Mystic Theurge too good or not?

[James McMurray]

No, but you can say that the underlying _principle_ of adding two classes together is broken.

Wrong, you can only say that allowing the combining of two classes to extend beyond a single 10 level prestige class might be broken.

Granted, it most likely would be, but without actual playtesting, its impossible to say for sure.

 

[hong]

Wrong, you can only say that allowing the combining of two classes to extend beyond a single 10 level prestige class might be broken.

Granted, it most likely would be, but without actual playtesting, its impossible to say for sure.

If I wanted to be sure in everything I said, I'd buy Enron shares.

 

[Mistwell]

Lawyer, OTOH, would be a base class IMO (you don't have to graduate law school to be a lawyer, at least not in the US ... you just have to pass the qualifying exams).

Wrong. California remains alone, I believe, in permitting the Bar without law school, and even then you have to pass a special First Year Law Exam (which is much more difficult than he Bar), and get a sponsor. And once you do it, you basically have become a sole practitioner because no law firm or company would hire you.

99.99% of the lawyers in the US graduate law school with a juris doctorate (typically 3 years, though rarely in 2 years, and more often in 4+ years).

 

[krunchyfrogg]

My concern is that the first splatbook will include another class that does exactly that... without changing the Mystic Theurge.

As soon as that happens, it will open the door to a 20th level character with 9th level spells from two classes...

-Hyp.

True, good point. Another solution (I play this way) is to only allow any character access to one PrC. PrC's are supposed to be secializations: some characters never take a PrC. Limiting PC's to only one PrC isn't much of a restriction.

 

[Darklone]

I'd have used prestige classes with lower entrance requirements (simply 1 level in each class) but additional spellcasting levels in both classes similar to the cleric BAB (1st level: not, 2-4th level: +1 spellcasting in both classes, rinse, repeat).

If you have several similar PrClasses, add them. Does not hurt, the more classes you gain, the less spellcasting power you'll have.

If you want to combine three classes, no problem.

Brd1/Clr1/Wiz1 ... it's housemade PrClass would give spellcasting to all three levels every even level (like wizard BAB).

 

[Storm Raven]

Wrong. California remains alone, I believe, in permitting the Bar without law school, and even then you have to pass a special First Year Law Exam (which is much more difficult than he Bar), and get a sponsor. And once you do it, you basically have become a sole practitioner because no law firm or company would hire you.

Umm, no. California is not alone. Virginia allows individuals to read for the bar as well.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Maybe a simple solution would be making a very minor change in the MT PrC: Instead of being a 10 level PrC, give it a 5 level cap (there are many other 5 level PrCs).

I'm going to handle the MT in two ways in my games:
1) Only available to cleric/mages of gods with the magic domain
2) Has spellcasting progression alternate with spellpower.

The combined effect will be flavor (which the MT is lacking, IMHO), providing SR defeating abilities (why most people say multiclass cleric/mages suck) and still not give out those 9th level spells.

I've seen what just a level or two of caster can do for a character, having complementary caster abilities is quite potent. Once the SR problem is mitigated I don't see a problem with multiclass casters and Spell Power does that quite handilly. I'm going to do the same with EKs.

 

[JPL]

Wrong. California remains alone, I believe, in permitting the Bar without law school, and even then you have to pass a special First Year Law Exam (which is much more difficult than he Bar), and get a sponsor. And once you do it, you basically have become a sole practitioner because no law firm or company would hire you.

99.99% of the lawyers in the US graduate law school with a juris doctorate (typically 3 years, though rarely in 2 years, and more often in 4+ years).

And it seemed like a good idea at the time, huh?

 

[Mistwell]

Umm, no. California is not alone. Virginia allows individuals to read for the bar as well.

In Virginia, you need to have special approval by the Board and thereafter complete a required period of law study, which amounts to about as much studying as law school (without the buildings). Maine, Colorado and Vermont also have similar requirements, all of which are quite difficult to meet and are not often utilized.

The point remains. 99.9% of all attorney's in the US went to law school, the overwhelming majority for 3 years. Calling an Attorney in the US a "base class" because it "doesn't even require graduate school" is extremely inaccurate (and a bit insulting). Not only does it require graduate school, but it requires way more than your typical graduate degree (hence is a Doctorate in Jurisprudence, and not a Masters Degree).

In addition, I believe you would find a similar percentage of Medical Doctors who were permitted to take the medical exams without a formal degree from a medical school. Is MD a "base class" because it "doesn't even require graduate school" because there are a tiny fraction of exceptions to the rule that you need to go to Medical School?

 

[Snipehunt]

If they have "more levels" than their compatriots, it supports bad multiclassing. They just put in more work.

Now, out of those lawers, how many are practicing surgens? Branching is one thing, keep both up is completely different.

Now, I agree with the "modern times are irrelevant" point of view - IMO this doctor/lawyer analogy is not meaningful when discussing the MT. Real life "levels" depend as much on training and education - which is largely complete for professions early on - as experience.

That said:

At least get the analogies right.

Doctors are not surgeons. Surgeons require a lot of time-consuming techncial training many doctors never learn. I don't know of any surgeon/lawyers - you'd be in your later 30's probably before you even finished school. You'd be collecting social security before you'd established a practice in either. A surgeon would be like a red wizard, or archmage, who then took some MT levels.

As for practicing dr/lawyers - you won't find many, if any. Dr's and lawyers are both licensed by states. Most I know have a lic. to practice law in, say, CA, and med. in, say, Ill. It'd be illegal for them to practice both.

The practicing lawyer, however, is generally every bit as good a doctor as a practicing doctor. The practicing lawyer who is also an MD generally has kept up in studies, and techniques, and is almost as good, if not as good, a GP as the practicing Dr. IF the lawyer wanted to docter, she easily could step right in.

I'll say a two-level multiclass penalty probably just about covers it. Just like the MT.