Hierophant - worth losing spell progression?

[Ferox4]

My cleric character is starting to get to a level where he needs to start thinking if he's going to pull the trigger and go the route of this PrC or not. I see your caster level still increases, but the number of spells you know doesn't. It has a number of fairly cool abilities though:

- Divine reach (for those cure spells)
- Mastery of Energy (to real kick butt on undead)
- Spell power (to really juice up your caster level)

I'm not convinced though. Are these special abilities worth slowing the character's ability to cast 8th- and 9th-level spells?

It depends. Do you want the Hierophant flavor or not? I don't see sacrificing one level of Cleric before reaching Epic levels as that big of a deal. The Cleric is a strong class to begin with and besides, are you really going to play epic level characters?

 

[Wish]

I think Hierophant and Archmage are perfectly balanced because they hit both respective classes where it hurts. (Well, in order to get cool new abilities of course!)

I wouldn't pause to take some Hierophant levels if I continued in spell progression and only had to sacrfice a slot or two. But a wizard character has fewer spell slots and spending one of them hurts a lot. And most of them are higher level slots, which hurts even more.

No, I don't think that one should change that.

To get a standard array of abilities, the Archmage loses a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th level slot (5 total slots, 35 spell levels). The Heirophant loses a 4th, 5th, 6th, two 7th, three 8th, and five 9th (13 slots, 98 total spell levels). That would be all of the 9th level slots, and the opportunity for bonus slots from wisdom. That's nowhere near balanced. As somebody else said, the fact that nobody in their right mind would take all 5 levels of this class pre-epic, while archmage is a viable and attractive option for mages, indicates a serious balance problem.

 

[Wish]

I'd be interested in hearing what others consider to be viable PrCl's for clerics other than the Sacred Exorcist.

Out of 3 highish level clerics I've played or played with, we've got one who's straight cleric - he relies on turning. Another is mostly cleric, but went contemplative for a few levels. The third (the one I play) is a complete mutt. He completely sacrifices turning, picks up one level of fighter for weapon proficiencies, and has levels of contemplative, divine disciple (from FR), and a custom pclass for a knightly order he belongs to.

Basically, you can decide which you would rather have - turning ability or pclass abilities. 2 of the 3 clerics I'm most familiar with chose pclass abilities.

 

[Nail]

UD must not be a large factor in the campaign. ....I guess I can understand that.

 

[Artoomis]

...As somebody else said, the fact that nobody in their right mind would take all 5 levels of this class pre-epic, while archmage is a viable and attractive option for mages, indicates a serious balance problem.

I think the balance problem is the expectation that a character's main strength will be preserved in a prestige class - be it spell casting, melee fighting, barbarian raging, rogue's special abilities, whatever. The attitude of "Gee, I'll give up those abilities I don't care about and get some way cool stuff instead."

Taking a prestige class should be a hard choice, not a no-brainer. Currently, it is far too easy to find a prestige class for which you keep full spell casting progression. For wizards, you might lose one or two bonus feats and familiar progression, for sorcerors only familiar progression, for clerics, turning progression.

I'd like to see more prestige classes that focus on something other than a characters normal primary strength. Frankly - that's boring and too easy a decision/ Some examples:

The anti-undead cleric who gets spells only every other level, but slays undead like mad.

The paladin who gives up spell-casting to have an amazing mount and amazing riding.

The sorceror/wizard who gets spell-casting every other level and focuses on making items (his caster level still goes up each level).

The druid who gives up a lot of spell casting in exchange for focusing on plant or animal (or both) abilities.

The sorceror/wizard who gives up some spellcasting in exchange for focusing on his familiar - more than what Improved Familiar does.

The rogue who gives up improving sneak attacks (and maybe uses the wizard attack bonus progression) to focus on scouting, gaining way cool scouting abilities.

And on and on....

These would be prestige classes with character.

The Hierohant is a tough choice, no doubt. As it should be - as all prestige classes should be.

 

[bensei]

When thinking about the Hierophant's abilities, do not forget the spell-like ability. When your Cleric has one spell which he casts very often, you can make him cast this spell safely even when paralized, grappled (given a fair concentration), silenced, deafened, etc., and since you can use this ability twice a day, in some sense you gain an extra spell of that level.

Some interesting spells to make into a spell-like ability: Greater dispel magic, Summon Monster 7, Destruction, Righteous Might.

 

[Artoomis]

When thinking about the Hierophant's abilities, do not forget the spell-like ability. When your Cleric has one spell which he casts very often, you can make him cast this spell safely even when paralized, grappled (given a fair concentration), silenced, deafened, etc., and since you can use this ability twice a day, in some sense you gain an extra spell of that level.

Some interesting spells to make into a spell-like ability: Greater dispel magic, Summon Monster 7, Destruction, Righteous Might.

Hmmm.... You could combine that with the Quicken Spell-Like ability feat - only 2 times per day, but still...

 

[James McMurray]

If its an attack spell, se Assume Supernatural ability to make it (Su), removing spell resistance. A character at Exodus did this with a Maximied Empowered Ray of Enfeeblement. Touch attack for 11 + (d6+5)/2 strength penalty with no save or SR is pretty nasty.

 

[DM_Matt]

Origionally, both Heirophant and Archmage had no spell prog. They were released in the Living City 3e conversion document. However, they changed them before the FRCS came out to make thme more different. Thus, history seems to indicate that either method should work for either class.

 

[strongbow]

As I recall, Sean K Reynolds has a document on his website that reveals during discussion about designing 3.0 archmage and hierophant, hierophant has casting progession and paid spell slots, just like the archmage. I believe the address is www.seankreynolds.com He may have taken it down since it has been so long. Taking one level for reach is good. Remember that the 3.5 rules explicity state that you may touch an ally without having to roll to hit. (p 141 first complete sentence) Now whether your DM will interpret that to mean that you can use ranged touch attacks on allies is another matter. Also, consider getting the +4 to turn undead. A +4 on the Cha Check is like having a level of turning and the +4 on turning damage is like having 8 pts of Cha or 4 cleric levels.