3.0 Mystic Theurge? [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 Mystic Theurge? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lord Dastir
10-25-05, 06:21 PM Does this class exisit in 3.0? If so, where is it?

If not, does any one know of a good 3.0 class for a Arcane/Divine multiclass?
Grug the Just
10-25-05, 08:05 PM Nope doesn't exsist in 3.0. Personally, I wouldn't even allow it in 3.5 as is. In 3.0 your best option would be to find a PrC that allows you to upgrade your spellcasting level every level and alternate between arcane and divine.
Seeker of Undeath
10-25-05, 08:49 PM Does this class exisit in 3.0? If so, where is it?

If not, does any one know of a good 3.0 class for a Arcane/Divine multiclass?No and no. Sorry.
furious kender
10-25-05, 10:04 PM It's 3.5 only, although it typically is regarded as weaker character class because 3 lost levels of casting in both classes is a huge hit in power.
Darkprophet232
10-25-05, 10:11 PM It's 3.5 only, although it typically is regarded as weaker character class because 3 lost levels of casting in both classes is a huge hit in power.

At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard.

I hardly call that weak.
Quirriff
10-25-05, 10:25 PM Then you can add in something like True Necromancer, Or Geomancer, to further allow you to advance.
Jaerom Darkwind
10-25-05, 10:35 PM At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard.

I hardly call that weak.I do. It's your highest-level spells that get you through fights, and those are always at least one spell level lower than they should be. You can only cast 1 spell per round (2, at most), so having twice as many low-level spells as normal won't help you in a fight.
Darkprophet232
10-25-05, 10:42 PM I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer).
Seeker of Undeath
10-26-05, 01:00 AM I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer).I see you've been introduced to the two primary schools of thought on the theurge. In the end the question comes down to what you're going for. For versatility, a theurge is very good. For raw, bring the houses down, power a straight caster is normally considered best.

If your theurge is to be the primary caster, I'd suggest against it. If it's a secondary or tertiary caster, go for it full blast. I might suggest a Druid3/Sorcerer4/ArcaneHeirophant10/MysticTheurge3. Of course a FavoredSoul4/DreadNecromancer4/TrueNecromancer12 might also give you some mileage. Sure there's always the Cleric3/Wizard3 start, but I wanted to throw out something besides the norm.

Dual casters will always be controversial, and they'll always be potent. Enjoy them.
dan1234
10-26-05, 01:31 AM If I am not mistaking, the geomancer, in Masters of the wild, lets you go up either arcane or divine each level. Plus your character ends up looking really cool.
Seeker of Undeath
10-26-05, 01:33 AM If I am not mistaking, the geomancer, in Masters of the wild, lets you go up either arcane or divine each level. Plus your character ends up looking really cool.It does indeed. However, it doesn't allow for both at once. I happen to like it for a Sorcerer/RainbowServant/Geomancer though.
Darkprophet232
10-26-05, 01:59 AM I feel like I should elaborate on my point:

The MT is not overpowered, broken, twinked, or any such thing. They are, however, a very good PrC in the hands of someone that does not wish to specialize, and is willing to take a hit in overall power for a wider base to draw that power from. Overall, they are a viable option for most scenarios, including light combat.

If the campaign one is involved in centers around heavy, prolonged combat, then yes, the MT is underpowered and will be surpassed by even lower leveled casters. But, and this is a big one, in campaigns such as information gathering and puzzle solving, the pure salvo of spells available to them more than make up for their lack of higher level spells.

(edit: finished my thought)
20goingon1232
10-26-05, 07:26 AM I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer).
Incorrect. You give up effective use of most domain powers, turn ability, bonus feats, familiar progression and three full caster levels in both sides, and have a lower average HD, lower Fort/Ref saves and lower BAB. Hardly the equivalent of a 15/15 character, or even a 10/10 character.

With a druid MT, you lose even more.

The MT has options. However, those options cannot be as effectively metamagicked as pure casters. Also, for all your options, you still cast the same number of spells in a particular situation as a pure caster. Less, if you take into account quickened spells, which you get 3 levels later, if at all, given the scarcity of higher level spell slots.

Jaerom - You cannot be a level 14 cleric and wizard at character level 17. You cannot go beyond 10th level of MT pre-epic. The best you will ever get is 13/14 at level 17. Your entire thesis is based on faulty analysis. If you ignore limits, of course anything is possible.
CaoSlayer
10-26-05, 07:46 AM At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard.

I hardly call that weak.

I can since you can be a wizard 17 with a cohort cleric 15 just spending a feat.
Faragon
10-26-05, 08:35 AM I can since you can be a wizard 17 with a cohort cleric 15 just spending a feat.So can the MT, so this point is moot. Let's keep the discussion to the comparing of the classes.
mda9184
10-26-05, 09:15 AM I do. It's your highest-level spells that get you through fights, and those are always at least one spell level lower than they should be. You can only cast 1 spell per round (2, at most), so having twice as many low-level spells as normal won't help you in a fight.

The problem with that theory is that you based the whole class on a fight. There is so much more to role playing than fighting. You are basing your decision on the hack and slash style. And even if thats your basis for your decision then your still off to a degree. Having all of those spells as a cleric/wizards (prepared casters) gives you and extreme amount of versatility in combat. You don't always know what your going to be up against so versatility is a very good trade off.
Your lower level spells are also what get you through most of a dungeon. You can't waste all of your big spells on the first couple of encounters. Thats where most of your lower level spells come in. You can easily blast through your spells and not have to worry about what your going to use around the corner.
Just remember if your going to judge a class judge it on ROLE PLAYING, not ROLL PLAYING. Numbers are just a guide, they're not your character.
Particle_Man
10-26-05, 10:34 AM Just remember if your going to judge a class judge it on ROLE PLAYING, not ROLL PLAYING. Numbers are just a guide, they're not your character.

That's what I say when I play my Commoner with Skill Focus: Craft (Basketweaving). An infinite number of uses! :)

Mystic Theurges suck. Badly. Their only function is to play the lone spellcaster if absolutely no one else wants to play either an arcane or divine caster. And even then Bards do it better.

But to the original post, was there anything to the MT that made it impossible to simply play one in 3.0? I don't believe that it would be that much of a problem, given a willing DM. I would, however, BEG to be able to use the Practiced Spellcaster feat. You would still suck, but you would suck less.
Jaerom Darkwind
10-26-05, 02:21 PM Which reminds me of the other problem with the MT: you're at least 15% (possibly up to 25%) more likely to fail to penetrate SR. That's kind of a significant drawback.

Jaerom - You cannot be a level 14 cleric and wizard at character level 17. You cannot go beyond 10th level of MT pre-epic. The best you will ever get is 13/14 at level 17. Your entire thesis is based on faulty analysis. If you ignore limits, of course anything is possible. :uh-huh: How is this in any way relevant to my post?

The problem with that theory is that you based the whole class on a fight.Class balance is only relevant during an encounter. There's no such thing as an unbalanced character where role-playing is concerned, just better and poorer role-players.
20goingon1232
10-28-05, 04:04 AM Which reminds me of the other problem with the MT: you're at least 15% (possibly up to 25%) more likely to fail to penetrate SR. That's kind of a significant drawback.

:uh-huh: How is this in any way relevant to my post?

To get that caster level combination (17/17), you need to be a 11th level MT. Which is not possible pre-epic. Of course, if you ignore limits like that, then of course everything can broken.
Jaerom Darkwind
10-28-05, 09:44 AM To get that caster level combination (17/17), you need to be a 11th level MT. Which is not possible pre-epic. Of course, if you ignore limits like that, then of course everything can broken.I never made any mention of a 17/17 mystic theurge. Go back and look at my posts. I just made the observation that a MT is always one to two spell levels below a straight caster.
Ruric
10-28-05, 09:56 AM I've seen the class somewhere, it may or may not have been in unearthed arcana or complete arcane... Hmm... Er... Um... Look at my post: "Dancing: It's not for sissies... Dancer Core class". It's pretty good. Please? I haven't had a reply in days :weep: :confused: :weep:

I feel :raincloud
WihHizwind
10-28-05, 10:08 AM What a Mystic Theurge excells at is Item Creation, due to the masses of spells they have access to.

As for them being broken? No. You can/should only take 10 levels of Mystic Theurge (the epic progression for MT is odd/even for arcane/divine - no point in taking epic levels in the class), and in order to get into them, you need to get hit over the head with Multiclass bat - not only do you lose spellcasting levels before you hit level 7-9 (depending on what classes you took), but unless you're human or elf, you also get a multiclassing penalty unless you take it one level/one level - which makes you very weak.
And to top it off, you don't get access to 9th level spells before epic.

Essentially you're trading number/access of/to spells for spell power and other class features (familiar, domains, turn/rebuke, bonus feats, other nifty class abilities). I see no problem with the MT.

As for the Rainbow Servant/Geomancer combination, I've always thought that was wonderfully broken. A pity you can't finish the build pre-epic (23rd or 24th level, depending on wiz/sorc is the build cap...)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lord Dastir 10-25-05, 06:21 PM	Does this class exisit in 3.0? If so, where is it? If not, does any one know of a good 3.0 class for a Arcane/Divine multiclass?
Grug the Just 10-25-05, 08:05 PM	Nope doesn't exsist in 3.0. Personally, I wouldn't even allow it in 3.5 as is. In 3.0 your best option would be to find a PrC that allows you to upgrade your spellcasting level every level and alternate between arcane and divine.
Seeker of Undeath 10-25-05, 08:49 PM	Does this class exisit in 3.0? If so, where is it? If not, does any one know of a good 3.0 class for a Arcane/Divine multiclass?No and no. Sorry.
furious kender 10-25-05, 10:04 PM	It's 3.5 only, although it typically is regarded as weaker character class because 3 lost levels of casting in both classes is a huge hit in power.
Darkprophet232 10-25-05, 10:11 PM	It's 3.5 only, although it typically is regarded as weaker character class because 3 lost levels of casting in both classes is a huge hit in power. At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard. I hardly call that weak.
Quirriff 10-25-05, 10:25 PM	Then you can add in something like True Necromancer, Or Geomancer, to further allow you to advance.
Jaerom Darkwind 10-25-05, 10:35 PM	At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard. I hardly call that weak.I do. It's your highest-level spells that get you through fights, and those are always at least one spell level lower than they should be. You can only cast 1 spell per round (2, at most), so having twice as many low-level spells as normal won't help you in a fight.
Darkprophet232 10-25-05, 10:42 PM	I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer).
Seeker of Undeath 10-26-05, 01:00 AM	I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer).I see you've been introduced to the two primary schools of thought on the theurge. In the end the question comes down to what you're going for. For versatility, a theurge is very good. For raw, bring the houses down, power a straight caster is normally considered best. If your theurge is to be the primary caster, I'd suggest against it. If it's a secondary or tertiary caster, go for it full blast. I might suggest a Druid3/Sorcerer4/ArcaneHeirophant10/MysticTheurge3. Of course a FavoredSoul4/DreadNecromancer4/TrueNecromancer12 might also give you some mileage. Sure there's always the Cleric3/Wizard3 start, but I wanted to throw out something besides the norm. Dual casters will always be controversial, and they'll always be potent. Enjoy them.
dan1234 10-26-05, 01:31 AM	If I am not mistaking, the geomancer, in Masters of the wild, lets you go up either arcane or divine each level. Plus your character ends up looking really cool.
Seeker of Undeath 10-26-05, 01:33 AM	If I am not mistaking, the geomancer, in Masters of the wild, lets you go up either arcane or divine each level. Plus your character ends up looking really cool.It does indeed. However, it doesn't allow for both at once. I happen to like it for a Sorcerer/RainbowServant/Geomancer though.
Darkprophet232 10-26-05, 01:59 AM	I feel like I should elaborate on my point: The MT is not overpowered, broken, twinked, or any such thing. They are, however, a very good PrC in the hands of someone that does not wish to specialize, and is willing to take a hit in overall power for a wider base to draw that power from. Overall, they are a viable option for most scenarios, including light combat. If the campaign one is involved in centers around heavy, prolonged combat, then yes, the MT is underpowered and will be surpassed by even lower leveled casters. But, and this is a big one, in campaigns such as information gathering and puzzle solving, the pure salvo of spells available to them more than make up for their lack of higher level spells. (edit: finished my thought)
20goingon1232 10-26-05, 07:26 AM	I guess we are at an impass then. You look for sheer power, and I look for versatility. A character that can, in spellcasting, be the equivelent of a lvl 30 spell caster (wiz5/clr5/mt10) just has so many more options than just a level 20 wizard or 20 cleric, not to mention the further options you have to specialize your type of magic (true necromancer). Incorrect. You give up effective use of most domain powers, turn ability, bonus feats, familiar progression and three full caster levels in both sides, and have a lower average HD, lower Fort/Ref saves and lower BAB. Hardly the equivalent of a 15/15 character, or even a 10/10 character. With a druid MT, you lose even more. The MT has options. However, those options cannot be as effectively metamagicked as pure casters. Also, for all your options, you still cast the same number of spells in a particular situation as a pure caster. Less, if you take into account quickened spells, which you get 3 levels later, if at all, given the scarcity of higher level spell slots. Jaerom - You cannot be a level 14 cleric and wizard at character level 17. You cannot go beyond 10th level of MT pre-epic. The best you will ever get is 13/14 at level 17. Your entire thesis is based on faulty analysis. If you ignore limits, of course anything is possible.
CaoSlayer 10-26-05, 07:46 AM	At level 7 you're a lvl 4 cleric and lvl 4 wizard. At lvl 10 you're a lvl 7 cleric and lvl 7 wizard. At lvl 17, you're a lvl 14 cleric and lvl 14 wizard. I hardly call that weak. I can since you can be a wizard 17 with a cohort cleric 15 just spending a feat.
Faragon 10-26-05, 08:35 AM	I can since you can be a wizard 17 with a cohort cleric 15 just spending a feat.So can the MT, so this point is moot. Let's keep the discussion to the comparing of the classes.
mda9184 10-26-05, 09:15 AM	I do. It's your highest-level spells that get you through fights, and those are always at least one spell level lower than they should be. You can only cast 1 spell per round (2, at most), so having twice as many low-level spells as normal won't help you in a fight. The problem with that theory is that you based the whole class on a fight. There is so much more to role playing than fighting. You are basing your decision on the hack and slash style. And even if thats your basis for your decision then your still off to a degree. Having all of those spells as a cleric/wizards (prepared casters) gives you and extreme amount of versatility in combat. You don't always know what your going to be up against so versatility is a very good trade off. Your lower level spells are also what get you through most of a dungeon. You can't waste all of your big spells on the first couple of encounters. Thats where most of your lower level spells come in. You can easily blast through your spells and not have to worry about what your going to use around the corner. Just remember if your going to judge a class judge it on ROLE PLAYING, not ROLL PLAYING. Numbers are just a guide, they're not your character.
Particle_Man 10-26-05, 10:34 AM	Just remember if your going to judge a class judge it on ROLE PLAYING, not ROLL PLAYING. Numbers are just a guide, they're not your character. That's what I say when I play my Commoner with Skill Focus: Craft (Basketweaving). An infinite number of uses! :) Mystic Theurges suck. Badly. Their only function is to play the lone spellcaster if absolutely no one else wants to play either an arcane or divine caster. And even then Bards do it better. But to the original post, was there anything to the MT that made it impossible to simply play one in 3.0? I don't believe that it would be that much of a problem, given a willing DM. I would, however, BEG to be able to use the Practiced Spellcaster feat. You would still suck, but you would suck less.
Jaerom Darkwind 10-26-05, 02:21 PM	Which reminds me of the other problem with the MT: you're at least 15% (possibly up to 25%) more likely to fail to penetrate SR. That's kind of a significant drawback. Jaerom - You cannot be a level 14 cleric and wizard at character level 17. You cannot go beyond 10th level of MT pre-epic. The best you will ever get is 13/14 at level 17. Your entire thesis is based on faulty analysis. If you ignore limits, of course anything is possible. :uh-huh: How is this in any way relevant to my post? The problem with that theory is that you based the whole class on a fight.Class balance is only relevant during an encounter. There's no such thing as an unbalanced character where role-playing is concerned, just better and poorer role-players.
20goingon1232 10-28-05, 04:04 AM	Which reminds me of the other problem with the MT: you're at least 15% (possibly up to 25%) more likely to fail to penetrate SR. That's kind of a significant drawback. :uh-huh: How is this in any way relevant to my post? To get that caster level combination (17/17), you need to be a 11th level MT. Which is not possible pre-epic. Of course, if you ignore limits like that, then of course everything can broken.
Jaerom Darkwind 10-28-05, 09:44 AM	To get that caster level combination (17/17), you need to be a 11th level MT. Which is not possible pre-epic. Of course, if you ignore limits like that, then of course everything can broken.I never made any mention of a 17/17 mystic theurge. Go back and look at my posts. I just made the observation that a MT is always one to two spell levels below a straight caster.
Ruric 10-28-05, 09:56 AM	I've seen the class somewhere, it may or may not have been in unearthed arcana or complete arcane... Hmm... Er... Um... Look at my post: "Dancing: It's not for sissies... Dancer Core class". It's pretty good. Please? I haven't had a reply in days :weep: :confused: :weep: I feel :raincloud
WihHizwind 10-28-05, 10:08 AM	What a Mystic Theurge excells at is Item Creation, due to the masses of spells they have access to. As for them being broken? No. You can/should only take 10 levels of Mystic Theurge (the epic progression for MT is odd/even for arcane/divine - no point in taking epic levels in the class), and in order to get into them, you need to get hit over the head with Multiclass bat - not only do you lose spellcasting levels before you hit level 7-9 (depending on what classes you took), but unless you're human or elf, you also get a multiclassing penalty unless you take it one level/one level - which makes you very weak. And to top it off, you don't get access to 9th level spells before epic. Essentially you're trading number/access of/to spells for spell power and other class features (familiar, domains, turn/rebuke, bonus feats, other nifty class abilities). I see no problem with the MT. As for the Rainbow Servant/Geomancer combination, I've always thought that was wonderfully broken. A pity you can't finish the build pre-epic (23rd or 24th level, depending on wiz/sorc is the build cap...)