Developer's Roundtable: Mystic Theurge

[Bendris Noulg]

Hurrumph!

Guess I'll just keep printing AutoCAD-drawn Counters on Cardstock... Cheaper and easier to store.

 

[Henry]

We could live with only three classes: the warrior-type, the mage-type, the skillful-type. It has been proposed before. Heck, d20 Modern does something very close to that.

Of course, I don't see it happening with D&D, as it would change too much.

Actually, it sounds more like full circle, than changing too much.

There were originally only three classes in the original D&D circa 1974: The Fighting Man, the Cleric, and the Magic-User.

Believe it or not, I could live with such a thing in 4th edition D&D, coupled with feats and selections of class abilities to balance them out...

 

[I'm A Banana]

(By Jonathan Tweet)
The MTh is built to allow the arcane/divine spellcaster multiclass to work.

This is, IMHO, the beginning and end of the entire debacle. If a arcane/divine spellcaster multiclass *worked* without the PrC, there would be no need for it...

So why not fix the problem rather than slapping a band-aid on it, says the Midget...

 

[Henry]

(Don't get me wrong, I think Magic is a nice card game, but I'm not sure we want to try to impose "Magic" on D&D or vice versa).
--The Sigil

Actually, I think D&D has benefitted greatly from Magic the Gathering-type design principles. For quite a while it seemed that balance was handled by flavor and rarity, rather than by solid mathematical and logical game design concerns.

 

[dcollins]

Wow, my eyes just about popped out of my head when I saw that the Mystic Theurge had gone from "maybe-April-Fools-joke" to "core-rules-class-in-3.5".

I definitely think it's overpowered. I may be one of the few people who actually doesn't even think 3rd Edition multiclassing is that underpowered. In my play, I've been very happy with a choice to multiclass Druid/Sorcerer, for example... in exchange for a single top-level slot, I get scads of lower spells, so I get to be casting all the time. The flexible-at-the-price-of-a-top-slot option is definitely already there in the core rules as written. Only compared to AD&D multiclassed elves does it look like a disadvantage.

I'm of a like mind with many posters that a feat-chain that does something similar (combine clerics & wizards) would be far preferable. A prestige-class to do an end run around multiclassing feels... well, it feels clunky in a very 2nd-Edition kind of way, frankly. I'm really skeptical that this could have been playtested.

Anyway, I'd recently been tinkering with feats to do exactly this. As a starter: one feat to combine the caster level of two selected classes, for any spell the share between their lists. As a second: one feat to exchange a slot from both classes for one slot at a higher level within a day. Things like that. (Edit: And make them metamagic feats so a wizard can grab them with their bonus feats.)

This may tie into the "flavorless" criticism, as well. This topic feels almost entirely mechanical (improving cleric/wizard multiclassing), and therefore feat-based, instead of being truly class-based.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

As a starter: one feat to combine the caster level of two selected classes, for any spell the share between their lists.

I'd be more inclined to permit something more akin to the School of Necromancy feature that the True Necromancer gives.

As a second: one feat to exchange a slot from both classes for one slot at a higher level within a day. Things like that. (Edit: And make them metamagic feats so a wizard can grab them with their bonus feats.)

This may tie into the "flavorless" criticism, as well.

This comes into two things: What are the prereqs and what in the campaign environment does it represent? Feats aren't as held-to-flavor as much as Prestige Classes are, since Feats are more akin to a single ability while Prestige Classes are campaign defining components, although a Feat contrary to campaign flavor is also subjectable to elimination/ignorability.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I may be one of the few people who actually doesn't even think 3rd Edition multiclassing is that underpowered. In my play, I've been very happy with a choice to multiclass Druid/Sorcerer, for example... in exchange for a single top-level slot, I get scads of lower spells, so I get to be casting all the time. The flexible-at-the-price-of-a-top-slot option is definitely already there in the core rules as written. Only compared to AD&D multiclassed elves does it look like a disadvantage.

Sadly, I still think this is wrong....3e spellcaster multiclassing is severely underpowered, in part based on the way that encounters have been balanced -- it is assumed that for a CR 18 encounter, you're going to be able to cast Wish. It is assumed for a CR 6 encounter that you're lighting off at least one Fireball. It is a given at CR 8 that you have Haste.

If you're eighth level character isn't on par with this (IOW, just a few levels behind, if at all), they're going to suffer BIG TIME. Being as good as a spellcaster half your character level doesn't cut the cheese. But nor is it nessecarily a good thing to drop scads of low-level slots down there, because no matter how many Fireballs you can cast, you'd usually be better with one quick Meteor Swarm.

*This* is the problem with 3e spellcaster multiclassing as it sits. Whereas things like hit points, saves, and BAB stack, things like spellcasting (Which can be arguably compared to a different sort of BAB) don't. And when Spellcasting is pretty much the only thing a given class does, taking a hit in it would be like taking a level of Fighter without BAB...it just don't work...

 

[Outlaw]

Sadly, I still think this is wrong....3e spellcaster multiclassing is severely underpowered, in part based on the way that encounters have been balanced -- it is assumed that for a CR 18 encounter, you're going to be able to cast Wish. It is assumed for a CR 6 encounter that you're lighting off at least one Fireball. It is a given at CR 8 that you have Haste.

This is an absurd notion and one of the reasons why I don't like to play arcane casters. Too often playing a wizard without fireball in his spellbook is met with utter disbelief. The spell selection is the largest out of all the spellcasters and I do believe that a balanced party of appropriate level could handle a CR 18 monster without casting Wish.

Similarly, any spellcasting class that takes a second class that doesn't add spell levels to its original class is weakening its overall spell power. There's nothing that needs to be "fixed" with a Clr/Wiz because the person who's making such a character should understand what kind of roll that will put him into.

Personally, I don't like how essential multiclassing seems to have become to some people. I think there is a reward for single classing, being the best at what you do. If the trend of PrCs is going to "make up" for limiting your ability for expanding your repetoire, then give me a PrC that allows me to make a character that gives me the abilities of a 15th level fighter, 15th level cleric, 15th level rogue and 15th level wizard while allowing me to wear heavy armor, ignoring armor check penalites and spell failure all achieved at 17th level. Obviously prestige classes are going to continue to escalate until someone begins to argue how the class I just mentioned isn't overpowered.

Needless to say, you won't be seeing the Mystic Theurge in any game I run.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

This is an absurd notion and one of the reasons why I don't like to play arcane casters. Too often playing a wizard without fireball in his spellbook is met with utter disbelief. The spell selection is the largest out of all the spellcasters and I do believe that a balanced party of appropriate level could handle a CR 18 monster without casting Wish.

That's not exactly what Kamikaze meant. Replace "fireball" with "3rd-level spell" and "Wish" with "9th-level spell" and it makes more sense.

Similarly, any spellcasting class that takes a second class that doesn't add spell levels to its original class is weakening its overall spell power. There's nothing that needs to be "fixed" with a Clr/Wiz because the person who's making such a character should understand what kind of roll that will put him into.

Why should the player of the Clr/Wiz be spanked around, but not the player of the Ftr/Rog? Compare the two and I'm sure you'll see that the Ftr/Rog will come out on top every time.

Personally, I don't like how essential multiclassing seems to have become to some people. I think there is a reward for single classing, being the best at what you do.

There still is a reward for single classing. The single class wizard or single class cleric is still more powerful, in my opionion. I think the Theurge might be a little overpowered, but not by much. Personally, I think I'd probably go with an alternating spell progression:

1) +1 arcane, +1 divine
2) +1 arcane
3) +1 arcane, +1 divine
4) +1 divine
5) +1 arcane, +1 divine
6) +1 arcane
7) +1 arcane, +1 divine
8) +1 divine
9) +1 arcane, +1 divine
10)+1 arcane or +1 divine (your choice)

Starting as a Wiz 3/Clr 3, this would give a Wiz 3/Clr 3/MTh 10 the spellcasting of a Wiz 11/Clr 10 or Wiz 10/Clr 11. Does that seem more balanced?

 

[dinsdale]

Re: My thoughts on the Mystic Theurge

1) The Mth class...

Maybe they will work this all out by the time we get to the Nth class.