Spell sword

[Bryantiza]

I've been looking around, doing research and such.
But I can't work out if it would end up making your character stronger or weaker.
For example;
Zeos is currently a lvl 8 wizard, and will remain wizard till lvl 15, then take 5 lvls in fighter.
But if i were to make him a fighter at lvl 10 till lvl 15, then become a spell sword through a CDQ of course till lvl 20, would he end up stronger, or weaker than if he didn't do the spell sword levels. (If my assumptions are correct, the feat 'still spell' would allow me to cast with armor on wouldn't it?)
What do you think?

[Bryantiza]

Also, a fighter up till lvl 10 could work also, but then i would only have up to lvl 2 or 3 spells i believe? which direction would be best to go if i want to go spell sword way?

(It would be nice if a high lvl spell sword could give me tips.....if there are any, i've never seen a single spell sword on the server status, unless i'm not looking hard enough)

[Talan Va'lash]

I'm not a big fan of the spellsword class as it stands.

Although its really cool, I don't think it holds up to a fighter/wizard with still spell.

-TV

[Bryantiza]

So a spell sword is pretty much useless then?
Apon looking at a spell swords abilities...they are actually pretty pathetic..
I see what you mean. If a Spell sword had something that was half useful...
Everything the Spell sword can do can be done using a wizard/fighter using the still 'spell ability' and using enchantments.
What on earth is the point of a spell sword then?
*shrugs*

[Tedulas]

*shakes head* I think Fighter/Wizard is better, Swordspell doesn't offer much in my view.

[regnus]

The still spell feat spells take a slot higher than normal. Where as the Spellsword casts spells with armor penalties negated at the same level slot. I think that is pretty nice. Once the spellsword gets to a certain level I think it is chain mail they can wear with no penalties. That is pretty nice as well.

I like the imbue abilities too. If you put a fire enchantment on your weapon and you run into a creature with fire resistance then your enchantment is useless. As a spellsword all you would have to do is imbue your weapon with cold or something other than fire. At level 10 they get wounding, vampiric, or vorpal. The nice thing about all of this is that the effects stack with any enchantments already applied to the weapon.

The only thing I see as a drawback to the spellsword is that their Imbue ability is only once a day. It would be nice if it was like 3 times a day or something like that.

[Bryantiza]

but the problems far out weight the good things.
-You'll earn less exp due to having to have an extra class
-It still only gives you a 30% less chance of failure (if i remember correctly)
-Unless they come up in big numbers later on, i have yet to see an enemy resistant to fire/ice

Other than what Regnus has said as its good points..which still seem pretty lame, is there ANYTHING that a Spell sword has? Or is it just a worthless prestige class? (no offence to the person who came up with the idea of this class)

[Dorganath]

Bryantiza - 10/9/2005 10:08 AM but the problems far out weight the good things. -You'll earn less exp due to having to have an extra class -It still only gives you a 30% less chance of failure (if i remember correctly) -Unless they come up in big numbers later on, i have yet to see an enemy resistant to fire/ice Other than what Regnus has said as its good points..which still seem pretty lame, is there ANYTHING that a Spell sword has? Or is it just a worthless prestige class? (no offence to the person who came up with the idea of this class)

A few comments...
1) I'm not sure about the fewer XP thing for having a PrC. 2) "Only" 30% less? Even 10% chance of spell failure can be a killer in combat. As a Sorcerer/Fighter character who's had that happen to him, my character no longer wears any armor besides Mage's Armor. And still spell raises the spell slot level by one, so magic missile becomes a 2nd level spell, and whatever your top spell level is is subject to the full failure %. Spellsword PrC reduces spell failure % without raising the spell's slot level. 3) Yes, there are creatures resistant to elemental damage. While goblins and Kobalds might combust quite rapidly, there are plenty of others that do not...including some on Mistone. I'd also add that there are also creatures that are more succeptible to types of elemental damage, such as Treants and their succeptibility to fire, I believe.
In general, the Spell Sword PrC is not about power...it's about RP. Anytime you multiclass, you end up with a more versatile character, but also a less powerful character overall, especially compared to aÂsingle-classed character of equivalent level. And yes, the usefulness of the Spell Sword class has been debated on and off, and on grounds of power alone, it's fairly weak. On grounds of RP, it's not. Those looking for power in the class dislike it. Those looking for depth of character and RP opportunities enjoy it.Â
It's far from "worthless," but then I suppose that depends on your definition of "worth".

[Talan Va'lash]

@regnus - you get more uses at higher levels. Also I think this ability stacks with regular enchantments (though the only thing I'm basing this on is that fact that if it doesn't its... really really useless.) The reason the ability is so weak (assuming my previous assumption is correct, if its not thats the main reason its weak) is that its duration is 1rnd/level of spellsword.

That means, at level 20 (assuming 5ftr/5wizard/10spellsword) The spellsword can add 1d8 elemental damage to their weapon for 1 turn (1min RL) twice per day, They'll be able to cast up to 5th level spells, with the duration and damage of a 5th level caster (fireballs do 5d6), their BAB will be 12 (lower than a rogue of the same level) and they'll be able to fight in chainmail with no spell failure. However, they do get a nifty thing called Imbue III, which lets you put wounding, vorpal, or vampiric on your weapon for 1rnd/level, so 1 min in this build.

A 10/10 Wiz(or sorc)/Fighter with still spell will have 15 BAB (same as a rogue of the same level) be able to cast up to 5th level spells with the duration and damage of a 10th level caster (fireballs do 10d6), however, they have to use still spell, so they can only really cast 4th level spells. However they can be wearing full plate and a tower shield

Assuming full HP for all HD the spellsword will have 10 more hp than the wiz/ftr

In conclusion, the 5wiz/5ftr/10spellsword isn't as incredibly weak compared to the 10wiz/10ftr as I was previously thinking. However, if my assumption is incorrect and the imbue dmg does not stack with weapon enchantments, this conclusion is invalid and they are a lot weaker.

Assuming my assumption is true... which I've already done, the 5wiz/5ftr/10spellsword is still a bit weaker probably, but the cool factor probably makes up for it. My measurement of this so called "cool factor" is based on the fact that I'm now pondering playing a character like this at some point. Still, I don't think it would hurt if the imbues were bumped up to 2rnds/level (would still only be able to have Imbue II going for 4 min at level 20 which is only 2/5 of the rest timer, and often on quests you a lot longer between rests than 10 minutes.) or the spellsword bab progression be changed to the rogue progression instead of the wizard progression. This will result in a BAB of 14 with the 5/5/10 build as opposed to 12. Still one lower than the 10/10 build, and it would still require putting off spellsword levels fairly far into epic and replacing them with more fighter levels to end up with 4 attacks per round (BAB 16).

-WildTangent

Edit:

@ Dorgies post while I was typing -

1) PrC's are not counted for the 20% xp penalty for having your levels too far apart.

2) Yeah, basically if you're always casting in lots of heavy armor and using stillspell, you can only cast spells one level lower than you know.

3) TOOOONNNS of stuff has resistance/partial or full immunity to fire. More stuff has resistance to fire than any other form of elemental damage. Blame darkfire and flame weapon for this one. But lots of other stuff has partial immunities to different stuff too. Trying to think of something thats not soooo far away as to almost be irrelevant to an 8th level character.... oh, fire elementals are completely (I think completely) immune to fire, makes sense hey? hehe. I know some certain really nasty monsters that have vulnerabilities to negative or positive energy (would acctually be really cool if these were options.. but since basically nothing is immune to them they're probably not options because then you'd pick it every time unless you ran into the rare creature thats immune to them. oh yeah, and these arent resisted by prot. from elements, so they're probably not options.)

pretty sure air elementals are fully/partially immune to lightning. Anything thats a tiefling has fire/lightning/cold resist, aasimar have fire/cold/acid resist. Genasai most likely are partially immune to their native element, Demons and devils have all kinds of weird elemental resistances.

er, I seem to have strayed from thinking of stuff thats not 20+ CR... well there are demons that are lower than that and have resistances

Willowisps are immune to lightning.

I think trolls arent, but probably should be vulnerable to fire and acid (played on a server that had a cool troll script, when they're hit to 1hp they fall over (like knockdown) and become immune to all damage other than fire and acid, they regen the whole time they're down, and when they get back up to 20hp or something they get back up and come back at you. But elemental damage on weapons was uber rare on that server, so you had to take a wizard down with the express role of finishing them off, meming like, entirely burning hands and acid arrows heh. But... I'm seriously digressing again bah.)

Gah, I'm really having trouble thinking of things on mistone that are immune to various types of elemental damage... oh well.

-WildTangent

[Bryantiza]

Do you not get 25% less exp for using a prestige class then?

[Olme]

Prc classes do not count as an extra class for purposes of assessing XP penalties.

[steverimmer]

I remember talking to Ghost about this when the spellsword PrC first came out, because I tried to build a Bard/Spellsword and I found out that the Imbue only lasted one round per level of the spellsword class. It was a nightmare as I wasÂrunning into battle for the first 5 levels and finding it'd run out before I actually hit anything. Anyway I'm sure Ghost said he meant it to be 1 round per character level but to be honest I can't remember it was so long ago.Â


This would in my opinion make the class worthwhileÂand wouldn't really over power it. I mean a level 20 character would have imbue for 2RL minutes then, which is enough for a hard battle and he'd still have to wait another eight minutes before it could be cast again.Â

[Bryantiza]

-In general, the Spell Sword PrC is not about power...it's about RP. Anytime you multiclass, you end up with a more versatile character, but also a less powerful character overall, especially compared to a single-classed character of equivalent level. And yes, the usefulness of the Spell Sword class has been debated on and off, and on grounds of power alone, it's fairly weak. On grounds of RP, it's not. Those looking for power in the class dislike it. Those looking for depth of character and RP opportunities enjoy it.
It's far from "worthless," but then I suppose that depends on your definition of "worth"-.
[/quote] I've done pure Rping characters for example Zalaelen, 90% RP since his too old to do anything else. I love Rping, but a character based solely on Rping, can't keep a man hooked forever. Kerberan is more of a 25% Rping, and Zeos is about 60% Rping, but some of the best Rping happens while out fighting, and as i found out with Zalaelen, pure Rping does not last forever, you feel left out when everyone else goes out on a journey but your old man doesn't get invited because his too old. i'm sure there are better ways of RPing and Rping a Spell sword is probably good fun but not everyone likes to be a pure RPer. Although...even though i have spent most of today complaining about Spell swords, i'm curious, but im not one of those people who are looking for a pure rping character as this is my main character, and although a spell sword sounds interesting as a sub-character(part time) I don't feel it has any full time uses as a bit of variety is nice.

[regnus]

@Talan

[Dorganath]

Bryantiza - 10/9/2005 11:20 AM I've done pure Rping characters for example Zalaelen, 90% RP since his too old to do anything else. I love Rping, but a character based solely on Rping, can't keep a man hooked forever. Kerberan is more of a 25% Rping, and Zeos is about 60% Rping, but some of the best Rping happens while out fighting, and as i found out with Zalaelen, pure Rping does not last forever, you feel left out when everyone else goes out on a journey but your old man doesn't get invited because his too old. i'm sure there are better ways of RPing and Rping a Spell sword is probably good fun but not everyone likes to be a pure RPer. Although...even though i have spent most of today complaining about Spell swords, i'm curious, but im not one of those people who are looking for a pure rping character as this is my main character, and although a spell sword sounds interesting as a sub-character(part time) I don't feel it has any full time uses as a bit of variety is nice.

It might help to not think in such absolutes. I'm not talking about a Spell Sword as a "pure RP" character. I'm saying the Spell Sword has RP value that enriches the character.Â
It boils down to this. If you're looking for a powerful fighting spellcaster, Spell Sword is probably not the proper avenue as it stands. If your character's progression doesn't fit with becoming a Spell Sword, then it's probably not the right choice. However, if you're looking for a character with some flare and who can do things that your typical fighter and arcane caster cannot do, then it might be a good fit.
And on being left out of adventures...my own Sorcerer/Fighter character is at best a back-line support character. His combined levels draw spawns in some places that are too much for his split classes to handle solo. He's 11th level Sorcerer, 5th level fighter. He wears Mage Armor, which gives a paltry +2ÂAC. He carries a crossbow, a staff and a bastard sword. If he's alone, he uses the melee weapons and hopes he can handle what comes (or goes invisible), if in a group, he carries the crossbow and tries to stay out of the way. In any case, he goes on plenty of adventures that would otherwise be vastly impossible for him. Yet he goes anyway and contributes as he can. If I wanted to go for pure power, I would have stuck with one class.Â
My personal advise would be to not worry too much about whether one build or the other would give you a more powerful character by level 20 and instead consider what feels right for your character.
That, of course, is my opinion. YMMV.

[Bryantiza]

but i wont know what the right feel is for my character till i become a spell sword. It wasn't until i got to lvl 5 as a pure fighter and lvl 5 as a pure wizard that i realized i liked both too much to choose, so i came up with Zeos. and not only is he good in battle, but his cool to Rp too, although he'll never see fighter days seeing as i'm killing him off. Even with using a crossbow, it doesn't make sense for a spell sword, who should be a really powerful fighter to have to resort to fighting in the back lines.
( i've played alot of games where spell swords are just as powerful as the other classes but only because of there magic giving them the power they need to make them as strong as a pure.) It doesn't make them more powerful, but makes them more enjoyable for those who like magic and hand-to-hand, but then a Druid is kind of like a spell sword. They have magic, and can cast through armor up to medium lvl without any restrictions, i just don't like druids spells, but ...*gets lost in thought for a second* nah don't worry, i was just thinking that it may be possible to go Druid/spell sword but i noticed that Druids spells are devine not arcane, plus i'm not keen on druid spells anyways.
...now where was i... ah yes, so i think i'll just go for the fighter/wizard way..and get still spell. Although i am really interested in becoming a spell sword, i don't think it has what i need...........hmm i need to think more about this. actually the only thing thats putting me off is the having three classes and the fact the imbuements don't last long enough.....

[Falreign]

You guys type a lot so I'll keep mine short. I feel the spellsword offers little to RP with though you might feel cool making things shiny the way others can with darkfire although it would last incredibly less longer. Which brings me to the second conclusion of how their abilities are currently exremely underpowered. Yep thats just my opinion though.

[Asmodean]

I guess I should chime in now... I have always loved fighter/wizard classes. Spells run out and when they do, I am not entirely defenseless. That is my reasoning anyway.. With that, I chose to develop Iradril to become a spellsword. Yes, still spell is nice, but you have to select the spell you want to have "stilled" and use a level higher slot. Battle is very fluid and is not prone having a spell ready for any instance. What seems to be a major thing that everyone hasn't really looked at is the choice of another FEAT!! I DO NOT HAVE TO BUY STILL SPELL as a feat. This can allow me to take improved crit for my bastard sword, or something like toughness for more HP. I get the failure reduction all the time and on all my spells, regardless to whether or not I'm in battle. Their BAB progresses like a cleric, so a 20th level SS (5 fighter, 5 wizard, 10 SS) has a 14 BAB. Their spells, if following similarly to Undead Slayers, should turn out to be spells of a 10th level wizard... so the above example of SS should have 5th level spells, although they will be at 5th level casting. (Still 5D6 Fireballs and such) This allows access to Stoneskin and other very nice battle magics. I feel this allows a very nice and more thorough blend for a fighter/wizard.

If I think of something more to say, I'll post it...

If anyone has viewed this in the last 5 minutes, I did make a few corrections.... sorry...

[GhostWhoWalks]

The Spellsword is designed to be a medium armor wearer that can enchance his/her own weapon to cut down on overhead from needing to buy magical gear. I'm quite pleased over all with how it turned out. It's also the only class in the world that has the ability to create and use a vorpal weapon, even if for short periods of time.

It's not as much of a tank as a still spell fighter/mage. It's not designed to be. It's designed for a light armored or medium armored blend. It's a nice supplement to the Fighter/Bard as well as a trasmuter type mage that focuses on spells that enchance melee skills through buffs.

It's meant to be a little less fragile than a normal mage and more capable in melee than a normal mage.

A 5/5/10 ends up basically casting spells as a 10th level mage, and ends up