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

[Spatula]

Spatula...

You forgot one key thing on spell vesatility, it's keyed with spell level. Your build Wiz 6/Clr 3/GeoM 1/MT 10 could only use his Int mod and ignore spell failure for ZERO 0 level spells. If you plan on doing alot of Ray of Frost, you're golden, but otherwise, you need more Geomancer levels to make Geomancer worth it.

Ah, you are correct, I missed that part of the spell versatility description.

 

[bmcdaniel]

GP Value of Mystic Theurege

I whipped up a little excel spreadsheet showing the GP value of the scrolls equal to the spellcasting ability of a Mystic Theurage vs an equivalent level wizard.

My methodology. I calculated the value of a scroll of the caster's level for each spell of each character. For example, a Wiz9's 3rd level spells are valued at 3 (spell level) * 9 (caster level) * 3 (spells at this level). I didn't include bonus spells for abilities or for wizard specialization.

Here are the results. Commentary follows.

[COLOR=white]
Table 1: Total Value at Actual Caster Level
	Level 9	Level 15 Level 19
Wiz	8,100	22,950	31,050
Theur	6,413	23,325	41,925
	79%	102%	135%

This is a good metric because scroll value takes into account caster level, which determines both DC and variable effects of the spells. One downside of this metric is that for some spells, this overstates the effect of caster level. For example, moving from caster level 9 to 19 increases the range and is useful for overcoming SR, but doesn't increase the damage of a magic missile.

Following is the same data compiled for scrolls which are written at MINIMUM caster level (which likely understates their value):

Table 2: Total Value at Minimum Caster Level
	Level 9	Level 15 Level 19
Wiz	4,400	22,050	34,250
Theur	3,213	26,125	64,525
	73%	118%	188%

Interestingly, using minimum caster level shows more benfit for the Theurege, despite the straight wizard having a high overall caster level.

All well and good, but this analysis is essentially static and ignores a very important part of spellcasting, the fact that you can only cast 1 spell per round (subject to haste, quicken, etc). Especially at higher levels, casters rarely run completely out of spells, so it is worthwhile to look at the average value of all spells.

Table 3: Average Value at Actual Caster Level
	Level 9	Level 15 Level 19
Wiz	450	765	817
Theur	229	409	544
	51%	53%	67%

Table 4: Average Value at Minimum Caster Level
	Level 9	Level 15 Level 19
Wiz	244	735	901
Theur	115	458	838
	47%	62%	93%

This table likely undervalues the straight wizard because, particularly for round-by-round (ie combat) spells, it is likely that the most powerful spells will be cast first. Even though we know the result will be, lets look at the value of the maximum spell castable.

Table 5: Maximum Value at Actual Caster Level
	Level 9	Level 15 Level 19
Wiz	1,125	2625	4,275
Theur	450	1650	2,800
	40%	63%	65%

Now, one more caveat before interpretation. Doing the above comparison of a straight wizard vs a straight cleric shows that the wizard is seriously underpowered. The total value of cleric spells for a 9th level cleric is 11700/6800 (actual caster level/minimum caster level) which means that wizards have 69%/64% of the casting capability of wizards. Combine this with the fact that we know that cleric have more non-casting abilities than the wizards (d8 HD, Medium BAB, Wider Armor and Weapon Choice, Turn Undead, Domain Power, Spontaneous Casting; although wizards do get bonus feats) and we can reasonably determine that cleric spells are, on the whole, less effective than wizard spells. All of which indicates that the Theureuge is slightly less powerful compared to a wizard than a straight spell-by-spell comparison would suggest.

Interpretation.

So, which table really reflects the actual power level of the Wizard vs the Theurege? Well that depends almost entirely on your campaign style. If spellcasters in your campaign are likely to use all of their spells before they rest and use them for purposes that are relatively independent of caster level (buffs, utility spells) and in non-combat situations, then Table 2 tells you that the Theurege is likely overpowered compared to an equivalent wizard. Whereas, if nearly all spellcasting happens within round-by-round context, then the Theurege is seriously underpowered compared to a straight wizard. Most campaigns are a mix somewhat inbetween.

To me, what is potentially the most troubling about the class is how its relative power grows over time. By all measures, at level 9 the Theurege is underpowered, sometimes very seriously. By level 19 (depending on campaign style) he may have caught up. Of course, my experience with D&D at the extreme end of the level chart shows that lots of things are broken at that level.

My own judgement is that given the Theurege has all the diasadvantages of a wizard (BAB, HD, saves), no feats, the tendancy for cleric spells to be underpowered and the likely style of the games I play in, the Theurege is probably underpowered at all but the very highest levels, where the game breaks down anyway.

Thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

BMM
[/COLOR]

 

[hong]

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?

You tell me. I usually _don't_ have different forms of elves in my campaign. However, even if I _did_ have different forms of elves, I _also_ have different types of spells, as I have now mentioned twice. Perhaps the lack of ears on Lego people's heads tends to result in hearing difficulties.

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.

Of course one doesn't preclude the other. When dealing with concepts that have no empirical basis in reality, the possibilities are only limited by the imagination. You can find a handwave for anything, even the bucket o' snails. However, some handwaves are better than others.

The point _you_ are missing, oh Lego-headed one, is that if you want a character with the innate ability to excel at all types of magic, then what is the reason for having different types of magic in the first place? Arcane and divine magic exist for a reason. If you want a character to excel in _both_ types of magic, then that undermines the reason for that divide.

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.

If I wanted a theology this complex, I'd be a theologian.

In what way are we ignoring it?

Who's "we", oh Lego-headed one? Because as far as I can tell, none of MY Lego people have any problems with what I'm saying.

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.

And you can do that, by multiclassing cleric and wizard.

Oh dear, such a character is nerfed according to the standard rules. My heart bleeds. If this concept of a multi-skilled caster is so important to you, then either 1) fix the standard rules so that multiclassing doesn't nerf spellcasters; or 2) get rid of the artificial divide between different types of magic. A prestige class whose only function is to serve as a patch is a prestige class without a reason for being.

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?

Tell me where I said anything about multiclassing.

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?

The blade dancer has some issues, in terms of niche preservation and the prevalence of magic. Since high-level 3E tends to resemble a wuxia movie anyway, what with flying, teleporting people all over the place, a class designed to emulate wuxia stunts ends up not having a niche to itself. Similarly, I can't see any niche for a mystic theurgoober except as a contrived patch for a hole in the multiclassing rules.

 

[jasamcarl]

Um, what makes this patch 'contrived'? That loaded term would imply that there is a complete disconnect between the Mystic and standard rules. That obviously is not the case, as it uses the PRC format. And anybody who has taken an analysis of this class at all seriously has pretty much come to the conclusion that it is balanced. So it suceeds in its stated goal and uses a format with a lot of precedence. What is 'contrived' about it?

 

[hong]

Um, what makes this patch 'contrived'? That loaded term would imply that there is a complete disconnect between the Mystic and standard rules. That obviously is not the case, as it uses the PRC format. And anybody who has taken an analysis of this class at all seriously has pretty much come to the conclusion that it is balanced. So it suceeds in its stated goal and uses a format with a lot of precedence. What is 'contrived' about it?

Repost for the tardy:

Presumably there's a distinction between them in your game world for a reason. Having a PrC that can use both types, without a very good reason for doing so (no, I don't think "masters all magic" is a good reason), blurs that distinction to the point of making it useless.

I can't think of any in-game niche that this PrC fills. The only reason it even exists, as far as I can tell, is to patch up a hole in the multiclassing rules.

 

[jgbrowning]

I'm I the only one that thinks magical versatility is vastly more important/powerful than raw firepower?

joe b.

 

[LuYangShih]

No, of course not. Half or more of the people I've seen look at this class have indicated they think it is overpowered. PrCs, though, unless ridiculously overpowered, (and even then) will always have supporters. When Sword & Fist first came out, many people insisted the Ninja Of The Crescent Moon was perfectly balanced.

 

[Celtavian]

Re

I think it is slighly overpowered, just not as much as some think. It isn't going to change the face of the game. The way SR and caster level checks are set up ruleswise limits the usefulness of any Prc that limits casting level. Thats just the nature of 3rd edition mechanics.

Also, with the loss of the extra spellcasting action from Haste, the extra spellcasting firepower won't be as useful. They will still only be casting 1 spell per round.

The real advantage I see to the class combination is that they will be able to call upon the most powerful offensive and defensive magic. That makes it slightly overpowered. The only balancing factor being that it will be easier for a straight class wizard or cleric to dispel or counter the spells of a Mystic Theurge, which slightly offsets the class advantages.

IMO, some people are a little to trigger happy to call the class either balanced or imbalanced without some time to play the class. Either way, I can't wait to give this class a try and see how well it will do for myself.

 

[rounser]

This is a tricky one, full of pros and cons.

Con: Your spells are going to bounce off of things more, because they're not as tough to resist as a single-classer.
Pro: You have more spells to bounce off things. If you live long enough to do so, that is...

Con: You don't get a handful of high level big blaster or big utility spells, so you're not as individually powerful.
Pro: You've got a heap of low level spells which can convert directly into buffs and heals and information for your party, so the party becomes more powerful with you in it.

Con: You'll probably not get through that many spells in combat at a rate of one per round in a single day before the rest of the party needs to rest.
Pro: Your out-of-combat spellcasting is going to be impressive and ongoing. Again with the buffs, heals and information-gathering.

At first blush, it looks like they could have renamed the Mystic Theurge....(drum roll)...
the Buffmaster.

I mean, spell resistance and saving throws don't matter when you're casting things on allies, and having top dog power level spells doesn't matter with buffs either.

As a support role character, I think it has the potential to have the bard and cleric well and truly beat.

 

[jasamcarl]

This is a tricky one, full of pros and cons.

Con: Your spells are going to bounce off of things more, because they're not as tough to resist as a single-classer.
Pro: You have more spells to bounce off things. If you live long enough to do so, that is...

Con: You don't get a handful of high level big blaster or big utility spells, so you're not as individually powerful.
Pro: You've got a heap of low level spells which can convert directly into buffs and heals and information for your party, so the party becomes more powerful with you in it.

Con: You'll probably not get through that many spells in combat at a rate of one per round in a single day before the rest of the party needs to rest.
Pro: Your out-of-combat spellcasting is going to be impressive and ongoing. Again with the buffs, heals and information-gathering.

At first blush, it looks like they could have renamed the Mystic Theurge....(drum roll)...
the Buffmaster.

I mean, spell resistance and saving throws don't matter when you're casting things on allies, and having top dog power level spells doesn't matter with buffs either.

As a support role character, I think it has the potential to have the bard and cleric well and truly beat.

Eh I don't think so. One premise which I think needs to be dispelled here is that high-level spellcasters are at all lacking in buffs in the first place. Given the long duration of most low-level buffs, there is a point at which the party is already suitably buffed and the ability to provide more has almost no effect. Relative to damage spells, the marginal utility of buffs decreases at a faster rate. The only thing most high-level casters use low-level slots for is buffs, and from what I have observed, they usually have enough of them. And as you pointed out, these last longer than the Mystic's and are harder to dispell.

As to the cleric and bard (the latter of which is more difficult to critique, given the large number of changes that have come with the revision), they are both superior in-battle buffers than a Mystic is likely to be. The cleric has the hp, bab, and saves to make its role as a 'front-line medic' truley viable, not to mention it has more outright blasting power (again, the three caster levels). The bard's musical abilities have less of an oppurtunity cost than other casters because it can make attacks as well. Plus the better saves makes it durable.

Oh, and before I forget, the hp advantage of the Mystic over the wizard is probably overblown. The ability score issue allows a wizard to trade off Int for Con and still maintain a healthy DC advantage over the Mystic in most of the spells it is likely to cast. The stunted familiar advancement also means a wizard can invest in a toad with less of a likelyhood that it will be knocked off in high-level combat.