Post/Author/DateTime	Post
gabrion 03-02-05, 02:09 AM	Alright, this is my first post, so try to take it easy on me when you take apart my idea! That said, I haven't seen much talk about creating magic users who can cast any spell in the game. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the following build should provide such and opportunity: Wizard 9/Cleric 1/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 Mystic Theurge after 9 lvls of wizard will (barely) allow you to reach 9th lvl arcane spells and since the 2 lvls of Ur Priest and 8 lvls of Theurge also give the player access to 9th lvl divine spells, this build can cast any spell in the game. I see the following problems though and I would thank anyone who could help me out with them: 1) Meeting pre-reqs for the Ur Priest will be a pain, especially 6 ranks in Bluff (since it is cross-class for both wizard and cleric). Along with this we need Knowledge arcana, the plains, and religion, plus spellcraft. Maybe the answer to this is just to make sure of a super high INT (i'm thinking at least a 22 by 9th lvl so that we have 8 skill points to dump into knowledge religion during our one lvl of cleric), but this leads into my next problem. 2) We need extremely high INT and WIS for this character. If the goal is to cast 9th lvl Arcana and Divine spells, then we need at least 19 in each of those by the time we reach 20th lvl. This shouldn't be too terribly difficult, but it does leave us with little focus on other useful ability scores. On this note... 3) Is it worth it? Sure the build can cast any spell in the game, but it seems to have a lot of drawbacks. One major thing is that we can only cast one 9th lvl spell of each type per day, unless we have amazing WIS or INT, which is unlikely since we have to split resources between them. Compare this to the Wizard or Cleric who can cast 4 or 5 9th lvl spells by 20th lvl, and it seems underpowerd. I guess it is really a question of how much spell casting ability we are willing to give up for ultimate versatility. Another drawback is that we must be evil. This doesn't matter in theory, but it means that the build is either campaign specific or must be used by a bad guy. Well, I've exhausted my thoughs on the matter, but I would love to hear advice on how to make this better, or other options. Thx.
necrosnoop110 03-02-05, 02:13 AM	1) Meeting pre-reqs for the Ur Priest will be a pain, especially 6 ranks in Bluff (since it is cross-class for both wizard and cleric). Have the Cleric 1 take the Trickery Domain and it grants Bluff as a class skill. There are a fair amount of threads for the 9th level spells in both divine and arcane builds you might want to do a search for more ideas. Necro
Un-dead 03-02-05, 02:29 AM	Maybe the answer to this is just to make sure of a super high INT (i'm thinking at least a 22 by 9th lvl so that we have 8 skill points to dump into knowledge religion during our one lvl of cleric), but this leads into my next problem. Take a look on Cloistered Cleric in UA. He gains 6 + Int modifier skill points per level.
gabrion 03-02-05, 02:34 AM	I looked through the library in your sig, but didn't find a reference to any such thread, and the search thing isn't working for me. Could you by any chance post a link to a thread where they discuss maximum divine and arcane spell casting abilities?
Tempest Stormwind 03-02-05, 02:38 AM	I looked through the library in your sig, but didn't find a reference to any such thread, and the search thing isn't working for me. Could you by any chance post a link to a thread where they discuss maximum divine and arcane spell casting abilities? All over the place, really. Anything with ur-priest and a decent amount of an arcane caster can end up with 9th level arcane/divine spells by using Mystic Theurge, for instance. However, here's the sick one. Mix in Sublime Chord (CA). Caelic did this first, I think, and the resulting Ur-Singer does wonders with caster levels. Personally? I hate the ur-priest. Semi-interesting concept, absolutely terrible execution, in my opinion. That won't stop it from being used here, though, so I'll suck it up and try to help.
gabrion 03-02-05, 03:09 AM	Looking back at the classes, it actually seems silly to throw Cleric 1 in at all. I thought one of the requirements for the Ur Priest was that he could cast divine spells, but it actually says the opposite, so I could make the build something more like: Wizard10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 Also, in response to the use of the Sublime Chord, I don't understand how it would be all that usefull in a build like this. The Theurge only builds on one previous arcane class, so it would just end up giving a player some Bard spells and then the spells from the Chord and the Ur Priest, which granted they both go up to 9th lvl spells, but it would still offer considerably less as far as overall selection of spells. Lastly, I know some people may be sick of this thread and have talked about it before, but the main quesiton I have wasn't about whether or not these kinds of things are possible (since they clearly are), but whether or not they are worth the costs. Any comments?
Squirrelloid 03-02-05, 03:42 AM	There are better ways to do what you want. First, take Human Paragon (Unearthed Arcana) to get bluff always in class and +1 spellcasting progression second level. Level 6 should move into a prestige class, probably Incantatrix because you're a straight caster. Thats Wiz4/HP1/Incant5/Ur2/Myst8. There are certainly other ways to do this. Fochluchan Lyricist can almost certainly do it, esp with myst theurge. Heck, even wiz3/cl3/myst3/HarpMage1/fochluchan10 gives you CL20 mage and 19 Cleric if you can (1) learn druid somehow (not too hard with dominate or similar magic, or be friendly with a druid), and (2) your DM lets Harper Knowledge qualify as bardic knowledge (same mechanic). O/w w3/c3/myst3/brd1/Foch10 with same caveats on druidic works. Or just go druid for least stretching - w3/d3/myst3/brd1/foch10. Those 2 give you CL19 in both druid and wizard. Basically, its trivial to get 9th casting in both. I've barely started twinking. Search around for Foch builds and Myst theurge builds.
Preyo 03-02-05, 04:44 AM	I'd say that it's only worth it based on circumstances. In the right party you'd be a godsend, in others you'd be a hinderance. Giving up everything else for level 9 spells in both forms of magic leaves a very volitile character. While capable of amazing things when it comes to the application of magic, the character basically sucks at everything else. In the campaign I am currently in we would love to have such a character with us as we are a very melee oriented party. However in a party that already has both a dedicated arcane magician and a dedicated divine spellcaster then you would be of almost no help. Especially when you die, and you will die.
gabrion 03-02-05, 04:58 AM	Heck, even wiz3/cl3/myst3/HarpMage1/fochluchan10 gives you CL20 mage and 19 Cleric I don't understand how the build you put together comes out with a CL20 mage when three classes were spent on cleric. It looks like a CL17 Mage. Am I miscalculating?
Sentient 03-02-05, 05:16 AM	bard 7 / Mindbender 1 / Sublime Chord 2 / Ur-priest 2 / Mystic Theurge 8. Sublime chord gives the same kinda fast-track 9th level arcane spells Ur-priest does. I like this build because you aren't a multiclass wuss till 11th level, and by then you got 5th level spells. CL 20 in each, if I'm not mistaken.
ancalimohtar 03-02-05, 05:58 AM	Uh, wow. A whole lot of misinformation given in this post. However, here's the sick one. Mix in Sublime Chord (CA). Caelic did this first, I think, and the resulting Ur-Singer does wonders with caster levels.No, That doesn't give the ridiculous CL caelic claimed it did. He relied on an extremely doubtful reading of "levels in an arcane spellcasting class." The actual CL was 18 (Just looked through it again, and Kiwi's is the only correct interpretation) Heck, even wiz3/cl3/myst3/HarpMage1/fochluchan10 gives you CL20 mage and 19 Cleric if you can (1) learn druid somehow (not too hard with dominate or similar magic, or be friendly with a druid), and (2) your DM lets Harper Knowledge qualify as bardic knowledge (same mechanic).If you went back and checked your arithmetic, that build actually gives 17 in each. Plus, most DMs I know wouldn't let Harper Knowledge qualify for Bardic Knowledge. w3/d3/myst3/brd1/foch10. Those 2 give you CL19 in both druid and wizard.Or 16/16 if you added correctly. Giving up everything else for level 9 spells in both forms of magic leaves a very volitile character. While capable of amazing things when it comes to the application of magic, the character basically sucks at everything else. In the campaign I am currently in we would love to have such a character with us as we are a very melee oriented party. However in a party that already has both a dedicated arcane magician and a dedicated divine spellcaster then you would be of almost no help. Especially when you die, and you will die.That's not his concern. Going from Wiz20 to his build doesn't lose anything in terms of "sucking at everything else." He doesn't lose HP, doesn't lose anything except Metamagic/Item creation feats. His concern is that he won't get as many 9th level spells as a Wiz20 or Clr20. bard 7 / Mindbender 1 / Sublime Chord 2 / Ur-priest 2 / Mystic Theurge 8. Sublime chord gives the same kinda fast-track 9th level arcane spells Ur-priest does. I like this build because you aren't a multiclass wuss till 11th level, and by then you got 5th level spells. CL 20 in each, if I'm not mistaken.Yes, you are. Assuming he's naked, CL18 in SC, CL19 in Ur-Priest. As for the actual build: 1) Meeting pre-reqs for the Ur Priest will be a pain, especially 6 ranks in Bluff Mindbender is the perfect solution, as it also gives Bluff as a class skill and gives you the +3 Base Fort required for UP. Requires 4 Bluff, which is perfect for Wiz5. I daresay this is the iconic build for Wiz/UP: Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4 This yields Wiz casting progression of (5 + 1 + 8 + 4) = 18, with an equal caster level. Ur-Priest casting progression = 2 + 8 = 10. UP caster level = (2 + 8) + 0.5*(5 + 1 + 8 + 4) = 19. This gets you three 9th level spells a day, before bonus spells are calculated.
SaintX 03-02-05, 08:12 AM	wizard 3 druid 3 mystic theurge 4 arcane heirophant 10 grants caster level 17 in each without using ur priest or sublime chord
Squirrelloid 03-02-05, 05:20 PM	I don't understand how the build you put together comes out with a CL20 mage when three classes were spent on cleric. It looks like a CL17 Mage. Am I miscalculating? oops, yeah, you're right... working a little too fast for my own good.
sparkster4242 03-03-05, 08:07 PM	careful there ancali, the UP's extra 1/2 boost is based on class levels, not caster-levels - also, it doesnt benefit from +1 PrC's because they are not spellcasting classes. the UP's caster-level would be: UP = 2 (UP) + 8 (MT) + .5*5 (Wiz) = 12 i'll have to look into MindBender - if it has Bluff as a class skill, then may be even better than Swamp Witch, from Ultimate Prestige Classes II. Wiz4/SW1/UP2/MT8/XX5 is a decent build, but it has some pretty harsh feat-crunch, since you have to blow a feat to gain Bluff as a class skill...
ranagrande 03-03-05, 08:58 PM	Bard 1/Wizard 6/Apostle of Peace 2/Mystic Theurge 8/Anything you want that advances arcane spells 3 There you go. That's a good, easy level 20 character who's able to cast both Wish and Miracle.
corvusnex 03-03-05, 10:33 PM	Druid 3/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 4/Arcane Hierophant 10 I think that is, by far, the simplest way to get 9th level divine and arcane spells in a 20 level build (CL 17 for both arcane & divine). Unfortunately your don't get to cast Miracle, just Wish :rolleyes: It doesn't require any special feats, races or anything. If you're allowed to use races from OA (Oriental Adventures), then pick the Bamboo Spirit Folk ;) as your character's race. They get Trackless Step (a pre-req for Arcane Hierophant) as a racial ability, meaning they could go: Cleric 3 (or Shaman 3)/Wizard 3/Mystic Theurge 4/Arcane Hierophant 10 This way, the character could cast both Wish and Miracle once he/she reached level 20. :D I might give this a try if my current character bites the dust. Corvusnex
corvusnex 03-03-05, 10:42 PM	wizard 3 druid 3 mystic theurge 4 arcane heirophant 10 grants caster level 17 in each without using ur priest or sublime chord Sorry SaintX, I didn't see your post. You called it first, and I think this type of build is the better way to get 9th level arcane & divine casting. Use of the Baboo Spirit Folk just allows one to get both Wish & Miracle with minimal fuss (unusual +0 LA race); no difficult alignments, feat or skill requirements. Corvusnex
Jeremymc 03-03-05, 10:57 PM	All over the place, really. Anything with ur-priest and a decent amount of an arcane caster can end up with 9th level arcane/divine spells by using Mystic Theurge, for instance. However, here's the sick one. Mix in Sublime Chord (CA). Caelic did this first, I think, and the resulting Ur-Singer does wonders with caster levels. Personally? I hate the ur-priest. Semi-interesting concept, absolutely terrible execution, in my opinion. That won't stop it from being used here, though, so I'll suck it up and try to help. Hmm... But doesn't the Sublime Chord have to pick a certain class to add to his SC for the purposes of CL? And this doesn't have anything to do with anything. But an ex-paladin, fighter, 10th Level ur-priest is a sort of neat thing to play. Lots of fighting feats, lots of spells.
Caelic 03-04-05, 03:51 PM	No, That doesn't give the ridiculous CL caelic claimed it did. He relied on an extremely doubtful reading of "levels in an arcane spellcasting class." The actual CL was 18 (Just looked through it again, and Kiwi's is the only correct interpretation) Cheerfully acknowledged. A strict reading of Ur-Priest does not allow for the stacking of caster levels--hence my later revisitation with the Sacred Chord, as the trick requires Apostle of Peace to actually work. The Ur-Singer still has a lot to recommend it, though--more skill points than a traditional MyTh build, more special abilities, better hit points and saves, and solid dual ninth-level spellcasting.
ancalimohtar 03-04-05, 04:43 PM	Caelic: No doubt. The Ur-singer, if you think about it, is the only concept that truly takes advantage of both double-speed iconic spellcaster-duplication classes--the Ur-Priest has everything the Cleric has (nothing watered-down except for the domains) and gets it twice as fast, and the SC has everything the Wiz/sorcs have (except for levels 1-3) and gets it twice as fast. Then you slap em together with MT, and you're ready to pick up all the extra bonuses on the side, like music. The only regrets I have about the Ur-Singer are that it doesn't get very many 9th level spells, and it has to use spontaneous casting for its arcane spells. Oh well. Can't have everything. careful there ancali, the UP's extra 1/2 boost is based on class levels, not caster-levels - also, it doesnt benefit from +1 PrC's because they are not spellcasting classes. the UP's caster-level would be: UP = 2 (UP) + 8 (MT) + .5*5 (Wiz) = 12No. When a prestige class adds to caster progression level, it effectively adds to the levels in the other casting class for the purposes of 1) determining spells per day, 2) number of spells known (if applicable), and 3) caster level. Let me quote the Mystic Theurge from the DMG:This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.Think about it: If we go by your reasoning, a Ftr10/UP1/DivinePrC9 would have a UP caster level of... 1? Because, again according to you, his caster level calculation would be: (levels in UP = 1) + 0.5*(levels in others = 0) = 1. Yet he can cast 9th level spells? Meaning he wouldn't be able to make a scroll of invisibility? (The lowest level you can make a scroll is the level that is required by your class to cast that spell, and you don't have that level.) Thus, by contradiction, we can conclude that MT (and other PrCs) effectively adds to levels in the spellcasting classes it furthers for the purposes of caster level calculations.
Axle_Steelcat 03-04-05, 04:50 PM	This needs heavy polish but... Human Wizard 3 (Practiced Spellcaster) Druid 3 (Practiced Spellcaster) Mystic Theurge 3 (Pre Req) Wild Mage 1 Arcane Heirophant 10 17th Wizard Caster Level 18 + 1d6 (well 17-3+4 +1d6) 16th Druid Caster Level 20 (16+4) 9th level druid spells are nice, but Wish is good enough from one side till level 21. Why? Because I like Wildmagic. :)
Nurlithion 03-04-05, 04:56 PM	why not a simple wiz3/clr3/mt14?
Vorlir 03-04-05, 04:58 PM	You can't take a prestige class past 10th level until you are epic, need something to fill those other 6 levels.
ranagrande 03-04-05, 06:38 PM	Seriously, Apostle of Peace is the way to go. If you don't like that first level of Bard that I had, you could do Cleric instead to get some nifty domain powers, or Druid for an animal companion, or Monk to get your wisdom bonus to your AC, or Paladin for better HP, or Rogue for skills. Basically, you just need something with Diplomacy as a class skill.
Snicker-Snack 03-04-05, 09:23 PM	Think about it: If we go by your reasoning, a Ftr10/UP1/DivinePrC9 would have a UP caster level of... 1? Because, again according to you, his caster level calculation would be: (levels in UP = 1) + 0.5*(levels in others = 0) = 1. Yet he can cast 9th level spells? Meaning he wouldn't be able to make a scroll of invisibility? (The lowest level you can make a scroll is the level that is required by your class to cast that spell, and you don't have that level.) Thus, by contradiction, we can conclude that MT (and other PrCs) effectively adds to levels in the spellcasting classes it furthers for the purposes of caster level calculations. I don't understand your argument, ancalimohtar. A Ftr 10/UP 1/Divine PrC 9 would have a caster level: (levels in UP=1) + (levels in CL increasing classes=9) + (0.5*Levels in other Spellcasting classes=0) for a total of 10. I don't see how this proves or disproves that Spellcasting increasing classes are Spellcasting classes by itself. Sparkster is saying that CL incresing classes are not considered spellcasting classes, and therefore they do not benefit the Ur-Priest CL boost: To determine the Caster Level of an Ur-Priest, add the character's ur-priest levels to one half of his levels in other spellcasting classes Note that it says "levels in spellcasting classes", not Caster Levels. Therefore the total CL for the build you presented would be: Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4 Wiz casting progression: (5 + 1 + 8 + 4) = 18, with an equal caster level. Ur-Priest casting progression = 2 + 8 = 10. UP caster level = (2 + 8) + 0.5*wizard levels (0.5*5=2) = 12.
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 02:16 AM	I don't understand your argument, ancalimohtar. A Ftr 10/UP 1/Divine PrC 9 would have a caster level: (levels in UP=1) + (levels in CL increasing classes=9) + (0.5*Levels in other Spellcasting classes=0) for a total of 10.Aha! Thus, when calculating UP caster level, there are essentially two elements: "levels in UP" and "levels in other." If "levels in UP" gets the benefit from "levels in CL increasing classes," (as I bolded from your post above), then why shouldn't "levels in other"? Either they both get it, the correct way, or neither gets it, in which case the absurd CL=1 example above would happen.
Lord Zeb 03-05-05, 02:32 AM	I think Wiz 3 / Cleric 3 / MyTh 4 / Arcane Hierophant 10 is the easiest way to get both. My Sublime Compilation (see sig) has some of the above and other Ur-Singer builds. Something hard to put together, but interesting could be something like (away from books ,so pls check prereqs): Bard 7 / Initiate of Draconic Mysteries 1 / Druid 1 / Ur-Priest 1 / Sublime Chord 1 / Fochlucan Lyrist 9 Alternatively, a Bard 2 / Druid 3 / Green Whisperer 5 / Sublime Chord 1 / Arcane Hierophant 9 has serious powers with 9th level spells thanks to SC and an 18th level druid casting... Cheers, Zeb
Snicker-Snack 03-05-05, 03:27 AM	Aha! Thus, when calculating UP caster level, there are essentially two elements: "levels in UP" and "levels in other." If "levels in UP" gets the benefit from "levels in CL increasing classes," (as I bolded from your post above), then why shouldn't "levels in other"? Because the "other" specifically state that you must have "levels in other spellcasting classes". Not simple extra Caster Levels, and not simple increase in spellcasting ability. Levels in the class. The fact that a Ur-Priest increses his Spellcasting ability and Caster Level when he takes Levels in a PrC does not proves that this PrC is, by definition, a "Spellcasting Class".
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 04:54 AM	Snicker: Do you seriously not understand, or are you just pretending? Nobody is saying MT is a spellcasting class. I'm saying MT adds to levels in spellcasting classes for the purposes of determining caster level. Look: The UP caster level calculation formula specifically uses the term "Ur-Priest levels" and then "levels in other spellcasting classes." First of all, we agree that these two terms are comparable, right? They just refer to different classes, but they refer to the same mechanism in each class, correct? Since the character (Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4) has UP2 and Wiz5, one definition would only allow UPCL to be 2 + 0.5(5) = 4, while the other would set UPCL = 2 + 8 + 0.5*(5 + 1 + 8 + 4) = 19. YOU CANNOT APPLY ONE DEFINITION TO THE "UR-PRIEST LEVELS" PART OF THE FORMULA AND THEN APPLY A SECOND DEFINITION TO THE "LEVELS IN OTHER SPELLCASTING CLASSES" PART OF THE FORMULA. IT'S ONE FORMULA--YOU NEED ONE DEFINITION.
Snicker-Snack 03-05-05, 10:31 AM	I'm saying MT adds to levels in spellcasting classes for the purposes of determining caster level. Right, It adds to the spellcasting level progression and Caster level. Since the character (Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4) has UP2 and Wiz5, one definition would only allow UPCL to be 2 + 0.5(5) = 4, while the other would set UPCL = 2 + 8 + 0.5*(5 + 1 + 8 + 4) = 19. YOU CANNOT APPLY ONE DEFINITION TO THE "UR-PRIEST LEVELS" PART OF THE FORMULA AND THEN APPLY A SECOND DEFINITION TO THE "LEVELS IN OTHER SPELLCASTING CLASSES" PART OF THE FORMULA. IT'S ONE FORMULA--YOU NEED ONE DEFINITION. I'm not using a different definition for each part of the formula. Look: A wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4. According to Complete Divine, you would add Ur-Priest Levels to the levels in other spellcasting classes to get the Ur-Priest Caster Levels. That Means: Ur-Priest Levels = 2 + half of a Spellcasting Class Levels = (0.5*5) = 2 But hey, the calculation is not over yet. There is another part of the formula, despite it not being stated in the Ur-Priest Class definition: This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly It is the PrC definition that makes us add MyTh levels in the Ur-Priest, though only for the direct determinination of Spells per day and Caster Level. So the Ur-Priest Caster Level Formula goes: Ur-Priest Levels=2 (because the Ur-Priest class told us so) + 0.5* levels in other spellcasting class=2 (because the Ur-priest class told us to do so) + Mystic Theurge levels=8 (because them MytH told us to do so)= 12. It's a perfectly viable way of seeing the Caster Level calcualtion without falling into neither extremes.
Shazam007 03-05-05, 10:42 AM	How about this one: (in this order) Druid1-2/Wiz1/Druid3/MystTh1-4/ArcHier1-10/MystTh5-6. Take practiced spellcaster(divine) at 1st, Alternate sourced spellcasting (from dragon magazine) at 3rd to prepare 2nd level arcane spells at 4th level to qualify for MystTh at 5th lvl. Then take practiced spellcaster (arcane) at 6th lvl. This build gives you 9th lvl. spells and 20th caster lvl. in both arcane and divine spells and does not cheat by using the cheesy Ur-Priest. This build is as close to perfect as humanly possible. ;) P.S. you are also left with a BAB of 12/7/2 at 20th lvl (which isn't too bad). "Alright you primitive screw heads, listen up!! You see this...this is my BOOM stick"!!! -Ash from Army of Darkness.
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 11:23 AM	Ur-Priest Levels=2 (because the Ur-Priest class told us so) + 0.5* levels in other spellcasting class=2 (because the Ur-priest class told us to do so) + Mystic Theurge levels=8 (because them MytH told us to do so)= 12.What the heck? Where did the MT tell you to do that? I'm going to take your quote from the SRD: ...adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.Thus, he adds 8 to both UP and to Wiz, then calculates any and all CL based off that, including Wiz CL. If we go by your (most recent) reasoning, MT wouldn't add to Wiz, only to UP, right? Then his CL for wizard would be 5, even though he could cast 9th level Wiz spells. Same problem as before. If you're still not convinced, here's a mathematical way of looking at it: These are the definitions (non-debatable, just definitions): L = actual levels, i.e., levels with XP devoted to them PL = progression levels, used for determining spells/day, etc. CL = caster level, used for determining spell effects/penetration, etc. These are the assumptions (pay attention to 4.): 1. WizPL = WizL + MTL ==> Wiz progression level is only dependent upon # of levels devoted to the wizard and MT classes 2. WizCL = WizPL ==> Other than with items/feats, Wizard CL is only dependent upon wizard progression level, nothing to do with UP 3. UPPL = UPL + MTL ==> same as 1.'s reasoning 4. The terms "Ur-Priest levels" and "levels in other spellcasting classes" (quoted verbatim) refer to the same mechanism in each class--either both are PL's, CL's, or L's. These are the conclusions (please look at them carefully): 5. WizCL = WizL + MTL ==> from 1. and 2. 6. From #4, only one of the following 3 could be true: a) UPCL = UPL + 0.5*(WizL) b) UPCL = UPCL + 0.5*(WizCL) c) UPCL = UPPL + 0.5*(WizPL) 7. If 6.a) then UPCL = 2 (if you reject this, cross out 6.a)) 8. If 6.b) then there exists a paradox. UPCL becomes recursively defined. (Problem with old CL calculation for Ur-Singer, for example.) 9. Thus, we eliminate a) and b), c) is the answer. UPCL = 19.
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 11:28 AM	Druid1-2/Wiz1/Druid3/MystTh1-4/ArcHier1-10/MystTh5-6. [...] This build gives you 9th lvl. spells and 20th caster lvl. in both arcane and divine spells and does not cheat by using the cheesy Ur-Priest. This build is as close to perfect as humanly possible.Using Dragon material to bypass a spellcasting requirement is less cheesy than using the UP? More importantly, you could get CL20 in both with Practiced Spellcaster, or ioun stones, or tons of other ways--but you don't have caster progression 20 in either. You have 19 druid progression levels and 17 wizard progression levels.
Snicker-Snack 03-05-05, 12:25 PM	Thus, he adds 8 to both UP and to Wiz, then calculates any and all CL based off that, including Wiz CL. The problem is that Caster Llevel has nothing to so with it. Mystic Theurge adds to both Ur-Priest's and Wizard's Caster Level and Spellcasting Progression, but it doesn't add class levels to any of them. If we go by your (most recent) reasoning, MT wouldn't add to Wiz, only to UP, right? Then his CL for wizard would be 5, even though he could cast 9th level Wiz spells. Same problem as before. That's not what I said. MyTh adds Caster Levels and Spells per Day, but Ur-priest Requires actual class levels in his "extra" CL boost. These are the definitions (non-debatable, just definitions): L = actual levels, i.e., levels with XP devoted to them PL = progression levels, used for determining spells/day, etc. CL = caster level, used for determining spell effects/penetration, etc. These are the assumptions (pay attention to 4.): 1. WizPL = WizL + MTL ==> Wiz progression level is only dependent upon # of levels devoted to the wizard and MT classes 2. WizCL = WizPL ==> Other than with items/feats, Wizard CL is only dependent upon wizard progression level, nothing to do with UP 3. UPPL = UPL + MTL ==> same as 1.'s reasoning 4. The terms "Ur-Priest levels" and "levels in other spellcasting classes" (quoted verbatim) refer to the same mechanism in each class--either both are PL's, CL's, or L's. These are the conclusions (please look at them carefully): 5. WizCL = WizL + MTL ==> from 1. and 2. 6. From #4, only one of the following 3 could be true: a) UPCL = UPL + 0.5*(WizL) b) UPCL = UPCL + 0.5*(WizCL) c) UPCL = UPPL + 0.5*(WizPL) 7. If 6.a) then UPCL = 2 (if you reject this, cross out 6.a)) 8. If 6.b) then there exists a paradox. UPCL becomes recursively defined. (Problem with old CL calculation for Ur-Singer, for example.) 9. Thus, we eliminate a) and b), c) is the answer. UPCL = 19. The problem is that you are considering MTL inherently into UPL when you calculate UPCL with the formula given by Ur-Priest, instead of considering it an extra bonus added by another class. That makes the MyTh counts one and a half time, even when it's not a spellcasting class by itself. Think like this: By Ur-Priest's definition alone, the UPCL would be : UPCL=UPL + 0.5*(WizL) > literally: Ur-Priest Levels and half the levels in other spellcasting classes While the UPPL would be: UPPL=UPL While with the Wizard Class definition alone: WizCL=WizL WizPl=WizL And then we add the Arcane Prestige Classes (AP) into it, and according to their definition, their levels will add in both WizCL and WizPL, but not to WizL directly, and so: WizCL=WizL+APL WizPL=WizL+APL And finally, according to the MyTh defintion, MyTh levels will add directly to UPCL, WizCL, UPPL,and WizCL, but not to UPL nor WizL. Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 4 UPL=2 WizL=5 APL=5 MTL=8 WizPL=WizL+MTL+APL=18 WizCL=WizL+MTL+APL=18 UPPL=UPL+MTL=10 UPCL=UPL+MTL+(0.5*WizL)=12
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 12:53 PM	I finally see what you're saying. You're wrong, but at least I understand you now. ;) You're basically saying that MT adds to CLs from a completely overarching rule--that it always adds X (where X is how many levels you've spent on MT) to CL, right? In other words: UPCL(just wiz/UP) = UPPL + WizPL UPPL(add in MT) = UPCL(just wiz/UP) + MTL However, that's not how it's written in the DMG. Again, I quote:This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.Meaning, for any xCL formula, replace all L's with PL's (if those L's came from classes MT added to). Do you understand now?
Shazam007 03-05-05, 12:54 PM	Using Dragon material to bypass a spellcasting requirement is less cheesy than using the UP? I think taking a single feat to optimize your character is far less cheesy than taking a prestige class that is abused because of how broken it is. More importantly, you could get CL20 in both with Practiced Spellcaster, or ioun stones, or tons of other ways--but you don't have caster progression 20 in either. You have 19 druid progression levels and 17 wizard progression levels. How would you suggest that one gets better than a 19th druid progression and 17th wizard progression with both having an effective caster level of 20th in each (without reliance on magic items)?
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 01:01 PM	I think taking a single feat to optimize your character is far less cheesy than taking a prestige class that is abused because of how broken it is.Listen to what you're saying. It's less cheesy to completely skip two levels of Wizard progression in favor of BOTH DRUID AND WIZARD PROGRESSION by using an extremely doubtful interpretation of a feat printed in DRAGON? Uh. No. How would you suggest that one gets better than a 19th druid progression and 17th wizard progression with both having an effective caster level of 20th in each (without reliance on magic items)?I don't. I was just pointing out that a CL 20 is not much to brag about--to only brag about your PL, because anybody can get CL20. PL depends on your build; CL just depends on having a free feat or two to blow on Practiced.
Snicker-Snack 03-05-05, 03:53 PM	However, that's not how it's written in the DMG. Again, I quote: This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly. Meaning, for any xCL formula, replace all L's with PL's (if those L's came from classes MT added to). Do you understand now? Ah. I see. The PrC's state that they add to spellcasting levels when you calculate CL, so you are adding them for every kind of CL calculation. Most probably not what the designers intended, but a strict reading of the RAW is with you here. You are indeed right.
The Thing in the Night 03-05-05, 03:58 PM	Listen to what you're saying. It's less cheesy to completely skip two levels of Wizard progression in favor of BOTH DRUID AND WIZARD PROGRESSION by using an extremely doubtful interpretation of a feat printed in DRAGON? Uh. No. Remember, Dragon has brought us the Invisible Blade, the Reaping Mauler, the Occult Slayer, and a version of arcane strike that was less powerful that the one in CW, among other things. It's fair game.
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 04:04 PM	Well, if you think about it, if an Ur-Priest could never get a good (15+) CL, he might as well not cast spells that allow a SR save, and those spells that have variable effects based on CL would just be terrible. Since UPL can only get to 10, the only way to really boost UPCL is to maximize the number of levels you spend on other spellcasting classes--and Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/PrC4 does just that. So the highest CL any non-epic UP build could ever have is 19. It's not really broken, unless your definition of balanced is "never let the UP catch up to a Cleric's CL, and never let him bypass enemy SR, and never let him... etc." The funny thing is, the UP almost seems made with the MT in mind. I mean, if taking UP eliminates the possibility of ever taking another divine casting class again, then to boost CL, you'd need to have arcane levels. And if you've got both, why not MT them together? Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/PrC4 is really truly the iconic UP build.
ancalimohtar 03-05-05, 04:28 PM	Remember, Dragon has brought us the Invisible Blade, the Reaping Mauler, the Occult Slayer, and a version of arcane strike that was less powerful that the one in CW, among other things. It's fair game.I get tired of reading you type that. You, The Thing in the Night, post that exact same thing every single time anybody says anything about Dragon not being balanced. I'll respond to it once, and by doing this, I hope you'll quit your trolling. Dragon magazine is endorsed by WotC as the "Official Dungeons & Dragons Magazine." This means jack squat. It's much less thoroughly tested, much more prone to glaring mistakes (even misspelling "arcane" makes you wonder just how much time they spent on the prestige class), and most of all, much more prone to having extremely non-standard mechanics. I like to think a lot--not all, but a lot--of the purpose of the CharOp board is to crunch the numbers to the max, and come up with the best builds/tactics based upon the most commonly agreed-upon set of rules/interpretations. 3.5 books are the first tier, because they're the most thoroughly tested material (unless you want to restrict it to Core only, which many do). Then, some people like to add in web enhancements to said books. Then, other people add in old 3.0 books that may or may not have been superceded by 3.5 material. Eventually, variants and Dragon magazine are added in. Then non-WotC d20 is added in, and yadda yadda yadda. The further you get from the Core, the more it depends on DM approval for builds/tactics. Dragon seems to feed off this--the purpose of Dragon, it seems to me, is to provide a wealth of resources to DMs and players so they can go through and pick out the ones they want to include in their games. In other words, Dragon is a resource that requires case-by-case approval, generally. The DMs I've played with (and I, when I DM) always, always, always checked the specific class or item or whatever in Dragon first, before allowing it. On the other hand, the 3.5 books are more accurately described as a resource that requires case-by-case bans. DMs generally say "You can use these books: A, B, C, D, E, F, ..., except for these classes: X, Y, and Z." Really, I don't think anyone can put up a good argument for Dragon magazine being, on average, more tested and more balanced than the 3.5 splatbooks. You don't see broken builds taking advantage of Dragon material as often because people generally don't have access to Dragon and because everybody feels dirty making builds that take advantage of loopholes found in a monthly magazine. You might as well write your own prestige class to purposely have a loophole and then take advantage of it.
Debug0x2a 03-05-05, 05:55 PM	Human or Elven Rogue 2, Druid 1, Wizard 3, Ur-Priest 1, Virtuoso 3, Sublime Chord 1, Fochluhan Lyrist 9 That gives you spellcasting abilities like that of a 5th level wizard, 10th level sublime chord, and 10th level ur-priest. In addition, you have the bardic fascinate, and the virtuoso's persuasive and sustaining song as if used by a 13th level bard, and 10th level bardic knowledge. I'll leave the caster level up to you guys to argue, but using what i figured was worst case scenario i figured arcane 19, divine 17 after using the practiced spellcaster feat for each class. For the ur-priest caster level i used ur priest's 1, and half of the wizard, virtuoso, and sublime chord levels. Best case scenario has a divine CL of 20 and arcane of 19. All of this is with iron will at lvl 1, malign spell focus at 3, practiced spellcaster for your arcane class at 6, and again for ur priest at 9, so you have 3 more feats to have fun with. I think that having bardic lore, trapfinding, bardic music, and 9th level wizard and cleric spells makes for a very good asset to a party. Only problem is that your 0th - 3rd level wizard spells use your int mod, and your level 4-9 spells use charisma while your ur priest spells use wis. Makes for alot of ability dependency, but i think its safe to say that in the long run int can be dumped. I'm not even going to try to argue the CL stuff because i think its rather poorly written as is, and either way you will have some problems and weird situation calculating it. I'd stick to the lower one of the two just because we all know ur-priest is broken already, but i dont think you can really argue it either way from the books, or rather you can argue it both ways. Anyhow, if you can con some poor druid into teaching you druidic (probably with a really good bluff and intimidate roll along with the prospects of a particularly nasty death) then you can drop the level of druid, and switch that and all of your wizard levels for sorc or warmage or battle mage. That way you dont need to worry much about int at all, just for skills.
Shazam007 03-06-05, 02:16 AM	Listen to what you're saying. It's less cheesy to completely skip two levels of Wizard progression in favor of BOTH DRUID AND WIZARD PROGRESSION by using an extremely doubtful interpretation of a feat printed in DRAGON? Uh. No. I don't. I was just pointing out that a CL 20 is not much to brag about--to only brag about your PL, because anybody can get CL20. PL depends on your build; CL just depends on having a free feat or two to blow on Practiced. There is no "extremely doubtful interpretation" to the feat i mentioned above. It's from Dragon #325, page 61 (but you knew that because you read it right?). It clearly states that you can prepare and cast arcane spells as divine spells and vice versa; therefore meeting the requirements of the MystTh before 5th level. I find any "words of wisdom" from someone who uses a picture of Jar-Jar Binx as his avatar image to be suspect. There is a whole lot of idea bashing in your posts...just not a whole lot of ideas. When you show me your "superior" build that gives a character better than a 19th level spell progression in Druid and 17th level spell progression in Wizard (at 20th level)...we'll talk. Until then...
ancalimohtar 03-06-05, 02:56 AM	I find any "words of wisdom" from someone who uses a picture of Jar-Jar Binx as his avatar image to be suspect. There is a whole lot of idea bashing in your posts...just not a whole lot of ideas. When you show me your "superior" build that gives a character better than a 19th level spell progression in Druid and 17th level spell progression in Wizard (at 20th level)...we'll talk. Until then... If you're judging people online based on a 20 pixel square image, you need to mature a lot more. Or maybe just learn some social skills. By the way, I like how you've put "superior" in quotes, as if you were quoting me, except nobody in this thread has yet used that word. Interesting! Could it be you're making up crap I said so you could build a strawman argument? Hmm! As far as idea-bashing--well, I never would have said anything if you didn't insinuate the Ur-Priest was cheesier than a Dragon feat that lets you bypass 2 Wiz levels. So who was bashing what first? So when you mature and stop making up random quotes and arguments, we'll talk. Until then, don't reply to me again.
scrollreader 03-06-05, 03:09 AM	when you mature and stop making up random quotes and arguments, we'll talk. Until then, don't reply to me again. May I presume, ancalimohtar, that you'll do the rest of us the same favor, if we ask? Or is this offer just too good to be true?
Debug0x2a 03-06-05, 03:24 AM	Agreed, less bashing, more munchkining. One thing ive been interesting in looking into is a blighter lyrist. Would be friggin hillarious if i could find a way to pull it off, but i was looking at maybe starting with rogue, then bard, then 1 level of druid, and a few levels of a prc to give you spell progression for the prereq, but skills that wont be lost when you decide to nuke a forest black mage style. Any ideas?
Mistwell 03-06-05, 12:04 PM	So when you mature and stop making up random quotes and arguments, we'll talk. Until then, don't reply to me again. Did you really call someone immature, and in the very next sentence tell them to never reply to you again? Maybe you should clamp your hands over your ears and scream "I'm not listening"...that'll teach him. Disclaimer: quotes above are not quoting you directly, in case you were about to throw a hissy fit over those too.
El_Machinae 03-06-05, 12:24 PM	Bard 1/Wizard 6/Apostle of Peace 2/Mystic Theurge 8/Anything you want that advances arcane spells 3 There you go. That's a good, easy level 20 character who's able to cast both Wish and Miracle. Nice, except it may not use a spellbook
Caelic 03-06-05, 12:37 PM	A better approach if you're going to use Apostle of Peace is the Sacred Chord. In simplest form: Bard8/Apostle of Peace2/Sublime Chord2/Mystic Theurge 8. That's the simple build, and it results in a caster level of Bard 10/Sublime Chord 18/AoP24. If you want to be somewhat sleazy, you can do this instead: Bard1/Sorceror6/Warlock1/Apostle of Peace2/Sublime Chord2/Mystic Theurge 8. Because of the bizarre way in which Sublime Chord interacts with the caster levels of other classes, your final caster levels would be: Bard: CL 8 Sorceror: CL 8 Warlock: CL 8 (You might or might not get EB and invocations for this.) Sublime Chord: 16 Apostle of Peace: 30 ...all in a caster who needs no spellbooks or other costly items.
Shazam007 03-06-05, 12:45 PM	Did you really call someone immature, and in the very next sentence tell them to never reply to you again? Maybe you should clamp your hands over your ears and scream "I'm not listening"...that'll teach him. Disclaimer: quotes above are not quoting you directly, in case you were about to throw a hissy fit over those too. Thank you Mistwell. Perhaps he needs to go back to grammar school to realize that quotation marks can be used to indicate a direct quote or to denote words of special significance (i.e. sarcasm). I also feel that he played the "You're immature" card far too soon. Maybe he'll pack up all his toys and go to another thread.
The Thing in the Night 03-06-05, 05:01 PM	Agreed, less bashing, more munchkining. One thing ive been interesting in looking into is a blighter lyrist. Would be friggin hillarious if i could find a way to pull it off, but i was looking at maybe starting with rogue, then bard, then 1 level of druid, and a few levels of a prc to give you spell progression for the prereq, but skills that wont be lost when you decide to nuke a forest black mage style. Any ideas? Use the Green Whisperer PRC from Dragon (gasp!) 311. Bard3/Druid2/Green Whisperer3/Blighter1/Spelldancer2/Sublime Chord2/Lyrist7. The singing, dancing black mage :D .
Lana "Silvertongue" 03-06-05, 05:54 PM	First off... Apostle of Peace.. Where can I find that? An my only other comment is good luck on fitting all that stuff on your character sheet.
Helmed Horror 03-06-05, 06:02 PM	It is in Book of Exalted Deeds
ancalimohtar 03-06-05, 07:05 PM	Please. All of you attacking me--did you read what he said, or are you just jumping on a bandwagon? Originally Posted by ancalimohtar when you mature and stop making up random quotes and arguments, we'll talk. Until then, don't reply to me again. May I presume, ancalimohtar, that you'll do the rest of us the same favor, if we ask? Or is this offer just too good to be true?Oh really? Why don't you go back up and QUOTE ME? When did I make up quotations by other people? If you're arguing with me, at least don't say nonsense. Did you really call someone immature, and in the very next sentence tell them to never reply to you again?Good job! Why would I want someone replying to me if he thinks I have nothing important to say BECAUSE OF MY AVATAR? How about all of you go back and read what was said? He keeps on arguing against this mystical assertion I've made (something about being able to make a more powerful build than 19/17? Who said that? If you read what I said, I specifically said: "I don't [suggest a build with better PLs]. I was just pointing out that a CL 20 is not much to brag about--to only brag about your PL") and then makes up quotes I've said about it.
ranagrande 03-06-05, 08:57 PM	Nice, except it may not use a spellbook I didn't even think about that. That would be a problem, wouldn't it? :P Alternatively, just go Sorceror 10/Apostle of Peace 2/Mystic Theurge 8. That still gives access to both Miracle and Wish at level 20, and it's even simpler than my previous idea.
Debug0x2a 03-07-05, 01:50 AM	Hey jar jar, my prefered solution is if you would both shut the hell up. Anyhow, what are the general specs for the Green Whisperer? If my DM would allow that PrC i might see about trying that. After all, who wouldnt love a singing dancing blackmage in the party? I personally believe that anything from Dragon goes on a case by case basis, but its worth a shot.
Iaimeki 03-07-05, 02:28 AM	http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=5415285
Debug0x2a 03-07-05, 02:34 AM	thanks iaimeki. That could make a very interesting character....
sparkster4242 03-08-05, 11:51 AM	ancali: you are still not calculating the UP's caster-level correctly. These are the definitions (non-debatable, just definitions): L = actual levels, i.e., levels with XP devoted to them [class levels - sparkster] PL = progression levels, used for determining spells/day, etc. CL = caster level, used for determining spell effects/penetration, etc. These are the assumptions (pay attention to 4.): 1. WizPL = WizL + MTL ==> Wiz progression level is only dependent upon # of levels devoted to the wizard and MT classes 2. WizCL = WizPL ==> Other than with items/feats, Wizard CL is only dependent upon wizard progression level, nothing to do with UP 3. UPPL = UPL + MTL ==> same as 1.'s reasoning 4. The terms "Ur-Priest levels" and "levels in other spellcasting classes" (quoted verbatim) refer to the same mechanism in each class--either both are PL's, CL's, or L's. [both are class levels, 'L' - sparkster] These are the conclusions (please look at them carefully): 5. WizCL = WizL + MTL ==> from 1. and 2. 6. From #4, only one of the following 3 could be true: a) UPCL = UPL + 0.5*(WizL) b) UPCL = UPCL + 0.5*(WizCL) c) UPCL = UPPL + 0.5*(WizPL) 7. If 6.a) then UPCL = 2 (if you reject this, cross out 6.a)) 8. If 6.b) then there exists a paradox. UPCL becomes recursively defined. (Problem with old CL calculation for Ur-Singer, for example.) 9. Thus, we eliminate a) and b), c) is the answer. UPCL = 19. the problem here is that a, b, and c are _all_ false. the UP's description is absolutely crystal clear: it gains the extra 1/2 boost from class levels ('L' above). the correct option is: 6d) UPCL = UPPL + .5*(WizL) the MT's PL-boost to Wizard has no bearing on the calculation of the UP's CL, because the MT has no effect on the Wizard's class-levels, 'L' - it affects WizPL, not WizL. ancali again: Well, if you think about it, if an Ur-Priest could never get a good (15+) CL, under ideal circumstances, the UP is limited to a pre-epic maximum caster level of 17. Wiz4/SW1/UP2/MT10/Divine PrC3 = 2 + 10 + 3 + .5(4) = 17. its an inherent limitation of the class. i suppose there might be a spellcasting class with a good fort save to replace Wiz4/SW1 ... with such a class, you could bump UPCL up to 18. this is on-par with a Cleric - one feat can narrow the gap even further. he might as well not cast spells that allow a SR save, and those spells that have variable effects based on CL would just be terrible. true, but doesnt change the way UPCL is calculated. Since UPL can only get to 10, the only way to really boost UPCL is to maximize the number of levels you spend on other spellcasting classes well, that and divine PrC's that add to UP. --and Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/PrC4 does just that. no, it doesnt. that build enhances CL (PL) in one other class, but it only provides 5 measly 'levels in other spellcasting classes' - class-levels ('L'). So the highest CL any non-epic UP build could ever have is 19. see above. It's not really broken, unless your definition of balanced is "never let the UP catch up to a Cleric's CL, and never let him bypass enemy SR, and never let him... etc." it doesnt have anything to do with balance, its part of the definition of the class. the UP _can_ get his caster-level up high enough to compete with a Cleric, but piling on Arcane PrC's wont help him accomplish it. snick: there is nothing in the UPCL formula to which the MT's arcane boost can be added, therefore it _cannot_ be added. the UP gains an extra 1/2 benefit from class-levels, and +1 PrC's have no effect on class-levels. the RAW is quite clear, and it disagrees with ancali.
ancalimohtar 03-08-05, 12:23 PM	ancali: you are still not calculating the UP's caster-level correctly. [Bunch of nonsense]Oh, Christ. I really don't want to explain to another person again why I'm right. Caelic understands. I spent hours typing stuff so now Snicker-snack understands. I really, really don't feel like making you understand. But I'm a nice guy, so we'll go through this again. If you still don't get it, ask Snicker-snack nicely and maybe he'll help you. Here we go. First, I'll go through it, then I'll respond to your specific arguments to clear up things: 1. Why do you count MT levels when you calculate the "Ur-Priest levels" part of the UPCL calculation? 2. So why can't you count MT levels when you calculate the "levels in other spellcasting classes" part of the UPCL calculation? (From now on, we'll shorten "levels in other spellcasting classes " to "Wizard levels" since we're using the example of Wiz/UP/MT.) 3. Both "Ur-Priest levels" and "Wizard levels" get the same benefit from MT. 4. Both "Ur-Priest levels" and "Wizard levels" have the same importance in calculating UPCL. 5. Thus, you either add MT levels to both or you add MT levels to neither. 6. If to both, you agree with me. 7. If to neither, then using these rules, I can make a UP build who casts 9th level spells but has a CL of 1. In fact, any UP build that uses PrCs to advance UP casting will have an extremely low CL. the UP's description is absolutely crystal clear: it gains the extra 1/2 boost from class levels ('L' above). the correct option is: 6d) UPCL = UPPL + .5*(WizL) Then why is that UPPL instead of UPL? If it gains boost from only class levels ("Ur-Priest levels" and "levels in other spellcasting classes" refer to the same mechanic) then that should be UPL. the MT's PL-boost to Wizard has no bearing on the calculation of the UP's CL, because the MT has no effect on the Wizard's class-levels, 'L' - it affects WizPL, not WizL.Which means that, again, the UPCL formula should only have Ls. Meaning it should be UPL instead of UPPL. And this leads us down the dark path of 9th level spells cast at caster level 1. under ideal circumstances, the UP is limited to a pre-epic maximum caster level of 17. Wiz4/SW1/UP2/MT10/Divine PrC3 = 2 + 10 + 3 + .5(4) = 17. its an inherent limitation of the class.First of all, You can't have MT9-10 or Divine PrC3, because UP progression only goes up to 10. Thus, pre-epic, you cannot add to it. You're stuck with adding Arcane PrC levels. So your build, modified, would be Wiz4/SW1/UP2/MT8/Arcane PrC 5, giving 2+2+8+2 = 14 by your CL calculation formula. The iconic build (Wiz5/MB1/UP2/MT8/Arcane Prc 4), meanwhile, gives 5 + 10 = 15, according to you. i suppose there might be a spellcasting class with a good fort save to replace Wiz4/SW1 ... with such a class, you could bump UPCL up to 18.You would know Mindbender does exactly that if you bothered to read this thread. Except Mindbender, and all other Arcane PrCs, require 5 hit dice to enter. Again, this comes out to CL = 15. the UP _can_ get his caster-level up high enough to compete with a Cleric, but piling on Arcane PrC's wont help him accomplish it.No, the UP can get his CL up to a good range, because you interpreted CL calculation wrong. Also, piling on Arcane PrCs is the best way to do it. Wasting a feat on Practiced Spellcaster is just about the dumbest thing a Wiz/UP can do. Please, please read over this and the argument between me and Snicker carefully to see where you might possibly not understand.
Votan 03-08-05, 12:41 PM	why not a simple wiz3/clr3/mt14? 1) You can't get into MyTh 11 until epic 2) more importantly, Mystic Theuruge starts alternating between increasing divine and arcane caster level in the epic version. Yes, half caster progression in both. Not the best choice in most circumstances as it aslo has a seriously retarded pace of epic feats.