If this has been officially clarified, I haven't seen anything, so I'll ask again:
Are domain powers and wizard school specialisation powers supposed to be based on caster level or actual class level? Will an archmage 5/ evoker 15 get the capstone ability?
|
This must have been answered before and otherwise pretty obvious, so I'll stick the question in here.
I was just scanning the schools and wondered what's up with the bonus spells? On page 194, we have this:
In addition to these abilities, each school also grants a
number of bonus spells. Whenever a wizard attains the listed
level, he can choose one spell from his school to prepare every
day as a bonus spell. Instead of gaining a spell of the listed
level, the wizard can instead choose a spell of a lower level,
which he can then prepare twice per day (except for 2nd level).
A universalist can choose spells from any school. Once chosen,
these spells cannot be changed.
And then, for fourth level, say, we have this:
4th Level: The wizard can cast any second level spell from
his chosen school once per day.
If he's fourth level, though, second-level spells aren't a level lower than any other level of spell he can cast. So what's he giving up?
Are the two things -- the paragraph on bonus spells and the list of levels -- not about the same thing (ie, the wizard gets both?), or where am I being dense?
Also, isn't this something of an 'in your face' for the Sorceror?
The "(except for 2nd level)" talks about wizard level, not spell level. (All the things in D&D called "level" can be confusing. I think I'd call the spell levels circles or tiers if I were tasked to develop a new edition)
That means that on 4th level, you could forsake your 2nd-level spell 1/day and instead get a 1st-level spell 2/day. But on 2nd-level, you cannot switch the 1st-level spell you cast 1/2 caster level/day for a lower-level (i.e. 0-level spell).
For example, you could do this as an evoker:
Level 1: Energy Ray (standard action, usable at will)
Level 2: Magic Missile 1/day per two caster level
Level 4: Scorching Ray 1/day OR Burning Hands 2/day (or even magic missile again)
Level 6: Fireball 1/day OR Scorching Ray 2/day
Level 8: Elemental Wall
Level 10: Cone of Cold 1/day OR well, you get the idea...
Level 12: Chain Lighting 1/day
Level 14: Delayed Blast Fireball 1/day
Level 16: Polar Ray 1/day
Level 18: Meteor Swarm 1/day
Level 20: Elemental Power.
On level 14, you could instead get, say, Forceful Hand 2/day.
If a cleric no longer gets his domain powers when prestige classing then he'd be better off using the old 3.5 rules where you at least got that one extra spell/day and weak domain power.
It's not always about being better off: It's about balance, and about making all choices attractive.
If you get to keep everything from the base class if you go PrC, why would anyone ever not take a PrC?
And why should wizards and clerics be the only ones that can multiclass without regrets, while everyone else gives up something? Might as well ignore levels 11-20 for base classes.
If this has been officially clarified, I haven't seen anything, so I'll ask again:
Are domain powers and wizard school specialisation powers supposed to be based on caster level or actual class level? Will an archmage 5/ evoker 15 get the capstone ability?
I too would really like to see this one clarified.
Thanks
In this thread here. It was mentioned
At some point Jason said that the caster level part in the descriptions of the domain, school and bloodline abilities was an error and it should be the class level.
Now I haven't seen the post personally but as Paizo is attempting to make the core classes more attractive options, denying the PrC's from building on existing class abilties makes sense and I don't doubt it. I don't have a problem with it as it only limits classes that tended to be really powerful in the first place(casters) end game. The end result is they are still as "powerful" as they were in 3.5E, with full caster progression PrCs, but they lose the bonus "class extras" that PFRPG has given them if they PrC out.
If this has been officially clarified, I haven't seen anything, so I'll ask again:
Are domain powers and wizard school specialisation powers supposed to be based on caster level or actual class level? Will an archmage 5/ evoker 15 get the capstone ability?
Official clarification, not yet. But "NO!" Simply put, you don't get the capstone ability of a class that you have not reached the cap of.
If a cleric no longer gets his domain powers when prestige classing then he'd be better off using the old 3.5 rules where you at least got that one extra spell/day and weak domain power.It's not always about being better off: It's about balance, and about making all choices attractive.
If you get to keep everything from the base class if you go PrC, why would anyone ever not take a PrC?
And why should wizards and clerics be the only ones that can multiclass without regrets, while everyone else gives up something? Might as well ignore levels 11-20 for base classes.
However, none of the casting classes just have casting. If I'm a wizard I'm still letting go of my extra feats. If I'm a cleric, I'm still loosing my Channel Energy. There are things you're giving up; however whether or not its enough is in question.
If they do decide that the bonuses don't continue, does that mean that I also don't get the specialization penalty for those higher levels? Should I have to suffer the restrictions of not being able to memorize prohibited 6th level spells if I don't also get the benefit of my extra 6th-level specialized spell per day?
If you have to give up the extra bonuses, then you're giving up an extra 6th-, 7th-, 8th- and 9th-level spell. Losing that would be pretty harsh and I can't think of any PrCs that would even come close to making up for that. Loremaster considers and extra first and second level spell-slot to be its top-tier secrets.
Also remember that taking any prestige class forces you to give up your 1 HP or 1 skill point per level. These losses do stack up.
As a side note, this also means that cleric PrCs should be rebalanced because they are loosing a significant part of their spellcasting.
However, none of the casting classes just have casting. If I'm a wizard I'm still letting go of my extra feats. If I'm a cleric, I'm still loosing my Channel Energy. There are things you're giving up; however whether or not its enough is in question.
Feats are more plentiful now in PFRPG, people didn't not multiclass for fear of losing a feat before, if anything they multiclassed to get more feats (2 levels of fighter for 2 more feats so I could get into that nifty PrC, sure!). Same thing with channel energy, prior to PFRPG the most common use for turning attempts was divine metamagic feats in our group or they got used occasionally on undead (but not very often even then, sometimes it wasn't worth trying and more effective to do something else). The new rules for channeling make it more of a cost though I will agree, but not nearly as much of a consideration as losing caster levels and spell slots. You don't get to channel more often as you level up (typically) it only gets more powerful, it is a set number of times per day at first level just like it is at tenth level (unless you go out of your way to change that). Feats and channeling like you are bringing up are class perks, the class is still a full progression caster and that is where its power comes from.
If they do decide that the bonuses don't continue, does that mean that I also don't get the specialization penalty for those higher levels? Should I have to suffer the restrictions of not being able to memorize prohibited 6th level spells if I don't also get the benefit of my extra 6th-level specialized spell per day?
You would lose out on them, if you have opposed schools memorized you wouldn't get the bonuses, which is the way it should be. It still isn't nearly as severe as the old "you can't have the spell regardless" specialization rules. You have the utility of being able to use them if needed now, you just lose a bit of power if you do so. The flip side is you aren't losing as much (you don't have the mid-higher level school/domain abilities to worry about losing if you PrC or multiclass early on), so the penalty is actually lessened in that case. Its not like you are getting extra spell slots now, you have a static bonus ability that is always the same. Is memorizing that 4th level prohibited school spell worth losing your 1st and 2nd level school bonus abilities? Same idea as "Is taking 2 levels (or more) of this PrC worth delaying my specialty abilities by 2 levels (or more)".
If you have to give up the extra bonuses, then you're giving up an extra 6th-, 7th-, 8th- and 9th-level spell. Losing that would be pretty harsh and I can't think of any PrCs that would even come close to making up for that. Loremaster considers and extra first and second level spell-slot to be its top-tier secrets.
You are losing a spell that you have no control over, maybe that schools spell/ability doesn't fit with your character concept or seems a poor choice any way you look at it. I can take a PrC that lets me do something else which fits or may be more useful and still gives me full progression casting, in that case it is a win-win situation. I'd have to say you aren't thinking hard enough if you can honestly not come up with at least one or two PrC's that have been published for 3.5 that give enough utility or useful abilities to make up for that loss. Regardless, if you don't think that they exist, just play a straight Wizard or whatever class and keep the specialization bonuses if that is what you really want. It isn't like they are forcing you to multiclass or PrC out of it. The core class just became more attractive to play in some ways... which was the whole point.
Also remember that taking any prestige class forces you to give up your 1 HP or 1 skill point per level. These losses do stack up.
These are completely "bonus" in my view, losing them is negligible as I wasn't getting them in 3.5E. As they are a perk and not available to every single class-race combination it is a non-issue. If I'm playing a n elven cleric I'm not going to see them anyways, what do I care if I don't get them for going into a PrC?
As a side note, this also means that cleric PrCs should be rebalanced because they are loosing a significant part of their spellcasting.
Cleric domains are in the same boat as wizard with specialist schools. They lost the bonus slot to a specified ability every level BUT don't have to worry about opposing schools (so less loss of power there really). They end up with the bonus ability appropriate to their cleric class level regardless. Add in that they have a very situational ability that was made much more useful and I hardly see a reason for a complete redo of PrCs. If I remember correctly there are even PrCs out there that specifically state they increase turning (and would increase channeling) so that is even less of a complaint. If you don't see the abilities of the PrC outweighing what you are possibly losing, don't PrC out, they aren't forcing you to do so (notice a trend here?).
If you don't want to lose the class abilities you don't multiclass or PrC out, extremely simple solution. You now have to think about what you are getting versus what you are losing instead of getting it all like it was in 3.5E, there is no problem here just a small reigning in of the caster classes power - one which you have complete control over, you get to choose as a player which way you want to go.
However, none of the casting classes just have casting. If I'm a wizard I'm still letting go of my extra feats. If I'm a cleric, I'm still loosing my Channel Energy. There are things you're giving up; however whether or not its enough is in question.
If they do decide that the bonuses don't continue, does that mean that I also don't get the specialization penalty for those higher levels? Should I have to suffer the restrictions of not being able to memorize prohibited 6th level spells if I don't also get the benefit of my extra 6th-level specialized spell per day?
If you have to give up the extra bonuses, then you're giving up an extra 6th-, 7th-, 8th- and 9th-level spell. Losing that would be pretty harsh and I can't think of any PrCs that would even come close to making up for that. Loremaster considers and extra first and second level spell-slot to be its top-tier secrets.
Also remember that taking any prestige class forces you to give up your 1 HP or 1 skill point per level. These losses do stack up.
As a side note, this also means that cleric PrCs should be rebalanced because they are loosing a significant part of their spellcasting.
I agree with most of this.
I'm looking through the PF Prestige Classes, and there is not a one of them that I would take as a wizard, sorcerer, or cleric.
The benefits gained do not outweigh the price these pure spellcasters have to pay for the PrC.
Now, I know it's not all about benefit vs. price, min-maxing, or munchkinizing.
But I like to think of my characters as if they were real. And these (imagined) real characters live in a very very dangerous (imagined) real world, full of (imagined) real monsters, bad guys, dungeons, traps, and unimaginable terrors lurking around every corner.
As such, I think my (imagined) real characters would make the decisions that give them the best chance of surviving this hostile world. Doubly so because they deliberately choose to leave the relative security of the walled cities and run off to the deepest, darkest, dangerousest corners of the world, looking for trouble everywhere they go.
Anyone who does that better do everything they can do to maximize their chances of surviving such a suicidal lifestyle.
So, without worrying too much about number crunching, min-maxing, or milking every munchkinized ounce of race/class/feat/item/spell benefits, I still do try to evaluate the choices my characters make with a fairly critical eye.
If I can't see a reason to make a certain choice, such as dual-classing or taking a prestige class, then neither can my character. If it seems a balanced choice, some gain, some loss, roughly equal, then I can make the choice based on other factors, like what the party needs, or what my character likes rather than needs.
But if I can see reasons not to make a certain choice, then there's no way my character would deliberately make the bad choice. No way he'd choose to lose more than he gains.
Which, unfortunately, is exactly what he'd expect from any PrC I have looked at as an option for my Pathfinder wizard and for my Pathfinder cleric.
I'm looking through the PF Prestige Classes, and there is not a one of them that I would take as a wizard, sorcerer, or cleric.
The PF prestige classes are not the only ones you have to choose from. With the backwards compatibility all 3.5E PrCs are fair game even if you don't want to use them. Paizo cannot do anything about the those existing classes, they can however make the core classes more "attractive" by making it so you give something up to go into a PrC. They have even stated this as their intention (paraphrased: "We want people to want to play all 20 levels of the classes."). If you don't think the PrC gives the character enough for the trade off, you are in no way required to enter into that PrC.
"I want the neat abilities of that PrC but I don't like that I have to give something up if I take it..." Taking a PrC for a caster class is now a decision instead of a foregone conclusion with the only choice being which PrC you are taking. There is no more having your cake and eating it too. It is a good thing.
I'm looking through the PF Prestige Classes, and there is not a one of them that I would take as a wizard, sorcerer, or cleric.The PF prestige classes are not the only ones you have to choose from. With the backwards compatibility all 3.5E PrCs are fair game even if you don't want to use them. Paizo cannot do anything about the those existing classes,
Yes, I know all those other prestige classes are out there.
For the most part, those are balance toward 3.5 classes (although I have always thought that about half of them are weak enough to be bad choices for any character).
Now that Pathfinder has enhanced the base classes, it's unlikely that very many of the 3.5 prestige classes can compete. I'll admit, there are probably still a few lurking in the dusty covers of my many, many 3.5 books that are still worthy of consideration by a Pathfinder base class, but those are just the few prestige classes that were clearly overpowered in 3.5.
And since they're not open content per the OGL, Pathfinder won't be reprinting them, enhanced or not.
Which is why I didn't reference them in my original post.
As for the prestige classes that Pathfinder can reprint, I feel they didn't do an adequate job of making them comparable to the base classes.
they can however make the core classes more "attractive" by making it so you give something up to go into a PrC. They have even stated this as their intention (paraphrased: "We want people to want to play all 20 levels of the classes."). If you don't think the PrC gives the character enough for the trade off, you are in no way required to enter into that PrC.
Which they did.
So much that just about anyone in a base class, particularly a spellcasting class, would be making a mistake to take a prestige class instead.
"I want the neat abilities of that PrC but I don't like that I have to give something up if I take it..." .
I never said that. Are you saying it?
Taking a PrC for a caster class is now a decision instead of a foregone conclusion with the only choice being which PrC you are taking. There is no more having your cake and eating it too. It is a good thing.
I agree with you 100%.
Unfortunately, I don't think this is what Pathfinder has accomplished.
It's more like now you can "have your cake or go hungry". Pathfinder core classes are the cake, everything else is going hungry.
What they should strive for is "have your chocolate cake, or try this angelfood cake - they're both equally yummy".
Yes, I know all those other prestige classes are out there.
For the most part, those are balance toward 3.5 classes (although I have always thought that about half of them are weak enough to be bad choices for any character).
Now that Pathfinder has enhanced the base classes, it's unlikely that very many of the 3.5 prestige classes can compete. I'll admit, there are probably still a few lurking in the dusty covers of my many, many 3.5 books that are still worthy of consideration by a Pathfinder base class, but those are just the few prestige classes that were clearly overpowered in 3.5.
And since they're not open content per the OGL, Pathfinder won't be reprinting them, enhanced or not.
Which is why I didn't reference them in my original post.
As for the prestige classes that Pathfinder can reprint, I feel they didn't do an adequate job of making them comparable to the base classes.
& more
In all honesty the PrCs from the DMG were generally not all that great in the first place. Once the first "splat" books were out they were rarely if ever taken, and we aren't talking about overpowered PrCs that were the alternatives here. Also if you look at the earlier PrCs you will see a trend. They weren't there to "power up" a character they were there to give more/differing options, essentially doing the same thing feats accomplish. Options and allowing "exceptions to the rule." It wasn't until several books and the inevitable power creep that the most commonly taken PrCs were prevalent, and even then it was usually less the "PrC is broken outright" and more "The PrC is broken when you take this, this and this and mix it together."
The problem with casters has always been they gave nothing of value up (unless you were doing a specific build like buffing the animal companion or familiar or some thing of that sort, and even then there was a PrC for it that made an exception so the critter counted the full PrC level versus the possible loss of caster level) when they PrC out. Even a specialist kept his/her +1 spell per level and got the other goodies on top of it. The balanced caster PrCs weren't ever used because they lost caster levels, if a PrC that lost caster levels was used it was so overpowered that the loss of caster levels was worth it. The core casters have always been "king of the hill" mid to end game, PrCs just made it that much better (more options = more utility = more power). It was like the cherry, or maybe the cherry and sprinkles/syrup even, on the sundae.
If a caster PrC offers full progression casting, equal to(or more) options or more powerful/useful options than feats for a build, and even a bit more role playing "flavor" to a character, I'm calling BS if you say it isn't up to the core class abilities. If a PrC gives really nice goodies away at the cost of 1-3 caster levels, I'm going to call it balanced and you apparently will call it a mistake. If a PrC (an in all likelihood overpowered PrC) gives nice goodies and full progression caster levels and you are calling it not comparable, I can only look at you in disbelief and question your powers of observation when it comes to game balance, and I'm certain the game designers will do the same. (fyi, not meant as an insult, just a description of possible differing views there)
That isn't to say that the abilities gained from a school or domain are useless or negligible, but they are not the same as a free spell slot that can be used for whatever you would like to put into them (if you are specialized you are going to cherry pick the best spell from your school or domain for that level anyways using your "critical view"). Losing a predefined and quite possibly useless ability at a certain level has much less of a cost when looking at things critically. Add in the bonus +2 attribute characters are getting and you are much more likely to have bonus spell slots anyways (The minimum stat you need to have a bonus 9th level spell is 28, so you would need to make up 8 points in 18 levels, hardly a chore). Also isn't going into a PrC a bit like specializing in something? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if you are going to specialize in something else, you would not continue to specialize in what you are already specializing in? Couldn't that be considered the "cost" of switching specializations mid way through a "career"?
"I want the neat abilities of that PrC but I don't like that I have to give something up if I take it..."
This for anyone who believes that PrCing out of a class shouldn't have some sort of impact on the core classes abilities. If anyone truly believes that the loss of a casters domain's/school's extra abilities is not balanced or too debilitating when going into a PrC then that statement is for them.
If a PrC gives full progression caster levels, that is having your cake, that is the core of a non-hybrid caster. The abilities that you get from the vast majority of any PrC are typically far better than the 2 feats you give up (assuming 10 levels). Now roll in the school/domains abilities, they aren't amazing, they are nice to have in some situations. How about these PrC abilities, they could be nice too in other situations. To me that is a wash, they are equally as "yummy" as they give full progression, the flavor is coming from the abilities each character build is getting from staying or PrCing or mix of the two. In a role playing game "min maxing" or a "critical view" usually means you are looking for bigger and better, PrCs weren't intended to be that, they were meant to be "different" it is just an unavoidable side effect that some differences make some things more attractive than others. Even if you don't agree it is a wash, it is a far, far cry from going "hungry" as you put it.
Anyways that seems to be what Paizo is trying to reinforce, more differences vs power increases. Despite this being an "open playtest" don't forget we are not playing in our own backyard. This is Paizo's "sandbox" we are sitting in, there are going to be differing views of things. If you don't like something you can always "leave" core behind (aka house rule it in your own games). If they have decided to balance the casters, who were already at the top of the power scale prior to the buffs in PFRPG, by saying you don't keep these goodies if you PrC I would have to say that is mild and not enough but at least it is a start. It doesn't break the game, makes a certain amount of sense and something like that will only annoy the min max players long term with a bit of nostalgia when they think of how it used to be. It just means they will find other things to tweak with the characters.
My only concern in this situation is that the Mystic Theurge is going to fall through the cracks with this change.
Yes, I know it got an endcap ability and a minor scaling ability. However, if you look at what the class lost in order to get it (a large chunk of spell slots, where spell slots were supposed to be it's advantage), then I feel something might still be missing to keep it balanced.
A normal Mystic Theurge build of 7/3/10, with Wizard/Cleric will result in the net loss of three 8th level abilities (1 specialist, 2 domain), 1 endcap ability (specialist) and a buttload of spells per day.
Now, the loss of 8th and 20th level abilities could be an arguable equivalent loss for the Mystic Theurge abilities.
However, now the Mystic Theurge loses spells per day on top of that. The Specialist School spells per day, and the Domain bonus spells (listed as powers), as they are all class abilities.
Jason has specifically mentioned that he felt the Mystic Theurge was balanced as a class due to the number of spell slots he got. That was his "thing".
However, the new Mystic Theurge is the equivalent to playing a 3.5 MT but without the Domain or Specialist slots after a certain level.
.
An easy fix for this would be to add an one extra arcane and divine spell slot every two Mystic Theurge levels to make up for the loss. Not quite as many spells, however they aren't fixed at one spell like the domain/specialist powers.
And if someone comes in with a Sorcerer, Bard, or Druid, they all still lose their class specifics (which were now balanced with the specialist and domain powers), so fixing this on the side of the Mystic Theurge keeps things equal no matter what your entry class should be.
Truth be told though... I'd prefer more "mixing magic" abilities over more slots. However, I haven't really come up with anything new to suggest regarding that avenue so far... /shrug.
If they do decide that the bonuses don't continue, does that mean that I also don't get the specialization penalty for those higher levels? Should I have to suffer the restrictions of not being able to memorize prohibited 6th level spells if I don't also get the benefit of my extra 6th-level specialized spell per day?You would lose out on them, if you have opposed schools memorized you wouldn't get the bonuses, which is the way it should be. It still isn't nearly as severe as the old "you can't have the spell regardless" specialization rules. You have the utility of being able to use them if needed now, you just lose a bit of power if you do so.
Okay this needs clarification.
You DO NOT LOSE YOUR BONUS SCHOOL SPELLS when you memorized an opposed school spell.
You DO NOT LOSE YOUR SPECIALIST ABILITIES.
You only lose the specialist bonus ability. [Abjuration = resistance 5, Conjuration = Armor bonus, Divination = acting in the surprise round, Enchantment = skill bonuses, Evocation = damage bonuses, Illusion = longer lasting illusions, Necromancy = 8HD undead controlled, Transmutation = ability score bonuses, Universal = None]
Each arcane school grants a number of school powers dependent upon the level of the wizard. In addition, each arcane school (except the universal school) also grants a specialist bonus power so long as the wizard does not have any spells prepared from his prohibited schools.
Most wizards chose one school of magic over all others. Due to their devotion, they gain a number of abilities based on the school of magic chosen. In addition, each school grants the specialist wizard a bonus ability so long as he did not prepare any spells of his opposition schools that day. Wizards without a favored school gain access to the universal school and do not gain a specialist bonus ability.
Okay this needs clarification.
You DO NOT LOSE YOUR BONUS SCHOOL SPELLS when you memorized an opposed school spell.
You DO NOT LOSE YOUR SPECIALIST ABILITIES.You only lose the specialist bonus ability. [Abjuration = resistance 5, Conjuration = Armor bonus, Divination = acting in the surprise round, Enchantment = skill bonuses, Evocation = damage bonuses, Illusion = longer lasting illusions, Necromancy = 8HD undead controlled, Transmutation = ability score bonuses, Universal = None]
Ok, well that makes it even less stringent (thanks for the clarification, btw ;) than I thought it was. It is only a minor loss if you decide you need prohibited school's spell for the day instead of an all or nothing deal. This is a decent bump in power regardless of how you look at it in comparison to the 3.5E casters.
As for the Mystic theurge PrC, it is still what it has always been. Leveling up it had the handicap of not having the top level spells that a non multi-class character would have. What it did have was twice as many spells from two vastly different sources, and that was its true "power." It always suffered from not ever having the top tier spells until epic levels and that is why many considered it a poor choice (at least from what I read, I liked the class personally). As for losing the domain and school abilities progressing further, you can say it hurts the MyT (or MTh or whatever it abbreviates to) more but in reality having twice as many spells per level is a big advantage and may be more of an advantage than some pure caster PrCs got. Less power top end but huge utility gain is what it was designed for. The newer trade off of some predetermined abilities for a significant number of spell slots is attractive even if you are "power gaming" or looking at things critically.
It still comes down to full progression spell casters are always going to be on the high end of the power curve in the current system, having them limited in some way finally and unable to get out of restrictions or gaining something with basically no loss by PrC'ing is a good thing (and obviously Paizo agrees as that is the path they are taking by all appearances). The core caster classes would have to lose a lot more before they are on the same level with the fighter, more than we will ever see changed in PFRPG.
As for the Mystic theurge PrC, it is still what it has always been. Leveling up it had the handicap of not having the top level spells that a non multi-class character would have. What it did have was twice as many spells from two vastly different sources, and that was its true "power." It always suffered from not ever having the top tier spells until epic levels and that is why many considered it a poor choice (at least from what I read, I liked the class personally). As for losing the domain and school abilities progressing further, you can say it hurts the MyT (or MTh or whatever it abbreviates to) more but in reality having twice as many spells per level is a big advantage and may be more of an advantage than some pure caster PrCs got. Less power top end but huge utility gain is what it was designed for. The newer trade off of some predetermined abilities for a significant number of spell slots is attractive even if you are "power gaming" or looking at things critically.
And I'd agree with you 100%... except that I'm not talking about the Specialist and Domain abilities, but rather the spells they get from specialist and domains.
Okay, here's what I'm talking about...
Here's a breakdown of a 10th level Mystic Theurge build (Wiz 3, Clr 3, MT 4) in 3e and Pathfinder:
3e Mystic Theurge
1st: 4+1 (Wiz), 4+1 (Clr) (10 total)
2nd: 3+1 (Wiz), 3+1 (Clr) (8 total)
3rd: 2+1 (Wiz), 2+1 (Clr) (6 total)
4th: 1+1 (Wiz), 1+1 (Clr) (4 total)
3e Straight Classed
1st: 4+1 (5 total)
2nd: 4+1 (5 total)
3rd: 3+1 (4 total)
4th: 3+1 (4 total)
5th: 2+1 (3 total)
Pathfinder Mystic Theurge
1st: 4+1 (Wiz), 4+1 (Clr) (10 total)
2nd: 3 (Wiz), 3 (Clr) (6 total)
3rd: 2 (Wiz), 2 (Clr) (4 total)
4th: 1 (Wiz), 1 (Clr) (2 total)
Pathfinder Straight Classed
1st: 4+5 (9 total Wiz) or 4+10 (14 total Clr)
2nd: 4+1 (5 total Wiz) or 4+2 (6 total Clr)
3rd: 3+1 (4 total Wiz) or 3 (3 total Clr)
4th: 3+1 (4 total Wiz) or 3 (3 total Clr)
5th: 2+1 (3 total Wiz) or 2 (2 total Clr)
..
Compare the Pathfinder classes. The Mystic Theurge doesn't have as many spells per day, AND he loses out on a complete spell level (5th level spells).
Compare the situation to 3e, where he had a lot more spells per day at the cost of that spell level.
This is before we even go into the 8th level abilities the straight classed characters get that the Mystic Theurge doesn't... and then any other class abilities lost (Turning, Feats, etc).
Edit: Addendum
Compare the Pathfinder classes. The Mystic Theurge doesn't have as many spells per day, AND he loses out on a complete spell level (5th level spells).
Compare the situation to 3e, where he had a lot more spells per day at the cost of that spell level.
This is fundamentally what I'm talking about. The losses, especially cleric losses are just too extreme.
Now we can talk about how missing out on two feats and familiar advancement isn't anything for a wizard to get a prestige class. But I'm not balancing it against all the broken PrCs out there. I'm just looking at the ones in the Pathfinder since that's all the Pathfinder people have control over (though as an aside we've banned most of the broken PrCs).
I have a character who would be perfect for the Loremaster prestige class in concept except it would cut down his efficacy considerably and take him further from concept. The Loremaster class in addition to being weak also has terrible secrets that have very little to do with being a Loremaster. There's actually a much better version of him in a module we're currently playing that has better secrets. But effectively this is a class that has been significantly nerfed.
I did a basic examination of Wizard 20 versus Wizard 10 Loremaster 10 and got basically this:
Gains
10 skill points
Bardic Lore (L10) (equiv. 45 skill points)
2 Languages (< 2 skill points)
+1 AC
+1 To Hit
1 first level spell slot
1 second level spell slot
1 feat
Loses
5 casting of 1st level spell (pre-determined)
6th level spell (pre-determined)
7th level spell (pre-determined)
8th level spell (pre-determined)
9th level spell (pre-determined)
20th capstone ability
10 levels of familiar advancement
2 feats
It could be argued that these are equivalent, but not so much. I have a character designed around the knowledge monkey and the wizard base class looks more attractive. And no I don't have to take the PrC, but I should also be able to lobby for a balancing that makes the Loremaster more Loremastery.