One of my players pointed out to me that if he takes the feat Precocious Apprentice (Complete Arcane, p. 181) as a 1st level wizard and then takes 3 levels of cleric and the appropriate ranks in Knowledge (Arcana) and Knowledge (Religion) he's qualified for the Mystic Theurge prestige class after only 4 levels. A strict reading of the rules would seem to allow this. I could house rule against it, but that seems arbitrary and I hate to stunt the creativity of my players. Any thoughts?
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I wouldn't worry about it overly. They're able to take a prestige class a level or two early, that's fine, but it won't adjust the power level of the character by much.
I dunno...the main balancing component of the MT is that their caster level is so low as compared to a straight caster. This character will be casting at a cleric level that is only one below his character level. That's a pretty big deal.
I dunno...the main balancing component of the MT is that their caster level is so low as compared to a straight caster. This character will be casting at a cleric level that is only one below his character level. That's a pretty big deal.I wouldn't worry about it overly. They're able to take a prestige class a level or two early, that's fine, but it won't adjust the power level of the character by much.
Bah, let him do it. I played a MT once, I was by far the weakest link in the party. The class just doesn't lead to a whole lot of power. It'll be like a cleric that loses most of his armor wearing capabilites and beating skills (until divine power) in exchange for a few wizard spells.
As for reduced power level, this guy'll take Practised Caster at 3rd level and be casting his Magic Missiles at full character level. On top of that, I've no doubt he'll make a gray elf with the Elf Wizard substitution level from Races of the Wild and thus get an extra spell per day of the highest level (arcane).
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Bah, let him do it. I played a MT once, I was by far the weakest link in the party. The class just doesn't lead to a whole lot of power. It'll be like a cleric that loses most of his armor wearing capabilites and beating skills (until divine power) in exchange for a few wizard spells.
I have also played an MT and generally agree with the fact that it is a weak class. That being said, it's weak in large part because you are so far behind other pure casters. Being 3 levels behind is significantly different from being 1 level behind. This MT will be casting nearly the same spells with the same effects as a pure cleric.
Granted, he's still going to have to deal with the MT's many other weaknesses, not the least of which being the fact that he will need a good Wis and a good Int, but I'd be hesitant to let a player jump into the class too early. I would probably allow it to see how it played out, but I would do so with a dose of caution.
This has come up before. My advice now, as it was then, is to ban both of the feats from p.181 of Complete Arcane.
However, if you want to allow the feat, but disallow early access into the class, point out that the strict wording of the PrC requirement is "Able to cast... 2nd level Arcane spells". Note the plural, and then point out that he'll only be able to cast one such spell.
|
However, if you want to allow the feat, but disallow early access into the class, point out that the strict wording of the PrC requirement is "Able to cast... 2nd level Arcane spells". Note the plural, and then point out that he'll only be able to cast one such spell.
That's an entirely correct interpretation.
And it's not nit-picky at all... The prerequisite is worded in such a way that implies that you have full facility in casting 2nd level spells, which that feat does not give you. By the RAW, the feat does not grant you the prerequisites for MT.
i am going to point out the fact that its a feat from a sidebar, not the main feats listing. this implies that it is a variant rule, which means he (she? i hate the whole pc pronoun thing...) should talk with you about whether YOU want to use that rule. and, since this player already brought it to you with the intent to use it, you should probably nix it now if you dont want this being used to circumvent the requirements.
tog
p.s. - to those of you who used the plurality technicality: does that mean my int 13 wizard, for example, has to be 4th level to qualify, whereas an int 14 wizard would qualify at 3rd? just wondering... tog
|
|
i am going to point out the fact that its a feat from a sidebar, not the main feats listing. this implies that it is a variant rule, which means he (she? i hate the whole pc pronoun thing...) should talk with you about whether YOU want to use that rule. and, since this player already brought it to you with the intent to use it, you should probably nix it now if you dont want this being used to circumvent the requirements.
tog
p.s. - to those of you who used the plurality technicality: does that mean my int 13 wizard, for example, has to be 4th level to qualify, whereas an int 14 wizard would qualify at 3rd? just wondering... tog
If your wizard has an int of 13, that's the least of your problems...
Seriously, even in the case you mention, you probably have at least 2 level 2 spells in your spellbook, even if you can only prepare and cast one of those per day. Therefore, you can cast 2nd level arcane spells (plural). If you foolishly only scribed one 2nd level spell in your spellbook at 3rd level (and scribed another 1st level spell with your other freebie), then I can't help you; it was a silly thing to do anyway.
|
I personally would consider the spell/spells distinction very nit-picky. I think it would be better, if it comes to it, to just say to the player that the build is potentially unbalanced. If it is, of course.
Some DMs seem to try and stifle players trying to be creative within the rules. I would prefer to let a player innovate and then actually see what the impact is. I can't say whether this build is inbalanced or not as I know little about the practical impact of the PrC. But my advice under these situations is to try it, see how it goes, and then decide. Prima facie, the guy is using a lot of feat slots he could use for other things which are enhancing. I don't think any of us can really say how this will work out just from reading the rules, as the actual dynamics in play are often surprising.
Plus, are the other PCs similarly power-gamed, in which case this one won't stand out. Plus, is the DM also a power-gamer, in which case it really doesn't matter at all - everyone is playing from the same hymn sheet and there shouldn't be too much conflict in playing style.