Mystic Theurge PrC - They've got to be kidding!

[Zappo]

My first reaction to this class was like "what the..."

Then I read this thread, I thought better about it, and I figured that:

• The MT really sucks at low levels. At 6th, he casts 2nd level spells top, and with a very low caster level that makes them much worse than the same spells cast by a pure caster. The extra versatility doesn't really help, it just means that he has a lot of different ways to suck, be it by casting buffs that expire in three hours, or by throwing 2d4+2 magic missiles (while the mage sneers and throws a fireball, which he's been throwing for the past level too), or by getting himself killed in melee.
  Even at 11th, he is casting 4th level spells while a pure caster is casting 6th level!
• The MT, because of his lack of fighting skills, can't make the same good use of buffs as a cleric. Yeah, he could use the arcane buffs to get about on par, but then only for a short time and only if he has, what, a half-dozen rounds to prepare? Without Haste, buffing becomes harder.
• The MT needs two high stats. Even assuming that he does the reasonable thing and focuses on one of his spellcasting aspects, he's still going to have to pull out a good score in, say, Wisdom, where a pure wizard can be just as happy with a 10. Oh, there are ways to get the stats you need, but they all imply tradeoffs. And while he can probably get a 24 or something in one of the two stats, he can't easily do it for both. So *at least* one of his two spellcasting aspects will have to deal with substantially less spell slots than a pure caster of the same level, and (more importantly), much lower spell DCs.
• Minor problems. He's got to prepare for two hours each morning, for example. I'm sure there are some more, but they aren't that important.

So, am I sure that this class is balanced? Nah... at high and epic levels when he has reduced the devastating impact of those lost 3 levels, it looks very dangerous, but I think there are more than enough elements to put away the torches and pitchforks until someone has actually played one through 10 levels, and until 3.5e is out and we can see how it integrates into the system.

 

[herald]

I'm still loving what I see about the class. I've used a NPC in my game called a "Paragon of Boccob", which is extremly close to what I read here.

The only thing that I would add is a "Code of Conduct" that had to be followed to ensure that the Spellcaster followed his diety very closely.

That makes my "Paragon of Boccob" a very interesting character.

(True Neutrality, defend magic at all cost, ect.)

Could you imagine one of these as a "Paragon of Vecna"?

This mixed with BOVD, Muhahahahahaha!

 

[hong]

Why couldn't there be a god of arcane magic who granted his priests divine spells?

Because it's dumb. Because there's no "god of arcane magic" in most worlds I know of; it's usually "god of magic" (no arcane or divine qualifier). Because if it's a god of magic, then they should grant _magic_ abilities to their functionaries. You want to heal? Go right ahead. You want to zap people with lightning bolts? Ditto. Or maybe not, to both questions. The point is that, if magic is magic, then spells are spells.

Hey, he's a god. Are you going to tell him 'no, your followers aren't allowed to heal people'?

You appear confused. What does healing people have to do with anything?

 

[Psion]

Is this verified? I seem to recall that someone who gains +1 effective level still gains the 2 free spells.

Unless they changed it in 3.5 (I have no idea why they would), then they do.

As the problem with this class revolve around high levels, I'm thinking the best way to deal with this class would be to make it a 5-level class.

Better yet, the class as it is is just BORING, and the problem seems to all hinge around high levels, I'd pull a few of the casting advancements out and replace them with some more flavorful class abilities.

 

[BryonD]

Better yet, the class as it is is just BORING,

VERY true

 

[mmu1]

[*]The MT, because of his lack of fighting skills, can't make the same good use of buffs as a cleric. Yeah, he could use the arcane buffs to get about on par, but then only for a short time and only if he has, what, a half-dozen rounds to prepare? Without Haste, buffing becomes harder.

What about an MT with Divine Power, Righteous Might, Stoneskin, Shield, and Tenser's Transformation? Maybe with Fly and Improved Invisibility thrown in for good measure... At high levels, many spells with a 10 minute/level duration last for hours.

I'd call that "on par"... Yeah, it'd take him time to buff up, and he can suffer greatly if Dispelled, but a cleric using anything more advanced than Bull's Strength / Endurance to buff himself in combat has the same problems. (well, fine, slightly less of a problem because his spells are harder to Dispel)

Thank god they're changing Haste in 3.5, with the 3.0 version of it, this guy would be completely absurd... All the advantages of being hasted, none of the problems - the "well, yeah, but with Haste you just blow through your spells twice as fast, and what are you left with" argument would no longer apply...

 

[herald]

Because it's dumb. Because there's no "god of arcane magic" in most worlds I know of; it's usually "god of magic" (no arcane or divine qualifier). Because if it's a god of magic, then they should grant _magic_ abilities to their functionaries. You want to heal? Go right ahead. You want to zap people with lightning bolts? Ditto. Or maybe not, to both questions. The point is that, if magic is magic, then spells are spells.

Hmmm, Let me check, Greyhawk has more than one god of magic, Forgotten Realms has more than 3, Dragonlance has 3 Gods of Magic. I'd be willing to guess that many worlds have gods of magic.

After all, thats why the whole domain "Magic" exists.

I disagree with you Hong on this one.

 

[bret]

OK, having thought about it overnight, I would playtest with two different characters.

FRCS:
Gnome Illusionist/Cleric with Gnome and Illusion domains.
Gets +2 caster level to illusions from the domains, which puts them at only a single level penalty for dispelling and SR.

PHB:
Human Wizard/Cleric with Luck and Travel domains.


I would go for at least a 15 in each of Wisdom and Int. Dump stat is Charisma since the character will not be able to turn undead anyways. I would figure it so that I could be assured of having a 19 Int by 20th level (when I could finally cast 9th level spells). In a low point buy game, this class is much less approachable. At about 30-32 points, you can do a respectable job.

It is difficult to say just how this PrC would stack up, need to experiment with a few different strategies to determine what really works best. I know that Spell Penetration, Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, and Silent Spell would be high on my list of feats. As the Gnome, I would definately take Spell Focus: Illusion since that is my main offense.

I think the hardest levels to get through would be 5-7. After that, I think the PrC would start really kicking in.

Until we see all of the revised edition rules, there really is no way to know if it is balanced.

One disadvantage that people haven't really gone into is the skill list. It is worse than either of the two base classes.

 

[hong]

Hmmm, Let me check, Greyhawk has more than one god of magic, Forgotten Realms has more than 3, Dragonlance has 3 Gods of Magic. I'd be willing to guess that many worlds have gods of magic.

Point me to where I said there are no gods of magic.

After all, thats why the whole domain "Magic" exists.

Which is stupid, and an attempt to shoehorn a concept into a ruleset that doesn't support it well.

 

[drnuncheon]

Because it's dumb.

I am truly staggered by your amazing powers of rhetoric.

Let's go back to your original contention, though, and see how well it works when applied to other domains:

If you want a "god of magic", without any qualifications on the _type_ of magic in question, then that should be reflected in how magic works in the game world. That is, there shouldn't be any distinction between arcane and divine in the first place.

Let's assume you're right, and that, if there is a god of magic, there should only be one type of magic. From there let us generalize to other gods:

If you want a "god of craftsmen", without any qualifications on the _type_ of crafting in question, then that should be reflected in how magic works in the game world. That is, there shouldn't be any distinction between blacksmithing and masonry in the first place.

Hmmm.

If you want a "goddess of love", without any qualifications on the _type_ of love in question, then that should be reflected in how love works in the game world. That is, there shouldn't be any distinction between romantic love and brotherly love in the first place.

Err...

If you want a "god of weather", without any qualifications on the _type_ of weather in question, then that should be reflected in how magic works in the game world. That is, there shouldn't be any distinction between sunny days and blizzards in the first place.

Maybe not.

So why should a god of "magic" be different from a god of craftsmen, of love, or of weather? Why couldn't a god of magic encompass arcane magic and divine magic?

J