duskblade-- too powerful?

[wildstarsreach]

Part of the problem I have found with a lot of discussions like this is that most people compare the duskblade to the fighter. Which is one of the weakest core classes in my opinion. So stating that a duskblade is more powerful then a fighter =! that it's overpowered. If you honestly feel that a duskblade is stronger then a cleric or druid then I can see your POV on overpowered a bit easier.

In my opinion the best "class" to compare a duskblade to is a gish build. Yes, a Gish uses PRCS, but if your talking about a base class from PHB2, I don't see a problem with a build using EK or Spellsword. So, comparing a Duskblade to a fighter/wiz/EK or fighter/wiz/SS/EK is a more useful comparison IMO.

Taking that in mind, and admiting that I havent played one or seen one played in a game, I think a duskblade will be good at the low levels(1-6 or so), start to drop in power up to 13, then the arcane channeling will bump him back up to par, then he will start to fall behind again. In my opinion a lvl 20 duskblade is significantly weaker then even a basic EK gish. Both because of lack of access to higher level spells, and a lack of the really good buffs.

Let's not forget that the Duskblade gets Polar Ray and Disintegrate as part of their 5th level spells.

They have sufficiant spells feats to do the Job. They are comparable but not superior to other classes. I'm currently playing a 4th level Duskblade and plan to run it up to 20th in the shackled City campaign we are playing. It does seem powerful but when I have run out of spells, It's no better than a lighter armored fighter. Of course I'm using combat expertise to avoid being hit. Survivability is what I'm working on.

 

[Aaron L]

I'll repost my post from the thread with the same topic in the General forum:

I just recently had the opportunity to play a Dusklade as my new character. I came in at 9th level. He was [/i]definitely fun to play, a grey elven Duskblade in mithral fullplate with a mithral heavy shield (and using the feat Somatic Weaponry to cast spells while my hands were full,) but he was far from too powerful. The straight classed Fighter flat-out outclassed me in damage output. The spells helped make up for that somewhat, but I was in no way no more effective than he was.

But dang, he was fun to play.

(Incidentally, this was my first time to play D&D in over almost 2 years. Boy it's great to have a game again!)

 

[Votan]

Part of the problem I have found with a lot of discussions like this is that most people compare the duskblade to the fighter. Which is one of the weakest core classes in my opinion. So stating that a duskblade is more powerful then a fighter =! that it's overpowered. If you honestly feel that a duskblade is stronger then a cleric or druid then I can see your POV on overpowered a bit easier.

Yes. It is one of the annoying things in modern debates that people compare classes in terms of power to things with the same role. There are a million threads pointing out how easily a cleric can take over the fighter's role. If the Duskblade is better than the Cleric that is one thing but that 13th level ability that people are so wprried about has 2 implicaitons:

1) You took 13 levels in Duskblade without taking a prestige class or 3. Very few melee characters in modern D&D make it to 13th level with prestige classing. Heck, the cleric I talk about above could easily have slipped into something nasty like Contemplative by then . . .

2) The real limiting thing in D&D is actions. Sure, the Duskblade can kill a lot of things with this ability if they are weak and he has managed to acquire whirlwind attack somehow. Please compare to other focused builds and realize just how weak that really is. At 13th level the Cleric is casting Destruction and the Wizard has access to things like Finger of Death, Reverse Gravitry, Mass Hold Person (and, as second level back-ups, has Disintegrate, Chain Lightening and Flesh to Stone).

Under this view, the Duskblade is not even remotely overpowered compared to other high level options available to players.

 

[pallandrome]

Come 5th level he's just getting 2nd level spells. But he can quicken 1 spell/day for free. So at 5th level he can "blow his wad" and attack, cast ghoul touch and true strike and power attack (if he has the feat.) This single attack provides +15 to attack, +10 damage (if using a 2-handed weapon) and a Fort save or be paralized. (if you wish to claim that the spells can't be cast without 1 hand free (debated if you can release and grasp the weapon as a free action) then just true stike works pretty well).

Please note that the paralyzation effect of Ghoul Touch does not allow a fort save. The fort save only prevents other baddies around the humanoid from being nausiated by the 10ft radius secondary effect.

EDIT: Unless I'm wrong, but I do not think that I am.

 

[szilard]

Heck, it is a better caster, IMO, than the bard...

Bards have a much wider range of spells available to them.

-Stuart

 

[brehobit]

Please note that the paralyzation effect of Ghoul Touch does not allow a fort save. The fort save only prevents other baddies around the humanoid from being nausiated by the 10ft radius secondary effect.

EDIT: Unless I'm wrong, but I do not think that I am.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ghoulTouch.htm

I see how you get that. However, I'm 99% sure that because the spell reads "Saving Throw: Fortitude negates" it means that the main effect is negated by a fortitude save.

Mark

 

[brehobit]

Bards have a much wider range of spells available to them.

-Stuart

Yep. But a duskblade is a very powerful caster....

Mark

 

[pallandrome]

Most of the spells are balanced around either requiring a to-hit roll, or allowing a save. Given the limited use of the spell (humanoids only, touch attack required) I would be amazed if it ALSO allowed a save for the primary effect. Since the secondary effect requires no touch attack, it allows a save. As I said, I could be wrong, but I could not find a single touch attack spell that allows a save, nor a single spell that allows a save, which also requires a touch attack.

 

[Arkhandus]

The saving throw entry would say "Fortitude partial" or "Fortitude negates (see text)" if it meant that only the stench was negated by a save. Instead it says just "Fortitude negates" in the Saving Throw line, therefore the entire spell is negated if the target succeeds on a Fortitude save. If they fail that, then it takes effect on them, and nearby creatures are then allowed a Fortitude save to avoid nausea from the stench, as noted in the description.

There is no clause in the description stating that the stench occurs regardless of whether or not the target is stricken or makes their own saving throw, therefore the stench is negated too if the target makes the Fort save.

Note that Hold Person is 3rd-level for sorcerers and wizards, whereas Ghoul Touch is 2nd-level, yet Ghoul Touch has the greater effect normally; thus why it requires both a touch attack and a saving throw, and then allows other victims nearby a saving throw of their own against the secondary effect. And before 3.5, Hold Person was more likely than Ghoul Touch to succeed fully (since it only allowed one save then, and had pretty good range; of course 3.5 neutered Hold Person to be hardly worthwhile).

Now Ghoul Touch is clearly superior, but the fact that it has more than one way to fail is its balancing factor, just as Disintegrate allows a Fortitude save even though it also needs a ranged touch attack.

 

[Quolyte]

With chill touch, you are basically always going to have +1d6 damage and 1 point str damage (save for the str damage). At pretty much any point past 3rd level you only really need to cast it once per fight. And as casting it is often free (maybe losing the option to charge), it is pretty much free damage. So if you want a slow-and-steady class, you can have it. Throw in the quicked true strike (icky if you have power attack) and things get ugly once or twice a day in addition. And frankly, ghoul touch, vampiric touch, and even touch of fatigue are pretty nice.

Just want to point something out here. The above example is wrong because when you use arcane channelling the effect only lasts one round, so you wouldn't be able to attack with chill touch more than once.