TurtlesAWD's page

The real misstep Paizo made in this whole ordeal was ruling the way they did on the original FAQ a year and a half ago.

I'd agree that a better step to make a year and a half ago would have been to lower the barrier of entry on underplayed prestige classes that still would have probably been seen as sub-par, if fun, assuming that was the purpose of the original ruling. But giving us candy and then taking it away because the wrapper might be too complicated to open is bound to annoy.

Sure, there's some possible issues with meeting requirements for feats, and maybe some other issues related to spell lists for classes like Oracles since I guess they made a change to the faq around the same time. Maybe we, the players, haven't been able to find legitimate cheese with this ruling, but possibly the developers have had trouble introducing new content while working around the old ruling. I don't know.

What I do know is that I just want to play a mystic theurge without sucking for ten levels. Does that make me a bad person?

I was pretty excited to have the chance to play a mystic theurge in a home game recently, and until such a time as something else comes along to not make the class head-scratchingly bad I will probably simply ignore this faq change going forward.

I mean the old faq entry certainly makes for weird, possibly non-intuitive character development. Certain races suddenly work better for certain classes under the right conditions which I doubt is ideal from a design standpoint. But it also didn't appear to make anything overpowered. I mean, if there's something coming out or something getting changed that's going to make the prestige classes this most heavily affects still be more viable I'm all for it, I think that will be a more elegant (and probably even more fun) solution. But if that's not the case then what's even really the purpose of this change?