Talk:Mystic Blade (3.5e Class)

Ratings

	Zhenra-Khal favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	Arcane Paladin AND it doesn't suck? Gish is my favorite flavor and boy do you make it tasty with this class. Adding this to my list for sure.

Blocked Rating	Somehownotsingle favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	They didn't actually write a reason for their rating here. They could add it by adding |reason=<stuff> to their rating (per the directions), and should do so soon or the rating will be removed.

	Ghostwheel likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	A class similar to the duskblade, but unique in its ability to use its spells. I'm proud to say that I was able to offer a few suggestions on this--a very balanced class that works very well, filling the sword & sorcery niche in yet another way. Favored. --Ghostwheel 11:13, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Balance Point

Is this seriously a Rogue BP? It doesn't look all that impressive after the first couple of levels (where it gets color spray so it's okay). Surgo 13:08, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I'm really not very well-versed with the balance points (it's just my best guess). Someone on the old Wiki actually said it was overpowered, but I can't help but be skeptical given Ghostwheel's support and now this. Would fighter be more appropriate? - TG Cid 14:34, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

After having reviewed the Balance Points, I'm somewhat in a bind as to what BP this would fall into. It seems to me as competitive as an SRD Bard, which falls under the rogue BP, and probably stronger than the Barbarian (fighter BP). I thought the Enhance Weapon ability was what set it apart, perhaps even making it abuse-worthy. - TG Cid 14:46, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this guy is as good as a Bard who is actually using his one level-appropriate ability (Charm). Strikes me as a Fighter balance. Surgo 15:05, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll change it. - TG Cid 15:11, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I disagree for a couple of reasons; first, bards can easily be pretty damn high on the balance list, being at around the same level as sorcerers (or wizards if you give weight to 22d6 extra damage on all melee attacks allies make). Next, compare it more to the duskblade, a class that's firmly at rogue level, rather than the bard. And the Mystic Blade has a number of incredible spells--for example, he has Haste which could let him become a swiftblade, a class that could fit it very well. Alongside it are Displacement, Fly, Greater Invis, Stoneskin, and a number of other incredibly buffs that can be used spontaneously depending on the situation you're in. These spells are INCREDIBLE, and shouldn't be underestimated. Finally, it gets a few bonus feats, which are a boon to any meleer--and they don't even need to be fighter bonus feats. All in all, definitely a rogue-level class. --Ghostwheel 18:39, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me for my sincere lack of knowledge on the bard (I never really saw the appeal of it personally). Anyway, given both arguments here I guess I'll leave it as is until we come to an agreement (although I'm not much of a factor here , given that the amount of knowledge both of you possess concerning BP's far exceed my own). - TG Cid 22:13, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I know I was perhaps the most concerned with the power of the Mystic Blade on the other wiki (at least judging by the talk page). Looking at level 7, a Mystic Blade can cast Quicken Spell(Haste). This is also possible for a 13th level Wizard to do, but they have to burn a 7th level spell to do it. Combine that with "Enhance Weapon +1 (choose "Bane" for the monster you are fighting)", which as far as I can tell stacks on already magical weapons (is that right?), and he is a serious threat. Say he were to "Touch of steel" Scorching Ray(Ranged Touch counts as touch, right?) through his weapon (using his 6th level ability and his first 2nd level spell of the day) to add another 8d6 damage to his now magical attack. Since he is hasted, what is to stop him from doing that again? Suddenly he is making 2 attacks, both of which are [weapon damage]+8d6(ToS:SR)+2d6(EW:Bane). Oh wait, he has the good BAB, so he's making multiple attacks per round. Here are his actions for the round:

• Free action: Quicken spell (Haste)
• Std Action: Attack with a Bane, Scorching-Ray-Touch-of-Steel attack
• Haste Std Action: Attack with a Bane, Scorching-Ray-Touch-of-Steel attack again
• Move, or keep attacking with your other attacks.

Granted, that round used up a ton of his resources (his only level 3 spell, 2/3 of his level 2 spells). Naturally, this entire "optimization" goes out the window if Ranged Touch spells don't count as Touch spells, but the article doesn't make any mention of that, so I would have allowed it. Now I'm not saying he's as strong as a wizard, this guy is toast against a wizard, but he's at least as balanced as a rogue. Or have I made some incredible mistake in either reading his abilities or understanding the basic mechanics of DnD(This is very possible)?--The Badger 21:22, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't think you're mistaken. I had meant to change it after I made the changes described below, but I never got around to it. It's done now. - TG Cid 21:45, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

I usually stay out of mechanics discussions because I end up looking like crazy grandpa is off his rocker again. So, to start here, I'll link haste. Badger, you're probably thinking of 3.0e haste, which granted extra actions. 3.5e doesn't, instead opting for "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding." As for scorching ray and Touch of Steel (which states "This attack is rolled as a normal attack roll, not as a melee touch attack."), it feels like the author's intent is to exclude ranged touch attacks. Anyways, that's all I got, carry on. --Ganteka Future 21:48, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Upon reading that, I'll agree with Ganteka, but I see how that part is confusing. I'll get it fixed, but the BP needed to be changed anyway. - TG Cid 21:51, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Mmk, so I had the wrong semantics for my theoretical attack round, but the actions still stand, right? I should have changed "Haste Std Action" to "Hastened Action", but he's still making that extra attack. As for ranged/melee touches, I always understood it as ranged was "melee+optional distance", seeing it pretty much as "You can do this attack from 30 feet away if you want to" and as a tactical decision to avoid melee combat. I could understand an argument saying you can't do melee touch attacks ranged (that is obvious, unless you have spectral hand working), but I wouldn't understand the argument saying "you can't cast ranged touch attacks while touching the target"--The Badger 21:57, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, since haste only gives you an extra attack if you make a full-attack action, you could make up to your maximum number of attacks plus one but not have the option to move afterwards.

One more thing that I realized I missed the first time is that when it said that the enhancement bonus stacks I just meant if you have a +2 weapon already you can make it the equivalent a +2 flaming or a +3, not a +1 bane. The intent was that you can change your Enhance Weapon bonus on the fly, but not any other enhancements (those are fixed). So by that logic, you would have to wait until level 10 before you can add bane to everything.

As for ranged touch attacks being used in melee, I don't think the rules have anything against it, but it seems aesthetically wrong to me. Anything that's a ray, for example, seems to me like it should move across space (even if the space is less than five feet) and not be able to be transmitted via direct contact. Most ranged touch attacks operate under a similar premise, so I think I like restricting it to melee. But the great thing about homebrew is that it can be edited in campaign use, so anyone who wants to include ranged touch attacks will hear no argument from me. - TG Cid 22:21, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the Enhance weapon was one of my biggest areas of confusion. I assume all the standard rules for making magical weapons still apply, right? In order to get a special quality on a weapon normally, the weapon must have an enchantment of +1. Does this requirement still exist for "Enhance Weapon"? My original theoretical weapon was a +1 longsword (inherently), which could become a +2, or a +1 Bane, correct? If my weapon was non-magical, is my only option at "Enhance Weapon +1" to make it a +1 weapon, or do I have access to the "Special Qualities" (like Bane)? Since the weapon loses enhancements when it leaves the Mystic Blade's hands, does that rule out "Dancing" as a special quality that can be taken? Logically, all of these are ultimately up to the DM. However, I have a Mystic Blade in the party I DM, I'd like to keep him in the spirit in which the Mystic Blade was written. I do understand where you're coming from with the Melee touch vs. Ranged touch attack, by the way, it's just not how I would (or did) implement it.--The Badger 22:46, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

The way I see it, Enhance Weapon can make any mundane weapon magical so long as he's holding it any weapon thy mystic blade holds can have at least a +1 enhancement. I actually was not aware that a regular enhancement bonus was required, so I think yes, your only option should be to make it magical since you could be bypassing the requirement that an item be masterwork in order to be magical. I sort of made the class under the assumption that there would already be a magic weapon in most characters' hands by level 3 (since shadows are CR 3 and a magic weapon is necessary to fight them effectively). I suppose it also rules out dancing as an option, but I get the impression that with full BAB the weapon would usually be much more useful, so that restriction is minimal as far as I'm concerned. BTW, bane requires a +2 enhancement, so it can't be added to your weapon until level 10 regardless of any previous enhancements it may have. - TG Cid 23:20, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Add-Ons

In the interest of giving the class a little more bite:

Warrior Magus (Ex): By second level, the mystic blade has finely honed his casting abilities to the point where he can cast normally while fully armed. He may now cast spells with somatic components even with both hands occupied.

Selective Prowess (Sp): The mystic blade compensates for his inability to cast higher-level spells by increasing the effectiveness of those spells he can cast. At 9th level, the mystic blade doubles the level modifier for the DC's of all spells he can cast (so a level 2 spell would have a +4 modifier, etc.).

Selective Mastery (Sp): While the mystic blade only has a few destructive spells in his repertoire, he has learned to use them with terrifying efficiency, adding extra magic into damage dealing spells. All of his spells that deal a certain amount of damage dice based on level now deal 1 additional damage per die so long as he at least 12 Intelligence. As he gains levels, he deals one additional damage per die so long as his Intelligence modfifier is higher than or equal to the amount of damage per die. At level 16, he deals 2 extra damage per die so long as he has 14 Intelligence, and so on. Bonus damage dealt by such a spell is not subject to Metamagic feats. This ability has no effect on spells that do not deal a certain amount of damage.

For example, a 16th level mystic blade with 14 Intelligence casts lightning bolt, which would normally deal 10d6 damage. He will deal an additional 20 damage with his lightning bolt spell.

Spellcasting Progression

Can I suggest making it so it get 5 or 6th level spells? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idkwhatmynameis (talk • contribs) at

I've been thinking about this too. I did the casting progression for this a long time ago and looking at it now it seems rather underwheming even with all of the other perks added on. Whether it be adding 5th and 6th level spells into the mix or perhaps just increasing the spells per day and offering access to the lower level spells earlier (or perhaps both), I think it could use a little fix with the spellcasting. Thoughts? - TG Cid 18:24, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

This really has nothing to do with the casting progression (though maybe bump it up to level 6 or give it something like warmages ability to learn spells that aren't on his list)but maybe you could try spontaneous casting?--Stryker 09:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Inspiration

This has inspired me, to a certain degree, to make my own spellcasting warrior type class, though mine will have a focus on necromancy. I may be copying some of the abilities shown here, mainly the Channeling spells through attacks (that's not really original but still), Warrior Magus and possibly Selective Prowess, if this doesn't sit right with you lemme know and i'll change stuff around.--Stryker 10:08, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. If you incorporate the Fell Animate feat from Libris Mortis, you can probably use it in conjunction with Channel Spell to kill a foe with the attack and then have it animate as a zombie or skeleton (not a terribly impressive ability, but still). The only concern I would present beforehand is the limitations of a 4-level spell list when it comes to necromancy, but I'll withhold any judgment until I see what it would actually look like. - TG Cid 14:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)