The Mystic Theurge sounds like such a cool idea. Progress spell casting of both arcane and divine? Yes please!
The problem is that it's meant for a pure spell casting build. Which means losing any caster levels is crippling at higher level play. When other pure casters are throwing around 9th level spells, you are still casting 7th level ones... And you won't get 9th level spells 'till you are 20th level.
The MT gains more spells per day than any other Prc. However, at higher levels the number of spells you can cast per round doesn't increase. You can't use Quicken effectively because you don't have higher level spell slots to spare. So having more spells per day doesn't actually help out all that much.
One problem is that granting full divine and arcane spell casting progression is just too darn powerful. The only way to keep it in check is to make you take the leadership feat and gain a Mystic Theurge as a cohort.
There are a couple ways to turn this from a NPC/Cohort Prc class, so here is one I was thinking of.
1) Instead of full casting progression in both Divine and Arcane, make it a full progression in one, but allow you to pickup spells from the other.
- At each level, gain +1 level of existing Divine or Arcane spellcasting class. Also allow you to add 2 spells from any divine or arcane spell list to your known spells. These new spells would have to be of a level you could currently cast.
- Change entrance requirements to 3rd level divine or arcane spells and 5 ranks of knowledge (arcane) or knowledge (religion)
This maintains the "multiple" spell list theme, but makes it a class worth taking.
Thoughts or other ideas on how to un-gimp the Mystic Theurge?
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I've seen the 3.5 version used to great effect - I don't think it's subpar at all. You're right that you get a lot more spells than you can cast in a typical day's worth of fights, even using quicken spell. However, the key is buffs, buffs, buffs. With all of those spells, you can put together quite the suite of long duration buffs (either 1 hr/level, or 10 min/level extended).
|
|
I wouldn't mess with the MT. I have seen one in my 3.5 campaign. The MT is not a blaster they are the answer, or perhaps I should say THE ANSWER. My player had a habit of making spell cards, he had a card for every spell he had in his head. The box that kept his memorized spells was larger than the one he kept with extra spells for swapping in and out. At the beginning of one adventure he fanned the cards, he had a freaking deck of spells.
The Prime example was an encounter with a half-Fiend Sorcerer. 15th level-ish when the party was 10 or 11. No he couldn't blast the sorcerer back, but he could counter everything that the sorcerer did. Sorc went invisibile, he'd cast glitterdust. Sorc laid down some love on the Paladin, he healed him up. Sorc cast fly, he put fly on partymembers. Sorc Slowed, well the parties sorcerer had the haste, but still he used his round to buff party members. At one point the entire party but the MT was in an Evard's Black Tentacles and the MT (using his cleric domain to avoid the effect) So it was a duel and the MT not only held his own, he sent that Sorcerer off crying in his milk.
|
I believe the best way to fix this is to alter the entry requirements.
Requirements
To qualify to become a mystic theurge, a character must fulfill all the following criteria.
Skills: Knowledge (arcana or religion) 5 ranks, Knowledge (arcana or religion) 2 ranks.
Spells: Able to cast 2nd-level divine or arcane spells and 1st-level arcane or divine spells.
This change means that you can enter as a 4th Cleric/ 1st Wizard, or vice-versa, be behind your main spellcasting class only 1 level and have your secondary be four levels lower.
The benefit of this is you have your main focus only slightly behind the power curve, and your secondary spells as a backup. You have versatility without gimping your total power level.
There is a solution for players who don't want to lose the access to higher level spells:
Don't play a mystic theurge.
If you want to (eventually) cast 9th level spells, play a straight caster of one class.
Other than that I think the versatility gained by a MT makes up for the loss in power and delayed access to higher level spells. The whole point of the Mystic Theurge is trading power for versatility.
Absolutely true. And in my experience, anyone playing a mystic theurge (or similar prestige class) picks up the Practiced Spellcaster feat, which, while non-OGL, has been in enough books that I think most of us are familar with it.
There is a solution for players who don't want to lose the access to higher level spells:
Don't play a mystic theurge.
If you want to (eventually) cast 9th level spells, play a straight caster of one class.
Well said.
I just want to say "BRAVO!" to Jason for the new Mystic Theurge - he kept it generic enough while adding a delightful tinge of blending to the class and a cute capstone.
There is a solution for players who don't want to lose the access to higher level spells:
Don't play a mystic theurge.
Agreed. You're getting a lot of extra power here, it's only fair that you lose something. Lagging 3 levels behind sounds fair to me.
Maybe the MT need not be the 50/50 balance guru ?
Requirement 2nd level in arcane or divine , 1st level in the other.
Entry at 5th level instead of 7th
Prime casting class is now 1 level behind max instead of 3, the secondary class is 4 levels behind.
MT ends at 15th at which point charc could be even up or could continue to focus on the prime casting.
e.g.
Wiz 3
Clrc 1
MT10 (Effective Wiz 13 , Clrc 11)
Wiz 6 (final effective Wiz 19 , Clrc 11)
Or if you don't like that make the entry req 3rd level spells arc or div an other 1st level.
I quite like the idea of a Major/Minor Mystic Theurge. It would certainly fit with the idea of the wizard who has some divine training or the cleric of magic etc.
Prime casting class is now 1 level behind max instead of 3, the secondary class is 4 levels behind.
I think that's not enough to pay for getting a whole second class worth of spellcasting, even if it's 4 caster levels behind.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I think that's not enough to pay for getting a whole second class worth of spellcasting, even if it's 4 caster levels behind.I still think it better than having completely irrelevant spellcasting power for your level in both classes.
How is being 3 levels behind completely irrelevant? Lets say you're a 13th level MT - you cast wizard and cleric spells at 10th level. So, instead of 7th level spells in one class, you can cast 5th in both. Are you suggesting that at 13th level, you never use 1st through 5th level spells, because they're irrelevant? This is not how I've seen the game played ever. Most casters after a full day's adventuring have used up almost all of their spells.
If you use 14th level (or any even level for that matter), you're casting at 11th level, which means you have 6th level spells instead of 7th. In this case, you're ever more not irrelevant than at odd levels.
|
|
You're two spell levels behind level-appropriate wise. Yes, you will still get utility out of your cornucopia of lesser spells, but your missing your biggest weapons.
This is comparative to taking infantry against infantry and armor. Yes, you can pull off a victory with a decent chance, but it's still better to have your own armor in play.
I think that's not enough to pay for getting a whole second class worth of spellcasting, even if it's 4 caster levels behind.
Prime casting class is now 1 level behind max instead of 3, the secondary class is 4 levels behind.
Especially when there is the Practised Spellcaster Feat to clear that "setback" right up.
|
|
Especially when there is the Practised Spellcaster Feat to clear that "setback" right up.
Which you have to take twice, one for each spellcasting.
This just goes back to my desire to see the fighter capable. I don't want a feat the class has to take to be competent. I want it built into the rules for combat or the class itself.
Especially when there is the Practised Spellcaster Feat to clear that "setback" right up.
Not quite. You only get to increase your caster level for the spell power, not spells/day or what spell level you have access to.
And lagging 1.5 spell levels behind is a blow, but it doesn't make the spells irrelevant.
I hate to repeat myself (as I keep saying), but you can always choose to not go that route.
Here is my analysis of the MT:
-By sacrificing higher level spells from a single caster, he gains a lot of lower level spells of 2 classes. Thus, versatility in exchange of power.
-This transaction comes at a price: the MT also forfeits all the other bonuses from both the cleric and wizard (or whatever classes he used, be it sorcerer and favored soul). Those bonus are a steep price: no more casting in armor, no more school power, ineffective channel positive energy, debuffed familiar.
-The MT is very unlikely to ever use up all his spells in a day. First, because the number of rounds in a combat is limited and the encounter will normally end before the MT uses everything (don't forget that the game is designed for 3-4 encounters before everyone is restored to full power). Second, if there is another spellcaster in the group, the group will most likely rest when that other spellcaster runs out of juice, which WILL be before the MT.
Therefore, I strongly disagree with the ones who say that the enhanced versatility compensates the loss in raw power. It may be true in a purely spellcasting point of view, but the sacrifice of the MT goes beyond higher level spells. Plus, he won't be using all the extra powers (in the form of more lower level spells) he received because of the limited opportunities to use them (before everything is restored).
So, what do we do with a great concept, but a class that leads to too many low-level powers and not enough high-level ones? We combine them! I believe that Paizo had a great idea with their "spell synthesis", but that a one-time super-extra-cool-deadly move isn't enough.
My solution is the creation of the class feature "Combine Metamagic". Here is the first draft, comments and options will follow.
Combine Metamagic (Su) A Mystic Theurge may spontaneously apply any metamagic feat he knows to a spell he is casting by sacrificing a prepared spell (or spell slot use for sorcerers) of the other spellcasting class he possess. The level of the spell sacrificed must be the same as the enhancement level of the metamagic feat applied. Doing so augments the casting time as follow: from free to swift, to move, to standard, to full-round, to an extra-full round action (as normal per SRD when a sorcerer applies metamagic). Example 1: a MT uses Combine Extend to cast the wizard spell "fly, swif" as a move action (instead of swift) to grand himself fly for 2 rounds (instead of 1), by sacrificing the first level cleric spell "bless". Example 2: a MT uses Combine Maximize to cast "cure critical wound" to heal a touched ally by 32 + caster lvl hit points. Doing so is a full-round action and he looses a prepared fireball.
Suggestions for game balance: As is written, I think it is too powerful. To limit this, maybe we can assign specific metamagic feats to the MT as he gains level (ex: he can use silent at level 1, extend at level 3, maximize at level 5, quicken at level 9). Or we could limit the use of Combine Metamagic to a number of times per day, that number of times might also be indexed to his class level (ex: once per day for every 3 MT levels). Last, which is my favourite way, have the level of spell sacrificed indexed to the MT level (ex: the sacrificed spell level cannot exceed one half his MT level, round down). Thus delaying the use of stronger metamagic for higher MT levels.
This transaction comes at a price: the MT also forfeits all the other bonuses from both the cleric and wizard (or whatever classes he used, be it sorcerer and favored soul). Those bonus are a steep price: no more casting in armor, no more school power, ineffective channel positive energy, debuffed familiar.
<snip>
Therefore, I strongly disagree with the ones who say that the enhanced versatility compensates the loss in raw power. It may be true in a purely spellcasting point of view, but the sacrifice of the MT goes beyond higher level spells.
I think this is a good point, that the loss of higher level spell casting is enough to balance the gain in versatility. It seems to me that the MT should gain something else to compensate the loss of other class abilities.
My solution is the creation of the class feature "Combine Metamagic". Here is the first draft, comments and options will follow.
I don't think this is the answer. MT can burn a spell slot to cast another lower level spell from the other spellcasting class, improving the MT's casting versatility. I don't think an MT ability should burn a spell slot to do anything but a cast a spell. This undercuts the notion of maximized spell versatility that is the premise of the PrC. I don't want to see an option to trade back any of that versatility for power.
If you want to improve the MT's metamagic versatility, why not just give MT a pool of metamagic spell slots so he can apply metamagic effects without burning higher level spell slots, but only a limited number of times per day?
Especially when there is the Practised Spellcaster Feat to clear that "setback" right up.I think that's not enough to pay for getting a whole second class worth of spellcasting, even if it's 4 caster levels behind.
Prime casting class is now 1 level behind max instead of 3, the secondary class is 4 levels behind.
What version of the feat are you using? Can someone provide the text if it differs from the following?
Practiced Spellcaster (from Complete Divine): When determining caster level for one of your spellcasting classes, you can add a bonus of up to +4. The amount of the bonus depends on the number of nonspellcasting class levels you have; you can add +1 for each nonspellcasting class level up to the limit of +4.
I don't see how that helps an MT at all. I assume that there must be a revision that lets you count levels in any class outside the casting class in question, but I'm just checking.
Assuming that the feat does work for the MT, it seems like a feat tax if you need it to fix the class.
The only real problem i have with the Mystic theurge is: What to do when you're through with 10 MT levels? You'd have to go back to progressing with one class. Since you have to have at least 6 levels before starting the PrC (3 Wiz/3 Clr) you'd end up with full PrC progression at 16th level and then you have 4 levels left to spend on what? Wizard?
What you get in the end is Wizard spellcasting on spell levels slightly under the level of single-class casters (which wouldnt be so bad if your cleric casting would still catch up, but:) and cleric spellcasting so far below your level's average it's no good anymore for more than a little healing.
This is as I see the main issue with the whole prestige Class. it's just not good beyond 16th level.
Threeshades is very much right on that point. Its not right for the Mystic Theurge to not be able to be progressed by other classes that can progress either Arcane or Divine casting (AKA classes that advance "spellcasting level" without specification)
We just need to be certain that the abilities in the class are good enough that most people won't prestige out of it until 10th class level, so those who choose to do so earlier make sacrifices and it ends up an even choice. (For the record, I think the only core option is Loremaster anyway, not exactly a superb choice, but something to finish out a 20 level campaign at least.)
I don't think it's the intent of the Loremaster PrC description to allow MT progression in both arcane and divine casting: "She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained." I would call the dual progression a special benefit of MT that cannot be advanced as a Loremaster; the Loremaster has to choose one of the MT prereq classes instead.
EDIT: Since I don't see any spell level limit on the capstone ability, I would think that it continues to be very useful after 16th level, when higher level spells in one of the two casting classes are gained. I'm not convinced that the weakness of MT is more pronounced after 16th level.
Guys, you missed the point of my last post. It wasn't saying that it necessarily does progress it (although such neutral spellcasting progression classes have been permitted to carry on for it and other dual-progression classes without any balance issues.) but rather, I feel that it should be arranged to be allowed. Otherwise this class that a character took for 10 levels suddenly becomes a drop-off, and you aren't progressing as a dual-caster anymore.
What's the purpose of being a Mystic Theurge if you can't have complete dual-progression all the way up, and instead have to abandon the path to focus on a single spellcraft once more? I have a hard time imagining many characters choosing to forgo study of something that has been such a part of them, instead focusing on one over the other.
I'm not saying it can be progressed, I'm asking. Do you think perhaps we should allow it to be?
Why didn't you say so? :-)
I don't see why Loremaster should allow this where another class does not. Dual progression in addition to the abilities of another class is overpowered. A 15-level PrC is awkward and delays the capstone. Maybe the capstone ability could explicitly grant free progression in one spellcasting class no matter how the character decides to continue. Then if the MT continues as a wizard, he continues to get dual progression, plus the other benefits of progressing as a wizard. The problem is, that makes reaching the capstone so good, I can't imagine anyone not doing it. If you granted half-progression in one spellcasting class instead, I'm not sure it would solve the role-playing problem of an MT uncharacteristically changing his focus.
For what it's worth, I think the change of focus has a plausible explanation anyway: Maybe it's simply not possible to dual progress at the highest spell levels. That level of power requires focus.
So I'm still not convinced that discontinuation of dual progression really creates any problems.
Here is a sample of why a Mystic Theurge is way over powered as it stands. I made a sample 'vanilla' character with the following Stats using the Paizo 25 point buy for Epic:
Human 20 total levels
S10/D10/C11/I20/W20/CH10
Feats:Empower Spell, Enlarge Spell, Extend Spell, Spell Focus(Evoc), Spell Penetration, Spell Mastery, Widen Spell, Greater Spell Focus (Evoc), Greater Spell Penetration, Heighten Spell,Eschew Materials, Quicken Spell.
I configured him 4 different ways and calculated the number of spells known as well as the number of total spell levels each combination can cast.
I configured him as a level 5 Wizard/Level 5 Cleric/ Level 10 MT
5 WIZ/5 CLER/10 MT
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 3 2 1 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Cleric Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 3 2 1 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 8 12 10 10 10 10 6 4 2 0 72 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 12 20 30 40 50 36 28 16 0 232 Total Spell Levels
Notice only max of 8th Level Spells for both Cleric as well as Wizard which seems to be an issue. So lets take a different approach and using the same stats lets look at going Level 7 Wizard, Level 3 Cleric, and level 10 MT. that would give access to 9th level wizard spells (or you can transpose them and go 7 levels of cleric for same result)
7 WIZ/3 CLER/10 MT
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 3 2 1
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Cleric Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 4 2 1 0 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 8 12 10 10 10 9 6 4 2 1 72 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 12 20 30 40 45 36 28 16 9 236 Total Spell Levels
The results are very Close, gaining only 4 total Spell Levels but now being able to cast up to 9th level Wizard Spells and 7th Level Cleric Spells. All of this seems in line until we compare it with a 10th level WIZ/10 CLERIC as well as a straight 20th Level Wizard. Lets compare them now using the same information.
10 WIZ/ 10 CLER
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 3 3 2
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 4 4 3 0 0 0 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Cleric Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 3 3 2
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 4 4 3 0 0 0 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 8 12 10 8 8 6 0 0 0 0 52 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 12 20 24 32 30 0 0 0 0 118 Total Spell Levels
Notice the 10wiz/10cler can only cast 5th Level Spells in each, loses 20 Spell levels compared to the MT and 114 Total Spell level as well! That is a huge disparity.
Now on to the 20th Level Wizard using the same stats:
20 WIZ
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 46 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 6 10 15 20 25 24 28 32 36 196 Total Spell Levels
The Epitome of of spell casters...the wizard at 20th level gets only 46 total spells per day and 196 Total Spell Levels. Compare that to the level 7 WIZ/3 CLER/10 MT and you will see that the MT casts 72 spells per day compared to a wizards 46 or 52 of the 10wiz/10 Cler. The MT also casts 236 Spell levels (zero level still count as 0 as they are unlimited for all examples) compared to 118 for the 10wiz/10 cler and 196 for the straight level 20 Wiz. For Pure Spell casting the Mystic Theurge dwarfs any other core casting in the game. Now the question is what do you gain or lose by going MT?
Losses: Depending on the level of cleric you take you will lose a number of Domain powers. On the wizard side you will lose some of the School Powers if you got that route and some bonus feats (3-4 depending on how many wiz levels you take).
Gains: Massive increase in the sheer volume of spells you can cast is the biggest. Also the Combined Spell abilities abd the Spell Synthesis at 10th Level MT. Being able to cast 2 spells at the same time (one from each class) is a fantastically powerful ability.
So why is this so overpowered? Well let me ask this...after looking at this after I made 4 characters...all middle of the road...what spell caster would NOT choose this presgtige class? IMHO this is still the most overpowered class in the entire game dating back to the 3.5 rules.
Now you can min/max with stats in each example and tweak feats etc...to slightly alter the final character, but to me this is a no brainer when playing a spell caster as you are the most powerful caster in the game bar none. Who would play a loremaster after this? Or really any straight class! The bumping of the Core classes was needed to balance the game, but this goes above and beyond any bumps given to the core spell casters!
Some ideas we had before the Paizo conversion was to alternate class progression (arcane one level and Divine the next) and add more abilities. Another was to only let it be a 5 level Prestige class. Yet another is to have 'dead' levels were you do not progress levels on either class. All I know is that if I wanted to add a broken class to play, I would stick with WOC. I do know that as it stands now, I would not allow this class into my Pathfinder game.
Am I right on this or missing something?
|
|
The 3.5 Mystic Theurge was almost a game breaker in my old campaign. I agree with most of the others; changes are not really needed to make this PRC competetive with straight class progression.
Example:
In my epic campaign, the MT used his Mage's mansion spell every day, allowing the party a place to safely rest and heal while deep in Underdark. The dracolich and his undead hoard they were facing couldn't touch them for the duration of the spell. He would heal them all and then he could mass teleport them to a better strategic location upon leaving. The final battle was extremely short.
Arnim, that's nothing a party can't do if it has both an arcane and a divine spellcaster. Except, you know, they do it earlier than a mystic theurge.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Therefore, I strongly disagree with the ones who say that the enhanced versatility compensates the loss in raw power. It may be true in a purely spellcasting point of view, but the sacrifice of the MT goes beyond higher level spells. Plus, he won't be using all the extra powers (in the form of more lower level spells) he received because of the limited opportunities to use them (before everything is restored).
I agree with this line of thinking. Trying to bring the Mystic Theurge closer in raw power to a straight caster risks making the class too good or dilutes what makes the theurge unique. The Mystic Theurge should be about quantity of spells, not quality. The problem is that the pipeline of spells a Mystic Theurge can bring to bear is limited by either the number of rounds in combat or the duration of the buffs. When I played a Mystic Theurge, I rarely used more than 1/3 of my total spells. Allowing those unused spells to be swapped for metamagic is a great way to get some mileage out of those slots.
Plus, it gives the Mystic Theurge a bit more of its own identity - the class has the potential to be the ultimate swiss army knife given the wide range of spells it can access. I'd probably also increase the number of spells gained in the spellbook per level (for wizard theurges) or known (for sorcerer theurges) to further the emphasis on versatility.
The 3.5 Mystic Theurge was almost a game breaker in my old campaign. I agree with most of the others; changes are not really needed to make this PRC competetive with straight class progression.
Example:
In my epic campaign, the MT used his Mage's mansion spell every day, allowing the party a place to safely rest and heal while deep in Underdark. The dracolich and his undead hoard they were facing couldn't touch them for the duration of the spell. He would heal them all and then he could mass teleport them to a better strategic location upon leaving. The final battle was extremely short.
I agree with Arnim. In our campaigns everyone played the MT and went multiclass because it was all anyone needed for a party. With a Fighter, Barabian, Rogue and 2 MTs it was all we ever needed. Our MTs were slightly slower at getting advancement to the better spells, but the raw number of spells trumped everything!
Now with the Paizo version I see the class even more powerful and I guarantee our spellcasters will all play MTs because they are so utilitarian. I do like the diverseness, but in the long run straight Clerics or Mages just can not hold a candle to the MTs. If this was the design of the PrC then they nailed it.
The tenth level ability rocks too! Two spells at one time! No other caster can stand to that!
The question is: Does this keep the game balanced with other classes?
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I agree with Arnim. In our campaigns everyone played the MT and went multiclass because it was all anyone needed for a party. With a Fighter, Barabian, Rogue and 2 MTs it was all we ever needed. Our MTs were slightly slower at getting advancement to the better spells, but the raw number of spells trumped everything!
This is an interesting party composition, and one that I think uniquely favors the MT. When most people talk about the power level of the MT vs. straight casters, they are talking about the raw power of the highest level spells available (and with good reason, given that the highest level spells account for a significant portion of a straight caster's raw power). On top of that, straight casters have a higher caster level (which figures into most spell variables) and generally have a higher casting stat (which figures into saving throws). On a round by round basis, it's better to cast a 7th level spell as a 13th level caster with a 20 in your casting stat than to cast a 5th level spell as a 9th level caster with an 18 in your casting stat. Both your example and Arnim's example seem to be instances where the only caster in the group is an MT, so you're not really comparing apples to apples (spell casters to spell casters), you're comparing apples to oranges (spell casters to non-spell casters).
That being said, it sounds like you have an interesting scenario that does favor the MT. It seems like with that party composition, your party strategy would be to have the MT be a supporting character and to rely on the melee types to dish out the damage. Instead of acting as an artillery unit, the MT would help control the battlefield and buff and protect the melee guys. It seems like this would allow such a party to adventure longer and to be quite effective. However, I have a hard time seeing how that would make them more powerful than a party with a straight caster (and, consequently, higher level buff and support spells) that rests more often. Being able to operate longer without resting is not normally what people mean when they talk about relative power levels.
The other problem that crops up when you have an MT in the party and no straight casters is that the party isn't being driven by the straight casters to rest as often, which gives the MT the chance to use their entire payload. My experience playing an MT was that I didn't cast all my spells and was seriously outclassed by the single class spellcasters in terms of effectiveness (because, as explained above, I was casting 5th levels spells and they were casting 7th level spells). If we continued to adventure after the straight class spellcasters fired off their big guns, I'm sure I would've had a greater opportunity to shine.
Anyway, I don't want to devolve into a debate regarding the power level of the MT, but I think that any comparison of power needs to look at the MT v. a straight caster. The MT's diversity of power is not normally a benefit unless you are playing a game where access to one type of magic is restricted (either because you don't allow potions/scrolls/etc. or there is only one caster in the party). Similarly, the MT's large number of spells is not normally a benefit unless you are playing a game with a longer play to rest ratio than is typical for a party with a straight caster. A variation in these assumptions will change the perception of the power of the MT.
I do agree though that the way to make the MT better is to capitalize on the diversity and make the class a good supporting class in scenarios such as yours to allow a party to operate without two straight casters. A key to doing that is to increase the MT's flexibility, either by allowing their buffs to last longer or enabling them to both heal and do something else - you basically allow them to function as two lower level casters.
One last thought. Another benchmark to consider is whether it's better to have an MT or a straight caster with Leadership and a cohort of the other caster type. In that scenario, the straight class caster gets the versatility of the MT plus the additional actions in combat afforded by an additional party member.
I see the above example as proof as to what Mildew was saying...
7 WIZ/3 CLER/10 MT
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 3 2 1
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Cleric Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 1
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 4 2 1 0 0
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 8 12 10 10 10 9 6 4 2 1 72 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 12 20 30 40 45 36 28 16 9 236 Total Spell Levels
Now on to the 20th Level Wizard using the same stats:
20 WIZ
Wizard Spell Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Spells per day 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Bonus Spells 2 1 1 1 1
Total per day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4
Base Save DC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Evoc Save DC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Total
Total Spells Spells
Per Day 4 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 46 Total Spells
Total Spell
Total Spell Levels
Levels 0 6 10 15 20 25 24 28 32 36 196 Total Spell Levels
Level 20 Wizard can cast 9th level spells (4 of them) with DC of 24 and can cast a total of 46 spell levels in a day (not including zero levels). The Straight Wizards casts 196 total spell levels per day. Caster level is 20.
Level 7 WIZ/3 CLER/10 MT can cast 9th level spells (1 of them) with DC of 24,also can cast 5th level Cleric spells, and can cast a total of 72 spell levels in a day (not including zero levels). The MT casts 236 total spell levels per day. Caster is 17 for the Wizard and 13 for Cleric spells.
The way I see it if you want the straight on punch of having to have the most powerful spell (and can cast it 4 times) then the straight caster is the way to go.
If you want to have a larger repertoire of spells and be more diverse then the MT is it. You can still cast your 9th level spells although less of them but you also have great other abilities added. Combined spells and spell Synthesis are great additions.
What I am trying to say is the in this thread it seems to me like others are saying we need to fix the MT and more it stronger. I would argue that if anything it is already too strong when compared to the Wizard UNLESS your focus is needing to have 4 9th level spells cast as a 20th level caster. If the MT gets more powerful then it eliminates the need for the Straight Classes...and I would disagree with that.
This is an interesting topic.
Stop asking for a buff to the Mystic Theruge. This is one of the most appealing PrC's that accomplishes what it is meant to: to give the character a wide variety of spellcasting options.
Giving it the ability to cast 9th level spells would destroy any incentive to playing a pure caster.
The conflict here is power vs. versatility.
As mentioned earlier, if you want 9th level spells, dont add this prestige class. However, if you want a potent mix of divine and arcane then this is clearly the class.
It's called balance, twits.
I had totally agreed with Matthew as the MT is completely powerful enough until his last comment. No room on these boards for name calling.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's called balance, twits.
Hilarious.
Yeah, you get a 9th level spell at 20th level, but you don't have access to one at 17th level (or 8th level spells for that matter).
Or 18th level.
Or 19th level.
At which times the single classed (non-sorcerer) caster gets 9th level spells.
The commoner could get the ability to cast wish 10 times per day at 20th level, and that wouldn't render the class playable prior to that level. Arguments that rely on comparing 20th level characters are inherently flawed given that it is only one point (and a point that is rarely achieved in most campaigns) in the character's range.
You make me miss Psychic Robot. At least his rudeness was well reasoned.
The only real problem i have with the Mystic theurge is: What to do when you're through with 10 MT levels?
Make a choice: Which class do you want to have 9th level spells in? If cleric, then four more levels of cleric, four levels of loremaster (increase cleric spellcasting), or four levels of thaumaturgist (taken at any time after cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 4) give spellcasting as a 17th level cleric and 13th level wizard at 20th level. If wizard, then four more levels of wizard, four levels of archmage, or four levels of loremaster (increase wizard spellcasting) give spellcasting as a 13th level cleric and 17th level wizard at 20th level.
And that's only dealing with 3.5 core options. Using Races of the Wild, a druid 3/wizard 3/arcane heirophant 10/mystic theurge 4 can cast spells as a 17th level druid and 17th level wizard at 20th level.
|
|
It was not so much offensive as it was unnecessary. You had a perfectly good arguement, and ended it with a zero-value statement. One of the difficulties I see on this board is that some people think aggressive language is the norm for debate. And it rubs the rest of us the wrong way.
I'm of the opinion that if you cannot discuss politely, you don't need to be discussing. I treat forums like this akin to debate class. You're going to lose points if you insult and demean your opposition.
As for the MT, I agree that making it better than straight caster is a bad choice. But I still worry about the beginning progression being to underpowered for its level.
Stop asking for a buff to the Mystic Theruge. This is one of the most appealing PrC's that accomplishes what it is meant to: to give the character a wide variety of spellcasting options.
The conflict here is power vs. versatility.
Yes, it's a trade off of Power vs. Versatility. But if your group has a Cleric or a Wizard in the party, that nullifies the trade off. A PrC that is only good for parties with no Wizard and no Cleric seems sub-optimal.
Because MT's are 3 caster levels behind in each class lets take a look at several key class functions:
1) Blaster at 11th level
+ Wizards are casting 10d6 Fireballs
++ Better yet, Wizards are casting 11d6 Chain Lightning
- MTs are casting 8d6 Fireballs
-- MTs don't get chain lighting for another 3 levels
+ Clerics are casting 11d6 Flame Strikes
- MTs don't get Flame Strike for another level
2) Buffing at 7th level
+ Wizard has been casting Haste for 3 levels now
- MTs don't get Haste for another level
+ Wizard/Cleric buffs last for 7 rounds
- MTs buffs last for 4 rounds
+ Wizard/Cleric has Protection from Energy (84 points)
- MTs don't get PfE for another level
3) Buffing at 12th level
+ Cleric/Wizard spells are lasting for 12 rounds
- MTs are lasting for 9 rounds
+ Wizards are casting Anti-Magic Field, Greater Dispel Magic, Globe of Invulnerability, Acid Fog, True Seeing, etc
+ Clerics are casting Antilife Shell, Heroes' Feast, Mass Bulls/Bears/etc spells, Heal/Harm, Wind Walk
+ Clerics cast Magic Vestment/Magic Weapon/etc at +3
- MTs are casting Magic Vestment/Magic Weapon/etc at +2
It seems like MTs would be the best buffers/battlefield control/support casters, but because of their retarded spell level progression, they are significantly weaker than straight caster class progressions.
What would be better in line with a straight classes power and still keep the versatility would be a PrC that continues full spell casting for a class, but allows them to cherry pick spells from the other class lists. That way you loose special class abilities (Familiar advancement, Bonus feats, Turn Undead, etc) but gain spell casting versatility... which is the real goal of the PrC.
Given the arguments put forth so far, I don't see Jason making any changes to this PrC, but I thought I'd at least put forth the idea.
Here's the inherit problem with this suggestion: if the MT had full progression in one type of spellcasting (let's use sorcerers for example), then every other PrC with full casting progression options for sorcerers would pale in comparison. Honestly, being able to compete with other full arcane spellcasters while having potent divine spells would get out of hand very quickly. Unless every other caster class and prestige class received high-level abilities that could compare, very few players would ever play those classes to their highest levels.
So, saying that the MT could be changed to make it better or give it a focus of its own is the same as saying that the MT should be better than a straight caster?
Great point! I see now that there can be no middle ground between MT is inferior to straight casters and MT is better than straight casters.
Here's the inherit problem with this suggestion: if the MT had full progression in one type of spellcasting (let's use sorcerers for example), then every other PrC with full casting progression options for sorcerers would pale in comparison. Honestly, being able to compete with other full arcane spellcasters while having potent divine spells would get out of hand very quickly.
It does not continue bloodline bonus feats/abilities for Sorcerers, so it would be a sacrifice for them in some ways. In addition, Sorcerers would still be limited by the # of spells known, they would just be able to pick from the Divine and Arcane spell lists. I hardly call that overpowered.
However, if you approach it from a Cleric side. Gaining full Cleric spells casting, but also being able to cherry pick the best arcane spells could be unbalancing. You would sacrifice Channel effectiveness, Domain abilities, etc, but it might just be too much. Perhaps a requirement that the opposite spells known must be 1 level lower than the max you can cast. So a Cleric casting 3rd level Divine spells could also pick up two 2nd level Arcane spells each level. That way they would never get 9th level arcane spells.
I think what I am currently arguing against is the explicit trap of the MT. It seems like a huge win, gaining both Divine and Arcane spell casting progression, but the only time it's effective is when there are no other casters in the group.