Could you tell us how the magus was built?
I mean one can see how it can be monk-like, but more data is useful.
Blunt and accurate, it seems, which is good. No sugar in play-testing.
I'm sure many things will change, so as a blind fan of Swords & Spells mixes, I'm going to remain cautiously optimistic for changes that will doubtlessly come in time.
The real question though, A Man in Black, is what might you suggest to fix and improve?
Something other than "scrap it" or "make it a full caster/melee" and the like, that is.
I'm sure through class features and Magus Arcana, there's bound to be a redemption though development. I for one would like to see the ability, when BAB allows for more than one attack, to simply forfeit an attack to cast a spell once per round during a full attack action - no penalties. Thinking like +6/+1, swing with the +6 and drop the +1 for a spell. Likewise possibly some built-in class feature that improves the DCs as you level for any spell you cast against a target you've attacked (up to +4 by 16th, bringing the DCs closer to a casters at least).
It's off to a rough start - but we'll see where it leads.
Has any one thought of using a thrown weapon like a spear or a short spear. Or a spell combat dual path [ranged or melee]. Or an archer with spells a weapon bonded bow. Eldrich Knight is mentioned. What about the arcane archer? Cast a spell into an arrow. An elf with a bow could work. The spell combat seems to be the only thing anyone wants to talk about. Remove that does the class work. Maybe instead of casting and full attack, spell combat could work like cleave. If you hit you cast a spell with out a defensive casting roll. The penalty is reduced and the ability is situational. You still get to cast in melee.
|
I really like the idea of the Magus' weapon containing only touch spells, single target buffs, single target debuff's etc, and all spells are cast either by touching the sword to the ally, yourself or channeled through the sword as a swift action (or some other mechanic) when you hit. The Magus' spell list would have to be more restrictive but it gets rid of the horrible spellstrike mechanic.
This means the 3/4 BAB magus doesn't have to gimp his chance to hit to have a bad chance of getting a spell off, instead he effectively prepares his weapon with spells at the beginning of each day, like a wizard prepares spells in a spellbook, and channels the spells through his sword as he battles.
Could you tell us how the magus was built?
I mean one can see how it can be monk-like, but more data is useful.
I'd like to second the call for build info, so we can get additional context on your data.
Yes, this is playtest impressions.
The magus is a new monk, in a bad way. He's not durable enough to hang out in melee, has no melee abilities that work unless he's standing still making full attacks, he's hopelessly MAD, and he has no particular role only he can do. Above all else, it's like the monk in that your main schtick involves rolling lots of dice, and failing a lot. That's just not fun.
There's lot of analysis of the math on Spell Combat; I won't duplicate that. The outrageous best-case scenario for success before mid-levels is 75%; more practical numbers are in the 35%-55% range. Practically, low-level magi who tried to use Spell Combat would have days where they didn't cast anything, and mid-level magi would routinely flub a cast every single turn. This is in addition to standard failure rates for spells; they still miss, are saved against, etc. Trying to use Spell Combat was an exercise in frustration.
Melee was equally frustrating. One-hand/open-hand combat is the weakest possible form of melee combat in 3e, and none of the magi could manage a high-str build due to MAD issues. The attack bonus wasn't high enough to attempt to Power Attack, and Spell Combat was incompatible with Vital Strike and suchlike. (One of my players had a brainstorm and tried to combine maneuvers and Spell Combat; this didn't even make it off the character sheet due to 3/4 BAB with a penalty being an obvious non-starter.) Even when attacking without the Spell Combat penalty, two-handed damage with a longsword, rapier, or shortsword is low.
So, they started standing back to cast spells, but even that didn't go well. It was difficult to fit the con and dex needed to survive in melee with the int to have decent spell DCs, so low-level spellcasting was an exercise in frustration, as base spell damage is low and enemies tended to save against other effects. It wasn't any better at higher levels, where damaging spells were laughably ineffective and reduced spell levels meant that save-based effects were...
<Hands MiB a beer>. I had the same impression. I was hoping it was just me, but that seems to be the consensus. I feel like the class needs to be taken apart and redone from scratch almost. I wish I had more to add, but I don't. In short +1.
[Threadjack]I miss your reviews on the APG.[/Threadjack]
I think the class also has another unspoken problem, it set on railroads to do one thing and most posible vialble won´t be more different between them than the legion agents Smith.
Humbly,
Yawar
Well much as I hate to admit it I actually find myself in agreement with the Man in Black..the Magus does not do what it says on the tin.
** spoiler omitted **
I politely disagree.
Humbly,
Yawar
To be fair, always remember, its the beta version without any class relevant feats, with an incomplete spell list. Anything that doesn´t quite work yet could be changed by some tiny element.
And maybe we will get better at countering the problems build into the class like the 1,5 minute workday.
But yeah the class could benefit from some finetuning^^
To be fair, always remember, its the beta version without any class relevant feats, with an incomplete spell list. Anything that doesn´t quite work yet could be changed by some tiny element.
And maybe we will get better at countering the problems build into the class like the 1,5 minute workday.
But yeah the class could benefit from some finetuning^^
To be fair in return, Wave Oracle.
|
My group just started using a magus, and so far he's been great. Perhaps it's his superior selection of spells, or his use of the bastard sword. Maybe it's because we don't have any full fighters in our group. But our magus hangs out in melee just fine, and looks like a very versatile and powerful character.
Wish he had more spells though. He can go through them really fast when he's not careful.
My group just started using a magus, and so far he's been great. Perhaps it's his superior selection of spells, or his use of the bastard sword. Maybe it's because we don't have any full fighters in our group. But our magus hangs out in melee just fine, and looks like a very versatile and powerful character.
Wish he had more spells though. He can go through them really fast when he's not careful.
It's been noted several times before now that the Magus can perform when he actually uses his arcanas and abilities. The real problem is his sustainability, which does translate into a power issue if your limited spell slots make you unwilling to use your abilities (which I suspect is the cause of at least some of the poor reports on the Magus' performance).
There have been several suggested fixes for this, mostly revolving around the idea of a "power pool" exclusively for fuelling arcana-usage.
One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)
He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword (I'm granting him the proficiency since he had been using a greatsword until this point. In the end it's an effective +1 damage from the longsword a magus defaults to proficiency in. This should not effect attack/casting rolls as compared to say, a longsword.)
Character was actually rolled, so his stats are admittedly higher than most. The relevant ones being an 18 strength and a 15 (possibly 16 after leveling to 4) intelligence.
I was surprised by how effective spell combat was on the casting side, but initially very unhappy with the performance of the melee side.
The player is not a new player, however, and knows he could lose a spell or two during combat. Through more or less the entire Asmodean Knot the player lost very few (possibly none?) spells to defensively casting. However, he consciously chose to use only 1st level spells during defensive casting periods, to minimize the chance of failure. As a GM, I find this in line with what I expect from this class. The mechanics currently encourage you to only use spell combat with lower level spells such as shocking grasp.
However, the -4 penalty to melee attacks definitely cramped the melee side of the character. At several points in the knot the character would cast a shocking grasp, channel through the weapon, hit touch AC but miss actual AC. Spellstrike is very clear that this would not trigger the resolution of the touch spell. I quickly came to the conclusion that this is a primary problem with the class.
I instituted a house rule shortly afterward that allowed the magus player to connect with a touch spell provided an attack cleared the target's touch AC. If the attack does not also clear the target's actual AC, the weapon portion of the damage does not resolve. This improved the flow of play significantly, normalizing the damage dealt to opponents, while allowing for fairly impressive "Spellstrike soft criticals" with some significant damage output. Both the player and I agreed that this improved the feel of the class significantly.
As far as flow of play, the one handed/open hand combat works extremely well when the player knows to shift to a two handed stance with power attack and has the strength to back it up on the damage front. Arcane bond significantly assists with relevant damage output at level four, as well. The ability to slap keen onto a weapon that is typically toting a touch spell around is downright terrifying. Power attacking, arcane striking, two handed shocking grasp imbued bastard sword critical hits end combats.
The player expressed a fairly low opinion of the level 3 arcana choices, which I echo. The low level Magus does not have enough spell slots to use the arcane accuracy or spell shield arcana. Pretty much ever. Both of these arcana are awful and were awful when we saw their precursors in 3.5 in the form of feats. Silent and still magic do not have scaling uses per day which make them unattractive compared to the rogue talents and rage powers these seem intended to match. Broad study only appears relevant to characters that are either ridiculous or completely useless. (Casters do not multiclass well. Never have in 3.x and never will.) Concentrate is one use per day, which is pathetic, but having heard the horror stories of failed spell combat the player took it. Maneuver mastery seems to be the most versatile of the low level arcana and is the only one I currently think is worth taking, as it is a static bonus that doesn't require the expenditure of resources and does not have limited uses per day. Familiar could be worthwhile for roleplaying reasons or if someone really wants the alertness and skill focus aspects.
Current suggestions:
1) Combat casting is a feat tax for this class and one they must address. This feat should be included in the class in the same way that monks get Improved Unarmed Strike. Power attack and Arcane strike are also very feat tax-ish, but the class can function without them, where it absolutely breaks down without combat casting.
2) Spellstrike with touch spells rarely resolves when combined with spell combat due to the removal of touch AC from the touch based spell. Allowing touch based spells to resolve so long as the roll beats touch AC, and then adding the damage from weapon strike if the roll beats actual AC completely smooths magus damage output as far as our group is able to tell.
3) Spell combat's -4 penalty to melee is extremely debilitating. Spell combat should consider spells as a light weapon and begin with a -2 penalty to the attack rolls with the weapon in hand. Most combat based misses were very near misses, and this reduction puts magus attack rolls in line with two-weapon fighting rogues, and drives them to seek flanking positions to counter the penalty.
4) 3rd level arcana options are mostly terrible. Broad study is irrelevant to a pure magus. All of the metamagic options are terrible. Arcane Accuracy and Spell Shield exacerbate the magus's extremely limited casting due to bard progression. Concentrate is bad. Familiar and Maneuver Mastery appear useful on paper, but I haven't been able to test them. Adding a Combat Casting arcana in the same vein as the rogue's "Finesse Rogue" talent can solve the primary issue of the feat tax on this class and give a viable option for a 3rd level arcana. I will address the issues with arcana in general in another thread.
One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)
He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword (I'm granting him the proficiency since he had been using a greatsword until this point. In the end it's an effective +1 damage from the longsword a magus defaults to proficiency in. This should not effect attack/casting rolls as compared to say, a longsword.)
Character was actually rolled, so his stats are admittedly higher than most. The relevant ones being an 18 strength and a 15 (possibly 16 after leveling to 4) intelligence.
I was surprised by how effective spell combat was on the casting side, but initially very unhappy with the performance of the melee side.
The player is not a new player, however, and knows he could lose a spell or two during combat. Through more or less the entire Asmodean Knot the player lost very few (possibly none?) spells to defensively casting. However, he consciously chose to use only 1st level spells during defensive casting periods, to minimize the chance of failure. As a GM, I find this in line with what I expect from this class. The mechanics currently encourage you to only use spell combat with lower level spells such as shocking grasp.
However, the -4 penalty to melee attacks definitely cramped the melee side of the character. At several points in the knot the character would cast a shocking grasp, channel through the weapon, hit touch AC but miss actual AC. Spellstrike is very clear that this would not trigger the resolution of the touch spell. I quickly came to the conclusion that this is a primary problem with the class.
I instituted a house rule shortly afterward that allowed the magus player to connect with a touch spell provided an attack cleared the target's touch AC. If the attack does not also clear the target's actual AC, the weapon portion of the damage does not resolve. This improved the flow of play significantly,...
I agree completely, especially regarding the arcanas.
So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?
So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?
Definitely sticking with the Magus. It currently functions far better than the Fighter 1 / Wizard 3 multiclass did. He's not missing entire combats anymore without rolling because he spent 3 rounds buffing before being capable of wading into melee.
|
So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?Definitely sticking with the Magus. It currently functions far better than the Fighter 1 / Wizard 3 multiclass did. He's not missing entire combats anymore without rolling because he spent 3 rounds buffing before being capable of wading into melee.
And he can with the magus?!? I'm sorry, but the magus needs to spend 3 rounds to buff up before wading into combat at that level too. Or do the smart thing and be a REALLY gimped wizard and cast BC spells. Which is what makes playing the magus and EK build so bloody frustrating. Your basically a gimped wizard till around level 8. Except the EK is less gimped.
And he can with the magus?!? I'm sorry, but the magus needs to spend 3 rounds to buff up before wading into combat at that level too. Or do the smart thing and be a REALLY gimped wizard and cast BC spells. Which is what makes playing the magus and EK build so bloody frustrating. Your basically a gimped wizard till around level 8. Except the EK is less gimped.So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?Definitely sticking with the Magus. It currently functions far better than the Fighter 1 / Wizard 3 multiclass did. He's not missing entire combats anymore without rolling because he spent 3 rounds buffing before being capable of wading into melee.
Ironically, there was another thread claiming that Eldritch Knights were totally gimped compared to the Magus. I guess there will always be haters.
And he can with the magus?!? I'm sorry, but the magus needs to spend 3 rounds to buff up before wading into combat at that level too. Or do the smart thing and be a REALLY gimped wizard and cast BC spells. Which is what makes playing the magus and EK build so bloody frustrating. Your basically a gimped wizard till around level 8. Except the EK is less gimped.
My playtesting says otherwise. Then again, the guy playing this magus actually knows what he's doing when building melee casters.
An interesting report, and it backs up my first impressions of the class.
|
Ah, a monk/soulknife. "I told you so".
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/ultimateMagicPlaytest/general/welcomeToTheUltimateMagicPlaytest&page =1#17
I actually like the class, but it's just woefully underpowered at the moment. I haven't followed magus threads in a few days, but if Spell Combat's penalties were removed at level 2, would this make it a much better class? I believe it would, but even without a full spell list, it'd be hard to determine that.
Ah, a monk/soulknife. "I told you so".
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/ultimateMagicPlaytest/general/welcomeToTheUltimateMagicPlaytest&page =1#17
I actually like the class, but it's just woefully underpowered at the moment. I haven't followed magus threads in a few days, but if Spell Combat's penalties were removed at level 2, would this make it a much better class? I believe it would, but even without a full spell list, it'd be hard to determine that.
The problem is not spell combat. The penalties are not actually as bad as everyone makes them out to be. The problem is that they do not have enough resources to be using spell combat regularly, so they run out of steam. Most of the combat descriptions and tactics I have seen described require the magus to spend 1/3 to 1/2 of its spells, and it is not guaranteed to get off all the spells. It needs something to boost it when not using spells.
Ah, a monk/soulknife. "I told you so".
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/ultimateMagicPlaytest/general/welcomeToTheUltimateMagicPlaytest&page =1#17
I actually like the class, but it's just woefully underpowered at the moment. I haven't followed magus threads in a few days, but if Spell Combat's penalties were removed at level 2, would this make it a much better class? I believe it would, but even without a full spell list, it'd be hard to determine that.
Funny thing, one of my Eberron characters was a Monk/Soulknife with the associated feats and a ruling to allow for an all-out Jilashtora, stacking AC, flurry, and unarmed strike (allowed my character to take the Tashalatora feat despite not manifesting powers). My GM said, "Why not? You're going for something underpowered anyway."
Mind you, my character wasn't useless, but he didn't shine too brightly, either. He survived as long as the adventure lasted, but we didn't finish it. I had a lot of fun with him, though, and plan on playing him again.
More on-topic, this class does take some significant risk being in melee all day, even more so when they're main ability can shut down their whole round at low levels. Ask my players; they were recently in a situation where 3/4 of the party didn't take any actions for the first 2 or 3 rounds. We nearly died during that encounter, and if luck swayed just a bit at least one character would have.
|
|
The problem is not spell combat. The penalties are not actually as bad as everyone makes them out to be. The problem is that they do not have enough resources to be using spell combat regularly, so they run out of steam. Most of the combat descriptions and tactics I have seen described require the magus to spend 1/3 to 1/2 of its spells, and it is not guaranteed to get off all the spells. It needs something to boost it when not using spells.Ah, a monk/soulknife. "I told you so".
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/ultimateMagicPlaytest/general/welcomeToTheUltimateMagicPlaytest&page =1#17
I actually like the class, but it's just woefully underpowered at the moment. I haven't followed magus threads in a few days, but if Spell Combat's penalties were removed at level 2, would this make it a much better class? I believe it would, but even without a full spell list, it'd be hard to determine that.
It sounds like WotC got the duskblade right on the first try. Solid damaging spells to channel, good armor, good BAB, lots of spells to channel, lets character wield 2H.
This is not good for the magus, because I don't want Paizo to change the magus to be more like duskblade. Although I wouldn't mind some channeling once in a while, I much rather have spell combat (or something that allows attacking and casting non-damaging spells). I was thinking how casters have these 3 + attribute abilities at level 1, and applying them to the magus. Imagine your sword shooting energy blasts like Link from Legend of Zelda, or the Sword of Omens (give me sight beyond sight!), or other awesome sword magicks.
Seems like Combat Casting isn't the only feat tax. Arcane Strike seems necessary too to provide a boost to damage. Magus arcane needs to be boosted, with different abilities instead as well.
I found with the Magus you need to go High Strength. Boost you Int to 12. That will get you to 16 and allow you to cast all your spells with your stat boost at 4th, 8th, 12th and 16th. So you don't need a higher int.
So say 15 pt Build
Str 18 (10 points +2 racial)
Dex 13 (3 points)
Con 12 (2 Points)
Int 12 (2 points)
Wis 10 (0 points)
Chr 8 (-2 Points)
This class needs strength. With a 20 PT build I'd put 5 more points to strength and drop Wisdom to 8 for 20 Strength.
For the first 5 levels focus on combat. Don't bother with Combat Casting and don't use Spell Combat. It's not worth it. You don't have enough spells and risking them to spell failure while taking a heavy hit to your combat ability just isn't worth it. So play the Magus as a fighter who can cast a buff or two before entering combat. Don't try to walk down the middle of the road yet. It just doesn't work well.
Seriously you are better off going all combat and casting shield before wading into battle. Once you are higher level Spell Combat is an option so pick up combat casting then. Just because you can do it at 2nd level doesn't mean you should but then why have an ability you won't use. Saying this why not swap spell Combat with the 5th level combat feat? As well give combat casting a bonus 1st level feat.
I wonder if you could get past some of the issues with spell combat by going with a one handed reach weapon like the scorpion whip or the chain spear. That way you could either do a shocking grasp whip spell strike or a regular whip strike + combat spell.
It's not a great damage dealer but it would allow you to be a martial controller of sorts combining trip attacks with other control spells.
If you remove the no two handed weapon restriction you could even give them a halfway decent polearm so they can function as a second rank fighter more effectively.
The problem is not spell combat. The penalties are not actually as bad as everyone makes them out to be. The problem is that they do not have enough resources to be using spell combat regularly, so they run out of steam.The penalties at low levels are that bad. They are at the point where you're better off not using it... and for blowing very limited resources to do it in the first place that's bad.
I'm not saying that simply eliminating the penalties will fix the class, but I am saying that this is the least invasive change that will do the most good.
At that point (and the few other suggestions that I listed in a prior post) it might get solved simply by tweaking the spell list and magus arcana abilities (which need lots of work as they need to become the focus for the class rather than a side note).
-James
The penalty should be there. It just makes sense that casting spells while attacking should be harder to do than casting a spells in combat with out attacking.
As for Spell Combat, it's just a bad idea to use at low levels. I wouldn't use till about Level 5. I think swapping it for the bonus feat at level 5 would fix a lot. That bonus feat a level 2 is way more useful. You get +1 Bab and weapon focus and power attack are an option at level 2. Combat Casting should be a freebie as it's a feat tax otherwise.
The problem is not spell combat. The penalties are not actually as bad as everyone makes them out to be. The problem is that they do not have enough resources to be using spell combat regularly, so they run out of steam.The penalties at low levels are that bad. They are at the point where you're better off not using it... and for blowing very limited resources to do it in the first place that's bad.
I'm not saying that simply eliminating the penalties will fix the class, but I am saying that this is the least invasive change that will do the most good.
At that point (and the few other suggestions that I listed in a prior post) it might get solved simply by tweaking the spell list and magus arcana abilities (which need lots of work as they need to become the focus for the class rather than a side note).
-James
No, the penalties are not a problem. The problem is being forced to cast defensively. A -2 to the check is mostly irrelevant, and a -4 to hit, though bad, is not unsurmountable and will still leave you hitting at least 1/4 of the time against normal enemies. The problem is it forcing you to make a concentration check when you normally wouldn't.
Str 18 (10 points +2 racial)
Dex 13 (3 points)
Con 12 (2 Points)
Int 12 (2 points)
Wis 10 (0 points)
Chr 8 (-2 Points)This class needs strength. With a 20 PT build I'd put 5 more points to strength and drop Wisdom to 8 for 20 Strength.
For the first 5 levels focus on combat.
So you're in melee wearing light armor with mediocre Dex and Con? That sounds like a recipe for a dead character.
The problem is it forcing you to make a concentration check when you normally wouldn't.That's not correct... any spellcaster who's casting in melee is going to be making a concentration check no matter what the class.
Not true for many reasons:
1. opponent out of AoO. You don't care to cast defensively because they can do nothing to you.2. You have miss chance and want to risk it, because getting the miss chance has a lower failure rate than casting defensively. High AC, Mirror Image, Displacement, ect.
3. you have cover, preventing AoO.
4. You cast out of reach and then 5 ft step, then attack. You can do this with touch attacks normally, and you normally can 5ft step mid full attack.
5. Opponent has a reach weapon and you are inside their reach
6. Opponent is prone.
Basicly, you only need to cast defensive normally if the opponent can take an attack of opportunity. Then, you only cast defensively if your other defenses are not better. Instead, this class must choose to cast defensively, even in the many cases where it normally wouldn't. I think the solution is to instead give the class a -2 to any concentration checks they want to make casting that spell, but not force any.
6. Opponent is prone.Basicly, you only need to cast defensive normally if the opponent can take an attack of opportunity.
Admittedly they will take a -4 to the AoO, but they still receive one.
Admittedly they will take a -4 to the AoO, but they still receive one.
6. Opponent is prone.Basicly, you only need to cast defensive normally if the opponent can take an attack of opportunity.
I guess your right. Not sure I agree with that, but they do. And i forgot one of the most common ones though, so I will replace that 6 with a new 6.
6. Opponent is flat footted. You won initiative.
I will replace that 6 with a new 6.
6. Opponent is flat footted. You won initiative.
Fair enough.
It sounds like WotC got the duskblade right on the first try. Solid damaging spells to channel, good armor, good BAB, lots of spells to channel, lets character wield 2H.
They actually didn't.
Hexblade came before Duskblade, and it wasn't very good. :p
Allowing Spellstriked Touch Effects to trigger on Touch AC is completely reasonable...
Anybody can get attack bonuses via Amulet of Mighty Fists that should apply to Touch Attacks (?), besides any `global` attack bonuses i.e. from buffs/bardic performance, so the fact the Magus can use the bonuses of their melee weapon doesn`t really change much IMHO.
It`s already been brought up, but I definitely think removing the forced Concentration check is justified and will speed up the game... If the Magus is casting while threatened they (like normal) will need to make a Casting Defensive check (with any penalties), but shouldn`t need to Cast DEFENSIVELY if they aren`t actually threatened. Certain approaches like using (Scorpion) Whips work well with this, but they have their own issues (mainly being that using a Whip itself provokes AoO`s), so are more likely to be ONE tool in a Magus` toolset, i.e. that they can switch between that and a sword or mace as the situation calls for.
If that was implemented, I think the Concentration penalty for Spell Combat could even be INCREASED and/or EXTENDED the duration of the Magus` career... It would just come into play when the Magus made the choice to NOT use their non-provoking combat options, as well as with situations like on-going damage, disrupting environs (movement, etc) and readied attacks (against them). They could get Combat Casting Feat for free, but a penalty which cancels it out when they use Spell Combat.
So you're in melee wearing light armor with mediocre Dex and Con? That sounds like a recipe for a dead character.
Str 18 (10 points +2 racial)
Dex 13 (3 points)
Con 12 (2 Points)
Int 12 (2 points)
Wis 10 (0 points)
Chr 8 (-2 Points)This class needs strength. With a 20 PT build I'd put 5 more points to strength and drop Wisdom to 8 for 20 Strength.
For the first 5 levels focus on combat.
You may be in light armor but you can cast shield. Chain shirt, shield spell, dodge and dex of +1 is 20 AC. Most first level encounters won't touch you and you can do this twice a day. You probably will have better AC than the fighter. As for hit points you can +3 per level with toughness and favored class. As well if you get toughness at first level you get 3 hit points off the start. So you can start with 13 hit points. The fighter in your group probably will have the same hit points based on 15 or 20 point build not taking toughness as they will go for weapon focus and power attack most often.
It sounds like WotC got the duskblade right on the first try. Solid damaging spells to channel, good armor, good BAB, lots of spells to channel, lets character wield 2H.They actually didn't.
Hexblade came before Duskblade, and it wasn't very good. :p
Hexblade was an arcane version of the Paladin. They learned the lesson that Pally wasn't a good caster either.
Plus, Hexes were too limited in number.