# Which PrCl would you never want in your game? (part 1 - DMG)



## Li Shenron (Jun 1, 2005)

Just to see which are the least popular prestige classes around. Which are the ones you really would not like to have in your game/setting? It could be because the concept is totally appalling to you, or because the class has received a very poor design, or because it is either too weak to be working or too good to be allowed... Whatever the reason   

A poll is coming, but of course an explanation to your vote is going to be very interesting. I'm leaving open the option of multiple votes, but I suggest to focus on 1-3 at most! Try to think, if you were really going to ban only 1 PrCl from this book, which would it be, and vote more than 1 only if you really cannot decide (anyway, if you vote all of them because you just hate PrCls, you're not really going to affect the poll much   ). You can also interpret the question as "which PrCl would you strip off the DMG if you could".

Personally I think that my least favourite from the DMG is... the *Thaumaturgist*. The reason is that while the concept was clear and in theory easy to "implement", the design is very poor: a bunch of improvements (to 3 spells) with no clear progression, not a single feature which seems striking and unique (the planar cohort might have been, but it looks weird how it's done), and bland prerequisites.


----------



## diaglo (Jun 1, 2005)

Bard.


----------



## Thanee (Jun 1, 2005)

None, really, but if I had to name one, which I consider the worst, that would be the Horizon Walker.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Li Shenron (Jun 1, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> Bard.




DMG!!!


----------



## drothgery (Jun 1, 2005)

Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.


----------



## diaglo (Jun 1, 2005)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> DMG!!!



i'm sure if you do a word search in the DMG it would come up at least once.


----------



## Psion (Jun 1, 2005)

Most of the DMG PrCs work fine for me, really.

The exceptions are the dragon disciple (because I already know how half dragons work in my game, and they don't fit the model) and red wizard (because not only is it, by default, FR specific, compared to the numerous arcane PrCs out there, I find it rather dull yet non-iconic.)


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 1, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.




Not even as NPCs?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 1, 2005)

I use all of them...even the Red Wizard. Just altered the flavour of the class and it fits perfectly into my homebrew.


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2005)

I'm fine with any of the DMG prestige classes.  Some are dull and flavorless, but are mostly harmless.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 1, 2005)

Shade said:
			
		

> I'm fine with any of the DMG prestige classes.  Some are dull and flavorless, but are mostly harmless.




Seconded.


----------



## painandgreed (Jun 1, 2005)

Horizon Walker is the only one that really wouldn't fit into a campaign in my homebrew. I'd have to rename the Red Wizards or something. The rest are typically regional or secret societies that are hard to join and seek to give that region flavor. For example, the secrets of Shadowdancers are only known to the females of a particular ethnic group far to the west. If a player wasn't female or from that ethnic group (let alone on that side of the continent), it would take a hell of a lot of role playing to ever become one.

Some are allowed to PCs that plan to go that way from the begining such as the Dragon Disciple. If you write up how your character is suspictious of being fathered by a dragon in the history and play it that way from the beginging, I'd probalby allow it but not if at 6th level you decide you want to be one for the special abilities. I did this once but wasn't allowed to do it so I feel shorted and wouldn't want to do that to another PC. Why did the DM not allow that PrCl? He thought the artwork for it was too dorky and to allow one would constantly remind him of the bad artwork. I really couldn't argue.


----------



## Wombat (Jun 1, 2005)

No Dragon Disciples (as no half-dragons) and no Horizon Walkers (absolutely no plane-hopping in my campaigns, ever).

Pretty simple.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Jun 1, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.



 No players would be able to take these PrCs in any potential game I would run b/c players can't be evil.  If they become evil, they become an NPC... at which point, they would be able to take the classes.


----------



## Alhazred (Jun 1, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.




Seconded.  Although I find the Dwarven Defender to be useless, and there is very little plane-hopping in my campaigns, so the Plane Walker is at a disadvantage, I wouldn't disallow these class.  However, I'd warn the players beforehand.


----------



## Campbell (Jun 1, 2005)

Assassin: The class abilities don't align with the type of assassins I prefer to portray in my games. For the most part, I'm not a fan of unnecesarry spellcasting.


----------



## KingOfChaos (Jun 1, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.




meh...you're no fun


----------



## the Jester (Jun 1, 2005)

Red Wizard.  I don't play in the frickin' Realms, and I really, really wish they'd made the setting-specific prc a Greyhawk one since that is the 'core setting' (even though I don't play in GH either).


----------



## Celebrim (Jun 1, 2005)

The harder question for me is which classes would I ever consider allowing in my game.

The answer to that is pretty much only those classes which facillitate other wise difficult multi-classing combinations.  The only really difficult multi-classing involves spell casting classes (particularly arcane spellcasting classes), and so the only PrC's which I would ever consider allowing from that list are Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight, and Mystic Theurge.   Those are to me the easiest sort of PrC to justify.  They do something useful and they do it in a fairly generic manner that is easy to paint as needed and fit into a game world.   A clr5/wiz5/mystic theurge10 seems to me to be about as powerful as a clr20 or wiz20, and a clr10/wiz10 is most certainly not.   Similar reasoning applies to combinations like rog5/wiz5/arcane trickster10 and ftr4/wiz6/Elderitch Knight10, because access to higher level spells is simply so powerful. 

The other ones bother me for various reasons.  Shadowdancer is about the best of them, because it is something like being able to take an alternative balanced 'rogue' class for levels 11-20.  The thing that kills it for me is that its utterly front ended, to the point of something like Rog19/Shadow Dancer1 being rather attractive.   The rest of them seem like straight forward 'base class only better' to me, and succeed at that to one extent or the other (Dwarven Defender and Heriophant being examples of not succeeding in it).   Prestige class fighter and 'arcane caster' variations in particular annoy me, because Fighter is such a versital class as it is and has so little to lose in most cases by sampling from any class with full fighter BAB progression.  Likewise, so long as an 'arcane caster' can keep his spell progression, he's got almost nothing to lose by sampling from any class that gives full spell progression because the SRD 'arcane caster' classes wizard/sorcerer have almost nothing going for them but thier spells.   So where is the real trade off if you can take 10 levels of something and get 5 or more feat equivalent abilities out of it plus not lose anything from your spell progression?

I honestly think that the worst of them is Blackguard, because it is a bad fix to the badly designed Paladin class.   To see an example of Paladin/Blackguard done right, see Green Ronin's Holy Warrior/Unholy Warrior.  Dragon Disciple is cheesy, but on top of that its another example of a class which seems to suffer from much better mechanical solutions existing, for example the racial levels in Savage Species or AU.


----------



## tylerthehobo (Jun 1, 2005)

I don't have a beef with any of this, and while overpowered, I always dug the Dragon Disciple.

(Granted, I've never DMed one, only played as one...heheh)


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 1, 2005)

It won't let me vote for none of them. :\


----------



## drothgery (Jun 1, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Not even as NPCs?




I was only thinking of PCs, but I really don't like the entire concept of anti-paladins (and a blackguard is just a renamed anti-paladin) or semi-spellcasting assassins, and don't play in FR.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 1, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> I was only thinking of PCs, but I really don't like the entire concept of anti-paladins (and a blackguard is just a renamed anti-paladin)




Sort of. I guess if you don't like unholy warriors running around causing trouble for the good guys that's your business.



> _or semi-spellcasting assassins,_





I like it, tied them to a particular guild, located in a specific city on the edge of a desert.

_



			and don't play in FR.
		
Click to expand...


_
Evil covens of wizards don't translate into your game at all? Just rename their fluff.


----------



## devilbat (Jun 1, 2005)

After experiencing the Mystic Thurge in one of my campaigns, I hope I never see one again.  I find them over powered.  Not to mention the half hour needed to go over thier spell list, every time a change is required.


----------



## Sigdel (Jun 1, 2005)

tylerthehobo said:
			
		

> I don't have a beef with any of this, and while overpowered, I always dug the Dragon Disciple.
> 
> (Granted, I've never DMed one, only played as one...heheh)





It's not worth it. Trust me. I ruined a perfectly good character by picking up that PrC.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 1, 2005)

devilbat said:
			
		

> After experiencing the Mystic Thurge in one of my campaigns, I hope I never see one again.  I find them over powered.  Not to mention the half hour needed to go over thier spell list, every time a change is required.




They are less powerful than a single-classed wizard with the Leadership feat and a cleric cohort (or vice versa). I have never figured out what made people scared of the relatively low power of the Mystic Theurge.


----------



## KingOfChaos (Jun 1, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> They are less powerful than a single-classed wizard with the Leadership feat and a cleric cohort (or vice versa). I have never figured out what made people scared of the relatively low power of the Mystic Theurge.




I agree, the Mystic Theurge has less feats than a normal straight classed wizard and is really no worse than dual/multi classing as a cleric/wizard in 2nd edition.


----------



## Orius (Jun 1, 2005)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> diaglo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Unfortunately, you didn't specify which _edition_ DMG, and diaglo ran with it.


----------



## Psion (Jun 1, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, you didn't specify which _edition_ DMG, and diaglo ran with it.




Nice try, no cookie. When bard appeared in a prior core book, it was the PHB.


----------



## drothgery (Jun 1, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Sort of. I guess if you don't like unholy warriors running around causing trouble for the good guys that's your business.




Unholy warriors are fine, they just have a PrC approriate to the champions of $INSERT_EVIL_DEITY_HERE$. Unholy warriors that are dark mirror images of paladins, or very nearly that, are cheesy.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 1, 2005)

Everything is fine except the Mystic Theurge. I'll never allow anyone to have a PrC that gives dual caster progression in two seperate classes, it's too open to abuse even if you don't get as many feats as a straight caster in one of those classes.

If you want to multiclass go back to 2e or expect me to start putting level limits on your character by race arbitrarily or something like that


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jun 1, 2005)

Arcane Archer is dull and, well, elf-centric. Even if I used elves I wouldn't allow it. It's not even mechanically cool. Pretty much a failure on every level.


----------



## MadMaxim (Jun 2, 2005)

I'd say the arcane archer and the shadow dancer. The arcane archer's ability to make +5 arrows gets obsolete the minute he gets his hands on a +5 longbow as the enhancement bonus goes to damage as well. I think it's just poorly designed and I hope I never see one in any of my games. And the rest of their class abilities aren't very cool either.

I don't like the shadow dancer because it doesn't give anything other than a little shadow jumping, some hide-in-plain-sight and improved evasion. It's just not very interesting for anyone.


----------



## FreeTheSlaves (Jun 2, 2005)

Order of the Bow Initiate.

Any PrC built around just improving specialization in one combat style strikes me as plain wrong and invokes the auto-ban.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jun 2, 2005)

Mystic Theurge is not allowed in any of my campaigns, never has been, and never will be.


----------



## Greylock (Jun 2, 2005)

I am astounded that the Horizon Walker is so high on this list. Many find it a fairly weak PrC, but I've always thought it very flavorful.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 2, 2005)

> the only PrC's which I would ever consider allowing from that list are Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight, and Mystic Theurge. Those are to me the easiest sort of PrC to justify. They do something useful and they do it in a fairly generic manner that is easy to paint as needed and fit into a game world. A clr5/wiz5/mystic theurge10 seems to me to be about as powerful as a clr20 or wiz20, and a clr10/wiz10 is most certainly not. Similar reasoning applies to combinations like rog5/wiz5/arcane trickster10 and ftr4/wiz6/Elderitch Knight10, because access to higher level spells is simply so powerful.




Odly enough, this is the precise reason I look askance at these classes. They patch a hole that should be filled with something much more substantial. They make multiclassing viable when it should be viable without that PrC.

The fact of the matter is that the game as written now suffers from a BIG problem in that magic is exclusive to spellcasters. Whereas even the most closeted wizard learns to thump head better than a newbie fighter, the most worldly and experienced fighter can't puzzle out a basic Light spell. It's a magical world -- everyone should learn a little bit of magic, to one degree or another. 

The stop-gap prestige classes always make me wince, because they're taking things that could be flavorful and unique, and instead replacing them with something designed to simply make a multiclass viable. The multiclass should be viable WITHOUT the PrC. The fact that it's not is a deep problem with the game today that isn't likely to be solved in anything more than a house rule fashion for a long time.

As for the PrC's, I'll agree with others that the DMG PrC's are all pretty good. In fact, I think that a lot of the PrC's that Wizards puts out are at least interesting, even if they're not particularly useful for anything because of the set-up of the game....


----------



## Celebrim (Jun 2, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Odly enough, this is the precise reason I look askance at these classes. They patch a hole that should be filled with something much more substantial. They make multiclassing viable when it should be viable without that PrC.




Well, if I could think of a way to alter the arcane classes so that they wouldn't need a PrC in order to justify certain multiclassing combos in a non-abusable manner, I'd do it.  But so far I've not seen a simple solution to the problem.  Making spellcasting a group of skills might do it, but it would require a big alteration of the existing game and likely a magic system so different from what we are used to seeing that it wouldn't feel like D&D to many.



> The fact of the matter is that the game as written now suffers from a BIG problem in that magic is exclusive to spellcasters.




I'm not sure that that is the exact defining quality of the 'big problem', but I know what you are talking about.



> The stop-gap prestige classes always make me wince, because they're taking things that could be flavorful and unique, and instead replacing them with something designed to simply make a multiclass viable.




Yeah, but see I don't want things to be flavorful and unique.  I want the player to set the flavor of his character, not necessarily the DMG or even the DM.   All I want _is_ viable multi-classing in every combination of classes.  The thing is, if I can't think of a better way to do it, and some player decides to play a Wizard/fighter (as opposed to a Fighter/wizard, which I can do), then I'd have to allow a PrC before the concept would be truly viable - and I really don't like PrC's.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 2, 2005)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Everything is fine except the Mystic Theurge. I'll never allow anyone to have a PrC that gives dual caster progression in two seperate classes, it's too open to abuse even if you don't get as many feats as a straight caster in one of those classes.




Anuse? You do realize that a Mystic Theurge is significantly less powerful than a single classed wizard or cleric, don't you?


----------



## Elephant (Jun 2, 2005)

FreeTheSlaves said:
			
		

> Order of the Bow Initiate.
> 
> Any PrC built around just improving specialization in one combat style strikes me as plain wrong and invokes the auto-ban.




Heh.  I ban that horrible PrC based on the awful "flavor text" used to introduce it.


----------



## Elephant (Jun 2, 2005)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> A clr5/wiz5/mystic theurge10 seems to me to be about as powerful as a clr20 or wiz20




Someone who can't cast 9th level spells in either Wiz or Clr is about as powerful as someone who can? I have a hard time agreeing.

Spell slots:
C/W/MT has 0 9th, 2+1 8th (includes domain), 4+1 7th, and lots of lower level spells.
C20 or W20 has 4 each of 9th, 8th, and 7th (+1 each if Clr).

That's a total of 6 extra high-power slots for the single-classed caster (7 if a Clr 20), and in general, higher level spell slots are worth more than lower level spell slots.

Caster Level:
C/W/MT is CL 15 in both Clr and Wiz.
C or W 20 is CL 20.

Lower caster level hurts the MT in two ways: Spell resistance checks and spell effects. The MT will have a harder time penetrating SR when he blasts foes with evocations, meaning more of his spells are wasted. For, say, healing spells (starting at Cure Crit), he's doing 5 HP less healing per person per casting. That really adds up when your party members are in the 150-200 max HP range.

Not to mention MSD that the MT suffers from...the single-classed character can afford to pump their casting stat as high as possible, while the MT has to push BOTH Int and Wis up to 18 by 20th level.  That's not a big deal if you managed to roll two 18s on your 4d6DL, but if you're using point buy, you'll run into problems.


----------



## Li Shenron (Jun 2, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> It won't let me vote for none of them. :\




I have left the "None" option out of the poll on purpose: the aim of this poll is to see which PrCl from the DMG gets more "thumbs down", then I'll put up another poll for another book and then again, and at the end there will be a final match to elect the "loser of the losers"   

With this in mind, the "None" option would not have had any effect on the tournament. There just _has_ to be a loser for each poll, so if "None" would have got most votes (it's possible because the DMG still has IMHO the best set of PrCls) I would still have had to pick the most voted class instead.

Of course you can just choose not to vote for any class in this round


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jun 2, 2005)

Dwarven Defender. Cause it's for dwarves.

Also, the main ability is useless, as you can defeat it so easily: Dwarven Defender goes into defensive stance, you throw a gold piece three yards away. Next round, the DD will perform a standing dive jump to get that coin.


----------



## Starglim (Jun 2, 2005)

Red Wizard: absolutely no Forgotten Realms. The Arcane Trickster has potential to be annoying but I could probably live with it.


----------



## Greylock (Jun 2, 2005)

Still wondering how/why the Horizon Walker manages to rank in the top three.


----------



## VirgilCaine (Jun 2, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> The fact of the matter is that the game as written now suffers from a BIG problem in that magic is exclusive to spellcasters. Whereas even the most closeted wizard learns to thump head better than a newbie fighter, the most worldly and experienced fighter can't puzzle out a basic Light spell. It's a magical world -- everyone should learn a little bit of magic, to one degree or another.




So you want magic to be like in Diablo--even Fighters get some magical ability, but they're so crappy at it there's not much point in using it unless they can't do anything else?


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2005)

Greylock said:
			
		

> Still wondering how/why the Horizon Walker manages to rank in the top three.




Lots of folks don't do forays into the planes frequently enough to justify a class.


----------



## Celebrim (Jun 2, 2005)

Elephant said:
			
		

> Someone who can't cast 9th level spells in either Wiz or Clr is about as powerful as someone who can? I have a hard time agreeing.




Well, it might not be perfectly true that having the casting ability of both a 15th level cleric and a 15th level wizard is equal to having the casting ability of a 20th level wizard its roughly true.   Certainly we agree that at some point, say having the caster ability of a 19th level cleric and a 19th level wizard and only be a 20th level character would be unbalancing.   So what's it going to be?  While you are giving up 4 9th level spells and 2 8th level spells, you are gaining 5 6th, 5 5th, 5 4th, 5 3rd, 5 2nd, 5 1st, and 6 0 level spells plus maybe some domain spells.   They might not be worth the four 9th level slots, not only are they definately worth something but its debatable whether 4 9th level arcane spells are worth that much more than (for example) 5 Heals, 5 True Seeing, 5 Greater Magic Weapon and a long list of other clerical magic.   Moreover, compared to the single class Wizard you are gaining 2 cleric domain powers which can be non-trivial (Luck for example, or improved caster level), improved weapon access, improved armor access, improved saving throws, a limited ability to turn undead, and much greater independence since you can cure yourself.



> That's a total of 6 extra high-power slots for the single-classed caster (7 if a Clr 20), and in general, higher level spell slots are worth more than lower level spell slots.




Yeah, but how much more?  You are gaining 36+ other spell slots in return, plus some minor abilities.  Surely that counts for something?



> Lower caster level hurts the MT in two ways: Spell resistance checks and spell effects. The MT will have a harder time penetrating SR when he blasts foes with evocations, meaning more of his spells are wasted.




First, blasting foes with evocations is in general a waste of a perfectly good spell in 3rd edition, especially against targets that are worth using spells on, especially at higher levels when lots of things are going to have damage resistance and evasion and the alternative is casting a 'save or die' spell.

Second, I have a feat that allows your caster level to be equal to your character level that was designed to let fighter types splash a few levels of a spell casting class.   You don't get more spells per day, but you do get better at using the ones you know. 



> For, say, healing spells (starting at Cure Crit), he's doing 5 HP less healing per person per casting. That really adds up when your party members are in the 150-200 max HP range.




Sure, but while his heal spell only cures 150 h.p. instead of 200 h.p., he's got 4 extra 6th level arcane spells - Antimagic fields or Greater Dispellings or Circles of Death or Disentigrate or whatever your favorite spell is.



> Not to mention MSD that the MT suffers from...the single-classed character can afford to pump their casting stat as high as possible, while the MT has to push BOTH Int and Wis up to 18 by 20th level.  That's not a big deal if you managed to roll two 18s on your 4d6DL, but if you're using point buy, you'll run into problems.




Agreed and I think that that is probably the biggest drawback to multiclassing between classes with different attribute needs, but then again, you can't have everything.  It's not so much that you can't pump both WIS and INT up to 18th by 20th level using point buy, but that you can't focus all your ability advances into pumping _one_ up to 22 or so, and you'll probably have to sacrifice more in your other attributes.   But while the multi-classed Cleric/Wizard might not be quite as twinked out as a single class character built by a min/maxer, the MT make it at least viable.   It might not be the most powerful character in the party, but it would certainly contribute alot given the number of spells it could cast per day.  A pure cleric10/wizard10 though _is just not viable in a high level campaign at all_.


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2005)

Wow... the mystic theurge debate again.

Well first off, I'll say to both sides that it does you no good to just NOT MENTION the points that the other side has. There are points that play in the MT's favor, and some that play against it.

Obviously, weakened overall caster level, lower "highest" spell level, MDS, and steep entry costs play against it.

OTOH, having double the magic progression of a core class (two spellcaster levels per character level) is a significant boon, even if those levels are not sequential. Especially if you factor in that the character can choose their spells in a complementary fashion between the two classes to maximize their impact on the game and minimize the chance that they don't have a spell pertinent to whatever situation that pops up in the game.

Certainly, the MT is not a first class combat mage, but it is a first class utility mage. As many base arguments of wizards being overpowered on the utility aspect, I think you would be remiss to ignore this aspect.

IMO, the MT is weak at low levels when it is still trying to catch up with the deficit it incurred qualifying for the class. By high levels, though, I think that its broad utility can make it a bit of a spotlight hog. And spotlog hog-ness is, to me, a quintessential measure of balance.


----------



## Gidien (Jun 2, 2005)

Mystic Theruge and Eldritch Knight... I can't believe anything so flavorless qualifies as a prestige class. I also lean towards believing that these are unbalanced, despite many good arguments on the boards to the contrary. Honestly when the MT was put up on Wizard's site I hoped and prayed it was an April Fool's joke.

Worse than any balance issues in my opinion is that these classes allow one player to fill in two slots, which might be okay in a small party, but what happens to the player of the wizard who is overshadowed by the MT player who is dishing out healing and holy words on top of arcane magic? Takes some potential fun from the game IMHO.

PrCs should give unique abilities that can't be attained otherwise, not just number boosts and caster levels.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 2, 2005)

Really should be a none option....

While they're are certainly some that I wouldn't want to play. I wouldn't have a problem with any of them in my game. Some might have require a minor flavor tweak, like Red Wizard would tagged as a member of a specific organization in my world. And if a player was going to pick up Arcane Archer, I'd certainly make sure they understood the stacking rules for magic arrows and magic bows. 

Beyond that, they're all acceptable. Some are bland, some I don't like the flavor of, but none do I have an issue with to the point of not wanting in my game.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 2, 2005)

Wombat said:
			
		

> No Dragon Disciples (as no half-dragons) and no Horizon Walkers (absolutely no plane-hopping in my campaigns, ever).
> 
> Pretty simple.



 You do realize the Horizon Walker has 5 levels of non-plane-hopping, right? Just levels 6-10 (or stick with the non-planar terrain masteries).

Personally, I'd rewrite the Arcane Archer and the Arcane Trickster.


----------



## Ace (Jun 2, 2005)

Greylock said:
			
		

> I am astounded that the Horizon Walker is so high on this list. Many find it a fairly weak PrC, but I've always thought it very flavorful.




As am I -- it is also really easy to fix if you don't have planar travel in your game -- just make it a 5 level class and disallow the Planar terrains -- easy peasy

of course someone just said this before me -- mea culpa and DOH!

However as far as autoban -- in general I don't like any of the Evil classes for PC's -- The rest are "meh" except the Horizon Walker which I like


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 2, 2005)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> I have left the "None" option out of the poll on purpose: the aim of this poll is to see which PrCl from the DMG gets more "thumbs down", then I'll put up another poll for another book and then again, and at the end there will be a final match to elect the "loser of the losers"




I demand the right to post on all polls whether or not my oppinion matters.


----------



## Greylock (Jun 3, 2005)

Psion said:
			
		

> Lots of folks don't do forays into the planes frequently enough to justify a class.




There's no reason why a HW would have to be a plane tripper. The DMG allows the HW to continue and take non-planar terrains after 5th level. I think it's a neat and very flavorful PrC, and one that I am itching for the right game for. No Feats, no combat tricks, no spells, no supernatural abilities. Just a classic explorer/adventurer. It's almost a Dan'l Boone, Marco Polo, Cap'n Cook type char concept.

It just bothers me to see it dismissed out of hand, and lumped in with Uber-PrCs.


----------



## Bront (Jun 3, 2005)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Assassin, Blackguard, and Red Wizard. No Evil games for me, thanks.



Ditto


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 3, 2005)

Gidien said:
			
		

> Worse than any balance issues in my opinion is that these classes allow one player to fill in two slots, which might be okay in a small party, but what happens to the player of the wizard who is overshadowed by the MT player who is dishing out healing and holy words on top of arcane magic? Takes some potential fun from the game IMHO.



Oh, I don't know. Probably the fact that the wizard has an entire spell level more spells, isn't wasting actions on divine spells, and is more focussed towards arcane stuff, and therefore (probably) better would do it.

Even when you have both progressions of magic, you're not using divine magic AS WELL AS arcane magic - you only get so many actions per turn, so you're using divine magic instead of arcane magic.

And frankly, arcane magic is far better - otherwise why would clerics get all that stuff (armour, weapons, hitpoints, saves, turning etc) to make up for it?


----------



## Pants (Jun 3, 2005)

I don't really care for the Dragon Disciple (personal reason), Thaumaturge (rules reason), and the Duelist (it sucks).

I pick the Duelist. It just.... sucks.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 3, 2005)

Gidien said:
			
		

> Worse than any balance issues in my opinion is that these classes allow one player to fill in two slots, which might be okay in a small party, but what happens to the player of the wizard who is overshadowed by the MT player who is dishing out healing and holy words on top of arcane magic? Takes some potential fun from the game IMHO.




Let's look at it then.

For the first three levels, the two characters are exactly the same. The Mystic Theurge-to-be (MTTB for short) takes three levels of wizard, and the straight wizard takes three levels of wizard.

For the next three levels, the MTTB takes three levels of cleric, gaining access to 2nd level clerical spells, while the straight wizard takes three levels of wizard, gaining access to third level wizard spells, and is just about ready to get fourth level spells.

The MTTB can now start taking Mystic Thuerge levels. He takes two levels of the PrC, and now, at 8th level, can cast third level spells in his two classes. Exciting! He can cast _fireball_ *and* _cure serious wounds_ (by the way, at 5th level caster ability each, so its only a 5 die _fireball_). Meanwhile, his wizard buddy has been casting the _fireball_ spell for three levels now, and casts an 8 die version. Plus he has been casting 4th level spells since his last level too, so while his MMTB friend can cast _cure serious wounds_, he can cast _stoneskin_, _dimension door_, _ice storm_, and _greater invisibility_. Finally, the straight wizard is one short level away from _5th_ level spell, while the MTTB is going to have to wait until 10th level to get 4th level spells.

Do I need to tell you how this works out at 9th level when the straight wizard can cast 5th level spells, while his MTTB companion is still slinging 3rd level spells as his best option?

I don't think the straight wizard will feel anything but sorry for the pitiable MTTB.


----------



## Romnipotent (Jun 3, 2005)

Red Wizard, because that would mean Im running FR... and that is not something I want to do, ever.

Vermin lord for 3e, and Chameleon for 3.5 non DMG.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 3, 2005)

Romnipotent said:
			
		

> Red Wizard, because that would mean Im running FR... and that is not something I want to do, ever.




This is a sentiment I never get. Sure, you may want to avoid playing the FR setting (I don't use it as anything but something to plunder for ideas), but it is very possible to use stuff _from_ the FR setting with the serial numbers filed off for other settings. Why, exactly, makes it impossible to use the Red Wizard PrC in this manner?


----------



## Bront (Jun 3, 2005)

I find it interesting that flavor is the problem for the DMG PrCs.  They aren't supposed to have specific flavor, they're supposed to be generaly usefull.  Their genericness actualy makes them flexable to let a character add his/her own flavor, or a GM to ad his own flavor.

I've played several 3.5 games, and the first time I ever took a PrC, it was the Elderich Knight, which fit the character I had built and the concept I had envisioned the character.  He later may take a few levels of Arcane Archer, though I'm not sure how many, but again, that fits the character.  Is he perfect? No.  Is he fun to play and flavorful? Yes.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 3, 2005)

* None would enter my campaign*- absolutely none of them. "Prestige class" is a dirty oxymoron. Initially intended for world development they're merely piles of game mechanics best used for a game of "munchkin" than anything D&D. Perhaps dungeon crawls when there's nothing more interesting about your character and you die every session or so. 
These bring no flavor to the game, dilute the archetypes, and provide benefits not commensurate with cost of entry in the least. 
Prestige class are the top thing for 4th edition I want to see burn and die a horrible death never to be used again.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 3, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Prestige class are the top thing for 4th edition I want to see burn and die a horrible death never to be used again.




My best educated guess:

Get used to disappointment.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 3, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> * None *- absolutely none of them. "Prestige class" is a dirty oxymoron. Initially intended for world development they're merely piles of game mechanics best used for a game of "munchkin" than anything D&D.
> These bring no flavor to the game, dilute the archetypes, and provide benefits not commensurate with cost of entry in the least.
> Prestige class are the top thing for 4th edition I want to see burn and die a horrible death never to be used again.



 Um...you know that you just answered "None" to "Which PrC would you NEVER want in your game."

So you just kind of said...all of them.


----------



## Elephant (Jun 3, 2005)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> Well, it might not be perfectly true that having the casting ability of both a 15th level cleric and a 15th level wizard is equal to having the casting ability of a 20th level wizard its roughly true. Certainly we agree that at some point, say having the caster ability of a 19th level cleric and a 19th level wizard and only be a 20th level character would be unbalancing. So what's it going to be?
> <snip>
> Moreover, compared to the single class Wizard you are gaining 2 cleric domain powers which can be non-trivial (Luck for example, or improved caster level), improved weapon access, improved armor access, improved saving throws, a limited ability to turn undead, and much greater independence since you can cure yourself.




That's why the MT is worthwhile. It's not as powerful as a single-classed wizard or cleric, but it's MUCH, MUCH more flexible. There's a definite tradeoff, and I think people look at the dual-spellcasting progression and go "OMG! Overpowered!" without giving it any thought.



> Yeah, but how much more? You are gaining 36+ other spell slots in return, plus some minor abilities. Surely that counts for something?




Lower level spell slots do count for something, but they're not as significant as high-level slots. Again, it's flexibility vs. raw power.



> First, blasting foes with evocations is in general a waste of a perfectly good spell in 3rd edition, especially against targets that are worth using spells on, especially at higher levels when lots of things are going to have damage resistance and evasion and the alternative is casting a 'save or die' spell.




That's a fair argument.  Even so, caster level counts for other things, too.



> Second, I have a feat that allows your caster level to be equal to your character level that was designed to let fighter types splash a few levels of a spell casting class. You don't get more spells per day, but you do get better at using the ones you know.




I wasn't considering the effects of non-core feats or classes...



> Sure, but while his heal spell only cures 150 h.p. instead of 200 h.p., he's got 4 extra 6th level arcane spells - Antimagic fields or Greater Dispellings or Circles of Death or Disentigrate or whatever your favorite spell is.




Heal is maxed out at 150 hp - that's why I didn't use it as an example. I'll note that the MT hits the 150 hp "sweet spot" at least 3 levels later than the pure cleric, however.



> Agreed and I think that that is probably the biggest drawback to multiclassing between classes with different attribute needs, but then again, you can't have everything. It's not so much that you can't pump both WIS and INT up to 18th by 20th level using point buy, but that you can't focus all your ability advances into pumping _one_ up to 22 or so, and you'll probably have to sacrifice more in your other attributes. But while the multi-classed Cleric/Wizard might not be quite as twinked out as a single class character built by a min/maxer, the MT make it at least viable. It might not be the most powerful character in the party, but it would certainly contribute alot given the number of spells it could cast per day. A pure cleric10/wizard10 though _is just not viable in a high level campaign at all_.




Agreed on all points in this paragraph. I suspect we're mostly on the same side of this debate; that is, MT is both acceptable (not bannably overpowering, indeed, somewhat underpowered IMO) and necessary (for doing the Wiz/Clr multiclass combo).


----------



## Li Shenron (Jun 3, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> I demand the right to post on all polls whether or not my oppinion matters.




You can also think of the poll as similar to a reality show: you have to vote and kick one out, you just can't vote "none". And of course your opinion matters! That's why you should post a comment rather than just vote/not-vote.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 3, 2005)

Horizon Walker, mainly because I don't feature much plane-hopping in my games.

I don't have any problems with any of the DMG PrCs, Horizon Walker included, however that  one in particular just doesn't mesh well, so if I had to choose one to boot, that would be my choice.


----------



## Romnipotent (Jun 3, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> This is a sentiment I never get. Sure, you may want to avoid playing the FR setting (I don't use it as anything but something to plunder for ideas), but it is very possible to use stuff _from_ the FR setting with the serial numbers filed off for other settings. Why, exactly, makes it impossible to use the Red Wizard PrC in this manner?



Rename the wizard and remove any reference to Thay, bind it into whatever setting I'm in and I'll use it... But I have this thing against Faerun, and especially the over hyped Thay. They cant even take Rasheman! (spelling is probably wrong)
I also like voting on polls, and of all of them its the only one I could pick. Then I used the only reason I have, "Dont like FR."
Thats all


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 3, 2005)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> You can also think of the poll as similar to a reality show: you have to vote and kick one out, you just can't vote "none". And of course your opinion matters! That's why you should post a comment rather than just vote/not-vote.




Oh, don't worry, as soon as we move beyond the DMG, I'll start up the hatin'.


----------



## Greylock (Jun 3, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Horizon Walker, mainly because I don't feature much plane-hopping in my games.




_*bangs head against wall*_


----------



## cmanos (Jun 3, 2005)

Red Wizard

1) its FR and I HATE all things FR.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 3, 2005)

> Well, if I could think of a way to alter the arcane classes so that they wouldn't need a PrC in order to justify certain multiclassing combos in a non-abusable manner, I'd do it. But so far I've not seen a simple solution to the problem. Making spellcasting a group of skills might do it, but it would require a big alteration of the existing game and likely a magic system so different from what we are used to seeing that it wouldn't feel like D&D to many.




The simplest way I've seen is the feat that gives you +4 caster level. 

Well, admittedly this is a house rule that changes the game in big ways, but I give every creature a "Base Magical Bonus" that functions and advances like a "Base Attack Bonus." This BMB is used to calculate caster level and possible access to spells. Big spellcasting classes get +1/level, bards are closer to +2/3, classes like rangers and paladins are nearer +1/2, and nonmagic classes like fighters and rogues are basically +1/3.

Then there are feats that give some minor spellcasting, kind of like what gnomes get, but with the ability to build on that to higher levels. And there's magic items that make use of it. PrC's that make use of it. Feats that allow supernatural abilities that make use of it. 

It just strikes me as entirely goofy that a wizard can be better at hitting things than a newbie fighter, but even the most experienced fighter won't be better at casting magic than a newbie wizard, despite all the wizards, all the magical items, all the magical creatures, all the supernatural effects, all the wonderous events, that occur to him on a daily basis. 



> The thing is, if I can't think of a better way to do it, and some player decides to play a Wizard/fighter (as opposed to a Fighter/wizard, which I can do), then I'd have to allow a PrC before the concept would be truly viable - and I really don't like PrC's.




Yeah, I don't like the fact that you're forced to do that. I'm a fan of PrC's, but I don't like the fact that a Wizard/Cleric *has* to choose one particular PrC or be useless. There's infinite variation on what a Wizard/Cleric can be. God of magic? Magic as a god itself? Knowledge is divine power? Science giving you the might of gods? But all are subsumed into Mystic Theurges becuase the MT gives you full spellcasting. They should just be able to be a Wiz/Clr without choosing a PrC....not as powerful as a pure Wiz or pure Clr, but still viable.



> So you want magic to be like in Diablo--even Fighters get some magical ability, but they're so crappy at it there's not much point in using it unless they can't do anything else?




More, I want to give everyone another resource to spend, and more ways to spend that resource. Who says fighters shouldn't be able to use that to improve their own fighting ability? Or to make them more diverse in their talents; able to Charm Person or generate a devensive aura, or whatever.


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2005)

Greylock said:
			
		

> There's no reason why a HW would have to be a plane tripper. The DMG allows the HW to continue and take non-planar terrains after 5th level. I think it's a neat and very flavorful PrC, and one that I am itching for the right game for. No Feats, no combat tricks, no spells, no supernatural abilities. Just a classic explorer/adventurer. It's almost a Dan'l Boone, Marco Polo, Cap'n Cook type char concept.




I had thought about mentioning that upthread myself. But that's not the prestige class as-is. It's a tweak.

Heck, I'd like the MT more if you front-loaded it a bit and took a few of their spellcasting levels away and replace them with fixed abilities. (More than like... I made such a class.) But that's not the MT as is.


----------



## Pseudonym (Jun 3, 2005)

I chose Assassin, mainly because I still view it as an occupaton rather than a class.  The same with ninja, but that's for another thread.

I also don't allow Blackguards or Red Wizards since I don't run evil games.  The one blackguardish NPC I created worked better as a straight evil cleric.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 4, 2005)

Greylock said:
			
		

> _*bangs head against wall*_




Yes, I am aware it's not required to take the planar abilities for levels 6-10.  However, some degree of planes hopping is conceptually tied to the class itself, hence Planar Terrain Mastery.

As for the standpoint of "well, you don't have to take planar terrains" - there are 8 non-planar terrain types.  It's a 10 level class.  I'm curious; what do you propose a fully non-planar 10th level Horizon Walker take for their last two abilities?


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jun 4, 2005)

ron-burgundy said:
			
		

>




I think diaglo needs to use this as an avatar.


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jun 4, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Yes, I am aware it's not required to take the planar abilities for levels 6-10.  However, some degree of planes hopping is conceptually tied to the class itself, hence Planar Terrain Mastery.




Planar Terrain Mastery doesn't show that the planes are tied to the class at all -- it shows that you *can't* take *any* planar abilities for the first 5 levels.  It's to make sure you are grounded in non-planar skills (although you can develop those later on, if desired).

As for the remaining levels -- assuming the character gets past level 8, or in deed level 5 -- I'd recommend making more terrain abilities.  Of course some would suggest multiclassing (perhaps back into ranger), but I imagine someone with 8 levels in HW is fairly devoted to the concept.


----------



## Sunderstone (Jun 4, 2005)

They all are fine to me, though some will be used more as NPC adversaries. Out of the list Id have to go with the Red Wizard being that Ive left FR behind in favor of returning to GH.


----------



## Greylock (Jun 4, 2005)

Psion said:
			
		

> I had thought about mentioning that upthread myself. But that's not the prestige class as-is. It's a tweak.




Why is it not the PrC "as-is"? My copy of the DMG says you can take any terrain you want after 5th. And nothing in the PrC says you have to have Plane walked. Some of the planar terrains just give elemental resistances.

As for "No Planar travel in MY campaign", well, it slips in with ease. One of the DMs I play with has told me several times that he "doesn't do" planar stuff. Yet, my char joined the game in a short planar episode. And do these folks who "don't do" planes never have Outsiders, or Celestials, or Abyssal creatures etc etc in the game?


----------



## Sejs (Jun 4, 2005)

Baby and bathwater.

Being able to summon a celestial lion, say, is not the same thing as having galavanting about the multiverse on magical holiday as a significant (if even minorly so) feature of your campaign.

It's like saying a game features half-elves as a player race, therefor it's got to feature warforged, illumians, and raptorians.  I mean, they're all playable races so it's the same thing after all.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 4, 2005)

> Planar Terrain Mastery doesn't show that the planes are tied to the class at all -- it shows that you *can't* take *any* planar abilities for the first 5 levels.




Ya lost me.

So, the class is in fact not tied to the outer planes at all, despite the fact that half of its class abilities are all about mastery of certain types of extraplanar terrain?


----------



## Gez (Jun 4, 2005)

Arcane Archer because they're elves.

Dragon Disciple because bonus spells instead of spellcasting progression annoys me.

Thaumaturgist because I didn't even bothered to read its description.



If I use my house-rules, or if I DM a gestalt game, then I would also out Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight, Mystic Theurge and similar multiclass patches. Otherwise, I'm fine with them.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 4, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Yes, I am aware it's not required to take the planar abilities for levels 6-10.  However, some degree of planes hopping is conceptually tied to the class itself, hence Planar Terrain Mastery.
> 
> As for the standpoint of "well, you don't have to take planar terrains" - there are 8 non-planar terrain types.  It's a 10 level class.  I'm curious; what do you propose a fully non-planar 10th level Horizon Walker take for their last two abilities?



 Since the terrain mastery don't include Artic or Volcanic (for instance), I'd allow a Horizon Walker in a non-planar campaign to take the Cold and Fiery planar terrain masteries, representing those two non-planar extremes. And since fire-subtype and cold-subtype creatures tend to flock to those locations, the bonus to attack them can remain.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 4, 2005)

Blackguard: The game already has bad guys - the champion of evil doesn't sit well with my personal concept of the campaign world.

Red Wizard: Again, this time it's personal, relative to my game world.

Duelist: Ok, *this* one just is soooooooo mechanically weak.  I mean it takes a lot for a class to be so weak that it makes Swashbuckler look like a great alternative.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 4, 2005)

*Has anyone from the "Mystic Theurges are powerful" answered this?*



			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> They are less powerful than a single-classed wizard with the Leadership feat and a cleric cohort (or vice versa). I have never figured out what made people scared of the relatively low power of the Mystic Theurge.




This was about Mystic Theurges, and no one from the "Mystic Theurges are too powerful" side has ever answered it on any thread that I have seen on any messageboard.  Given that MT's need the feat Practiced Spellcaster to up their effective caster level (so none of that "you are a feat behind" argument), if you ban MT's because they are "too powerful", do you also ban the Leadership feat?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 4, 2005)

> So, the class is in fact not tied to the outer planes at all, despite the fact that half of its class abilities are all about mastery of certain types of extraplanar terrain?




By Jove, I think he's got it!

A Horizon Walker who has never traveled more than 10 ft. from his cottage gets access to every kind of terrain mastery anyway. The HW isn't tied to ANY particular environment. 

Furthermore, I see no reason that some of the "planar" terrain masteries don't also apply to perfectly normal material sites. You don't have volcanoes (firey) or the arctic (cold)? You don't have the underground (cavernous)? You don't have areas of great evil, or great good (aligned)? 

None of the requirements for HW say that you have to have traveled anywhere, or that you ever will. The flavor says you try to, and that could be all offscreen (before the character enters the campaign, or after the campaign is over). Heck, it could've been all within 10 ft. (the flavor just says they travel the most dangerous lands, not all dangerous environments). 

You don't need planar travel...or even an adventure in more than a 10 x 10 room...to use any of the HW's abilities. By the RAW.


----------



## Psion (Jun 5, 2005)

Greylock said:
			
		

> Why is it not the PrC "as-is"? My copy of the DMG says you can take any terrain you want after 5th.




But it doesn't say you can't take the planar abilities. As-is, it's a plane-walking PrC.

We could debate meanings all day; it's really largely pointless. Though you may not see it as an implicitly planar PrC, you asked why other people have problems with it, and obviously their perception differs. You can't ask other people what their perceptions are and then argue away their perceptions.


----------



## Aust Diamondew (Jun 5, 2005)

Dragon Disciple, if you want to transform into a half dragon just break down its ECL and gain it point by point (like in savage species).

I also dislike the assassin cause it is based around 1 ability (death attack).
I also dislike the red wizard because for some specializations its awesome but for others it sucks.
But I only voted for dragon disciple because I just can't stand it.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 5, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> My best educated guess:
> Get used to disappointment.




I'm not so sure. Kits died in the transition from 2nd to 3rd so there's hope that "prestige classes" likewise get their ass booted in 4th. 
The only disturbing thing is that kits were much more balanced and flavorful than PrC so the trend would be that things get worse, not better as time goes forward. But that's judging off of a single data point.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 5, 2005)

Particle_Man said:
			
		

> This was about Mystic Theurges, and no one from the "Mystic Theurges are too powerful" side has ever answered it on any thread that I have seen on any messageboard.  Given that MT's need the feat Practiced Spellcaster to up their effective caster level (so none of that "you are a feat behind" argument), if you ban MT's because they are "too powerful", do you also ban the Leadership feat?




Leadership is an optional feat to begin with and your cohort is by no means guaranteed to be your level or even 2 levels lower.  

There are tons of spells that have personal range in the game. 
An MT can merely bring up an anti-life shell and then cast without fear of mellee. 
The wizard with the cleric cohort must use another tactic or use two spells and particular items (spell storing for instance). 
If you are both being threatened by spells, you need 2 spell resistance spells to cover both of you, while the MT needs only one. 
You also need twice the gear, unless you keep your cohort naked of magic items that hurts a lot. The MT needs only one set of gear. 
Even simple things like blinking, dimension door, spectral hand for touch-range spells, require much more effort or higher level magic to approximate with 2 casters rather than the ungodly all-in-one caster. 

Having both arcane and divine magic isn't balanced - it has never been. Not in 2nd edition, not in 3rd. That's why "a level for a level" multiclassing exists.
It's not even particularly well balanced for monsters, let alone PCs.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Jun 5, 2005)

Particle_Man said:
			
		

> Duelist: Ok, *this* one just is soooooooo mechanically weak.  I mean it takes a lot for a class to be so weak that it makes Swashbuckler look like a great alternative.




The bad thing about the Duelist is that they designed the Swashbuckler to be a "feeder" class to it. So instead of one good lightly armored finesse fighting class, you have two half baked ones.

I voted for Red Wizard on the general principle that if your going to have a setting specific element in a core book, it should be Greyhawk based.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Leadership is an optional feat to begin with and your cohort is by no means guaranteed to be your level or even 2 levels lower.
> 
> There are tons of spells that have personal range in the game.
> An MT can merely bring up an anti-life shell and then cast without fear of mellee.
> ...




Edit: I just want to say that tho' I disagree, I appreciate that you at least tried to answer my point.  But look below for my refutation.

The guy with leadership, combined with cohort, is effectively casting spells twice as fast as your MT.  The cohort, having his own chain of feats, can make his own magic items, if it comes down to it.  In addition, they can look out for each other (effectively, twice the hit points).  If one gets taken down, the other can still fight on or get away to get help.

A few parlour tricks with lower level spells being mixed from arcane and divine does not match the higher level devastation of a single classed caster, with cohort.   The sorceror with high chr and a cleric cohort will OWN an MT.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 5, 2005)

Particle_Man said:
			
		

> The guy with leadership, combined with cohort, is effectively casting spells twice as fast as your MT.



No he isn't. If you have more money you can afford items like metamagic rods of quicken.
And at many points it's irrelevant as survival is more important. Whether you cast one spell or 2 is largely irrelevant when the dragon breaths on you and you need protection from energy on, or in the case of the cohort + leader both need it on. 



> The cohort, having his own chain of feats, can make his own magic items, if it comes down to it.



It's still out of your own cash. One way or another you're splitting up resources not the least of which is XP. You're trying to compare groups with disparate XP levels. 



> In addition, they can look out for each other (effectively, twice the hit points).  If one gets taken down, the other can still fight on or get away to get help.



It's not effectively twice the hp if you're targeted with an area-effect.  It likewise doesn't mean anything if you're targeted with a save-or-die - what matters is your save and the MT will have a better save than the single-class characters guaranteed from both multiclassing and better overall gear. 
The MT can do things like contingency:heal, which isn't a parlor trick. 

And the MT can take leadership too you know - and get another MT.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jun 5, 2005)

Red Wizard - too FR for my tastes.

Assassin - well sort of, I renamed it. Assassin (from the Mongoose Power Class series) is a base class in my game, the DMG guys are Arcane Assassins or some such (they are there, but I have never used them...)

Dragon Disciple... not on your life. I don't have half dragons either.

The Auld Grump


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jun 5, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Ya lost me.
> 
> So, the class is in fact not tied to the outer planes at all, despite the fact that half of its class abilities are all about mastery of certain types of extraplanar terrain?




The class has the option, at later levels, to take planar abilities.  The first five levels can't be planar, and the next five may be but need not be.  The majority of horizon walkers won't have any planar abilities at all -- and even those who do will have just a few.  Even the most dedicated plane traveller will only have half of his abilities in planar mastery, and even then only once he's 10th level.

If I was making a character for a game with lots of planar travel I'd ignore the hoison walker as too mundane and Material Plane-based, taking a prestige class from the Manual of the Planes or Planar Handbook instead.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No he isn't. If you have more money you can afford items like metamagic rods of quicken.
> 
> It's still out of your own cash. One way or another you're splitting up resources not the least of which is XP. You're trying to compare groups with disparate XP levels.
> 
> And the MT can take leadership too you know - and get another MT.




I see some of your points, but still think the MT falls behind.  To address the above points, however: Metamagic Rods of Quicken are cheap enough for the Sorceror and Cohort to both have them, by the time the MT leaves "the suck zone".  Now they are still casting spells twice as fast.

Why am I splitting XP?  In 3.5 the cohort doesn't drain XP from the party or the main player, and the cohort can contribute his own XP to his own items.  

The MT can take leadership, but now is falling far behind in feats, since he also had to take practiced spellcaster (probably twice).  If we play the "useful feat game" the MT falls behind.  Also, the arcane single caster can beef up the familiar with feats, if he is so inclined.

I like Contingency:Heal, but there are other arcane Contingencies that can also be either nasty or defensive.  Besides, the cohort cleric can cast shield other on my sorceror.  That is one option the MT doesn't have.

Also, many area of effect spells/etc. have crap for areas.  If the party is reasonably spread out, they won't all get caught.  

And don't forget, the sorceror (or wizard) has ready access to more higher level spells.  Including a whole spell level that the MT doesn't have access to.  So the first spell cast is more likely to be more deadly, and require a higher save DC.  

And speaking of "the suck zone", don't forget that the sorceror is useful up to 6th level, but the 3rd level arcane/ 3rd level divine guy is going to be the spear carrier at that point.  The "suck zone" doesn't go away for quite a while after this, although the feat practiced spellcaster helps a lot.

So I can see how the MT might be slightly below a sorceror or wizard with cleric cohort, given intelligent spell choice by the MT.  But I cannot see it as overpowered.  Far from banning it, I would commend someone who took it for deciding to "take the hit" to his character's power.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 5, 2005)

Maybe the horizon walker can be looked at another way:


Since some of these powers are magical, perhaps some outer planar beings become interested in the HW, and are "Tempting" him into their "home turf" for benign/malign reasons.

So reverse the causality.  Instead of the walker first getting to the outer plane and then getting the power, he is first granted powers, and thus tempted to then travel to the other planes. Like "I have fire resistance?  Hmmm...and there is this mysterious letter saying that there are great magical jewels in the castle of X, in the elemental plane of fire..."

Come to think of it, the terrain powers could work the same way.  "In a dream, you are visited by a goddess who tells you to travel to the Desert of Y and find the lost relic of her son.  You are granted the great gift of not tiring in your sacred task."

Doesn't have to be that way, but just one way to reconcile the powers with the idea of planar/terrain travel.

Personally, I liked the idea of a Ranger (favored enemy dragon)/Horizon Walker (desert as first choice) who FOCUSED on hunting blue dragons (putting the two together).  But that is kinda level 1 HW stuff, so either he has to broaden his interests fast (more HW) or keep up with the ranger stuff (or cheese out a bit with barbarian).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure. Kits died in the transition from 2nd to 3rd so there's hope that "prestige classes" likewise get their ass booted in 4th.




Besides selling copies of the Player's Handbook, what makes the most money for WotC? Selling books that feature new PrCs. They are ahuge cash cow for WotC, and many people really like them, and would want them (more, it seems, than liked kits). So, as I said, my best educated guess: get used to disappontment.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure. Kits died in the transition from 2nd to 3rd so there's hope that "prestige classes" likewise get their ass booted in 4th.




Actually, kits didn't die. They got transformed into an inherently superior version: Prestige Classes. Now there is a mechanical loss (level) for a mechanical benefit (sweet powers). And they don't require you to make a new character to take advantage of them.

In 2e, Red Wizard might've been a Wizard kit. Now, it's a PrC, and it is much more interesting as a PrC than it ever could've been as a kit, because it can contain powerful and unique abilities, an entire menu of them, that can be payed for with more penalties than "Good-aligned creatures are hostile to you, ggrrrr".



> The only disturbing thing is that kits were much more balanced and flavorful than PrC so the trend would be that things get worse, not better as time goes forward. But that's judging off of a single data point.




.....Wow.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No he isn't. If you have more money you can afford items like metamagic rods of quicken.




Saying "the Mystic Theurge can spend thousands of gold pieces on something the single classed caster doesn't need to help make up the difference in their abilities" doesn't really help your argument. All things being equal, the non-MT won't have to drain his cash resources to obtein the same effect that the MT can get by buying expensive theings, and thus will be able to buy _other_ things, or even _the same things_, and end up ahead of the MT.



> [And at many points it's irrelevant as survival is more important. Whether you cast one spell or 2 is largely irrelevant when the dragon breaths on you and you need protection from energy on, or in the case of the cohort + leader both need it on.




And this is a problem because? Are you both likely to get caught in lots of the same AoE spells? I find that parties facing AoE capable opponents tend to spread out and minimize their multiple exposure. Having an extra body is always more helpful than not. 



> It's still out of your own cash.




No, it's not. Effectively, if the cohort has their own item creation capabilities, then you get the items he makes for half the cost you would have otherwise paid.



> One way or another you're splitting up resources not the least of which is XP. You're trying to compare groups with disparate XP levels.




Someone hasn't read the 3.5e rules very well. Go back and brush up on them, then come back with an actual argument.



> It's not effectively twice the hp if you're targeted with an area-effect.




"I can come up with a corner case that usually doesn't make much difference". Gosh, you _are_ convincing.



> It likewise doesn't mean anything if you're targeted with a save-or-die - what matters is your save and the MT will have a better save than the single-class characters guaranteed from both multiclassing and better overall gear.




And the MT has better overall gear because? Oh, right, he's spent several thousand gold on metamagic rods of quicken, so he has lots _less_ money to boost his saves than the single-classed character. Your argument simply doesn't wash.



> The MT can do things like contingency:heal, which isn't a parlor trick.




When he's 14th level. His single classed buddy has been able to cast one or the other of those spells for three levels now. I'm sure he's _very_ impressed that the MT has finally caught up.



> And the MT can take leadership too you know - and get another MT.




Some one who can cast spells _four]_ (or _five_) levels below the ability of the single classed caster. How useful!


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jun 5, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure. Kits died in the transition from 2nd to 3rd so there's hope that "prestige classes" likewise get their ass booted in 4th.
> The only disturbing thing is that kits were much more balanced and flavorful than PrC so the trend would be that things get worse, not better as time goes forward. But that's judging off of a single data point.




*choke*

Are you serious?  In 2E there was so much abuse of kits our DM almost gave up running.  Most of the kits came down to mechanical benefit for "X hates you" and "must wear red" types of 'restrictions'.  Prestige classes are a thousand times better -- and this is my opinion as DM, not player.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 5, 2005)

I never liked the Assassin Death Attack mechanic (and thus never used Assassins as a DM), but after having my Cleric the target of an Assassination attempt (in RttToEE), I can say with authority that Death Attack sucks, and the DMG Assassin is icky.

 -- N


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 5, 2005)

The trouble with Death Attack is that most of your enemies have great Fort saves, and the others are very hard to surprise (the arcane spellcasters have cool spells, and how do you get the drop on a rogue?)  So you are left assassinating bards.  

Plus most monsters have good fort saves and good con besides.

So you have to wait 3 rounds, hope that you are unnoticed, and then get once small chance for an instant kill.

Comparing the 1st ed. assassin, you didn't have to wait 3 rounds, and the chance was about 50% vs. your level, but you really had to plan the assassination (DM judgement).

And I think Diaglo can back up that originally Assassins were neutral, not evil.  Basically, mercenaries.

All that said, I like the idea of assassins as a DM.  They make good "sneaky" bad guys.  Playing one, though...


----------



## Nifft (Jun 5, 2005)

The _idea_ of assassins is a good one. Yes. No conflict there.

The _implementation_ of the DMG Assassin(tm) PrC is a bad one. That's all I'm sayin'.

 -- N


----------



## mmoran5554 (Jun 5, 2005)

I hate Dragon Disciples!  they are way too powerful.  they get way too many ability increases.  plus, most people don't even care about the dragon they learn from.  most people just take the class for the power and have no devotion to helping their favored dragons.  it's so stupid and unnecessary in D&D.  there are many prestige classes in the Dracominicon book that make more sense, less powerful, and more balanced out.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jun 5, 2005)

I've always felt that there's exactly *two* requirements for good prestige class design:

That the class is mechanically balanced for the standard game described by the rules.
That the prerequisites for and the abilities granted by the class make thematic sense together.
As far as I'm concerned, that's it. Now, I voted against the arcane archer because I don't think it's very interesting and because elves are accorded too much of the "coolness" of D&D - even though I don't think the class is cool, it seems to me that a character who fires spells from his bow is intended to be "cooler" than a warrior who's really good at holding the line _a la_ dwarven defender.

(I blame Tolkien. Jerk.)

From a mechanical standpoint, though, there's nothing wrong with the class. It's fairly well-balanced and its abilities make sense as a package.

When people talk about "bad" prestige classes, they are in my experience talking about them being bad for two reasons:

They're not balanced.
They're stupid.
In the first case, some players and DMs don't realise that Wizards of the Coast has to write to their standards of mechanical balance for the *core game*. Too often you can see DMs complaining that X and Y prestige classes are "completely broken", which indeed turns out to be the case - once considered in the light of Z changes the DM has made to the game, which completely shifts the grounds of play! Wizards of the Coast *has* published prestige classes which are unbalanced in the default game - they're not perfect. Their *actual* strike rate in such circumstances, though, is very different to the one attributed to them by DMs online and in geek conversations around the world, many of whom either fail to grasp what the actual default game balance is or who have made changes to that balance without considering the consequences.

In the second case, it's an obvious fact that people have different tastes. About the only objective criterion which can be applied to the question of how appropriate a given prestige class is for the game on "flavour" grounds is this: whether or not the class in question appeals to a reasonable proportion of players of the game *who are likely to buy the book in which it appears*. That last clause is bolded because it's crucial: the context in which a prestige class appears can and does make a difference.

Take a much-maligned example: the Green Star adept prestige class from _Complete Arcane_. Arguments about mechanical balance aside, I've seen dozens of players and DMs denigrate the class for its "weirdness" - and while said weirdness has eminently defensible roots in the weird fantasy fiction of authors like Clark Ashton Smith and Robert E. Howard, it's arguably true that the Green Star adept found its way into _Complete Arcane_ simply because it's a spellcaster class - and that it might have found a more receptive audience if its creator had been assigned to write a few prestige classes for, say, a book on constructs, or a book more explicitly inspired by such weird fantasy fiction than by the pseudo-Tolkien default flavour of Dungeons and Dragons. In other words, the "weirdness" of the Green Star adept is arguably appropriate to D&D - considering that Gary Gygax himself prefers such sources to Tolkien - but it was not *necessarily* appropriate for inclusion in _Complete Arcane_, given that the _Complete_ series is intended to appeal to as many players as possible and therefore arguably cannot afford to stray too far from the default flavour of D&D, as a book like _Heroes of Horror_ arguably can.

In essence, my point is this: many of the objections raised against prestige classes are short-sighted, and many of the genuine problems with them are not generally recognised in audience discussion. Personally, I love prestige classes, and favour a multiplicity of applications for them beyond the _Dungeon Master's Guide_'s suggestion that they be used to mechanically distinguish in-game organisations that characters (or their enemies) might like to join. To my mind, they can be more than that - they don't even have to have a recognisable impact detectable by characters in the gameworld, existing instead as a purely metagame construct to facilitate a character concept. But then, that's one extreme of a continuum of which the other end is the _Dungeon Master's Guide_ default, and I imagine that most players and DMs occupy points elsewhere on that continuum.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 5, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Now there is a mechanical loss (level) for a mechanical benefit (sweet powers).



Un-huh.  Lemme see what I need to "lose" mechanically to enter, oh I don't know, the assassin "prestige class". Um, I need Disguise 4 ranks, Hide 8 ranks, Move Silently 8 ranks.
[Sarcasm]
Oh man I feel the * pain * of my *  sacrifice  *. 
[/Sarcasm]



> And they don't require you to make a new character to take advantage of them.



[Sarcasm]
I'm sure with every spiffy new book that WOTC puts out with ever more power-creep that you have a PC just waiting in-line with the exact requirements necessary to meet the new PrC. 
[/Sarcasm]
Please. It's blatant intellectual dishonesty to claim these require _ no modification of existing characters _. 




> In 2e, Red Wizard might've been a Wizard kit. Now, it's a PrC, and it is much more interesting as a PrC than it ever could've been as a kit, because it can contain powerful and unique abilities, an entire menu of them, that can be payed for with more penalties than "Good-aligned creatures are hostile to you, ggrrrr".



You're right. Now it's "you must be an archer to qualify for this archery PrC, ggrrrr".


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 5, 2005)

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> *choke*
> Are you serious?  In 2E there was so much abuse of kits our DM almost gave up running.



But has no problems running with 5 levels of redwizard, 5 levels of archamge, 1 level of the arcane order or other blah/blech/blue/blam "builds" that can hit ACs of 229 or caster levels into the 50's? 
Sounds like he needs medication. 



> Most of the kits came down to mechanical benefit for "X hates you" and "must wear red" types of 'restrictions'.  Prestige classes are a thousand times better -- and this is my opinion as DM, not player.



Yeah and most Prestige classes come down to mechanical benefits for something you were doing already - like being an archer - oh look you need to take archery feats?!?! The PAIN. Someone make it stop!... 
Anyhow my opinion as a DM is Prestige classes are by far the most broken ridiculous nonsense that is as someone has pointed out: a cash cow for the masses. The simple fact that you can stack levels of X and Y and Z gives you 100 time the abuse potential of a kit. Plain and simple. More option = more ways to break the game in more ways. 
I've never seen a broken kit. I've seen 1 trillion damage hulking hurlers though. 

I ran a game of munchkin once - and guess what? No one used the munchkin rules. They brought only "legitimate expansion rules" as their munchkin character. Sign of the times.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 5, 2005)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> When people talk about "bad" prestige classes, they are in my experience talking about them being bad for two reasons:
> 
> They're not balanced.
> They're stupid.




To add to your experience:



3. They're inflexible.
4. They don't scale well.

Those are my two biggest pet peeves. They are combined in the typical PrC cop-out -- "do cool thing 1/day, DC=fixed number".

 -- N


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> The only disturbing thing is that kits were much more balanced and flavorful than PrC




You have got to be kidding me.

You are the only person I have ever, ever seen or read who has tried to argue that kits are a "balanced" system.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jun 6, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> You have got to be kidding me.
> 
> You are the only person I have ever, ever seen or read who has tried to argue that kits are a "balanced" system.




I fear he means it.


----------



## BullMarkOne (Jun 6, 2005)

*Dragon Disciples = teh suck*

Just say no to half-dragons!


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> You have got to be kidding me.
> You are the only person I have ever, ever seen or read who has tried to argue that kits are a "balanced" system.



Compared to the oxymoron "prestige classes" they're orders and orders and orders of magnitude better.
PrC are the godzilla's of imbalance. Never before have characters managed 10 trillion damage per hit for instance (hulking hurler).


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Saying "the Mystic Theurge can spend thousands of gold pieces on something the single classed caster doesn't need to help make up the difference in their abilities" doesn't really help your argument.



It does when the single class + cohort can't afford enough gear to adventure properly. 



> All things being equal, the non-MT won't have to drain his cash resources to obtein the same effect that the MT can get by buying expensive theings, and thus will be able to buy _other_ things, or even _the same things_, and end up ahead of the MT.



This makes no sense. The PC + cohort needs to have 2 sets of gear. Get it? 2. The number 2. It's twice as much as 1. You cannot get more out of less. Ok? If you want your cohort to survive he's going to need things like armor, weapons, cloaks of resistance, luckstones, and so forth. Unless you like raising him a lot. That or your own gear is much weaker. 




> And this is a problem because? Are you both likely to get caught in lots of the same AoE spells? I find that parties facing AoE capable opponents tend to spread out and minimize their multiple exposure. Having an extra body is always more helpful than not.



I find area of effect spells tend to hit large numbers of the party. That's why AoE spells and effects are actually useful, that's their point. Get it? You use AoE spells because, beleive it or not, you can often manage to hit multiple things with them. Funny that? 
Saying people spread out after being smashed around a bit isn't wrong. Saying that you're never going to get caught by them is. You will. It happens. All the time. Part of the game. 



> No, it's not. Effectively, if the cohort has their own item creation capabilities, then you get the items he makes for half the cost you would have otherwise paid.



Look guy, I don't understand how you're having so many problems with the concept of twice the resource expenditure. You're not getting twice the cash for the same monsters as the lone MT if you're a PC+cohort. 




> Someone hasn't read the 3.5e rules very well. Go back and brush up on them, then come back with an actual argument.



I don't actually _ like _ the 3.5 rules - and I didn't bother to look it up. 




> "I can come up with a corner case that usually doesn't make much difference". Gosh, you _are_ convincing.



Sounds like someone's having trouble coming up with actual arguments... 



> When he's 14th level. His single classed buddy has been able to cast one or the other of those spells for three levels now. I'm sure he's _very_ impressed that the MT has finally caught up.



Depends on how far non-core you go and how high level. You can easily use precocious apprentice to make the level gap 1 and the arcane heirophant or other similarly broken and stackable half-half caster PrC.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I don't actually _ like _ the 3.5 rules - and I didn't bother to look it up.





I'm not sure there's much I can say to this.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Thank you Particle_Man for keeping your head about you, unlike others... 



			
				Particle_Man said:
			
		

> Metamagic Rods of Quicken are cheap enough for the Sorceror and Cohort to both have them, by the time the MT leaves "the suck zone".  Now they are still casting spells twice as fast.



Sorcerors can't use quicken to effect. 
My bad about splitting XP in 3.5. 



> The MT can take leadership, but now is falling far behind in feats, since he also had to take practiced spellcaster (probably twice).  If we play the "useful feat game" the MT falls behind.



No, no he doesn't need to take "practiced spellcaster". He can just stack orange ioun stones. They're unnamed bonuses to caster level, they stack. 



> I like Contingency:Heal, but there are other arcane Contingencies that can also be either nasty or defensive.  Besides, the cohort cleric can cast shield other on my sorceror.  That is one option the MT doesn't have.



It's an option, but keep in mind if  you're both hit by AoE spells and your cohort is likely dead. Regardless the MT can do so many things the others can't it's not even funny. Greater glyphs of warding with arcane spells, contingencies with diving spells, stacking personal range buffs like blink and sanctuary, spectral hand and healing spells or inflict, etc... 



> And don't forget, the sorceror (or wizard) has ready access to more higher level spells.  Including a whole spell level that the MT doesn't have access to.  So the first spell cast is more likely to be more deadly, and require a higher save DC.



That's only true in a certain level range and the MT can always take precocious apprentice to make the gap only 1 level.  



> And speaking of "the suck zone", don't forget that the sorceror is useful up to 6th level, but the 3rd level arcane/ 3rd level divine guy is going to be the spear carrier at that point.  The "suck zone" doesn't go away for quite a while after this, although the feat practiced spellcaster helps a lot.



The 6th level sorceror has how many 3rd level spells? 3 or 4 castable per day? 
Beyond that he's the same as the MT, except he has less 2nd level magic and less variety in his spells. 
Buy a wand of a 3rd level spell.  




> So I can see how the MT might be slightly below a sorceror or wizard with cleric cohort, given intelligent spell choice by the MT.  But I cannot see it as overpowered.  Far from banning it, I would commend someone who took it for deciding to "take the hit" to his character's power.



I don't think 9th/9th spellcasting ability is "taking a hit". 
Or even at level 12 when you've got 6th level magic and the MT (assuming the least broken "build") has 5/5.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I'm not sure there's much I can say to this.




Then don't? 

Confucious says: man who lives in glass house needs to change in basement.
Work on that one for awhile if it's less mystifying then someone disliking 3.5. 
Sigh...


----------



## Nifft (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> 1/ No, no he doesn't need to take "practiced spellcaster". He can just stack orange ioun stones. They're unnamed bonuses to caster level, they stack.
> 
> 2/ That's only true in a certain level range and the MT can always take precocious apprentice to make the gap only 1 level.




1/ Bonuses from the same source do not stack. Even unnamed ones.

2/ That trick does not work. 

 -- N


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> 1/ Bonuses from the same source do not stack. Even unnamed ones.



That only applies to spells by the book. If you really care, use 3.5 crafting rules to make rings, boots or whatever you want with the same property. 



> 2/ That trick does not work.



By the book it does.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Un-huh.  Lemme see what I need to "lose" mechanically to enter, oh I don't know, the assassin "prestige class". Um, I need Disguise 4 ranks, Hide 8 ranks, Move Silently 8 ranks.
> [Sarcasm]
> Oh man I feel the * pain * of my *  sacrifice  *.
> [/Sarcasm]




You also lose the ability to take say, rogue levels, and the benefits that accrue from taking those levels instead of the assassin prestige class. Specifically, you lose 4 skill points per level, and the ability to take as many nifty high level rogue special abilities, and (for what it's worth) advancement of your trap sense.

It's called opportunity cost. Look it up.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> You also lose the ability to take say, rogue levels, and the benefits that accrue from taking those levels instead of the assassin prestige class. Specifically, you lose 4 skill points per level, and the ability to take as many nifty high level rogue special abilities, and (for what it's worth) advancement of your trap sense.



Oh gosh oh dear oh my! 
I only gain, a death attack, 4 levels of spells, poison use, save bonuses to poison, hide in plain sight. And I can take a level of rogue at any point? How will I cope? 



> It's called opportunity cost. Look it up.



No, that's trying to justify the blatantly _ wrong _. If even for 1 second you think PrC are _ not blatant powerups _ then you've spent that second as a wasted second of your life. 

I'm ok with people enjoying blatant powerups, it can be fun. I am nothing but irritated by how people _ would even try to claim them different _. It's called * intellectual dishonesty *. Look it up.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jun 6, 2005)

Nifft said:
			
		

> To add to your experience:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The first isn't a downside - prestige classes are *supposed* to be specialised. If you mean it in a more metagame sense, well . . . I encourage all DMs to modify prestige classes as they see fit, but I'm not sure that a good DM needs the encouragement.

As for scaling well, that's a balance issue. Like I said, Wizards *have* produced poor prestige classes.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> It does when the single class + cohort can't afford enough gear to adventure properly.




Your math simply doesn't add up, because you don't understand the rules of the game.



> _This makes no sense. The PC + cohort needs to have 2 sets of gear. Get it? 2. The number 2. It's twice as much as 1. You cannot get more out of less. Ok? If you want your cohort to survive he's going to need things like armor, weapons, cloaks of resistance, luckstones, and so forth. Unless you like raising him a lot. That or your own gear is much weaker._





Or you use your double ability to craft items to make up the difference. Oh wait, that requires you to understand the rules, which you don't.

_



			I find area of effect spells tend to hit large numbers of the party.
		
Click to expand...


_
Then your party is comprised of pretty dumb people. QED.

_



			That's why AoE spells and effects are actually useful, that's their point. Get it? You use AoE spells because, beleive it or not, you can often manage to hit multiple things with them. Funny that?
		
Click to expand...


_
Funny, smart players rarely give their opponents the opportunity to do it. So it's not much benefit. Plus, given the way magic items scale, a pair of _cloaks of resistance +3_ cost about the same as the same as a single _cloak of resistance +4_. Add in the double crafting capability, and the cost of two _cloaks of resistance +4_ is actually _less_ for the single classed caster plus his cohort.

_



			Saying people spread out after being smashed around a bit isn't wrong. Saying that you're never going to get caught by them is. You will. It happens. All the time. Part of the game.
		
Click to expand...


_
Minor part, and one that does little to diminish the value of a cohort. 

_



			Look guy, I don't understand how you're having so many problems with the concept of twice the resource expenditure. You're not getting twice the cash for the same monsters as the lone MT if you're a PC+cohort.
		
Click to expand...


_
Read the crafting rules sometime. You will find them illuminating.

_



			I don't actually  like  the 3.5 rules - and I didn't bother to look it up.
		
Click to expand...


_
In which case you have no business getting into a rules discussion concerning the _rules_. That's why your argument sound so stupid, you don't know what you are talking about.



> _Sounds like someone's having trouble coming up with actual arguments..._





If you had an argument concerning the _rules_ that made sense, there would be a response to it. You don't.



> _Depends on how far non-core you go and how high level. You can easily use precocious apprentice to make the level gap 1 and the arcane heirophant or other similarly broken and stackable half-half caster PrC._





Except we aren't talking about non-core right now. Plus, if you actually _understood_ the MT class and the cohort rules, you'd realize how big the caster level gap is.

Take a single classed wizard. He's, say, 11th level, able to cast 6th level spells. He has a cleric cohort, who it turns out _by the rules_ (see page 106 of the 3.5 DMG) can be no more than 9th level, and thus able to cast 5th level spells.

Now, take your MT. Let's say he went to MT as fast as he could, and is a 3rd level wizard, 3rd level cleric, and 5th level MT. Neat. He is an 8th level caster as a wizard, and an 8th level caster as a cleric, meaning he can cast 4th level spells in each. Not so nifty. He is a lower level caster than his single classed companions cohort.

"*But*", the MT schemes, "I'll take leadership too, and get a MT cohort and show my wizard friend who's boss." Not quite. His cohort can be at most 9th level, and thus could be, at most, a 3rd level wizard, 3rd level cleric, 3rd level MT. _His_ caster level is a measly 6th level. He can cast 3rd level spells.

Putting the cohort three castable spells levels behind the single classed character. Two behind the single classed character's cohort. Not much use when it comes to dealing with CR 11 opponents.

You see. The math makes your "MT cohort strategy" pretty silly.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 6, 2005)

> Oh gosh oh dear oh my!
> I only gain, a death attack, 4 levels of spells, poison use, save bonuses to poison, hide in plain sight. And I can take a level of rogue at any point? How will I cope?




You have, in a normal game, 20 levels or less to spend before the game resets. For every level you spend doing something, it costs you the ability to do something else. In exchange for high-level rogue superpowers, you gain spells that your wizard friend can already cast, save bonuses to poison that your fighter buddy doesn't need, a death attack that the cleric is better at doing through magic, and a hide in plain sight wich is piddly in comparison to invisibility.

Congrats. You now can do things that everybody else in the party could do worse than anybody else in the party could do it. This is power? This is horrendous might? This is out-of-control-might-mongering? ESPECIALLY compared to the "I'm an elf so I win!" kits?!



> No, it's called trying to justify the blatantly wrong . If even for 1 second you think PrC are not blatant powerups then you've spent that is a wasted second of your life.
> 
> I'm ok with people enjoying blatant powerups, it can be fun. I am nothing but irritated by how people would even try to claim them different . It's called intellectual dishonesty . Look it up.




I have ten dollars. I can spend it on many different things: a night at the movies, some gas for my car, save it for rent, buy two old 2e pdfs, etc. No matter what I spend it on, I have more than I had before I had that ten dollars, but spending it on one thing makes me unable to spend it on something else.

3.5e gives you levels. You can spend it on many different things: PrC's, advancing your base class, multiclassing, bloodline levels, powerful races, etc. No matter what you spend it on, you have more than you had before you had that level, but spending it on one thing makes you unable to spend it on something else.

If you'd like to compare it to kits, in 2e, it was like trying to give you a new dollar and take four quarters, but effectively it just gave you a free dollar, because it never really took four quarters.

I'm not sure by what criteria you determine blatantly wrong or intellectually dishonest, but it seems that kits tried to give you something for nothing, while PrC's give you something for the price of a level, which is a rescource that most campaigns don't have in much abundance.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 6, 2005)

If you don't like 3.5 rules, why are you talking about the Mystic Theurge at all?  They don't even exist in the 3.0 rules.

I also find it suspicious when a prestige class *requires* certain items to be on par with other classes.  If you need such specific items as orange ioun stones and rods of metamagic (quicken) to function on anything close to par (or in your terms, be overpowered), then I think that an easier solution would be to ban orange ioun stones and rods of metamagic quicken than to ban Mystic Theurges.  If you think MT's are too powerful, that is.  And note that you cannot make rods of metamagic before 12th level, so you are relying on your DM to be generous to let you buy one or find one.  Not every DM has "Ye Olde Magic Item Supermarket".

As to prestige classes in general, I would say that some PrCl's are more prestigious than others.  The assassin is relatively easy to get into (if your DM allows evil characters at all) and gets the death attack, but it is a one-trick pony feature that usually doesn't work (hard to set up, and fort saves are the easiest saves to make for monsters, and characters with low fort saves tend to have anti-assassin measures built into the class (rogue uncanny dodge, wizard/sorceror spells, etc.)).  The Fochluhan Lyricist, on the other hand gets lots of goodies, but it requires 3 different base classes and lots of levels before you can get into it.  So some of the "power ups" seem relative to how easy it is to enter the class.

As I recall, 2nd ed. kits allowed advantages without serious disadvantages.  Elf kits were the worst abusers of this.  Prestige Classes are agreed by almost everyone to be more balanced than 2nd edition kits.  The few strange loopholes (hulking hurler being one) can be quickly eliminated by a slight wording change in one of the class's abilities.  That is not endemic of a serious problem with prestige classes in general.  Even Assassin has some limits.  If I want a Rogue/Assassin, I am good to go.  If I want a Swashbuckler/Assassin or Warlock/Assassin or Hexblade/Assassin, then I got problems because those classes don't have the right skill-set.  So I already would have to plan ahead to multi-class into a class with the right skill-set, just to get into the assassin class.  With 2nd ed. kits, you are good to go from 1st level.

Oh, another advantage of the Wizard/Soreror + Cleric Cohort: twice as many feats, for twice the amount of items that can be created, or other goodies.

Another problem: your Mystic Theurge takes longer to set up his combos.  That slow down is going to, well, slow him down, relative to the rest of the party.  By the time he is set up, the 20th level Wizard has already done his Time Stop and destroyed the BBEG, and then had tea with his cleric cohort.

Personally, I think that the problem with prestige classes is that people forget that they are there for the DM.  The DM decides which one's would fit his world, for roleplay reasons.  A few "multi-class utility" prestige classes are a bit dry, but that is because they are designed to plug a multi-classing hole, and the DM, if he allows them, is expected to add the flavour.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Oh gosh oh dear oh my!
> I only gain, a death attack, 4 levels of spells, poison use, save bonuses to poison, hide in plain sight. And I can take a level of rogue at any point? How will I cope?




You aren't understanding. Every level of assasin is a level of rogue you can't take. You get to be, for example, a 10th level rogue/10th level assassin. He gets to be a 20th level rogue.

You gain those things. He also gains 40 more skill points, three more special abilities, and trap sense +6 (yours caps out at +3).

Death attack is offset by a special ability. As is hide in plain sight. The single classed rogue has one more special ability. The save bonus to poison is offset by the rogure's increased trap sense. The 12 spells per day you can cast (at a maximum caster level of 10th) are offset by the rogue's 40 extra skill points.



> _No, that's trying to justify the blatantly  wrong . If even for 1 second you think PrC are  not blatant powerups  then you've spent that second as a wasted second of your life._





Ah, the rantings of someone who doesn't understand what they are talking about. RtFM one of these days and actually pay attention. You might not sound so ignorant when you yelp.



> _I'm ok with people enjoying blatant powerups, it can be fun. I am nothing but irritated by how people  would even try to claim them different . It's called * intellectual dishonesty *. Look it up._





I believe someone failed their Knowledge check to figure out what the term "opportunity cost" means.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No, no he doesn't need to take "practiced spellcaster". He can just stack orange ioun stones. They're unnamed bonuses to caster level, they stack.




Yes, getting infinite amounts of 30,000 gp items is always easy. Just where do your characters keep their infinite bags of money>



> _It's an option, but keep in mind if  you're both hit by AoE spells and your cohort is likely dead. Regardless the MT can do so many things the others can't it's not even funny. Greater glyphs of warding with arcane spells, contingencies with diving spells, stacking personal range buffs like blink and sanctuary, spectral hand and healing spells or inflict, etc... _






A wizard with a cleric companion is probably less able to survive AoE than his cohort. And all of the "neat tricks" you talk about occur three levels later than just using the spells would for the single classed character. I'm not sure I really care if your 5th+ level character can use _spectral hand_ to deliver _cure_ or [/i]inflict[/i] spells (_inflict_ spells? straight wizard touch attack spells are almost always much better anyway), or if your 14th level character can make a _greater glyph or warding_ with an arcane spell, or pretty much any of the tricks you can do. By the time a MT gets to a caster level, the spells have lost much of their punch, as he is facing more powerful opponents.



> _That's only true in a certain level range and the MT can always take precocious apprentice to make the gap only 1 level._





No, it's pretty much true at all levels. An MT lags at least 1.5 caster levels behind a single classed character. A cohort must always be two levels lower than the character he is attached to. So the cohort lags even further, 3 spells levels or so.



> _The 6th level sorceror has how many 3rd level spells? 3 or 4 castable per day?
> Beyond that he's the same as the MT, except he has less 2nd level magic and less variety in his spells.
> Buy a wand of a 3rd level spell. _





The bag of infinite money again. But this. Buy that. Make up for other character's class abilities by buying things. Money isn't ever infinite, spending it on a wand means you can't spend it on something else.



> _I don't think 9th/9th spellcasting ability is "taking a hit".
> Or even at level 12 when you've got 6th level magic and the MT (assuming the least broken "build") has 5/5._





And your caster level is 9th, and the single classed caster is 12th. Try overcoming spell resistance (which is pretty common at that stage of a campaign) when you are losing three caster levels. Watch your spells get dispelled with ease by your opponents! Fun!

Using the MT, you can never get to 9th/9th level spell casting ability. Perhaps you would know this _if you read the rules_. Combined with other stuff, maybe, but we aren't talking about "other stuff" we are talking about the MT. "The MT class is broken when you add other non-core stuff" isn't an argument that's any better than "the fighter class is broken when you add other non-core stuff".


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Congrats. You now can do things that everybody else in the party could do worse than anybody else in the party could do it. This is power? This is horrendous might? This is out-of-control-might-mongering?



Except you don't need the wizard or the cleric then? They can use their abilities and resources for other things? That's even _ assuming you have either in your party at the ready when you actually * need * the abilities _. Which is of course complete and utter crap. A wizard in the jaws of a behir has better things to do than cast invisibility on you no matter how good it would make your next attack. 
The "you've gained all these abilities but really they're useless" argument is um, lacking, tremendously. 
If you have more abilities -> you have more abilities. And certainly more than a plain frigging rogue. 



> ESPECIALLY compared to the "I'm an elf so I win!" kits?!



Like? Just for fun. Post the write-up of an "I'm an elf so I win!" kit. Just for frigging laughs. 




> 3.5e gives you levels. You can spend it on many different things: PrC's, advancing your base class, multiclassing, bloodline levels, powerful races, etc. No matter what you spend it on, you have more than you had before you had that level, but spending it on one thing makes you unable to spend it on something else.



Er.. no. The assumption you're making is all options are equal - and they aren't. That's the whole crux of the matter - the prestige class option is _ better _ than the other options, 95% of the time.
That's this whole "balance" concept? 

The four quarters analogy fails utterly because Prestige class give more than they take - plain and simple. And you can take multiple ones, unlike kits. The price of flexibility is something you've utterly failed to take into account and flexibility is power - real power.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Except you don't need the wizard or the cleric then?




Because in extremely limited circumstances you can do what they can do too?



> _They can use their abilities and resources for other things? That's even  assuming you have either in your party at the ready when you actually * need * the abilities . Which is of course complete and utter crap. A wizard in the jaws of a behir has better things to do than cast invisibility on you no matter how good it would make your next attack._





And that would be just as true if you were a single classed rogue instead of a rogue/assassin.



> _The "you've gained all these abilities but really they're useless" argument is um, lacking, tremendously.
> If you have more abilities -> you have more abilities. And certainly more than a plain frigging rogue._





I believe someone hasn't really compared his options. An assassin has about the same number of options as a single classed rogue. Different options to be sure, but anout the same array, and at about the same power level.



> _Er.. no. The assumption you're making is all options are equal - and they aren't. That's the whole crux of the matter - the prestige class option is  better  than the other options, 95% of the time.
> That's this whole "balance" concept?_





Except they aren't "better 95% of the time". In the case you are arguing _right now_ the assassin's abilities compare relatively similarly to a single classed rogue with total class levels equal to an assassin of the same total class levels.



> _The four quarters analogy fails utterly because Prestige class give more than they take - plain and simple. And you can take multiple ones, unlike kits. The price of flexibility is something you've utterly failed to take into account and flexibility is power - real power._





Some prestige classes give more than they take. We aren't talking about those PrCs right now, We are talking about the DMG PrCs, which don't, when you actaully look at what you'd give up to get those nifty PrC powers.

And taking mutiple PrCs usually doesn't end up with any more overall power than just taking one, or none. You clearly haven't paid attention to the actual rules as written in the core books, or you'd have noticed this.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Compared to the oxymoron "prestige classes" they're orders and orders and orders of magnitude better.
> PrC are the godzilla's of imbalance. Never before have characters managed 10 trillion damage per hit for instance (hulking hurler).




Just so you know - Hulking hurler is possible without PrCs. In fact the only necessary component is the rule from complete warrior that tells you how to work out the damage from an improvised weapon, because it makes weapon damage scale exponentially with carry capacity.

If you remove that rule, and replace it with, say, simply scaling a club to the appropriate size, all is well again.

As for the "I'm an elf, so I win" kits? I think it's probably called bladesinger.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Or you use your double ability to craft items to make up the difference. Oh wait, that requires you to understand the rules, which you don't.



Here's your argument in a nutshell Storm Raven: 
The caster and cohort need to equip each other with twice (2) the gear. 
They both take crafting feats to get discounts on their money for XP. 
They're not lower level, ever, for doing this so maintain their caster level advantage. 
The MT never takes a crafting feat, doesn't happen to get scribe scroll for free, and is all and all a complete and utter moron. 
Do you see any glaring mistakes here Storm Raven? Hmm...? None? 



> Then your party is comprised of pretty dumb people. QED.



No it's just the monsters are smart. Weird isn't it? Smart monsters and all?   




> Plus, given the way magic items scale, a pair of _cloaks of resistance +3_ cost about the same as the same as a single _cloak of resistance +4_. Add in the double crafting capability, and the cost of two _cloaks of resistance +4_ is actually _less_ for the single classed caster plus his cohort.



Let's see, just because you deserve it. I craft a cloak +4. He crafts a cloak +4. We spend as much as a cloak +4. We lose XP. It is somehow, by Storm Raven logic alone, _ actually less cost _ for the single class caster and his cohort. 1+1 = X where X is <2.
Yes.... it's all becomes clear after the mushrooms... all da funny num'bhers... 



> Read the crafting rules sometime. You will find them illuminating.



Oh that comment's hilarious. 





> Take a single classed wizard. He's, say, 11th level, able to cast 6th level spells. He has a cleric cohort, who it turns out _by the rules_ (see page 106 of the 3.5 DMG) can be no more than 9th level, and thus able to cast 5th level spells.



Or we could choose the level out of every two where the gap isn't so big. 
Like say 12th level.
Then you've got an MT with 5th/5th and his cohort with 4th/4th versus your 6th/5th. 
* GET IT? It's not  too hard  *


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Yes, getting infinite amounts of 30,000 gp items is always easy.



No. All he needs is 3 of them to negate any caster level gap. At best. 



> By the time a MT gets to a caster level, the spells have lost much of their punch, as he is facing more powerful opponents.



You know little about the game system or the spell system by saying that. Your wizard isn't only powerful because of his most powerful spell - he's powerful because of all the lower-level magic he can also cast. A flesh to stone spell is better than a polymorph other (or baleful for 3.5). But often a polymorph spell works quite well enough. Flesh to stone is better because it has larger scope. If you have more lower-level spells you have larger scope in your repertoire. 
Likewise his magic isn't "outdated" all the time. There are many cross-over spells that are in both arcane and divine classes but at different levels. An MT _ will _ be able to plane-shift earlier than a single classed wizard. When the wizard gets lesser planar binding the MT has lesser planar ally. Same for true seeing and a host of other imminently useful and powerful spells. Go read your book.  




> And your caster level is 9th, and the single classed caster is 12th. Try overcoming spell resistance (which is pretty common at that stage of a campaign) when you are losing three caster levels. Watch your spells get dispelled with ease by your opponents! Fun!



Puh-lease. I can cope with 15%  more dispelled spells when I have 2x the raw number. 
That's just a caster level argument. You don't have anything left to offer. 



> Using the MT, you can never get to 9th/9th level spell casting ability. Perhaps you would know this _if you read the rules_. Combined with other stuff, maybe, but we aren't talking about "other stuff" we are talking about the MT. "The MT class is broken when you add other non-core stuff" isn't an argument that's any better than "the fighter class is broken when you add other non-core stuff".



Oh I get it. The MT isn't broken because it's supposed to "stop" at level 10? I guess you had better go tell the designers that. They've taken a completely different tangent my friend... Seems like you were wrong.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> And that would be just as true if you were a single classed rogue instead of a rogue/assassin.



Because a single classed rogue can cast modify memory? and hide in plain sight and do a death attack? Really? 
This is getting old real fast. 



> I believe someone hasn't really compared his options. An assassin has about the same number of options as a single classed rogue. Different options to be sure, but anout the same array, and * at about the same power level. *



Nice hollistic grades you're giving out there. Bolded part is um completely wrong. Actually the whole text is but the bolded part moreso. 




> Some prestige classes give more than they take.
> *snip*
> And taking mutiple PrCs usually doesn't end up with any more overall power than just taking one, or none.



Oh boy. 1+1 strikes again. I'm tired of this "debate".


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Here's your pathetic little argument in a nutshell Storm Raven:
> The caster and cohort need to equip each other with twice (2) the gear.
> They both take crafting feats to get discounts on their money for XP.
> They're not lower level, ever, for doing this so maintain their caster level advantage.
> ...




In general, the XP hit from crafting is small enough that it will never make a difference to total character level. And it will never make a whit of difference to the _cohort_ (that would be the RtFM part). Perhaps if you _knew_ the rules you are arguing about, you might be able to come up with a cogent argument.

Plus, the cohort has a whole array of feat slots he can use, to take item crafting feats so the single classed caster and cohort can craft a _wider array_ of items than the single classed caster, meaning you can get the crafting discount in cash on a more significant  number of your items.



> _No it's just the monsters are smart. Weird isn't it? Smart monsters and all?_





It sounds like you have dumb players, who don't know how to deal with their opponents effectively.



> _Let's see, just because you deserve it. I craft a cloak +4. He crafts a cloak +4. We spend as much as a cloak +4. We lose XP. It is somehow, by Storm Raven logic alone,  actually less cost  for the single class caster and his cohort. 1+1 = X where X is <2.
> Yes.... it's all becomes clear after the mushrooms... all da funny num'bhers... _





And the cohort crafts a cloak +4, and it effectively doesn't cost him any experience points. And given that the single MT character, at say, 12th level, has 4 feats to spend, while the single classed wizard character plus his cleric cohort has a a combined 7 feats (less one for Leadership), plus two more wizard bonus feats the MT doesn't have, the single classed character and his cohort have access to a greater variety of item crafting feats. The MT may not even have enough feat slots available to take Craft Wondrous Item and be able to craft the cloak to begin with. he certainly won't have that plus Craft Wand, Craft Staff, Craft Magic Arms and Armor, and Brew Potion.



> _Oh that comment's hilarious._





It might be, if your grasp of the rules wasn't so pathetic.



> _Or we could choose the level out of every two where the gap isn't so big.
> Like say 12th level.
> Then you've got an MT with 5th/5th and his cohort with 4th/4th versus your 6th/5th.
> * GET IT? It's not  too hard  *_





And now, you, the MT, have 1 5th level wizard spell, and 1+1 5th level cleric spells. Your single classed wizard friend, however, has 2 6th level spells, and 3 5th level spells.

Your MT cohort has 1 4th level wizard spell, and 1+1 4th level cleric spells. The wizard's single classed clerical cohort has 2+1 5th level spells, and 3+1 4th level spells.

You cap out at 5th level. The wizard and his cohort have 1 more 5th level clerical spell than you, and 2 more 5th level wizard spells. Plus they have 2 6th level spells. How is it that being able to cast 3 fewer 5th level spells and 2 fewer 6th level spells makes your argument make any more sense than it has so far?

You just don't understand how weak your "argument" (to dignify the stream of nonsense words that are coming from your keyboard) actually is when you stack it up against reality.


----------



## Nuclear Platypus (Jun 6, 2005)

"Assassination is the highest form of public service." -- Chiun

I actually voted all of 'em, except for the Arcane Trickster.

Arcane Archer, Dwarven Defender - Why always with the frellin' elves n dwarves? Show the other races some love! 

Assassin - good idea but why evil? Remo and Chiun sold that sacred cow a while back.

As for the rest, most just don't grab me. They're just kinda 'blah'. Eventually I'll get a 'been there, done that, got the shirt' with the Trickster but at least its something more original.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No. All he needs is 3 of them to negate any caster level gap. At best.




So, 90,000 gp is pocket change to be hand waived away? Using the standard assumptions, characters don't even see that much _total_ wealth until they are 12th level. Your argument doesn't wash.



> _You know very very little about the game system or the game. Your wizard isn't only powerful because of his most powerful spell - he's powerful because of all the lower-level magic he can also cast. A flesh to stone spell is better than a polymorph other (or baleful for 3.5). But often a polymorph spell works quite well enough. Flesh to stone is better because it has larger scope. If you have more lower-level spells you have larger scope in your repertoire._





And the clerical cohort more than makes up for the difference in the lower level spells that the MT can cast, because he can cast _as many or more equal level clerical spells as the MT at every caster level_.



> _Likewise his magic isn't "outdated" all the time. There are many cross-over spells that are in both arcane and divine classes but at different levels. An MT  will  be able to plane-shift earlier than a single classed wizard. When the wizard gets lesser planar binding the MT has lesser planar ally. Same for true seeing and a host of other imminently useful and powerful spells. Go read your book._





And? Being able to cast an array of utility spells makes him more powerful than someone who can do that _and more_? Especially since he has his clerical cohort with him who can cast spells _better_ than the MT? I'm not seeing where you are making sense.



> _Puh-lease. I can cope with 15%  more dispelled spells when I have 2x the raw number.
> That's just a caster level argument. You don't have anything left to offer._





But you don't have "2x the raw number". You actually have fewer spells than a wizard + cohort.



> _Oh I get it. The MT isn't broken because it's supposed to "stop" at level 10? I guess you had better go tell the designers that. They've taken a completely different tangent my friend... Seems like you were wrong._





The MT is written as a 10 level class. Perhaps you should evaluate it based on what is written, not what you think it might be able to do. In any even, even if you do use various other classes to get to 9th/9th spellcaster progression, the MT is _still_ behind. Work out the spells available numbers, if you can figure out how to open the books to begin with. The single classed caster always has many more spellls available than the MT.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Because a single classed rogue can cast modify memory? and hide in plain sight and do a death attack? Really?




He doesn't need to. He has 40 more skill points to spend on jacking up his Bluff skill, his Hide skill, and so on. He has slippery mind, or crippling strike, or opportunist, or some other special ability that is more than equal to the difficult to set up (3 rounds is an _eternity_ most of the time), and difficult to pull off death attack



> _This is getting old real fast._





Yeah, your inability to grasp simple rules is tiring.



> _Nice hollistic grades you're giving out there. Bolded part is um completely wrong. Actually the whole text is but the bolded part moreso._





Well, it comes from _actually reading the book_, which you, by your own admission. haven't bothered to do. You see, 40 skill points is a _huge_ gap, the rogue special abilities compare quite well to the assassin's abilities, and so on. If you did bother to read the books and pay attention, you might notice that.



> _Oh boy. 1+1 strikes again. I'm tired of this "debate"._





Given that you haven't made an argument that holds water yet, I'm not surprised. Displaying your lack of understanding so publicly must be wearing on you.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

Nuclear Platypus said:
			
		

> Assassin - good idea but why evil? Remo and Chiun sold that sacred cow a while back.




Do what I did with the class: tie it to a specific group. The entrance requirements kind of make it seem like it should be. Make "other aligned assassins" straight rogues, or members of other class combinations, or other PrCs.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> In general, the XP hit from crafting is small enough that it will never make a difference to total character level.
> And it will never make a whit of difference to the _cohort_ (that would be the RtFM part).



Sure, of course not. You're trying to make up twice, 2, that number I keep repeating add-nauseum that you're just not getting for reasons unknown, 2 times the gear and not losing significant XP. My we're all numbers tonight aren't we? 88 000 GP for 12th level and that's 3520 XP a _ completely insignifican hit in XP _. 



> It sounds like you have dumb players, who don't know how to deal with their opponents effectively.



YEP. Next time an invisible dragon surprises them, because they can cast spells too you know, and breathes on them I'll say they're dumb. Your not making a good case for yourself... 



> And the cohort crafts a cloak +4, and it effectively doesn't cost him any experience points.



How are you _ gaining _ money out of deal. You said it will cost less. My maths skillz ar'nt tha god, I dinna under'fand how youse mak more frum (1+1)/2 > 1. 
Jesus this is hopeless. 




> And now, you, the MT, have 1 5th level wizard spell, and 1+1 5th level cleric spells. Your single classed wizard friend, however, has 2 6th level spells, and 3 5th level spells.



Oh I see. The game is only 2 rounds long every day. Well I guess I'll have to duck out for those 2 rounds, you know being out-classed and all.  
Why praytell did you stop there? 
Your wizard has 4 4th level spells and the MT has 5. You get 4 3rd level spells and the MT has 6. And bonus spells too! Oh you only get one bonus spell pool. Too bad.
And my MT would never think of becoming a specialist either. Not with a whole frigging spell pool of magic on the other side.  



> You just don't understand how weak your "argument" (to dignify the stream of nonsense words that are coming from your keyboard) actually is when you stack it up against reality.



I won't dignify that with reply and honestly your tone is not becoming of someone who repeatedly contradicts himself from one paragraph to the next and has found unique formula for 1+1.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> He doesn't need to. He has 40 more skill points to spend on jacking up his Bluff skill, his Hide skill, and so on. He has slippery mind, or crippling strike, or opportunist, or some other special ability that is more than equal to the difficult to set up (3 rounds is an _eternity_ most of the time), and difficult to pull off death attack



Oh no! not crippling strike! or slippery mind! I'll just have to cry myself to sleep for having hide in plain sight, death attack, 4 levels of spells, poison use and bonuses to poison! 
* The hilarious thing is I'm starting to think you actually beleive this  *.




> Well, it comes from _actually reading the book_, which you, by your own admission. haven't bothered to do. You see, 40 skill points is a _huge_ gap, the rogue special abilities compare quite well to the assassin's abilities, and so on.



And so on eh? Where's the so on? You know the actual comparison? 3 special abilities are worth 4 levels of casting, hide in plain sight, poison use, bonuses to saves? 40 skill points is not that much, it's a 1st level of rogue with a starting +2 int. It's a couple of skill enhancing items, that are cheap. Like greater slippery armor. 
Dude. Wake up. It's not too late to admit you're wrong.

Honestly it's been fun, though it has drifted off topic. I've gotten a glimpse of what a true beleiver is like and it's slightly frightening. But until the 1+1's start adding up correctly, I am disarmed. No amount of logic will prevail. Until that time, rattle away Storm Raven, you clearly have more time than I do or will have in coming days. I'll let you have the last word, even if it's as illogical and contradictory as your previous words.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Oh no! not crippling strike! or slippery mind! I'll just have to cry myself to sleep for having hide in plain sight, death attack, 4 levels of spells, poison use and bonuses to poison!
> * The hilarious thing is I'm starting to think you actually beleive this  *.




But it's not just one special ability. It's three, plus 40 skill points, plus trap sense. yes, the assassin gets two special abilities and spells (12 total, oh my!) and poison stuff, but he misses out on a bunch too. That's the trade off. In 2e, with kits, you had _no_ trade off, you just added a bunch of abilities to your character sheet, usually for "role-playing" limitations that didn't really exist.

And I'm not sure you quite understand how difficult a death attack is to pull off. You have to spend three rounds observing the target. Even invisible and hiding, that is difficult to pull off against most CR appropriate opponents once you reach the mid- to high- levels. It's a nice ability, but it is so rare that you can actually _do_ it, as opposed to, say Opportunist, which you can have a reasonable chance of doing _every round_ in combat (and, if you are reasonably smart, will mostly be sneak attacks to boot), that the infrenquency of its application makes it not as cool as you seem to think it is.



> _And so on eh? Where's the so on? You know the actual comparison? 3 special abilities are worth 4 levels of casting, hide in plain sight, poison use, bonuses to saves? 40 skill points is not that much, it's a 1st level of rogue with a starting +2 int. It's a couple of skill enhancing items, that are cheap. Like greater slippery armor.
> Dude. Wake up. It's not too late to admit you're wrong._





It's not a 1st level rogue, its pushing your skill levels to the point where you can make skill checks of such extreme difficulty that you may as well have the ability to cast spells. The 1st level rogue doesn't get you 23 ranks in Bluff. He gets you 4. There is a significant difference in the uses for those two arrays of abilities.

Skill enhancing items huh? Once again, your argument is "I don't need abilities, I can just spend my way out of not having them". Sure, I guess that might make sense, but on the other hand, I could just say "the rogue can offset the assassin's spell casting ability by buying wands and using his insanely high Use Magic Device skill to use them." In the end, you compare characters based on their abilities, not based on what you could buy to offset those abilities, becuase the other side could always counter by buying other things.



> _Honestly it's been fun, though it has drifted off topic. I've gotten a glimpse of what a true beleiver is like and it's slightly frightening. But until the 1+1's start adding up correctly, I am disarmed. No amount of logic will prevail. Until that time, rattle away Storm Raven, you clearly have more time than I do or will have in coming days. I'll let you have the last word, even if it's as illogical and contradictory as your previous words._





Well, given that I've read the rules, and you clearly haven't, your arguments continue to make no sense. Your probelm is that you _aren't_ using logic, or that your logic is so crippled by your lack of understanding of the rules of the game that your statements amount to gibberish.


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> But has no problems running with 5 levels of redwizard, 5 levels of archamge, 1 level of the arcane order or other blah/blech/blue/blam "builds" that can hit ACs of 229 or caster levels into the 50's?
> Sounds like he needs medication.




He'd have problems with Red Wizard since it's a FR class, but no problems with archmage.  I've never used the other prestige class you mention -- is that from Complete Arcane?

We've played games (with me DMing) running to levels in the mid-20s and no one's come close to hitting AC 229 or caster level 50, despite having prestige classes.  I allow nearly 100 prestige classes, so I don't think it's the lack of selection.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Sure, of course not. You're trying to make up twice, 2, that number I keep repeating add-nauseum that you're just not getting for reasons unknown, 2 times the gear and not losing significant XP. My we're all numbers tonight aren't we? 88 000 GP for 12th level and that's 3520 XP a _ completely insignifican hit in XP _.




Actually, it's more like 1,770 XP. You are splitting crafting duties with your cohort, and his experience points, by the rules, are essentially free.



> _YEP. Next time an invisible dragon surprises them, because they can cast spells too you know, and breathes on them I'll say they're dumb. Your not making a good case for yourself..._





High level characters are hard to surpirse with invisible opponents. There are so many counters and skills that work to defeat them that it becomes a much less useful tactic at that point.



> _How are you  gaining  money out of deal. You said it will cost less. My maths skillz ar'nt tha god, I dinna under'fand how youse mak more frum (1+1)/2 > 1.
> Jesus this is hopeless._





Because I _have a wider array of Item Crafting feats to use to make items_, and thus I can get the "I crafted the item and it cost less" benefit on a higher percentage of the equipment I use. Keep up here.

Plus, despite your yelping, you don't really need a lot of bonuses to get your cohort to have more than enough ability to survive combat. Compare two actual characters (not the various hypotheticals that just amount to your saying "but I can have this, and this, and spend 30,000 gp on that", and so on). Two characters, both 12th level (since you seem to like that level), standard elite array of stats:

Wizard 12: S 8, I 18 (15 + 3 points for level), W 10, D 13, C 12, Ch 14 (so I can have a good cohort). 4 available feat slots, plus 2 wizard bonus feat slots.

Hit points 43.5 (average), Fort +5, Reflex +5, Will +8

Wiz 3, Clr 3, MT 6: S 8, I 16 (15 + 1 point for level), W 16 (14 + 2 points for level), D 13, C 12, Ch 10 (note that the lower Charisma hampers his turning abilitiy, but to change it, you would have to give up Dex or Con, save bonuses and/or hit points). 4 available feat slots.

Hit points 51.5 (average), Fort +7, Reflex +5, Will +14

The MT is a lot better at Will saves, but not much better off in Fortitude saves, and exactly equal in Reflex saves (which most AoEs are). Now, the straight wizard, having a couple "extra" feats from being a wizard, uses one of his regular feats on Leadership, getting himself a cleric cohort:

Cleric 10, S 13, I 8, W 17 (15 + 2 points for level), D 10, C 14, Ch 12. 3 available feat slots.

His poitns 68.5 (average), Fort +9, Reflex +3, Will +10

Now, I thought you said I'd have trouble keeping the cohort alive. He has more hit points on average than either PC, and his unenhanced saves compare very favorably. Note also, that the wizard has a higher save DC for all his spells, while the cohort's save DCs are exactly equal to the MT's. The MT is a lower caster level than the cohort too. The MT is still coming out behind. Between the PC and his cohort, I've spent one feat out of a total of 9, while the MT has four. I can blow a couple feats on save enhancing feats. Let's give the cohort Lightning Reflexes, to bring his Reflex save up to +5.

Now, let's talk about magic items. Both PCs should have 88,000 gp at their disposal. You keep wanting to blow money on orange _ioun stones_, and metamagic _rods of quicken_. Well, the orange ioun stone costs 30,000 gp, and a lesser metamagic rod of quicken costs 35,000 gp, so you've eaten up most of your money there (leaving you with 23,000 gp). You can buy a _cloak of resistance +4_ for 16,000 gp, leaving you 7,000 gp. Your saves end up looking like this: Fort +11, Reflex +9, Will +18. Pretty nifty.

The wizard and his cohort, on the other hand, get some items too. Both get _cloaks of reistance +4_, for 32,000 gp, Leaving the wizard with 51,00 gp in items to spend. Now their saves end up like this:

Wizard: Fort +9 Reflex +9, Will +12
Cleric Cohort: Fort +13, Reflex +9, Will +14

Except for the disparity in the Will saves, there are in the same range as one another. Given that the cohoirt has more than 15 more hit points than the MT, I'm thinking his suriviability isn't a problem. Plus, the wizard and his cleric firend have 51,000 gp left to spend, and the MT only has 7,000. Granted, his caster level is now equal to the cohort, but he still lags two behind the wizard. And while the MT can cast two spells in a round three times per day (and one of them has to be a 3rd level or lower spell), the wizard and his cohort can accomplish much the same thing to the extent that they have spell slots.

The MT could get a stat enhancing item or two, but he's probably going to want to buy some defense instead, like _bracers of armor_, and maybe an _amulet of natural armor_ (which, by the way, he wouldn't be able to wear with a _periapt of wisdom_), and that will consume most of his available cash. The wizard buys relatively cheap nonmagical armor for his cohort and equips himself with some _bracers_ an _amulet_, and still has thousands of gold pieces left to buy himself a _headband of intellect_ and his cohort a _periapt of wisdom_, jacking up their save DCs even more compared to the MT, and giving them more bonus spells to boot.

And this all leaves aside, for a moment, the fact that the cohort, when recruited, arrives with gear appropriate to his level (see the text of the discussion on leadership in the DMG, or the SRD if you prefer), meaning that you don't have to do the intiial equipping of the cohort out the the wizard's funds. Yet another portion of your argument collapses when subjected to the light of day.

I also note than the wizard + cohort combination has it all over the MT in terms of sundry abiilities too. The cohort turns as a 10th level cleric, four times per day, and his Charisma _adds_ to his ability. The MT turns as a 3rd level cleric, twice per day, and his Charisma serves as a penalty to his ability. He also has a familiar with the abilities of a 3rd level wizard, which likely severely hampers his familar's survivability (he's probably better off without one at that point). The straight wizard has a familiar with the special abilities of a companion to a 12th level character (for what those are worth).

Oh, the wizard and his cohort have 13 more skill points between them than the MT has.

The wizard/cohort combo is pretty much way ahead overall. And I haven't crafted a single thing. In the face of reality, your argument crumbles like the houe of cards it is.



> _Oh I see. The game is only 2 rounds long every day. Well I guess I'll have to duck out for those 2 rounds, you know being out-classed and all._





I see you haven't played out many high level combats. High level combat tends to be over _fast_, in a handful of rounds. Being outclassed by three top level spells is a huge deal.



> _Why praytell did you stop there?_





Because no one has said that the MT doesn't have a lot of lower level spells. It's just that, over the course of a day (especially at higher levels) you usually end up with many more spell slots than you can use _anyway_, so having a pile of 1st level spells isn't that big a deal most of the time, since a high proportion of them will simply go uncast.



> _Your wizard has 4 4th level spells and the MT has 5. You get 4 3rd level spells and the MT has 6. And bonus spells too! Oh you only get one bonus spell pool. Too bad.
> And my MT would never think of becoming a specialist either. Not with a whole frigging spell pool of magic on the other side._





The MT has 5 4th level spells. The wizard/cohort have 8. The MT has 6 3rd level spells. The wizard/cohort have 8. Too bad your argument falls apart so easily. In any event, even leaving aside the cohort, I think I'd rather have more _5th and 6th_ level spells than _3rd and 4th_ level spells. I would think that was obvious, but with you, I'm not so sure.

And the wizard only has to worry about one set of bonus spells per character, meaning he can bump up his single spell casting statistic high and easier than the MT can bump both of his. All things being equal, the wizard/cohort have _more_ bonus spells on average than the MT has. Too bad you didn't actually work out the details before you ran yourself off the rails on that.



> _I won't dignify that with reply and honestly your tone is not becoming of someone who repeatedly contradicts himself from one paragraph to the next and has found unique formula for 1+1._





I'm not sure I have to use anything other than a tone of incredulity when discussing the _rules_ with someone who knows so little about them. Your arguments tear like wet paper towels when subjected to any sort of examination. I'd quit too if I were you, and it became as obvious as it has that you just don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Work on that one for awhile if it's less mystifying then someone disliking 3.5.




That's not what mystifies him. What is mystifying is that you are discussing 3.5e rules having admitted that you haven't bothered to read them.


----------



## iksander (Jun 6, 2005)

Well Dungeon Master is wrong on one account, MT can't be qualified for with Precocious Apprentice. Trick is in the phrasing of the second paragraph of the PA feat.

The 229 AC character is the Wizard CO board special, although it was an attempt to jack AC through the roof, not make an effective character.

Jacking caster levels through the roof is typically done with items, a la ankh of ascension, orange ioun stones, etc.  Their are some feats that allow the caster level to be jacked, its typical used in builds concentrating on holy word, etc.  

Although DM does have a point, prcs do lead to power creep, (but them again nearly every supplements escalates power with additional choices in feats, spells, items, etc...).  What can can ya say outside the fact that additional choices tend to equal power.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

iksander said:
			
		

> Although DM does have a point, prcs do lead to power creep, (but them again nearly every supplements escalates power with additional choices in feats, spells, items, etc...).  What can can ya say outside the fact that additional choices tend to equal power.




I woudl say that additional choices tend to equal additional choices. Whether they equal additional power depends on the choices. They will offer more flexibility, and many people confuse flexibility for power, but with the design set up that the rules embody, most choices involve giving up a different option in exchange for the one you chose.

Most peopel (DungeonMaster among them) tend to think about what high level characters with "X, Y, and Z" options can do, and declare that this combination is "broken". What most of these arguments miss is this: most high level D&D characters are powerful no matter what you do (unless you do the most counterproductive things possible, like building a sorcerer with a 9 Charisma or similar nonsense). What matters is what you gave up to get X, Y, and Z options compared to what X, Y, and Z options give you.

Many options allow characters to specialize, which makes them seem powerful, but those options forego other abilities that would give a more diverse array of abilities (the assassin is a good example of this, he gives up a pile of spendable skill points effectively for a handful of spells per day, he gets the very specific death attack ability, but gives up more versatile rogue special abilities, and so forth). Some PrCs are overpowered, but that's not a general issue. It certainly isn't evidenced by the PrCs in the 3.5 DMG (contrary to what DungeonMaster thinks), or PrCs in general. I could point to some PrCs that are overpowered, but that's a design flaw of those PrCs, not the concept of more choices.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Sigh... sure why not I'm actually not doing anything today.

Because, clearly, you're incapable of understanding anything I type as a reasoned argument, Storm Raven let's have a little fun. 
How about you go and write up a 12th level wizard and his cohort and I'll write up a plain 12th level MT, with no leadership feat?  
Standard gold, standard array for ability scores 15,14,13,12,10,8. PHB, no other Prestige classes, MM and DMG only. You get no benefits associate with leadership from anything ( though I'm sorely tempted to ascribe "failure") and have a familiar like any other wizard.
We'll even assume, as you've done among all the other blithering, that you get to pick your cohort's feats rather than have the DM write up the NPC you've attracted as a cohort. 
If you want a spell on your wizard's spell list you have to pay for the scroll (standard price) and the standard scribing cost.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Because, clearly, you're incapable of understanding anything I type as a reasoned argument, Storm Raven let's have a little fun.




You have yet to make a reasoned argument in this thread.



> _How about you go and write up a 12th level wizard and his cohort and I'll write up a plain 12th level MT, with no leadership feat?
> Standard gold, standard array for ability scores 15,14,13,12,10,8. PHB, no other Prestige classes, MM and DMG only. You get no benefits associate with leadership from anything ( though I'm sorely tempted to ascribe "failure") and have a familiar like any other wizard.
> We'll even assume, as you've done among all the other blithering, that you get to pick your cohort's feats rather than have the DM write up the NPC you've attracted as a cohort._





I already did that. Perhaps you didn't notice amidst all your whining. The MT lost out at every turn, pretty much having built him as well as possible to build him. If you think you can build a better MT, go ahead, but you will find that you are severley hampered by having to deal with two spellcasting attributes, and end up having lots of troubles keeping up financially because of your apparent heavy reliance on insanely expensive magic items to "offset" the natural advantages of the wizard/cohort.


----------



## iksander (Jun 6, 2005)

Heh, if only it was so easy.  Not all additional choices were created equal.  And sometimes the equal ones dont always stack well with each other. 

Sometimes you give up nothing (Ie cleric levels for most cleric PrCs levels, etc...) or lose a small bit for big bennies (Wizard to incantatrix, etc...).  Their are other classes whose possible abuse only comes out with mixing PrCs (Ie: Crazy MT builds using Urpriest and Sublime chord, etc...).  

Now I'd like to state that I like prestige classes and feats, as it allows a great deal of customization, but it opens the game up to power creep; whether the power creep is due to cherry picking class levels or due to somethings being flat out better.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> You have yet to make a reasoned argument in this thread.



From someone who repeatedly affirms he's getting a deal out of crafting 2 items at half-cost versus buying 1 this is most humourous. Or this one again: 



			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Some prestige classes give more than they take.
> *snip*
> And taking mutiple PrCs usually doesn't end up with any more overall power than just taking one, or none.



You have a lot of problems with quantities it seems. 




> I already did that. Perhaps you didn't notice amidst all your whining.



No you didn't. You made the MT pay full price for items he can craft and then claimed you had some sort of advantage. Bizarre and contorted "logic" to say the least, put your money where your mouth is and do a full write up.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> From someone who repeatedly affirms he's getting a deal out of crafting 2 items at half-cost versus buying 1 this is worthless.




Well, given that I get items for half the price, and don't expend double the experience points, I'd say it's a pretty good deal. But you'd have to actually read the rules to understand how that works.



> No you didn't. You made the MT pay full price for items he can craft and then claimed you had some sort of advantage. Bizarre and contorted "logic" to say the least, put your money where your mouth is and do a full write up.




_Everyone_ paid full price for the items they had in the example, making everything equal. Perhaps you would have noticed that if you weren't so busy trying to figure out the rules.

But go ahead, build your MT character. Enjoy. I'll see what you come up with. Shall we set an experience point level for the characters rather than an experience level? If you are crafting items, it would make the comparison meaningful.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 6, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You have a lot of problems with quantities it seems.




You have a lot of problems evaluating options, and understanding what an opportunity cost is.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 6, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Well, given that I get items for half the price, and don't expend double the experience points, I'd say it's a pretty good deal. But you'd have to actually read the rules to understand how that works.



Look, I don't know how to put this in politically correct language, but that's completely moronic? Do you realise what you write? 
You need 2 articles of something. The other guy needs 1. You pay XP, any amount, and get 2 for the _ exact same price _ he gets 1 without XP expenditure. You're not "winning". At all. 
I don't know how to word this any other way to drill this through a thick skull. It's very frustrating.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Look, I don't know how to put this in politically correct language, but that's completely moronic? Do you realise what you write?
> You need 2 articles of something. The other guy needs 1. You pay XP, any amount, and get 2 for the _ exact same price _ he gets 1 without XP expenditure. You're not "winning". At all.
> I don't know how to word this any other way to drill this through a thick skull. It's very frustrating.




The MT needs to buy some very expensive gear JUST TO KEEP UP.

Instead of buying the expensive gear just to keep up, another character buys the same amount of gear, and GETS AHEAD.

You say "I buy 3 ioun stones and boost my caster level by 3! Now I equal the wizard!"

The wizard says "I do too. Now I'm 3 ahead again!".

Understand?


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jun 7, 2005)

I find the concept of blackguards quite lame. If their abilities are basically just going to be mirror images of the paladin which is a 20-level class, why not just make a 20-level class for blackguards? Of course, I also find it lame that they are just basically paladins with goatees and not much flavor of their own. I wish they'd just ditched the paladin entirely and made a "holy warrior" available to any alignment with some customizable abilities. Gee, I wonder why no one's thought of that...


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 7, 2005)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> I find the concept of blackguards quite lame. If their abilities are basically just going to be mirror images of the paladin which is a 20-level class, why not just make a 20-level class for blackguards? Of course, I also find it lame that they are just basically paladins with goatees and not much flavor of their own.




Only one class gets the goatee.  Only one class gets the flavour.  Bow down before the Warlock, the King of Style!


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Look, I don't know how to put this in politically correct language, but that's completely moronic? Do you realise what you write?
> You need 2 articles of something. The other guy needs 1. You pay XP, any amount, and get 2 for the _ exact same price _ he gets 1 without XP expenditure. You're not "winning". At all.




No one got a discount for crafting in my example, on either side. I _could have_ saved money for both the MT and the wizard/cohort by having them craft items, but doing so works out to the _disadvantage_ of the MT, since the wizard/cohort have, effectively, _twice_ the XP pool to drasw from for their crafting endeavors.

In other words, I didn't use all of the advantages available to the wizard/cohort and _still_ came out ahead in the transaction. You see, if we start crafting things, both sides can do that trick, so it comes out as a wash. Say you go ahead and craft your orange _iouns stone_, your _lesser rod of metamagic_, and your various defensive items (cloak, amulet, bracers and so on). You save money and spend experience points. Great. The wizard/cohort can do that too, saving the same percentage of money you did, and still spending their excess cash on a bunch of other stuff.

The MT needs expensive items to bring himself up to the casting ability of the wizard/cohort. Things like ioun stones, and metamagic rods. The wizard/cohort _doesn't need to buy these items_. They can buy _other things_, providing better defense, while still outclassing the MT in the spell casting dapeartment with their higher save DCs, higher caster level, and so on.

You need to go back and actually read the example. Everyone else who has read it understands it. You are the only one who is not getting it, and I think that is just because, at this point, you are willfully not understanding the rules.

So, are you going to stat out your "super-powered MT" any time soon? You said you would, and since then, I've seen nothing but a lot of bluster and ranting. I thought you were probably one of those guys who was all talk, but who would wilt when the time came to put his cards on the table. I see now that I seem to have been right.


----------



## Kem (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Look, I don't know how to put this in politically correct language, but that's completely moronic? Do you realise what you write?
> You need 2 articles of something. The other guy needs 1. You pay XP, any amount, and get 2 for the _ exact same price _ he gets 1 without XP expenditure. You're not "winning". At all.
> I don't know how to word this any other way to drill this through a thick skull. It's very frustrating.




The Myth is DESIGNED for when they are the only caster so that the party has both a Cleric and a Wizard.  In a party with a Wizard or a Cleric (Or Druid for that matter), the party would be BETTER OFF with a caster of the other type.

If you make a Myth, I am sure just about anyone who tries will make a BETTER Wizard, Cleric OR Druid.  Keep in mind, you have to declare which spot in a 4 person party you want to be taking.

--------------------------------

Also the reason he could more easily spend EXP on items is that he gets 2 bonus feats towards that.  The Myth doesn't.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

I'm still waiting to see what DungeonMaster produces. I think I'll probably be waiting a while. All talk and no action, that guy.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

Well, this brings up an interesting point:

Many people complain about a lot of elements of the D&D rules as put forward. They will vociferously argue that this or that is "broken", "overpowered" or otherwise a problem with the game (in this thread, it happens to have been PrCs that have been targeted). They talki blithely about various "super-powerful" combinations and decry the terrible results thus produced, alleging all kinds of abstract examples of abuse and horror.

And then you ask them to demonstrate, concretely, their argument. You ask them to put out an example, detailed out, of the problem combination, or problem class, in order to compare the result with the standard options that are an accepted part of the game.

And guess what? Nine times out of ten, they, like DungeonMaster, will turn tail and run. When subjected to the rigors of actually _producing_ an example of the offending character build, they become strangely silent. Because when they were talking about the various combinations they were ranting about they didn't take into account other options, the limitations on a character's resources, and so on.

The funny thing in this thread is that _DungeonMaster_ suggested making example characters, within some very standard parameters. And I pointed out I had already done that, but if he thought he could do better with his side of the argument to make an example of his own. Thus far, the sum total of his response has been to complain, ineffectually, about the examples provided. But he hasn't provided his own example.

I think that says everything that needs to be said about his opinions concerning the broken nature of prestige classes in general, and prestige classes in the DMG specifically. He demanded examples. I said put your money where your mouth is. His money is nowhere to be seen.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 7, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I'm still waiting to see what DungeonMaster produces. I think I'll probably be waiting a while. All talk and no action, that guy.



Pardon? I've asked you to provide fully stated wizard + cleric cohort using the rules described. You're still completely unable to understand even the simplest arguments so rather than going insane trying to explain (1+1+ XP)/2 >> 1 I'm merely waiting for you to actually provide a write up.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Pardon? I've asked you to provide fully stated wizard + cleric cohort using the rules described. You're still completely unable to understand even the simplest arguments so rather than going insane trying to explain (1+1+ XP)/2 >> 1 I'm merely waiting for you to actually provide a write up.




Umm, I already did. Several posts ago. Perhaps you might have noticed that. I'm still waiting for your super-powered version of the MT you promised. You are the guy who has said that using the MT gives you a super powerful build. Let's see your example.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 7, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Because when they were talking about the various combinations they were ranting about they didn't take into account other options, the limitations on a character's resources, and so on.



Oh that's hilarious that is. Just gold.  Sounds like an off-shade of brown without the extra "o".


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Oh that's hilarious that is. Just gold.  Sounds like an off-shade of brown without the extra "o".




I see you are still dodging and weaving, avoiding the question, and basically doing exactly what I said you would do - refuse to put your objections into concrete form.

Basically, your argument is looking more and more foolish all the time.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 7, 2005)

So this is what you keep insisting is a "write up"? 

Wizard 12: S 8, I 18 (15 + 3 points for level), W 10, D 13, C 12, Ch 14 (so I can have a good cohort). 4 available feat slots, plus 2 wizard bonus feat slots.
Hit points 43.5 (average), Fort +5, Reflex +5, Will +8
Cleric 10, S 13, I 8, W 17 (15 + 2 points for level), D 10, C 14, Ch 12. 3 available feat slots.
His poitns 68.5 (average), Fort +9, Reflex +3, Will +10

Your cleric is level 9, because you have a familiar -1 to leadership score. 
You have no chosen gear, no race, no chosen feats beyond leadership. 

I guess I * do * have to show you what a write up is otherwise you might consider this a write-up.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> So this is what you keep insisting is a "write up"?
> 
> Wizard 12: S 8, I 18 (15 + 3 points for level), W 10, D 13, C 12, Ch 14 (so I can have a good cohort). 4 available feat slots, plus 2 wizard bonus feat slots.
> Hit points 43.5 (average), Fort +5, Reflex +5, Will +8
> ...




I did choose some gear (that which was necessary for comparison purposes), written up later, you'd notice that if you bothered to read. The race of the character in question doesn't really matter, since it comes out in the wash anyway - you play a dwarven MT, and get dwarven advantages, then the same can be done for the wizard and/or cleric. In the end, race doesn't matter for the comparison, so why clutter up the example with it? The same goes for feats - the wizard by himself has 2 more available feat slots than the MT, let alone the cohort. Anything the MT can choose, the wizard can match by himself, and take other feats as well.

The cleric is level 10, for two reasons (1) the wizard can call his familiar _after_ he takes the Leadership feat (and knowing he's going to take it, probably would), and (2) once you have obtained your cohort, the only limitation on his levels is that he cannot be higher than your level minus two, the Leadership score is no longer a limitation.

But I see you are just going to dodge, weave, avoid, and evade, hoping that no one will notice that you haven't even bothered to provide any kind of example of what you consider to be a super-powerful MT. We can only assume you don't know how to make one. As long as you avoid making your example concrete. you can engage in the abstract "but I can do this, that or the other" game, ignoring that you don't have infinite resources, and what options you forego to get to your "super-powerful" character.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

And, as usual, when the call goes out for him to provide a concrete example to examine, DungeonMaster goes missing.


----------



## Kem (Jun 7, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Pardon? I've asked you to provide fully stated wizard + cleric cohort using the rules described. You're still completely unable to understand even the simplest arguments so rather than going insane trying to explain (1+1+ XP)/2 >> 1 I'm merely waiting for you to actually provide a write up.




Problem is, we ALL know what a wizard tends to look like.

You are trying to say that a Myth is better then a wizard.   So go ahead, core only also.  No need to turn this into a "Who found the best items contest".

And I'll save you some time.  If the Myth is the only Mage/Cleric in the party, they are near perfect, a cleric would be better (Healing Magic/Cleric Magic is almost needed, wizard magic is not as much).  But in a party with either a cleric or a wizard, they should just be the other.

Keeping leadership in mind, a Wizard 11 & Cleric 9 are _better_ then a Myth *12*.  More higher level spells, and _twice as many actions_.  So if the wizard/cleric wants to spend exp to be a lower level, then by all means they can.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 7, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Keeping leadership in mind, a Wizard 11 & Cleric 9 are _better_ then a Myth *12*.  More higher level spells, and _twice as many actions_.  So if the wizard/cleric wants to spend exp to be a lower level, then by all means they can.




What DungeonMaster doesn't seem to be able to understand is something I pointed out several posts ago: his argument concerning the "double equipment" needs of the wizard/cohort doesn't hold water. His hypothetical MT, to the extent he has put forward the build, relies on very expensive equipment to "keep up" offensively with the wizard/cohort (like orange _iouns stones_ and _lesser metamagic rods of quicken spell_), equipment that, in these examples comes out of an essentially fixed pool of available cash (equipment that, realistically, doesn't allow the MT to close the offensive gap he suffers from). The wizard/cohort _don't have to spend their cash on this equipment_, and as a result have more than enough available cash to provide for their defensive needs (mostly save enhancing items).

But, since DungeonMaster is still hung up on the item creation issue, I can explain. One can create items using either cash, or cash plus experience points. Both hypothetical builds have the exact same amount of cash (88,000 gp, as is standard for a 12th level character). But the MT has only a single pool of experience points to use to craft items, while the wizard/cohort have roughly 1.75 times that. Thus, they have more resources available to use to craft items, and can outstrip the MT when doing so. If the MT wants to stretch his cash by crafting items for his use (reducing, say, the cost of making an orange _ioun stone_ from 30,000 gp to 15,000 gp plus 1,200 experience points) he can, but the wizard/cohort combination can match him by crafting 30,000 gp worth of their own items (probably not orange _ioun stones_, they don't really need them) but the wizard only spends, effectively 685 or so of his own experience points doing so, the rest can be spent by his cohort companion on his own crafted items. Once you get into a crafting race to make your cash go further, the MT will always lose, since he has fewer abvailable resources to commit to the effort.

But, as I said, I didn't need to do that. Just using the base cash amounts (which actually provides a result more advantageous for comparison purposes for the MT) shows that the wizard/cohort have more than enough cash resources to stay well ahead of the MT in effectiveness. In reality, it comes down to DungeonMaster's inability to understand the concept of opportunity cost, which is what causes all of his arguments to end up as nonsense.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 7, 2005)

Wow you've got a big mouth when you're left to your own devices for little under an hour... 

Just using plain rules, not trying to abuse the item crafting system, polymorph or other highly abusable mechanics. I'll correct any mistakes if anyone can find them. 
And no item worth more than 30 percent of the character's wealth.
I won't even try to use all the advantages of the MT, just break more than even in many categories.

* THE   URGE *
Human Evoker3/Clr3/Urge6
* Stats: * str 8, dex 14 (12+ 2 gloves), con 15 (13+ 2 iounstone), int 20 (15+1 levels+ 4 headband), wis 20 (14 +2 levels +4 periapt), cha 10
* Hp: * 63.5 (8 +2d8+9d4 = 28.5 + 2x12 con)
* AC: * 22 (10 + 2 dex + 5 wis +1 monk + 4 mage armor)
* Touch AC: * 18
* Saves: * +12/+12/+20
( 3/1/3 cleric + 1/1/3 wizard + 2/2/5 MT then + 2 con, +4 dex and weasel + 5 wiz then +3 resistance +1 luck)
* Skills: * the standard, spellcraft, concentration and so forth, not a big deal will be better than the non-MTs
* Feats: * Scribe scroll (free), Empower spell (1st), Maximize spell (1st), Craft wondrous item (3rd), Spell penetration (6th), Quicken spell (9th), Craft rod (12th).
* Gear: * 88 000 total
8000 Metamagic rod of lesser maximize (crafted)
17500 Metamagic rod of lesser quicken (crafted)
4000 Ring of counterspells
8000 Periapt of wisdom +4 (crafted)
8000 Headband of intellect +4 (crafted)
4500 Cloak of resistance +3 (crafted)
15000 Orange ioun stone (crafted)
6500 Monk's belt (crafted)
4000 Ioun stone +2 Con (crafted)
2000 Gloves of dexterity +2 (crafted)
10000 Luckstone (crafted)
100 Weasel familiar
150  scroll of fox's cunning 
200 scribing cost of fox's cunning 
-----------------------------
87950 GP total
Extra cash for scrolls, mundane gear, etc...

* Spells per day: *
Arcane:
1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
4+1/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1 (+ from specialisation)
2/1/1/1/1/1 from int 20
Total:
7/5/5/4/3
Divine:
1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
4+1/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1 (+ from domain)
2/1/1/1/1/1 from wis 20
7/5/5/4/3

* Sample Wizard spell book: * (2 per level except for 5+2=7 at level 1)
1st level: Mage armor, Magic missile, True-strike, Burning hands, Charm person, Ventriloquism
2nd level: Scorching ray, Fox's cunning, Mirror image, Gust of wind, Cat's grace
3rd level: Fireball, Lightning bolt, Displacement, Stinking cloud
4th level: Improved invisibility, Black tentacles, Wall of ice, Wall of fire
5th level: Feeblemind, Bigby's interposing hand

* Typical spell selection: DCs are (15+ spell level) *

_ Arcane: _ (opposition schools necromancy and abjuration)
5th: Empowered fireball x2, Feeblemind
4th: Improved invisibility, Evard's black tentacles, Wall of ice, Empowered scorching ray
3rd: Fireball x2, Lightning bolt x1, Empowered magic missile, Stinking cloud
2nd: Scorching ray x3, Mirror image, Gust of wind 
1st: Magic missile x4, Mage Armor, True strike, Charm person

_ Divine: _
5th: Teleport, Spell resistance, True Seeing
4th: Dimension door, Death ward, Divine power, Dimensional Anchor
3rd: Fly, Seering light, Dispel magic x2, Protection from energy
2nd: Aid, Silencex2, Resist energy, Hold person
1st: Longstrider, Sanctuary x2, Sheild of faith, Divine favor, Obscuring mist, Command

* 
Domains are Travel and Luck, gets to re-roll 1/day a save, attack roll, etc... and freedom of movement 1/day
* 

Standard way of killing the opposing wizard+cleric (as if it matters since it's so easy):
"Since I am so weak I guess I get to go first right?"
Round 1: Empowered Maximized(rod)Fireball + Quickened(rod) Empowered fireball
- even if dipswitch and company make both saves, the wizard is dead. Big if too.
Especially without a divine ability to reroll.
And likely has to save for death from massive damage too.
Or Round 1: Black tentacles + Quickened(rod) Silence
Or Round 1: Or plain maximized seering light (or empowered maximized searing light if he's feeling mean)
Or Round 1: Plain old Feeblemind vs. his _ very _ wimpy save...
Or Round 1: Dimensional anchor + quickened well you get the gist.
And that's only his offense. Better luck next time plucky. And the leadership modifier is for _ having a familiar _ not acquiring one while you have a cohort. *sigh*


----------



## Snowy (Jun 7, 2005)

and the cleric who was standig behind you rather than next to his wizard master hits you with his axe and your dead.


----------



## Snowy (Jun 7, 2005)

sorry that was a bit brief, I wont bother with the build I'm sure its a great one.

All the tactics you suggested can be done by a straight wizard, or at least the ones based on a variation of quickened "this" normal "this" (where this is a high damage spell). They aren't just Mystic theurge special abilities. The mage OR the cleric can also do this in fact slightly better as they can maximise a better spell as they can CAST HIGHER LEVEL SPELLS.

Actually I was wrong there is one thing I'll comment on, your dig about going first, as the mage lacks MAD, he can pump up DEX as well as INT to improve initiative and as he/she doesn't need as many feats to pump up spellcasting he can take improved initiative and quick recconoiter if they want to puch it they can even take danger sense too.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 7, 2005)

> Standard way of killing the opposing wizard+cleric (as if it matters since it's so easy):




If this is your standard for balance, no wonder you're so voiciferous in decrying the lack of balance in the game....

Balance doesn't come from winning in a PvP battle. It comes from contributing to a party against challenges of varying ELs.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Balance doesn't come from winning in a PvP battle. It comes from contributing to a party against challenges of varying ELs.



Agreed 100% that's why I said "as if it matters". It doesn't. Any reasonable person that knows the system will tell you a spellcaster able to cast 5th level magic can kill a spellcaster that can cast 6th. That's fruitless discussion. Even the "cohort" argument is moronic, all you really need is to charm some monster, like a hydra or a spellcasting outsider, or a naga, or an NPC. If you treat them well they'll follow you and help you out. Or use planar ally for instance, which he has. 

The point is URGE here is doing what 2 characters do. 
That's the gold standard of balance - stealing the role of other characters. Even stealing 50% of the role of other characters is * broken * in my opininon - let alone casting "spell resistance" and having ludicrous saves, and then maximize-empowered-fireballing. 
"Beware the all powerful hybrid that has the firepower of a wizard and the healing power of a cleric". Those are the words from the 3rd edition DMG under designing classes. 

And besides, the MT is from the stats #3 most banned so I can't be _ that out of step of general opinion _.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Snowy said:
			
		

> All the tactics you suggested can be done by a straight wizard, or at least the ones based on a variation of quickened "this" normal "this" (where this is a high damage spell).



Of course they can. The wizard can even have all the same gear. His cohort is then naked however. 



> They aren't just Mystic theurge special abilities. The mage OR the cleric can also do this in fact slightly better as they can maximise a better spell as they can CAST HIGHER LEVEL SPELLS.



They have 1 higher level slot. It's important but really push comes to shove, having the extra spell pool is golden. I don't *have* to take protection versus elements on my arcane half. Or teleport. And the domain granted powers are just icing on the cake. 



> Actually I was wrong there is one thing I'll comment on, your dig about going first, as the mage lacks MAD, he can pump up DEX as well as INT to improve initiative and as he/she doesn't need as many feats to pump up spellcasting he can take improved initiative and quick recconoiter if they want to puch it they can even take danger sense too.



Or we could both abuse polymorph for this sort of discussion and get silly dex scores. It's just an example. He's never going to be able to "scry" on me by 3.5 rules, my will save is ludicrous. We can go on and on.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> And the leadership modifier is for _ having a familiar _ not acquiring one while you have a cohort. *sigh*




I'll deal with the rest of your silliness later. You need to go back and reread the Leadership feat. The modifier applies if you _have a familiar when you recruit your cohort_. After that, your Leadership score matters _not at all_ with respect to the level your cohort can obtain. There are rules given for how cohorts gain experience points.

So, maybe you need to brush up on some rules before you start getting cocky. I'll deal with the rest of your complete goofs later.


----------



## Testament (Jun 8, 2005)

Like his use of the quicken rod on the empowered fireball?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Round 1: Empowered Maximized(rod)Fireball + Quickened(rod) Empowered Fireball




Hey, big guy, you do realize that this is illegal don't you?  I'm interested in seeing how you cast a spell with somatic and material components with a pair of rods in your hands. You know, I'm getting almost afraid to check the rest of your silliness, given the very basic mistakes you make on a regular basis concerning the rules.

I'm also interested in seeing how you cast two empowered fireballs, since you apparently only memorized one.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Hey, big guy, you do realize that this is illegal don't you? From the description of metamagic rods "a caster may only use one metamagic rod on a given spell" (DMG page 236). You know, I'm getting almost afraid to check the rest of your silliness, given the very basic mistakes you make on a regular basis concerning the rules.




Well, what he's doing isn't *strictly* illegal for the reason you state.

He's got an Empowered Fireball memorized, and is maximizing it with his lesser metamagic rod of maximize.  The problem is that you cannot use a Lesser Metamagic rod on any spell higher than 3rd level, meaning that Empowered Fireball (a 5th-level spell) is likely not a valid target.

The next problem is that he's using two separate rods in a single turn - each of which needs to be in-hand in order to be used.  Since you also need a free hand to cast any spell with a somatic or material component (of which Fireball has both) and I don't see Eschew Materials or Still Spell in there, he's definately running out of hands.

EDIT:  He also seems to only have one Empowered Fireball memorized - though he could easily switch the LB for an FB, so the issue is less important.

Another point which has not actually been addressed is that each character is starting off at 12th level with standard gold and unlimited XP to spend.

This isn't the way to handle things.

Instead, start with an XP total and a GP total.  Spend them however you wish (levels, multiclassing penalties, crafting, etc.).


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> The point is URGE here is doing what 2 characters do.
> .




No, he's not. He may, LOOK to be, but if you have your URGE guy and then a Wizard and Cleric both with Quicken Spell(since you seem to love that so much, its only fair they both get it), they're casting FOUR spells per round. STILL twice as many as your URGE. And, since they act on different Initiative modifiers, they will have a much better effect on the battle as a whole, with one being able to react to the actions of enemies.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Well, what he's doing isn't *strictly* illegal for the reason you state.
> 
> He's got an Empowered Fireball memorized, and is maximizing it with his lesser metamagic rod of maximize.  The problem is that you cannot use a Lesser Metamagic rod on any spell higher than 3rd level, meaning that Empowered Fireball (a 5th-level spell) is likely not a valid target.
> 
> The next problem is that he's using two separate rods in a single turn - each of which needs to be in-hand in order to be used.  Since you also need a free hand to cast any spell with a somatic or material component (of which Fireball has both) and I don't see Eschew Materials or Still Spell in there, he's definately running out of hands.




You also have the problem of using lesser metmagic rods on 5th level spells.



> _EDIT:  He also seems to only have one Empowered Fireball memorized - though he could easily switch the LB for an FB, so the issue is less important._





He could, but the point isn't whether he can blast a wizard/cohort combination. If the wizard/cohort get the initiative, Urge dies in the first round instead. The point is who can contribute more over the course of an advanture, and Urge can't keep up. He can only use his lesser metamagic rods a grand total of three times per day each, while the wizard/cohort can cast two spells per round all day, until they run out of spells.



> _Another point which has not actually been addressed is that each character is starting off at 12th level with standard gold and unlimited XP to spend.
> 
> This isn't the way to handle things.
> 
> Instead, start with an XP total and a GP total.  Spend them however you wish (levels, multiclassing penalties, crafting, etc.)._





I did suggest this. I even pointed out that is the way it should be handled. In his rush to make a completely screwed up character, DungeonMaster ran past that point. I figure he spent at least 6,600 xp on crafting items in his spree.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Of course they can. The wizard can even have all the same gear. His cohort is then naked however.




Umm, no he's not. The cohort shows up with "gear appropriate for his level", after that, it would cost extra to equip him. But even assuming that the wizard recruited him when the cohort was 4th level (the earliest he could get the cohort), the cohort would have at least 3,300 gp. If the wizard waited until 9th level to recruit his cohort (about the time the MTs abilities start mattering), he would show up with 7,200 gp worth of gear. Even if the wizard spends no money on his cohort, the cohort is far from naked.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> * Gear: * 88 000 total




You've got some problems here.



> _8000 Metamagic rod of lesser maximize (crafted)
> 17500 Metamagic rod of lesser quicken (crafted)
> 4000 Ring of counterspells
> 8000 Periapt of wisdom +4 (crafted)
> ...





How do you craft the ioun stone. You don't seem to meet the prerequisites.



> _6500 Monk's belt (crafted)
> 4000 Ioun stone +2 Con (crafted)_





Another ioun stone.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Of course they can. The wizard can even have all the same gear. His cohort is then naked however.



No he's not. The cohort starts with his own gear.


> They have 1 higher level slot. It's important but really push comes to shove, having the extra spell pool is golden. I don't *have* to take protection versus elements on my arcane half. Or teleport. And the domain granted powers are just icing on the cake.



Actually I was pretty sure that being 3 caster levels higher than you would probably give them more than just a single higher level slot...


> Or we could both abuse polymorph for this sort of discussion and get silly dex scores.



Assuming that you've already cast polymorph when you waltz into the fight. The wizard has those bennies ALL THE TIME.

Oh, and your spellbook sucks. A big part of the wizard is versatility - for the 23,000 gp that you've spent on boosting up your caster levels, the wizard has a whole lot more spells than you... And that's really what makes a wizard powerful. If you're just going for "most damage in a round", use a sorceror. Who, incidentally, STILL knows more arcane spells than you.

And finally - I note that you listed "skills - not important, better than the non-MT".
Wrong. The non MT has a better natural intelligence than you do, and the same number of regular skill points per level.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

The Ioun stones in the DMG have the following statblock:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Moderate varied; CL 12th; Craft Wondrous Item, creator must be 12th level.




Accordingly, he meets the prerequisites.

I'd be more concerned about this:

8000 Headband of intellect +4 (crafted):  He doesn't have access to Fox's Cunning, as stated.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jun 8, 2005)

Bring the tone back to polite, please.  

Not neutral.  Polite.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> * AC: * 23 (10 + 2 dex + 5 wis +1 monk + 4 mage armor +1 luck)




Luckstones don't grant an AC bonus. Your mage armor is only up nine hours out of the day. What happens when you are attacked outside of this time frame?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Wow... what a flurry of activity...  

Anyhow, all at once: 

1/ I do meet the prerequisite for ioun stone crafting (as noted by Elvenshae)
2/ Only heighten spell changes the level of a spell. All other metamagic does not change the spell's level. The rods work on 3rd level or lower spells. Even if it takes up a 5th level slot, an empowered fireball is 3rd level. 
3/ I have caster level 10, not 9 from the ioun stone. I can memorize more mage armor if you "really" think it's relevant. 
So empowered maximized fireball + quickened empowered fireball is legal using my items. 
4/ Luckstone to AC my bad. (fixed)
5/ I thought clerics had all the animal  buffs, they don't (fixed) 

"The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for it's level" does * NOT * mean "the cohort arrives with gear" it means "you _ need to equip him appropriately _" otherwise he's going to leave you. 

The interpretation of  the leadership penalty for having a familiar is _ extremely dubious _. That would be like setting up a stronghold, staying put for a month, then getting all your followers, packing up and selling the stronghold and keeping all the followers. It's bunk. If you have a familiar you're at -2 to your cohort's effective level. He doesn't like your divided attention.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

> I figure he spent at least 6,600 xp on crafting items in his spree.




6680, good guess.  Thats half a level.



> Just using plain rules, not trying to abuse the item crafting system, polymorph or other highly abusable mechanics.




Like the Monk's Belt.



> * THE   URGE *
> Human Evoker3/Clr3/Urge6




Evoker cannot bar Divination.



> * Stats: * str 8, dex 14 (12+ 2 gloves), con 15 (13+ 2 iounstone), int 20 (15+1 levels+ 4 headband), wis 20 (14 +2 levels +4 periapt), cha 10
> * Hp: * 52.5 (8 +2d8+9d4 = 28.5 + 2x12 con)
> * AC: * 23 (10 + 2 dex + 5 wis +1 monk + 4 mage armor +1 luck)
> * Touch AC: * 20




Touch AC is 19, well 18 once you get rid of the Luckstone AC bonus.  Your nomal AC is 22.




> * Saves: * +12/+12/+20
> ( 3/1/3 cleric + 1/1/3 wizard + 2/2/5 MT then + 2 con, +4 dex and weasel + 5 wiz then +3 resistance +1 luck)
> * Skills: * the standard, spellcraft, concentration and so forth, not a big deal will be better than the non-MTs
> * Feats: * Scribe scroll (free), Empower spell (1st), Maximize spell (1st), Craft wondrous item (3rd), Spell penetration (6th), Quicken spell (9th), Craft rod (12th).
> ...




You can't craft the gloves or the Headband.



> * Spells per day: *
> Arcane:
> 1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
> 4+1/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1 (+ from specialisation)
> ...




Fixed your typo on the ability bonuses, didn't matter really, you don't have 6th level spells.



> Standard way of killing the opposing wizard+cleric (as if it matters since it's so easy):




What role are you filling in the party?


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> 2/ Only heighten spell changes the level of a spell. All other metamagic does not change the spell's level. The rods work on 3rd level or lower spells. Even if it takes up a 5th level slot, an empowered fireball is 3rd level.




Yeah, I'm not certain I buy that argument, though.

For instance, wands may only contain spells of 4th-level or less.

However, you can place metamagicked spells into wands, as if the spell was actually of the level it was metamagicked to.

Thus, you cannot make a wand of empowered fireball.



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell’s higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat). A character doesn’t need the metamagic feat to activate an item storing a metamagic version of a spell.




Accordingly, I'd say that there's precedent that a lesser rod of X only applies to spells cast at 3rd spell level or below after they are modified by metamagic feats.  Accordingly, you can use a lesser rod of maximize on an empowered magic missile (1 + 2 = 3), but not on an empowered fireball.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Wow... what a flurry of activity...
> So empowered maximized fireball + quickened empowered fireball is legal using my items.




If you had 2 empowered Fireballs Up.



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell






			
				DM said:
			
		

> "The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for it's level" does * NOT * mean "the cohort arrives with gear" it means "you _ need to equip him appropriately _" otherwise he's going to leave you.




No it means he arrives with equipment.  Before he comes to you, he is an NPC, he is not a begger.



			
				DM said:
			
		

> The interpretation of  the leadership penalty for having a familiar is _ extremely dubious _. That would be like setting up a stronghold, staying put for a month, then getting all your followers, packing up and selling the stronghold and keeping all the followers. It's bunk. If you have a familiar you're at -2 to your cohort's effective level. He doesn't like your divided attention.




You only consult the table when attracting NEW followers.  Its not a continuous thing.

Although selling your Stronghold would have a net -3 effect on your leadership.  You lose the +2 and gain -1 for moving around alot.  There may be other factors.  Also followers are not absolutly loyal.  And they can die very easily.

Also, they tend to be rather unneeded.  The Cohort is the important part of the feat.

Also your Cohort only consults the leadership table _when you first encounter them and gain them as a cohort_.  After that they gain exp.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> 6680, good guess.  Thats half a level.



Yep. It's all of a sudden relevant? 



> Evoker cannot bar Divination.



My bad. Redoing. Tossing blink and shield. Now bars abjuration. Both are divine specialities. So no harm done.  Picking up true-strike. 



> What role are you filling in the party?



Well we've got a little "shock and awe" with an extremely potent couple of rounds of utter destruction the likes of which only metamagic rods can provide. 
We've got the insane defensive spells of a cleric and the defensive domain powers to make sure that "Urge" stays alive no matter what. 
We've got the firepower of a mage. 
Can plane shift AND teleport the party. 
Can spontaneously convert my spells to healing spells.
And I can switch it up with a little preparation to go the divine-power-righteous-might-quickened-true-strike route too.  
Yeah pretty much well got the bases covered. Ready to join munchy campaigns worldwide.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Can spontaneously convert my spells to healing spells.




Just to make sure, you know that only applies to cleric spells, right?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> He can only use his lesser metamagic rods a grand total of three times per day each, while the wizard/cohort can cast two spells per round all day, until they run out of spells.



And exactly how many spells is that? 2 more hmm? Or less?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Just to make sure, you know that only applies to cleric spells, right?



Yep, but he does have those you know.


----------



## Testament (Jun 8, 2005)

And yet, the dedicated Cleric and Arcane Caster do everything you do, only better.  And they aren't all the eggs in one basket.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Wow... what a flurry of activity...
> 
> Anyhow, all at once:
> 
> ...




Nope, they are 5th level spells for magic item purposes.



> _3/ I have caster level 10, not 9 from the ioun stone. I can memorize more mage armor if you "really" think it's relevant.
> So empowered maximized fireball + quickened empowered fireball is legal using my items._





Actually, it isn't. You have to have a hand free to cast the spell, and you only have two hands. That means you can only have one rod in hand, and can't use both your metamagic rods at once. Second, your "rule" violates the rules concerning magic items and spells, which have been pointed out already.



> _4/ Luckstone to AC my bad. (fixed)
> 5/ I thought clerics had all the animal  buffs, they don't (fixed)_





There's that not knowing the rules thing again.



> _"The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for it's level" does * NOT * mean "the cohort arrives with gear" it means "you  need to equip him appropriately " otherwise he's going to leave you._





Actually, it does, but you'd know that if you read the rules.



> _The interpretation of  the leadership penalty for having a familiar is  extremely dubious . That would be like setting up a stronghold, staying put for a month, then getting all your followers, packing up and selling the stronghold and keeping all the followers. It's bunk. If you have a familiar you're at -2 to your cohort's effective level. He doesn't like your divided attention._





Actually, it's exactly what the rules say. Once you attract the cohort, the rules for _recruiting_ cohorts no longer apply. The rules for _cohort advancement_ apply, and those rules don't refer to your leadership score at all.

Unlike cohorts, followers don't advance. You don't refer to the advancement tables for them, so your leadership score doesn't matter to them. In any event, I haven't even been considering the 8 1st level followers that the wizard would be entitled to, so that element doesn't matter for this discussion.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> For instance, wands may only contain spells of 4th-level or less.



There are rules specifically for those. These are not wands. They are the be-all and end-all metamagic rods.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Yep, but he does have those you know.




Just checking.  Some people are confused on this point.



			
				DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> There are rules specifically for those. These are not wands. They are the be-all and end-all metamagic rods.




Actually, if you check the rules text I quoted, it mentions every form of magic item that stores spells and has an associated level limit.

The general rule seems to be that magic items care about the effective spell level (which all metamagic feats affect), not the base spell level (which only Heighten Spell affects).


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> If you had 2 empowered Fireballs Up.



Done. As said, it's only a sample spell list. I could have 2 fireball or lightning bolts. It doesn't matter. 



> No it means he arrives with equipment.  Before he comes to you, he is an NPC, he is not a begger.



No it doesn't. You're interpreting that but no, it doesn't say you get a fully equipped cohort. That's ridiculous. 



> You only consult the table when attracting NEW followers.  Its not a continuous thing.



That's likewise ridiculous. You could claim to have killed 20 followers, taken their gear and leveled your follower up to his current level. 
We're already operating under the assumption that the wizard gets to pick and choose his follower's entire feat selection and manipulate his XP total to use him as a crafting mule - you realise that right?  




> Also, they tend to be rather unneeded.  The Cohort is the important part of the feat.



This is likewise irrelevant. You want to get a familiar and not suffer the leadership penalty but blantantly ridiculous is doing the same with a stronghold and followers.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
			
		

> Actually, if you check the rules text I quoted, it mentions every form of magic item that stores spells and has an associated level limit.



I agree 100%.. Metamagic rods don't store spells. Done deal.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

You STILL can't pick a role in a 4 member party.  You are stuck trying to do everything.



			
				DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Well we've got a little "shock and awe" with an extremely potent couple of rounds of utter destruction the likes of which only metamagic rods can provide.




How many rounds of combat are you viable for?  You do know how bad direct damage is right?  Notice that your GOOD combos above reply not on damage?

You do know that the Wizard has more spells available to cast and will do more damage per spell and have a wider variety of spells to cast?

You are up against DISINTIGRATE while you whip out your best _two_ spells.  You are then up against your regular routine while you are on your _BAD_ set of spells.

As such you fail to take the wizard's role.



> We've got the insane defensive spells of a cleric and the defensive domain powers to make sure that "Urge" stays alive no matter what.




You being alive and having to cast all those spells, on yourself, in no way matter.

While you are casting those spells, you are unable to cast the wizard spells you talked about above.

As such you are not as defensive as a cleric, unless you admit you are subpar as a wizard.  You are also unable to turn undead, your AC sucks due to lack of armor, your HP are low.  Set your sights lower.  The wizard loses less.  The cleric loses alot going into the Myth.

As such you get to pick which you suck at.



> We've got the firepower of a mage.




Mage has Disintegrate, you have Fireball.  Do the math.



> Can plane shift AND teleport the party.




If you replace the wizard, the cleric can cast one.  If you replace the cleric the wizard can do the other.



> Can spontaneously convert my spells to healing spells.




You don't have HEAL.  You can't convert that one.



> And I can switch it up with a little preparation to go the divine-power-righteous-might-quickened-true-strike route too.




Replacing the cleric?  Who has more HP, Better AC due to armor, shield, not needing an Ioun stone of +1 Caster level, and HEAL so they don't need to keep casting weaker heal spells.

You are not replacing the cleric, ever.  Don't even try.  The only chance you have is at replacing the wizard.  Your Buff Bot has 1 single encounter in him.  After that he's really sad.

You are not replacing the fighter, who easily has 2x your HP, better AC, and better To Hit.



> Yeah pretty much well got the bases covered. Ready to join munchy campaigns worldwide.




I wouldn't with that character.  Unless you are in a party of bards (Although they could be viable if you allowed some non-core books), you will be one of the weaker character.

When people whip out spells like HEAL, HARM, and DISINTIGRATE, noone really worries about fireball.  In fact, with those spells available, I'd RATHER be hit by fireball.  At least that maxes out at 90.  Heck of a lot better then 120/144.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I agree 100%.. Metamagic rods don't store spells. Done deal.




Alright.  :\ 

Look - the general rule is that magic items care about modified spell level, not base spell level.

Can you post the exact wording of the MMR rules text?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Nope, they are 5th level spells for magic item purposes.



Nope, they are not. Read it up, spell level, not slot. It's irrelevant what slot it occupies. All that's relevant is spell level. 
Just buy them with you cash. Who cares? 




> Actually, it isn't. You have to have a hand free to cast the spell, and you only have two hands. That means you can only have one rod in hand, and can't use both your metamagic rods at once.



I have my rods tethered to me by strong yet short chain. 
Maximize rod in hand: Maximized empowered fireball (standard action)
Drop rod (free action)
Pick up metamagic rod of quicken spell (move equivalent action)
Quickened empowered fireball (free action) 
*Urp, that was easy*

Now um, where's _ your _ write up? With the leadership penalty for having a familiar if you have one?


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No it doesn't. You're interpreting that but no, it doesn't say you get a fully equipped cohort. That's ridiculous.




Why is it ridiculous?  It says the cohort has gear as an NPC.  This is not a "the cohort must be equiped as a NPC to stay" is says specifically "The DM determines the details of the character.  The Cohort has gear as an NPC".



> That's likewise ridiculous. You could claim to have killed 20 followers, taken their gear and leveled your follower up to his current level.




Thats a -40 on your cohort leadership value.  Unless you have a Leadership score of 2 or higher, no cohort.



> We're already operating under the assumption that the wizard gets to pick and choose his follower's entire feat selection and manipulate his XP total to use him as a crafting mule - you realise that right?




Once in the party, you are like their mentor.  And you can choose to attract a certain type of cohort.

All they are looking to do here is attract a Cleric who is able to create his own gear, as to be more self sufficient.



> This is likewise irrelevant. You want to get a familiar and not suffer the leadership penalty but blantantly ridiculous is doing the same with a stronghold and followers.




Oh you suffer the leadership penalty.  It just doesn't matter.

Just like having your Int permenently drained doesn't decrease already gained skill points, or the spells you had in your spellbook at level 1.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Now um, where's _ your _ write up? With the leadership penalty for having a familiar if you have one?




Your character isn't even legal yet.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> You STILL can't pick a role in a 4 member party.  You are stuck trying to do everything.



Stuck "trying to do everything?" Urge does do everything. And we can have 2 Urges, just like him rather than a wizard and cleric in our party. 



> How many rounds of combat are you viable for?  You do know how bad direct damage is right?  Notice that your GOOD combos above reply not on damage?



A large number maybe 2 or 3 less than the wizard + cohort? And no I tend to think 60+ damage is pretty good, especially when you save for massive damage each time. 
I personally wouldn't go for the quicken rod and would just get 2 more maximize rods but this is for "shock and awe".  



> You do know that the Wizard has more spells available to cast and will do more damage per spell and have a wider variety of spells to cast?



No I didn't know that, in fact it's not at all true. That wider variety had better include some defensive magic or he's pretty dead. I have all my defensive magic from my clerical side. 



> You are up against DISINTIGRATE while you whip out your best _two_ spells.  You are then up against your regular routine while you are on your _BAD_ set of spells.



Hmm... 3.5 disintegrate, the weak version right? Touch AC of 18, I can take 5d6 on the save in stride, because I get to re-roll remember? Luck domain granted power and all? Try feeblemind wisdom-less wizard. 
What exactly is a "bad" set of spells? I have hold persons, stinking clouds, walls of ice, fireballs, lightning bolts, searing light, charms, I can target all types of saving throws but I aim primarily for reflex, because it's the worst for the majority of things. 



> The cleric loses alot going into the Myth.



He does, in hitpoints, but at any point of the day I can strap on armor and well, fight pretty damn good with divine power and righteous might if that's the nature of the battle.  
This MT has a defensive spell-casting focus, it's not like he can't change in a minute. And he can throw arcane buffs up too.  




> As such you get to pick which you suck at.



The MT does not "suck". It is uber. 



> Mage has Disintegrate, you have Fireball.  Do the math.



Correction, I have empowered maximized fireball. An 8th level slot. Does anything in 3.5 fear 3.5 disintegrate? I've lost track since it was nerfed. Poor beholders. You used to inspire fear.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Why is it ridiculous?  It says the cohort has gear as an NPC.  This is not a "the cohort must be equiped as a NPC to stay" is says specifically "The DM determines the details of the character.  The Cohort has gear as an NPC".



Not in my SRD: 
"The character can attract a cohort of up to this level. Regardless of a character’s Leadership score, he can only recruit a cohort who is two or more levels lower than himself. * The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for its level.*  A character can try to attract a cohort of a particular race, class, and alignment. The cohort’s alignment may not be opposed to the leader’s alignment on either the law-vs-chaos or good-vs-evil axis, and the leader takes a Leadership penalty if he recruits a cohort of an alignment different from his own." 
And nothing more. 



> Unless you have a Leadership score of 2 or higher, no cohort.



Make it 10 of them then, you know what I mean. 




> All they are looking to do here is attract a Cleric who is able to create his own gear, as to be more self sufficient.



Dude here wants to use the cohort as some sort of item creation mule. 



> Oh you suffer the leadership penalty.  It just doesn't matter.



Sadly it does. 

And I think I've cleared up all mistakes.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Stuck "trying to do everything?" Urge does do everything. And we can have 2 Urges, just like him rather than a wizard and cleric in our party.




No you don't do everything.  At any one time the most precious commodity, TIME, is limited and in any given frame of time you are stuck doing ONE thing.

You miss this.  Bigtime.



> A large number maybe 2 or 3 less than the wizard + cohort? And no I tend to think 60+ damage is pretty good, especially when you save for massive damage each time.
> I personally wouldn't go for the quicken rod and would just get 2 more maximize rods but this is for "shock and awe".




*laugh*  Your Save DC is 18.  Thats it.  You are doing 30+ not 60+ to most targets.

Even YOUR Reflex save makes that on a 6.  A SIX.



> No I didn't know that, in fact it's not at all true. That wider variety had better include some defensive magic or he's pretty dead. I have all my defensive magic from my clerical side.




Blink, Displacement, Improved Invis, how much more do you need?  You don't have TIME to cast your defensive spells if you are going offensive.  You have to pick one.



> Hmm... 3.5 disintegrate, the weak version right? Touch AC of 19, I can take 5d6 on the save in stride, because I get to re-roll remember? Luck domain granted power and all? Try feeblemind wisdom-less wizard.




Yeah, um, not an arena match.  Wanna try that again?



> What exactly is a "bad" set of spells? I have hold persons, stinking clouds, walls of ice, fireballs, lightning bolts, searing light, charms, I can target all types of saving throws but I aim primarily for reflex, because it's the worst for the majority of things.




Yeah those are most of them.  Wall of ice and Hold Person are ok.  Hold person blows against casters, Wall of Ice is good.  Glad you got a couple good spells.  While you are using these though, the wizard is still on level 5 spells.  Good Game.  Not to mention the wizard still has those spells.  You know for AFTER duplicating your Emp/Max Fireballs.



> He does, in hitpoints, but at any point of the day I can strap on armor and well, fight pretty damn good with divine power and righteous might if that's the nature of the battle.
> This MT has a defensive spell-casting focus, it's not like he can't change in a minute. And he can throw arcane buffs up too.




You will never replace a Cleric.  Mostly because you CAN'T change into armor in a minute.  Without Silent Spell you are not casting any good Mage buffs before putting it on.



> The MT does not "suck". It is uber.




Playtest him then.  I can tell _for a fact_, that you would never think of playtesting it.  And I have never heard of anyone saying that _from playtesting_ they are overpowered.  Only in made up situations like arenas, and theoretical discussions such as this.



> Correction, I have empowered maximized fireball. An 8th level slot. Does anything in 3.5 fear 3.5 disintegrate?




So can the wizard.  Whats your point?  The Wizard can do it ALOT more then you also.  AND can cast 24d6 non-fire damage at a single target.  You can't.

So, I would like to point out _another_ questionable game mechanic you are using.

Metamagic Rods.
Your character is utter garbage without them, so I will conceed that Metamagic Rods are very powerful.  Too bad your character isn't.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Not in my SRD:




Its in the DMG.  Thats why you don't have it.



> Make it 10 of them then, you know what I mean.




No not really.  You want to attract followers for the purpose of killing them for their equipment.  DMs tend to use that to work against the players.  You know the whole "You know, I heard he kills his followers if they have something he wants" issue.

Leadership is a Role-Play feat that requires DM intervention in terms of use, hence it being in the DMG and not the PHB.

At 10 of them thats a -20 on your leadership score.  Your Myth only has a score of 12.  A Paladin MIGHT have a leadership score of 16-18.  And a Paladin wouldn't do that.




> Dude here wants to use the cohort as some sort of item creation mule.




No, only the the Cohort THEMSELF.  So the COHORT, makes the COHORTS own stuff.



> And I think I've cleared up all mistakes.




Are your gloves no longer crafted?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> And exactly how many spells is that? 2 more hmm? Or less?




Actually, it's more, because their casting stat bonuses are higher than yours, and the wizard has a higher caster level. To wit:

12th level Wizard (Transmuter, Necromancy and Illusion prohibited) (starting experience 72,680 to mimic your crafting antics, final experience 66,240), Human, Str 8, Int 22 (15 + 3 level bonuses + 4 headband), Wis 13 Dex 12 (10 + 2 gloves) Con 14 (12 + 2 amulet), Cha 14
Feats: Scribe Scroll (Free), Improved Initiative (1st), Spell Focus (Transmutation) (1st), Greater Spell Focus (Transmutation) (3rd), Craft Wondrous Item (5th level bonus feat), Leadership (6th), Lightning Reflexes (9th), Craft Rod (10th level bonus feat), Forge Ring (12th), Alertness (from familiar)
Skills: Better than Urge, primarily because his Intelligence bonus is higher.
AC 18 (10 + 5 robe, +2 ring, +1 Dex), BAB +6/+1, Fort +12 (+4 base +2 Con +4 robe, +2 familiar), Reflex +11 (+4 base, +1 Dex, +4 robe, +2 feat), Will +13 (+8 base, +1 Wis, +4 robe), SR 18 (robe), HP 55.5 (average), Init +5 (+1 Dex, +4 feat)
12th level caster, 14th for overcoming spell resistance, save DC 16 + spell level, 18 + spell level for transmutation spells) 0th: 4+1, 1st: 6+1, 2nd: 6+1, 3rd: 5+1, 4th: 4+1, 5th: 4+1, 6th: 3+1
Familiar (Rat): normal rat abilities and 22 hp, +6 natural armor, Int 11, improved evasion, share spells, emapthic link, deliver touch spells, speak with master, speak with other rats, spell resistance 17, Fort +4, Reflex +6, Will +9, +8 on attacks.

Equipment:
Robe of Archmagi (crafted) 37,500 gp
Headband of Intellect +4 (crafted) 8,000 gp
Gloves of Dexterity +2 (crafted) 2,000 gp
Amulet of Health +2 (crafted) 2,000 gp
Ring of Protection +2 (crafted) 4,000 gp

10th level Cleric Cohort  (recruited at 4th level with 6,000 xp, since then has earned 57,600 x 0.75 = 43,200 xp for a total of 49,200 xp, final experience 48,880), Dwarf, Str 13, Int 8, Wis 22 (15 + 3 level bonus +4 periapt), Dex 12 (10 + 2 gloves), Con 16 (14 + 2 racial bonus), Cha 10 (12 - 2 racial penalty)
Feats: Improved Initiative (1st), Lightning Reflexes (3rd), Craft Magic Arms and Armor (6th), Combat Casting (9th)
Skills: Minimal due to Intelligence penalty, but at least 5 ranks of Knowledge: Religion.
AC 27 (10 + 10 armor, + 4 shield, + 2 ring, + 1 Dex), 31 against giants, BAB +7/+2, Fort +14 (+7 base +3 Con +4 cloak), Reflex +10 (+3 base, +1 Dex, +4 cloak, +2 feat), Will +17 (+7 base, +6 Wis, +4 cloak), HP 78.5 (average), Init +5 (+1 Dex, +4 feat), +2 bonus to saves against spells and spell-like effects, +2 bonus to saves against poison, stonecunning, stability, +2 skill bonus to Appraise and Craft checks related to stone or metal, +1 attack bonus against goblinoids and orcs, Earth domain, Protection domain, turn undead 3x/day at 10th level ability, +2 bonus to turn roll.
10th level caster, save DC 16 + spell level 0th: 6, 1st: 6+1, 2nd: 6+1, 3rd: 4+1, 4th: 4+1, 5th: 3+1

Equipment:
+2 Full Plate (masterwork plate when recruited, enhanced by crafting) 2,000 gp
+2 heavy steel shield (masterwork shield when recruited, ehanced by crafting) 2,000 gp
masterwork morningstar (when recruited)
Cloak of Resistance +4 (crafted) 8,000
Periapt of Wisdom +4 (crafted) 8,000 gp
Ring of Protection +2 (crafted) 4,000 gp
Gloves of Dexterity +2 (crafted) 2,000 gp

I've got 8,500 left to put into my spellbook and sundry gear, so I can have a pretty full spell book. At this point, running through the spell book and spell selections would likely be a waste of time, since the Wizard/Cohort can match you spell for spell (no metamagiced spells, but we've got higher level spells to cast, so the save DCs will be higher), plus several more spells, and higher level ones to boot. The pair is also more durable, able to cast two spells per round until they run out of spells, and has a wider selection of available spells (since the Wizard's spell book is much larger than yours). They are also both closer to leveling up than you.

Your spells are going to have a hard time doing much damage, and you are likely to go second in the round, since you are comparatively slow to react. But a head to head match up is silly, the real key is that this pair would be much more valuable to a party of other adventurers than Urge.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Stuck "trying to do everything?" Urge does do everything. And we can have 2 Urges, just like him rather than a wizard and cleric in our party.




And your party would suffer for it.



> _A large number maybe 2 or 3 less than the wizard + cohort? And no I tend to think 60+ damage is pretty good, especially when you save for massive damage each time.
> I personally wouldn't go for the quicken rod and would just get 2 more maximize rods but this is for "shock and awe"._





A lot fewer. Let's look at how many more spells the wizard + cohort have than Urge:

Arcane: 1st: 0, 2nd: 2, 3rd: 1, 4th: 1, 5th: 1, 6th 4
Divine: 1st: 0, 2nd: 2, 3rd: 0, 4th: 1, 5th: 1

So, for review, the wizard + cohort have 4 more 2nd level spells, 1 more 3rd level spell, 2 more 4th level spells, 2 more 5th level spells, and 4 more 6th level spells. That's a little more than "2 or 3 less". That's 13 fewer spells, or, to put things into better perspective, 53 spell levels worth of spells. Your problem is that you don't look at what your character _gives up_ when he becomes "less than uber".



> _No I didn't know that, in fact it's not at all true. That wider variety had better include some defensive magic or he's pretty dead. I have all my defensive magic from my clerical side._





Your save DCs on your fireballs are 18, and you first have to overcome spell resistance to get through (and your caster check isn't that great). The wizard saves on a 7, the cleric saves on a 6. You were saying the saves were "unlikely"? In any event, the wizard probably, since he can cast _contingency_ has one that triggers something like a _lesser globe of invulnerability_ whenever he is subjected to hostile magic.

Meanwile the Wizard (who probably gets the initiative on you, spell casters are all about initiative) hits you with something like a _flesh to stone_, save DC 24, you save on a 12 or the combat is done. You fail, you can reroll, but that burns your domain ability for the day. The cleric can then hit you with _flame strike_ save DC 21, in which case you suffer 5d6 or 10d6 damage or casts _righteous might_ and moves up towards you, to whack you with an AoO if you try to cast a spell. They could take any number of other options, most of which would really hamper your day due to the wizard's higher level spells, and the higher save DCs both of them have.



> _Hmm... 3.5 disintegrate, the weak version right? Touch AC of 18, I can take 5d6 on the save in stride, because I get to re-roll remember? Luck domain granted power and all? Try feeblemind wisdom-less wizard._





His Will save is +12, and he has has SR 18. Your caster level check is +12 (you fail a little less than a third of the time), and your save DC is 20 (he saves more than 40% of the time). Even if you get through, you have to deal with the cohort who will probably finish you off before you can act again. I'm not really quaking here.

And the wizard's _disintegrate_ DC would be 24. His touch attack roll bonus is +8, so he hits about half the time. You fail your save more than half the time. If he hits, prepare to suck up 24d6 damage.



> _What exactly is a "bad" set of spells? I have hold persons, stinking clouds, walls of ice, fireballs, lightning bolts, searing light, charms, I can target all types of saving throws but I aim primarily for reflex, because it's the worst for the majority of things._





It is a limited set of spells, based on your very weak spell book.



> _He does, in hitpoints, but at any point of the day I can strap on armor and well, fight pretty damn good with divine power and righteous might if that's the nature of the battle._





Armor that you haven't paid for out of your equipment list.



> _This MT has a defensive spell-casting focus, it's not like he can't change in a minute. And he can throw arcane buffs up too._





Your arcane buffs are pretty limited: you gave up abjuration remember?



> _The MT does not "suck". It is uber._





You have an odd definition of "uber", one that apparently means "not as good as standard classes at things". In point of fact, compared to the alternatives, the MT pretty much sucks.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Your dex is benefiting from mysterious extra level bonus. It should start at 10 to, not 11, lowering your saves and AC. 
Your familiar is granting you bonus to saves and the alertness feat somehow. 
You have obviously forgotten spell penetration feats at some level or another because you're only at CL = 14 vs SR by my count.
Your cohort does not have a cloak. 
You have the same intelligence bonus as the Urge until 12th level, be happy with your 1 skill point. Sadly the urge has a luckstone, so you have worse everything than him. 
You have no metamagic rods. 
You still need to show spells. 

In fact the _ only _ thing you have over the Mystic theurge is 4 6th level spells per day. And that's assuming the rods don't count. If you factor the rods then you have _ less _ than he does - with both you and your cohort.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Your dex is benefiting from mysterious extra level bonus. It should start at 10 to, not 11, lowering your saves and AC.




Yep.



> _Your familiar is granting you bonus to saves and the alertness feat somehow._





Look up familiars.



> _You have obviously forgotten spell penetration feats at some level or another because you're only at CL = 14 vs SR by my count._





I had it on one version, it drifted in to this one. Fixed.



> _Your cohort does not have a cloak._





Fixed.



> _You have the same intelligence bonus as the Urge until 12th level, be happy with your 1 skill point. Sadly the urge has a luckstone, so you have worse everything than him._





Except that the Urge has lower stat modifiers, so he's out of luck.



> _You have no metamagic rods._





So? I don't need them.



> _You still need to show spells._





Because? I can match you spell for spell, and more. That's the point.



> _In fact the  only  thing you have over the Mystic theurge is 4 6th level spells per day. And that's assuming the rods don't count. If you factor the rods then you have  less  than he does - with both you and your cohort._





The rods somehow give you extra spells per day? Of course, I also have 4 2nd level spells, 1 3rd level spell, 2 4th level spells, and 2 5th level spells more than you. A total of 53 spell levels worth of spells. And I can cast two per round all day. Can you?

Oh, and my save DCs are higher. And my caster level is higher. And my spell penetration is better. And I can effectively turn undead, and you can't. You just don't understand how outclassed Urge truly is.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> *laugh*  Your Save DC is 18.  Thats it.  You are doing 30+ not 60+ to most targets.
> Even YOUR Reflex save makes that on a 6.  A SIX.



I guess that says a lot for disintegrate doesn't it? 
The Urge is also remarkable at saving. 
Storm giants are CR 13 and have +8. And they're not the worst at saves in the game either. 



> Glad you got a couple good spells.  While you are using these though, the wizard is still on level 5 spells.  Good Game.  Not to mention the wizard still has those spells.  You know for AFTER duplicating your Emp/Max Fireballs.



Well he clearly hasn't been able to duplicate my fireballs. Sadly. 



> Playtest him then.  I can tell _for a fact_, that you would never think of playtesting it.  And I have never heard of anyone saying that _from playtesting_ they are overpowered.  Only in made up situations like arenas, and theoretical discussions such as this.



Well it passes the theory test then. I've heard from numerous people they are overpowered.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I guess that says a lot for disintegrate doesn't it?
> The Urge is also remarkable at saving.
> Storm giants are CR 13 and have +8. And they're not the worst at saves in the game either.




They also have 199 hit points. They laugh at the piddly damage you deal out.



> _Well he clearly hasn't been able to duplicate my fireballs. Sadly._





Why bother? Intentionally hamper my save DCs to accomplish an effect I could just get by using actual 5th and 6th level spells? Metamagic, when it increases the spell level slot, is a sucker's bet.



> _Well it passes the theory test then. I've heard from numerous people they are overpowered._





Just because many people believe something doesn't make it true. In this case, the "many people" are wrong. Your "uber" MT is behind in save DCs, spell slots, caster level, and just about everything else that makes for a valuable caster in a party.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Look up familiars.



Ah, I guess I should add that to my list too. 



> Because? I can match you spell for spell, and more. That's the point.



No you can't. You don't have the same opposition schools. You need to write up your spells dude.  



> The rods somehow give you extra spells per day? Of course, I also have 4 2nd level spells, 1 3rd level spell, 2 4th level spells, and 2 5th level spells more than you. A total of 53 spell levels worth of spells. And I can cast two per round all day. Can you?



If I want to be moronic and trade away the rods I can. I can buy with my cash pearls of power - is that what you respect? Heck I can even buy better stat enhancing items for their price. 
The urge also has 1 less int then you and is better or equal in every stat AND has a luckstone. You lose in skills, regardless. Write them up for fun. 
You've basically not matched either hp, AC, saves or raw firepower. 
You're out-classed go back to the drawing board.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I guess that says a lot for disintegrate doesn't it?
> The Urge is also remarkable at saving.
> Storm giants are CR 13 and have +8. And they're not the worst at saves in the game either.




With a truck load of HP, and a fort save thats a bit higher then +8, I don't think they care about Massive Damage saves or HP damage.  

That same Storm Giant hits you on a 5 for 3d6+14 damage.  Then on a 10 for the same, then on a 15 for the same.

OR

Chain Lightning for 20d6, although you are likely to only take 10d6 because of the save.



> Well he clearly hasn't been able to duplicate my fireballs. Sadly.




You can't duplicate Contingency.  He could if he wanted to, you don't have the option.



> Well it passes the theory test then. I've heard from numerous people they are overpowered.




No, it doesn't pass the theory test.  Just because you think its overpowered doesn't make it so.  I have a DM that thinks Improved Trip is overpowered by how it looks.  That doesn't mean it IS overpowered.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Ah, I thought it was a raven.




It's a rat.



> _No you can't. You don't have the same opposition schools. You need to write up your spells dude._





Yeah, I pretty much can. You can cast 5 3rd level wizard spells, I can cast 6. You can cast 4 4th level wizard spells, I can cast 5. You can cast 3 5th level wizard spells, I can cast 4. Every time you use a spell slot, I can match it with an equal spell. And I haven't added in the fact that the cleric cohort can cast more spells than you as well.

You can cast two spells per round for three rounds out of the day. I can do it 28 rounds per day (not counting cantrips and orisons).



> _If I want to be moronic and trade away the rods I can. I can buy with my cash pearls of power - is that what you respect? Heck I can even buy better stat enhancing items for their price._





No, I just don't need them to cast two spells per round. Having two casters does that. You use the rods to patch a weakness, a weakness my character doesn't have. So I don't need them.



> _You've basically not matched either hp, AC, saves or raw firepower._





I have more combined hit points than you by a huge margin. My wizard has 55.5, the cleric has 78.5. Urge only has 52.5. My wizard _by himself_ has more hit points than you.

The wizard has an AC only a few points less than yours, while the cleric has an AC a fair amount higher. Being able to cast _shield_ (since he can use abjurations) makes up the difference (much of your AC comes from a first level spell, so mine can counter). You lose most of your AC when flat-footed too (it drops to 14, touch AC 10, I hope you aren't targeted with a touch spell before you can act).

Saves? I have SR, you don't. My save totals are almost as high as yours in every category, even for the cohort (who gets save bonuses against things like spells, and has enough hit points to take more punishment to begin with). I think you need to actually read what has been written.

And raw firepower? I have 6th level spells. I can blast things far better than you ever could hope to. My save DCs are _far_ higher than yours, since you keep insisting on using metamagiced 3rd level spells. While you monkey about with _fireballs_, I'll be using things like _chain lightning_, _cone of cold_, and _cloudkill_, you know, higher level spells.

I have a higher caster level. My base save DCs are higher. My spell penetration is better.

So, you were saying?



> _You're out-classed go back to the drawing board._





I think you have that backwards.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

> Your save DCs on your fireballs are 18, and you first have to overcome spell resistance to get through (and your caster check isn't that great). The wizard saves on a 7, the cleric saves on a 6. You were saying the saves were "unlikely"? In any event, the wizard probably, since he can cast _contingency_ has one that triggers something like a _lesser globe of invulnerability_ whenever he is subjected to hostile magic.



Dude, my caster level is 12 vs. your SR of 18. I can CAST SR on myself for hours at SR of 22. You havn't even picked spells. And your will save and pathetic touch AC means 50%  of the time you're a drooling 1 hp nobody with a single feeblemind. Ooops. Did the Urge just kill you again? 



> Meanwile the Wizard (who probably gets the initiative on you, spell casters are all about initiative) hits you with something like a _flesh to stone_, save DC 24, you save on a 12 or the combat is done.



You still havn't picked spells. Your save DC is 23 with flesh to stone incidentally. 



> The cleric can then hit you with _flame strike_ save DC 21, in which case you suffer 5d6 or 10d6 damage or casts _righteous might_ and moves up towards you, to whack you with an AoO if you try to cast a spell. They could take any number of other options, most of which would really hamper your day due to the wizard's higher level spells, and the higher save DCs both of them have.



* OH NO! Not a flame-strike! * Does maximized empowered fireball + quickened empowered fireball not resonate? How about the dimension door I have from domain abilities? 
I don't think arena combat is your um, selling point here. 



> And the wizard's _disintegrate_ DC would be 24. His touch attack roll bonus is +8, so he hits about half the time. You fail your save more than half the time. If he hits, prepare to suck up 24d6 damage.



Oh so 12% of the time with re-roll you um, *might* cause some damage?  



> It is a limited set of spells, based on your very weak spell book.



I presume with your "left over cash" your spell book is overflowing. 




> You have an odd definition of "uber", one that apparently means "not as good as standard classes at things". In point of fact, compared to the alternatives, the MT pretty much sucks.



Point in fact, it's completely out-doing your wizard + cohort idea.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Dude, my caster level is 12 vs. your SR of 18. I can CAST SR on myself for hours at SR of 22. You havn't even picked spells. And your will save and pathetic touch AC means 50%  of the time you're a drooling 1 hp nobody with a single feeblemind. Ooops. Did the Urge just kill you again?




This is not an arena, its a game with 3 OTHER party members.  Please remember this.  Everyone.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Yeah, I pretty much can. You can cast 5 3rd level wizard spells, I can cast 6. You can cast 4 4th level wizard spells, I can cast 5. You can cast 3 5th level wizard spells, I can cast 4.



No you can't. Because you didn't buy the rods I can cast higher sloted magic than you can.
Again, I could buy pearls of power. You've won nothing.  




> No, I just don't need them to cast two spells per round. Having two casters does that. You use the rods to patch a weakness, a weakness my character doesn't have. So I don't need them.



Your cleric dies in round 1. Why? Because he is under-geared. What now? I guess that's it for your "advantage". 



> I have more combined hit points than you by a huge margin. My wizard has 55.5, the cleric has 78.5. Urge only has 52.5. My wizard _by himself_ has more hit points than you.



Urge has 63.5 hp.  You die in roughly 1 round still. Saving both times. 




> The wizard has an AC only a few points less than yours, while the cleric has an AC a fair amount higher. Being able to cast _shield_ (since he can use abjurations) makes up the difference (much of your AC comes from a first level spell, so mine can counter).



* PICK SPELLS *. 




> Saves? I have SR, you don't. My save totals are almost as high as yours in every category, even for the cohort (who gets save bonuses against things like spells, and has enough hit points to take more punishment to begin with). I think you need to actually read what has been written.



your "save total"? Tell that to feeblemind. I think it cares. 



> And raw firepower? I have 6th level spells. I can blast things far better than you ever could hope to. My save DCs are _far_ higher than yours, since you keep insisting on using metamagiced 3rd level spells. While you monkey about with _fireballs_, I'll be using things like _chain lightning_, _cone of cold_, and _cloudkill_, you know, higher level spells.



* PICK SPELLS *. Urge can cast cloudkill and cone of cold. Your chain lightning is pathetic compared to a maximized empowered fireball. You have +1 DC for um, all of those spells listed. 



> I have a higher caster level. My base save DCs are higher. My spell penetration is better.



+2, +1, +2. I have more hp, better AC, better saves, divine abilities, don't have to buff two-characters, higher level equivalent spells, oh god where does the list end? 

* PICK SPELLS. * There's no point in further arguing with you when I provide a complete write up and you provide a handwaiving.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Dude, my caster level is 12 vs. your SR of 18. I can CAST SR on myself for hours at SR of 22.




Sure you could. I hope you aren't hoping to spend that 5th level spell slot on something else.



> _You havn't even picked spells._





There's no reason to. It's already obvious that the Urge is hopelessly outlclassed.



> _And your will save and pathetic touch AC means 50%  of the time you're a drooling 1 hp nobody with a single feeblemind. Ooops. Did the Urge just kill you again?_





Your touch attack is +8, my touch AC is 14, so you need a 4 to hit to begin with. You need to overcome SR, which you fail a quarter of the time. Your save DC is pathetic: 20. The wizard's Will save is +13. Even accounting for the -4 adjustment, the wizard saves 50% of the time. So, the actual chance that you will succeed is 28%. And you have yet to deal with the cohort, who can probably whack you around by himself.

I hope you aren't caught flat-footed. Your touch AC is only 10 then.



> _You still havn't picked spells. Your save DC is 23 with flesh to stone incidentally._





Nope, 24. 10 + 6 Intelligence modifier + 6 spell level + 1 Spell Focus + 1 Greater Spell Focus = 24.



> _* OH NO! Not a flame-strike! * Does maximized empowered fireball + quickened empowered fireball not resonate? How about the dimension door I have from domain abilities?
> I don't think arena combat is your um, selling point here._





it's a _flame strike_ plus a _disitnegrate_, or _flesh to stone_. You seem to forget that while you can cast two spells per round three times per day, my guys can do it 28 times per day. 10d6 damage averages 35 points, and the _disintegrate_ you saved against caused you 17.5 damage. You are at 0, even if you save against the _disintegrate_. If you fail the save, you are almost surely dead (84 average damage).



> _Oh so 12% of the time with re-roll you um, *might* cause some damage?_





I burn up your reroll. And then you don't have it any more. And your character gets picked apart.



> _I presume with your "left over cash" your spell book is overflowing._





Pretty much, given that I left thousands of gp in the kitty, and you left pennies.



> _Point in fact, it's completely out-doing your wizard + cohort idea._





You are the only one posting here who thinks so. Your utility is very limited, to a few rounds per day, and even then, the wizard + cohort outmatches you down the line. The point isn't who can win a heads up fight, in a spell casting duel that is almost always the one who wins initiative unless the other gets lucky. The key is who is more valuable over the long haul, and that's clearly the wizard + cohort combination. They have 53 more total spell levels than you to cast, they can cast two spells per round 25 more times per day than you, they have higher save DCs for their spells, they have more useful sundry abilities, and can absorb more damage than you.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> This is not an arena, its a game with 3 OTHER party members.  Please remember this.  Everyone.



Sure. I agree. If it were an arena, he'd be dead. Which is also fairly easy to agree upon. 
Now until he picks spells, to satisfy those crafting requirements I don't think there's much more to discuss.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Sure. I agree. If it were an arena, he'd be dead. Which is also fairly easy to agree upon.
> Now until he picks spells, to satisfy those crafting requirements I don't think there's much more to discuss.




Actually in an Arena, whoever loses initiative loses.

He took II, you lost already.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Sure you could. I hope you aren't hoping to spend that 5th level spell slot on something else.



I have it _ memorized _ get it? Because I picked spells and actually offered up a sample spell selection. What are you lazy? Afraid it won't look so-hot? Can't afford all the neat-o spells you want? Just do it. 




> Your touch attack is +8, my touch AC is 14, so you need a 4 to hit to begin with. You need to overcome SR, which you fail a quarter of the time. Your save DC is pathetic: 20. The wizard's Will save is +13. Even accounting for the -4 adjustment, the wizard saves 50% of the time. So, the actual chance that you will succeed is 28%. And you have yet to deal with the cohort, who can probably whack you around by himself.



Quickened true-strike. Oh look I didn't roll a 1. Feeblemind. 





> You seem to forget that while you can cast two spells per round three times per day, my guys can do it 28 times per day.



Not when they're dead. Your cohort dies in round 1 remember. 38.75 minimum damage from the plain maximized empowered fireball then the next fireball for 26.25 minimum damage. Them dwarven clerics don't save none to good neither. 
And you have no teleportation magic. 



> 10d6 damage averages 35 points, and the _disintegrate_ you saved against caused you 17.5 damage. You are at 0, even if you save against the _disintegrate_. If you fail the save, you are almost surely dead (84 average damage).






> I burn up your reroll. And then you don't have it any more. And your character gets picked apart.



Funny that you have none and would be dead? 




> The key is who is more valuable over the long haul, and that's clearly the wizard + cohort combination. They have 53 more total spell levels than you to cast, they can cast two spells per round 25 more times per day than you, they have higher save DCs for their spells, they have more useful sundry abilities, and can absorb more damage than you.



They fail their saves more often, they need to cast spells on both to be effective, they don't have combined abilities and your spell level analysis is so horribly flawed it's unreal.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No you can't. Because you didn't buy the rods I can cast higher sloted magic than you can.




Three times per day. Oh, wow. How were you going to offset the 53 extra levels of spells that my guys can cast? With a rod? Don't make me laugh.



> _Again, I could buy pearls of power. You've won nothing._





And then you don't have the rods, and can't cast two spells per round.



> _Your cleric dies in round 1. Why? Because he is under-geared. What now? I guess that's it for your "advantage"._





Except, of course, he doesn't. Why? Because his saves and hit points save him. And he cast _spell resistance_, giving him SR 22, making your spells less than effective.



> _Urge has 63.5 hp.  You die in roughly 1 round still. Saving both times._





If you pentrate SR. And if you don't, as I said before, trigger the _contingency_ that activates a _lesser globe of invulnerability_ that makes him invulnerable to your _fireballs_, giving you a bunch of wasted effort.



> _* PICK SPELLS *._





Why bother? In every area that counts, the wizard + cohort outclass you, able to cast more spells, higher level spells, more effectively than you. Going through the motions of picking spells is just silly at this point. You lost the debate. You may as well admit it.



> _your "save total"? Tell that to feeblemind. I think it cares._





And you only succeed 28% of the time. Ohh, scary.



> _* PICK SPELLS *. Urge can cast cloudkill and cone of cold._





yes he can. At a lower caster level. And not as often. You just seem to want to kill your save DCs by throwing around hopped up 3rd level spells for some reason.



> _Your chain lightning is pathetic compared to a maximized empowered fireball. You have +1 DC for um, all of those spells listed._





Your maximized empowered fireball has a save DC of 18. The chain lightning has a save DC of 22. That's quite a bit more than 1. While everyone saves against your spell, you fail against the _chain lightning_ almost half the time.



> _+2, +1, +2. I have more hp, better AC, better saves, divine abilities, don't have to buff two-characters, higher level equivalent spells, oh god where does the list end?_





You start behind by 53 spell levels. You can only cast two spells per round three times per day. Your divine abilities are severely hampered by your low cleric level (your _freedom of movement_ only lasts three rounds per day, you turn undead as 3rd level cleric). My cohort has divine abillities too, and uses them as a 10th level cleric. You lose on that score too.



> _* PICK SPELLS. * There's no point in further arguing with you when I provide a complete write up and you provide a handwaiving._





You've hopelessly lost the argument. You only want to harp on this irrelevant issue in a desperate attempt to obscure that fact.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I have it _ memorized _ get it? Because I picked spells and actually offered up a sample spell selection. What are you lazy? Afraid it won't look so-hot? Can't afford all the neat-o spells you want? Just do it.




because it doesn't matter. The argument is over, and you lost. Abjectly. Apparently the only person who doesn't see that is you.

_



			Quickened true-strike. Oh look I didn't roll a 1. Feeblemind.
		
Click to expand...


_
Your odds only go up to 35% to succeed.



> _Not when they're dead. Your cohort dies in round 1 remember. 38.75 minimum damage from the plain maximized empowered fireball then the next fireball for 26.25 minimum damage. Them dwarven clerics don't save none to good neither._





He saves against your fireballs on a 6. Oh, sorry, did that ruin your train of thought? And if you are busy casting _feeblemind_, how are you casting your fireballs?



> _And you have no teleportation magic._





I might, in fact, as a transmuter, I probably do. But it doesn't matter to begin with.



> _Funny that you have none and would be dead?_





You seem to assume a lot. You assume you win intiative. You assume your spells overcome SR. You assume that a wizard capable of casting _contingency_ won't have it, and won't use it to protect himself. You assume that everyone will fail their saves. You assume you will always make yours.



> _They fail their saves more often, they need to cast spells on both to be effective, they don't have combined abilities and your spell level analysis is so horribly flawed it's unreal._





Really? Then you are saying I don't have 2 more 2nd level slots, 1 more 3rd level slot, 2 more 4th level slots, 2 more 5th level slots, and 4 more 6th level slots than you? It's there, the numbers are up for everyone to see. You can delude yourself over this if you want, but you are outclassed as a caster here.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Actually in an Arena, whoever loses initiative loses.
> He took II, you lost already.



Not when you can re-roll. I can re-roll initiative. +3 (his dex is lower) vs re-rolling means he loses. 
And I agree. In an arena, initiative is prime mover. And weren't you of the opinion that contingency takes effect _ after _ the triggering event? 
Evard's black + silence, feeblemind, or going nuclear. There's no hope. 
If the metamagic rods are "useless" and "not factored" into the equation that easily frees up 3 feats for me too. Really the consolidated defenses of the Theurge means he will win, regardless. 


* Anyhow, it's late here and if there isn't an actual spell list and spell book by tommorow then I will consider it conceeding defeat in the argument. *


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Sure. I agree. If it were an arena, he'd be dead. Which is also fairly easy to agree upon.




Only if you win intiative, and then its not a sure thing for you. If you lose initiative (and you probably will) you lose.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Only if you win intiative, and then its not a sure thing for you. If you lose initiative (and you probably will) you lose.



Look dude, here's the plan, you complete your write up and we can run one ok? After your first horrible defeat then we can run another? Ok? It's not that hard to run these things online.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Not when you can re-roll. I can re-roll initiative. +3 (his dex is lower) vs re-rolling means he loses.




You only get to reroll _once_ per day. You sure like to trot that out for every roll, don't you? You can reroll your initiative. You can reroll your saves. You can reroll your attacks. And so on. I think you are having a hard time with the concept of _once_

And you have to beat both the wizard and his cohort to go first. Your odds are much lower.



> _And I agree. In an arena, initiative is prime mover. And weren't you of the opinion that contingency takes effect  after  the triggering event?_





It doesn't matter, if triggered after your first fireball, the rest of your magic is ineffective until you start using higher level spells. 



> _Evard's black + silence, feeblemind, or going nuclear._





How many spells per round are you going to be casting now? 



> _There's no hope._





For you? Nope. You lose intiative, and you die. And you are likely to lose.



> _If the metamagic rods are "useless" and "not factored" into the equation that easily frees up 3 feats for me too. Really the consolidated defenses of the Theurge means he will win, regardless._





They aren't useless. They are just highly specialized, and thus, of limited use over the long haul. You can use them 3 times per day, the most important use being to cast 2 spells a round a couple times per day. The wizard + cohort can do it 28 times per day, and then the wizard can cast 5 more spells. You just can't seem to get that simple and incontrovertible fact.

Your "consolidated defenses" add up to little, since you dropped abjuration, and thus lost most of the wizard defenses.



> _* Anyhow, it's late here and if there isn't an actual spell list and spell book by tommorow then I will consider it conceeding defeat in the argument. *_



*

You lost. You just don't know it.*


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Look dude, here's the plan, you complete your write up and we can run one ok? After your first horrible defeat then we can run another? Ok? It's not that hard to run these things online.




Silly person. Do you really think a head to head battle is how to measure a character? It's not the first fight that's critical. Its how you stand up to three, or four, or five. By the time your character gets through his first combat, he's pretty much done for the day. How useful does that really make you?


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Not when you can re-roll. I can re-roll initiative. +3 (his dex is lower) vs re-rolling means he loses.




With 2 Cavets.

First, you have to decide to reroll BEFORE you know what your initiative roll means.
Second, You MUST accept the reroll.

Also, His Init Mod is +5, he has Improved Init.

I'll post a character also.  But keep in mind, Its a character ment to occupy the Wizard's Spot, spell list wise.  She's going to be so much fun to make


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

Here's one for you.

*Chiyochan, The Pink Pigtailed Gnome Of Knowing Everything There Is To Know.*
_Tiny Gnome Diviner, Opposition Enchantment 12_
Str:  4 (8 -2 Gnome, -2 Size)
Dex: 14 (12 +2 Size)
Con: 15
Int: 24 (15+3 Levels +6 Earring)
Wis: 10
Cha: 14

Ranged Touch Attack: +10
AC: 16 Touch, 24 Flatfooted, 26 Normal (+2 Dex, +2 Size, +4 Shield +6 Armor, +2 Deflection)
HP: 55.5
Saves: Fort: +10, Refl: +10, Will: +12 (4/4/8 +3 Resist, +2/2/0 Abil Mods)
Feats: Scribe Scroll, Craft Wonderous Item, Leadership, Empower Spell, Quicken Spell, Maximize Spell, Craft Rod, Craft Staff
Skills: Approx 5 Maxxed, Concentration, Spellcraft, Knowledge Arcanae, Craft Armor, 1 unpicked. (I'd Pick Craft Calligraphy and have her use regular size materials)

Equipment: (88k)
Earring of Intellect +6 (18000gp crafted)
Vest of Saves +4 (8000gp crafted)
Light Mithril Shield of Protection +4 (4583gp crafted)
Bracelet of Armor +6 (18,000 crafted)
Ring of Protection +2 (8000)
Maximized Lesser Spells Stick (8000 Crafted)
Staff of Quickened True Strike (16875 crafted)
Silent Lesser Spells Stick (1500 Crafted)
Empowered Lesser Spells Stick (4500)

291gp left over.

Spells:
Base: 4/4/4/4/3/3/2
Spec: 0/1/1/1/1/1/1
Int : 0/2/2/2/1/1/1
Tota: 4/7/7/7/5/5/4

DC: 17 + Spell Level (18 for illusions)
Spellbook:
6th: Contingency, True Seeing, Greater Dispelling, Flesh to Stone
5th: Permanency, Teleport, Telepathic Bond, Cloudkill
4th: Phantasmal Killer, Scrying, Greater Invisibility, Enervation
3rd: Tongues, Haste, Ray of Exhaustion, Non-Detection
2nd: Fox's Cunning, Mirror Image, See Invisibility, Scorching Ray
1st: Mage Armor, True Strike, Reduce Person, Magic Missile, Comprehend Languages, Ray of Enfeeblement

Sample Spell List:
6th: (4/4)True Seeing, Greater Dispelling, Flesh to Stone, Empowered Enervation
5th: (5/5)Telepathic Bond, Teleport, Cloudkill, Max Scorching Rayx2
4th: (5/5)Scrying, Phantasmal Killer, Enervation, Greater Invisibility, Empowered Scorching Ray
3rd: (7/7)Hastex3, Ray of Exhaustionx2, Non-Detection, Tongues
2nd: (7/7)Mirror Image, Scorching Rayx3, See Invisibilityx2
1st: (7/7)True Strike, Cmprehend Languages, Magic Missilex2, Ray of Enfeeblementx3
Reduce Person is Permanent on Chiyo.

When Chiyo hit level 12, an NPC who Chiyo knew as Sakaki's church bought armor from Chiyo.
*Sakaki, The Tall Cleric*
_Human Cleric 10 of Luck and Travel_
Str: 13
Dex: 12
Con: 18
Int: 10
Wis: 21
Cha:  8

Attack: +7/+2 (+1 Str, +1 Dex)
AC: 11/22/23 T/F/N
HP: 68.5
Saves: +11/+6/+12
Feats: Craft Arms/Armor, Craft Wonderous Item, Tower Shield Profiency, 2 Unpicked
Skills: Concentration, Religion, Spellcraft

Equipment: (16k)
Full Plate of Coolness +2 (2550 crafted)
Masterwork Mace +1 (1300 crafted)
Shield of Coolness +2 (2055 crafted)
Cloak of Resistance +2 (2000 crafted)
Necklace of Wisdom +4 (8000 crafted)

Spells:

Your Cleric List.  Plus Flame Strike and Spell Immunity.  Why?  Cause now you can shut up about your cleric spells.

Thats why you don't compare to a Wizard/Cleric Cohort Pair.

-------------------------------------------

More then 5 times a Day I can cast 3 spells a round.
My Touch Attack Bonus is +10, +30 with true strike which I can use almost at will.
My Empowered Enervation deals 1-6 negative levels and hits.  Thats a big hit on saves, attack rolls, and 1-6 of the highest level spells gone.
My Phantasmal Killer has a Save DC of 22.  Rogues die.
Max Emp Sorching Ray deals (24+2d6)x3 with the first one hitting for 31 no save, the others needing to make a touch attack.

Flesh to Stone has a save DC of 23.  That Storm Giant fails that save 25% of the time.  Only it kills him it doesn't deal 1/4 to 1/2 his HP in damage.  With an Emp Enervation the round before I can bring his chance to hit me down an average of 3.5 points, making it so that he hits me on a 16 with his bow.  And my cohort on a 13.  This would allow my party to easily kill the poor giant.  As if he has his weapon out, his ATK just dropped by that 3.5 to hit them when the party closes.  It Also drops his save by 3.5 making him fail against flesh to stone 40-45% of the time.

I am more useful over the long run, I have more control over my damage, and there is not a cleric spell I don't have access to that you have.

My Hp are irrelivant, as being able to cast an extra spell per round OVER you allows me to be healed during combat while still casting 2 spells.

My AC is higher then yours.  My Saves are average for my level (Myth does win on will save typically, watch out for DMs that like fractional Saves), and between two people we outcast the bajeezus out of you.

If I really want, I can just make a wizard almost exactly like you, only 3 levels higher in just wizard, and take a cohort who is better at casting clerical spells then YOU ARE.  You have to take an IOUN STONE to make her.

Don't even bother trying to say that a Myth is better then a Wizard/Cleric Cohort Pair when the wizard is the same level as you.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

The problem overall is that the question isn't "who could win in a head to head battle", because that almost always goes to the guy who wins initiative in a high level spell caster duel, and these match ups are no exception. The question is "who can handle threats to the party better".

The question is "how do you deal with a trio of bone devils", and then "followed by a pair of dread wraiths", and then "followed by an adult blue dragon", and then "followed by a 12 headed pyrohydra".

The problem with Urge, is that he doesn't have the staying power to keep going through all these challenges. He most likely blows most of his capabilities on the bone devils, and then has to retreat.

And all the harping on AC is amusing. An AC of 22, which Urge is trumpeting proudly, is like saying "hit me again and again" at 12th level. A straight up 12th level fighter of fairly modest capabilities (say +12 BAB, +4 Strength bonus, +1 WF, +3 weapon) hits that AC on a 2. He hits with his second attack on a 7, and his third on a 12. If he has a level or two of barbarian, and has a _belt of giant strength +4_, when he's raging those numbers go to 2/3/8. No wizard based character is going to have anything resembling a worthwhile AC, ever.

The comparison works out like this, assuming both pairs are casting spells in combat against CR appropriate foes:

Round 1:

Urge: 2 5th level spells
Wiz-Clr: 1 6th level spell, 1 5th level spell

Round 2:

Urge: 2 5th level spells
Wiz-Clr: 1 6th level spell, 1 5th level spell

Round 3:

Urge: 2 5th level spells
Wiz-Clr: 1 6th level spell, 1 5th level spell

Round 4:

Urge: 1 4th level spell
Wiz-Clr: 1 6th level spell, 1 5th level spell

Round 5:

Urge: 1 4th level spell
Wiz-Clr: 1 5th level spell, 1 4th level spell

From the 4th round of combat in a day, at no point does Urge catch up. After the first three rounds of daily combat, the Wiz-Clr always have a spell slot of equal level to the Urge's available, and another one to boot. By the 12th daily round of combat, Urge is down to 1 3rd level spell per round, while Wiz-Clr are casting 1 4th and 1 3rd each round. We could even assume that the _maximize rod_ counts to "raise" his spell slot levels, and give Urge one 8th level slot in each of the first three rounds of combat (the _quicken rod_ doesn't count for that, since it just allows him to match casting two spells in a  round, which doesn't gain him any ground), but he still falls quickly and woefully behind as the day's endeavors wear on.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

"Mine more powerful than yours"
"Not, mine is"
etc,etc

Storm Raven, if you'd be so kind to write up a spell list. I don't think it matters for the discussion, but you ask him to write it all up, it'd be proper to do the same.

Once that is done, why don't you start a new thread with a poll. Get the community to decide which is a more useful character to an adventuring party.

Personally, I've never been able to decide whether MT is too powerful or not. (I've been dying to play one in a campaign to find out). I think the wizards with cohorts are clearly more powerful. I'd think they'd still be more powerful, if they took a level of cleric to get the luck domain, just to remove that variable from the comparison. It doesn't, help me decide on the MT though. It just makes the Leadership feat looks extremely powerful.


----------



## Psion (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> Once that is done, why don't you start a new thread with a poll. Get the community to decide which is a more useful character to an adventuring party.
> 
> Personally, I've never been able to decide whether MT is too powerful or not.




A poll isn't going to tell you if a given class (spell, feat, etc.) is too strong for YOUR game.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> "Mine more powerful than yours"
> "Not, mine is"
> etc,etc
> 
> Storm Raven, if you'd be so kind to write up a spell list. I don't think it matters for the discussion, but you ask him to write it all up, it'd be proper to do the same.




Actually, I didn't, He posed the idea, but here goes:

1st: Enlarge Person, Grease, Identify, Magic Missile, Shield, True Strike
2nd: Cats' Grace, Fox's Cunning, Glitterdust, Pyrotechnics, Scorching Ray, See Invisibility
3rd: Blink, Dispel Magic, Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Slow
4th: Dimension Door, Lesser Globe of Invulnerability, Mass Enlarge Person, Polymorph
5th: Baleful Polymorph, Cone of Cold, Feeblemind, Telekenisis, Teleport
6th: Antimagic Field, Acid Fog, Chain Lightning, Contingency, Disintegrate, Flesh to Stone, Greater Dispel Magic.

Typical Memorization:


Wizard
1st (7): Magic Missile x3, Reduce Person, Shield x2, True Strike
2nd (7): Glitterdust x2, Pyrotechnics x2, Scorching Ray x2, See Invisibility
3rd (6): Blink, Dispel Magic, Fireball x2, Lightning Bolt, Slow
4th (5): Dimension Door x2, Mass Enlarge Person, Polymorph x2
5th (5): Cone of Cold, Baleful Polymorph x2, Feeblemind, Teleport
6th (4): Acid Fog, Chain Lightning, Disintegrate, Flesh to Stone

A couple days ago, he cast _Contingency_, linking it to _Lesser Globe of Invulnerability_ with the trigger "whenever I am affected by hostile magic"

Cleric
1st (7): Bane, Bless x2, Entropic Shield, Magic Weapon, Obscuring Mist, Sanctuary (D)
2nd (7): Align Weapon, Hold Person, Lesser Restoration, Shield Other (D), Silence, Sound Burst, Spiritual Weapon
3rd (5): Blindness/Deafness, Dispel Magic, Prayer, Protection from Energy (D), Searing Light
4th (5): Dimensional Anchor, Divine Power, Freedom of Movement, Poison, Spike Stones (D)
5th (4): Flame Strike, Righteous Might, Slay Living, Spell Resistance (D)

I didn't optimize the spell selections to deal with the "arena duel" silliness that DungeonMaster seems to think is so important, but to contribute to the success of a party over the course of a day's adventuring. of course, there are several tactics that coul be used with this spell array to seriously ruin Urge's day, but that's not the point.



> _Personally, I've never been able to decide whether MT is too powerful or not. (I've been dying to play one in a campaign to find out). I think the wizards with cohorts are clearly more powerful. I'd think they'd still be more powerful, if they took a level of cleric to get the luck domain, just to remove that variable from the comparison. It doesn't, help me decide on the MT though. It just makes the Leadership feat looks extremely powerful._





Leadership can be powerful, but few people have said "ban it". On the other hand, lots of people say that the comparatively weak MT class should be banned. The problem with the MT is that it is _slow_. Until he hit 12th level, and could craft his metamagic rods, Urge was really slow from round to round when casting spells (one per round, except the rare 1st level quickened spell). Basically, this level (12th) is the high point of Urge's existence, and the Wiz-Clr combination still outdoes him pretty handily.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Actually, I didn't, He posed the idea, but here goes/:




Sorry, easy to lost track of these things. I don't think the spell list matters, but it does remove a point of dispute.



			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Leadership can be powerful, but few people have said "ban it". On the other hand, lots of people say that the comparatively weak MT class should be banned. The problem with the MT is that it is _slow_. Until he hit 12th level, and could craft his metamagic rods, Urge was really slow from round to round when casting spells (one per round, except the rare 1st level quickened spell). Basically, this level (12th) is the high point of Urge's existence, and the Wiz-Clr combination still outdoes him pretty handily.




I've never allowed leadership in my games. Not as a matter of balance, but simply to keep the number of characters on the table down (with animal companions, familiars, mounts, NPCs traveling with the party, summons, this tend to slow down). Just seems sort of weird to trade a feat that gives +4 to Initiative for something that gives you a powerful NPC to help you out. I know it's limited by the leadership score and by the DM getting to pick out the details of the NPC. 

I know MT is slow to get going. I was working on one in a campaign, which end when you got around 4th level (was planned to go much further). Wizard 2/Cleric 2 is amazingly weak compared to a normal 4th level Wizard or Cleric. Admittedly, for a small party I was able to fill two roles. I was the ultimate utility caster, but I was very little use in combat.

The real power of the MT is in their diverse abilities. As a healer or battle caster, he'll always be weak compared to a straight up caster, but he's much more likely to have that one spell you need right now. He seems like he'd work the best either in a party of with no primary casters, or one with both a cleric and wizard filling in the holes in their abilities. Also handy is that can easily specialize without losing generality, using their cleric spells to compensate. 

I'm just going to have play one, or have someone in my campaign play one to figure out if balance is really an issue. I'm starting to think it won't be. Looking at what is supposed to be a tweaked out MT above, they seem rather gear dependent. Once the costs for equipment that any character that's actually going to be adventuring is going to need are factored in not to mention the months of downtime needed to craft all everything, they're likely to be a bit weaker. I think the MT build left 50gp for scrolls, potions, wands, and food.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Here's one for you.



You've liberally abused the crafting system Kem. Earings of intelligence boost and such. I've actually used the plain items. Your character is invalid.
(mithral sheild? and you complained about my monk belt  !!!)


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> 1st: Enlarge Person, Grease, Identify, Magic Missile, Shield, True Strike
> 2nd: Cats' Grace, Fox's Cunning, Glitterdust, Pyrotechnics, Scorching Ray, See Invisibility
> 3rd: Blink, Dispel Magic, Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Slow
> 4th: Dimension Door, Lesser Globe of Invulnerability, Mass Enlarge Person, Polymorph
> ...



You have to pay for all these extra spells. And the scribing costs. 



> I didn't optimize the spell selections to deal with the "arena duel" silliness that DungeonMaster seems to think is so important, but to contribute to the success of a party over the course of a day's adventuring. of course, there are several tactics that coul be used with this spell array to seriously ruin Urge's day, but that's not the point.



The current MT is *NOT * optimized for an arena duel. At all. He's made specifically so it's difficult for you to meet his abilities - which you havn't been able to do, for want of cash. Because beleive it or not that was your argument pages ago I tried to address by posting an actual build - that the MT is not "want" for item crafting. He's better geared by far than the other characters. And everything applies to him and him alone.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You have to pay for all these extra spells. And the scribing costs.




I did. That's why I left myself a significant pool of cash to use.



> _The current MT is *NOT * optimized for an arena duel. At all. He's made specifically so it's difficult for you to meet his abilities - which you havn't been able to do, for want of cash._





I've matched every ability of yours and more. The real amusing thing is you can't seem to figure that out. How are you doing in the 6th round of combat for the day? You are real big on saying "I can do X on round 1", but strangely silent when it comes to rounds 4+. You say "he's not built for an arena duel", but then every post of yours amounts to "I can kill you on round 1" (a highly dubious proposition I might add).



> _Because beleive it or not that was your argument pages ago I tried to address by posting an actual build - that the MT is not "want" for item crafting. He's better geared by far than the other characters. And everything applies to him and him alone._





He needs to be better geared, just so he can keep up, which he hasn't. You have to blow wads of cash just to be able to match the double spell casting ability of Wiz-Clr, and you can only do that for a few rounds per day. You have to blow wads of cash to be able to have a caster level as high as Clr, and you are still 2 caster levels behind Wiz. You have to blow wads of cash to keep up in skills, and you are still 13+ skill points behind the combination of Clr-Wiz. You are "better equipped", but that only serves to offset to a minor degree your inherent weaknesses compared to Wiz-Clr.

If only you understood how outclassed you truly are.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I did. That's why I left myself a significant pool of cash to use.



You need to "POST" it. Geez... what's the problem? 



> I've matched every ability of yours and more. The real amusing thing is you can't seem to figure that out. How are you doing in the 6th round of combat for the day?



Pretty good because beleive it or not flesh-to-stone is not necessarily the best thing to cast when a collosal scorpion charges you. "fly", a lower level spell is a much better option. You fail to see this. And that it takes *2* fly spells to get the same effect.
And you havn't matched my character's power. You have no rods.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You need to "POST" it. Geez... what's the problem?




What? You can't do math?



> _Pretty good because beleive it or not flesh-to-stone is not necessarily the best thing to cast when a collosal scorpion charges you. "fly", a lower level spell is a much better option. You fail to see this. And that it takes *2* fly spells to get the same effect.
> And you havn't matched my character's power. You have no rods._





I don't need rods. Get that through your head. You _need_ the quicken rod because otherwise you can't cast two spells in a round without a significant spell level hit. I don't. I can cast two spells in a round 28 rounds in a row.

I don't need _flesh to stone_ for the collosal scorpion. I can use _acid fog_ for that, and stop him cold (no save). The cohort casts _spike stones_, keeping the scopion in place even longer, while it gets pounded on, suffers damage, likely ends up with slowed movement, and generally gets chewed up. I don't need two fly spells, I can use the _other_ spells I posted. You seem fixated on the spells you prefer, but the problem is, that they aren't the greatest spells. There are alternatives, and they are quite effective.

How useful are you in the 6th round, when the only thing you are doing is casting _fly_ and getting away? How much is that helping your party? You are basically saying to the rest of your party "I'm saving myself boys, I hope he doesn't kill you before next round". My guys are saying "we'll hold him in place, you guys pound on him with ranged attacks while he struggles to break free". Who is the more valuable member of the team?

I have more than matched your character's power. It is amusing that you can't figure this out.


----------



## the Jester (Jun 8, 2005)

So is there going to be a part 2 to this thread or what?


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

I think it's quite clear (at least to some of us) that the Wizard with Cleric cohort is more generally capable than the Wizard/Cleric/MT. How hard do you think it'd be able to demonstrate this without using the leadership feat? 

Being able to add a cleric cohort makes the comparison very easy, but for those that don't use leadership (for whatever reasons), is the MT still balanced against a straight caster?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> Being able to add a cleric cohort makes the comparison very easy, but for those that don't use leadership (for whatever reasons), is the MT still balanced against a straight caster?




Generally. The MT lags behind in spell level, and has to use expensive items to up that. Without the cohort to equip, the straight caster can match the MT item for item, without any real trouble. The MT has to worry about two primary spell casting attributes, so, all things being equal, he typically lags behind in save DCs and bonus spells for that class. He doesn't get the wizard bonus spells (when matched against a wizard), and his turning and domain abilities are pretty limited by his low cleric level and he can't use most of his spells while in armor (when matched against a wizard).

The MT has value - he can cast a lot of lower levelled spells, and fill in as an extra caster. But he can't match the higher level spells of the straight caster, and has to worry about things like his double spell casting attributes, and lousy sundry abilities.

(By the way, anyone notice that DungeonMaster has said Urge would be able to "strap on some armor" and go into melee effectively. Check his Strength, even with _righteous might_ he's only up to a 12 Strength - not that impressive).


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> (By the way, anyone notice that DungeonMaster has said Urge would be able to "strap on some armor" and go into melee effectively. Check his Strength, even with _righteous might_ he's only up to a 12 Strength - not that impressive).




I think not owning armor would more an issue than being strong enough to move decently in it.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You have no rods.




I think it salient to point out that your argument doesn't amount to one that "the MT is too powerful", it amounts to "metamagic rods are too powerful". I don't see you advocating banning metamagic rods.

It's also valuable to point out that the MT is at his high water mark here. If you bump everyone up a level (and the Wiz-Clr get there before he does, all other things being equal), the MT lags behind even more.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> I think it's quite clear (at least to some of us) that the Wizard with Cleric cohort is more generally capable than the Wizard/Cleric/MT. How hard do you think it'd be able to demonstrate this without using the leadership feat?
> 
> Being able to add a cleric cohort makes the comparison very easy, but for those that don't use leadership (for whatever reasons), is the MT still balanced against a straight caster?



 After many games where I've watched MTs in groups with Clerics/Wizards and such...they aren't more powerful and they don't take the place of the primary caster. What they are, is the best possible support caster you can have in a group. They've got such a wide variety of options that MTs fit the support roll wonderfully, but definitely don't stand up to the effectiveness of a single classed caster.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

By the way, buying and scribing the extra spells in the wizard's spellbook cost 6,000 gp, leaving the pair with 2,500 gp for sundry equipment. Just so you know.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> I think it's quite clear (at least to some of us) that the Wizard with Cleric cohort is more generally capable than the Wizard/Cleric/MT. How hard do you think it'd be able to demonstrate this without using the leadership feat?



Note clearly that we're trying to prove a single character without leadership is roughly equivalent to a full class and cohort. All the arguments boil off into so much steam if the Mytic Theurge takes leadership as well. It is an inherently one-sided debate that I chose to take on because the MT is really just that good. You can't lose perspective of this. 



> Being able to add a cleric cohort makes the comparison very easy, but for those that don't use leadership (for whatever reasons), is the MT still balanced against a straight caster?



I think that's abundantly proven. The MT is much _ much _ * MUCH * better than the straight caster. Orders of magnitude.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> By the way, buying and scribing the extra spells in the wizard's spellbook cost 6,000 gp, leaving the pair with 2,500 gp for sundry equipment. Just so you know.




I'm getting fed up of trying to make you people post things that are "defacto" because I did. You know, I go to the trouble and time to post things all in one place, and correct them all and you're _ grudgeingly _ being forced to do the same. 
#1 it's not fun 
#2 it doesn't look well on you
Stop handwaiving. 
You bought 3 6th level spells at 1650 GP each and 600 GP per page. Just those are 6750 GP.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Note clearly that we're trying to prove a single character without leadership is roughly equivalent to a full class and cohort. All the arguments boil off into so much steam if the Mytic Theurge takes leadership as well. It is an inherently one-sided debate that I chose to take on because the MT is really just that good. You can't lose perspective of this.




Then the MT loses your precious "single equipment roster" value. Plus, its costly for the MT, since he has comparatively so few feats. The Wiz can afford to do it, he has bonus feats to spend as well.



> _I think that's abundantly proven. The MT is much  much  * MUCH * better than the straight caster. Orders of magnitude._





You really are humorous.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I'm getting fed up of trying to make you people post things that are "defacto" because I did. You know, I go to the trouble and time to post things all in one place, and correct them all and you're _ grudgeingly _ being forced to do the same.
> #1 it's not fun
> #2 it doesn't look well on you
> Stop handwaiving.
> You bought 3 6th level spells at 1650 GP each and 600 GP per page. Just those are 6750 GP.




It would have cost him 4500 gp to purchase the spells and copy them into his book (assuming he found somebody with the spell in their book, and didn't scribe them from scrolls). I agree it would have been nice for him to tally them up, but he left quite a bit of gold, and didn't acquire very many spells.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I'm getting fed up of trying to make you people post things that are "defacto" because I did. You know, I go to the trouble and time to post things all in one place, and correct them all and you're _ grudgeingly _ being forced to do the same.




Because, at this point, _it doesn't matter_. Urge is hopelessly outclassed.



> _#1 it's not fun_





I'm not interested in your "fun". You made the challenge. It has been abundantly proven that your argument has lost. All you are doing now is whining.



> _#2 it doesn't look well on you_





It doesn't seem to bother anyone else. In point of fact, every other person who has looked in on this thread and posted since the two opposing positions have been put up have (a) agreed with me, and (b) said that the spell selection doesn't really matter.

And you have continued to rant like someone took your candy. Who "doesn't look well here"?



> _Stop handwaiving.
> You bought 3 6th level spells at 1650 GP each and 600 GP per page. Just those are 6750 GP._





I bought them via a spell book, which is much cheaper, and copied them into it.

2 2nd level spells: scrolls @ 150 gp each, 200 gp to scribe = 700 gp
1 3rd level spell: book @ 300 gp, 300 gp to scribe = 600 gp
1 5th level spell: book @ 500 gp, 500 gp to scribe = 1,000 gp
3 6th level spells: book @ 600 gp each, 600 gp to scribe = 3,600 gp

The 6th level spells cost 600 gp each (per the rules for buying and selling spell books), and 600 gp per page, or 3,600 gp. Total expense for all additional spells = 5,900 gp. I could have scribed more spells, but didn't feel the need. I also shorted myself one 1st level spell in my spell book, make it _reduce person_.

Now stop whining and gnashing your teeth. It makes you look bad.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Note clearly that we're trying to prove a single character without leadership is roughly equivalent to a full class and cohort. All the arguments boil off into so much steam if the Mytic Theurge takes leadership as well. It is an inherently one-sided debate that I chose to take on because the MT is really just that good. You can't lose perspective of this.




Full caster + cohort easily does more than the MT. The only room to doubt that is dealing with having spread the resources between caster and cohort. 

Without the cohort, it's much harder. You can't as easily say well the full caster has more spells per day for example. Even without the cohort, the better character in terms of a single combat is clearly the full caster, but I hardly think that's a very important metric in a normal campaign. The raw number of spells and diverse abilities makes the MT very useful to a party. I'm not sure if it can be compared very easily.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I don't need rods. Get that through your head. You _need_ the quicken rod because otherwise you can't cast two spells in a round without a significant spell level hit. I don't. I can cast two spells in a round 28 rounds in a row.



You do need rods or you don't pack the same offensive or defensive punch. Pure and simple. You can cast a wizard spell and a cleric spell but you can't cast both a wizard spell and a wizard spell or a cleric spell and a cleric spell. Get it? 




> I can use _acid fog_ for that, and stop him cold (no save). The cohort casts _spike stones_, keeping the scopion in place even longer, while it gets pounded on, suffers damage, likely ends up with slowed movement, and generally gets chewed up.



Really? It's um, going to get out of that in 1 round. Better think fast. 




> How useful are you in the 6th round, when the only thing you are doing is casting _fly_ and getting away? How much is that helping your party? You are basically saying to the rest of your party "I'm saving myself boys, I hope he doesn't kill you before next round".



Um dude, I have more than enough spells to go beyond 6 rounds. 




> I have more than matched your character's power. It is amusing that you can't figure this out.



No more specifically you've contorted the leadership rules, and specifically avoided trying to reach the Theurge's saves, hp, and punch because you can't afford it with you and your cohort. And it's like pulling teeth to have you make a proper write up - with an example no less.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Then the MT loses your precious "single equipment roster" value. Plus, its costly for the MT, since he has comparatively so few feats. The Wiz can afford to do it, he has bonus feats to spend as well.



This is insane. Now your arguing against your case. You have 2 feats more from being a wizard. The MT can tradeoff his item creation feats. It's not even funny anymore the levels of circular logic going on here.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> This is insane. Now your arguing against your case. You have 2 feats more from being a wizard. The MT can tradeoff his item creation feats. It's not even funny anymore the levels of circular logic going on here.




He could, but the problem is that you keep shifting your arguments. You say "but my MT could do this", or "my MT could do that", except that you have to make choices. You are arguing from the perspective of _not_ making choices, having all options open, even _after_ you have put forward your best build.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I'm not interested in your "fun". You made the challenge. It has been abundantly proven that your argument has lost. All you are doing now is whining.



You're not even following the rules of the challenge anymore. 



> I bought them via a spell book, which is much cheaper, and copied them into it.



You're making up the rules as we go. For piddly cash too. You must feel really backed against the wall or something?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You do need rods or you don't pack the same offensive or defensive punch. Pure and simple. You can cast a wizard spell and a cleric spell but you can't cast both a wizard spell and a wizard spell or a cleric spell and a cleric spell. Get it?




And? I can cast two spells per round. For 28 rounds. You can do it three times. Are you sure you want to keep making that comparison? The rods don't help you that much, they give you a _very temporary_ boost, that _partially_ offsets the Wiz-Clr combination advantage, but when they run out, you are in trouble.



> _Really? It's um, going to get out of that in 1 round. Better think fast._





It's movement is slowed to 5 feet per round. It will take considerably longer than 1 round to get out. As long as it has a portion in the AoE, it's hampered by it, and then hampered by the _spike stones_. You should look up the rules before discussing them.



> _Um dude, I have more than enough spells to go beyond 6 rounds._





At one spell per round. And you, apparently, are spending your round's action to abandon your party and cast _fly_. How helpful! You see, by round six, you cast one spell per round, I still cast two. And my remaining spells are higher level than yours. Basically, by round six, you have the casting ability of a cohort.

So, just how valuable are you in round six again?



> _No more specifically you've contorted the leadership rules, and specifically avoided trying to reach the Theurge's saves, hp, and punch because you can't afford it with you and your cohort. And it's like pulling teeth to have you make a proper write up - with an example no less._





I've used the Leadership feat exactly as written. Your lack of understanding of the rules is not my problem. Your AC is better by a fraction, your saves are better by an inconsequential amount, and you are _way_ behind in hit points, since between the Wiz and Clr we have more than twice as many hp as you do.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You're not even following the rules of the challenge anymore.




I equipped the character using the standard rules of the core rule books. You had other rules in mind?



> You're making up the rules as we go. For piddly cash too. You must feel really backed against the wall or something?




Look up "spell books" in the SRD. You will find it illuminating.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> He could, but the problem is that you keep shifting your arguments. You say "but my MT could do this", or "my MT could do that", except that you have to make choices. You are arguing from the perspective of _not_ making choices, having all options open, even _after_ you have put forward your best build.



This doesn't make any sense. ?!?!?
I can't figure out what the hell you meant by "arguing from the perspective of not making choices having all options open even after you have put forward your best build". 
What on earth do you _ mean _ by this run-on illogical sentance?


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> This doesn't make any sense. ?!?!?
> I can't figure out what the hell you meant by "arguing from the perspective of not making choices having all options open even after you have put forward your best build".
> What on earth do you _ mean _ by this run-on illogical sentance?




I mean that, you have to make choices. Without making these choices, you keep all your options open. You keep saying "instead of this, I could do that", and switching back and forth in your argument to try to counter the fact that the Wiz-Clr is simply better than you at a lot of things. But you couldn't actually switch. You'd have to pick one way or the other and be stuck with it, and have a glaring weakness.

By the way, good luck with recruiting that cohort with your weak Leadership score (no Charisma bonus).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I think that's abundantly proven. The MT is much _ much _ * MUCH * better than the straight caster. Orders of magnitude.




Think about this - you've convinced _nobody_ who has posted in this debate that your argument holds water. Perhaps you should stop getting hot and bothered and figure out what that means with respect to your position.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I equipped the character using the standard rules of the core rule books. You had other rules in mind?



Yeah like paying for the goddamn scrolls like was set out back when we started this? Anything else is campaign specific. You're assuming you can find a wizard who will let you scribe from his personal spell book. You're assuming you get an equipped cohort who doesn't care you have a familiar and has all the crafting feats you want and will liberally allow himself to be a crafting mule. 
You're just trying to avoid paying 2200 GP for a 6th level spell by the character creation rules. You're only allowed treasure dude, not friendly (and high level) wizards lending you their personal spell books for a day. 
You could be from a backwater savage land with not even a large town. 

I have to work now, and tonight I play D&D. Hopefully you'll actually clear up all your "discrepancies" by tommorow otherwise it's fruitless discusing any further with you because you have no compunctions making things up as we go along as you see fit. 
And the scorpion is 40x40. Your cloud is a 20 foot radius. Do the math.


----------



## MadMaxim (Jun 8, 2005)

Please, guys... Settle down and stop this pointless discussion...


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Yeah like paying for the goddamn scrolls like was set out back when we started this? Anything else is campaign specific. You're assuming you can find a wizard who will let you scribe from his personal spell book. You're assuming you get an equipped cohort who doesn't care you have a familiar and has all the crafting feats you want and will liberally allow himself to be a crafting mule.
> You're just trying to avoid paying 2200 GP for a 6th level spell by the character creation rules. You're only allowed treasure dude, not friendly (and high level) wizards lending you their personal spell books for a day.
> You could be from a backwater savage land with not even a large town.




Paying for the privilege of copying spells from others books (for common spells) is pretty well laid out in the rules. Finding someone with the spellbook shouldn't be any harder than finding someone with a particular magical item or scroll you want to purchase. 

I think at this point, the discussion has gotten long enough and convoluted enough that it's losing much of a point.

Might I suggest, that I'll make a new thread (being an individual undecided about the MT in general, and rather interested in the outcome), make the setup clear (Level X, XP Y, Core books), and both character get presented from scratch (with all gear listed including spell costs, when cohorts/familiar were acquired, when items were crafted).  Having seen what you've come up with in the past, you can figure that in. I'd be curious in seeing a better pure caster with and without cohort. 

I'll review the cohort in rules in a moment, and offer my opinion on the familiar matter.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Yeah like paying for the goddamn scrolls like was set out back when we started this? Anything else is campaign specific.




Except that it is _in the core books_, which you specified.



> _You're assuming you can find a wizard who will let you scribe from his personal spell book. You're assuming you get an equipped cohort who doesn't care you have a familiar and has all the crafting feats you want and will liberally allow himself to be a crafting mule._





First off, go back and _read_ the Leadership feat. The fact that you have a familiar doesn't matter one whit _after_ you have recruited the cohort. You then use the rules for _advancement_ of the cohort, which are different.

From the SRD:



> The character can *attract* a cohort of up to this level. Regardless of a character’s Leadership score, he can only *recruit* a cohort who is two or more levels lower than himself.




and then (also from the SRD):



> Cohorts *earn XP* as follows:
> 
> The cohort does not count as a party member when determining the party’s XP.
> 
> ...




There's nothing in there about "your cohort cannot advance beyond the level allowed by your Leadership score", or anything similar. He just can't advance to be less than two levels lower than you.

The cohort is equipped as an NPC appropriate to his level. This is _also_ in the text of the Leadership feat.

The only crafting feat the cohort has is Craft Magic Arms and Armor, and the only things he crafted were for his own use. That's hardly a "crafting mule".



> _You're just trying to avoid paying 2200 GP for a 6th level spell by the character creation rules. You're only allowed treasure dude, not friendly (and high level) wizards lending you their personal spell books for a day._





He didn't _lend_ me a spell book, I _bought_ the spell book. Perhaps you would understand this if you bothered to _read the rules_.



> _You could be from a backwater savage land with not even a large town._





And I could have the _teleport_ spell. Oh wait, I do. Besides, if that were the case, where are you getting the thousands of gold pieces worth of material components to manufacture your magic items?



> _I have to work now, and tonight I play D&D. Hopefully you'll actually clear up all your "discrepancies" by tommorow otherwise it's fruitless discusing any further with you because you have no compunctions making things up as we go along as you see fit._





You mean I have no compunctions against using the core rules as written? No, none at all. The fact that you don't _understand_ how the core rules work is not my problem. It's yours. Like I said, everyone who has looked in on this thread and posted has been of the confirmed opinion that your argument doesn't hold water. You should think about that.



> _And the scorpion is 40x40. Your cloud is a 20 foot radius. Do the math._





That means it takes it _longer_ to get out of the area, because it's bulk remains in the AoE longer, and it gets nailed by the _spike stones_ longer. From the text of the spell _solid fog_ (which _acid fog_ references for movement penalties): "any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet". As long as part of it is in the AoE, it is attempting to "move through it", and is thus hampered. Read the rules some time. Figure it out.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No more specifically you've contorted the leadership rules, and specifically avoided trying to reach the Theurge's saves, hp, and punch because you can't afford it with you and your cohort. And it's like pulling teeth to have you make a proper write up - with an example no less.




Having re-read the leadership/cohort rules, it looks correct. 

At level 6 (when he gained the leadership feat), his leader score would be 6 + 2 Cha -2 Familiar = 6, allowing him to attract a 4th level character. (Assuming he summoned his familiar at 1st level or any other point before getting leadership). Him selecting amongst though that offer to join him, a cleric is quite reasonable.

As the wizard adventured, going up to 12th level, the cleric would have gain appropriate experience to level up to at least 10th level. As per the cohort advancement rules (DMG pg. 104-105), he would gain levels up to 2 below the  PC. Considering the amount of time the wizard spent crafting during that time, it's not unreasonable to assume the cohort picked up Craft Arms and Armor, if he hadn't had it to start with.

Unless you are going to site a specific rule to the contrary, please stop complaining about the poor cohort (being a cohort is a tough enough life as it is ).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

Here's something else to think about: Urge is _heavily_ dependent upon his metamagic rods. Suppose a greatsword wielding fighter walked up to him and sundered them? It wouldn't be that hard: carried or held items are pretty easy to hit, his would only have AC 11 (attacked by 12th level combat specialist, +12 BAB + 4 Strength + 2 magic + 1 WF - 4 power attack = +15/+10/+5. They have 10 hit points and hardness 10. Most combat jockeys can hand out that much damage without difficulty by 12th level: 2d6 + 6 (Strength) + 2 (Specialization) + 2 (magic) + 8 (power attack) = 26 average (minimum 21). He's going to have a hard time surviving without them.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You've liberally abused the crafting system Kem. Earings of intelligence boost and such. I've actually used the plain items. Your character is invalid.
> (mithral sheild? and you complained about my monk belt  !!!)




Ah you see.  That earring uses the headband slot.  If you look at any item that has a "different" slot that I use, you will see its normal slot seems to be... empty.

And you are complaining about a Mithril Shield?  A _Mithril_ Shield?  You have to be kidding.


----------



## Kem (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Note clearly that we're trying to prove a single character without leadership is roughly equivalent to a full class and cohort. All the arguments boil off into so much steam if the Mytic Theurge takes leadership as well. It is an inherently one-sided debate that I chose to take on because the MT is really just that good. You can't lose perspective of this.




Its not.  And the fact that you think 1 character with weaker spells is better then 2 haracters with BETTER spells, convinces me that argueing with you is pointless.



> I think that's abundantly proven. The MT is much _ much _ * MUCH * better than the straight caster. Orders of magnitude.




I can prove you wrong.  But since you think _Mithril_ is questionable...


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> I can prove you wrong.  But since you think _Mithril_ is questionable...


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> I can prove you wrong.  But since you think _Mithril_ is questionable...




Its getting to the point of ridiculousness with him.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No more specifically you've contorted the leadership rules, and specifically avoided trying to reach the Theurge's saves, hp, and punch because you can't afford it with you and your cohort. And it's like pulling teeth to have you make a proper write up - with an example no less.




Let's go down your "advantages" one by one:

Saves: Your saves are slightly better, but they are offset by things like the Wizard's ability to cast _contingency_ and protect himself against the bulk of your spells with something like _lesser globe of invulnerability_. The cleric has bonuses against magic and poison, as well as saves that are almost as good normally. And he has more hit points.

HP: You have slightly more than the Wizard, but less than the Cleric. Together, they have more than twice as many HP as you.

Punch: You can whip out a couple of damaging spells per day, and even do two per round for a couple rounds. But your save DCs are pathetic, especially with the metamagiced spells you love so much. And the Wizard and Cleric can cast two spells per round long after you have been reduced to just one, and their save DCs and the Wizard's caster level outclass you. And they can keep casting spells long after you have run out.

You also can't turn undead worth a damn (how _are_ you going to deal with the two dread spectres who show up), and are highly vulnerable to sunder attempts against your precious rods (which are pretty obviously important, since you tethered them to your wrists).


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 8, 2005)

Hello brick wall? Are you there? I really enjoy talking to you.  
It seems like people have lost track of the discussion. The MT is equivalent to a cohort + wizard. The MT is superior to the lone single-classed character. The MT with leadership _ categorically dwarfs _ the wizard + cohort. 
Since the MT's metamagic superiority is not recognized (very very foolish) all I do is can them. 

* THE   URGE *
Human Evoker3/Clr3/Urge6
* Stats: * str 8, dex 12 (10+ 2 gloves), con 15 (13+ 2 iounstone), int 20 (15+1 levels+ 4 headband), wis 20 (14 +2 levels +4 periapt), cha 14 (12+2 iounstone)
* Hp: * 63.5 (8 +2d8+9d4 = 28.5 + 2x12 con)
* AC: * 21 (10 + 1 dex + 5 wis +1 monk + 4 mage armor)
* Touch AC: * 18
* Saves: * +12/+11/+20
( 3/1/3 cleric + 1/1/3 wizard + 2/2/5 MT then + 2 con, +3 dex and weasel + 5 wiz then +3 resistance +1 luck)
* Skills: * the standard, spellcraft, concentration and so forth, not a big deal will be better than the non-MTs by virtue of the stone of good luck alone
* Feats: * Scribe scroll (free), Empower spell (1st), Improved initiative (1st), Craft wondrous item (3rd), Leadership (6th), Spell penetration (9th), Greater Spell penetration (12).


* Gear: * 88000 total
8000 Periapt of wisdom +4 (crafted)
8000 Headband of intellect +4 (crafted)
4500 Cloak of resistance +3 (crafted)
15000 Orange ioun stone (crafted)
6500 Monk's belt (crafted)
4000 Ioun stone +2 Con (crafted)
4000 Ioun stone +2 Cha (crafted)
2000 Gloves of dexterity +2 (crafted)
10000 Luckstone (crafted)
-----------------------------
62 000 GP total

* Spells per day: *
Arcane:
1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
4+1/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1 (+ from specialisation)
2/1/1/1/1/1 from int 20
Total:
7/5/5/4/3
Divine:
1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
4+1/4+1/3+1/2+1/1+1 (+ from domain)
2/1/1/1/1 from wis 20
7/5/5/4/3

* Sample Wizard spell book: * (2 per level except for 5+2=7 at level 1)
1st level: Mage armor, Magic missile, True-strike, Burning hands, Charm person, Ventriloquism
2nd level: Scorching ray, Fox's cunning, Mirror image, Gust of wind, Cat's grace
3rd level: Fireball, Lightning bolt, Displacement, Stinking cloud
4th level: Improved invisibility, Black tentacles, Wall of ice, Wall of fire
5th level: Feeblemind, Bigby's interposing hand

* Typical spell selection: DCs are (15+ spell level) *

_ Arcane: _ (opposition schools necromancy and abjuration)
5th: Empowered fireball x2, Feeblemind
4th: Improved invisibility, Evard's black tentacles, Wall of ice, Empowered scorching ray
3rd: Fireball x2, Lightning bolt x1, Empowered magic missile, Stinking cloud
2nd: Scorching ray x3, Mirror image, Gust of wind 
1st: Magic missile x4, Mage Armor, True strike, Charm person

_ Divine: _
5th: Teleport, Spell resistance, True Seeing
4th: Dimension door, Death ward, Divine power, Dimensional Anchor
3rd: Fly, Seering light, Dispel magic x2, Protection from energy
2nd: Aid, Silencex2, Resist energy, Hold person
1st: Longstrider, Sanctuary x2, Sheild of faith, Divine favor, Obscuring mist, Command

* 
Domains are Travel and Luck, gets to re-roll 1/day a save, attack roll, etc... and freedom of movement 1/day
*

Cohort:

* THE   DEMIURGE *
Dwarven Druid 10 
* Stats: * str 10, dex 10 (12 -2 race), con 16 (14 +2 race), int 13, wis 21 (15 +2 levels +4 periapt), cha 8  
* Hp: * 78.5 (8 + 9d8 = 48.5+ 3x10 con)
* AC: * 16 (10 + 5 wis +1 monk)
* Touch AC: * 16
* Saves: * +12/+7/+14
( 7/3/7 druid then + 3 con, +2 feat + 5 wiz then +2 resistance)
* Skills: * the standard, spellcraft, concentration and so forth
* Feats: * Improved initiative (1st), Maximize spell (3rd), Lightning reflexes (6th), Craft rod (9th).

25 900 to spend
* Gear: * 88 000 total
8000 Periapt of wisdom +4 (crafted)
2000 Cloak of resistance +2 (crafted)
6500 Monk's belt (crafted)
+ animal companion(s)
-----------------------------
16500 GP total
Extra cash for ... a metamagic rod of maximize! So give it to the Urge. 

* Spells per day: *
Divine:
1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th
4/4/4/3/2
2/2/1/1/1 from wis 22
6/6/5/4/3


* Typical spell selection: DCs are (16+ spell level) * 
_ Divine: _
5th: Baleful polymorph, Control winds, Animal growth
4th: Flamestrike, Rusting grasp, Spike stones, Giant Vermin
3rd: Call lightningx2, Poison, Wind wall, Greater magic fang
2nd: Barkskin, Delay poison x2, Heat metal, Warp wood, 
1st: Pass without trace, Faerie fire, Entangle, Speak with animals, Hide from animals, Detect snares and pits.

* 
ADMIT UTTER AND TOTAL DEFEAT IN THE FACE OF THE URGE AND THE DEMIURGE. 
* 
 
So he brings to the party, well everything he had before - 1 quicken rod and a ring no one cared about. Oh yeah and druidic magic. Oh did I say druidic magic? I think I did. 
You have a small handful of 6th level spells. And nothing more. Now's the time to go back and read all my posts again.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 8, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Hello brick wall? Are you there? I really enjoy talking to you.
> It seems like people have lost track of the discussion. The MT is equivalent to a cohort + wizard. The MT is superior to the lone single-classed character. The MT with leadership _ categorically dwarfs _ the wizard + cohort.
> Since the MT's metamagic superiority is not recognized (very very foolish) all I do is can them.
> 
> ...




What's the prohibited schools? Do double check your math, it's wrong is a few places.

For the MT vs. Full Caster + Cohort comparison, you've given no reasons to think the MT is in anyway better. The reasons you keep reiterating don't make sense to me. How is a MT better at metamagic than a full caster?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 8, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> How is a MT better at metamagic than a full caster?




Apparently, because he can have metamagic rods.  :\


----------



## Particle_Man (Jun 8, 2005)

The problem was that the wizard has the feat to spare for Leadership because a) the Wizard gets bonus feats, and b) the Wizard doesn't need to buy something like "Practiced Spellcaster" to raise his effective caster level.

The Mystic Theurge can have a cohort, but that costs yet anther of his precious feats.

I suppose the Wizard could switch out his cohort for a druid instead of a cleric, if we want to compare them in equal druidity...


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> ADMIT UTTER AND TOTAL DEFEAT IN THE FACE OF THE URGE AND THE DEMIURGE.




You are funny. You might have an argument - if you had statted your characters out correctly. As it is, your ability scores are all wrong, your math is screwed up, and  (most importantly) you calculated your Leadership score. You also messed up your cash (you cannot afford your precious maximize rod).

You _still_ have a lower caster level for your spells, by quite a bit, and your save DCs are lower. You cast fewer high level spells. Your sundry clerical abilities are a joke (do keep posting how you get _freedom of movement_ as a domain power, the 3 rounds per day you can use it is really humorous).

Fix your problems with your character. I think you will find the experience illuminating.


----------



## Testament (Jun 9, 2005)

I think its become beyond pointless.  The foolishness of this argument is being trampled by the superior fool.

The MT is a hideously weak PrC, end of story.  And ooooh, he has metamagic rods (that he's using illegally).  Now give a real caster those rods and watch the oh so borken MT get splattered all the faster.

Sorry DungeonMaster, your whining and tooth-gnashing isn't convincing anyone here.  I think maybe you should just give up, and go back to your own certainity.  And at any rate, how can I not side with the faction that includes a fan of "Azumanga Daioh!"?


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

Testament said:
			
		

> Sorry DungeonMaster, your whining and tooth-gnashing isn't convincing anyone here.  I think maybe you should just give up, and go back to your own certainity.  And at any rate, how can I not side with the faction that includes a fan of "Azumanga Daioh!"?






Just to get on topic, I picked assassin, and almost also hit Blackguard.

Once someone in the partry becomes one they tend to be rather anti-party.  They are not overpowered in the sense that they are too good.  They just are not ones I'd want a PC taking in a typical party.  Assassin more then Blackguard.

I would only allow an assassin if the whole party decided to join the guild.  Otherwise the jobs the assassin will end up taking will always seem to be related to what the party has to do.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Once someone in the partry becomes one they tend to be rather anti-party.  They are not overpowered in the sense that they are too good.  They just are not ones I'd want a PC taking in a typical party.  Assassin more then Blackguard.




I use assassins and blackguards (and even red wizards), as NPCs. They are there for the PCs to fight, not for the PCs to be.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> You are funny. You might have an argument - if you had statted your characters out correctly. As it is, your ability scores are all wrong, your math is screwed up, and  (most importantly) you calculated your Leadership score. You also messed up your cash (you cannot afford your precious maximize rod).



Everything is adjusted. 
My leadership score is the same as yours - exact same. 



> You _still_ have a lower caster level for your spells, by quite a bit, and your save DCs are lower. You cast fewer high level spells. Your sundry clerical abilities are a joke (do keep posting how you get _freedom of movement_ as a domain power, the 3 rounds per day you can use it is really humorous).



Sadly, it's significantly more power than you can muster.  




> Fix your problems with your character. I think you will find the experience illuminating.



What I've found is the increadible, absolutely increadible, amount of bias coming from this 3.5 stronghold. I of course expected a lot but it's really nothing short of intellectual dishonesty. 
On the other hand I'm _ very heartened _ and "illuminated" by the fact that a sizeable majority of silent posters immediately recognize the * insanity * that is the Mystic Theurge and that is reflected in the poll. 
Hopefully, in the future we will finally banish the spectre of the be-all and end-all divine/arcane caster of 2nd edition and it will never rear its head again.


----------



## Testament (Jun 9, 2005)

In the immortal words of Black Mage: LANDBRIDGE!

How is a character who does what two do, only BADLY, powerful?!  Your spell access is weak, you never get 9th level spells, your DCs are inferior, you have to take Practiced Spellcaster twice JUST TO KEEP UP, and you have MAD to boot.

How is this insanely powerful?

Why are we bothering?  You really can't say much for the intelligence of anyone who gives up abjuration though, probably the most important spell school.  Or someone who's taking part in this discussion without having read the core rulebooks.


----------



## Snowy (Jun 9, 2005)

perhaps it would be more sensible to think about the comparison in abstract terms rather than using specific spells. feats or items? 
I mean any character can take any feat (that they qualify for) or learn a spell or use an item.

So maybe looking at it in this format.

Human Wizard level 10

Has three important stats           con dex and int

str 8
dex 16
con 16
int 16
wis 8
cha 8

30 point buy split the simplest way (and 2 points extra from levels (not included))

BAB +5

Has 5 regular feats and scribe scroll summon famliar and 2 bonus meta magic feats

can cast wizard  4 0th 5 1st 5 2nd 4 3rd 3 4th 2 5th

skill points 5x13 (ignoring stat increases) wizards list

Human Mystic theurge (wizard 3 cleric 3 theurge 4)

Has four important stats           con dex int and wis

str 8
dex 13
con 13
int 16
wis 16
cha 8

or 

str 8
dex 14
con 14
int 16
wis 15
cha 8

30 point buy split the simplest way (I'd probably pick the second as best?) (and 2 points extra from levels (not included))

BAB +5

Has 5 regular feats and scribe scroll summon famliar.

turn undead as a 3rd level cleric 2x per day  

can cast wizard 4 0th 5 1st 4 2nd 4 3rd 2 4th 
can cast cleric  6 0th 6 1st 5 2nd 3 3rd 2 4th

has two domain powers (if level limited ones at level 3, makes sense to pick the non-level linked ones!)

skill points 5x6 (wizard) 5x3 (cleric) and 5x4 (theurge) (ignoring stat increases)
must take knowledge arcana 6 ranks and knowledge religon 6 ranks.


----------



## Yair (Jun 9, 2005)

I voted for arcane trickster. The concept is just so annoying.

In my current campaing I allow everything, out of simply encouraging my players to seekk out new worlds an... ehn... more gaming products. For some reason they are too lazy to check out the great wealth of d20 products out there, and I decided I'll make them join the fun whether they like it or not.


----------



## Snowy (Jun 9, 2005)

oh yeah, i forgot, assassin as I dislike insta-kills, second up would be me modifying lots of the rest to make them more flavourful or less setting specific, red wizard for setting, and gragon disciple for flavour (i'd make it more of a casting class I think, unless someone wanted it the way it was, ooh possibly make it similar to a were-creature class)


----------



## Snowy (Jun 9, 2005)

out of interest whats wrong with the lore master those of you who posted? I'm hoping to play one sometime


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Everything is adjusted.
> My leadership score is the same as yours - exact same.




That was one of your errors, your stats are out of whack, and it gave you a Leadership score that is too high. The problem now is that you weren't able to recruit your cohort until you were 12th level (or your Leadership score to recruit them would have been lower, and your cohort would have started less powerful).

Really, the main problem with your build, and why it remains unconvincing, is that the _bulk_ of your power relies upon magic items you could not get until your became 12th level. At 11th level, no ioun stones, no monk's belt, your AC is screwed, your stats go down (including your Charisma, screwing your Leadership score), you lose the caster level bonus you cherish so much.

In point of fact, the Urge build _only_ looks good once you hit 12th level, and then it compared unfavorably with a single classed caster in the critical areas of save DCs, caster level, and high level spells. Your wizard spell book is a joke. Before 1th level, you cannot craft the items you use to prop yourself up (and you cannot afford many others that you are using), after 12th level, the increase in wealth swamps the impact of these items (and you start falling seriously behind in caster level).

You picked (intentionally of course) the "sweet spot" for the MT. And you still came up short.



> _Sadly, it's significantly more power than you can muster._





Only in a world where the delusional reign.



> _What I've found is the increadible, absolutely increadible, amount of bias coming from this 3.5 stronghold. I of course expected a lot but it's really nothing short of intellectual dishonesty._





That is really humorous coming from someone who doesn't understand the simple concept that "higher save DCs, higher caster level, higher levels spells = better spell caster".



> _On the other hand I'm  very heartened  and "illuminated" by the fact that a sizeable majority of silent posters immediately recognize the * insanity * that is the Mystic Theurge and that is reflected in the poll._





Of course, the vast majority of people voted _before_ you posted your argument, and since then, no one who has posted has thought your assessment had merit, even after seeing your "super powerful" Urge builds. What you have demonstrated, at best, is that metamagic rods are too powerful, not that the MT is a problem.


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

I'll start by saying a Cleric is better then a Myth.  Taking Myth Levels loses too much from the cleric.  You're only hope is to replace the mage.  However if you don't REALLY want to be a cleric, and would rather be a wizard, but noone wants to be the cleric, then a Myth might be for you.

If you are the only caster, then sure the Myth is perfect for you.  It adds both types of magic to the party (eventually, levels 4-11 are especially PAINFUL powerwise, at 12 it gets better, but be ready to be a support character)



			
				DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> What I've found is the increadible, absolutely increadible, amount of bias coming from this 3.5 stronghold. I of course expected a lot but it's really nothing short of intellectual dishonesty.




I notice alot of bias coming from the 3.0 "Stronghold".  Funny that.

So here is some simple math.

The Single Class caster will have 3-5 more of their highest 3 levels of spells then you will have of those same 3 levels.

Let me put it this way.  _The bard gets 3rd level spells before you do_.  _The Bard_.  _The bard also gets 4th level spells at the same time you do_.  _*THE BARD*_.  And the BARD is a spontanous spellcaster, like the sorc with a slow progression.  _Bard, The_.  People always seem to pick the high levels.  Try getting there sometime.  Hope you like waiting till level 8 to get that fireball you love to metamagic so much.  _Level Eight_.  At level 12 you _just_ got Teleport and Feeblemind.

The Wizard or Cleric has access to them 3 levels BEFORE you do.  And the same with those metamagiced versions of the spells.  This is not a "We are both level X, lets see how we fare".  You are trying to compete, while its taken you longer to get those high level slots you need to be effective (watch your build disappear at level 11 or lower), while the other character is like "Are you serious?  We did that 3 levels ago, look at these better spells that we need."  At 13th level, the wizard gets access to cleric spells via limited wish.  However, since most of the time, the wizard is casting wizard spells and leaving cleric spells to the _cleric_, its only needed in an emergency.  Scroll it.

My top 20% is better then your top 20%.  I don't care where your 20% comes from, mine is better.  My Next 20% _is your next 20%_.  Thats 2 encounters where I am _better then you_.  My top spell is better then your top spell.  _Thats one encounter where my spell is always, going to be better then your top spell_.  Lower level spells may vary in usefulness based on situation, however _in general higher level spells are more useful, and better then lower level spells_.

My HP will either be close, or much better then your HP.  You have 4 primary stats (Wis/Int/Dex/Con) while I have 3 (Int/Con/Dex).  This also means our AC will be about the same as we likely rate Con > Dex.  Also even discounting wisdom, our Cons are likely to be near the same, your leg up on HP is 13 if you take cleric first, 9.5 if you don't.  2 Points of con near level 10, or improved toughness (extra feat).  Keep in mind that 13 HP matters most at lower levels, where your spell selection will suck.  Hard.  Also you will have cleric spells, not wizard spells, so you are actually a cleric at this point while they are a wizard.  Thats a wash.

Items.  We have equal access, except for the fact that the Straight Wizard has 2 extra feats that are either metamagic or item creation.  As such they have a crafting/spellcasting advantage right there, I'd say that about evens out with domains.  If not exceeds.  Discount all magic items then, except that the wizard can have a bonus here.

Skills, the Myth is required to spend extra skill points in religion.  This lowers the skill points.  Also, the Myth is likely to not add all points form leveling into Int, they can however, so the main point sink is religion.  Since Int for Wizards is of more importance then wisdom for clerics, I am betting that the higher of the two will be int.

Saves.  Multiclassing wins.  Bug/Feature of the system.  By the book, Myth will have higher will/fort saves.  With fraction saves, only better will save (due to wisdom) and fort save (due to cleric levels).

Bab: Both of these guys miss.  Unless its touch, or true struck or some other magic to hit.  Their STR is likely to be rather... Questionable, so they would both do better to rely on their magic.  Just as the Wizard should, and the Myth has plenty to spare.

You Get cleric spells.  Which don't matter unless you replace the cleric in the party.  Otherwise the cleric in the party does that, and you are supposed to play wizard.  As such your cleric spells _support_ the main cleric.  Since your cleric spells are duplicated in the party, they are not as worthwhile.  If it was a druid, you would end up with healing duties (after combat, not too much during, you get HEAL really late, even AFTER the druid gets it).

You have wizard spells.  Which only matter if you replace the wizard.  If you do replace the wizard, there is nothing you can do as a wizard, that a straight wizard can't do better.  Your cleric spells are duplicated in partry already, so that advantage is eh.  Higher level spells are needed for the wizard to perform at their peak.  Just as a Cleric would have heal 3 levels before you, a wizard has key wizard spells 3 levels before you.  Like teleport, Greater Dispelling, _dispel magic_, and anything else that is higher then level 2.  Like fly, and overland flight.



> On the other hand I'm _ very heartened _ and "illuminated" by the fact that a sizeable majority of silent posters immediately recognize the * insanity * that is the Mystic Theurge and that is reflected in the poll.
> Hopefully, in the future we will finally banish the spectre of the be-all and end-all divine/arcane caster of 2nd edition and it will never rear its head again.




Yeah.  Its a 3rd tier class in the poll.  Red Wizard is top tier, _Dragon Disciple_ is second tier.  This is a "Which class would you not want in your campaign" not a "Which class is too broken to be allowed in your campaign poll".  I voted Assassin because of campaign issues with having a PC assassin.

Look at archmage, argueably one of the best caster PrCs out there.  26 votes.  5th tier.  Look at all the classes "Better" then archmage.  But you see, people don't have campaign issues with an archamge, they make sense and can be seen in most popular fantasy literature.  They don't cause intra party issues (Blackguard/Assassin), they don't have irritating powers that could get out of hand(DD), or deal with summoning creatures.  Their powers are all straightforward, and non-complicated.  

Also 63/326 is not a sizeable majority.

And since they are silent, you have no clue if they agree with you or not.  Only that they don't want a Myth in their campaign for whatever reason.  Some people dislike it because they don't like it, or like the idea of it, not because its too good.  Other people feel that having the two types of spellcasting is just something noone should have (not that its overpowered, they just don't want the option to have both).

Other people say no because of discussions like this that they want to avoid.

People who vote the same as you don't always agree with your reason for voting that way.

Case in point, one person voted against assassin because they hate insta kills.  I don't care about insta kills, as wizards get one at 1st level (sleep is effectivly instant death).


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

Snowy said:
			
		

> out of interest whats wrong with the lore master those of you who posted? I'm hoping to play one sometime




Only thing I can think of is that its better suited as an NPC class.  Although it could also be that they give up very, very little and gain alot (not really alot, but alot of what they spent they get back, and then some).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> You are trying to compete, while its taken you longer to get those high level slots you need to be effective (watch your build disappear at level 11 or lower), while the other character is like "Are you serious?  We did that 3 levels ago, look at these better spells that we need."




The only truly fair way to look at an MT vs. a straight caster is to work them up through the levels from first. Then you can see how the MT struggles from levels 4 through 11, how he only partially catches up from 12 through 15, and then falls behind again at levels 16+.

It would also allow for "organic" development of magic items. Many of the items relied on by the "Urge build" aren't craftable before level 12, and certainly aren't affordable for him without dipping heavily into his available cash prior to that. He'll likely have to burn a fair amount of his cash on items that would be less than useful later on, rather than being able to spend himself down to pennies on the exact perfect selection of items to offset his glaring weaknesses.

And then you have to put him in play. By the time you hit mid- to high- levels, most spell casters don't burn through all of their spell slots in a day. They just have that many _already_, so they have some that just don't get used. This means that a lot of the "extra" spells that an MT comes with become surplusage, and not all that useful in real play.

The "Urge" example is interesting, but it shows just how contorted the MT has to be to keep up with the straight caster, and, when you look at it with any kind of honest evaluation, demonstrates just how difficult being an MT is, since so much of his "powers" don't kick in until he hits 12th level and he has the cash and ability to craft the items he desperately needs.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

Snowy said:
			
		

> has two domain powers (if level limited ones at level 3, makes sense to pick the non-level linked ones!)




Using the core rules, this limits you to the Chaos, Evil, Good, Healing, Law, Luck, and War domains and half of the Knowledge domain (+1 caster level for divinations). The Animal domain might also half-qualify, but the domain ability does not specify the effective caster level of its granted spell-like ability. Most of these domain abilities are not that impressive overall.


----------



## ARandomGod (Jun 9, 2005)

painandgreed said:
			
		

> Horizon Walker is the only one that really wouldn't fit into a campaign in my homebrew.




Interestingly enough, I think that this PrC is the one that by default has to fit into every campaign. So perhaps they don't fit in with what your world has IN it... _they came from outside_! Anything can happen outside.



			
				Wombat said:
			
		

> No Dragon Disciples (as no half-dragons) and no Horizon Walkers (absolutely no plane-hopping in my campaigns, ever).
> 
> Pretty simple.




Even here, so there's no hopping IN your plane. Things can still get trapped there from outside of it. Unless, of course, there are no fire elementals/other outsiders at all. 

I don't have plane hopping in any of my games either. But I've had HW's in them.

If I were to pick one, it would be the arcane archer. Because that's just aweful. Especially in 3.5 ... But I'd allow someone to play it if they wanted to. I'd even switch the bonus they get so that their class enhancement to arrows would stack with magic bow bonuses, the way the class was intended. I don't like the fact that it's racist however. I drop all that racist fluff when I run games. (PS, those who think it's overpowered this way, rule it 3.5 and it goes away.)



			
				devilbat said:
			
		

> After experiencing the Mystic Thurge in one of my campaigns, I hope I never see one again.  I find them over powered.  Not to mention the half hour needed to go over thier spell list, every time a change is required.




This is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that _they've tried it_ and they consider it overpowered. It surprises me to the point that I wonder if the person playing it cheated. 



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> Everything is fine except the Mystic Theurge. I'll never allow anyone to have a PrC that gives dual caster progression in two seperate classes, it's too open to abuse even if you don't get as many feats as a straight caster in one of those classes.
> 
> If you want to multiclass go back to 2e or expect me to start putting level limits on your character by race arbitrarily or something like that




THIS is more often what I hear about that class. 
"I've never given it a fair shake, and I never will."
And that makes sense to me. It's a perfectly valid opinion, too... as is one that has tried it and considers it overpowered... just that second one shocked me.



			
				Aus_Snow said:
			
		

> Mystic Theurge is not allowed in any of my campaigns, never has been, and never will be.




There now. That's pure predjudice, and something easily understood and accepted. ^_^



			
				Greylock said:
			
		

> I am astounded that the Horizon Walker is so high on this list. Many find it a fairly weak PrC, but I've always thought it very flavorful.




I think it's the dimension door ability. Really, really bothers some people.



			
				Ace said:
			
		

> As am I -- it is also really easy to fix if you don't have planar travel in your game -- just make it a 5 level class and disallow the Planar terrains -- easy peasy
> 
> of course someone just said this before me -- mea culpa and DOH!




Or ignore planar travel, and have the characters learn it from experience with outsiders. Heck, not even with outsiders, shifting from experienceing/seeing travel magic. Fiery plane from communing with the campfire. Etcetera. They don't only get these abilities on those planes, so there's no reason for them to GO to those planes to get them.

Or, of course, like some have said, just only allow terrain mastery, no planar terrains.


----------



## ARandomGod (Jun 9, 2005)

Man, I couldn't get through all the posts on this conversation..

Anyhow. I actually agree with some of the reasons some people give for disliking PrC's altogether. But I see them as a core aspect of 3.X... and that talk as just disliking 3.X's base premises (Feats and PrC's). Since this thread isn't about THAT, I leave that type of thought out.

I think that it's interesting that two of the most hated (but not THE most hated) at the time I'm looking at this poll are two of my current favorites.  I really like the Dragon Disciple and the Horizon Walker. I like to combine HW levels with Shadow Dancer levels, to add on to the number of unfavored PrC's I like.

I'm doing DD in an Eberron campaign I'm playing in. It's so lovely (and ironic) combined with my Warforged character. And "giving up" a few HPs for the ability to use wands and therefore be able to repair yourself? That's awesome. Add in some innate true strike and the power attack feat. A lovely tank.

HW/SD combo... the ShadowWalker. That's an interesting archer. Can't be seen, touched. Snipes from a distance. Poor in melee, not that great indoors... but actually has stats similiar to a secondary tank. He's been the most fun since all my Arcane Tricksters.


----------



## ARandomGod (Jun 9, 2005)

Well, apparently I didn't miss anything, as everything else was just people arguing about the MT. 
OOoh it's overpowered. 
No, it' underpowered.
No it's not.
Yes it is.
No it's not.
You're just contradicting me.
No I'm not. 
There, you just did it again.
No I didn't.

Heheh. Well. One thing I noticed is that the MT character forgot to take a cohort himself. It's pretty well known that the leadership feat is overpowered. Of course, the MT is running horribly low on feats due to his inherent two in one nature... but still. 

Generally speaking people whom I've seen not allow MT would also not allow the Leadership feat. With a similiar arguement. Leadership is two in one, just a different way. Personally I don't think that it's in too much doubt as to HOW the leadership feat is more overpowered than the MT, but that doesn't really matter.

Face it, the DM poster said he didn't like it "because". Sure, his because is a because it's overpowered, but something he apparently let himself get tricked into, proof of it's 'overpoweredness', he's gone about the wrong way. His argurement for why it's overpowered, if you read it carefully, is that it has more options than one person should, and it takes more spotlite time than one person should. Now, the leadership obviously does this too! And really I don't think that the people who are saying MT is underpowered are debating the fact that the MT has a LOT of options. And since that was the guy's real beef, you're arguing over the same side. You BOTH (all) think the MT is overpowered in the same way he does. Although it's obvious that he's also failing to see your point (that the MT is a horriffically weak character), you're also failing to see his (that it's two in one! TWO IN ONE@! THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT!!!)

Lol


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 9, 2005)

ARandomGod said:
			
		

> you're also failing to see his (that it's two in one! TWO IN ONE@! THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT!!!)




I'm not sure I'm failing to see his point. I'm just not buying his contention that a pair of spellcasters who can cast 3rd level spells would be more valuable to a 9th level party than one who can cast 5th level spells, and I'm thinking they would be even less so if only one of them could effectively act in a round.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I'm failing to see his point. I'm just not buying his contention that a pair of spellcasters who can cast 3rd level spells would be more valuable to a 9th level party than one who can cast 5th level spells, and I'm thinking they would be even less so if only one of them could effectively act in a round.



I might say that not just you have failed to see my point, repeatedly.  And the rest of the time there's a willingness to ignore it, which is intellectually dishonest. 
If we're all playing fair ball, and I'll retract my claims of dishonesty, I'de like to see  your "total spell levels *analysis*" for the MT+cohort vs. wis+cohort. And claim total crushing victory for the Urge. 
I'de also like to see some admission that the addition of druidic magic is a crushing advantage. 
And that my caster level to break SR is equal to your wizards. And I'll spend the remaining cash not on the rod but on a bigger headband of intellect so the DC is the same. 
And that despite all claims to the contrary, your wizard's robe of the archmagi isn't any less "contrived" than my character's gear in terms of when you could acquire it, friendly high level wizards lending you their spellbooks not withstanding.

Then we can discuss that in reality, you have a mere +2 caster level difference, 2 extra feats , and a handful of 6th level spells versus a metric truckload of lower level ones and a character is significantly greater in survivability, in saves, AC, hp and well.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 9, 2005)

The thing is, many people see a higher level spell as being much much better than a lot of lower level spells. In other words, a sixth level spell isn't equal to two or even three fifth level spells, but it is worth more. And, there are times when the MT is two spell levels below the straight classed character. By the time you're casting fifth level spells, third level spells are all but worthless, and second level spells practically are worthless, except for a select few utility spells.

To convince someone that the MT is useful, first you must convince them that the fact that they have a bunch of low level spells actually makes a difference against an equal CR challenge.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Then Third Wizard it comes down to the specifics of the game. 
And it's not just lower level spells, it's the arcane/divine mix. 
If your DM runs 1 short encounter a day then you do look like crap. If you have the standard 4, you're breaking even. If you have more than 4, you're hot stuff.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 9, 2005)

I somwhat agree. I think the MT is a perfectly balanced PrC for a "normal" game. It's definately underpowered for one big encounter per day, but I don't think it is overpowered when dealing with lots of encounters a day. That depends on if you think low level spells are actually worth anything.

But, the arcane/divine mix doesn't make much difference when looking at a 4 person party situation, as a party is better off with a separate divine and arcane caster. In the case of the MT trying to fill both roles at the same time, his resources will be too spread out, so he has to choose one to specialize in anyway. You can't handle both arcane and divine duties at once.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> And I'll spend the remaining cash not on the rod but on a bigger headband of intellect so the DC is the same.
> And that despite all claims to the contrary, your wizard's robe of the archmagi isn't any less "contrived" than my character's gear in terms of when you could acquire it, friendly high level wizards lending you their spellbooks not withstanding.
> 
> Then we can discuss that in reality, you have a mere +2 caster level difference, 2 extra feats , and a handful of 6th level spells versus a metric truckload of lower level ones and a character is significantly greater in survivability, in saves, AC, hp and well.




Ignoring specific builds presented, gear can only go against the MT. At best, the MT and full caster can buy the exact same gear, and get the same benefits from it. Most likely some amount of the MT's gear is going to be compensating for his weaknesses (headband to up spell DCs because his stats are spread widely, ioun stones to boost caster level because his is lower). The full wizard having the extra feats for crafting only makes that matter worse.

Specific gear picks and spreading across cohort needlessly complicate the matter. The MT's gear simply won't make it better than a full caster, unless the MT is better than the full caster irrespective of gear (unless there are specific synergies which have not been brought up). So please stop arguing from gear.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 9, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> I somwhat agree. I think the MT is a perfectly balanced PrC for a "normal" game. It's definately underpowered for one big encounter per day, but I don't think it is overpowered when dealing with lots of encounters a day. That depends on if you think low level spells are actually worth anything.




I think the MT's extra healing between encounters and the straight caster higher spells ending encounters quicker will balance out for the most part. At least past 12-14 level, before then the MT's pretty screwed.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

You see that isn't true dnabre. The MT can select gear that works well for him, specifically. Like for instance the Monk-Belt. 
Really 3 levels of caster level are worth 45000 GP. It's not "insignificant" but it's not that much money, particularly at the higher levels. The single classed characters _ often _ rely upon spell trigger items like wands and scrolls that the MT simply doesn't need because of his raw spell capacity. 
The gear, caster level, and stat dependency arguments have been dispelled. 
The net result is you're left with the value of a higher level of spellcasting versus the all powerful divine/arcane mix for lower level spells. 
We've been here before, it's 2nd edition demi-human casters all over again. It wasn't balanced then, it isn't balanced now.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Third Wizard in the standard wiz,fig,clr,rog party you don't need a cleric + wizard in the 4 person party. You could have an MT + druid. They win by versatility alone. Or an MT + paladin. Or an MT + monk.  
He fills the shoes of both characters sufficiently enough to be bereft of the others and gain another aspect of either the spell system or the combat arena.
Or you can add more "hybrid" classes to the arena as well. Arcane tricksters, eldricht knights and what have you. As more characters overlap in ability their versatility increases and that is real power. 
It's 2nd edition all over again. The standard party casts 2 6th level spells fighter and rogue charge into the fray. The hybrid party casts 4 5th level spells or does the same as the standard. They just have that much more versatility.
If the cleric goes down, well the standard party is in a real bind. If the wizard with teleport goes down the standard party is in a real bind. No one cares in the hybrid party, because more than one person can teleport, more than one person can raise the dead, there's arcane hierophants and mystic theurges and arcane tricksters....


----------



## dnabre (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You see that isn't true dnabre. The MT can select gear that works well for him, specifically. Like for instance the Monk-Belt.
> Really 3 levels of caster level are worth 45000 GP. It's not "insignificant" but it's not that much money, particularly at the higher levels. The single classed characters _ often _ rely upon spell trigger items like wands and scrolls that the MT simply doesn't need because of his raw spell capacity.
> The gear, caster level, and stat dependency arguments have been dispelled.
> The net result is you're left with the value of a higher level of spellcasting versus the all powerful divine/arcane mix for lower level spells.
> We've been here before, it's 2nd edition demi-human casters all over again. It wasn't balanced then, it isn't balanced now.




The full caster can select gear that works for him too. A monk belts does even more for full cleric (who'll likely have a higher wisdom) (not getting into the brokenness of the monk belt). My point is those few items like the monk-belt which can help the MT but not one of the full casters are the only differences in gear. Spell-trigger items might be handy, but you have to make that argument. Your MT above doesn't use any spell trigger items true, but neither does the full caster that was posted (which isn't realistic for either in a normal campaign).

Every gold piece a MT can spend upping his caster level or spell DCs the full caster can do as well (better with DC because he only has one caster stat). Saying the MT's caster level isn't an issue because he'll up it with ioun stones and spell penetration is disingenuous . A full caster can do the same thing, and he's not starting out behind. 

45,000gp is a hell of lot of money for anybody below 16th level. It is worth 3 casters levels? For somebody, it's quite an investment.

If you want to argue that MT doesn't have to depend on spell trigger items as much, make that argument (claiming something isn't an argument). Spell trigger items are cheap though, saying your MT doesn't have spend money for the wand of cure light isn't really saying much though. Please do elaborate on that point, if you think it's worthwhile. It's one of the few relevant points you've made.


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> We've been here before, it's 2nd edition demi-human casters all over again. It wasn't balanced then, it isn't balanced now.




False.  Its not the same, and you know it.  This is openly dishonest.

In 1e/2e the dual spellcaster was a _single level behind until you hit level 10_.

The Myth is _3 levels behind starting at 4th level_.

In 1e/2e you _took the best of the two classes in saves, and the average in HP_.

In 1e/2e the wizard would be level 10 the Myth would be level 9/9.

The Wizard would have approx 25+ _UP TO_ 2 per level, and getting that +2 is harder then in 3e.  Do think you needed a 16 to get it.

The Myth would have approx 35 + the same for con.  The Wizard would have wizard save, the Myth would have the better of the 2 in each catagory. Thats more then 30% extra HP.

They would both be casting the same level spells.  They would both have everything else the same as there was no item creation feats.

_It is not the same._  This is the _weakest_ arguement against the Myth.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You see that isn't true dnabre. The MT can select gear that works well for him, specifically. Like for instance the Monk-Belt.




Which works even better for a druid.



> Really 3 levels of caster level are worth 45000 GP.




You're going to have to explain this one. Compare a 5th level wizard to an 8th level wizard, spell-wise: one more 1st level spell, one more 2nd level spell, two more third level and two 4th level spells that the 5th level wizard has none of. 

The MT makes up for this by gaining the ability to cast cleric spells of these levels. I say it balances out, eventually - around level 12 or so. But, I don't see how that relates to gp values.



> The gear, caster level, and stat dependency arguments have been dispelled.




Eh? Multiple Ability Dependancy is still an issue for the MT and not the straight class, unless you are a straight class that has MAD, like the favored soul. 



> We've been here before, it's 2nd edition demi-human casters all over again. It wasn't balanced then, it isn't balanced now.




Not even close... See, its because of the way the xp tables worked in 2ED. Take a cleric/wizard in 2ED in a party with a wizard and a cleric. Lets look at the xp total of 225,000. This puts the priest character at 9th level, and the wizard at 10th level. This puts the cleric/wizard at 8th/8th. Lower levels are worse, with 40,000 xp the wizard is 6th, the cleric is 6th, and the wizard/cleric is 5th/5th.

See, because xp increased so radically from level to level, even halving your xp between your two classes generally put you 1-2 levels below where a straight classed character of that level would be. When you need 1 million xp for level X and 2 million xp for level X+1, then splitting xp really isn't that bad. That's why multiclassing in 2ED was so powerful, because you weren't far behind at all in terms of raw power.

The MT doesn't have this benefit. He is always behind, and at lower levels much further behind.



> Third Wizard in the standard wiz,fig,clr,rog party you don't need a cleric + wizard in the 4 person party. You could have an MT + druid. They win by versatility alone. Or an MT + paladin. Or an MT + monk.




But, the MT still has to choose a roll. Is he the party healer? The artillery? A buffer (<-- this is the roll MTs excel at by the way). You can't do everything at once, so it doesn't really matter if you can cast both arcane and divine spells. To heal, you have to be near melee, which puts the MT at a disadvantage to a cleric in the same roll. He doesn't excel at artillery compared to a wizard because of the lower caster level (for SR) and lower DCs for his spells. 

Here's the crux:
*He has to choose what he is going to do. Just like a fighter can't be both offensive and defensive at the same time, a MT can't be both a healer and a blaster at the same time.

*Now, he can one battle take over healing, and one battle take over artillery, but in both these circumstances he will not be as good at either roll as a straight classed character. This is the balancing factor. He can switch rolls. That is the balancing factor: more versatility fpr less power. 


> Or you can add more "hybrid" classes to the arena as well. Arcane tricksters, eldricht knights and what have you. As more characters overlap in ability their versatility increases and that is real power.




I do not agree.



> It's 2nd edition all over again.




I belive I pointed out why this is incorrect already, so I won't go into it again.



> The standard party casts 2 6th level spells fighter and rogue charge into the fray. The hybrid party casts 4 5th level spells or does the same as the standard. They just have that much more versatility.




And, here we run into this again. 4 5th level spells are inferior to 2 6th level spells + fighter and a rogue. Heck, 4 5th level spells are probably inferior to just the 2 6th level spells themselves. You gain nothing by throwing around more low level spells. And note, that the Eldritch Knight won't be casting 5th level spells unless he's more wizard than fighter. Which isn't a good thing for a party.



> If the cleric goes down, well the standard party is in a real bind. If the wizard with teleport goes down the standard party is in a real bind. No one cares in the hybrid party, because more than one person can teleport, more than one person can raise the dead, there's arcane hierophants and mystic theurges and arcane tricksters....




That doesn't work, because with a MT you don't even have _teleport _when you would with a wizard. Not to mention Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters.


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> It's 2nd edition all over again. The standard party casts 2 6th level spells fighter and rogue charge into the fray. The hybrid party casts 4 5th level spells or does the same as the standard. They just have that much more versatility.
> If the cleric goes down, well the standard party is in a real bind. If the wizard with teleport goes down the standard party is in a real bind. No one cares in the hybrid party, because more than one person can teleport, more than one person can raise the dead, there's arcane hierophants and mystic theurges and arcane tricksters....




More dishonesty.

That Hybrid party cannot cast the same spells as the Normal Party.  Not until 3 levels after it.

In the Hybrid Party, they can only raise the dead _3 levels after the normal party can do it_.

They can't Teleport for _3 levels after the normal party can do it_.

Getting the cleric raised from the dead can be done via scroll (rogue), friendly spellcaster in a town, or they can just roll up another.

Your arguement isn't that they are too powerful, its that they can do too much.



> Then we can discuss that in reality, you have a mere +2 caster level difference, 2 extra feats , and a handful of 6th level spells versus a metric truckload of lower level ones and a character is significantly greater in survivability, in saves, AC, hp and well.




Interesting.  Thats all you think the wizard has?

The Caster Level difference is 3.  Below is a nice list of the top 4 spell levels, and how the 2 compare on just the spells listed in the spells per day list.

```
7th : 4(Wiz  +1), 3(Wiz  +2), 2(Myth +2), 1(Myth +3)
8th : 4(Wiz  +2), 3(Even --), 2(Myth +2), 1(Myth +3)
9th : 5(Wiz  +1), 4(Wiz  +2), 3(Myth +2), 2(Myth +3) 
10th: 5(Wiz  +2), 4(Even --), 3(Myth +2), 2(Myth +3)

That should be enough to show the pattern that follows until you hit 19 with the wizard (no 10th level spells).  You trade 1.5 of the highest level and 1 of the higest level (on average) for 2 of the 3rd highest level and 3 of the 4th highest level spells.

You can make the 2nd highest and lower spells higher in your favor, but then you trade even MORE highest level spells.  And there is still every odd level where you don't have [i]either[/i] of the 2 highest level spells.

The wizard has 3 caster levels, and 1.5 [i]spell levels[/i] on you.  Those 1.5 spell levels mean that you have to wait till level 12 to teleport, the NORMAL party does it at level 9 when you can't even cast greater invisibility, divine power, or your Empowered Scorching Ray.  The Normal Wizard is already empowering Fireball, casting teleport wall of force, or whatever other [i]5th level spells[/i] they happen to have.  Enjoy your 3rd level spells.

There are things the Hybrid party can do that the normal party cannot, and there are things the normal party can do that the hybrid can't.  Its a trade off.
```


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> False.  Its not the same, and you know it.  This is openly dishonest.



No, it isn't. It's a fair comparison. The MT *might* and I say might because it depends on how you play him, might be weaker at lower levels but there was never anything as ridiculous as the 8th/9th casting crap at higher levels. At least there were level caps. 
And further non-core PrC make it 9th/9th which goes well beyond any travesty 2nd edition did. 



> In 1e/2e the dual spellcaster was a _single level behind until you hit level 10_.



Not true, the XP tables and XP bonuses for high stats made gaps. 



> In 1e/2e you _took the best of the two classes in saves, and the average in HP_.



So? In 3.5 you get tons of save bonuses and get cleric HD and cleric starting hp?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> More dishonesty
> That Hybrid party cannot cast the same spells as the Normal Party.  Not until 3 levels after it.



You aren't even integrating what I write. You merely whip off your rant with what selective portions you're imagined exist. Note carefully I said the hybrid party would cast 5th and the normal party would cast 6th. The self same situation as we've discussed for pages now.  
The accusations of "dishonesty" are nothing short of laughable considering all the crap you people have been trying to pull in terms of rule abuses and twistings. 




> In the Hybrid Party, they can only raise the dead _3 levels after the normal party can do it_.
> They can't Teleport for _3 levels after the normal party can do it_.



So? so? so? They can all do it? 



> Getting the cleric raised from the dead can be done via scroll (rogue), friendly spellcaster in a town, or they can just roll up another.



Wow that's a fantastic way of proving your point. "They can just roll up another X each time they get stuck".  *rolls eyes*



> Your arguement isn't that they are too powerful, its that they can do too much.



Versatility is power. A flesh to stone spell is worthless against an iron golem. A magical sword can do the trick. Sorry Kem, versatility is * power *. That's the basis of 3E multiclassing, or at least it was.  




> The Caster Level difference is 3.  Below is a nice list of the top 4 spell levels, and how the 2 compare on just the spells listed in the spells per day list.



I don't understand your list. You're going to have to write it out clearer. 10th what? Level, spell level? 



> The Normal Wizard is already empowering Fireball, casting teleport wall of force, or whatever other _5th level spells_ they happen to have.  Enjoy your 3rd level spells.



Will do m'lady. Especially with a metamagic rod or two. And I get multiple 4th just next level and you're still at 5th. I can wait. Your 5th level magic seems pretty tame in prospect of 2 4th. Oh the shades of 2nd edition...  And in a real game you'de have to pay for more high level spells too, incidentally. 



> There are things the Hybrid party can do that the normal party cannot, and there are things the normal party can do that the hybrid can't.  Its a trade off.



Advantage hybrid. It's not a fair trade.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Versatility is power. A flesh to stone spell is worthless against an iron golem. A magical sword can do the trick. Sorry Kem, versatility is * power *. That's the basis of 3E multiclassing, or at least it was.




Specialization is power. Versatility is somewhat useful.

Unless it is your oppinion that bards are the most powerful class in the PHB.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> Specialization is power. Versatility is somewhat useful.
> Unless it is your oppinion that bards are the most powerful class in the PHB.



A lone bard is arguably the most survivable class in the PHB. 
Specialisation is only power when you have others covering your weaknesses or you never confront your weakness.
It is conditional power.
The most highly evolved dinosaurs lost to the muskrat. The evolution of your character may very well be no different.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 9, 2005)

We are talking about a party of four PC of the same level in challenging encounters here. Or at least I am.


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> No, it isn't. It's a fair comparison. The MT *might* and I say might because it depends on how you play him, might be weaker at lower levels but there was never anything as ridiculous as the 8th/9th casting crap at higher levels. At least there were level caps.
> And further non-core PrC make it 9th/9th which goes well beyond any travesty 2nd edition did.




Um, 9/7 or 8/8.  Please know what you are talking about.

And non-core?  NON-CORE?  We aren't talking NON-CORE.  And the Ur-Priest is questionable _without_ considering the Myth.  Same with any other class that allows the myth to hit 9/9.

This is about the _Mystic Theurg_, not any of those other classes.



> Not true, the XP tables and XP bonuses for high stats made gaps.




Absolutly true.  It was a 10% bonus for having a 16.  Thats it.  Thats not even part of a level.  Since until you hit 10ish each level was _double_ the previous level.  That 10% bonus let the single class character get 1 free level per 10 _after_ level 10, and let them hit the next level sooner.  Thats it.

And at about 10 the cleric and wizard even out, the wizard ends up taking more xp per level after that, while the cleric takes less.



> So? In 3.5 you get tons of save bonuses and get cleric HD and cleric starting hp?




You have less HP now, and worse saves.  Its part of that "Its not the same as in 1e/2e".


----------



## Sejs (Jun 9, 2005)

> Wow that's a fantastic way of proving your point. "They can just roll up another X each time they get stuck". *rolls eyes*




"Sorry Bill, your cleric's dead and we can't bring him back.  Go home."

Or is it...

"Sorry Bill, your cleric's dead and we can't bring him back. You can roll up another character and I'll work you in, but it can't be a cleric.  Anything else is fine, but you're not allowed to play another cleric.  Even if you enjoyed your last one."

?


----------



## Kem (Jun 9, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You aren't even integrating what I write. You merely whip off your rant with what selective portions you're imagined exist. Note carefully I said the hybrid party would cast 5th and the normal party would cast 6th. The self same situation as we've discussed for pages now.




Uh huh...  You picked a single level, and then are using that _single_ level to prove your points while at many, many other levels, your example _doesn't work_.

Because when you are casting 5th level spells, they could have 7th (one level higher) or you could only have 4th (one level lower).

The dishonesty you have is that you ignore any level but 12 for the Myth.  Or for that matter, I bet you'd ignore any ODD level.



> The accusations of "dishonesty" are nothing short of laughable considering all the crap you people have been trying to pull in terms of rule abuses and twistings.




Read my recent posts, you have not disproved any of it.



> Wow that's a fantastic way of proving your point. "They can just roll up another X each time they get stuck".  *rolls eyes*




Thats one of 3 methods.  You'll notice its the only method open to a party of pre level 12 Hybrids.  You know from level 9 to 11?  Where the cleric has been able to raise people already?  Or that teleporting to somewhere with someone ABLE to raise the dead is possible?



> Versatility is power. A flesh to stone spell is worthless against an iron golem.  A magical sword can do the trick.




All spellcasters have issues with Golems.  This is where the wizard buffs like haste come in handy.  Or greater invisibility.  Or Blink.  Or spells like Acid Fog that have no SR.

You have the Fighter to stand toe to toe, why try to take that role when you can make him so much better at it.  And you'll never be as good at it due to HP/AC/BAB not having weapons.



> Sorry Kem, versatility is * power *. That's the basis of 3E multiclassing, or at least it was.




It is power.  But for spellcasters, specialization in _spellcasting_ is power is more power.  The Red Wizard isn't thought to be overpowered because they get a variety of spells.

Likewise, sacrificing caster levels makes you a worse spellcaster because _it delays access to higher level spells_.

And is not having 2 6th level spells worth having 2 more 4th level spells and 3 more 3rd level spells?

You cast Raise Dead, they cast Ressurection.  You cast Cure Critical, they cast Heal.  You cast Fireball, They cast Teleport.  You cast Greater Invis, they cast Contingency.  Granted on even levels its not _as bad_.



> I don't understand your list. You're going to have to write it out clearer. 10th what? Level, spell level?





```
7th : 4(Wiz +1), 3(Wiz +2), 2(Myth +2), 1(Myth +3)
```

7th is character level.
4 is spell level.
Wiz +1 means that the wizard has one more spell of this level then the myth.
3 is 3rd level spells.
Wiz +2 means the wizard has 2 more spells here then the myth.

The spells the Wizard has base over the myth form a very predictable pattern.

1.5 spells of of the highest the wizard can cast over you, 1 spell of the next highest the wizard can cast over you.  The myth then has 2 spells over the wizard and 3 spells over the wizard for the next 2 levels.



> Will do m'lady. Especially with a metamagic rod or two. And I get multiple 4th just next level and you're still at 5th. I can wait. Your 5th level magic seems pretty tame in prospect of 2 4th. Oh the shades of 2nd edition...  And in a real game you'de have to pay for more high level spells too, incidentally.




Actually adding another 5th level spell.  So thats 2 5th level spells, and the same number of 4t6h level spells that you have.

And those rods, can be used by the wizard just as well as by you.  Please stop with the items unless it can be proven to only help one or the other.

And you get 2 spells per level for free.  Thats in a real game.  And thats 4 5th level spells known.  And I'll take waiting to have 6th level spells while you dilly with 4th level spells.  Then YOU get to wait to cast 5th while I am casting 6th.



> Advantage hybrid. It's not a fair trade.




I'll take Teleport over Fireball.  Raise Dead over Prayer.  I'll take Wish over Limited Wish, Miracle over Ressurection.  I'll take Fireball over Scorching Ray, and Heal over Cure Critical.

A Hybrid Party is versatile, but unlike 2e/1e, they don't have the output of the Normal Party.



> A lone bard is arguably the most survivable class in the PHB.




Actually that would be cleric.



> Specialisation is only power when you have others covering your weaknesses or you never confront your weakness.




Hence having a party of players, and not just one.  The Myth (as has been admitted) is good for a party with no casters.

Versatility is ONLY power, when that versatility doesn't wash out the abilities too much to be useful.  This is why the Bard is a poor replacement for a wizard or cleric.  They aren't good enough casting to fill either of those rolls.  They do okay replacing the rogue as long as its a social rogue.

So where does that leave the Versatility of the Bard?

Is a party of 4 bards somehow better then a Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard?


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 9, 2005)

Kem said:
			
		

> Um, 9/7 or 8/8.  Please know what you are talking about.
> This is about the _Mystic Theurg_, not any of those other classes.



You're clearly not immune to the typo either. Theurg. 

Anyhow, I'll reply to the rest later when I have time. I've spent enough time on this to realise it's like arguing religion with a small vocal minority of people (that always turn up for the same debate).


----------



## Kem (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> You're clearly not immune to the typo either. Theurg.




I always say "Myth" because thats what it is.  I spelled it out that time and goofed.  I'll stick to Myth.



> Anyhow, I'll reply to the rest later when I have time. I've spent enough time on this to realise it's like arguing religion with a small vocal minority of people (that always turn up for the same debate).




I feel the same way.  Thats why I provided actual statistics, and numbers behind what I was saying.  Makes me feel better when people ignore them.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 10, 2005)

> A lone bard is arguably the most survivable class in the PHB.



  Only if they avoid combat whenever possible. 

A lone druid or a lone cleric both trump the lone bard in terms of survivability.

Edit: The bard is also trumped by the Lone Ranger, but that's because he has a gun and a faithful indian companion.  *nod*


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jun 10, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Only if they avoid combat whenever possible.
> 
> A lone druid or a lone cleric both trump the lone bard in terms of survivability.
> 
> Edit: The bard is also trumped by the Lone Ranger, but that's because he has a gun and a faithful indian companion.  *nod*




What about the lone gunman?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 10, 2005)

Kae'Yoss said:
			
		

> What about the lone gunman?



 But there are three of them!...well, okay, I guess they do only count for 1 when it comes to combat.


----------



## Testament (Jun 10, 2005)

Testament's Conclusions:

1.  A foolish argument will be won by the superior fool
2.  Metamagic rods are overpowered.


----------



## ARandomGod (Jun 10, 2005)

I thought I covered all this in my posts. 

Some people hate prejudicially. Facts do not sway these people, they will not look at them, or consider them real facts. Therefore presenting facts does not affect them. 

So make your will save already people and stop arguing about this! 'Tis silly. 

He has a valid point. He hates the MT. And nothing's going to affect this. You should stop trying.


----------



## Snowy (Jun 10, 2005)

ARandomGod said:
			
		

> SNIP
> 
> He has a valid point. He hates the MT. And nothing's going to affect this. You should stop trying.




But we can only hope that other people when considering this issue will read the reasoned arguments and make an informed decision, rather than a biased one on wrong assumptions.

I'm so close to starting a play-by-post and asking for a myth and a couple of casters to have an online example for people to look at. I might get up the courage eventually.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I might say that not just you have failed to see my point, repeatedly.  And the rest of the time there's a willingness to ignore it, which is intellectually dishonest.




Says the man who doesn't understand the difference between magic items and characters. Says the man who doesn't understand how useless his Urge build would be at 4th level, or 5th level, or 6th level, or 7th level, or 8th level, or 9th level, or 10th level, or 11th level. How valuable are you to the party again?



> _If we're all playing fair ball, and I'll retract my claims of dishonesty, I'de like to see  your "total spell levels *analysis*" for the MT+cohort vs. wis+cohort. And claim total crushing victory for the Urge._





The MT+cohort catch up, somewhat. BUt I can't do an analysis until you fix the problems with the Urge/Demiurge build. Which you still haven't done.



> _I'de also like to see some admission that the addition of druidic magic is a crushing advantage._





It might be an advantage, but since you calauclated your Leadership score wrong, we can't figure out what level your cohort is supposed to be. You also didn't tell us when you recruited your cohort, so we don't know what effect he'[s had over the course of your Urge's career (here's a hint, the Wizard-Cohort pair were brought together when the Wizard was 6th level, and the Cleric was 4th level. You can't afford the items that allow you to attract a reasonably high level cohort until you are _12th level_).



> _And that my caster level to break SR is equal to your wizards._





There is much more to caster level than breaking SR. Besides, if the Wizard gets rid of his worthless Craft Rod feat and replace it with Spell Penetration, he moves ahead again.



> _And I'll spend the remaining cash not on the rod but on a bigger headband of intellect so the DC is the same.
> 
> And now you don't have any access to the precious metamagic rods you love. And you can't afford the more powerful headband anyway with the cash you have left. You have to give something else up too.
> 
> ...


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> A lone bard is arguably the most survivable class in the PHB.




And now you've just proven you exist in a reality different from normal humans.



> _Specialisation is only power when you have others covering your weaknesses or you never confront your weakness._





D&D is, by its nature a _team game_. Other to cover your weaknesses is the standard.



> _The most highly evolved dinosaurs lost to the muskrat. The evolution of your character may very well be no different._





Actually, they likely lost to meteors falling from space. But that is no more relevant to this topic than your claim concerning dinosaurs.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> You're going to have to explain this one. Compare a 5th level wizard to an 8th level wizard, spell-wise: one more 1st level spell, one more 2nd level spell, two more third level and two 4th level spells that the 5th level wizard has none of.




He means that you can craft three orange ioun stones for 45,000 gp (leaving aside the fact that it would also cost him 3,600 xp, he likes to gloss over losing experience points to craft things).

He still hasn't focused on the fact that you can't benefit from three orange ioun stones at once, since you cannot gain a bonus from the same source multiple times. But that is where his silly "three caster levels is worth 45,000 gp" argument comes from.

And he doesn't even begin to account for the fact that he doesn't have the ability to craft them (and certainly can't afford them otherwise) before he hits 12th level.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Says the man who doesn't understand the difference between magic items and characters. Says the man who doesn't understand how useless his Urge build would be at 4th level, or 5th level, or 6th level, or 7th level, or 8th level, or 9th level, or 10th level, or 11th level. How valuable are you to the party again?



Uh-huh. We'll just have to "pretend" the odd levels don't exist. Or the sorceror core class. 




> The MT+cohort catch up, somewhat. BUt I can't do an analysis until you fix the problems with the Urge/Demiurge build. Which you still haven't done.



There's nothing wrong with the build. 



> You can't afford the items that allow you to attract a reasonably high level cohort until you are _12th level_).



Really? I can't afford a cloak of charisma +2 at level 6? I guess your wizard was naked until level 11ish when he bought his robe?  This discussion is pointless. You're unwilling to even do your own stupid analysis over again. ---> Intellectual Dishonesty. 
Heck you're not even willing to pay for your spells or take the leadership hit from having a familiar so cry me a river. 



> The difference is that the wizard's power isn't dependent upon that item at levels 4-11. Without them, your MT sucks. With them, he barely catches up.



I guess that's as close as an admission of defeat as I'm going to get. 



> And I hope you've figured out a way to deal with those dread spectres. And don't get caught flat-footed.



Good old evocation.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

Sejs said:
			
		

> "Sorry Bill, your cleric's dead and we can't bring him back.  Go home."
> Or is it...
> "Sorry Bill, your cleric's dead and we can't bring him back. You can roll up another character and I'll work you in, but it can't be a cleric.  Anything else is fine, but you're not allowed to play another cleric.  Even if you enjoyed your last one."



Nope, it's more like: 
"Well let's see if the party can escape here on their own, without their cleric as you might all need new characters."


----------



## dnabre (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Really? I can't afford a cloak of charisma +2 at level 6? I guess your wizard was naked until level 11ish when he bought his robe?




Looking back, you've apparently fixed the math with his gear. I was off originally, don't know if people had noticed that you'd fixed it. You hitpoints are still wrong.

You didn't buy a cloak of charisma at level 6, you're character does not list anything to said you did, so you didn't. You don't say when you attracted your cohort, so we must assume you did so at your current level with your current gear. At the moment, you're character's leadership score is 12 (12+2-2) so you can't attract a 10th level cohort. Oh, I don't quite follow the gear total for your cohort, but regardless you cohort doesn't get to give you presents.



			
				DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> This discussion is pointless. You're unwilling to even do your own stupid analysis over again. ---> Intellectual Dishonesty.
> Heck you're not even willing to pay for your spells or take the leadership hit from having a familiar so cry me a river.



You have yet to point out a single actual error in his character. His cohort and spell purchases are correct, rules for them have been sighted, and have been confirmed by others. If you still claim there is an error, you're welcome to point what the error is. Just claiming there is an error, and claiming others are aware of it and being dishonest is not only pointless, but is a personal attack. 

I've already walked through the rules for his cohort, if you don't understand them or disagree with, you're welcome to address them, claiming that Storm Raven or me is being intellectually dishonest does nothing to further your argument and may cause this thread to be locked.

*Edit:* Ok, still not sure where the numbers for your cohort are from, but he should have 16,000gp worth of gear, he has (ignoring any extra stuff you claim he'd have purchased simply to give to you) 16500 worth of gear.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

God you people have too much time on your hands...



			
				Kem said:
			
		

> Uh huh...  You picked a single level, and then are using that _single_ level to prove your points while at many, many other levels, your example _doesn't work_.



Um, no. If I wanted to be picky I'de take 20th level. 
This is like me saying: "you picked a class, a single class! What about the sorceror?! What about the cleric that takes a level of barbarian?! What about the wizard that dies and loses a level? "
I took an appropriately high level and clearly you feel threatened by it so I guess it proves my point well enough. It's got to be balanced at level 12 too incidentally. 




> The dishonesty you have is that you ignore any level but 12 for the Myth.  Or for that matter, I bet you'd ignore any ODD level.



The dishonesty is that you try to ignore level 12 for the Urge. Or for that matter, I bet you'de ignore any EVEN level. 



> Read my recent posts, you have not disproved any of it.



I actually take the time to read your posts Kem. It's you that don't read mine, remember the spat you had about me saying the hybrids would all cast lower level spells? And you didn't realise I had them listed as lower level? 




> Thats one of 3 methods.  You'll notice its the only method open to a party of pre level 12 Hybrids.  You know from level 9 to 11?  Where the cleric has been able to raise people already?  Or that teleporting to somewhere with someone ABLE to raise the dead is possible?



Listen, I grant you that they get the spell earlier - you _ have to grant me that the hybrids are "better" at it because they have "more" _. It's not even up for debate Kem. 




> All spellcasters have issues with Golems.
> You have the Fighter to stand toe to toe, why try to take that role when you can make him so much better at it.  And you'll never be as good at it due to HP/AC/BAB not having weapons.



But the hybrids have 2, or more  guys who can do this. Get it? 




> It is power.  But for spellcasters, specialization in _spellcasting_ is power is more power.  The Red Wizard isn't thought to be overpowered because they get a variety of spells.



He's clearly hated. By the poll. But guess what? So's the MT. He's in 3rd place. 







> 7th is character level.
> 4 is spell level.
> Wiz +1 means that the wizard has one more spell of this level then the myth.
> 3 is 3rd level spells.
> Wiz +2 means the wizard has 2 more spells here then the myth.



Ah. These are spells per day then I take it. That list is hugely in error. Largely because of the fact that there are bonus spells per level. Even with just 14s in the relevant abilities the numbers change. That's why I made a write-up, to show this sort of thing. 



> The spells the Wizard has base over the myth form a very predictable pattern.



The "pattern" won't become apparent until much higher level, when ability score increase can no longer keep pace with advancing levels. And the wizard can't specialise as easily as the MT. There are too many variables Kem to base much of anything off of this table you've constructed. 



> And you get 2 spells per level for free.  Thats in a real game.  And thats 4 5th level spells known.  And I'll take waiting to have 6th level spells while you dilly with 4th level spells.  Then YOU get to wait to cast 5th while I am casting 6th.



In a real game things like being able to heal yourself happen a lot. Among other things. Your 6th level spell is likely worthwhile, but never as worthwhile as a complete seperate spell pool and divine granted abilities. 



> Actually that would be cleric.



The cleric has no skills. The bard has healing. The bard is more versatile and more survivable. Absolutely not a drop of doubt about it.  



> Versatility is ONLY power, when that versatility doesn't wash out the abilities too much to be useful.



Agreed. The current MT wash enough. Requirements on the order of 4/4 then MT levels would be better balanced.  

That's all I have for today, sorry folks.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> Looking back, you've apparently fixed the math with his gear. I was off originally, don't know if people had noticed that you'd fixed it. You hitpoints are still wrong.



Which hp? 
Every second line I write is read but not integrated so I'm not surprised. 



> You didn't buy a cloak of charisma at level 6, you're character does not list anything to said you did, so you didn't. You don't say when you attracted your cohort, so we must assume you did so at your current level with your current gear.



I took the feat at the same level he did. We have the same scores, exact same. Are you too going to claim the wizard is adventuring with his robe-of-the-archmagi at lower levels? No, chances are he had another item or suite of items to increase his saves. This isn't a day-to-day tabulation of wealth. It's a total character wealth at a given point in time. 



> You have yet to point out a single actual error in his character. His cohort and spell purchases are correct, rules for them have been sighted, and have been confirmed by others.



I pointed out an entire list. The "rules sighted by others" are not the rules set down for character creation. It's bogus crap. Just like the leadership crap.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Uh-huh. We'll just have to "pretend" the odd levels don't exist. Or the sorceror core class.




It isn't the odd levels. It's that _the MT sucks until he reaches at least 11th level_.



> _There's nothing wrong with the build._




Your leadership score is wrong, so we can't figure out if your cohort is built correctly.



> _Really? I can't afford a cloak of charisma +2 at level 6?_





You didn't buy one.



> _I guess your wizard was naked until level 11ish when he bought his robe?_





No, he just used _mage armor_ to provide defense. It isn't that important though, as you will see below.



> _This discussion is pointless._





Given how clueless you are, I think so.



> _Heck you're not even willing to pay for your spells or take the leadership hit from having a familiar so cry me a river._





(1) It's not my fault you completely fail to understand the rules concerning cohorts. The fact that you persist in making such a fundamental rules mistake really doesn't help your cause.
(2) I paid for the spells using standard rules from the Core Rules. Cry me a river.

In any event, just to lay this silliness to rest, here is a _single classed wizard_, 12th level, matched up to your original Urge build (leaving aside the cohorts, since they will essentially offset one another). You should recognize the equipment array:

Wizard 12 (Evoker, Necromancy and Illusion prohibited)
*Str* 10, *Int* 22 (15 + 3 level bonus +4 headband), *Wis* 16 (14 + 2 periapt), *Dex* 15 (13 + 2 gloves), *Con* 14 (12 + 2 ioun stone), *Cha* 8
*AC* 20 (10 + 4 mage armor + 4 belt + 2 Dex), *Touch AC* 16, *Flat-Footed AC* 14, *HP* 55.5, *Init* +6 (+2 Dex, +4 feat), *Fort* +12 (4 + 2 Con +1 luck +3 cloak +2 feat), *Reflex* +12 (4 +2 Dex +1 luck +3 cloak +2 familiar), *Will* +15 (8 +3 Wis +3 cloak +1 luck)
*Skills:* Concentration +18, Decipher Script +22, Knowledge: Arcana +22, Listen +6, Spellcraft +24, Spot +6
*Feats:* Alertness (familiar), Scribe Scroll (Bonus), Improved Initiative (1st), Great Fortitude (1st), Craft Wondrous Item (3rd), Empower Spell (5th), Spell Penetration (6th), Maximize Spell (9th), Quicken Spell (10th), Craft Rod (12th)

*Gear (78,200 spent out of 88,000 total, 9,650 gp left to add spells to spell book)*
Metamagic Rod of Lesser Maximize: 8,000 gp (crafted)
Metamagic Rod of Lesser Quicken: 17,500 gp (crafted)
Headband of Intellect: 8,000 gp (crafted)
Periapt of Wisdom +2: 2,000 gp (crafted)
Gloves of Dexterity +2: 2,000 gp (crafted)
Monk’s Belt: 6,500 gp (crafted)
Orange Ioun Stone: 15,000 gp (crafted)
Luckstone: 10,100 gp (crafted)
Pink Ioun Stone: 4,000 gp (crafted)
Cloak of Resistance +3: 4,500 gp (crafted)
Weasel Familiar (100)

A couple days ago he cast _Contingency_, and linked it to a _Lesser Globe of Invulnerability_, with the trigger "if I am targeted or affected by hostile magic.

*Spell Slots (caster level 13)*
0th: 4+1, 1st: 6+1, 2nd: 6+1, 3rd: 5+1, 4th: 5+1, 5th: 4+1, 6th: 3+1, 7th:1+1

*Sample Spell Book:*
1st level: Burning Hands, Enlarge Person, Identify, Mage Armor, Magic Missile, Shield, True-Strike
2nd Level: Scorching Ray, Fox’s Cunning, Glitterdust (350 gp), Gust of Wind, Cat’s Grace, Owl’s Wisdom (350 gp)
3rd Level: Dispel Magic, Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Stinking Cloud
4th Level: Black Tentacles, Lesser Globe of Invulnerability, Wall of Ice, Wall of Fire
5th Level: Cone of Cold, Feeblemind, Wall of Force, Teleport
6th Level: Chain Lightning, Contingency, Flesh to Stone, Greater Dispel Magic
7th Level: Limited Wish, Prismatic Spray

*Spell Selection (DC 16 + spell level, caster level 15 to overcome SR)*
1st Level: Magic Missile x4, Mage Armor, True Strike, Shield
2nd Level: Scorching Ray x3, Glitterdust x2, Gust of Wind, Owl’s Wisdom
3rd Level: Fireball x2, Lightning Bolt, Empowered Magic Missile, Stinking Cloud, Dispel Magic
4th Level: Black Tentacles x2, Empowered Scorching Ray, Lesser Globe of Invulnerability, Wall of Ice, Wall of Fire
5th Level: Cone of Cold, Feeblemind, Empowered Fireball x2, Teleport
6th Level: Chain Lightning, Flesh to Stone x2, Greater Dispel Magic
7th Level: Prismatic Spray, Empowered Cone of Cold

So, let's compare, head to head.

AC: Urge wins. By two. Exciting!
HP: Urge wins. By 8. Exciting!
Initiative: Urge loses. By 4.
Fort Saves: Tie. Aren't his cleric levels supposed to help him here?
Reflex saves: Tie.
Will saves: Urge wins. By 5. Not too shabby.
Feats: Urge loses. Wizard has everything Urge has, plus Improved Initiative and Great Fortitude.
Gear: Virtually identical. The only change was to drop the _ring of counterspells_, and lower the _periapt of wisdom_ to +2 in order to leave cash for his spell book.
Save DCs: Urge loses. By 1.
Spell Slots: Urge loses. By a lot. Even combining his cleric and wizard spell slots, he's behind in usefulness. Compare spells by spells level -

Urge
1st: 10, 2nd: 10, 3rd: 8, 4th: 6, 5th: 4

Wizard
1st: 7, 2nd: 7, 3rd: 6, 4th: 6, 5th: 5, 6th: 4, 7th: 2

So, Urge has three more 1st and 2nd level spells, and two more 3rd level spells. However, Wizard has 1 more 5th level slot, 4 more 6th level slots, and 2 more 7th level slots. Urge has _one more net spell slot than Wizard_, and the "difference" is that Wizard has spells two levels higher than Urge can cast.

Special abilities: Urge wins by a little. He can turn undead, very badly. He can reroll one roll per day, which is nifty. He can use _freedom of movement_ for three rounds per day, which is also kinda nifty. His familiar is comparatively worthless, and quite vulnerable (as he is lacking in the high level familiar abilities).

Wizard could add several spells to his spell book, but I don't need to for this comparison, since, as a spell caster, Wizard just totally outclasses Urge every way that counts. Of course, there is also the fact that Wizard didn't go through the "dead" period between 4th and 11th level, where he was a huge burden to his party due to his lousy capabilities.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I took the feat at the same level he did. We have the same scores, exact same.




No, you don't. Because you didn't get your charisma boost until _12th level_, so if you recruited your cohort at _6th level_ your leadership score was lower and you had to recruit a lesser cohort, and thus your cohort won't be _10th level_ when you reach _12th_.



> _I pointed out an entire list. The "rules sighted by others" are not the rules set down for character creation. It's bogus crap. Just like the leadership crap._





I'm glad to see you persist in not knowing what the rules of the game are. It makes your arguments concerning the rules _so_ much more convincing.


----------



## dnabre (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Which hp?



The Urge's hp, post #280 28.5 + 2x12 != 63.5.



			
				DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Every second line I write is read but not integrated so I'm not surprised.
> 
> I only quote those parts I'm directly responding to.
> 
> ...


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> This isn't a day-to-day tabulation of wealth. It's a total character wealth at a given point in time.




If that's how you want to do things, it clants even more heavily in the wizard's favor, since the value of his spell book is 100 gp per page, not "value of scroll + 100 gp per page".


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> Listen, I grant you that they get the spell earlier - you _ have to grant me that the hybrids are "better" at it because they have "more" _. It's not even up for debate Kem.




You're right that it isn't open for debate. But, you're wrong in your assumption that hybrids are better at anything. More does not mean better. In this case, more means lesser abilities but a greater amount of them per day. I don't think you see the balancing factor that they are _lesser abilities_. 

As for spells, a 6th level spell will cost you 

Some quotes of note in the SRD:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Spellbooks: A wizard must study her spellbook each day to prepare her spells. She cannot prepare any spell not recorded in her spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory.
> A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from her prohibited school or schools, if any; see School Specialization, below) plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the wizard has, the spellbook holds one additional 1st-level spell of your choice. At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook. At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards’ spellbooks to her own.






			
				SRD said:
			
		

> In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks. This fee is usually equal to the spell’s level x50 gp.






			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Selling a Spellbook
> Captured spellbooks can be sold for a gp amount equal to one-half the cost of purchasing and inscribing the spells within (that is, one-half of 100 gp per page of spells). A spellbook entirely filled with spells (that is, with one hundred pages of spells inscribed in it) is worth 5,000 gp.






			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook
> ...
> Space in the Spellbook: A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has one hundred pages.
> Materials and Costs: Materials for writing the spell cost 100 gp per page.
> Note that a wizard does not have to pay these costs in time or gold for the spells she gains for free at each new level.




Now, lets do the math. First, how many spells does he have? We have to remember to subtract the spells he gets for free every level. 

1st - 6 - 6 (actually should have more 1st level spells) = 0
2nd - 6 - 4 (3rd and 4th levle bonus) = 2
3rd - 5 - 4 (5th and 6th level bonus) = 1
4th - 4 - 4 (7th and 8th level bonus) = 0
5th - 5 - 4 (9th and 10th level bonus) = 1
6th - 7 - 4 (11th and 12th level bonus) = 3

Okay, so now we have to determine what it would cost to get a spellbook with this many spells in it. I'm going to take the worst case scenario and assume that in 12 levels the wizard never looted a spellbook from a fallen enemy nor did he make friends with another wizard and swapped spells with said wizard. Both very unlikely circumstances, but it could happen... um... yeah...

So, we've got 100 gp x spell level to buy a book containing a spell, since selling is half price and you can sell spellbooks for 50gp x spell level. So, the prices are going to be 200 gp for a 2nd level spell, 300 for a 3rd, etc. And scribing costs will also be 100 gp x spell level. 

2nd - (200 gp x 2)2 = 800 gp
3rd - (300 gp x 1)1 = 300 gp
5th - (500 gp x 1)1 = 500 gp
6th - (600 gp x 3)3 = 5,400 gp

For a grand total of 7,000 gp in a worst case scenario where the wizard has been repeatedly screwed over in terms of spell aquisition. _Half _that is he gets his spells from a wizard who is willing to charge to let him copy them out. Less than that if there have been even a few enemy wizards in the campaign he has fought against and looted a spellbook from. So, really, in realistic terms we're looking at around a 3000 gp investment for the spells he picked out, but a worst case scenario of 7000 gp spent.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 10, 2005)

By the way, I find it important to note that the MT does _NOT _get 2 bonus spells per level like the wizard does.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> You're right that it isn't open for debate. But, you're wrong in your assumption that hybrids are better at anything. More does not mean better. In this case, more means lesser abilities but a greater amount of them per day. I don't think you see the balancing factor that they are lesser abilities.




The funny thing is it's not really "more". It's "about as many, but far less powerful".

The straight wizard has 2 7th, 4 6th, and 1 5th level spell slot than Urge does not have. His save DCs are higher. His initiative rolls are better.

Urge has 3 1st, 3 3rd, and 1 3rd evel spell slot that the Wizard does not have. Urge can use _freedom of movement_ for three rounds per day, and reroll one roll per day. Urge can (sort of) turn undead. Urge has better Will saves, and a few more hit points. Urge has an AC advantage that is completely negated if Wizard casts _shield_ (and quibbling over a 22 AC vs. a 20 AC at 12th level is silly).

So, offset

(1) the _freedom of movement_ ability (its not even as powerful as a 4th level spell) and higher Will save bonus against the 5th level spell slot the wizard gets.
(2) the reroll ability against a 6th level spell slot.
(3) the turn undead ability, AC and extra hit points against the better intiative, better skills, and higher save DCs (being able to turn undead as a 3rd level cleric at 12th level is not even that useful).

And you still have to stack up 2 7th level spell slots and a 6th level spell slot, against Urge's 3 1st level slots, 3 2nd level slots, and 1 3rd level slot. One fairly common method of comparing spell slots to one another is to square the level of the spell = 1st level spells = 1, 2nd level spells = 4, and so on (since spell slots do not scale up in a linear fashion).

So, the Wizard, using this method, would have a power score for the Wizard of 134, while Urge has a 24 for this set of spells. Just counting spell levels, Wizard is ahead 20 to 12.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

> In any event, just to lay this silliness to rest, here is a _single classed wizard_, 12th level, matched up to your original Urge build.






> *Spell Slots*
> 0th: 4+1, 1st: 6+1, 2nd: 6+1, 3rd: 5+1, 4th: 5+1, 5th: 4+1, 6th: 3+1, 7th:1+1






> *Sample Spell Book:*
> 7th Level: Limited Wish, Prismatic Spray






			
				Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Given how clueless you are, I think so.



I see this has degenerated into direct insults. 
Direct insults - calling _ me _ clueless and my builds "in error" - but  12th level wizard, and 7th level spell slots and 7th level prepared spells. And then go on to describe the 7th level spells. * After * discussing for pages and pages about 12th level wizards and 6th level spells. * After * writting up 2 wizard builds at the same level.  
The irony is biting. And not one of the other people point this out. 

There's nothing more for me to do here. 
Everything has been said, the statistics tell the truth. The vocal minority of MT and 2nd edition multiclass spellcaster lovers: I salute you. Enjoy your broken toy. Let's hope it dies once and for all in the next edition.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> There's nothing more for me to do here.
> Everything has been said, the statistics tell the truth. The vocal minority of MT and 2nd edition multiclass monsters: I salute you.




You know, you completely ignored my entire post where I told you exaclty why this is completely different than 2nd Edition multiclassing. As far as I'm concerned you ceded the point when you decided not to debate it.

And, you are the vocal minority... if you'll notice you're the only one saying they're overpowered.


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

dnabre said:
			
		

> The Urge's hp, post #280 28.5 + 2x12 != 63.5.



As a final note, and this time I do mean * final*, the number is correct, the little equation got chopped. 
8+2d8+9d4+2x12= 63.5 average. Thanks though. 
It won't help me much against Storm Raven's 7th level spell casting 12th level wizard though. It would have been nice if _ someone, anyone _ noted this. Anyhow. 
This is a charade now and has been for quite some time.
I'm sorry 3rd wizard, I haven't had time. I've got to much fanaticsism to smash that the odd intelligent argument that crops up is likely to get blown away by the latest gust of nonsense. If you really want a reply send me a private message.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 10, 2005)

Like how he called out the 7th level error without actually addressing any of the valid points that SR brings up?

Yeah. More is not better.


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> I see this has degenerated into direct insults.
> Direct insults - calling _ me _ clueless and my builds "in error" - but  12th level wizard, and 7th level spell slots and 7th level prepared spells. And then go on to describe the 7th level spells. * After * discussing for pages and pages about 12th level wizards and 6th level spells.




Perhaps you didn't notice the _orange ioun stone_. You know, the one that says "+1 caster level". That makes him a 13th level caster. Hence, 7th level spell slots. Catch up here.

Even leaving the 7th level slots aside, you basically have to compare 3 1st, 3 2rd, and 1 3rd level spell slot to a 6th level spell slot. You still don't come out ahead (36 on the power scale to your 24).


----------



## Storm Raven (Jun 10, 2005)

DungeonMaster said:
			
		

> AsIt won't help me much against Storm Raven's 7th level spell casting 12th level wizard though. It would have been nice if _ someone, anyone _ noted this. Anyhow.




They _noticed the ioun stone_.



> _This is a charade now and has been for quite some time._





Yes, and you have been drifting further and further away from reality all the while.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jun 10, 2005)

> Perhaps you didn't notice the orange ioun stone. You know, the one that says "+1 caster level". That makes him a 13th level caster. Hence, 7th level spell slots. Catch up here.




I am under the impression (perhaps incorrectly) that when something adds to your caster level, it is for the purposes of things like SR and the dice you roll, not for things like spells/day and access to spell levels. It increases *caster* level, not *class* level, and class level is what teaches you spells.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Jun 10, 2005)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> I am under the impression (perhaps incorrectly) that when something adds to your caster level, it is for the purposes of things like SR and the dice you roll, not for things like spells/day and access to spell levels. It increases *caster* level, not *class* level, and class level is what teaches you spells.




That's my understanding, as well.

Thus, a 6th-level wizard with such an Ioun Stone can cast a 7d6 fireball, but he cannot cast a Stilled Fireball (i.e., he's got no 4th-level slots).


----------



## Insight (Jun 10, 2005)

This discussion has gotten SO far off topic I hope you guys either start a new thread or just drop it.  I was interested in the actual real topic, not who can out-argue whom.


----------



## Campbell (Jun 10, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> Perhaps you didn't notice the _orange ioun stone_. You know, the one that says "+1 caster level". That makes him a 13th level caster. Hence, 7th level spell slots. Catch up here.
> 
> Even leaving the 7th level slots aside, you basically have to compare 3 1st, 3 2rd, and 1 3rd level spell slot to a 6th level spell slot. You still don't come out ahead (36 on the power scale to your 24).




I hate picking nits, but I'm going to have to here. Caster level has no effect on spells per day. Caster level is one component of your spellcasting ability. Your class level in the relevent spellcasting class determines spells per day. While caster level usually coincides with class level, it doesn't have to. Magical effects that modify caster level do not grant any additional spell slots. Some prestige class abilities grant additional spellcasting capabilities as if you had continued to progress in your original spellcasting class, but those abilities explicitly grant additional spells per day, additional spells known, and an increase in caster level. 

My Source


			
				SRD said:
			
		

> *Caster Level *
> A spell's power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to your class level in the class you're using to cast the spell.
> 
> You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.
> ...


----------



## DungeonMaster (Jun 10, 2005)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> They _noticed the ioun stone_.



             


 
 



> Originally Posted by Storm Raven
> Given how clueless you are, I think so.


----------

