Cleric / 1 Wizard / 2 Mystic Theurge / 1 ... REALLY? PFS Legal?


Rules Questions

51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Aasimar is a bit above on RP, sure, but tiefling? Dwarf is 11 RP. How many of those do you see compared to human's 10? RP is less important than the applicability to the build at hand. Humans always have that - bonus feat - whereas aasimar sometimes have that - with unorthodox stat bonuses and good SLAs - and tieflings occasionally do - with their SLAs.

How often do you see people build fetchlings (17RP)? Betcha it's less common than Ifrits (6 RP)! Bet you Samsarans (unlisted but uncommon) and Humans are more common than Svirfneblin (24!!! RP)


Jeff Merola wrote:
zza ni wrote:


it is also flagged as supernatural ability and not spell like ability, so the ruling tha tspell like abilities can come instead of spell casting ability doesn't realy work here.
look here
Your link contradicts your claim. You see that (Sp)? That means it's a spell-like ability. Supernatural abilities are denoted (Su).

oh sorry. i just asumed that sp was short for super(natural).

id still argue that that one is a lesser,mirror image and should be level 1 or 0 instead of 2. it has shorter duration and lesser effect. if they wanted that cleric to have a 2nd level sla they could just easly give him the ability to mimic the spell. (it is obvius also why it is limited as non of the other domains give a 2nd level sla.as far as i can tell)


zza ni wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
zza ni wrote:


it is also flagged as supernatural ability and not spell like ability, so the ruling tha tspell like abilities can come instead of spell casting ability doesn't realy work here.
look here
Your link contradicts your claim. You see that (Sp)? That means it's a spell-like ability. Supernatural abilities are denoted (Su).

oh sorry. i just asumed that sp was short for super(natural).

id still argue that that one is a lesser,mirror image and should be level 1 or 0 instead of 2. it has shorter duration and lesser effect. if they wanted that cleric to have a 2nd level sla they could just easly give him the ability to mimic the spell. (it is obvius also why it is limited as non of the other domains give a 2nd level sla.as far as i can tell)

Please actually read through the thread. You will find a link with a dev comment which says abilities based off of (and reference) spells count as that level for their effects.

Fate inquisition gives a 2nd level SLA.


Bronnwynn wrote:
Svirfneblin (24!!! RP)

Too be fair svirfneblins are are insanely good, just hard to play because where the hell do they come from

Sovereign Court

Jiggy wrote:

Re: Power of MT — Imagine you're running a 5-9 scenario. Most of the party is 8, so that's the subtier you're running. But then you've got a 5th-level cleric and a 5th-level wizard. But you don't have room for both at the table, so you say "Hey, how about if you guys just both always stand in the same square, and share a pool of actions so only one of you gets to do anything in any given round? That should be the same power level as an 8th-level character, right?"

Eh....

Wouldn't it be Wiz7/ Cl6 ?

Their power level is not far off and as with a gestalt they gain a small portion of power due to the amount of options available for their actions.

So really, yeah, they would be about 8th level with this build...not as much for a normal build MT IMO.


I find it quite interesting to compare the current mystic theurge with the 1st edition version.

1st ed: multi classed cleric/magic user. Due to how the experience charts worked, this would generally be one level lower in each class than a single classed character. Eg if the rest of the party were level 6, the cleric/m-u would be 5 and 5.

In Pathfinder, without early entry, it was 3 levels lower in each class. With early entry, it becomes 1 and 2 levels lower in each class.

So it is still weaker than the 1st ed version, plus it lacks the other class benefits (bonus feats, school powers, channeling, etc).

And the clincher for me is that the most powerful (1st ed) version still wasn't overpowered vs a single class caster! It was on par, most of the time. Weaker in a short adventuring day and stronger in longer days.

Liberty's Edge

rknop wrote:

OK, I haven't been able to track down all the FAQs and forum postings and so forth that allow one to construct an argument that this is legal, but before I tell a player it's not, I'm hoping somebody can show me where to find it.

The character is a Peri-Blooded Aasimar, which has Pyrotechnics as a SLA, thereby satisfying the 2nd level arcane spell requirement under the currently ill-conceived FAQ ruling from the design team.

With Wizard/2 and Cleric/1, it's possible to have the 3 ranks needed in the two knowledge skills.

Finally: Trickery domain. "Copycat", a weaker version of "Mirror Image", is said to be 2nd level because Mirror Image is, and it's divine because it's from a Cleric domain.

At which point I'm saying, waiddaminnit, you're drawing a tortured connection between RAW and FAQAW to stomp absolutely all over the I in RAI.

Starting with RAI: Mystic Theurge is arguably a very powerful prestige class, since you get two caster levels per level. As such, it should require some effort to qualify for. By default, that means 3rd level wizard and 3rd level cleric, so you can't start it until 7th level.

I usually disagree with the argument that SLAs should qualify you for prestige classes, and would not allow it in a home game, although in some cases I can see it. Again, in terms of Mystic Theurge, where the class represents serious study in both divine and arcane lore, I don't think that stuff you were born with that you can't improve through experience should qualify. But, whatever. Let's leave that one aside, and say that the arcane prerequisite is satisifed.

But Coypcat as a 2nd level divine spell? Really? It's a weaker version of Mirror Image, but because it "cites" Mirror Image it gets to count as 2nd level. It's only an arcane spell in the book, but because it's a Cleric ability, it gets to count as divine. This, by the strict reading of the rules, may well be legal, but DAMN it's cheesy, and to my mind a reason all by itself to throw out SLAs,...

First, RAI does not mean rules as you want them to be. Given that it has been given the go ahead by the designers there is absolutely no RAI argument against it.

Second, mystic theurge was a greatly under powered prc in 3.5 without early entry / ur priest, and has remained so into Pathfinder. It is playable with the faq, though not entirely optimal.


Considering PFS is run by a set of arbitrary house rules I don't see how this belongs in the rule section any more than any other house rule dependent question.

Sovereign Court

Actually - while the Cleric 1/Wiz 2 is perfectly legal, I'd think that Oracle 1/Sorceror 2 would be a better build since they both run off of the same casting stat.

(Oracle would have to go with the sub-par wood revelation to pick up the level 2 spell-like ability.)

Curious - would a Kitsune's Alter Self ability qualify as a level 2 arcane spell-like ability? (I'm assuming yes - but I figured I'd double-check while posting in this thread.)

Sovereign Court

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Curious - would a Kitsune's Alter Self ability qualify as a level 2 arcane spell-like ability? (I'm assuming yes - but I figured I'd double-check while posting in this thread.)

That's a Supernatural ability, so no.

Sovereign Court

Fraust wrote:
Considering PFS is run by a set of arbitrary house rules I don't see how this belongs in the rule section any more than any other house rule dependent question.

Because PFS hasn't seen any reason to do this differently from the general game rules. This is the forum for those. And they allow it.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Actually - while the Cleric 1/Wiz 2 is perfectly legal, I'd think that Oracle 1/Sorceror 2 would be a better build since they both run off of the same casting stat.

(Oracle would have to go with the sub-par wood revelation to pick up the level 2 spell-like ability.)

Curious - would a Kitsune's Alter Self ability qualify as a level 2 arcane spell-like ability? (I'm assuming yes - but I figured I'd double-check while posting in this thread.)

Oracle/Sorcerer is painful because those classes already have delayed casting. The unified casting stat is really great but doesn't offset the 2 lost spellcasting levels.

Furthermore, two spontaneous casters lose out quite a bit because they already have decent staying power as single classes, and two spontaneous means you haven't opened up your spell list as much as with two prepared casters.

You could definitely still do it, but Cleric/Wizard or Cleric/Empyreal Sorc are still the best choices.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

OilHorse wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Re: Power of MT — Imagine you're running a 5-9 scenario. Most of the party is 8, so that's the subtier you're running. But then you've got a 5th-level cleric and a 5th-level wizard. But you don't have room for both at the table, so you say "Hey, how about if you guys just both always stand in the same square, and share a pool of actions so only one of you gets to do anything in any given round? That should be the same power level as an 8th-level character, right?"

Eh....

Wouldn't it be Wiz7/ Cl6 ?

Their power level is not far off and as with a gestalt they gain a small portion of power due to the amount of options available for their actions.

So really, yeah, they would be about 8th level with this build...not as much for a normal build MT IMO.

I was talking about traditional entry, where you have three "off" levels for each spellcasting class: 8–3=5.

And even with Magical Knack, that just means the 5th-level wizard's buffs last a little longer and his one fireball for the day deals an extra 2d6 damage. He still has the spells per day of a 5th-level wizard.

So yes, it really is like replacing an 8th-level character with a 5th-level cleric and a 5th-level wizard who have to alternate getting actual turns in combat.

Dark Archive

I have a retirement waiting Fey Sorcerer / Dual Cursed Wood Oracle MT who leveraged warp wood and glitterdust SLA. It benefits from being SAD as well as also having good flavor (He was a hero in a war in the feywild before taking up treeherding, forgetting everything he knew, and talking like Deckard Cain).

I built the character to try to show that the SLA ruling was all kinds of broken. I determined at the end it was no more broken than a straight level 11 diviner wizard with persistent spell and staff of the master (ahem DHaller). At high levels I think it plays out about right. Having 63 spells per day has it's advantages with things like Divine Interference. I am missing out on some power (contingency, G Heroism, Heal ) but that is offset by being able to keep the party buffed with FoM, Haste, Magic Circle:Evil and GMW and still having slots to ruin the days of my GM.

For Save-or-Suck casters like enchanters, the single stat is key and the MT gives you more tricks against mindless enemies. When I compare it to a straight kitsune sorcerer the versatility and dual-cursed I will stick to the MT every day. Spells like Charitable Impulse and Terrible Remorse cover up some of the lost power (side note: Ever made a Xill turn over all it's weapons or made Glabrezu punch itself to death? Hilarious). I was also a pretty outstanding face character as well so I wasn't all combat based even though my skills were limited.

I would say 3-4 was the hardest part as I hadn't really come online and was a one trick pony with a misfortuned command to provoke attacks of opp at a DC 20 or so. 5 got me Calm Emotions and 6 got me Command Undead so I could start controlling the battlefield a bit. At level 8 Haste came online I felt a lot more useful but that's when casters generally start tearing stuff up.

Magical Knack was pretty key for SR. For MT's, You are trading a trait for a feat.

Liberty's Edge

Starfinder Superscriber

OK, Necroing this a little bit.

If the sense of the developers (et al.) is that staring the Mystic Theurge prestige class at 4th level is not overpowered, then I think it's being done wrong. There should be an errata that changes the prerequisites to something like "3 ranks in Knowledge (Religion), 3 ranks in Knowledge (Arcana), at least 1 caster level for divine spells, at least 1 caster level for arcane spells, at least 3 overall caster levels."

That's the effect right now... except that there's also "only for aasimar and tieflings of specific subtypes who happen to have the Trickery domain or Fate inquisition." Which is really byzantine.

It seems that they've decided that a 4th level Mystic Theurge is not overpowered (and I see the arguments that it's not), and so are not closing the loopholes that allow for it. But that doesn't change that they are rules loopholes, and it means that, somehow, by accident, specific domains of cleric are more able to become a mystic theurge... and it's not the magic domain. That's just weird.

I understand that Pathfinder is a big complicated rules set with lots of little rules interactions like this. I understand that some people find it fun to find these little combinations and do things with it. Personally, though, I see this as an indication of a flaw in the system. I'm no longer arguing that the early-entry MT is overpowered. Rather, I think that if the early-entry MT is OK, then it should just be the early entry MT, instead of some corner case loopholes that allow for it. I'd rather have a rules set that was coherent and consistent instead of one where you can find loopholes to fly through and do things with.

Scarab Sages

rknop wrote:

OK, Necroing this a little bit.

If the sense of the developers (et al.) is that staring the Mystic Theurge prestige class at 4th level is not overpowered, then I think it's being done wrong. There should be an errata that changes the prerequisites to something like "3 ranks in Knowledge (Religion), 3 ranks in Knowledge (Arcana), at least 1 caster level for divine spells, at least 1 caster level for arcane spells, at least 3 overall caster levels."

That's the effect right now... except that there's also "only for aasimar and tieflings of specific subtypes who happen to have the Trickery domain or Fate inquisition." Which is really byzantine.

It seems that they've decided that a 4th level Mystic Theurge is not overpowered (and I see the arguments that it's not), and so are not closing the loopholes that allow for it. But that doesn't change that they are rules loopholes, and it means that, somehow, by accident, specific domains of cleric are more able to become a mystic theurge... and it's not the magic domain. That's just weird.

I understand that Pathfinder is a big complicated rules set with lots of little rules interactions like this. I understand that some people find it fun to find these little combinations and do things with it. Personally, though, I see this as an indication of a flaw in the system. I'm no longer arguing that the early-entry MT is overpowered. Rather, I think that if the early-entry MT is OK, then it should just be the early entry MT, instead of some corner case loopholes that allow for it. I'd rather have a rules set that was coherent and consistent instead of one where you can find loopholes to fly through and do things with.

There is a guide here on the forums that was made detailing the methods of early entry into the prestige class, and I promise you that the methods you listed aren't the only ones.

But then again, I think that spell-like abilities should be more common than they are.


I would prefer if they lowered all the reqs for prestige classes so you could actually go into them relatively quickly. and you could bypass the need to play specific races or choose specific feats to bypass the spell level needs..

I don't think they're really loop holes. Certain types of cleric/wizards/races are naturally more inclined to it. Not really all that weird. It further delineate the differences in "schools" of thought

Liberty's Edge

Starfinder Superscriber

Whether or not the specific methods I listed are the only ones isn't the point. The point is that they're loopholes. If the loopholes are OK, then the straightforward way of doing it should be errataed to be OK, instead of leaving it to guides and people who fine corner cases. The point of this game is to be a roleplaying game, not a puzzle game like Portal. Any puzzles should be in-world, not in creating your character in first place.

To be clear, I'm not dissing system mastery. I'm fine with there being value in knowing how the system works. I don't like it when system mastery is about finding the corner cases that feel like violating the rules without actually violating the rules.


rknop wrote:
If the loopholes are OK, then the straightforward way of doing it should be errataed to be OK, instead of leaving it to guides and people who fine corner cases.

I personally like finding bizarre corner cases that seem like loopholes but technically work to do something cool but not overpowered, but maybe I'm weird :P.

That aside, I agree with you. If there is no issue with the backdoor method then just open it up to everyone. Personally in my game I'd let anyone enter a prestige at the earliest level available to a race/build using SLA early access.


Quote:
There should be an errata that changes the prerequisites to something like "3 ranks in Knowledge (Religion), 3 ranks in Knowledge (Arcana), at least 1 caster level for divine spells, at least 1 caster level for arcane spells, at least 3 overall caster levels."

I'd completely agree with this. This is what I run at my own table. With that said, you don't need the "at least 3 overall caster levels" clause. It's needless rules bloat, since any serious theurge build will meet that requirement effortlessly.


PRC's would have a neater place I think if they could be used earlier. Non of them are particularly crazy. but if easier to enter you could enter specifically build to a prc and not be stuck in pointless land for such a long time. Usually I'll only use prc if I start the game 8+.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

rknop wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
This is not PFS specific. Moved to the correct forum.
How are we supposed to get rulings about what's legal in PFS when questions about what's legal in PFS get relegated to the rules forum that many people avoid like the Worldwound?

There is an irony here. Mike Brock who moved your post IS the "what is PFS legal" guy. He didn't see a reason to dive in the conversation. I interpret that as confirmation that he thought you were getting good advice, or at least he was going to relegate your question to the Rules forum.

I think the answer you got isn't the answer you wanted, but it does happen to be the RAI and RAW answer, which makes it the PFS answer, and thus he answer you asked for.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
happen to be the RAI and RAW answer, which makes it the PFS answer, and thus he answer you asked for.

+1

51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Cleric / 1 Wizard / 2 Mystic Theurge / 1 ... REALLY? PFS Legal? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.