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

Not so bad to me...

Looking over the class, and this thread, it doesn't look so bad...

While others have been comparing this to a straight Wiz or Sor or Cleric, how about a comparison with the Wiz/Cleric (or Sor/Cleric)? To me, multiclassing is all about versatility, but the WizX/ClrX doesn't lend itself to versatility very well in mid to high levels.

The Wiz10/Clr10 doesn't stand a good chance against that CR 20 (typically, SR 31) creature. However, the Clr3/Wiz7/MT10 has a better shot at it, and even then it would seem like a coin toss (which is what it should be, right?).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Re

Hmmm...this class is strong, maybe too strong. I just tried to map out a character. The loss of feats is pretty dramatic for a wizard, but the cleric doesn't lose all that much because WotC hasn't done much with turning. Hard to enter any other PrC's as well.

I know I will be playing this class with at least one of my characters that was previously a cleric/wizard/ftr in 2nd edition. I am glad they brought back a class that feels like the old multi-class characters.
 

Does Discover magazine still toss in the annual fake article as an "April Fool's" joke? I remember they did one about burning water (as in the old joke about the cook so bad they could burn water), and another about the hot-headed rodents that lived in the snow.

That's what this class strikes me as - a more sly, tongue-in-cheek April Fool's joke, posted a day late and with the other, more obvious April Fool's articles running interference.
 

Personally, I think the class is overpowered. If I was playing a Wizard, I would gladly trade three levels of my progression to gain Cleric spellcasting up to seventh level. Losing a few ninth level spell slots and three feats (which isn't as bad as it seems, since you can often gain feats through certain domains), is nothing compared to the gains you make. I would never allow this PrC in my game, and furthermore, the more details I see for 3.5E, the more I dislike it.

I was really interested about 3.5E when it was first announced, but the "revisions" being made seem to be clarifying a few rules, and adding a few half-assed PrCs. I was thinking of pre-ordering 3.5E, now I'm going to wait for at least a month before I consider picking it up. I hope WoTC can pull this off, but it doesn't seem like they will right now.
 

ColonelHardisson said:
Does Discover magazine still toss in the annual fake article as an "April Fool's" joke? I remember they did one about burning water (as in the old joke about the cook so bad they could burn water), and another about the hot-headed rodents that lived in the snow.

That's what this class strikes me as - a more sly, tongue-in-cheek April Fool's joke, posted a day late and with the other, more obvious April Fool's articles running interference.

The Wizards developers have stated this is not an April Fools joke, as you would already know if you had read the rest of the thread.
 

LuYangShih said:


The Wizards developers have stated this is not an April Fools joke, as you would already know if you had read the rest of the thread.

Yes, I did read the thread. Monte and SKR are no longer with WotC (Monte left WotC around 3 years ago, IIRC, and SKR left several months ago, and didn't receive proper credit for his work in Savage Species, indicating he may not be as aware of things at WotC as he should be (not a knock on him; WotC is at fault in this regard), and haven't been for a while. With no disrespect to them, I won't take it as gospel until it's actually in the DMG.

So there.
 
Last edited:

Olive said:
<a href="http://boards.wizards.com/rpg/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=140;t=000452">This thread</a> on the wizards board has Mark A Jindra (WotC Web Developer) saying that it is not an april fools joke...

:rolleyes:

Andy Collins also defended the class on the Wizards boards. Like I said, read the thread. But then again, even with all the WoTC developers saying it is, you won't believe until it's in the 3.5E DMG. I guess you better just bow out of all 3.5E related discussion until then. :p
 
Last edited:

As Mike Sullivan states, the Mystic Theurge is an attempt to make spell-casting multiclassing as useful and tempting as a level of rogue or fighter.

I think this prc accomplishes its goal well, and as far as balanced it comes up fair. First, you have to preclude allowing the character to take a level of True Necromancer (a first level ability which stacks cleric and wizard levels for the casting level of necromancies would be quite broken), and then you have to consider other clr/wiz prcs to see if there is another uber broken quality when in conjunction with the theurge.

If youve determined that that issue is ok, the theurge isnt really overpowered, just different. He has quite a bit of endurance, as in able to cast spells more often than a sorceror, but with considerably less power.

I believe any comparison to Theurge and Cleric comes with cleric on top, as the cleric retains her better BAB, better saves, better HP, turning ability, and the ability to cast divine spells in armor, all of which the theurge loses. The big comparison is with a straight wizard and the theurge.

3/3/1 Theurge vs 7 Wizard
The wizard's spells are so much better the comparison is almost moot. The wizard also has a leg up on familiar advancement, and 1 more feat. The wizard will probably be looking to enter a prc himself soon, but we will assume he stays straight wizard.

Theurge Spells Per Day: Clr 5/4/3. Wiz 4/3/2
Wizard Spells Per Day: 4/4/3/2/1

There are 2 big comparisons, highest spell level and total spells. For the purpose of this argument, 0 level spells are not considered. The Theurge has 12 spells and his highest is level 2. The Wizard has 10 and her highest level is 4. Clearly, this is no contest, the Theurge has only begun to become a viable character concept.

3/3/4 Theurge vs 10 Wizard
The wizard has gained another feat and at this point can communicate with his familiar telepathically. The theurge has achieved a 7th level caster in both arcane and divine magic.

Theurge Spells Per Day: Clr 6/5/4/3/2. Wiz 4/4/3/2/1
Wizard Spells Per Day: 4/4/4/3/3/2

The Theurge has 22 spells and highest level 4. The wizard has 16 spells, highest level 5. The theurge is approaching the power of the wizard, but will never beat it. A theurge can cast a fireball for 7d6 damage, with a spell penetration of +7. The wizard casts a fireball for 10d6 damage, with a spell penetration of +10, or could use a 5th level slot for an empowered fireball.

Its important to point out that as far as buffing fellow party members, the theurge is unparalleled. His ability to summon monsters is also strong, as the odds of running out of spells is smaller.

3/3/7 Theurge vs 13 Wizard
The wizard's familiar has gained spell resistance and the ability to be scried by its master, but the wizard is still only 2 bonus feats up on the theurge.

Theurge Spells Per Day: Clr 6/5/5/4/4/3. Wiz 4/4/4/3/3/2
Wizard Spells Per Day: 4/4/4/4/3/2/1

The theurge is really pulling his own weight, with a whopping 37 spells per day, highest level 5th. However the wizard has advanced far enough to get 7th level spells, and despite his smaller amount of spells per day (a mere 18, less than half of the theurge) they are more potent. Compare the Theurge's Cone of Cold at 10d6 and 50 ft to the Wizard's at 13d6 and 65 ft. Comprable? Yes, but the wizard could cast a still and silent version as a level 7 spell, or a Prismatic Spray. The Wizard also retains a +3 relative to the Theurge on Spell Penetration rolls.

At this point its prudent to consider costs. The theurge will probably be saving on some scribing costs, as overlapping divine and arcane spells dont need to be scribed, but the theurge has 2 important mental statistics. Also, despite his strong role as a buff-stick for the party, his buffs lasts 3 caster levels less than the wizard, and are 3 caster levels easier to dispel.

3/3/10 Theurge vs 16 Wizard
A close showdown, this is the theurge at the height of his power as after this level he will have to take single class levels or another prc.

Theurge Spells Per Day: Clr 6/6/6/5/5/4/3/2. Wiz 4/4/4/4/3/2/1.
Wizard Spells Per Day: 4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2

The Theurge is up to 50 spells a day, highest level 7. The Wizard has picked up a third bonus wizard feat and has almost reached 9th level spells. With 28 spells and up to level 8 spells, the Theurge has managed to pull ahead. His spells arent quite as potent, and are still behind the Wizards' in terms of penetration, but if he can live long enough to cast them he has more force.

Its also noteworthy to point out that if a Theurge took Cleric as his starting class, he will have perhaps 10 more hp and by level 16 equal saving throws except Will, which is 3 higher for the Theurge. While he has been able to advance most of his skills as a straight wizard, he has lost Scry as a class skill, a potentially powerful loss for a high level spellcaster. If he chose to have a familiar at all, it is little more than a hindrance, as its death will only harm the character, and it is not nearly as hardy as the Wizard's counterpart.

This discussion did not take bonus spells into account, but the theurge would probably benefit almost twice as much as the Wizard. 3e encounters are difficult to balance at high levels, when a single high level spell the monster doesnt manage to save against spells the end of the encounter. For the Theurge, the odds of a 1-spell answer working are far lower, especially against "boss" encounters (CR 1-3 levels higher than party).

I maintain that this prc is really only powerful if you begin play at higher than 9th level, as up till that point the Theurge (or multiclassed wiz/clr) is significantly less powerful than a single class combination (or a spell-fighter combination). It is not until the highest level of play that a theurge comes into his own, and at that point he has more spells than he can use in a day. It is also in the Theurge's greatest benefit to acquire this class as quickly as possible (right after getting clr3/wiz3), slower acquisition means longer that you are "underpowered".

Technik
 

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

mearls said:
Ah, I figured that's where that came from. Needless to say, I don't agree with that ruling.

Well, you can disagree all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that the "standard boilerplate PrC spellcasting text" explicitly contradicts your notion of what is given by the ability.
 

hong said:
There are distinct forms of weather. There are also distinct forms of magic. They are called "spells". There is, further, no real-life analogue to "divine" or "arcane" magic, as there is for weather, last I checked, so such analogies are just a distraction.

:rolleyes: Fine, you want an analogy without a real-life analogue? Corellan Larethian is the god of elves. If he encompasses all forms of elvenitude, why bother having different forms of elves?

The point - which you are doing such a fine job of missing that I am forced to believe it is deliberate - is that the fact that there are multiple varieties of magic does not preclude the existence of a single god of magic.

hong said:
The patron of divine casters is whoever grants their spells, whether that's Heironeous, Lathander, Billy the deity of trolls, etc. The concept of a "god of magic" is antithetical to the whole point of having divine spells in the first place.

Why?

First of all, the patron of a divine caster is whoever grants their spells in the first place. There could also be a god who looks over divine casters in general - perhaps he's the one who first figured out how to grant a mortal the power to cast spells. It all depends on the structure of religion in your campaign.

hong said:
It would appear that your Lego head is doing strange things to you, because you're not making sense. Nobody has suggested "smashing all its possibilities into one thing", whatever that means.

Well, except you, when you bizarrely insist that a god of magic precludes a distinction between divine and arcane spells. You're really not doing a very good job of expressing your point.

hong said:
THe point is: why bother with this artificial divide, if all you're going to do is ignore it?

In what way are we ignoring it? Divine casters cast divine magic, arcane casters cast arcane magic. Some people happen to have the skill and training to do both, just as some people have multiple PhDs. The presence of that case hardly means we are ignoring the divide in all cases.

hong said:
Arcane and divine magic exist to further specific roles or archetypes within the game. If what you want is to munge these archetypes together, then why have arcane and divine magic in the first place?

Fighters and rogues exist to further specific roles or archetypes within the game. If what you want to do is to munge these archetypes together, then why have separate classes in the first place? I guess we should just get rid of multiclassing completely, eh?

Or, replace 'rogues' with 'magic-users'...and then consider your blade-dancer character (or prospective blade-dancer, I can't recall), happily munging the two archetypes together. But wait - that was a new archetype! You needed to use elements from both! So how is that different from the cleric/magicuser, Mystic Theurge, Hallowed Mage, or whatever?

J
 

Remove ads

Top