Also, because this is in something of a vacuum, we can't make a whole lot of determination. Perhaps Wizards will have more to give up in 3.5? (I could see them beefing up the skills a bit, and perhaps giving one or two more familiar treats, and the change in some spells will mean that certain example spells may not be the classics anymore)
I said it before, and I'll say it again:
Saying that the MT is overpowered because it has more spells/day is like saying that the Sorcerer is overpowered because it has more spells/day.
And as for PrC's being ways to mitigate poor choices -- that's why things like the Lasher exist. However, I *do* have a problem with those types of PrC's...fundamentally, you can't have a whip-warrior without the Lasher. Just like you can't have an effective cleric/wizard without the MT. It means that it's that much more limiting...I'd have preferred it to be goverened by feats/class powers/whatever, and have spiced up the PrC a bit. It's like a void in the campaign that ONLY this PrC can fill...and I do have some problems with a PrC as a 'fix'.
Now, for the flaws I see in it:
* As Psion pointed out, it is a VERY dull class..you could spice it up, but they wouldn't have abilities to reflect the spice.
* This is a 'fix' for a more fundamental problem, so it reeks of 'half-assedness.' A Wiz/Sorc, for instance, is still skrewed. The problem is mitigated somewhat by examples like the
FFd20 Magicians, which allow caster levels to stack, but it remains a rather fundamental problem to the system itself -- the divide doesn't cross as easily as the attack bonus divide, because it's not a universal.
* It means that NO Clr/Wiz or Clr/Sorc is as valuable as this PrC. Effectively, it's a PrC that HAS to exist, or power is lost. It's a PrC that FORCES you to use it, or suck. I am disturbed at it...they shouldn't suck without the PrC...