Is Mystic Theurge a balanced P. class?
- Thread starter darthkilmor
- Start date
Storm Raven
First Post
irdeggman said:
Actually, even with the use of the 3.0 spells, it isn't that great of a class. Using 3.0 haste seems like it would be great, but since you only have a tiny handful of net spell slots gained (and those are really low level), it isn't that big of a deal. And you give up lots (hit points, Fort saves, BAB and so on), it is just that what you give up isn't "sexy", like being able to cast fireball and remove curse.
Of course, while you are fooling around with 3rd level spells, the full progression cleric is casting righteous might and raise dead. I hope the extra +2 1st level spells and +3 0th level spells are worth that.
Storm Raven
First Post
KarinsDad said:
No, he gets the domain spells for the progression. The domain spells are tied to his spellcasting level, not his cleric level.
Samhaine
First Post
Indeed. The game is properly classified as 3.0+, not 3.5 with old spells. So far we're using the 3.5 ranger, the 3.5 monk, the 3.5 paladin, 3.5 damage reduction to make the abilities of the 3.5 monk useful, and precious little else. I'm very careful about which 3.5 rules that differ from 3.0 core are allowed for just this reason. Sorry I didn't make that clearer with my initial post.irdeggman said:
Particle_Man
Explorer
I assume that if you ban the MT then you will also want to ban the Leadership feat, as a wizard with a cleric cohort, or a cleric with a wizard cohort, can do everything that a MT can do, and has more (total) hp, and the cleric half can wear armor with no ASF chance.
Garboshnik
First Post
A few comments about the MT:
He's terrible at the beginning and much better at the end. Take this into account when you pick out a level to compare to.
He works a lot better with 3.0 spells because of Haste, long buffs, and some more stacking stuff (like shield granting a cover bonus).
Many people mention what he loses compared to both cleric and a wizard. He really ought to be compared to a straight wizard, so he actually *GAINS* HP, BAB, saves, domain abilities, etc. Everyone always says that he loses these.
Taking a specialist wizard is a great help, cleric spells can cover the lost domains.
When analyzing the power of the class, do not just count the D6's on his fireball. Take into account what a huge benefit all the extra healing/buff/versatility spells may be to the rest of the party out of combat.
He's terrible at the beginning and much better at the end. Take this into account when you pick out a level to compare to.
He works a lot better with 3.0 spells because of Haste, long buffs, and some more stacking stuff (like shield granting a cover bonus).
Many people mention what he loses compared to both cleric and a wizard. He really ought to be compared to a straight wizard, so he actually *GAINS* HP, BAB, saves, domain abilities, etc. Everyone always says that he loses these.
Taking a specialist wizard is a great help, cleric spells can cover the lost domains.
When analyzing the power of the class, do not just count the D6's on his fireball. Take into account what a huge benefit all the extra healing/buff/versatility spells may be to the rest of the party out of combat.
IcyCool
First Post
Garboshnik said:
Fair point, although it's self-defeating. Why not compare him to a straight cleric? He actually *LOSES* HP, BAB, saves, ability to wear armor and cast all of his spells, etc.
Compared to the straight Wizard, he loses casting levels, bonus metamagic feats, familiar advancement, and is 3 levels behind as far as aquiring spells.
