra way of getting flanking and CA is very valuable.

As a sorcerer I would probably keep out of melee range to begin with and move into flanking in round two or three. I would maybe go for using the Close Blast 3 attack early on as well, either way ending in melee range very quickly.

 

[fireinthedust]

These two contradict each other.

Also, by using Sorcerous Blade Channelling, the feat specifically states that the attack is changed to a melee attack, thereby it should get the melee attack proficiency bonus. Otherwise, what then is the point of the feat? Making a ranged attack into a melee attack is a negative, not a positive. The only justification for it (aside from daggermaster cheese, which shouldn't be taken into consideration because the feat isn't specifically built to allow such, it's just a coincidence) is to gain the proficiency bonus to the attack.

And Reaper's Touch is a race-specific feat which doesn't discount other feats allowing the same thing through synergistic mechanics.

No and No. Also: No!

Sorcerous blade channelling, I believe, says nothing about changing the attack to affect AC. It says nothing about adding proficiency bonus because it doesn't change the attack to a weapon attack from implement. It only says that the attack is now a melee attack.

Daggermaster works perfectly well: it says you increase attacks with a dagger. If you want to call customer service and get a ruling on that, fine; however, I wouldn't add on what isn't there.
Keep in mind you can use magical dagger properties on your sorcerer spells, even if they're made for weapon attacks: a flaming dagger will add fire damage on a crit,t hat sort of thing.

Reaper's Touch: Ah-ha, no: the article doesn't have Shadar-Kai as a pre-req, ergo it's not a racial feat. Same way my Eladrin Swordmage can take the Fey Death feat, despite it being in an article on assassins (granted, pre-PH3 class).

 

[fireinthedust]

By a strict reading of the rules, it would actually be a ranged basic attack that can be used as a melee attack.

Meaning that it could be used whenever you are allowed a ranged basic or basic attack, but not when you are granted a melee basic attack. Despite not being a melee basic per se, you could use it as a melee attack whenever you are granted a ranged basic or basic attack (in order to avoid granting opportunity attacks).

This is where the rules get funny, y'know? But I agree with this; though, if it's changing ranged to melee, I think the OP kinda makes sense in saying that Acid Orb is now a MBA.

I think a sorcerer is a great melee character *if* they get Leather, and have a healer standing, like, right next to them. Keep in mind that, with Rogue MC, Daggermaster (or even just a jagged dagger), the lightning at-will means you can run in and out of melee, flanking with every shot. Then you're out of melee, technically.

The parrallel here is back in 3e how there were touch-attacks: ranged touch attacks and melee touch attacks. Basically the feat in question lets you change the ranged touch attacks into melee ones. That is why you don't get the weapon proficiency bonus.

On the other hand, you're not going after AC, so you don't need it.

 

[Kzach]

Reaper's Touch: Ah-ha, no: the article doesn't have Shadar-Kai as a pre-req, ergo it's not a racial feat.

Reaper's Touch was changed in both errata and the Dragon Annual. It's Shadar-kai specific now.

 

[lexoanvil]

The power doesn't have the keyword because it doesn't need to. The feat is the exception that changes the rule. It changes the power into a weapon-based attack that requires a dagger.

also incorrect show me where it states it becomes a weapon attack. it doesn't all it does is effect the range aka allowing you to use it in melee without provoking attacks. daggers in many cases are used as implements. this does not mean any powers were a dagger is applicable as an implement magically transforms into a weapon attack.

 

[Kzach]

daggers in many cases are used as implements. this does not mean any powers were a dagger is applicable as an implement magically transforms into a weapon attack.

Exactly, this is why there's a feat to do it...

 

[lexoanvil]

Exactly, this is why there's a feat to do it...

the feat doesnt do that it says nowhere it gains the weapon keyword. you might as well give daggers brutal 3 with the feat because you think its appropriate. if the feat dosn't say specifically it gains the keyword "weapon" it will not gain the proficiency bonus.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Exactly, this is why there's a feat to do it...

If you read what the feat says, the only thing it does is change ranged sorcerer attacks into melee attacks.

It makes it so that you can utilize your sorcerer spells in melee range without incurring OAs. It also has the secondary benefit that you can take advantage of feats and such that are restricted to melee attacks (Power Attack).

Melee attacks are not the same as weapon attacks. Weapon attacks get the proficiency bonus. Melee attacks don't (unless they're also weapon attacks). Sorcerer attacks using Sorcerous Blade Channeling are melee implement attacks, not melee weapon attacks, and therefore do not benefit from the proficiency bonus.

If the feat was intended to change ranged sorcerer attacks into weapon attacks, it would say so. It does not.

To put it another way, if SBC did turn sorcerer spells into weapon attacks, it would grant +3 to hit and therefore be equivalent to epic Expertise (but available at Heroic tier). That's quite clearly both absurd and broken.

 

[lexoanvil]

also ran this build through the character builder you don't get the bonus.
myth busted.