Arcane Channeling + Shocking Grasp

[Torin Ironfist]

Maybe its because i do not have the past years of experience in D&D as some do, but I dont see why this argument is not what you like to speak of in a rules forum... it seems to me this would be the exact type of argument you would want to talk about in a rules forum. I am not looking to annoy or anger anyone, and if thats the generally accepted idea then i can take our query elsewhere, but the argument in question is an argument about a rule. Not finding any specific rule to tell us how exactly this works, I, being the curious type, would like to find out if there are any official rulings, or, if not, how it is played in house.

Again, I dont have a ton of experience playing D&D, so if this next statement seems completely obtuse, please go easy on me.

I do interpret a touch attack to be easier because you are not trying to do any physical damage to an opponent, just touch them... if i had to do the rest of a normal strike against an opponent with a touch attack, then it wouldnt be just a touch, but a hit, and in that hit i would cause damage. I dont go around swinging at my friends and staying "see that?! i touched you!" . The essence of a touch attack is that all you have to do is touch another person/thing/etc in order to transfer some sort of energy, kinetic or magical.

I do not see how this invalidates my argument at all. I agree completely that a missed normal attack doesnt suggest that you have touched your opponent, it doesnt have any bearing on what you did, other than missing your target. Please explain how this invalidates an argument. I never argued that if i miss my opponent i should automatically do shocking grasp damage because "i touched them anyways". The nifty little idea that rgard had earlier is probably what you are referring to, and that was only if you miss with your total attack +'s, but without the shocking grasp +3, but would have hit with the shocking grasp +3 (the idea being you swung, missed, but got close enough that the electricity jumped, as electricity does, from your weapon, to the metal object it is attracted to on the opponent.. which is why you were getting the +3 from shocking grasp in the first place).

I have to run out with the GF, but will be back to finish my thought in a few hours... sorry for the half response.

P.S. I totally agree with you on interpretations... its the essence of table top roleplaying.. to interpret the situation in your mind however you please. Which is why i interpret power attack to be as such: swinging harder, with less accuracy. Yes in the real world, that may just damage your weapon and leave you with nothing to show for it, but in the game, the name of the feat, as well as the feats pre reqs (str 13) say it is a str based skill, not a dex based skill of positioning your attack... but again, you may interpret it as you like, and i will not bat an eye, nor should you.

 

[Fifth Element]

I am currently playing a duskblade at 6th. It can in a short term become over whelming for a DM with monsters. I move up, my character has both Blade of Blood and Shocking Grasp. I'm only getting one attack. I cast Blade of Blood sacrificing 5 HP to get 3d6, this spell is a swift action, then arcane channel Shocking grasp for an additional potential of 5d6, then roll to hit. I do 1d8+3+3d6+5d6 doing about 35 points on average to living creatures. This will take most cr's of the appropriate level down to about 40%, if I do nothing else with spell, I can repeat this 5 times using 2nd level spells as well. 3rd-8th level is IMO the best time for the Duskblade.

When I get to that level with my duskblade, I'm thinking (with one round of prep time):

Smiting shocking grasp in round 1
Swift-cast true strike in round 1
Move as needed
Round 2, blade of blood (swift) before attacking
Arcane channel shocking grasp
Full Power Attack with a two-handed weapon (greatsword)

Damage 2d6 (sword) +3d6 (blade of blood) +10d6 (two shocking grasps) +12 (Power Attack) +4 (normal Str bonus) = 15d6+16 with an attack bonus of +22 for one attack. That's a lot of d6's for a 6th-level character.

Uses 3 1st-level slots and a 2nd-level slot, but with the True Strike you're not going to miss. Save it for the big guys, damage is 31-106 (assuming no crit), average 68.5.

Then at 9th level one could add Arcane Strike to the mix.

 

[wildstarsreach]

When I get to that level with my duskblade, I'm thinking (with one round of prep time):

Smiting shocking grasp in round 1
Swift-cast true strike in round 1
Move as needed
Round 2, blade of blood (swift) before attacking
Arcane channel shocking grasp
Full Power Attack with a two-handed weapon (greatsword)

Damage 2d6 (sword) +3d6 (blade of blood) +10d6 (two shocking grasps) +12 (Power Attack) +4 (normal Str bonus) = 15d6+16 with an attack bonus of +22 for one attack. That's a lot of d6's for a 6th-level character.

Uses 3 1st-level slots and a 2nd-level slot, but with the True Strike you're not going to miss. Save it for the big guys, damage is 31-106 (assuming no crit), average 68.5.

Then at 9th level one could add Arcane Strike to the mix.

The problem with that is the two shocking grasps. You have to discharge one before you could cast another.

 

[Fifth Element]

The problem with that is the two shocking grasps. You have to discharge one before you could cast another.

Not sure I agree. The way I interpret Smiting Spell is that the spell is transferred to the weapon, which then holds the charge. You effectively discharge the spell when you cast it. Note that the spell dissipates from the weapon after 1 minute, whereas you can normally hold a touch spell's charge indefinitely. This implies that the magic has been transferred to the weapon.

The descriptive text supports this interpretation.

What do you think?

 

[Kmart Kommando]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that touch spells that don't get discharged last like 1min/level then dissipate. Older FAQ maybe? Or Sage Advice, can't remember.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Not sure I agree. The way I interpret Smiting Spell is that the spell is transferred to the weapon, which then holds the charge. You effectively discharge the spell when you cast it. Note that the spell dissipates from the weapon after 1 minute, whereas you can normally hold a touch spell's charge indefinitely. This implies that the magic has been transferred to the weapon.

The descriptive text supports this interpretation.

What do you think?

When a duskblade (Player’s Handbook II, 20) uses arcane channeling to deliver a spell but misses with the weapon attack, is the spell discharged or can he try to deliver the spell again on his next turn?
This follows the normal rule for touch spells; that is, a melee touch spell that misses its target is not discharged. However, when using the improved version of this class feature gained at 13th level, the spell is discharged at the end of the round regardless of whether you hit or not (as described on page 20).
From FAQ of 012607

This then supports my interpretation. You use the normal rules for melee touch spells. You have a skill or supernatural ability to channel through the weapon. The charge is not transferred to the weapon, you just have the ability to channel through. With shocking grasp, electricity using an electrical conduit makes sense to channel this spell whether you are a duskblade or not. If you don't touch them the first round, let's us say from to high an AC, then you could revert to using the touch attack and discharge it. If the opponent has metal armor, then you would get the +3 to attack.

 

[Darklone]

...
P.S. I totally agree with you on interpretations... its the essence of table top roleplaying.. to interpret the situation in your mind however you please. Which is why i interpret power attack to be as such: swinging harder, with less accuracy. Yes in the real world, that may just damage your weapon and leave you with nothing to show for it, but in the game, the name of the feat, as well as the feats pre reqs (str 13) say it is a str based skill, not a dex based skill of positioning your attack... but again, you may interpret it as you like, and i will not bat an eye, nor should you.

The problem is not the interpretation, but that two obviously totally different interpretations can be made about the same rules mechanism.

Another example for this: Hitting with a lot of strength means to many people to swing wildly, though for weapon experts strength means better control of the weapon and a cleaner cut. (which would be interpreted by others as Dexterity...)

The problem about the touch attack again: As you said, it's about striking with a "loaded" touch spell or simply touching with that touch spell. Now, in the special case where you tried to hit with a strike and missed, it hinges on your interpretation whether you still touch the opponent or not (since you would have hit his touch AC). The rules/FAQ say no. Your interpretation says yes. Mine says no.

That does not necessarily mean the game designers share my opinion/interpretation. They should care more about game balance and that may be their reason for their ruling.

 

[Torin Ironfist]

My interpretation doesnt say anything of the sort, my interpretation in this also doesnt matter at all. If you care to ask my opinion, i would again, actually agree with you... if i miss his ac with his armor on, or off, it doesnt matter, i missed him... but that wasnt what i was asking about. What i was asking was, if i miss him with my attack, as in, my swing does not connect, but comes close... does the spells caveat function... does the spell for lack of a better visual "draw my weapon to him with his metal armor on"

the guy ( ) the sword swing ||


( ) || ( ) ||
[ ] || [ ] ||
[ ] || [ ||
[ ]|| [ ||

the first swing is without shocking grasp on... the second with... if you were to roll, for instance, 1 below his ac before adding the +3 shocking grasp mod... if the shocking grasp were to function, which was the original question. does it function to "draw" your attack towards your opponent if he is wearing metal armor. I didnt assume the attack touched him otherwise. My dm has decided against the mod working for a couple different reasons, the most important being ease of use for other spells as well, so for me the discussion is moot, but i would still like to hear what you think dark.

Edit, well i see it doesnt keep spacing, so i hope you can figure that one out haha

 

[FatherTome]

The Duskblade does nothing unusual with Arcane Strike that does not already exist in the RAW.

Since my copy of PHB is in the car, I'm slightly lazy here and thus not quoting exactly, but if an exact quotation/page numbers is required I can do that later.

PHB states that touch spells can be delivered via unarmed strike, and thus also deal unarmed strike damage, but they are no longer considered a touch attack and thus require you to hit the opponents' full AC. The Duskblade is merely an extension of this, allowing you to channel a touch spell through a weapon attack - and later a full attack action. Thus the attack gets the +3 from shocking grasp, since you also get the +3 when delivering the touch spell via unarmed strike.

Complete Arcane has a section dealing with weaponlke spells (touch spells and ray spells) which include the critical modifiers - weaponlike spells can crit, can recieve skirmish/sneak attack damage, and can even have their threat ranges improved. Whether weaponlike spells can crit as part of an Arcane Strike, I don't know, but weaponlike spells can crit on their own, and melee attacks can crit on their own. I suspect that only the weapon attack can crit on an Arcane Strike, though.

 

[Darklone]

The Duskblade does nothing unusual with Arcane Strike that does not already exist in the RAW.

Since my copy of PHB is in the car, I'm slightly lazy here and thus not quoting exactly, but if an exact quotation/page numbers is required I can do that later.

PHB states that touch spells can be delivered via unarmed strike, and thus also deal unarmed strike damage, but they are no longer considered a touch attack and thus require you to hit the opponents' full AC. The Duskblade is merely an extension of this, allowing you to channel a touch spell through a weapon attack - and later a full attack action. Thus the attack gets the +3 from shocking grasp, since you also get the +3 when delivering the touch spell via unarmed strike.

If you disagree with posters that agreed to not agree with you, it would be nice to address their arguments. So far you didn't post anything new for the case of "Duskblade should get +3 to hit for the normal melee attack".

Complete Arcane has a section dealing with weaponlke spells (touch spells and ray spells) which include the critical modifiers - weaponlike spells can crit, can recieve skirmish/sneak attack damage, and can even have their threat ranges improved. Whether weaponlike spells can crit as part of an Arcane Strike, I don't know, but weaponlike spells can crit on their own, and melee attacks can crit on their own. I suspect that only the weapon attack can crit on an Arcane Strike, though.

So does this part answer the good old question whether a spell that is channeled through a normal attack that scores a critical is a critical as well? IIRC not.