Question on a couple of feats from Compete Divine...

[Pax]

Right, as I said, no need. The crux of the discussion at the moment is the correct reading of the RAW for the two feats. I didn't want to confuse the issue with talk of balance. But since you ask...

And the crux of my counter to your argument is, "there's no explicit statement in either direction". Neither feat names the other, and there's no official guide as to whichof them should take precedence over the other.

Which is when pure examinations of balance comes into it.

Looks great to me (and balanced). [...]

And that's well and fine - as far as it goes.

Looks almost the same except that instead of being able to cast Cure Critical Wounds only 1/day you can now cast CCW 3/day spontaneously and prepare it 1/day. That’s a considerably greater curative domain spell power than Arcane Disciple would care to place in the hands of an arcane caster.

And you have neglected to observe that the ability to cast extra curative spells costs another feat. Also, as I said, if healing is worth enough to you to take TWO feats, and you're a wizard with a Wisdom of 16+, you're much more likely to take levels of Cleric and Mystic Theurge. IMO, a competent min/max'er would do precisely that, in fact.

So by comparison, if the AD and SH feats are used this way, there really isn’t a reason to take levels in Cleric the MT-route as you have abundant (greater than the MT actually at higher spell levels) curative spells at your finger-tips.

I disagree - remember, i said "WIS 12 to 15, Spontaneous Healer; WIS 16+, theurge)"; that means one less spontaneous casting of a cure[/u] spell per day.

Given the Healing Domain, and a 16 Wisdom, the Theurge-varian could conceivably cast:

• (Level 4; 2+d+0) 3x cure critical wounds per day;
• (Level 3; 3+d+1) 5x cure serious wounds per day;
• (Level 2; 3+d+1) 5x cure moderate wounds per day;
• (Level 1; 4+d+1) 6x cure light wounds per day;
• (Level 0; 5) 5x cure minor wounds per day.

... which is 45.5 spell levels of healing (counting Cure Minor as half a spell level, same as when pricing magic items).

Compared to that, the (e.g.) 15 wisdom, 18 intelligence AD/SH nonspecialist Wizard could cast:

• (Level 6; 1 out of 1+0) 1x heal per day;
• (Level 5; 1 out of 2+0) 1x mass cure light wounds per day;
• (Level 4; 1 out of 3+1) 1x cure critical wounds per day;
• (Level 3; 1 out of 3+1) 1x cure serious wounds per day;
• (Level 2; 1 out of 4+1) 1x cure moderate wounds per day;
• (Level 1; 1 out of 4+1) 1x cure light wounds per day;
• (Spontaneously, 2 per day) 1x mass cure light wounds and 1x cure critical wounds.

That's 30 spell-levels of healing, and keep in mind that it costs him two feats to be able to do this. And even given the same wisdom of 16, that's one extra cure critical wounds per day. Assuming he uses that entire quota of healing in a day, he's left with (as a wizard):

• (level 6) 0 spells
• (level 5) 0 spells
• (level 4) 1 spell
• (level 3) 1 spells
• (level 2) 2 spells
• (level 1) 2 spells
• (level 0) 4 spells

... Whereas our Theruge, after using his healing capacities to the maximum, would have:

• (level 4) 3 spells (2 more than the straight wizard)
• (level 3) 4 spells (3 more than the straight wizard)
• (level 2) 4 spells (2 more than the straight wizard)
• (level 1) 5 spells (3 more than the straight wizard)
• (level 0) 4 spells (the same number of spells, natch)

So much for the straight wizard being a better arcane caster AND a comparable healer, eh? the theurge gets half again as many levels of healing, AND has more than twice as many arcane spells available to him in addition to said healing.

And to top it all off ... all that uses your artifically skewed example levels! (I mean, really ... giving the straight caster an odd-numbered level, so that the Theurge loses TWO entire spell-levels? HARDLY a fair measure of overall balance!)

So, balance-wise, there’s another reason that this interpretation is not likely the correct one.

Until and unless youlook at it appropriately. Sheesh.

 

[green slime]

NOOO!!!!!!!!!

I'm agreeing with Pax! Argghhhh!!!!!!

Have mercy upon my soul!

 

[Liquidsabre]

And the crux of my counter to your argument is, "there's no explicit statement in either direction".

Where I then proceeded to try and point out where in the RAW you could see how the feats are to work. If you disagree with what I posted, that's fine. *shrugs* Perhaps then you should try to dispute what I posted above. It is not a counter if you simply lay down a completely different line of discussion (that of balance in this case) and don't address the points of my argument.

Neither feat names the other, and there's no official guide as to which of them should take precedence over the other.

I don't think they need to, for the reasons stated above. Though I definately think there should be an FAQ on the topic to keep others from getting muddled in the mess (easy to do).

And you have neglected to observe that the ability to cast extra curative spells costs another feat.

I have NOT if you read my post. A MT has to take Practised Spellcaster TWICE to gain full effect for the feat. This equals the two feats spent by the full wizard (though I neglected to mention that the straight wizard gains two extra feats, one at 5th and 10th, something YOU have neglected).

I disagree - remember, i said "WIS 12 to 15, Spontaneous Healer; WIS 16+, theurge)"; that means one less spontaneous casting of a cure[/u] spell per day.

So you change the stats to be more beneficial for one build over the other? How is this an accurate comparison?? When you compare builds you should leave as much of the base character the same as possible: same race, stats, and level. You change any of those and you SKEW the comparison. Wow, if you don't even see that I don't think there's anything more to discuss on this point.

So much for the straight wizard being a better arcane caster AND a comparable healer, eh? the theurge gets half again as many levels of healing, AND has more than twice as many arcane spells available to him in addition to said healing.

Actually a more precise comparison for THC (total healing capacity ) would be to calculate the maximum number of hit points that could be healed using all the healing spells available.

In this case we have (1) Cleric 3/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 2, and (2) Wizard 8. Both have Int 16, Wis 16 and both use up two feats as above. Calculating maximum HPs for each spell (using the Wizard with Spontaneous Healing and able to cast any level of cure spell 3/day):

MT2 (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*13) + (4*24) + (3*32) = THC of 262

W8 #1 (0/1/1/1/4) = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (1*32) + (4*40) = THC of 229

-or- (with the max 1 cast/prep spell per day at each level)

W8 #2 (0/1/1/1/1) = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (1*32) + (1*40) = THC of 109


So, by the numbers above, a straight wizard #1 has a VERY comparable healing ability to the MT. Not only does Wiz #1 have access to 4th level arcane spells, but has a total healing capacity that of 87.4% of the MT! As I said before, no real reason to ever go the MT route by reading the AD-SH feat combo as others might suggest (I even put the Wiz at an even level to boot).

It only starts to look much better when we interpret the AD-SH combo as I have suggested (Wiz #2), with a THC of 109, just 41.6% of the MT's total healing capacity. This looks much more balanced, and yet the straight Wiz #2 still has a considerable amount of healing at hand, not to mention that by 10th level this wizard will have receieved two bonus feats (equivalent to the number of feats already used to get this ability to cast cure spells) something the MT route does not offer.

And to top it all off ... all that uses your artifically skewed example levels! (I mean, really ... giving the straight caster an odd-numbered level, so that the Theurge loses TWO entire spell-levels? HARDLY a fair measure of overall balance!)

So....you're saying we should compare a 12th level character vs an 11th level character to accurately compare? Ah, wait it can be done, just make both at 12th level then, I see. That'll work. Though it puts the straight Wiz at a slight disadvantage for the comparison, but from the THC calculation it still looks great.

Until and unless youlook at it appropriately. Sheesh.

No smilie face for you!! Well...okay.

 

[Pax]

Where I then proceeded to try and point out where in the RAW you could see how the feats are to work.

Which, as I and others have said, is not explicitly the correct way to read them. You continually make the assumption that the restriction in AD trumps the ability granted by SH.

By that logic, the restriction in the Wizard class (only spells on the sorceror/Wizard list) trumps the ability granted in AD (spells in domain list added to classlist), and AD is utterly useless.

Feats inherently modify what is possible. IMO - and in others' opinions as well - SH provides one way to cast more curative spells than with just AD alone.

It comes down to a "chicken or the egg" question - which is taken into account LAST, the limit of [1/day/level] from AD, or the limit of [#=wisdom bonus] from SH.

You cannot point to anywhere in the rules as written that specifies AD comes last, nor can I point to anywhere that specifies the opposite.

Thus, my insistance that it comes down to balance.

If you disagree with what I posted, that's fine. *shrugs* Perhaps then you should try to dispute what I posted above. It is not a counter if you simply lay down a completely different line of discussion (that of balance in this case) and don't address the points of my argument.

I *have* addressed them - and balance is the counter. You, however, simply dismiss that outof hand. Your mind is already made up, and you refuse to see any other alternative; you don't want SH to expand the healing capacity, so you refuse to acknowledge that your position is no more grounded in a rule you can point to that specifies AD's limits trump SH's benefits.

I don't think they need to, for the reasons stated above. Though I definately think there should be an FAQ on the topic to keep others from getting muddled in the mess (easy to do).

Simple idea: no one feat trumps the benefits of another feat unless it specifically and explicitly says so, or some other passage of the rules does so.

I have NOT if you read my post. A MT has to take Practised Spellcaster TWICE to gain full effect for the feat.

Only if you TAKE said feat. We're measuring pure ability to sling spells, not penetrate SR or whatever. Practised Spellcaster is not required to be a Theurge. Desireable, yes; but not required.

This equals the two feats spent by the full wizard (though I neglected to mention that the straight wizard gains two extra feats, one at 5th and 10th, something YOU have neglected).

I neglected nothing of the sort; since neither of them can be ofthe sort thatis SH or AD, they were irrelevant to the matter at hand.

So you change the stats to be more beneficial for one build over the other?

notice, I made a conditional statement - that, if a Wizard wanted to be good at healing and hada Wisdomof 16 or better, it would be more advantageous for him to take levels of Cleric and Mystic theurge.

How is this an accurate comparison?? When you compare builds you should leave as much of the base character the same as possible: same race, stats, and level.

Only in cases where the presumption is "all else equal". not where the basic, founding principle of the comparison is RELIANT on a difference in an attribute, class, race, or whatever.

The fundamental concept of my proposed comparison was a Wizard(x) with a Wisdom of 12 to 15, versus a Wizard(3)/Cleric(3)/Mystic Theurge (x-6) with a wisdom of 16+.

You change any of those and you SKEW the comparison. Wow, if you don't even see that I don't think there's anything more to discuss on this point.

A lot less, actually, than how you skewed the results by giving the straight-class caster an odd-numbered level, thus costing the theurge two spell levels. Losing 5th and 6th level spells is a LOT more of a difference than losing one spontaneous spell per day.

Actually a more precise comparison for THC (total healing capacity ) would be to calculate the maximum number of hit points that could be healed using all the healing spells available.

Except that one of those healing spells is a Mass variant, and I didn't care to argue over how many targets the wizard might or might not reasonably expect to have.

In this case we have (1) Cleric 3/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 2, and (2) Wizard 8. Both have Int 16, Wis 16 and both use up two feats as above.

I see no reason to consume two feats for the Theurge, actually. Since being a healer is entirely secondary to him, he need only consider ONE Practised Spellcaster, to keep up in Arcane casting.

Remember, we're talking about a Wizard wanting to add some healing, which means the cleric levels are a sidelight, and nothing more.

Calculating maximum HPs for each spell (using the Wizard with Spontaneous Healing and able to cast any level of cure spell 3/day):

MT2 (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*13) + (4*24) + (3*32) = THC of 262

W8 #1 (0/1/1/1/4) = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (1*32) + (4*40) = THC of 229

You micalculated. For the theurge, the CModW are worth 2d8+6, for 22 max; the CSerW are 3d8+6, for 30 max. And yes, I am specifically calculating this with a LOWER caster level, because this character would NOT care to boost their Cleric caster level - especially at only 8th level!

Further, the Wizard(8) won't HAVE four 4th elvelspells, with a 16 intelligence as you indicated for the example. He'll have 1 base, plus one for intelligence. That's two spells. Three, if he's a specialist - but he'd also have to avoid taking Conjuration as an opposed school, then.

Since we're not looking at tinked-out-to-the-max smackdown builds, I'd say a Generalist is the more appropriate measure. Thus, two total 4th level spells, meaning two of those spontaneous casts have to move to lower-level spells. Third-level slots, in this case.

Please, do lets try and keep the example builds within the bounds of the rules, shall we?

Anyway, the totals (when corrected) come to 248hp for the theurge, versus 213 for the AD/SH Wizard. If we did apply Practised Spellcaster, that would be a nice bit MORE - another 21hp (net effective caster level of 9), bringing the comparison to 271 (theurge) vs 213 (AD/SH), for better than a 25% advantage ... still to the Theurge.

Again, remarkably enough, an advantage (though only about 20% this time, w/o the Practised Spellcaster feat) in favor of the Theurge. What a surprise, isn't it, that 17 healing spells should be at least a little better than 7 healing spells in total effect?

So, by the numbers above, a straight wizard #1 has a VERY comparable healing ability to the MT.

Only because you incorrectly guaged the number of spells available at the top level, when counting up the Wizard's capacity ... which then shifted the count quite dramatically in favor of your argument.

And ... for gags, let's look at AVERAGE healing, instead of maximum - which means, 4.5hp per 1d8 of healing:

[bq]
MT2, sans Practised Spellcaster (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*10.5) + (4*15) + (3*19.5) = Avg of 161hp healed
MT2, with Practised Spellcaster (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*10.5) + (4*18) + (3*22.5) = Avg of 188hp healed

W8 #1 (0/1/1/3/2) = (0*0) + (1*9.5) + (1*17) + (3*21.5) + (2*26) = Avg of 143hp healed
[/bq]

So even on average, where sheer volume of spells is de-emphasised, the Theurge still has the advantage. What's more, he can fire off his potential healing in smaller "chunks". Let's compare WORST-case capacity to heal, shall we? IOw, what happens when the dice are not with the player, and he rolls all 1's for healing spells:

[bq]
MT2, sans Practised Spellcaster (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*6) + (4*8) + (3*9) = Minimum of 94hp healed
MT2, with Practised Spellcaster (5/5/4/3) = (5*1) + (5*6) + (4*11) + (3*12) = Minimum of 115hp healed

W8 #1 (0/1/1/3/2) = (0*0) + (1*6) + (1*10) + (3*11) + (2*12) = Minimum of 73hp healed
[/bq]

So. We have the straight AD/SH Wizard, who can heal 73-213 hitpoints (averaging 143hp) ... versus the Theurge who can heal (without Practised Spellcaster) 94-248 hitpoints (averaging 161hp), or a Practised theurge, who heals 115-271 hitpoints (averageing 188hp).

Not only does Wiz #1 have access to 4th level arcane spells, but has a total healing capacity that of 87.4% of the MT!

Not so - first off, if he's flushing ALL of his 3d and 4th level spells for healing, his "access" to 4th level arcane spells is illusory. Second of all, as noted above, you made a significant error in calculating how many spells of 4th level were available for healing.

Versus a theurge without Practised Spellcaster, your straight wizard gets 88.8% asmuch healing; versus a theurge with Practised Spellcaster, the percentage drops to 76.1%

As I said before, no real reason to ever go the MT route by reading the AD-SH feat combo as others might suggest (I even put the Wiz at an even level to boot).

And you forgot something. After doing all that healing, what have the characters got left ... ? The character is still nominally a Wizard, after all!

Your straight wizard ... has only (4/3/2/0/0). OTOH, either Theurge version has (4/4/3/2) - an extra arcane spell of each level from 1st to 3d. And yes, in both cases, that presupposes a 16 intelligence and not a specialist.

The end result of this flurry of healing is that the straight wizard couldn't toss a fireball to save his life, but the theurge is just as capable of doing so - twice in a row even - as he was before doing any healing.

So. By going theurge, you get roughl 13-31% more healing on average, AND, preserve more of your Arcane potential for before and after using that healing.

That gives the Theurge a clear advantage on both sides of the Wizard/Cleric dividing line. If the AD/SH character wishes to match the Theurge in arcane potential, he has to fall remarkably further behind in terms of healing. The only disadvantage is being a spell level and a half behind (depending on if total level is even or odd).

So; I'd say that, taking A. correct numbers, B. both the presence and absence of Practised Spellcaster (Cleric), C. remaining arcane potential, and D. maximum, minimum and Average healing capacity alike ...

... the result is clear: if you have a 16+ wisdom, and want to add so much healing that two feats seem to be a worthwhile cost, the character is better off nearly all around multiclassing into Mystic Theurge. Plain as the nose on your own face, I'd say.

So....you're saying we should compare a 12th level character vs an 11th level character to accurately compare? Ah, wait it can be done, just make both at 12th level then, I see. That'll work. Though it puts the straight Wiz at a slight disadvantage for the comparison, but from the THC calculation it still looks great.

No disadvantage, other than not having an artificially-overstated advantage. While not yet having access to the next spell level, he'd still have an overall increase inspells-per-day.

In closing: your analyses were flawed, your presumptions have been disproved, and balance has been seen to not be threatened by allowing AD and SH to work with full transparency.

Any questions?

 

[Liquidsabre]

Alright buddy the kiddie gloves come off...

Which, as I and others have said, is not explicitly the correct way to read them. You continually make the assumption that the restriction in AD trumps the ability granted by SH.

And YOU continually make the assumption that SH removes the limitation set by AD. *shruggs* It's really no concern to me any longer now that others in the thread have already been helped. All of my argument is already up there, if you disagree FINE. Live life, have many babies, and enjoy yourself. But I'm pretty sure more people would agree with my interpretation over YOURS, so

By that logic, the restriction in the Wizard class (only spells on the sorceror/Wizard list) trumps the ability granted in AD (spells in domain list added to classlist), and AD is utterly useless.

Except where the AD feat specifically states where it changes said rule with the TEXT: "Add the chosen domain spells to your class list of arcane spells."

Phew, are you trying to miss text laid out right in front of you here on purpose? I don't think anyone who misses things that are right THERE in the text should be able to argue the RAW. Come back only after you have read the text before trying to "argue" or make "points". Trust me, it helps.

Feats inherently modify what is possible. IMO - and in others' opinions as well - SH provides one way to cast more curative spells than with just AD alone.

Correct, feats modifiy what is possible, as stated in their TEXT. But as we've seen, you appear to have problems with this.

You cannot point to anywhere in the rules as written that specifies AD comes last, nor can I point to anywhere that specifies the opposite.

Actually, I have but as has been proven, you are in FACT bliiiinnnnddd. Glasses perhaps?

Thus, my insistance that it comes down to balance.

Which is apparently ALL ya got for an argument. Cute.

I *have* addressed them - and balance is the counter. You, however, simply dismiss that outof hand.

If THAT's your argument then....YES.

Your mind is already made up, and you refuse to see any other alternative;

Not with arguments like THAT. lol

you don't want SH to expand the healing capacity, so you refuse to acknowledge that your position is no more grounded in a rule you can point to that specifies AD's limits trump SH's benefits.

Sorry, I don't try to make arguments more like you do. I use things called "examples" and "text" as evidence and also make use of a handy technique called READING. All you do is shake your head as a counter argument an then go spouting off about balance as a valid method for determining the RAW.

Simple idea: no one feat trumps the benefits of another feat unless it specifically and explicitly says so, or some other passage of the rules does so.

There was a relevant example I made previously in an earlier post, oh but I forgot, you probably didn't read and likely have NO idea what I'm referring to. *shrugs* What's the point of posting anything then when trying to have a discussion with ya Pax, honestly.

Only if you TAKE said feat. We're measuring pure ability to sling spells, not penetrate SR or whatever. Practised Spellcaster is not required to be a Theurge. Desireable, yes; but not required.

LOL, whatever dude. The practised spellaster feats were taken from YOUR example for the MT, so I'm sorry for trying to STAY consistent and use YOUR example. Notice my calculations are based off of the PS feat, omg were you like born in a barn?

I neglected nothing of the sort; since neither of them can be ofthe sort that is SH or AD, they were irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Ooookkkaaaayy. Yes, 10th level human wizard has a sum total of: 7 feats! Count them, 7! Thats 2 MORE than the MT gets! So that gives the Wiz a sum total of 2 EXTRA feats! Everyone now! 7-5 = 2! Wasn't that fun?! *clapping hands together like a school girl*

notice, I made a conditional statement - that, if a Wizard wanted to be good at healing and had a Wisdom of 16 or better, it would be more advantageous for him to take levels of Cleric and Mystic theurge.

Only in cases where the presumption is "all else equal". not where the basic, founding principle of the comparison is RELIANT on a difference in an attribute, class, race, or whatever.

The fundamental concept of my proposed comparison was a Wizard(x) with a Wisdom of 12 to 15, versus a Wizard(3)/Cleric(3)/Mystic Theurge (x-6) with a wisdom of 16+.

Whatever dude, blah blah blah. I used Int 16 and Wis 16 for both stats to make them completely EQUAL. Get over it already.

A lot less, actually, than how you skewed the results by giving the straight-class caster an odd-numbered level, thus costing the theurge two spell levels. Losing 5th and 6th level spells is a LOT more of a difference than losing one spontaneous spell per day.

Oh dear! I did didn't I!? Well maybe if you READ my last post I fixed this little booboo didn't I? (The whole having your precious MT at odd levels for their spellcasting and gimping the Wizard at an even leve, or didn't you catch that?) Live in the NOW man!

Except that one of those healing spells is a Mass variant, and I didn't care to argue over how many targets the wizard might or might not reasonably expect to have.

Right, notice how in my LATEST post I reduced the classes in level so we had to only consider the 1st-4th level cure spells! Embrace the present my friend!

I see no reason to consume two feats for the Theurge, actually. Since being a healer is entirely secondary to him, he need only consider ONE Practised Spellcaster, to keep up in Arcane casting.

Remember, we're talking about a Wizard wanting to add some healing, which means the cleric levels are a sidelight, and nothing more.

Blah, blah, blah.

You micalculated. For the theurge, the CModW are worth 2d8+6, for 22 max; the CSerW are 3d8+6, for 30 max. And yes, I am specifically calculating this with a LOWER caster level, because this character would NOT care to boost their Cleric caster level - especially at only 8th level!

Whatever man, take away practised spellcasting, see if I care. It was YOUR idea. Oh and in case you missed it above I didn't MISCALCULATE anything. Just because you CHANGED it by removing practised spellcaster from my example, doesn't make it a miscalculation. No matter how many times you tell yourself that.

AHA! I'm now going to ADD the practised spellcaster back now! Pax!!! You miscalcualted woohoo!! Look at all this, its all WRONG! How could you?? Use a calculator or something.

Further, the Wizard(8) won't HAVE four 4th elvelspells, with a 16 intelligence as you indicated for the example. He'll have 1 base, plus one for intelligence.

Whoops thanks for catching that. Actually he'll have a base of 2 (being 8th level and all). Don't forget I'm also using YOUR method of interpretation for Spontaneous Healer. As a wizard with cure spells on his spell list he can now cast spontaneously any level of cure spells up to 3/day.

The corrected calculation for both (removing the practised spellcaster as you suggest, man I'm such a sucker, I keep using YOUR examples in an attempt to have a reasonable discussion, though I usually try not to change them and then call you wrong lol...):

MT2 [5/5/4/3] = (5*1) + (5*13) + (4*22) + (3*30) = THC of 248

W8-Pax: [0/1/1/1+1 (cast spont once)/2 (cast spont twice)] = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (2*32) + (2*40) = THC of 181

-or- (with the max 1 cast/prep spell per day at each level)

W8: (0/1/1/1/1) = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (1*32) + (1*40) = THC of 109


The Pax-version of the Wizard still has an equivalent THC that of 73% of the MT. While my version of the wizard (with SH used as I think it should) only has 44% of the total healing capacity of the MT. As I said, a more reasonably balanced interpretation of the Spontaneous Healer feat as the MT gets to retain their ability to be a much better healer than a wizard with the AD-SH combo (as it should be).

I'll leave the numbers out there for others to decide if they think this is out of balance or not. I won't go transposing my opinion on the matter as certain others-not-to-be-named-might (pax).

Please, do lets try and keep the example builds within the bounds of the rules, shall we?

Oh my, rudeness substitued as wit, how clever!

Note the changes above, nice of you to assume I am bending the rules as opposed to making a mistake by accident. Then again, we have seen that rudeness is apparently part of your argumentative style, lacking text references and such I imagine this is to make up for other legitemate arguments or logical reasoning on your part. Though I have read the latter half of your post and it looks pretty sound, except for the whole conclusion thing.

Anyway, the totals (when corrected) come to 248hp for the theurge, versus 213 for the AD/SH Wizard. If we did apply Practised Spellcaster, that would be a nice bit MORE - another 21hp (net effective caster level of 9), bringing the comparison to 271 (theurge) vs 213 (AD/SH), for better than a 25% advantage ... still to the Theurge.

Wow, a theurge has only a 25% advantage. Thats...amazing. Just stunning. *shruggs* Amazingly enough these numbers are remarkably similar to mine. Go figure, guess you gotta do 'em yourself before accepting them eh? What ever winds your clock mate.

Only because you incorrectly guaged the number of spells available at the top level, when counting up the Wizard's capacity ... which then shifted the count quite dramatically in favor of your argument.

Which I amended to instead favor the MT in my LATEST post. Oh, I forget, your method of argumentation involves NITPICKING, and taking it wherever it is you can get it. Even if it is a few posts back. Ahh...*nods sagely*

And ... for gags, let's look at AVERAGE healing, instead of maximum - which means, 4.5hp per 1d8 of healing:

Don't know why you would. Proportionally, halving all the numbers won't change anything, but then again, math is hard.

So. We have the straight AD/SH Wizard, who can heal 73-213 hitpoints (averaging 143hp) ... versus the Theurge who can heal (without Practised Spellcaster) 94-248 hitpoints (averaging 161hp), or a Practised theurge, who heals 115-271 hitpoints (averageing 188hp).

Ah, this stuff is looking pretty good. What have we learned today?

Not so - first off, if he's flushing ALL of his 3rd and 4th level spells for healing, his "access" to 4th level arcane spells is illusory. Second of all, as noted above, you made a significant error in calculating how many spells of 4th level were available for healing.

Duly noted and snubbed sir!

Versus a theurge without Practised Spellcaster, your straight wizard gets 88.8% as much healing; versus a theurge with Practised Spellcaster, the percentage drops to 76.1%

Uh, so you think that the Wiz having 88-76% healing capacity of the MT is a good thing? *whistles* Kay.

And you forgot something. After doing all that healing, what have the characters got left ... ? The character is still nominally a Wizard, after all!

Oooohhh a good point! *grabs it and hugs it closely, rocking gently* Mmmmm, point.

Your straight wizard ... has only (4/3/2/0/0). OTOH, either Theurge version has (4/4/3/2) - an extra arcane spell of each level from 1st to 3d. And yes, in both cases, that presupposes a 16 intelligence and not a specialist.

The end result of this flurry of healing is that the straight wizard couldn't toss a fireball to save his life, but the theurge is just as capable of doing so - twice in a row even - as he was before doing any healing.

Uuuuhhh, Pax dear? The straight wizard still has (4/4/3/1) left. But that would be a miscalcualtion on your part, aha! And I didn't even have to change anything before I said that.

So. By going theurge, you get roughl 13-31% more healing on average, AND, preserve more of your Arcane potential for before and after using that healing.

That gives the Theurge a clear advantage on both sides of the Wizard/Cleric dividing line. If the AD/SH character wishes to match the Theurge in arcane potential, he has to fall remarkably further behind in terms of healing. The only disadvantage is being a spell level and a half behind (depending on if total level is even or odd).

Ya see Pax ol' buddy. This is good stuff, if you'd just cut out all the nitpicky and winey stuff in the beginning parts, reading your posts wouldn't be so bad...

So; I'd say that, taking A. correct numbers, B. both the presence and absence of Practised Spellcaster (Cleric), C. remaining arcane potential, and D. maximum, minimum and Average healing capacity alike ...

... the result is clear:

if you have a 16+ wisdom, and want to add so much healing that two feats seem to be a worthwhile cost, the character is better off nearly all around multiclassing into Mystic Theurge. Plain as the nose on your own face, I'd say.

Only if it's an insane little nose running around and attached to gnome, but ok.

No disadvantage, other than not having an artificially-overstated advantage. While not yet having access to the next spell level, he'd still have an overall increase inspells-per-day.

In closing: your analyses were flawed, your presumptions have been disproved, and balance has been seen to not be threatened by allowing AD and SH to work with full transparency.

Any questions?

Yes, can I have some? Whatever it is you're on.

Cheers!

*hangs up sign: This thread is closed now*

Ba-bye.

 

[strongbow]

Tone down the flames, guys. You both make excellent points, but there no value in insulting each other. I can't imagine the amount of time y'all took to parse the quotes and type all you did. Good work, sans the flames.

 

[Liquidsabre]

He started it.

 

[Pax]

Alright buddy the kiddie gloves come off...

[sarcasm] oh, eek. someone save me. eek. help.[/sarcasm]

And YOU continually make the assumption that SH removes the limitation set by AD.

Uh, no. I've said - repeatedly - it could go either way, and insisted on therefor examining it in light of game balance.

Except where the AD feat specifically states where it changes said rule with the TEXT: "Add the chosen domain spells to your class list of arcane spells."

Phew, are you trying to miss text laid out right in front of you here on purpose?

No - just pointing out to you,that if AD can limit SH, then the Wizard Class Spell List can limit AD.

Because the SH feat specifically states that the character is able to spontaneously convert prepared spells to cure wounds spells, a number of times per day equal to the character's wisdom modifier.

No mention is made of any limitations as regards domain slots, domains, the AD feat, etc. Only the spontaneous conversion to cure wounds is described.

There is nothing in the rules which explicitly ascribes precedence or superiority to either feat's limits and abilities.

Correct, feats modifiy what is possible, as stated in their TEXT.

And SH states you can spontaneously convert X number of prepared spells to equivalent-level cure spells exactly as a cleric does. And clerics aren't restricted to doing so once per spell level per day.

Actually, I have but as has been proven, you are in FACT bliiiinnnnddd. Glasses perhaps?

Okay, give me the exact book and page number, along with a quote, that says anything even remotely close to "the limitations of Arcane Disciple limit your ability to spontaneously conver spells with the Spontaneous Healer feat".

Which is apparently ALL ya got for an argument. Cute.

Because it's all there is to argue about, beyond IMC's and IMO's.

Sorry, I don't try to make arguments more like you do. I use things called "examples" and "text" as evidence

Even in the absolute and utter lack of text which states what you purport to be the rules?

Even when the examples disprove your claims,and prove the claims of those who hold the stance opposite you?

Now, that's comedy.

and also make use of a handy technique called READING.

More accurately, "deciding what you want it to say, and then mis-reading it however you need to 'make' it say exactly that".

All you do is shake your head as a counter argument an then go spouting off about balance as a valid method for determining the RAW.

There is nothing written that says AH's limitations are effective on the abilities of SH - wether or not those limits are in fact so effective is purely a matter of personal opinion - leaving only the balance or imbalance of the combination as a basis for judging wether or not it "should" be permitted - which I have (repeatedly, now) pointed out to you in clear and unmistakable terms.

And I've also, using yourown numbers, shown you that it is NOT, in fact, an unbalanced option to permit to a character who wanted to pick up both feats.

There was a relevant example I made previously in an earlier post,

No, there wasn't.

You've never given an example of where the text says Arcane Disciple in any way limits Spontaneous Heler.

LOL, whatever dude. The practised spellaster feats were taken from YOUR example for the MT,

Liar.

I was not the person who insisted the MT would take PS twice. Once, sure, quite probably. Twice, no, nowhere near as likely. You brought the Practised Spellcaster into the mix, not me.

so I'm sorry for trying to STAY consistent and use YOUR example. Notice my calculations are based off of the PS feat,

And again, I nevr presupposed the cleric "side" of the Theurge would be so boosted, at all. You did.

omg were you like born in a barn?

Leave the gratuitous insults out, I guarantee you I can sling better than pitiful attempts like that.

Ooookkkaaaayy. Yes, 10th level human wizard has a sum total of: 7 feats! Count them, 7! Thats 2 MORE than the MT gets! So that gives the Wiz a sum total of 2 EXTRA feats! Everyone now! 7-5 = 2! Wasn't that fun?! *clapping hands together like a school girl*

But thoswe 2 feats are not "take anythign you want", they are "item creation, metamagic, or spell mastery". Thus they're not worth quite as much as a "pick any featyou qualify for" option would be.

Get over it already.

Live in the NOW man!

Embrace the present my friend!

Those who forget the past, are doomed to repeat it.

And it especially rankles when you accuse me of a wrongdoing of some sort, when you had only just a post or two ago done the same thing, to a higher degree.

Deal with it.

Blah, blah, blah.

How eloquent.

Whatever man, take away practised spellcasting, see if I care. It was YOUR idea.

No, it most certainly was not, you insufferable suppurating pustule of imbecility! For god's sake, man, can't you even remember what you've said?

Don't forget I'm also using YOUR method of interpretation for Spontaneous Healer. As a wizard with cure spells on his spell list he can now cast spontaneously any level of cure spells up to 3/day.

Irrelevant, he still cannot cast more spells of a given level than he has, wether it'sspontaneous or not!

SH doesn't give you extra spells per day, it lets you exchange existing prepared spells for a spontaneous casting of an equal-level cure spell.

W8-Pax: [0/1/1/1+1 (cast spont once)/2 (cast spont twice)] = (0*0) + (1*13) + (1*24) + (2*32) + (2*40) = THC of 181

Let's get this straight. You have TWO fourth-level spells. A 16 Intelligence is not high enough for a bonus 4th level spell.

Thus, if you prepare and cast one healing spell of 4th level, you no longer have the slots available to spontaneously cast two more.

RTFM, get a clue, etc, etc.

Uuuuhhh, Pax dear? The straight wizard still has (4/4/3/1) left. But that would be a miscalcualtion on your part, aha! And I didn't even have to change anything before I said that.

All right, one fireball (or comparable), which is still less than the Theurge's two third-level spells.

The rest of your drivel, frankly, simply isn't worth my time. It's quite rare that I find myself tempted to report a post; you're owed some congratulations. I suppose.

 

[EricNoah]

Guys, knock it off please. This style of argument doesn't make you look clever, it makes you look like a jerk.

 

[Pax]

You're right; I shouldn't have responded in kind, especially when I know my points are so strong without doing so; sorry about that, sometimes irritation just gets the better of me.