Arcane Strike opinion

[RobbyPants]

In your opinion, would it hurt anything if Arcane Strike was available at 1st level (perhaps change the prereq to "able to cast 1st level arcane spells")?

Because it scales with level, I honestly don't have a problem with it. I was just looking at the BAB +4 and 3rd level spells prereq and it seemed unnecessarily steep.

[midnight_v]

Hmm... isn't it written like that to keep it "gishy" or whatever?

[InnaBinder]

It wouldn't HURT anything in a higher CO/Tome friendly game to be sure, but I think that I'd prefer it as +1 BAB as a prereq, for purely thematic reasons.

[RobbyPants]

Hmm... isn't it written like that to keep it "gishy" or whatever?

Well, the way I presented it, it is still gishy. It's augmented by your ability to hit things.

That being said, the way it's written, you can't qualify until 7th or 8th level, and you don't get a feat until 9th level. I don't like making people wait that long to be able to do things. Especially if they scale pretty naturally on their own.

It wouldn't HURT anything in a higher CO/Tome friendly game to be sure, but I think that I'd prefer it as +1 BAB as a prereq, for purely thematic reasons.

You could. It's just you'd have to wait until 3rd level to use it, then.

[Jackinthegreen]

It wouldn't HURT anything in a higher CO/Tome friendly game to be sure, but I think that I'd prefer it as +1 BAB as a prereq, for purely thematic reasons.

You could. It's just you'd have to wait until 3rd level to use it, then.

It would need to be modified further because the bonus can't be higher than the character's BAB and only certain caster classes get 1 BAB at 1st level anyway.  On the purely fluff side of things a BAB 1, spell level 1 requirement fits enough for the gish feel.  In terms of actual gameplay, having it at level 1 won't screw things up at all since +1 attack and +1d4 damage is fairly pitiful.  Duskblades would still qualify at level 1 with BAB 1 and 1st level spells of course, which is the main class that uses the feat anyway.

[veekie]

I'd personally leave the BAB requirement as it is, but drop the spellcasting requirement to 1st level.

[Amechra]

I can't remember; which is Arcane Strike limited by, HD or BAB?

Because it has great synergy with Power Attack, if you don't want to go a charger route...

(Highly inefficient, I know, but adding xd4+2x damage, where X is your BAB, to all your attacks in round is pretty darn tempting.)

[SorO_Lost]

BAB, but who cares. 9th level spells is much harder to obtain than +9 BAB, like you have to deoptimize in an attempt to find a way to have higher level spells than BAB after the first level.

Problem with Arcane Strike is the low return rate. IE 4th level spell gives +4d4 (+10) damage for one round vs say 3rd level spell gives +10 moral to damage (ferocity of sanguine rage) for several rounds. It's a bad example but it does point out there are spells that do this feat's job. Specially when we're talking 9th level or so when you can finally take this Feat.

[Amechra]

If I remember correctly, there is a way to get an Infinite number of 1st level spell slots as a Red Wizard; you can definitely spend those...

[RobbyPants]

I think the feat works better for TWFing, but is it that crappy otherwise?

[InnaBinder]

I think the feat works better for TWFing, but is it that crappy otherwise?

It's less "crappy" than "niche", IMO.  On a Duskblade, a Battle Sorcerer, or some other gish concepts, it's a pretty useful choice for when the enemy has closed to melee or when you're built to engage that way.  It provides potentially less return on investment than some spell options, but better return on investment than a host of other feats designed for combat.  The issue that it has to compete with spells, which we know is an unfair fight in 3.5.

[SorO_Lost]

You know, if you're looking into house ruling this feat into usefulness, the obvious first step is to address that conflict.

For one thing, I do agree the requirements are pretty high, I'd drop the requirements so a level 1 can meet them. Honestly, at level 1 your average THF deals 2d6+6 for one hit kills anyway so why nix +1d4 on top of probably 1d6+2 until level 3 or 6, or even 9 which is the as-is? Then lower the cost of use. Like maybe during morning prep you can set aside one spell slot to use this ability once per encounter. It's still limited and pretty underpowered in the late game, but for low levels it's a nice quick and easy damage boost that thermionically feels gishy and a little Paladin like. Even as a side effect, you would be better set up to handle the ultimate gishy gish, the Arcane Swordsage, as they can normally recast as many spells as they want. It makes the really the only class that could make this feat useful but the change would knock a spell/maneuver out of their daily list. Which is something else to consider as well. Food for thought though.
 

[Halinn]

The mechanics of how to power it could be similar to Pathfinder's Arcane Strike. (but with less bad numbers)

[SorO_Lost]

That's another way.

But simple +1~+5s are boring. I'd keep the 1d4 trait and find a way to make it work.
Cool effects are cool effects, never underestimate the player's desire to roll dice.

[RobbyPants]

What if, in addition to the normal stuff it grants it also had the ability for you to make an extra melee attack as a swift action in a round that you cast an arcane spell?

[Jackinthegreen]

What if, in addition to the normal stuff it grants it also had the ability for you to make an extra melee attack as a swift action in a round that you cast an arcane spell?

Then it means a lot of meleers will be going after it just to get that extra attack, which most likely means a Duskblade level.  It not stacking with haste or other extra attack options would essentially make it worthless, yet having it stack would pretty much make it necessary.

[RobbyPants]

You have to cast a spell to trigger the effect. You can't full attack and then make an extra attack, so, there'd be no stacking with Haste.

I suppose you could cast True Strike and then quick smack someone with it for +20 to hit...

[Jackinthegreen]

Looking at it again, that seems to really screw up the actions.  I can't tell if it's in a good or bad way yet, but I'll type out my thoughts and see where they go.

The routine for it would probably be cast spell, move into melee range, then make the swift attack.  Once in melee range casting spells can become difficult.  Using a quickened spell to avoid the AoO means using up the swift action, and then full attacking anyway but not getting an extra attack because the swift action has already been used barring gaining extra actions in the first place.

That addition feels rather clunky and inelegant to me.  Its effective uses seem rather limited if it requires actually casting a spell.

[linklord231]

On the other hand, Arcane Swordsages just got a lot better.  For them, it's almost like giving away Martial Study (Dancing Mongoose) for free at level 1 and with other stuff on top. 
Unless you don't count their spell-maneuvers as actual spells.  Or just don't allow them at all, since they're an adaptation (and a rather vague one at that).

[RobbyPants]

Yeah, I wouldn't worry about arcane swordsages at all. Even without this, they're an optional variant already regarded as seriously unbalanced.