Is the Mystic Theurge Viable?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Slacker2010 wrote:
If you DM allows Veriant rules from D20 then THIS fixes your caster problem. Levels 6 and 7 will still be hard being that you only have 2 level spells of divine or arcane but starting at level 8 (wiz3/clr3/MT2) I think the utility and versatility will make up for it.

Completely agree - Magic Rating seems the perfect solution to me. Essentially, it's that Practiced Spellcaster feat (for free, no limit) actually. It sounds like a lot, but it affects everyone (who isn't a full-class spellcaster). It even works well without mystic theurge - I had a PC play up to Drd6/Wiz6 with this and stayed plenty strong throughout.

Check it out, try it out, see if it fixes it for you.


Gotta be honest. Reason MT sucks is because low-level divine spells suck. A lot. Like, way worse than their arcane equivalents. =)

This makes getting less arcane spells, or less high level divine spells, a tragedy.

You don't really get added flexibility by gaining those cleric spells, because they're just not good. You'd rather have a few more wizard spells than a lot more cleric spells, because wizard spells are a lot more flexible/better.

Let me put it this way:
If you gave me a prestige class that I had to have 2 different arcane spell-lists, and then advanced them equally, that class would be fine and have tons of added versatility.

But make me take 1 arcane and 1 divine? Druids have a better list than clerics...but it's still no wizard list. At least at low levels.

-Cross


Crosswind wrote:

Reason MT sucks is because low-level divine spells suck. A lot. Like, way worse than their arcane equivalents. =)

Perfectly good 1st level Cleric spells:

Bane, Bless, Command, Comprehend Languages, CURE LIGHT WOUNDS, Doom, Endure Elements, Entropic Shield, Hide from Undead, Obscuring Mist, Pro. from [Alignment], Sanctuary, Shield of Faith, Summon Monster I.

Perfectly good 2nd level Cleric spells:

Aid, Augury, Bears Endurance, Bulls Strength, Calm Emotions, CURE MODERATE WOUNDS, Darkness, Delay Poison, Eagles Splendor, Hold Person, Make Whole, Owls Wisdon, Remove Paralysis, Resist Energy, Restoration-Lesser, Shatter, Silence, Spiritual Weapon, Summon Monster II, Undetectable Alignment, Zone of Truth.

But the big kicker? You get ALL of these as soon as you can cast them FOR FREE. Arcanists cannot compare on that note.


Mirror, Mirror -- he's claim that the druid spell list is better than the cleric's. Let him go man it's a lost cause.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Mirror, Mirror -- he's claim that the druid spell list is better than the cleric's. Let him go man it's a lost cause.

Ok, point. My bad. Please continue.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
LazarX wrote:
That class does exist and it's coming out in the Advance Player's Guide... it's called the Witch. she's got a selection of spells from areas traditionally divine and arcane and she's got full caster levels as well as a unique mechanic.
But what if we are denying the existance of Witches, Beatrice?

Someones has been watching Umineko no naku koro ni....


Abraham spalding wrote:
Mirror, Mirror -- he's claim that the druid spell list is better than the cleric's. Let him go man it's a lost cause.

Hey, not very nice.

Blinding Spittle is a druid only spell that blinds without a save. Druids have great spells (just not in PF only books). Spell compendruim has the good ones.


M P 433 wrote:
I remember the days in 1st/2nd edition when folks would play a class because it was fun, not because it was "equal" in combat ability to another or had "dead" levels. Ah but those days have come and gone...

Really? Because when I remember 2e, I remember the giant flood of terrible kits that were all horribly overpowered. I remember 2e dying because it couldn't stop crapping out terrible kits and books - and thank god, because it died a long and horrible death. I remember characters being punished for not having a 16 in their main stat, or mandatory stats in order to dual or multiclass - stats you couldn't make up after you rolled out your character, so if you had a character concept and rolled poorly, you better ask the DM for a paddle 'cause your canoe is heading down a rather disgusting stream.

When I think of 3e, I think of coming up with a character concept and then optimizing the character around it to make it powerful.

Nostalgia glasses seem stylish at times, but they're awfully hard to see through.

The problem with Mystic Theurge is that it's stupifyingly difficult to have someone with awesome arcane and divine power and not be either stupidly powerful or stupidly weak.


Starbuck_II wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Mirror, Mirror -- he's claim that the druid spell list is better than the cleric's. Let him go man it's a lost cause.

Hey, not very nice.

Blinding Spittle is a druid only spell that blinds without a save. Druids have great spells (just not in PF only books). Spell compendruim has the good ones.

Ok if you go non-core and you go back to 3.5 you can find some decent spells. As is the cleric in core has great spells of all levels, and then more spells added in through domains. Once you open up that non-core and 3.5 the cleric again jumps to the forefront only more so.

My point still stands, the druid does not have a better spell list. He might have a decent/good spell list, but it is not better.

Personally I'm kind of fond of burning disarm, however even there we see the main problem with most druid spells -- they are entirely too situational. Either the target must be or have something, or you have to have a certain environment or it can only be used in certain ways. In the end that means most times you prepare spells you have to rely on a small number of very generic spells unless you know for sure that you are going to be in specific circumstances against specific opponents in specific environments.

Cleric spells are generally useful no matter the opponent, terrain, or situation.

The reason this works for the druid is the number of other abilities the druid has: wildshape, an animal companion, several immunities, etc. These help make up for a weak spell list.

In fact his suggestion that arcane casters are actually better than divine casters is also false. Divine spell casters have better base stats, better spell lists, ease of obtaining spells, and easily expanded spell lists.

And it doesn't matter what type of caster it is:
The oracle does the same thing to the sorcerer that the cleric does to the wizard.

Consider: The oracle gets the bonus spells for his focus, then all the cure spells as bonus spells known and the sorcerer's full compliment of spells known too in addition to better BAB hit dice, and saves plus more focus abilities, which are generally more useful and plain better.

The cleric gets bonus spells known off his two domains compared to the wizard's one specialty, gives up nothing for this and his domain spells can easily net him some of the wizard's most powerful spells to add to his already good spell list. In addition he gets the bonus spell per day, four domain powers (in a few cases even more on top of this) and the channel energy ability. All his spells are automatically known, where as the wizard has to track his down and spend money to put them in a book that can be taken from him very easily.


I always looked at the Mystic Theurge as a "magical tool box" more than anything else. Give the guy a few pearls of power, a varied spell list, and send him out. He won't have the most powerful spells, but he will most likely have something useful for the occasion, no matter what it is.

Shadow Lodge

To play off Abraham's last post: Cleric/Druids with the Fire Domain also get an almost iconic Wizard/Sorcerer spell, fireball.

That's just cool, and I don't see Wizards getting prayer or searing light without having to use something like limited wish.

Jason Ellis 350 wrote:
I always looked at the Mystic Theurge as a "magical tool box" more than anything else. Give the guy a few pearls of power, a varied spell list, and send him out. He won't have the most powerful spells, but he will most likely have something useful for the occasion, no matter what it is.

+1


James Jacobs wrote:
In my opinion... the mystic theurge is a GREAT character if your party has no other spellcasters.

Gotta disagree. Witch is a GREAT character if your party has no other spellcasters.(though it's not official yet) Cleric (with carefully chosen domains) is a good choice.

The Mystic Theurge isn't as good as either of those choices. At level 16 I'm going to admit the MT is looking mighty fine, but it suffered a lot to get there (and many campaigns never get near that far)

I mean - look at the Witches spell list...then add in Hexes and consider you will be casting spells 2 levels higher than an equivalent level MT, . It's not even comparable.

THAT SAID....

I figure if you are going to go with Mystic Theurge - there are a few things you can do to minimize the pain...

1) Play an Elf. You are losing 3 caster levels (at least) from any spell, which means SR has become a much bigger problem. Elf reduces this problem by 2.

2) Spell Penetration. Take it for reasons given on #1. 'nuff said.

3) Cleric/Wizard is the only way to go. Yeah yeah, the Oracle/Sorcerer option means single casting stat - but 2 levels of casting just ain't worth it. (When you qualify for MT you will be an 8th level character who is unable to cast 3rd level spells - you will not get 3rd level spells until level 10!!!!). Witch and Druid have too many non-casting abilities that you give up when you PrC.

4) Search your spell list: Look for spells that do not provide saving throws and do not give SR. These spells are your friends. Put them on your list.

5) Don't believe the lies: For most of your career you will NOT have more castings than other casters - fact is you will have about the same but lower level. Honest. Nope, I'm not making this up as I go. Just be aware of it, own it, and move on. Most importantly, don't waste your spells. Just like any other caster

6) Silent Image: This is your greatest friend of all. Get a Wand - like right now. SI is the spell that gives you something to do that's useful even when other casters are much better than you.

7) CLW wands: You can't afford to waste half your castings on cure spells. CLW wands are cheap and efficient, and you can use them just as well as a pure cleric.

8) Dealing with MAD: Int is your primary stat. Wisdom needs to get up to 17 by level 16. Don't worry about your Cleric spell DC's. Use your cleric spells for healing, buffs, battlefield control, and utility.


On the druid spell list being better than the Cleric: At making things not move, yes. Overall, hell no.

This coming from someone who has rolled a lot of Druids.

Core Druid has two kinds of spells: You're dead, and like another spell but worse. Probably the best out of all of these is Call Lightning just because Entangle + Spike Stones doesn't block line of sight. Even that is stopped by standing indoors on a non-stone surface and the DM not letting you use a moss carpet from your inventory to Entangle off of.

The Druid is ridiculous when you use those spells AND when you CAN use them. Flat out some of the best lockdown spells in the game. But can you kill something? With 3rd party spells. Can you lock down a caster? With Creeping Doom, which is stupidly high level. Overall, the Cleric has so much more utility it isn't even funny. I've never been one to concentrate on my animal because of how much it slows down the game. I use summoning spells only when necessary due to that slowing everything down as well. Plus, a Bison or 70 square feet of difficult terrain that auto-damages and has a chance to slow even more? One of these is marginally better than the other. Unfortunately, Spike Stones cannot be cast all the time and the Bison can.

The Druid's spell list is devastating: but in an area with a wood paneled floor, much less so.


don't ever play a mystic thuerge. there are far better options. if you really want to be a hybrid caster. just wait for the witch to come out.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Crosswind wrote:

Reason MT sucks is because low-level divine spells suck. A lot. Like, way worse than their arcane equivalents. =)

Perfectly good 1st level Cleric spells:

Bane, Bless, Command, Comprehend Languages, CURE LIGHT WOUNDS, Doom, Endure Elements, Entropic Shield, Hide from Undead, Obscuring Mist, Pro. from [Alignment], Sanctuary, Shield of Faith, Summon Monster I.

Perfectly good 2nd level Cleric spells:

Aid, Augury, Bears Endurance, Bulls Strength, Calm Emotions, CURE MODERATE WOUNDS, Darkness, Delay Poison, Eagles Splendor, Hold Person, Make Whole, Owls Wisdon, Remove Paralysis, Resist Energy, Restoration-Lesser, Shatter, Silence, Spiritual Weapon, Summon Monster II, Undetectable Alignment, Zone of Truth.

But the big kicker? You get ALL of these as soon as you can cast them FOR FREE. Arcanists cannot compare on that note.

Those spells aren't really very good.

Bane and Bless; You're spending a standard action to give your allies a 5% better chance to hit for the remaining 3-4 rounds of the combat. In a party of 4, of which maybe 3 will be swinging, this gets you an extra hit like...2 combats in 3. Woo. Ditto for Bane, but with missing.

Command - Single target save or miss a round. Terrible.
CLW - Overrated. Get it on a wand.
Doom, Endure elements, Entropic Shields - have you ever really cast these? Really?
Obscuring, Pro from Evil, and Summon Monster are the clerics best spells at level 1. And they would be mediocre to bad wizard spells.

At level 2, Silence is the only A-grade spell on there. Everything else wouldn't even be looked at by another caster, except in select circumstances.

----

As for the idea that Druids don't have a better spell list at low levels?

Nothing a cleric gets is remotely as good as Entangle. Shillelagh is a better self-buff than any cleric level 1 spell.

Flame Blade, Flaming Sphere, Barkskin are better than anything but Silence (and maybe Hold Person, if you're fighting a lot of humanoids).

Cleric spells at low levels just aren't worth a standard action, except in particular circumstances.

Wizard spells, on the other hand...

-Cross


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
don't ever play a mystic thuerge. there are far better options. if you really want to be a hybrid caster. just wait for the witch to come out.

Unless the witches spell list gets an infusion during the release I'd rather play my Wizard/Archivist/Mystic Theurge.


Crosswind wrote:
Those spells aren't really very good.

As I look at the spells you consider strong below, I realize we are not discussing the same subject.

Clerics are not Wizards, and should not be played as such. Wizards do their thing, and Clerics do an entirely different thing. What makes the Druid list weak is that is uses Cleric-level powered spells and does Wizard-like things.

And it absolutly blows my mind you do not consider Hold Person an A-list spell...


Treantmonk wrote:


Gotta disagree. Witch is a GREAT character if your party has no other spellcasters.(though it's not official yet)

I mean - look at the Witches spell list...then add in Hexes and consider you will be casting spells 2 levels higher than an equivalent level MT, . It's not even comparable.

Even though the class isn't official yet, any chance you posting a little something on your thoughts on the class and some of its abilities, spells, and feats?


http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/advanced-player-s-guide-playtest/witch---fin al-playtest-version

That is the final playtest version....


Treantmonk wrote:
3) Cleric/Wizard is the only way to go. Yeah yeah, the Oracle/Sorcerer option means single casting stat - but 2 levels of casting just ain't worth it.

I'm curious to know, would your assessment of an Oracle/Sorcerer be different if the Alternate Source Spell feat from Dragon Magazine 325 were allowed? With it, a Sorcerer 4 / Oracle 1 (or vice versa) could qualify for MT as early as 6th level. Would the witch still win out in your opinion. It seems to me that the witch's limited spell list, need to prepare spells and inability to back-up her "spellbook" could significantly limit her versatility.


KenderKin wrote:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/advanced-player-s-guide-playtest/witch---fin al-playtest-version

That is the final playtest version....

Yes I have that, but I was more interested in his experiences in playing a witch, and maybe a small mini rundown of the class like the Wizard guide he has.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Crosswind wrote:
Those spells aren't really very good.

As I look at the spells you consider strong below, I realize we are not discussing the same subject.

Clerics are not Wizards, and should not be played as such. Wizards do their thing, and Clerics do an entirely different thing. What makes the Druid list weak is that is uses Cleric-level powered spells and does Wizard-like things.

And it absolutly blows my mind you do not consider Hold Person an A-list spell...

I'm not sure I care about what "role" a spell fills. Mostly, I just care if it's worth using a standard action in combat to do. Most low-level cleric spells aren't. Some druid spells are. A LOT of wizards spells are.

Hold Person is an A-list spell vs. some types of monsters, assuming you have somebody next to them already. That's nice, but situational. A-list spells, to my mind, are spells that you find a use for more often (Silence, for example).

-Cross


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
don't ever play a mystic thuerge. there are far better options. if you really want to be a hybrid caster. just wait for the witch to come out.

I have to agree. When I read

Core Rulebook wrote:

He does not, however, gain other benefits

a character of that class would have gained.

the only thing I can think is that you'd be better off just continuing to take levels one at a time in both the arcane and divine classes you are "splitting." That way you at least get the benefits of those classes. Losing those benefits just to continue to gain spells/day in both classes doesn't seem like an equal trade off. I think you should be able to pick which class to gain the benefits from, and still get the increased spells/day from the other. At least then you have a character that continues to progress. Of course that little change might make the Theurge overpowered, so there might have to be some other trade off.


The MT I have seen in play at our table was brilliant. I hate it people say you are doing it wrong, but if you are looking for kill power or mega healing out of this build you are in fact doing it wrong. The MT in our campaign was a skeleton key for any impedance, a answer guy for a multitude of issues from, invisible or flying foes, cursed pc's, in excesible areas to a fighter who needs just that one buff to hit the BBEG or protection from the dragons breath weapon. He was the ultimate utility player and in this roll he was beyond fantastic. The DM found his ability to always have an answer on hand quite a handful to deal with. YMMV but I think if you play an MT with this goal in mind you would be very delighted with your choice.


WarmasterSpike wrote:
The MT I have seen in play at our table was brilliant.

Hey share! I want to hear details.....


Tangible Delusions wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:


Gotta disagree. Witch is a GREAT character if your party has no other spellcasters.(though it's not official yet)

I mean - look at the Witches spell list...then add in Hexes and consider you will be casting spells 2 levels higher than an equivalent level MT, . It's not even comparable.

Even though the class isn't official yet, any chance you posting a little something on your thoughts on the class and some of its abilities, spells, and feats?

I intend to do a witch handbook when the APG comes out for sure (will be the first one I do).

I will say the witch is awesome. The spell list is terrific and incredibly versatile. I like the Bat familiar though because I can't live without silent image ;) I love that the final playtest added Wall of Thorns to the spell list (which is a fantastic wall spell) since the witch was woefully short on wall options.

The Hexes are NASTY and give you staying power beyond other casters. You can use Misfortune, Fortune and Evil Eye to buff your allies and debuff your enemies - and use CACKLE to extend the duration every round. NASTY. It is very possible for the witch to be devastating in combat with never casting a spell.

In a campaign I'm currently playing, we don't have a party healer, and our arcane caster just blasts and charms, so I spent quite a bit of time seeing if I could make a Mystic Theurge work, and had difficulty. When I looked at the witch I was very pleased. Problem solved.

The Exchange

James Jacobs wrote:

One of the core assumptions in Pathifnder is that we want a single classed character to be the norm. We want them to be viable. And the way we handled that is by making single classed characters as attractive as possible from 1st level all the way up to 20th. Prestige classes, we hope, become more of a choice that a player might make because of flavor desires for his character, or because he wants to hyper-specialize in one aspect of his class, or because he just wants something different, but it should NEVER be a "I'll take levels of this prestige class so I can just be better at my class role than if I remained single classed." That's not part of our design philosophy.

This goes even more for multiclassing, in fact, and particularly for spellcasters. Basically, if you want the VASTLY increased versatility and options that multiclassing a spellcaster gets you, our philosophy is that you have to give something up for that significant increase in options.

A multiclassed spellcaster whose spells are equal to or even VERY CLOSE to equal to a single classed spellcaster's spells means that there's no point to being a singleclassed spellcaster. That's not something we want in the core rules.

Honestly... the best way to have your cake and eat it too by having both spellcasting classes at your disposal at full power so you don't "fall behind" the others in your group is to get permission from the GM to run two characters.

And the concern that "my multiclassed character is not as powerful as the other player's single classed character" is, frankly, the game working as it should. In theory, the single classed character should be complaining, "My single classed character isn't as versatile as that other player's multiclassed character" I guess.

Essentially, this philosophy ties people more strongly to paizo. Interesting variants become a function of buying the appropriate splat books to have access to a linear number of paizo approved exceptions rather than the players creating uniqueness by mixing and matching from available options.

Essentially, one could have a design point basis where one could say +1 1 to BAB was worth 7 points. +1 to a reflex save with 3 points... And with that point buy system you could design any number characters.

The problem is that it future updates become much smaller, and harder to fluff. ie., you could release

"+1 to grapple checks" costs 1 point.
"Improved Grapple" costs 3 points.
d6 for hp 2pts
d8 for hp 3 pts

Etc. Not a lot of ways to fluff it up - as opposed to releasing whole new classes that are almost entirely repetivite rereleases of previous info with 1-2 twists.


Treantmonk wrote:


In a campaign I'm currently playing, we don't have a party healer, and our arcane caster just blasts and charms, so I spent quite a bit of time seeing if I could make a Mystic Theurge work, and had difficulty. When I looked at the witch I was very pleased. Problem solved.

We are starting a new one and was initially going to run a MT for much of the same reason, then witch caught my eye. Sounds like we came to some of the same conclusions. (Though I am debating between bat and raven)


Tangible Delusions wrote:
Treantmonk wrote:


In a campaign I'm currently playing, we don't have a party healer, and our arcane caster just blasts and charms, so I spent quite a bit of time seeing if I could make a Mystic Theurge work, and had difficulty. When I looked at the witch I was very pleased. Problem solved.

We are starting a new one and was initially going to run a MT for much of the same reason, then witch caught my eye. Sounds like we came to some of the same conclusions. (Though I am debating between bat and raven)

Yeah, I can relate. Invisibility, Confusion...nice list too.


Dragonchess Player wrote:
There's been some discussion on whether or not a mystic theurge is "viable" during play...

In a word: no. I played one... just don't do it. It just wasn't an effective class in any way. After endless pressure by the rest of my group I finally just ditched it and rolled a new character. I really think they missed the boat on this one.

To make it effective, rather than dual classing the two casters like that, just use the spell point totals as they would normally be for a single class (like the cleric), but divide the spells memorized for each level between the two classes. That way they still have level effective spells. IMHO that's how multiclassing should work in this game anyway.

The real weakness is that, in many ways, the game is designed for the lower level spells to fall out of effectiveness as the levels rise (due to saves etc... like flaming sphere), leaving only the higher level spells to be effective. The Mystic Theurge loses these effective spells all together.


If you play the MT as a buffer and with some ability do to do damage it's not a bad choise. Make Wizard the arcane caster and Cleric the Divine caster. Boost your int and you will have at least 5 skills per level. See the MT as a complimentary character. I'm sure it's was designed to be one. A bit like the bard.

Everytime the Bard comes up I get the answer the Bard is great, he is a great buffer, he got both arcane and divine spells and I shouldn't complain because he isn't suppose to do damage. "They were designed to be complimentary characters. They existed to enhance the archetypal four's abilities, not replace them. " as houstonderek put it.

Jason once said this about the bard:
Cmon now, the bard concept has never been one of raw power. The bard is good at a lot of different things, but he is not the master of any of them. If you are looking for that class, well.. there are 10 of them to choose from. Will he get nuked first.. probably not, unless the bad guys realize that everyone is getting +3 to hit and damage from the guy in the back, who is also casting haste on the party, greater invis on the rogue, and curing the barbarian. I know its not the same, and I suspect that most folks do, but that is the entire point of the bard. They help win the fight indirectly sometimes.

As a buffer the MT will eventually be even more versatile than the Bard and the MT will have MUCH more spells per day and MUCH more spells known and MUCH higher level spells AND.....he will have spells that actually to damage AND he will have battlefield control spells.

So I say. If you can play the bard you can sure as H*ll can play the MT.

But then again I wouldn't mind see the prereq change to:
divine and arcane caster level 4/2 or 2/4
or: divine and arcane caster, 6 ranks in spellcraft.

Shadow Lodge

Zark wrote:
If you play the MT as a buffer and with some ability do to do damage it's not a bad choise. Make Wizard the arcane caster and Cleric the Divine caster. Boost your int and you will have at least 5 skills per level. See the MT as a complimentary character. I'm sure it's was designed to be one. A bit like the bard.

This doesn't match my experience with Pathfinder bards at all. Not sure if you've played with Pathfinder bards but they are no longer the 5th wheel of the party.

Bards also don't have to wade through a bunch of levels where they are vastly less powerful than the rest of the party. Mystic Theurge is very weak relative to the rest of the party at character levels 4-8.


I never understand why people think that Mystic Theurges are "versatile".

They aren't. The missing 1-2 spell levels means you are giving up a huge amount of versatility because as spell levels go up, new problem-solving abilities are gained. Considering the amount of overlap on the spell lists, getting an extra spell list at the cost of higher spell levels actually gets you a net loss in versatility.

Sure, you may get some things you wouldn't ordinarily get. For example, some healing spells are nice to add to arcane magic, but they won't offset the sheer range of things you can do with those 1-2 extra spell levels of an arcane class (or offset the fact that you'd be better off using Wands of Cure Light Wounds for healing anyway). I mean, aside from that, there isn't anything really unique that you get from cleric magic that arcane magic doesn't do better.

It all breaks down the day the MT is solving problems with a Flaming Sphere or a Web because his highest spell level is 2nd, and the single-classed caster has his 4th level spells and is using Charm Monster and Shadow Conjuration. Then when the MT is finally starting to use Charm Monster and Shadow Conjuration, the single-caster has Antimagic Field and Planar Binding. When the MT gets those.... well, you get my point.

I guess people expect to get to level 20 where they finally get to shine by having all the spells and a huge number of spells to cast, despite the fact that the campaign is over and having both lists is now meaningless, and that single-casters have had more spells than they could cast since around 10th level.


K wrote:


I guess people expect to get to level 20 where they finally get to shine by having all the spells and a huge number of spells to cast, despite the fact that the campaign is over and having both lists is now meaningless, and that single-casters have had more spells than they could cast since around 10th level.

Good points.

As for the wand of CLW argument I find it silly. For bulk healing it great but at higher levels you need greater healing spells and the caster level.
Edit: But I do agree that at lower levels they are weak and at higher levels single-casters usually have more spells than they could cast.


0gre wrote:
Zark wrote:
If you play the MT as a buffer and with some ability do to do damage it's not a bad choise. Make Wizard the arcane caster and Cleric the Divine caster. Boost your int and you will have at least 5 skills per level. See the MT as a complimentary character. I'm sure it's was designed to be one. A bit like the bard.

This doesn't match my experience with Pathfinder bards at all. Not sure if you've played with Pathfinder bards but they are no longer the 5th wheel of the party.

Bards also don't have to wade through a bunch of levels where they are vastly less powerful than the rest of the party. Mystic Theurge is very weak relative to the rest of the party at character levels 4-8.

Agreed. Pathfinder Bards are tough. The ability to maintain inspire courage as a free action really changes the dynamics. (Nevermind the ability to start it with less than a standard action as you advance)


Zark wrote:


Good points.
As for the wand of CLW argument I find it silly. For bulk healing it great but at higher levels you need greater healing spells and the caster level.
Edit: But I do agree that at lower levels they are weak and at higher levels single-casters usually have more spells than they could cast.

Maybe in combat.

But once battle is over CLWs are more effective for the cost.
Sure, it might take a minute to heal anyone to full, but you ae saving money you can use to heal more later.

In battle, you'd be better buying a healing belt. In combat healing is hard to do good (clerics turning thing is decent) as you normally heal one person for same amount they get hit in 1 rd for meaning no good.

Dark Archive

Viable is a relative term. Anything is viable or even fun if the rest of your party is on a similar power level. But a MT, especially off Druid, is going to be exceptionally weaker than the rest of the party until very high levels. They can be fun... We have one in the campaign I am running now. But they have just hit 8th level and he is only now starting to be useful.


Starbuck_II wrote:


In combat healing is hard to do good (clerics turning thing is decent) as you normally heal one person for same amount they get hit in 1 rd for meaning no good.

That's not my experience. In fact if it wasn't for our level 6 cleric with the healing domain and a CSW our level 8 monk would have died in yesterday's game.


Treantmonk wrote:
Agreed. Pathfinder Bards are tough. The ability to maintain inspire courage as a free action really changes the dynamics. (Nevermind the ability to start it with less than a standard action as you advance)

I fully agree with the "start it with less than a standard action" - that's really great for bards. However, the maintain as a free action is nothing new - been that way for inspire courage (and *most* bardic abilities) since 3.0.

Starbuck_II wrote:
In combat healing is hard to do good (clerics turning thing is decent) as you normally heal one person for same amount they get hit in 1 rd for meaning no good.

Healing someone for the same amount they are hurt (or even close to the same amount) is completely a good thing to do. Unless the whole group is getting hit like that, that means you, a single person, are negating the actions of another creature, while the rest of your party continues to beat things down.

It's not always the *best* action, but it's certainly effective. When you can no longer cure as much as is dealt, that's when healing becomes hard (and temporary retreats become more necessary).


I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.


Peter Stewart wrote:
I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.

Taking a straight 10th level caster including 0 lvl spells, these are the total spells per day:

Bard: 13
Cleric: 20 (+5 Domain spells)
Druid: 20
Sorcerer: 26
Wizard: 20

10th level ? 3/? 3/Mystic Theurge 4, which makes each class have 7th lvl access:
Bard: 8
Cleric: 14 (+4 Domains)
Druid: 14
Sorcerer: 16
Wizard: 14

when you combine the total number of spells available per day with your choice of classes the only single class that has almost the same as but less depending on your class choices is the Sorcerer

EX: Wizard 3/ Cleric 3/ Mystic THeurge 4: 28 spells per day (+4 Domains)

now of course we know we can't combine them, but the pure numbers support more spells available. even if its a minor fraction.


Also ran the numbers at level 8 and 16 using 20 point buy and magic items i would buy at those levels if i was actually playing the classes:

spoiler:

3wiz/3clr/2MT = 20 spells + 3 Specialization + 3 Domain = 26 total

8 Wizard = 20 spells + 4 Specialization = 24 total

at 16th level

3wiz/3clr/10MT = 63 spells + 7 spec + 7 Domain = 77 Spells

16 Wizard = 41 Spells + 8 Spec = 49

So at low levels you dont have double or even alot more spells but it does start to scale much better as you spell levels progress.

Anyway thats not what I wanted everyone to look at: Is it just me or do not all the specialize powers go off of level. The Abjuration School Resistance (ex) is one that only talks about level. The Conjuration School Dimensional Steps seems it would still be available to MT's but they would only be able to teleport 30ft (due to wiz level). Divinations 8th level ability looks like it would work. There are more im sure, granted they are small bonuses but I think they still apply to the MT.


Peter Stewart wrote:
I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.

oops, someone did and the MT got more spells. ;-)


Zark wrote:
Peter Stewart wrote:
I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.
oops, someone did and the MT got more spells. ;-)

IIRC level 10 is the tipping point in this regard, where they MT gets 'more spells'. I.e. this is where the payoff BEGINS.


Slacker2010 wrote:

Also ran the numbers at level 8 and 16 using 20 point buy and magic items i would buy at those levels if i was actually playing the classes:

** spoiler omitted **

So at low levels you dont have double or even alot more spells but it does start to scale much better as you spell levels progress.

Anyway thats not what I wanted everyone to look at: Is it just me or do not all the specialize powers go off of level. The Abjuration School Resistance (ex) is one that only talks about level. The Conjuration School Dimensional Steps seems it would still be available to MT's but they would only be able to teleport 30ft (due to wiz level). Divinations 8th level ability looks like it would work. There are more im sure, granted they are small bonuses but I think they still apply to the MT.

Not weighing in on one side or another as to whether or not the Mystic Theurge works as a prestige class, but the Mystic Theurge also has the option to use a higher level divine or arcane spell slot to prepare a spell one level lower from their arcane or divine spells. This can give them increased versatility if they want to make more use of their divine or arcane spells in a certain situation.


Slacker2010 wrote:
Anyway thats not what I wanted everyone to look at: Is it just me or do not all the specialize powers go off of level. The Abjuration School Resistance (ex) is one that only talks about level. The Conjuration School Dimensional Steps seems it would still be available to MT's but they would only be able to teleport 30ft (due to wiz level). Divinations 8th level ability looks like it would work. There are more im sure, granted they are small bonuses but I think they still apply to the MT.

All those school abilities are based on Wizard class level.

Zark wrote:
oops, someone did and the MT got more spells. ;-)

Agreed, however his point holds up a bit better if you count total "spell levels", i.e. 1st = 1, 2nd = 2.


Zark wrote:
Peter Stewart wrote:
I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.
oops, someone did and the MT got more spells. ;-)

If you take out 0 level spells - they don't get any more than a straight sorcerer by level 10.

I'm guessing those numbers become less favorable for the MT at lower levels.


Helic wrote:
Zark wrote:
Peter Stewart wrote:
I'd urge those who are rambling inaccurately about how the Mystic Theurge is rolling in spells to actually run the math on spells per day on a MT vs. a single caster. Particularly for levels 1-10, but even later.
oops, someone did and the MT got more spells. ;-)

IIRC level 10 is the tipping point in this regard, where they MT gets 'more spells'. I.e. this is where the payoff BEGINS.

Even after the breakpoint, the "extra spells" you get is illusionary. Check this out:

At 10th a MT has:
Wiz 4/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1
Clr 4/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1
Assumed max stats and bonus spells
Wiz 4/4+2/3+2/2+2/1+2
Clr 4/4+2/3+2/2+2/1+2
Total:8/12/10/8/4 = 42 spells

A specialist Wiz has:
4/4+1/4+1/3+1/3+1/2+1
Assumed max stats and bonus spells
4/4+2/4+2/3+2/3+2/2+2
Total: 4/6/6/5/5/4 = 30 spells

However, I'll still take the Wiz because four 5th level spells and a 4th level spell is way better than the extra three 3rd, four 2nd, six 1st, and four cantrips you get by being a MT on top of the fact that the MT has no 5th level spells. This is 10th level people, and tossing around some extra stuff you got at 5th level with poor DCs does not make you "versatile."

Things get worse at 11th level, when the MT has 46 spells and an extra six 1st, four 2nd, four 3rd, one 4th, and four cantrips and the specialist Wizard has 36 spells, but is rocking an extra four 5th level spells and three 6th level spells from two spell levels that the MT can't cast from.

At that level, the specialist Wizard also has an extra +1 DC to all his spells because put his ability bonuses into his one casting stat, higher DCs from better spells so he needs to cast fewer spells to get the same effects on monsters, and he needs half the stat mod magic items.

In fact, with his extra two spell levels the chances are good that every spell he casts in combat every day will be from spell levels the MT doesn't have access to.

Plus, if the MT can't keep getting his bonus spells from high stats, things get even worse for the MT.


Slacker2010 wrote:

Also ran the numbers at level 8 and 16 using 20 point buy and magic items i would buy at those levels if i was actually playing the classes:

I understand your using a point buy for the stats, but we aren't talking about bonus spells from stats, because depending on how you do your stats that can be more or less, not everyone uses point buy, I don't. I'm running pure base numbers, no stat bonuses.

51 to 100 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Is the Mystic Theurge Viable? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.