15 levels of Mystic Theurge

[Nifft]

Taking that 15th level would be useless anyway. ('i get spells/level as a 21st clr... oh wait. no spells')
15 levels was an arbitrary number. (I could have said 'more than 10 levels of MT')

15 + 3 = 18. You'd be an 18 Cleric / 18 Wizard at level 21.

Also, some class combinations other than wiz/clr require you to take even more levels before entry, reducing the number of levels between MT10 and lvl 20 even more.

I always balance a class against the most optimal legal combination. If you want to make a Bard / Druid prestige class, I think it would need some goodies over what a Mystic Theurge gets, but that's a different conversation -- that combination is not relevant to the maximum power of the Mystic Theurge class.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

- Quote -

15 + 3 = 18. You'd be an 18 Cleric / 18 Wizard at level 21.

- Quote -

WRONG dead WRONG

MT 15 Clr 3 Wiz 3

1. Turns As 3rd level cleric (nearly useless) for 21st level character
2. Has familiar w 3rd level features (that probably has been dropped)

Casts as 18th level Clr and 18th level Wiz - which is the main feature of the class

Oh ... wait a Minute ... the ONLY thing a Wizard or Cleric does is cast spells? I think NOT.

 

[hong]

- Quote -

15 + 3 = 18. You'd be an 18 Cleric / 18 Wizard at level 21.

- Quote -

WRONG dead WRONG

MT 15 Clr 3 Wiz 3

1. Turns As 3rd level cleric (nearly useless) for 21st level character
2. Has familiar w 3rd level features (that probably has been dropped)

Casts as 18th level Clr and 18th level Wiz - which is the main feature of the class

Oh ... wait a Minute ... the ONLY thing a Wizard or Cleric does is cast spells? I think NOT.

Sigh.

 

[Nifft]

Oh ... wait a Minute ... the ONLY thing a Wizard or Cleric does is cast spells? I think NOT.

I can't tell if you're agreeing with me. The sarcasm sauce is just a bit too thick.

So I'll assume you are. Glad to have you aboard!

Cheers, -- N

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

No - I am forcing you to think outside that box you are trying to think inside. If the only way I can do it is to utterly destroy that box with sarcasm, so be it. Please do note that I hit the Statement, not You.

Your argument rests on the fundamental requirement that the ONLY benefit of being a Wizard or Cleric is spellcasting. It is only about 60-80% of the class. When you take away the other 20-40% of Wizardry and Clericdom... you dramatically weaken the arsenal at the disposal of a character.

oh - fyi - it is an extreme pain in the tail end to cast arcane spells while in armor. This has a tendency to eat up the "brokenness" of the so called "optimum combination".

IMC you must suffer all of the disadvantages of a class before you can claim its advantages. I Outllaw "Multiclassing into" the Barbarian base class for this reason. Granted having the spellcasting capability of an 18th level cleric and an 18th level wizard at 21st level is extremely potent; I point out that it is in essence ALL the character has. The thing you see as a strength is also a weakness. Remember that when you try and argue against the logic that is MT.

 

[Herzog]

15 + 3 = 18. You'd be an 18 Cleric / 18 Wizard at level 21.

You mean 'cast like a 18 Cleric / 18 Wizard'.

But yes, you're right. I think I made a calculation error somewhere....

I was trying to say two or three things at once, and they got mixed up.

Trying to split: a Cleric 3 / Wizard 3 would need 17 levels of MT to reach casting levels of Wiz 20 / Cler 20. If we would allow MT20, all MT levels passed 17 would be useless, since there is not spellcasting progression past lvl 20 for the base classes.

a Cleric 3 / Wizard 3 would need 14 levels of MT to reach character level 20, after which you could switch to Epic Progression if you wanted to.

a Cleric 4/ Wizard 4 would need 16 levels of MT to reach casting levels 20, and 12 levels of MT to reach caster level 20 to go Epic.


There, that was what I was trying to say.

Now, as to the relative power of a Cler 3/Wiz3/MT14 (and assuming Practiced Spellcaster for both classes) :
Is this class more powerfull than a Cler20? how about a Wiz20? How about Cler10/Wiz10?

Fact is, they are not the same. There is more to a Cleric than spellcasting, and more to a Wizard than spellcasting. If this was not the case, you could strip both classes of all non-casting extra's (armor proficiencies, weapon proficiencies, bonus feats, etc) without anyone being bothed.

Now, if that 'more' is 20-40% of the class, I don't know. If I did, I wouldn't be asking opinions here on the board.

Herzog

 

[LightPhoenix]

oh - fyi - it is an extreme pain in the tail end to cast arcane spells while in armor. This has a tendency to eat up the "brokenness" of the so called "optimum combination".

I don't think that wearing armor is a particularly optimal tactic for a MT to use. You've lost any combat prowess that comes with a straight Cleric, so there's no real reason to be on the front line. It's certainly feasible, but I don't think it's in any way optimal.

For this reason, the MT is a prestige class geared towards arcane casters, not divine. It's an arcane class that picks up the ability to cast cleric spells up to 7th level, at the sacrifice of an improved familiar (trivial) and three feats. Yes, you can take your levels in Cleric instead, but as you pointed out, the divine classes lose so much that it isn't particularly worth it.

Allowing the casting of ninth-level spells in both classes allows the wizard not just their own abilities at a trivial loss (external balance aside), but gives them the major component of a Cleric as well. That's not balanced - there should not be as good a divine caster than the Cleric or Druid. Just like there shouldn't be better arcane casters than the Wizard or Sorcerer.

 

[Nifft]

Now, as to the relative power of a Cler 3/Wiz3/MT14 (and assuming Practiced Spellcaster for both classes) :
Is this class more powerfull than a Cler20? how about a Wiz20? How about Cler10/Wiz10?

Clr 10 / Wiz 10 sucks, and you know it. No-one would play that if they cared about their character's effectiveness.

As to the others, the problem is that the price for MT is all up front. You pay for X levels of Cleric casting with exactly -3 levels of Wizard casting. If we agree that Cleric 3 / Wizard 3 / MT 10 is balanced -- and I think it's generally accepted that it's reasonable -- then adding more MT must have additional cost.

If you think that Clr 3 / Wiz 3 / MT 10 is terribly weak, we should talk about that.

Fact is, they are not the same. There is more to a Cleric than spellcasting, and more to a Wizard than spellcasting. If this was not the case, you could strip both classes of all non-casting extra's (armor proficiencies, weapon proficiencies, bonus feats, etc) without anyone being bothed.

Now, if that 'more' is 20-40% of the class, I don't know. If I did, I wouldn't be asking opinions here on the board.

IMC, Clerics get only Light armor and one Domain. They're still really strong, and people still play them. "Battle-Cleric" means you also took one level of Fighter or Barbarian. From what I've seen in monster books, Turn Undead becomes worthless around level 10, thanks to how HD increase more rapidly than CR (and how Turn Resistance starts cropping up).

IMC, Wizards mostly ignore their Familiar ability. They don't want to risk the XP drain. Both current Wizards also have prestige classes (so clearly they prefer PrC abilities over bonus Feats).

Basically, in both cases, their major class ability is spellcasting. That's how it looks on paper, and that's how it plays out. There is more to the class than spellcasting, but not much. Spellcasting is 90% of the class, including tons of hidden class features.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Herzog]

As to the others, the problem is that the price for MT is all up front. You pay for X levels of Cleric casting with exactly -3 levels of Wizard casting. If we agree that Cleric 3 / Wizard 3 / MT 10 is balanced -- and I think it's generally accepted that it's reasonable -- then adding more MT must have additional cost.

If you think that Clr 3 / Wiz 3 / MT 10 is terribly weak, we should talk about that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you are saying is that a Wiz3/Clr3/MT1 is behind on the power curve, and a Wiz3/Clr3/MT10 is back on the power curve, or maybe even ahead of the power curve.

My problem is mainly, how do we measure that?

Suppose I created a spellcasting class that is 3 levels behind in spells/day and spells know in respect to the Wizard, but gets twice the number indicated. (so, higher level spells are reached later, but once you get there you get twice the number a Wizard gets).
Also, he gets no familiar and no bonus feats.

As a maximum, you could get to lvl 20 and cast spells as a lvl 17 wizard, with twice the number of spells. Would you consider that balanced?
If not, where would you consider the class being 'broken'? At lvl 13? earlier? later?

Herzog

 

[Piratecat]

If the only way I can do it is to utterly destroy that box with sarcasm, so be it.

Except people understandably take offense to extreme sarcasm and being condescended to, and then arguments escalate. I think everyone is better off when folks are a little more polite than what we see in this thread.

That goes for everyone, of course, not solely Gerion. Thanks.