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

[hong]

I am truly staggered by your amazing powers of rhetoric.

Thank you. I'll be here all week.

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.

(etc)

Huh? A god of craftsmen (or love, or weather, or whatnot) does not imply lack of distinction between crafts, just as a god of magic does not imply lack of distinction between spells. There are no "arcane" or "divine" craftsmen, last I checked.

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?

Exactly. If said god encompasses both forms of magic, then why bother with having two distinct forms in the first place?

 

[Goobermunch]

Please excuse my rambliness. I've got a headcold from hell and NyQuil is my lord and savior.

That said, I've been reading a lot of complaining about the Mystic Theurge. I've also seen a number of analyses comparing the MT to a high level caster.

I'm going to suggest a different analysis. I think the MT is under powered. I say this, because I can get all of the benefits (and more) with a single feat. That feat of course, is leadership.

Let's start with the big downside of your MT: you combine the spellcasting power of two classes with one set of hitpoints and one physical location. Anything that takes you out deprives your party of all of your goodness.

At 7th level, when you can first take this class, you've got all the juice of a 4th level wizard and a 4th level cleric.

At 7th level, I've had leadership for a level and can have a cohort of up to 6th level. This means that my 7th level sorceror can bring his friendly 6th level cleric along with him.

Advantage: Leadership.

At 12th level, you're casting as a 9th level cleric and a 9th level wizard.

I'm casting as a 12th level sorceror and my cleric pal is still cruising along one level behind me . . . with all his unadulterated cleric hitpoints and BAB intact.

At 16th level, you're casting as 13th level cleric and a 13th level wizard. At best, you're getting two spells off each round.

At 16th level, I'm a brutishly powerful 16th level sorceror. My cleric friend is respectably 15th level. We're casting between 2-4 spells each round. That is, of course, assuming my cleric friend isn't an elven archer to boot.

Now, hey, wait a minute . . . you're saying. My MT can take leadership too. At 16th level, I can bring a 15th level caster along with me.

To which your party should respond . . . sure, but then, why are we dragging you along . . . we'll just hire the 15th level caster and convince him to take a cohort! And even then, your party is ahead of the game.

Viewed in this light, I really don't think the MT is all that great!

--G

 

[Nightfall]

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.

Think you have some good points Psion. For me I'm just going to raise the requirements to make it a little less accessable. Maybe more like 9 or 10th level.

 

[drnuncheon]

Huh? A god of craftsmen (or love, or weather, or whatnot) does not imply lack of distinction between crafts, just as a god of magic does not imply lack of distinction between spells. There are no "arcane" or "divine" craftsmen, last I checked.

If said god encompasses both forms of magic, then why bother with having two distinct forms in the first place?

If said god encompasses all forms of crafts, then why bother with having distinct forms in the first place?

If said god encompasses all forms of weather, then why bother with having distinct forms in the first place?

I don't think this is a difficult concept. If one god can be the patron of both blacksmiths and masons, then why cannot another god be the patron of both arcane casters and divine casters? Both are using different forms of magic, buch as a blacksmith and a mason use different types of craftsmanship. The magic is used in different ways, much as ironwork and worked stone are used for different things. They require different sets of skills (although there is some overlap), just like blacksmithing and masonry.

So, why should 'magic' get all of its possibilities smashed together into one thing, when nothing else does?

J

 

[coyote6]

I'd like it if the class scaled better at higher levels, and was resonable to take for epic as well.

I came up with an alternate progression, its just a little weaker overall and doesn't get much stronger in epic levels:

1 Both
2 Divine
3 Both
4 Arcane
5 Both
6 Both
7 Divine
8 Both
9 Arcane
10 Both

With this progression you get +7 levels to both. Does it seem better balanced this way? At 20th level the best you could have Wiz 17/Clr 10.

I believe that should be Wiz14/Clr10. A Wiz7/Clr3/MT10 (using your progression) gets +7 caster level for both classes; 7+7=14.

Wiz14/Clr10 at 20th level is fairly weak, IMO. Don't expect to penetrate much spell reisistance.

And that's towards the min/max end of the scale; the Clr5/Wiz5/MT10 will be casting as a Wiz12/Clr12; no 7th level spells, horrible spell penetration, no special abilities, etc.

IMO, the class itself is okay; it's what you can do out of the class that might cause problems -- mainly, taking nothing but wizard or cleric levels after you're done with MT. I don't think a character with an even split between Wizard & Cleric levels will be too powerful.

You could up the requirements to require the ability to cast 3rd level arcane & divine spells -- but I think that might make the character aiming for this class untenably weak at lower levels. Before you take the class, you'd be 10th level character who's most powerful spell would be a bare minimum 3rd level spell. 5d6 fireball, vs. typical CR 10 threats? Not a good way to live.

That requirement would also mostly exclude sorcerers from this class entirely, since they'd have to be Sor6/Clr5 to meet the requirement. They would then be incapable of taking 10 levels of the class without going epic; worse, they'd never even get 8th level spells. That'd be a shame, because it sounds like a fun character concept (person born with innate magical ability who chooses religious service).

<shrug> I'll still wait and see.

 

[herald]

Huh? A god of craftsmen (or love, or weather, or whatnot) does not imply lack of distinction between crafts, just as a god of magic does not imply lack of distinction between spells. There are no "arcane" or "divine" craftsmen, last I checked.

No, but there are Arcane and Divine spell casters, and that's all there needs to be to support the point.

There has always been a distiction between Divine Magic and Arcane Magic in D&D. That's why the Prc is made the way it is. I think I can say with all certainty that the 3.5 rules will not differ so much from the 3.0 rules and have a totally intergrated spell list of Divine and Arcane spells.

If you want an anology of Gods of Craftsmen and the like simply doesn't hold up. In D&D gods grant divine spells. Even when the spell duplicates in the Arcane Spell list, it is Divine. That's the way the system is made. You could Rule zero what you want with the spell tables, but don't expect Wizards to start making Prcs with those kind of exceptions.

 

[mearls]

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

This is incorrect. The standard, boilerplate text for gaining additional caster levels via a prc is very particular about how a character only gains more spell slots and an increased caster level. The wizard's free spells per level is a major advantage compared to prestige classes and one of that class's core abilities. Those 7th, 8th, or 9th level spells are not cheap to scribe into your book.

 

[Storm Raven]

Exactly, this is pretty much just like the 1e/2e cleric/wizard multiclass. Was that class horribly overpowered and game breaking?

As was true for most multiclass or dual class combinations in 1e/2e, the answer to your questions is "Yes".

 

[Psion]

Sorry, Mike, you are incorrect. Per Skip.

Edit: From the T&B FAQ. Emphasis mine:

If I take spellsword as a prestige class and choose
wizard as the previous spellcaster class, what happens if I
advance several levels as a spellsword (gaining several +1
bonuses to the previous spellcaster class) then take
another level of wizard? What happens if I take a couple
of different prestige classes and then go back to wizard?
For example, suppose I have a 5th-level wizard/4th-level
fighter/10th-level spellsword/1st-level mage of the arcane
order?

The sample character casts spells (and has free spells for
his spellbook) as an 11th-level wizard.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

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

Sorry, Mike, you are incorrect. Per Skip.

Okay I'll bite which one is Mike and what is he wrong about .?
ken