Never said it was just for wizards, if I did at any point, I corrected my self.
We misread. You said it was a PrC for wizards, but mainly casters. We overlooked the second half.
My other argument still stands, though: Once you can use high-level magic (say, 7th level and above) you're the s!&#. If you get that far, you do have an awesome control over magic. No need for a PrC that is "just like the core class, only more so".
You know, just about everything the archmage could do are just slightly better (or worse, depending on the value of a spell slot of any given level) than an existing feat, or feat chain. The feats tend to be more restrictive, but there's ways around most of it.
Arcane Fire: Burn a 9th level slot, plus sacrificing off a spell? To deal 5d6 + Spell level d6 as a long range magic damage attack? Better and more effective ways to do this using lower level slots, and actual spells, in all honesty. Hell, empowered any-3rd-level-blasting-spell-of-your-choice-that-does-1d6/cl beats this, and for what, a 5th level slot instead?
Arcane Reach: There's a feat that replicates the first selection of this ability. It increases the spell level by 2, but we all know about reducing metamagic costs, right? Especially considering the Universalist 8th level ability. 1/2 levels, reduce the level adjustment of a MM feat on a spell? And you can do it more than once a round? Still potentially useful ability outside of the feat, just because of the lack of Metamagic requirement, and you can take it a second time to get a 60 foot reach instead.
Mastery of Counterspelling: There is a feat chain somewhere, iirc, that replicates this. I could be wrong though. In fact, I most likely am, so this is one ability that doesn't have a feat replication of which I'm aware. There are spells to do it though, and contingencies can help prepare for this.
Mastery of Elements: Feat to replicate this. It's not on the fly, and it only replaces to one element per time you take the feat, however...
Mastery of Shaping: Second ability without a feat or feat chain to replicate it, at present.
Spell Power: Numerous ways to replicate this for most spells.
Spell-like ability: Feat chain to do this, although it's more restrictive by quite a bit. Also, all wizards now receive this to a degree.
Now, combine in Universalist wizard abilities to MM a spell on the fly with no boost, metamagic rods, etc. and this starts to add up. Perhaps throw something in to make up for the two abilities that aren't replicatable instead? Do we really need something to replicate them?
I have to agree with Jason and Co on this one. Just not necessary. Flavorful? Yes. But entirely unnecessary when you can backwards it back in if you really feel like it adds mechanically to the game somehow.
Arcane fire (su) that's the big deal on this one: No spell failure, no caster level checks, no spell resistance, nothing, and it can be used with any level spell, meaning I can choose to do anywhere from 5d6 (0th level spell) to 14d6 (9th level spell) at extreme range.
Arcane Reach (su) Splat book feat, but the feat raises spell level, this doesn't and works on all spells. Not available in Core currently.
Mastery of Counterspell Makes counterspelling worthwhile... sort of. Really needs Improved Counterspell to be worthwhile.
Mastery of the Elements Takes 4 splat book feats (in complete arcane) to come close to replacing this ability. On the fly changing of energy types between 5 energy types (fire, sonic, cold, electricity, or acid) is just what the sorcerer ordered, and very useful for wizards too.
Mastery of Shaping 2 splat book feats are similiar (sculpt spell, extra-ordinary spell aim). Useful still becuase this can be used on the fly, again just what the sorcerer ordered as it lowers the need for a bunch of different blasting spells.
Spell Power Increasing caster level isn't that easy without splat books. The only other Core way of increasing Caster Level without leveling is an Ioun Stone.
Spell-like Ability This one isn't much anymore with wizard's already getting their bonus spells. But spell-like abilities don't provoke attacks of opportunity, and can't be counter.
Just pointing out what makes some of these abilities special, and why I would like them to still be available in some fashion.
Arcane fire (su) that's the big deal on this one: No spell failure, no caster level checks, no spell resistance, nothing, and it can be used with any level spell, meaning I can choose to do anywhere from 5d6 (0th level spell) to 14d6 (9th level spell) at extreme range.
Arcane Reach (su) Splat book feat, but the feat raises spell level, this doesn't and works on all spells. Not available in Core currently.
Mastery of Counterspell Makes counterspelling worthwhile... sort of. Really needs Improved Counterspell to be worthwhile.
Mastery of the Elements Takes 4 splat book feats (in complete arcane) to come close to replacing this ability. On the fly changing of energy types between 5 energy types (fire, sonic, cold, electricity, or acid) is just what the sorcerer ordered, and very useful for wizards too.
Mastery of Shaping 2 splat book feats are similiar (sculpt spell, extra-ordinary spell aim). Useful still becuase this can be used on the fly, again just what the sorcerer ordered as it lowers the need for a bunch of different blasting spells.
Spell Power Increasing caster level isn't that easy without splat books. The only other Core way of increasing Caster Level without leveling is an Ioun Stone.
Spell-like Ability This one isn't much anymore with wizard's already getting their bonus spells. But spell-like abilities don't provoke attacks of opportunity, and can't be counter.
Just pointing out what makes some of these abilities special, and why I would like them to still be available in some fashion.
Thank you.
Arcane Fire: Burn a 9th level slot, plus sacrificing off a spell? To deal 5d6 + Spell level d6 as a long range magic damage attack? Better and more effective ways to do this using lower level slots, and actual spells, in all honesty. Hell, empowered any-3rd-level-blasting-spell-of-your-choice-that-does-1d6/cl beats this, and for what, a 5th level slot instead?
Since this is a supernatural ability, there is virtually no defense against it. Only not being hit helps you (well, and being in an antimatic field, but that doesn't exactly leave you in the best position). If it hits, you take the damage. Nothing saves you. No SR, no energy resistance, no immunity, no protective magic.
That's quite good.
Mastery of Counterspelling: There is a feat chain somewhere, iirc, that replicates this. I could be wrong though.
I don't know about anything that turns your counterspells back to harm the caster, but there's the Reactive Counterspelling feat that lets you counterspel without preparing an action for it.
I have to agree with Jason and Co on this one. Just not necessary. Flavorful? Yes. But entirely unnecessary when you can backwards it back in if you really feel like it adds mechanically to the game somehow.
I'd say it's not even that flavourful. It's a PrC that represents what every spellcaster becomes at this level, anyway. You don't really abandon your path of becoming the most powerful cleric or wizard or what have you in order to become an archmage or hierophant. It's basically a title you can take on if you're powerful enough. If we were talking about something special, like Metaspell Master, who gets to use metamagic effects in new and exciting ways (text taken directly from brochure), I could see it, but to me, archmage or hierophant is what all spellcasters become when they grow up (and *not* stray from the path)
So keep the PrCs, turn the abilities into feats - actually, I'd not even turn everything into feats: I don't see why we'd need Spellpower the way it is now. That's like a feat that grants you +1 on all attacks rolls.
Just for the sake of clarification, Reach Spell is an OGL feat, and it can be found in the Divine Rules section of SRD.
Thank you KnightErrantJr, I didn't know it was OGL now...
:Sigh: not that our DM cares, "Is it in Core? Then you can't have it."
Oh well, knew what I was getting when I started so I don't mind too much.
|
Been playing D&D since 1988. Since the release of 3rd edition in 2000/2001, I don't know a single player who did not multiclass out of the wizard class, and at least 75% of them ended up taking the archmage PrC.
Why?
Methinks either wizard was underpowered or bland at high levels, or because archmage was, well, overpowered.
Compared to other PrCs found in the "Complete X" books, archmage was relatively balanced, especially considering the high feat requirement.
Compared to the PRPG wizard and sorcerer class, and mystic theurge, Core 3.5 archmage is about just right, but I could now see an actual dilemma happening in the minds of players: "Do I keep taking wizard levels, or go for archmage?"
IMO, I think the most common answer to this we'll see in the future will be "keep taking wizard levels," as most people will want the 20th-level school power (or in the case of sorcerers, bloodline powers), and also because most people won't like to pay the steep feats cost for archmage (although now, with PRPG, getting feats is easier; i.e. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, etc.)
By the way, is there anyone here, other than me, who's in favor of keeping PrC HD values the same for non-Pathfinder material? (e.g. for instance, one of my players took 5 levels in the PRPG wizard class, then went for War Weaver from Heroes of Battle; after looking at his sheet, I noticed he kept using d6 hit points for War Weaver, and I went "nah-ha... you take d4 hp Mister... War Weaver is insanely powerful and you get to pay the price for defecting out of wizard!")
For a lot of the non pathfinder material I agree with sticking to what is written for that PrC. After all the point of increasing the Core Base classes was that they didn't compare to what was out there. If we turn around and increase all the PrC's and non core classes we defeat the purpose of improving the Core.
I would re-adjust the save throws though, I'm mean like that.
Arcane fire (su) that's the big deal on this one: No spell failure, no caster level checks, no spell resistance, nothing, and it can be used with any level spell, meaning I can choose to do anywhere from 5d6 (0th level spell) to 14d6 (9th level spell) at extreme range.
Yes, but is still costs a spell slot. Yes, there are ways around that, but it's still just not worth it when there are no-SR, no Save RTA spells out there than can duplicate this for a much lower cost. Even without going out of "core".
Mastery of Counterspell Makes counterspelling worthwhile... sort of. Really needs Improved Counterspell to be worthwhile.
No, it needs Reactive Counterspell to be worthwhile. Otherwise, use the spell that does the same thing.
Mastery of the Elements Takes 4 splat book feats (in complete arcane) to come close to replacing this ability. On the fly changing of energy types between 5 energy types (fire, sonic, cold, electricity, or acid) is just what the sorcerer ordered, and very useful for wizards too.
On the fly is all well and good, but it's still not enough on it's own to be worth keeping the class. Plus, how often do you come up against enough things that you have to constantly swap damage types? This is, of course, assuming it's still more effective to deal energy based damage to such a foe rather than just SoD/SoS and controlling it to death.
Spell-like Ability This one isn't much anymore with wizard's already getting their bonus spells. But spell-like abilities don't provoke attacks of opportunity, and can't be counter.
Check page 388, as well as page 169 of your pathfinder book again. SLA's provoke AoO's. Only real difference between an SLA and a spell consists of arcane spell failure %'s. Still not worth it on its own.
Mostly everything else already mentioned involves my original statement: It's just not a good enough class feature to warrant keeping the class. I never said most of these (there were a few I did say this about) weren't worth it. They especially aren't worth sacrificing off high level spell slots for them. If the only defense that can be provided for why they are useful consists of "in straight core you can't do it", then there's an issue. Especially since pathfinder is being designed to be fully backwards compatible with 3.5.
I second making some of the more useful ones feats, or even advanced down the existing tree of feats that replicate what it can already do (Requiring energy sub and energy admix to get the energy alteration ability, for instance). With the new wizard changes, there's no longer a "Must Take Levels" mentality that can even begin to apply here, and even Sorcerers have ways around it. While all of the former Archmage's class abilities have strong situational use, in a game that focuses on economy of action, artificially restricting yourself of your most potent resource at the high levels, spells per day, for the possibility of more flexibility makes little to no sense, especially since the more common lower level ones can make up the difference well ahead of time. I really don't think Archmage needs to make a return as a PrC in any format.
Well, spell-like abilities have no components and thus no ASF and they do not need to be prepared each morning. Otherwise, they function just like spells. They're fairly significant differences, but they're also clearly not supernatural abilities, in terms of ease of use or power.
I also miss these prestige classes but the Feats chains wouldnt be a bad idea eitherDisagree. This was a PrC usually for a wizard, but generally a caster, that has put such extreme level of research into spells in such a variety that the spells start to act more like limbs and extensions of their body. I don't think this can be covered as a feat as it is too powerful
Well yeah the 3.5 Arch Mage was/is that but that was not the way of it originally. Originally an Arch Mage in first edition D&D as well as most fantasy fiction is simply a powerful wizard. They may be able to utilize magic like it is a limb or an extension of their body or whatever but that is basically just flavor, you can have that with an Arch Mage any way you slice it. I personally think the best way to build an Arch Mage is with as much flexability in character creation as you ca get, because they have entered grad school as far as magic is concerned, they can select this that and the other thing and become uber powerful in it, they are versatile and as far as mages go should be the most powerful and awe inspiring among arcane spell casters. I honestly don't think you can accurately reflect this type of thing through a prestige class, you have to have the flexability of choosing feats, alternate class features and powers to build your arch mage the way you want him to be. I think this wold be a most satisfying alternative, in fact in might be an interesting idea in Pathfinder if at epic levels characters begin to learn to transcend class, to come out of the box so to speak, perhaps they cease to advance class wise but continue to advance in character level and a whole world of eclectic epic powers and feats become available to them at 21st level. If a fighter character wants to continue focusing on that aspect of his character he would most certainly have feats and powers to choose from to do that but he could also branch out into other areas without having to select another class and change his hit die type and saving throws and all that stuff.Of course he woldn't be able to spend his first 20 levels as a fighter and then take an epic feat and suddenly he is casting 9th level arcane spells, no there would be prerequisites to taking a certain path, but through taking the right path and selecting the right prerequisites the fighter could most certainly slowly work his way toward those 9th level spells if he wanted to, he could just learn more powerful fighter stuff, he could add some kung -fu to the mix, learn to be stealthy, pick locks or just about anything else. Characters can do this some at lower levels but at eppppic levels they cold spend some time on it and become really really good at things that maybe they missed out on before, due to their class or they coold experience entirely new things. I don't know what the system would look like exactly this is only bare bones idea level stuff but I think it is a good concept to work from.
Charles