In my opinion, the problem with the prestige classes you mentioned, Shadow, is that there is no mechanic that allows spellcasters to benefit from multiclassing. No matter how little it appears to matter, the melee-based classes at least share their BAB among each other, so its not like your overall skill as a weapon-based fight is dwindling as you level. In contrast, caster level is split apart between classes. the best way I could phrase it is that it would be like if a multiclass rogue / fighter made some attacks with his rogue BAB and some with his fighter BAB instead of both stacking together like the rules say they do.
In my opinion, the easiest fix (which would also be a good band-aid to classes like Mystic Theurge and Eldritch Knight) is to make a universal "caster level" stat, which represents the character's natural skill with magic. Full-progression spellcasters, be they wizards or bards, add their full level to their caster level, while paladins / rangers use their level -3 (minimum 0). Classes without progression (such as fighters and rogues) use half their character level as their bonus, same as how wizards use half their level for their BAB.
You would still split up spells known / spell slots between classes; the only change is that if you're a wizard 5 / cleric 5, you cast both your spells as a 10th level character instead of a 5th level wizard or a 5th level cleric.
It depends on how you build your character. In 1e, you rolled your stats, chose your race and class(es), but after that, your elven fighter/mage probably looked pretty similar to another f/m of comparable level. Now, one EK can look very different from another, depending on where you grab your martial and arcane prowess (witch, ranger, paladin, bard), what archetypes you pick, and how much of each source you take.
|
Magus wins till you get to high levels level 6 spellcap hurts even if we rarely if ever play higher than 14th,I still dont like to know im capped out.Traits and feats help with making them better than 3.5 but they are about two levels weaker than a 2nd edition version.My experience is only with eldritch knights though.
Eldritch Knight works pretty well, IMHO, and grants the same flavor. As an exercise I once built a character who had been a 1st/2nd Ed hybrid Half Elf Fighter/Mage into an EK, and felt the EK could actually accomplish more than the AD&D version. And if I wanted to play a "gish" I'd play an Eldritch Knight before I played a Magus. (Or for a more "well rounded" buffer type, an Arcane Duelist.)
(But I'd also rather play a commoner before I played a Magus. That's just me.)
Arcane Trickster emulates a very specific kind of rogue/arcanist but does it well. It has a lot of neat little unique tricks. It's not a powerhouse class. I haven't seen one a lot in practice however.
Mystic Theurge is where things fall apart more--it's a very hard class to build. The one I've ever seen in gameplay got dropped quickly because character advancement didn't feel like improvement. I'd like to play one as a challenge, but I get that I'd be in for... well, a challenge. Compared to the cleric/mage... I think ultimately the AD&D version got more spells. I love the idea of the mystic theurge but it's hard to find a way to make it work.
In a way, I think the best "mystic theurge" in Pathfinder is a Bard with the Magician archetype. You have the same HD as a cleric. You can cast in armor. You get cure spells and great buffs. You get some arcane spells--and with the magician archetype, you can get some of those blasty spells bards are otherwise denied. You won't be spamming spells the way a real mystic theurge is meant to--instead being a more skill based and party support character--but I think that matches some of the best feel for it and still has a character that can contribute evenly from low levels on up.
|
It's very hard to replicate the "feel" of a 2e multiclassed character in Pathfinder. One reason is because all classes in Pathfinder advance at the same rate (everybody goes up a level at 2000 XP on the normal advancement path), while in 2e a fighter needed 2000, a wizard 2500, and a rogue only 1250. The Pathfinder progression is also more uniform throughout the range; 2e capped out at somewhere between 10th and 15th level (depending on class), at which point going up a level required a fixed (but still class-dependent) number of XP.
Even more important, though, is the simple fact that the mathematics of splitting some total number of earned levels between different classes - the Pathfinder system - produces very different results from splitting the rewards at the XP level. If a pathfinder character was splitting XP evenly between two classes you'd end up with each class being about two levels behind a single-classed character with the same number of XP (so instead of an F10 you'd have an F8/W8). I suspect that at some point the additional powers gained from the 2nd class would be more than sufficient to compensate for a two-level lag in the primary class, so the balance would swing over in favour of multiclassing.
I like being able to take multiple classes to build to a concept, but I'm all too aware of the fact that doing so puts me at quite a disadvantage. I might take one or two levels of secondary class for flavour, or to get access to a particular ability, but I wouldn't consider trying to advance two classes at comparable rates under the current system. Archetypes (and, to some degree, prestige classes) do mitigate this drawback somewhat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have not played 1e and have had contact with 2e only occasionally, so I can only answer your questions theoretically.
I think Paizo has done a good job - better than WotC - with those prestige classes. Those classes do well what they were designed to do. It's just that the fundamental approach of Paizo to balance the various classes and prestige classes is to have trade-offs, i.e. you have to give something to get something. And this is what many do not seem to like: They do not want to be great at casting and fight a little, or be good at casting two kinds of magic spells, but they want to be perfect at everything without giving anything up. If you accept the various limitations, you can do really great things with those classes though.
Prestige classes
- Many special combinations of class features not available in base classes, e.g. shadowdancer offers great versatility to a fighter and adds many features such as darkvision or evasion or shadow evocation
- You do not get the favored class bonus, no extra spells per level for prepared casters, class-level-dependent features do not advance
- Unlike in D&D 3.0/3.5 standard classes are not a mere starting point which you leave asap for a prestige class anymore. Prestige classes give you different stuff, not better stuff
Profiles
- Eldritch Knight: Full caster that can fight better than pure caster. Pays with class features, and is worse at fighting than pure fighter
- Arcane Archer: Great even for non-archery focused characters that focus on fighting but want to dip and additionally progress spellcasting.
- Dragon Disciple: The melee equivalent to the arcane archer. AA & DD are the opposite concept to EK, i.e. martially focused characters that can cast acceptably vs. casting-focused character that can fight acceptably.
- Mystic Theurge: You advance casting in two classes at a full progression. There gotta be a payoff somewhere, and it is there with the 2nd level casting requirement, so you will be limited to level 8 spells maximum on a 20 level progression if you do not emphasize one class. In another thread I reasoned why you are best off focusing on one casting class, dipping into another and then progressing both than going for maximum advancing in both classes.
- Arcane Trickster: You can enter this at 6th level with a wide variety of classes. The class features focus on sneak attack, so classes that provide that feature are the prime candidates. Disarming traps, sneaking with spells and sneaking impromptu are its core abilities. Also, since you advance casting, being able to always cast improved invisibility and thus happily sneaking all the time makes it a rather strong class as well.
A lot of the class combinations are covered by core/base classes and archetypes in pathfinder, not prestige classes. Bards and alchemists in particular cover many grounds: they can gain sneak attack and still have spells. Bards, particularly arcane duelists and archaeologists, and magus cover the classic fighter/mage combinations, sandman bards and archaeologists can easily cover the thief/mage combinations and so on.
A strength of pathfinder IMO is that all those core classes and base classes still have something that sets them apart (higher BAB, earlier and better sneak progression, better survivability, more and different talents etc.), so they do not become superfluous :-)
I had previously considered the idea of:
Magus 9/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 10
It seemed pretty nice at the time that I was conceptualizing it, but I never got around to looking at it in more depth.
Also, I'm currently playing in a game in which I am playing a character who will become a mystic theurge. Currently at 4 oracle (lore)/3 sorceror (fey bloodline) and his effectiveness is somewhat lacking (to be expected) except for when the group is combating anything with a mind.
I'm hoping things will be picking up for him once he's got a few MT levels under his belt, but I doubt he would be as effective as a pure caster of another class, which is probably how things should be. My main gripe is with the mid levels not being very friendly.