Developer's Roundtable: Mystic Theurge

[FireLance]

Honestly, I don't think a single caster class is the way to go. Just as Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian all have a place as a warrior class, so do Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, and Druid as casters.

The reason the warrior aspect of multiclassing works well is because BAB isn't on a separate table for each class -- it stacks. Spellcasting is more like saying that a Monk/Fighter multiclass can only use the BAB he earned as a Monk for unarmed attacks and can only use BAB earned as a Fighter for swordplay. If things worked that way, there would be (appropriate) cries of "broken".

So, to fix the spell progression, we need a mechanic for caster level. I have a couple of ideas, although they are from the top of my head and I make no claim to them being a suitable final solution, they should make my point. I'll give my best idea, half-baked though it may be.

Each character literally has a "Caster Level" (CL) value similar to the BAB. Wizards, Clerics, Druids, and Sorcerers all get a +1/1 progression (like a Fighter's BAB); Bards get a +3/4 progression; and Paladins and Rangers get a +1/2 progression. The CL from these classes stacks, just like BAB does.

(rest of post deleted)

Mercule, I like this idea. I don't think we need a separate spells per day table, though - just use the existing spells per day of the individual classes. So, a Wiz10/Clr10 has the spells per day of a Wiz10 and a Clr10, but casts all his spells as a 20th level spellcaster.

 

[RangerWickett]

Heh. While this is an odd idea - New Zealand's native mammals include several species of bats, and the Polynesians brought rats and dogs with them... not a lot of lion-hunting in these parts - interestingly enough, we had someone mauled by a tiger a few weeks ago

-Hyp.

Wait, then who are those African tribesmen who hunt lions as part of their coming of age ritual?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Wait, then who are those African tribesmen who hunt lions as part of their coming of age ritual?

Masai.

-Hyp.

 

[Najo]

Mystic Theurge Facts

Regardless of the varying points of view, lets look at what we all seem to be agreeing on and weigh that.

1) The mystic theurge is causing a large amount of disagreement and debate. The result being probably one of the biggest divisions between D&D fans on the internet.

2) It is a band-aid solution that does not resolve the true problem being the multi-classing rules. Like Monte Cook said, their is no difference between the multiclassed 10 wiz/ 10 clr and a 5 wiz/ 5 clr / 10 MT story wise. Game mechanical, the MT is superior to the other. Something is wrong with that.

3) The mystic theurge does not fully solve the problem for any other mutliclass combinations. The optimal final character (not including other prestige classes, and 3rd party materials) is a 7 wiz/ 3 clr / 10 MT. Other classes lose to much of their abilities to find this prestige class worthwhile.

4) The mystic theurge threatens to weaken or overly strengthen the power balance of all previousily designed spell casting prestige classes. A perfect example using the true necromancer from tome of blood: wiz 6/ 3 clr/ 10 mt / 1 TrN. This class can cast as a Wiz 17/ clr 13 still (jsut like the wiz 7/ 3 clr/ 10 mt can), but its necromancy and death domain spells are cast as a level 30 spellcaster. This class experiences no loss in spell selection and gains a whole school at 10 levels higher than it should.


5) Any player who wishes to multiclass into cleric and wizard more than 3 levels each is foolish not to take this class, in turn meaning that the class causes pigeon holeing. It was built to make this multiclass combination optimal and in turn it is the most powerful option available which most liekly means it becomes the only option.

Now taking these facts, and laying them out: The mystic theurge is a band-aid solution to attempt to optimize divine & arcane spell caster mutliclassing. The class even says in its own description this is what it is supposed to do. It has obvious reprecusions to game balance and does not solve the problem it sets out to. But what is the real problem?

Multi class rules for spellcasting characters.

Ask yourselves this:

1) if the multiclassing rules worked, ie putting spell casters together gave you a character that was balanced in capability with non-spellcasting multiclassed characters (a problem most of us and all of the main designers see) would you need this prestige class? Would you even build it?

2) If we approve of fixes like this, then what happens to the balance of all of the other classes?

If someone were sick would you rather cover up the symptons and ignore the true problem, or cure the disease that is causing those symptoms?

With these facts I personally feel we need to get rid of the mystic theurge and find the proper solution. Otherwise we will regret it in the long run when the unseen sideeffect appear.

One more thing I have to add. I CAN NOT reveal my sources, but it is my understanding from that this class was not in the last playtester copy of the 3.5 rules. Meaning that this class has not reiceved the same play testing that the new haste, ranger, harm, heal etc.. have. It at most was begun playtesting in the last six months. Considering this, and already the effect the class has had on the D&D community we need to look at what the true problem is and how it really should be fixed.

My hunch is that WOTC knows something is not quite right about this class and put it out on the web to get feedback like this from everyone before the books were finished.

What does everyone think?

 

[Fenes 2]

I still maintain that there is, imho, no need to fix caster multiclassing. Clerics have, with the right domains, already access to many of the arcane spells, and can make up the rest with item use through the magic domain.

Voila, a balanced (as far as clerics are balanced) arcane/divine magic user.

 

[MerricB]

Re: Mystic Theurge Facts

Regardless of the varying points of view, lets look at what we all seem to be agreeing on and weigh that.

Fair enough. I'll try to point out the areas that you assume we're agreeing on but we're not.

2) It is a band-aid solution

"Band-Aid" is an emotive term; some people think the MyT is an elegant solution.

Game mechanical, the MT is superior to the other. Something is wrong with that.

Not necessarily true.

5) Any player who wishes to multiclass into cleric and wizard more than 3 levels each is foolish not to take this class, in turn meaning that the class causes pigeon holeing. It was built to make this multiclass combination optimal and in turn it is the most powerful option available which most liekly means it becomes the only option.

Only if another PrC is not built which emphasises different aspects of the Clr/Wiz progression. Certainly, the MT loses out big time on the Cleric features apart from spellcasting.

Now taking these facts, and laying them out: The mystic theurge is a band-aid solution to attempt to optimize divine & arcane spell caster mutliclassing. The class even says in its own description this is what it is supposed to do. It has obvious reprecusions to game balance and does not solve the problem it sets out to. But what is the real problem?

False facts lead to a false conclusion. It does solve the problem that it sets out to solve: it makes a Cleric/Wizard archetype possible without being underpowered in comparison to normal 20th level characters.

However, it may cause game balance problems. I'm not sure about that, however - I haven't done the analysis yet.

Multi class rules for spellcasting characters.

Ask yourselves this:

1) if the multiclassing rules worked, ie putting spell casters together gave you a character that was balanced in capability with non-spellcasting multiclassed characters (a problem most of us and all of the main designers see) would you need this prestige class? Would you even build it?

Of course not.

However, there is a reason the multi-classing system doesn't work with regard to spellcasters.

Simplicity.

The 3E multiclass system is one that is a great deal simpler than the previous 1E/2E system. 3E is a simple additive system for the most part - you take your capabilities, and you add them together. (There are a few oddities like turning and familiars that work strangely, but for the most part it holds together well). In 1E/2E, you had a replacive system that was hard to understand, and very dodgy in terms of game balance.

In 3E, multi-classing creates a "virtual" class - even with just two classes, there are a multitude of virtual classes you can create, dependent on when you take levels in each class.

Some of these classes (e.g. the Fighter/Rogue) are nearly as optimal as a pureclass character. Others (such as the Cleric/Wizard) are clearly underpowered.

To make these blending of capabilities more balanced and attractive, there are two basic options under the 3E rules.

* Create a new class.
* Create a new prestige class.

The Mystic Theurge could very easily be imagined as a single class; gaining spells from both divine and arcane spell lists. Such a class could be rigorously created from 1st to 20th level, and thus balanced.

The advantage to the prestige class is that it's not as static and fixed as a base class. It allows a little more variation.

Consider this: if the MT was a basic class, a MT17/Cleric 3 would not have the cleric spell levels stacking with the MT cleric spell levels without an addition to the rules. (And I think such an addition could be more disruptive than the MT is!)

However, the Cleric7/Wiz3/MT10 build is a viable build; possibly not as powerful as the Clr3/Wiz7/MT10, but similar in total power. This is a variation that only the Prestige Class can add.

There is a trade-off between the Prestige Class and the basic Class approach; WotC have decided that the Prestige Class is the proper approach. They may be proven wrong, but I personally think they have taken the right approach.

The only change I might suggest to the MT is that at levels 6 and 7, the progression become:
6th: +1 divine spellcaster level
7th: +1 arcane spellcaster level

This would stop the MT from gaining 9th level spells, and keep it at high levels consistently 4 levels behind the single class character's spellcasting capabilities.

The issues with metamagic, strange counterspelling feats and other matters I do not know enough about to comment on.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

That said, there is one design assumption that the MT reveals in all its flawed glory:

Spellcasting levels will be at most a total equal to the character's level

That's what trips up the True Necromancer. If the MT had been created before the Necromancer, would the Necromancer work that way?

The two designs are at odds with each other, and one must change. The problem that the Mystic Theurge faces is that it comes into an environment where there that design assumption has been in force for almost three years, and all the subsiduary design that is based on that.

It remains to be seen if it can be addressed in an appropriate manner without the scars showing.

Cheers!

 

[Najo]

Clarifyiing

When I say band-aid, I am using the term that I have seen commonly used in this discussion, meaning that you are covering up the wound instead of healing it. It basically means they are not removing the problem.

The Mystic Theurge in concept is truly an interesting idea and I personally like the pushing of the rules into new places (like they do with cards games such as Magic). But its execution is flawed. This class doesn't allow other divine/ arcane caster combinations, so it doesn't solve the problem it sets out to and it favors certain combinations over by the way it removes class abilities from those classes. So you are not truly mutliclassing your caster classes.

A much better solution is to allow caster levels from all the casters to stack when multi classed for everything except spells per day.

If done this way you end up with characters like such:

10 fighter/10 wizard (caster level 10)
10 wiz/10 clr (CL 20)
10 brd/5 wiz/ 5 fighter (CL 15)
10pal/10 clr (CL 15)

All of these classes end up having spells per day limited by their actual class level, their casting power (affecting max spell effects, dispel and counter rolls and spell resistance) are not affected. Fighter mages are about equal in power to a paladin or ranger, but cleric/ mages are still CL 20 with a wide assortment of lower level spells (much like the mystic theurge concept).

What I like about this system is separates your casting power from spells you know. It also is more backwards compatible then the mystic theurge prestige class.

In fact the only part of the rulebook they would have to change is a small blurb in the mutli-classing rules section where it explains how to stack BAB, saves and other class abilities. Caster level should stack. Your devotion to a magic type is represented by the spells you have access to, which would not change.

What I am surprised by is that the mystic theurge obviously breaks previous material (especially prestige classes). Before these debates everyone was worried about whether or not the D&D 3.5 rules would work with their books they own as WOTC is claiming they do. Now people are worried about whether or not the Mystic Theurge is broken. Well the mystic theurge makes D&D 3.5 NOT compatible with 3.0, that is something to consider when wondering if it is broken. It changes how you value mutli-classing and caster level completely. It says that a wizard sacrificing 2 feats and familiar abilities are equal to 10 cleric caster levels. It also says that a cleric BAB, saves and turning ability are equal to 10 wizard levels.

I am sorry, that is wrong.

 

[RangerWickett]

So, Merric, would you be opposed at all if they changed the spellcasting rules so that caster levels from different classes integrated smoothly, without needing prestige classes? I think that's what he meant by 'band-aid': It'd be better if the spellcasting classes were designed to be compatible, without requiring a prestige class to make the combination feasible. Don't you agree?




Now, I don't yet have an opinion as to whether the Theurge is over/under/just-right-powered. However, it doesn't seem elegant.

Consider:

The Monk class is distinctive. The Paladin class is distinctive. They both have very identifiable archetypes. However, if you want, you can mix the two classes together, creating a monk-paladin, perhaps a very wise do-gooder who focuses on perfecting himself to be a guide to others. A multiclassing monk-paladin takes a little from each archetype, and mixes them together in a fairly balanced way, without requiring a special prestige class. A paladin 5/monk 5 fights about as well as a paladin 10, but with a slightly different set of skills. This multiclassing option is fairly balanced.

The druid is distinctive. The bard is distinctive. However, if you try to multiclass between the two of them (and heck, it makes sense, since weren't the original druids in England closely related with bardic traditions?), you run into some trouble. A bard 5/druid 5 should be able to use magic as well as a druid 10 (though with a slightly different selection of magical powers), but instead he uses it as either a bard 5 or a druid 5. This multiclassing option is a little underpowered, but at least the classes have abilities other than spells that keep them powerful.

Now, what about a sorcerer/wizard multiclass? These classes only really get spells, so really, 5 levels of sorcerer isn't very useful if you already have 5 levels of wizard, since instead of trading one type of good ability for another good ability, he trades a good ability for a much weaker ability, giving up 5th level spells to gain a few more 1st and 2nd level spells.

I'm just saying I would have liked if the rules for the core classes were designed so that multiclassing for spellcasters was as elegant as it is for non-spellcasters. Fighter and barbarians, or rangers and rogues don't need a prestige class for multiclassing to be fair to them, so I think the designers of 3.5e could've come up with a way for different spellcasting classes to multiclass smoothly.

To me, this is not simply a matter of power balance; it's a matter of proper design. The Theurge could be a completely balanced way to multiclass wizard and cleric, but it requires a few new rules that I don't think were necessary. And, as people have said, this class doesn't help bard and druids multiclass any more smoothly, since druids lose out on their numerous class abilities, so undoubtedly someone will design a prestige class that works for druid-bards. Why should we do this, though, when we could have built a more elegant solution directly into the classes themselves?

 

[Najo]

On the head

You nailed exactly what I am saying Ranger Wickett. If they did stacking casterlevels, the wizard sorcerer becomes interesting to. You would cast as a 20th level arcane caster, but some of your spells would be known and and the rest memorized. You would take levels in sorcerer to get almost a spell-like ability and levels in wizard to study true magic.

Oh and yes, the druids and bards were part of the same celtic traditions in the tribes of europe. Bards were the lorekeepers of the tribes and the druids were essentially the priests.