PHB II: Duskblade too powerful?

[Soel]

Giving Duskblades Wraithstrike, while fitting, would give them a huge boost in power overall. Wraithstrike is borderline ridiculous for its level.

That's more of a problem with that spell, rather than the duskblade having it. I don't think it'd be crazy to raise wraithsrtike to a 4th level spell, btw, (for all casters.) That puts it at about the right levels for when a duskblade, or a fighter/mage could take it.

 

[Umbran]

Ignoring the snark battle waging in the background.... (Yet still commenting on its presence. )

Pointedly failing to comment is still a comment

There's a couple folks here who have clearly forgotten a good general guideline - address the content of the post, rather than make statements about the poster. Consider this a friendly reminder, and a strong suggestion that there not be any further escalation in that regard.

 

[wayne62682]

I have played a Duskblade.. one person in my group felt it was too powerful (Quickened True Strike + Power Attack w/2-handed weapon + Shocking Grasp), one felt it was powerful but not overwhelmingly so, and the DM thought it was great (the rest were indifferent).

I personally love the class but my group seems to think it's on the high end (I could routinely pull out 40+ damage in a single swing, albeit not very often); however as I typically say, my group does not like me using any non-Core books because they're typically more powerful (read: can do certain things better) than the equivalent Core class, and I'm essentially the only person in the group to own the additional books.

P.S. I voted balanced with the Core classes. It's essentially the equivalent to a Barbarian.. lots of damage output but little else.

Regards,
Wayne

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Having now played a Duskblade....

I went with the FLAVOR of the class, rather than the mechanics.

A Lightly Armored, High Dex, Finesse based fighter. (After all, it's described as being 'from the elves').

The Warblade could Monkey Stomp me in Combat (OK, Go Figure).

The Sorcerer could out-cast me (Again, makes sense).

The Goblin rogue was a more impressive combat presence than myself.

I could shine for a few combats (when I had spells), but otherwise I felt more like a Warrior (Fighter lacking feats) than a High Powered Class.

Looking back,

If I had chosen a more Hulking ME-SMASH!!! Type character, my character might have been a lot more powerful. Esp when you got to the Heavier Armor and Niftier Spells.

The class suffers from the same problem all X per Day types do, such as spell casters. They really shine in the first few combats, then quickly, very quickly fade into the background once all their special uses are gone.

I find a Cleric make a better base Fighter-Magic User than the Duskblade (at least from the Fighting once the spells are gone).

I have not played it enoguh to say for sure. But baring some min-maxer getting his hands on it, I'd say it was pretty well balanced.

One last thing.

Why the heck do they take all the time to tie this class into the Elven Bladsong and then make a class the is best served by looking nothing like a bladesinger? (I suppose humans might have 'perveted' it from its orginal source, but still making a lightly armored, Dex Based Fighter is NOT the way to go with this class.

Also. whoever came up with the name DUSK-BLADE should be forced to read the dicitionary (at least the 'D' Section). Where is the DUSK in the DUSKblade? I was envisioning all sort of Shadow-type spells and effects to enhance his combat effectivness, and I got a Fighter-Mage. I don't think they even have a single Shadow to choose from.

Get a Thesaurus out and look up Magic. I'm pretty sure Dusk ain't there.

 

[Garnfellow]

We saw our first use of a duskblade last night (an elf duskblade 9) and it seemed slightly underpowered in the big, big fight with drow cultists and fire giant thralls. Granted, the player was still trying to get a handle on the new class abilities, but his spell DCs as well as attack bonuses seemed like (slightly) weak sauce. I'd need more data points to make a call, though.

 

[wayne62682]

Why the heck do they take all the time to tie this class into the Elven Bladsong and then make a class the is best served by looking nothing like a bladesinger? (I suppose humans might have 'perveted' it from its orginal source, but still making a lightly armored, Dex Based Fighter is NOT the way to go with this class.

I agree. Funnily enough the Duskblade I played was in Faerun, and I was allowed to make up the class's background in FR.. I decided they were the "Sith" version of the Bladesingers, being more agressive than peaceful, more offensive than defensive, etc. It was pretty cool, but the class did get boring really fast and I replaced him with another, more interesting character.

Also. whoever came up with the name DUSK-BLADE should be forced to read the dicitionary (at least the 'D' Section). Where is the DUSK in the DUSKblade? I was envisioning all sort of Shadow-type spells and effects to enhance his combat effectivness, and I got a Fighter-Mage. I don't think they even have a single Shadow to choose from.

I agree with this, too. I thought they gave a (rather weak...) explanation for it, the "Dusk" part being that swordplay and magic are supposedly "like night and day". If you ask me, I think it was because "Mageblade" was already taken and "Spellsword" is a PrC so "Spellblade" would sound too similar.

 

[satori01]

I find a Cleric make a better base Fighter-Magic User than the Duskblade (at least from the Fighting once the spells are gone).

I'm not sure how you can say a cleric w/o spells is a better combatant than a Duskblade w/o spells. A Duskblade has a better BAB, and a better assortment of weapons to chose from. A cleric will have heavier armor, at lower to possibly mid levels, but at the end game a Duskblade is going to have the same unbuffed AC. Now talking about self buffing, I agree a cleric with rounds to prepare is the badest mofo on the planet, increasing AC, (really increasing AC), and upping his or her own damage output. Again it takes a lot of rounds for a cleric to do this. Duskblade seems well designed to go in and do 'its thing' with minimal to no preparation.

I'm impressed with the Duskblade design as it does not step on the toes of the Psychic Warrior, the Psy Warrior being more cleric like in its power use stratedgy, and the Dusblade being less a buff machine, (at least from what I have seen).

 

[Nalfeshnee]

I did not vote in the poll becasue of the lack of an option between way too powerful and on par.

I've been waiting for a core class like this for a long time (i tend to play fighter/wizards), and now that ive seen it i actually think its too good. I think the combination of fighter BAB and many low-level abilities and a very good spell list make it a tad over-powered, though it is a one-trick pony, likely to cast the same spells over and over (greatsword, power attack, blade of blood, shocking grasp + attack = lots of damage. ad nauseum until he runs out of spells)...

 

[Victim]

On the whole, the Duskblade seems okay. However, their power scaling is kind of wonky. Consider a Duskblade using his best damaging channeled spell plus Blade of Blood for +3d6.

1: +4d6
5: +8d6
10: +8d6
15: +10d6
20: +13d6

Blade of Blood+Shocking Grasp offers huge damage potential to low level Duskblades that's rather out of line both compared to their later capabilities and the striking power of other characters. Of course, that's before their increased numbers of spells per day kick in, so they don't have very many shots.

 

[wildstarsreach]

*sigh* Alright, the LONG version, since you're not understanding me at all.

This thread is a discussion of how balanced the Duskblade is. You offered the anecdote of seeing two different fights where the Duskblade involved dominated. To me, this seems like a useless observation. A full BAB armored caster can be expected to dominate a single fight, their weakness is fewer spells than a full caster and less AC and HP than a full warrior. The balance, if it exists, is over a multiple encounter day. It's like coming to a discussion about Warlock balance and offering, "Well the DM started us naked in the wilderness without weapons or spellbooks, and the Warlock dominated every fight."

I tried to point out that your observation didn't have much weight to it due to the circumstance, in what I thought was a fairly polite way. You came back with a fist full of snark. I will admit, I got a bit offended by that, and threw snark back. Now you're acting hurt. And here we are.

But how can you totally dismiss anecdotal evidence. It is these types of observations that start someone to question if something is wrong. Don't be so dismissive. Refute his argument with evidence please. I disagree that this class will be overpowered. But it is a respectable solid class.