Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rhualtaen 02-18-08, 02:42 AM	I haven't yet formed an opinion of it, but I'd like to know what the general consensus is, if in fact one exists. One of my players recently asked if I would allow this prestige class, since he wants to work toward it if it's a valid choice. I just read it, and the abilities it grants make me wonder... The class gives full progression of druid and wizard spells It has a d6 hit die, which is not great but not the worst (and most importantly, one better than wizards and sorcerors) It gives 4 skills per level, 2 better than wizards and sorcerors It gives an average (rogue-esque) base attack bonus, not the poor one of wizards and sorcerors It also gives one's familiar/companion some pretty frightening enhancements What I'm wondering is, if this prestige is not broken, why? At a glance, it looks to me like a wizard who gets more skills, a better HD, better BAB, a beastly familiar, and full progression of druid spells. Considering that one would only need 3 levels of druid (and everything else wizard) to qualify for this class, it looks suspiciously like a rudely powerful wizard. I genuinely appreciate my player bringing up the potentially unbalanced nature of this PrC, but I'd like to know what others think.
StruckingFuggle 02-18-08, 02:57 AM	At a glance, it looks to me like a wizard who gets more skills, a better HD, better BAB, a beastly familiar, and full progression of druid spells. Well ... Like a Druid/Wizard ... except he casts both wizard and druid spells as a wizard and druid of three levels lower. Which means not just reduced caster levels, but far more importantly, he'll always be 1, and half the time, two spell levels behind. When others have 6th level spells, he has 5th, and maybe only 4th. And so on and so forth. Considering that one would only need 3 levels of druid (and everything else wizard) to qualify for this class, it looks suspiciously like a rudely powerful wizard. Generally, I'd rather not be three levels behind having the higher-level spells.
JaronK 02-18-08, 04:32 AM	It's not only not broken, it's also weak. Having the ability to cast a wide variety of underpowered spells is not nearly as good as the ability to cast fewer really awesome ones, and that's the tradeoff you're making by losing so many caster levels to get into the class. JaronK
Cartigan 02-18-08, 08:11 AM	The class gives full progression of druid and wizard spells It has a d6 hit die, which is not great but not the worst (and most importantly, one better than wizards and sorcerors) It gives 4 skills per level, 2 better than wizards and sorcerors It gives an average (rogue-esque) base attack bonus, not the poor one of wizards and sorcerors It also gives one's familiar/companion some pretty frightening enhancements What I'm wondering is, if this prestige is not broken, why? At a glance, it looks to me like a wizard who gets more skills, a better HD, better BAB, a beastly familiar, and full progression of druid spells. It is because it's a dual class. How did you manage to miss that fact? It gets better HD and BaB because it is meant to be somewhat in combat like the Druid and because that is what the Druid gets. And it gets better skill points because the Druid does; besides, the Wizard having 2 per level is retarded. And I would ignore CharOp people when asking for broken/not broke opinions *cough* JaronK *cough*. If it were up to them we would have 3 classes and none of them would be dual progression classes. The class isn't broken, but it is far more powerful than the Mystic Theurge, which isn't saying anything - every prestige class out after the core are more powerful than core prestige classes. It offers versatility while progressing Druid abilities in addition to spell versatility. A straight Wizard or Druid will be more powerful spell wise and a Druid will have better Wildshape abilities, but this class is a workable combination of the two.
Bergtann 02-18-08, 09:07 AM	As JaronK said, it is not only not broken, it is rather weak. It is one step above Mystic Theurge, but that is damning with faint praise indeed. The Mystic Theurge is considered one of the weakest PrCs ever. Also, in addition to what has been said here already, you cant enter it untill level 8 normally. You need BaB +4 as I remember. Ad Wiz + Druid gets that at level 7. Also, you want to wait untill level 9. As I remember, it advances wildshape, but does not grant it. (I could be misremembering here, its been a while since I looked at it.) Like the other dual-progression classes: High-level spells are the most powerful things in the game. After a certain point, you don't normally run out of low-level ones anyway. So it trades the most desired thing in the game away, to gain something you have a surplus of already. Not good. And I would ignore CharOp people when asking for broken/not broke opinions *cough* JaronK *cough*. If it were up to them we would have 3 classes and none of them would be dual progression classes. The class isn't broken, but it is far more powerful than the Mystic Theurge, which isn't saying anything - every prestige class out after the core are more powerful than core prestige classes. It offers versatility while progressing Druid abilities in addition to spell versatility. A straight Wizard or Druid will be more powerful spell wise and a Druid will have better Wildshape abilities, but this class is a workable combination of the two. I got to adress a few points here: Not asking CharOpers about issues of power balance is like saying don't ask a physican about a health problem. They spend their time studing that exact thing, and working with it. Best not ask the guys that know the stuff. Also: there are literally hundreds of classes and combinations being worked over on the charop boards. Finally, the Eldich Knight and Loremaster still do Ok as far as DMG PrCs go. Far from being every PrC after core being stronger, many are weaker. (Of course the MT is still in a class of its own)
JaronK 02-18-08, 03:08 PM	And I would ignore CharOp people when asking for broken/not broke opinions *cough* JaronK *cough*. If it were up to them we would have 3 classes and none of them would be dual progression classes. CharOp: The place where people study balance and know how classes work. Yeah, asking them is silly. Your second scentance is just stupid. The only classes that the Char Ops boards will shoot down on sight as being too stupid to play are the CW Samurai, the Healer, and the Planar Shepard (too weak, too weak, too strong). Everything else gets useful advice. JaronK
Cartigan 02-18-08, 04:19 PM	I got to adress a few points here: Not asking CharOpers about issues of power balance is like saying don't ask a physican about a health problem. They spend their time studing that exact thing, and working with it. I disagree. Not asking them about balance is like not asking a plastic surgeon about how to treat a runny nose. They don't look at it from a normal angle, they look at it from a min-maxed/munchkinned/how-can-we-bend-the-rules-of-the-game-to-break-this-class angle, especially Jaron. Finally, the Eldich Knight and Loremaster still do Ok as far as DMG PrCs go. The Abjurant Champion makes the Eldritch Knight look like a joke. Loremaster is ok.
JaronK 02-18-08, 04:26 PM	I disagree. Not asking them about balance is like not asking a plastic surgeon about how to treat a runny nose. They don't look at it from a normal angle, they look at it from a min-maxed/munchkinned/how-can-we-bend-the-rules-of-the-game-to-break-this-class angle, especially Jaron. Enough with the personal attacks. I have NEVER advocated the use of munchkin tactics. I have NEVER advocated using broken tactics in actual gameplay. Honestly, I doubt you know what "munchkin" means (for one, it means throwing out any actual roleplay in favor of mechanical advantages, something I have never advocated at all). I have, however, talked about what tactics are legal and possible within the scope of discussions of balance. Failure to discuss such tactics during balance discussions leads to, well, failure to understand the basic principles of game balance. At any rate, cut out the completely unprovoked personal attacks. They violate board rules, and are completely uncalled for. JaronK
ninjarabbit 02-18-08, 05:57 PM	As a COer myself I feel I'm a pretty good judge of what's strong, what's weak, what's broken, what's abusable, and I can tell you exactly why. To dismiss mine or anyone else's opinion on a subject that we'd be considered very knowledgable is just silly. To answer the original question I think the AH is very average at best. Yeah it has a few nice abilities but at the end of the day I'd rather be a druid20 or a wizard5/arcanespellcastingPrCs15. AH pretty much suffers from the same problems the mystic theurge suffers from in being 3 levels behind in both your druid and wizard spellcasting, barring a few specific and questionable tricks.
Rhualtaen 02-18-08, 06:28 PM	It is because it's a dual class. How did you manage to miss that fact? ... And I would ignore CharOp people when asking for broken/not broke opinions *cough* JaronK *cough*. If it were up to them we would have 3 classes and none of them would be dual progression classes. Cartigan, while I do thank you for your opinion, the above are what are called ad hominem attacks. My current profile may be new to this message board, but I am not new to the internet, and I can tell you from a reasonably informed position that such attacks are basically taboo in any civilized environment. Penny Arcade (among others) put it quite well with the following equation: Normal human being + opinion + anonymity (internet) = raging d*ckhead. Moral of the story? Kindly refrain in the future. It only damages your peers' opinions of you.
The_Shaman 02-18-08, 06:38 PM	The Abjurant Champion makes the Eldritch Knight look like a joke. Loremaster is ok. It's because the abjurant champion is rather powerful, not because the EK is weak.
StruckingFuggle 02-18-08, 06:47 PM	The Abjurant Champion makes the Eldritch Knight look like a joke. Loremaster is ok. It's also only 5 levels long. So after 5 levels of gishy goodness, what do you do then? A level of dragonslayer? A level of Spellsword? Okay, but you've still got a lot of levels to fill out. EK is still decent filler for that. EK is also easier to get into / something you can get into a lot(ish) earlier than AC is.
Wih 02-18-08, 06:48 PM	The power of a PrC is determined by two things: What you get compared to your baseclass (IE in this case, comparing a Wizard to a Arcane Heirophant will make you think it's powerful). But also, it's based on what you have to give up to get into the class. In this case, you're suppose to put at least 3 (if not 5 for Wild Shape) levels into Druid. This means you'll be 3 (or 5) levels lower than a Wizard of your level, and will be throwing around spells of 2-4 levels lower. This is very sub-par. Power in DnD comes from specializing. Taking a few levels in Wizard will not (in most cases) improve your power as a Druid, nor will taking a few levels in Fighter (usually) improve your magical prowess. It will infact make you a weaker, subpar character. These Prestige classes make a Druid/Wizard (or Eldritch Knight making a Wizard/Fighter) actually viable - trying to play a Druid10/Wizard10 will make you Purple Worm Chowder. As for an offnote on the Abjurant Champion - It has only 5 levels so the benefits aren't that big. No familliar, no wizard bonus feats, no epic progression, and tougher pre-reqs (including a dud feat). Not saying that pay-off isn't worth it, but it's still not as all-powerful as some other options out there.
StevenO 02-18-08, 07:26 PM	It's also only 5 levels long. So after 5 levels of gishy goodness, what do you do then? A level of dragonslayer? A level of Spellsword? Okay, but you've still got a lot of levels to fill out. EK is still decent filler for that. EK is also easier to get into / something you can get into a lot(ish) earlier than AC is. If you want to compare the EK to the AbC I'd agree the AbC is better but also hindered by being only five levels long. You get a LOT in those five levels but you still need to finish out with something else. The Eldritch Knight and Abjurant Champion are BOTH generally available to characters begining at 7th level. It is just that the EK gets there with warrior1/Wizard5 while the AbC gets in with a much weaker casting base, either Battle Sorcerer4/warrior2 or warrior4/arcanist2. One thing to remember about the Arcane Hierophant is that levels in Mystic Theurge often follow. I haven't studied the AH much so I don't know its specifics but if you can get in with a 3/3 casting split and come out at 13/13 at 16th level you can get to 17/17 by using MT which of course means 9th level spells for both sides. It may have problems early but eventually all those additional casting levels in another spell class should make up for the three lost casting levels. I HATE that the Druid3/Wizard3/AH10/MT4 build is often used to justify what dual progression PrCs should be shooting for to justify some home made classes.
Cartigan 02-18-08, 08:38 PM	It's also only 5 levels long. So after 5 levels of gishy goodness, what do you do then? A level of dragonslayer? A level of Spellsword? Okay, but you've still got a lot of levels to fill out. EK is still decent filler for that. You lose a caster level and the only bonus you get is a single fighter feat. EK is also easier to get into / something you can get into a lot(ish) earlier than AC is. Well actually, you can't get into the EK earlier than AC. While the AC does require a +5 BAB and 1 level arcane casting, the EK requires you to be able to cast 3rd level spells (5th level Wizard at best) and be familiar with all martial weapons (one class level of any class with that ability). I believe that makes them even. No familliar Oh no, he doesn't have a physical manifestation of experience drain. And Abjurant Champion is designed for martial classes wanting to take up arcane casting. It is blatantly and obviously for that purpose. People really need to look at it from that angle.
StruckingFuggle 02-18-08, 11:15 PM	You lose a caster level and the only bonus you get is a single fighter feat. ...And d6hd, and 1:1 BAB... Granted, 'tis only d6 (should be d8, says I...)(*considers houseruling*), but! It's better than a d4. :) And if you're taking it in addition to AbC, you lose the level for spells known and spells/day, but you do get your caster_level back. :) Well actually, you can't get into the EK earlier than AC. Strictly, you're right. When I wrote that, I forgot that you could get into EK with more than one fighter level ... because technically you can, but you don't want to do that. And Abjurant Champion is designed for martial classes wanting to take up arcane casting. It is blatantly and obviously for that purpose. People really need to look at it from that angle. 'Designed', maybe, but it works oh so well from the other, better angle, too. :) Better, even.
Shadowhowler 02-19-08, 12:50 AM	I wouldn't say the PrC is 'Broken'... but there is certainly some 'power creep' present in it. I look at it as follows: Is the Arcane Hierophant the best road to uber-power in D&D? Uh... no, not by a long shot. It *IS*, however, with the combination of Mystic Therurge, the only way I currently know to end up with 9th level Divine and Arcane spells at 20th level without the use of some contriversial cheese. And thats something. If you absolutly want to play a Druid/Wizard... well... you would be silly NOT to use this PrC... it is AWESOME for this purpass.
JaronK 02-19-08, 12:58 AM	It *IS*, however, with the combination of Mystic Therurge, the only way I currently know to end up with 9th level Divine and Arcane spells at 20th level without the use of some contriversial cheese. And thats something. Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 isn't contriversial... If you absolutly want to play a Druid/Wizard... well... you would be silly NOT to use this PrC... it is AWESOME for this purpass. It's like Foclean Lyrisist that way. If you want to play a Druid/Bard/Rogue, it's awesome! Of course, by chosing to be that combination, you're already weaker than a pure Druid anyway by a lot, so it would need to be awesome. Same goes for the AH. JaronK
Staple 02-19-08, 03:05 AM	Something about AH that hasn't come up yet is that it also lets the Wizard cast in Druid Armor. However, another important thing about Arcane Heirophant is that you actually have to be 4 levels behind in a class. It requires Base Attack +4--which, unless you're doing it with Battle Sorceror, will take you 7 levels to qualify for, instead of the 6 required for most dual casters. As a whole, I find that Hierophant does what Mystic Theurge should have done--it gives you a dual caster that blends two classes (instead of just blending one aspect of the class) and that isn't made of paper like MT. I'd say it's better than MT, but not strictly better since it's Druid only and takes another level to enter.
JaronK 02-19-08, 03:18 AM	I'd say it's better than MT, but not strictly better since it's Druid only and takes another level to enter. Well, usually you take a few levels of MT first, then switch to AH as soon as possible to solve that whole later entry issue. The two classes go together reasonably well. JaronK
Bergtann 02-19-08, 06:31 AM	Cartigan, if you actually went to the CO boards occasionally, you would see that the EK is still being used in builds there. Which, to my mind is quite an accomplishment for a DMG PrC! It was one of the original 3.5 PrCs, and it manages to remain relevant at the edge of 4th ed. Granted, the CO boards thrives on variety, and there are hundreds of classes (as opposed to three) being run thorough there, but it is still good.
JaronK 02-19-08, 06:39 AM	It's worth noting that you can get into EK if you have full martial weapon proficiency from something other than a class level. For example, the Militia feat gives it, thereby allowing you to enter the class without the extra caster level loss (and you can enter it earlier than Abjurant Champion that way). Also, it depends on your race. I believe Outsiders all get full martial proficiency, for example, so a Tiefling Wizard could get in without needing other classes (and with LA Paydown, that would work quite well). JaronK
Cartigan 02-19-08, 08:51 AM	and it manages to remain relevant at the edge of 4th ed. I don't see how 4th edition is relevant. Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 isn't contriversial... Yet there is still the cheese :rolleyes: This is why I make statements like I did However, another important thing about Arcane Heirophant is that you actually have to be 4 levels behind in a class. It requires Base Attack +4--which, unless you're doing it with Battle Sorceror, will take you 7 levels to qualify for, instead of the 6 required for most dual casters. It is probably there to encourage getting Wildshape before going into the clsas.
Bergtann 02-19-08, 09:19 AM	I don't see how 4th edition is relevant.I'd like to direct your attention to this statement: And I would ignore CharOp people when asking for broken/not broke opinions *cough* JaronK *cough*. If it were up to them we would have 3 classes and none of them would be dual progression classes. The class isn't broken, but it is far more powerful than the Mystic Theurge, which isn't saying anything - every prestige class out after the core are more powerful than core prestige classes. I am saying that if the EK have been used in builds on the CharOp board throught the entire span of 3.5 that means that it compares well in power to every PrC put out through 3.5. And yet no-one calls it broken. That is pretty good. (And honestly, if anyone knows whats broken and whats not, it is the CharOp boards. Elsehwere you'll see classes like the Mystic Theurge, Ultimate Magus and Favored Soul described as broken)
StevenO 02-19-08, 01:53 PM	Something about AH that hasn't come up yet is that it also lets the Wizard cast in Druid Armor. However, another important thing about Arcane Heirophant is that you actually have to be 4 levels behind in a class. It requires Base Attack +4--which, unless you're doing it with Battle Sorceror, will take you 7 levels to qualify for, instead of the 6 required for most dual casters. . I knew AH has some other prereqs. The minor problem in needing a +4 BAB is that it doesn't stop the eventual Drd3/Wiz3/MT4/AH10 build because you get that last BAB by taking MT2 before going into AH. Needing two levels of MT early weaken the build a little but does nothing to hinder the end result.
The_Shaman 02-19-08, 02:00 PM	IIRC it requires level 2 arcane spells, so one can't enter it with druid 3/sorc 3 anyway.
JaronK 02-19-08, 06:03 PM	Yet there is still the cheese :rolleyes: This is why I make statements like I did I'm not seeing how Wizard 3/Druid 3/Mystic Theurge 4/Arcane Heirophant is not cheesy, but Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 is. They both end up with nearly identical casting, they use the same basic concepts (make use of two PrCs that give faster cast progression than a single base class to get 9th level spells in two areas), and they're esssencially the same, it's just that one of the builds uses a class that gets its spells faster, while the other uses a second class that progresses two spell classes at once. JaronK
The_Shaman 02-19-08, 06:32 PM	The main difference between the two builds imo is that while they end relatively equal, the wizard/ur-priest has a much more uniform progression. Sure, at 20 they can be similar (although I'd go with wizard/UP anyway, for the slightly more 9th level spells and DMM cheeze) but there's a significant difference between a wizard 3/druid3/AH 2, who barely gets out a fireball and a wizard 8, who's already throwing solid fogs and stoneskins for a while.
StevenO 02-19-08, 06:36 PM	I'm not seeing how Wizard 3/Druid 3/Mystic Theurge 4/Arcane Heirophant is not cheesy, but Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 is. They both end up with nearly identical casting, they use the same basic concepts (make use of two PrCs that give faster cast progression than a single base class to get 9th level spells in two areas), and they're esssencially the same, it's just that one of the builds uses a class that gets its spells faster, while the other uses a second class that progresses two spell classes at once. JaronK The 17/17 AH build is a cheesy with MT in the mix but if you take out the MT and just advance one side it certainly becomes a fair build that ends up 13/17. It also avoids some "cheese" by being behind the curve for several formative levels. Using both MT and AH is little cheesy but if just using one it definitely is not. The W10/UP2/MT8 build is cheesy because it only suffers a momentary setback before advancing again. Only dropping two levels instead of three is a big benefit. It really gets bad due to the Ur-Priest's accelerated spell progression which compresses 17 levels of clerical casting into 10 Ur-Priest levels which means at 20th level your effectively casting with a 17/18 split. You've also gain access to 9th level spells before you reach 20th level because you get Wiz 17 casting at character level 19 and IF you get a bonus 9th level Ur-Priest spell you gain 9th level spells then although a WIS 28 shouldn't be that easy. This build also has the tremendous advantage of sticking to a class (Wizard) long enough that the character can become good enough they can weather the brief two level drought in power increase. A Druid 3 taking a break to pick up 3 levels in wizard and another 2 in MT before starting MT has a LOT of catching up to do so playing up to a Drd3/Wiz3/MT4/AH10 is certainly not going to be an easy task. Now starting one at 14th is another matter entirely because many classes can become broken if they don't need to "pay their dues" to get to that level. A wizard 9/10 taking a two level break for a couple levels of Ur-Priest may set back their spellcasting a bit but is the lost spell level going to make such a big difference when those spells would often just be improvements on things you already could do?
JaronK 02-19-08, 06:41 PM	The 17/17 AH build is a cheesy with MT in the mix but if you take out the MT and just advance one side it certainly becomes a fair build that ends up 13/17. It also avoids some "cheese" by being behind the curve for several formative levels. Using both MT and AH is little cheesy but if just using one it definitely is not. In this case, someone said that the Wiz/Dru/MT/AH build was the only way to get dual 9th level casting that he knew of that wasn't contriversial cheese. I mentioned that Wiz/Ur/MT also worked, and Cartigan said it was cheesy. So, the comparison here is between those two builds, not between Wiz/Dru/AH and Wiz/Ur/MT. Meanwhile, the Wiz/Dru/MT/AH is weaker early in the game (because it's a dual casting class, instead of a pure caster class), but it does get Wild Shape and a half decent animal companion over the Wiz/Ur/MT build, so in the end it might be stronger (kind of a tossup). I mean, there are advantages to both builds, but neither one feels horribly cheesy, and I'd say that Wizard 20 (or more likely, Wiz X/any other PrC that advances casting Y) is stronger than either one. So what makes it cheese? The fact that you don't suck as hard as a Wizard 7/Druid 3/AH 10? JaronK
ninjarabbit 02-19-08, 06:49 PM	The Druid/wizard/AH/MT build may look powerful at level 20 but if you tried playing the build from level 1, 5, or even 10 you'll realize that the price for that power at level 20 is being weak at levels 4-19.
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 07:40 PM	At the BAB requirements: Wiz1/Druid5/AH 10/MT 4 is a perfectly viable build. No more cheesy than anything you guys are thinking up with Wiz 10/UP 2/MT 8. And for those wondering how the hell this is possible: Human Focused Conjurer 1/Druid 5/MT 4/AH 10 Feats 1st: Precocious Apprentice Human: Educated Flaw 1: Why not Spell Mastery. Other options include a Reserve feat. Flaw 2: Uncanny Forethought comes to mind. 3rd: Practiced Spellcaster 6th: Natural Spell 9th: Whatever 12: Whatever 15th: Whatever 18th: Whatever Fully legal RAW build. Due to Focused Conjurer's wording, Precocious Apprentice grants 3 2nd level spells, and because of FS's special wording, you lose the slot from PA. Because of how PA is worded, you no longer need to make a CL check when casting 2nd level Conjuration spells. And if you use Uncanny Forethought in the build, you can spontaneously cast any 2nd level Wiz spell from the Conjuration school. RAW, this meets the requirements for AH. This is also much more effective for casting, as it is only a level behind normal Druids.
StevenO 02-19-08, 07:56 PM	Using Precocious Apprentice to meet a 2nd level spell requirement is somewhat questionable legality at best and definitely cheese in any case. Using the Flaw system to get bonus feats which of course help meet prereqs I (and I believe many others) would call broken.
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 08:09 PM	Using Precocious Apprentice to meet a 2nd level spell requirement is somewhat questionable legality at best and definitely cheese in any case. Using the Flaw system to get bonus feats which of course help meet prereqs I (and I believe many others) would call broken. What? None of the flaws are even geared towards the PrC entry requirements. They are there for sheer versatility purposes. As to the question-ability of PA, that is why I had the build as a Focused Specialist. The wording on it makes this fully legal, if cheesy. Flaws are not broken unless you give more than the recommended of two. Doing so seriously puts stress on the ECL of your PCs. Extra feats don't hurt too much, just look at the Fighter. Extra feats in excess is broken, especially when unbound by what they can be. I know many DMs who incorporate Flaws into their games, and none of them will tell me that the system is broken (maybe poorly balanced, but not broken outright).
JaronK 02-19-08, 08:12 PM	As to the question-ability of PA, that is why I had the build as a Focused Specialist. The wording on it makes this fully legal, if cheesy. I'm not familiar with Focused Specialist, but how does it negate the PA problem of slot migration that makes PA usually RAW illegal as a method of qualifying for MT/AH? JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 08:22 PM	I'm not familiar with Focused Specialist, but how does it negate the PA problem of slot migration that makes PA usually RAW illegal as a method of qualifying for MT/AH? JaronK The wording on PA is that if you cast a spell using that spell slot before you would normally be able to cast 2nd level spells, then you make the CL check. FS says you lose a spell slot and gain two in its place. Because they are not the slots granted by PA, you no longer have to make the check. And because that slot given up is specifically tied to a single spell, you can now cast spells unhindered, provided they are from your specialty school. RAI may disagree with this, but RAW says otherwise.
JaronK 02-19-08, 08:25 PM	The wording on PA is that if you cast a spell using that spell slot before you would normally be able to cast 2nd level spells, then you make the CL check. FS says you lose a spell slot and gain two in its place. Because they are not the slots granted by PA, you no longer have to make the check. And because that slot given up is specifically tied to a single spell, you can now cast spells unhindered, provided they are from your specialty school. RAI may disagree with this, but RAW says otherwise. Oooh. Sneaky. But does PA actually give you a spell slot to lose? I thought it just lets you cast the spell... JaronK
Cartigan 02-19-08, 08:44 PM	1st: Precocious Apprentice Fully legal RAW build. Based on a munchkin favorable DM ruling on Precocious Apprentice. Oooh. Sneaky. But does PA actually give you a spell slot to lose? I thought it just lets you cast the spell... He is putting a mop on a wig and calling it a date. If PA gave you an official 2nd level spell slot, it would let you qualify for the PrCs. He is still relying on PA supposedly giving you a spell slot but applying it differently. Actually, in fact, he is explicitly breaking the RAW to use it like that. In effect, you have an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used to cast the chosen spell, and cannot be used for any other purpose. Ironically, it appears Precocious Apprentice is online as a preview to CA.
archerpwr 02-19-08, 08:59 PM	Based on a munchkin favorable DM ruling on Precocious Apprentice. Define the following for me: Munchkin Baiting Flaming Trolling Broken Overpowered Balanced Ad hominem attacks I want to speak the same language so we can properly debate. The bolded words are especially relevant to your comments to JaronK.
JaronK 02-19-08, 09:00 PM	If PA gave you an official 2nd level spell slot, it would let you qualify for the PrCs. Actually no, the reason PA doesn't qualify you is because the spell slot that it gives migrates to the other class, meaning you can't qualify for Arcane/Divine classes. You can use it legally to qualify for classes like the Anima Mage, though... but of course it doesn't matter if it's a Spell Slot for that, it only matters if you can cast the spell. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 09:54 PM	Oooh. Sneaky. But does PA actually give you a spell slot to lose? I thought it just lets you cast the spell... JaronK It does give a single 2nd level spell slot. And because this slot is lost to FS, it can't cross over to Druid, so nothing happens when you hit 4th level. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041114a]In[/url] effect, you have an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used to cast the chosen spell, and cannot be used for any other purpose. Choose one 2nd-level spell from a school that is not barred to you. You can cast that spell once per day. In effect, you have an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used to cast the chosen spell, and cannot be used for any other purpose. If you cannot cast 2nd-level spells yet, you must succeed on a caster level check (DC 8) to successfully cast the spell; if you fail, you miscast the spell to no effect. Your caster level with the chosen spell is your normal caster level, even if this is insufficient to cast the spell under normal circumstances. When you become able to cast 2nd-level spells, you lose the previous benefit described above. Instead, you simply have an extra 2nd-level spell slot, which you may use to prepare (or spontaneously cast, if you are a spontaneous caster) 2nd-level or lower spells as you normally would. You also gain a +2 bonus on all Spellcraft checks. Special: You can only take this feat as a 1st-level character. Note the "In Effect" clause. Nowhere else in the relevant rules text of the feat does it mention that you can't use the slot for something else. Due to that clause, this is RAI, not RAW.
Cartigan 02-19-08, 10:31 PM	Note the "In Effect" clause. Note the "for no other purpose" clause. With the "in effect," you can argue that it would let you qualify for classes earlier, but because of the "for no other purpose," you're little cheesy trick won't work at all. Nowhere else in the relevant rules text of the feat does it mention that you can't use the slot for something else . Except IN THE "IN EFFECT" CLAUSE. Try reading it again. In effect, you have an extra 2nd-level spell slot that must be used to cast the chosen spell, and cannot be used for any other purpose.(READ ME)
JaronK 02-19-08, 10:31 PM	Clever. See, now that is what I would call cheesy. RAW legal, but kinda cheesy because while we can't be totally sure of intent, it's unlikely at best that PA was meant to be used that way. Whereas something like Druid/Wizard/MT/AH doesn't seem cheesy, it's just a natural combination of those classes. JaronK
JaronK 02-19-08, 10:33 PM	Except that he's not using it for another purpose, he's getting rid of it entirely. Imagine if I said "this statue can only be used for religeous worship. You cannot use it for anything else!" If you then sold the statue and bought a potted plant (or whatever) you haven't used the statue for another purpose... you've sold the statue, and are now using the potted plant for another purpose. Unless you're worshiping the plant. I dunno. Your call. JaronK
Cartigan 02-19-08, 10:34 PM	Clever. See, now that is what I would call cheesy. RAW legal, but kinda cheesy because while we can't be totally sure of intent, it's unlikely at best that PA was meant to be used that way. It's not raw legal, he didn't even bother to finish reading the sentence after "in effect" because if he had, he would've seen that it explicitly states the spell slot can't be used for any other purpose. Except that he's not using it for another purpose, he's getting rid of it entirely. Exactly, he is losing it in exchange for something - he is using the spell slot to do something besides cast the spell. And I don't see anything in that cheesetastic RAW breaking that lets him cast second level spells.
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 11:01 PM	It's not raw legal, he didn't even bother to finish reading the sentence after "in effect" because if he had, he would've seen that it explicitly states the spell slot can't be used for any other purpose. Exactly, he is losing it in exchange for something - he is using the spell slot to do something besides cast the spell. And I don't see anything in that cheesetastic RAW breaking that lets him cast second level spells. Yes, actually, I did. And it says use the slot for any other purpose. Hard to use something you are giving up, now isn't it?
Shadowhowler 02-19-08, 11:02 PM	Well, usually you take a few levels of MT first, then switch to AH as soon as possible to solve that whole later entry issue. The two classes go together reasonably well. JaronK Doh. Ninja'ed. I was gonna say that. :(
Cartigan 02-19-08, 11:10 PM	Yes, actually, I did. And it says use the slot for any other purpose. Hard to use something you are giving up, now isn't it? You are using the spell slot to change in for other spell slots.
Shadowhowler 02-19-08, 11:15 PM	In this case, someone said that the Wiz/Dru/MT/AH build was the only way to get dual 9th level casting that he knew of that wasn't contriversial cheese. I mentioned that Wiz/Ur/MT also worked, and Cartigan said it was cheesy. So, the comparison here is between those two builds, not between Wiz/Dru/AH and Wiz/Ur/MT. Meanwhile, the Wiz/Dru/MT/AH is weaker early in the game (because it's a dual casting class, instead of a pure caster class), but it does get Wild Shape and a half decent animal companion over the Wiz/Ur/MT build, so in the end it might be stronger (kind of a tossup). I mean, there are advantages to both builds, but neither one feels horribly cheesy, and I'd say that Wizard 20 (or more likely, Wiz X/any other PrC that advances casting Y) is stronger than either one. So what makes it cheese? The fact that you don't suck as hard as a Wizard 7/Druid 3/AH 10? JaronK I agree. The build you put forth (Which I had not seen becuase, to be honest, I've never looked at the Ur-Priest acept at a glance) and the Wiz3/Druid3/MT4/AH10 seem to be near even to me becuase of the AH's Animal Companion Enhance abilities and the Druid Wildshape. Also... I don't see the build you mentioned with the Ur-Priest as especialy filled with cheese. What *I* ment by cheese was people trying to use things like Precocious Apprentice to count as the ability to cast 2nd level spells in order to save on level lose. THATS the cheese I was refering to. So... now I know of 2 builds that get you 9th level casting in both Arcane and Divine by 20 level without using a massive limberger attack. :P
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 11:15 PM	You are using the spell slot to change in for other spell slots. No, you are getting rid of it entirely. I don't think that giving something up qualifies as using it, last time I checked the English language. This argument isn't RAI but rather Linguistics, and much different from what you are thinking about. By definition, losing something is not the same as using it.
Shadowhowler 02-19-08, 11:21 PM	At the BAB requirements: Wiz1/Druid5/AH 10/MT 4 is a perfectly viable build. No more cheesy than anything you guys are thinking up with Wiz 10/UP 2/MT 8. And for those wondering how the hell this is possible: Human Focused Conjurer 1/Druid 5/MT 4/AH 10 Feats 1st: Precocious Apprentice Human: Educated Flaw 1: Why not Spell Mastery. Other options include a Reserve feat. Flaw 2: Uncanny Forethought comes to mind. 3rd: Practiced Spellcaster 6th: Natural Spell 9th: Whatever 12: Whatever 15th: Whatever 18th: Whatever Fully legal RAW build. Due to Focused Conjurer's wording, Precocious Apprentice grants 3 2nd level spells, and because of FS's special wording, you lose the slot from PA. Because of how PA is worded, you no longer need to make a CL check when casting 2nd level Conjuration spells. And if you use Uncanny Forethought in the build, you can spontaneously cast any 2nd level Wiz spell from the Conjuration school. RAW, this meets the requirements for AH. This is also much more effective for casting, as it is only a level behind normal Druids. Sniff... Sniff... Ah yes, THERE is the cheese I was talking about.
Sinfire Titan 02-19-08, 11:35 PM	Sniff... Sniff... Ah yes, THERE is the cheese I was talking about. Cheesy Puffs or just plain Cheese? Or do you like Cheese Whip?
Cartigan 02-19-08, 11:37 PM	No, you are getting rid of it entirely. I don't think that giving something up qualifies as using it, last time I checked the English language. You can't give up what you don't have. You don't have that spell slot to give up, you only have it to cast that one spell.
Shadowhowler 02-20-08, 12:15 AM	Cheesy Puffs or just plain Cheese? Or do you like Cheese Whip? I was thinking it was more of a Brie Fondue.
The_Shaman 02-20-08, 12:29 AM	Given the amount of cheeziness involves, I'd probably go for French in this case ;)
StevenO 02-20-08, 12:34 AM	This is getting way off topic but Wiz10/UP2/MT8 is only a little crazy but is definitely legal and doesn't require any "smoke and mirror" to pull off. I'd guess all the posts from #32 to this one illustrate what a "broken" build truely is.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 01:00 AM	You can't give up what you don't have. You don't have that spell slot to give up, you only have it to cast that one spell. Your statement is contradicting itself in ways I never thought a contradiction could do so. Seriously, that is like a 7-dimensional contradiction. Having a spell slot for the sole purpose of casting a single, predetermined spell still counts as having a spell slot.
JaronK 02-20-08, 02:09 AM	So... now I know of 2 builds that get you 9th level casting in both Arcane and Divine by 20 level without using a massive limberger attack. :P There's actually a bunch, though they all depend on your particular definition of "cheese." For example, you could use Ur Priest and Sublime Chord with a Mystic Theurge for 9th level spells in both... consider, for example, Ur Priest 2/Sublime Chord 2/Mystic Theurge 8. That only uses up 12 levels, and gives you 9th level spells in each, so whatever goes before it just has to meet all the prerequisits for Ur Priest and Sublime Chord. Or if you prefer, turn yourself into a Beholder via various means and be an Ur Priest/Beholder Mage/Mystic Theurge. There are a bunch of similar builds, all making use of fast progression PrCs combined with double advancement builds. I've even seen a triple threat build with 9th level psionic powers in addition to 9th level arcane and divine spells... yehaw. At that point, we've actually got something powerful. And then there are early entry tricks that don't involve the rather dubious Precocious Apprentice. Earth Spell, for example, can allow you to cast higher level spells than normal, so you could do something like Wizard 2/Druid 1/Mystic Theurge 10/Arcane Heirophant 7, if you're a human with Heighten Spell, Earth Sense, and Earth Spell as your first three feats. See Races of Stone for details. If you can use a flaw, then you can get in with just one level of Wizard (and 8 levels of Arcane Heirophant), but I think using flaws for early entry gets us closer to the limburger zone. Especially if you then go back and retrain away those less useful feats using PHBII now that you qualify for both classes without them, a process known as bootstrapping. Illumans can also use Heighten Spell for early entry, as can clerics if you get Divine Metamagic: Heighten Spell. And then of course anyone who can get free persistant spell some way (Divine Metamagic, Anima Mage, or whatever else) can just use Persistant Shapechange to effectively cast as a 20th level Wizard or Cleric all day by turning into a Black Ethergaunt or Solar, which gives you the effect of a dual casting class, but only at the point where you can already cast Shapechange. And yes, this works, I've been over why too many times but it does. And then there's Archivists, who can effectively cast off the entire Wizard/Sorcerer list using a few interesting tricks (though they'll need a Warlock to pull it off, and you have to be using either Masters of the Wild or Dragon Magic and Complete Mage to get the bulk of that list), and of course they can cast all normal divine spells too. So yeah... there are actually a number of ways to get the ability to cast 9th level divine and arcane spells. Which ones you count as cheesy or not cheesy depends on personal opinion. Of course, this is all one huge tangent, but I thought you should know! And you know what they say, knowing is... 15% of the battle. 80% is kicking ass and taking names, and 5% is looking more awesome than the other guy while you do it. JaronK
Bergtann 02-20-08, 02:42 AM	Yay! for educating people. :clap:
Cartigan 02-20-08, 10:41 AM	Your statement is contradicting itself in ways I never thought a contradiction could do so. Seriously, that is like a 7-dimensional contradiction. Having a spell slot for the sole purpose of casting a single, predetermined spell still counts as having a spell slot. But only for casting that one spell. You are using that spell slot to give up for other spell slots. None of which explains how you can cast 2nd level spells. Or if you prefer, turn yourself into a Beholder via various means and be an Ur Priest/Beholder Mage/Mystic Theurge. You might as well use the Precocious Apprentice "trick." And then of course anyone who can get free persistant spell some way (Divine Metamagic, Anima Mage, or whatever else) can just use Persistant Shapechange to effectively cast as a 20th level Wizard or Cleric all day by turning into a Black Ethergaunt or Solar, which gives you the effect of a dual casting class, Then there is the argument whether or not you are actually granted that ability by Shapechange. And then there's Archivists, who can effectively cast off the entire Wizard/Sorcerer list using a few interesting tricks (though they'll need a Warlock to pull it off, and you have to be using either Masters of the Wild or Dragon Magic and Complete Mage to get the bulk of that list), and of course they can cast all normal divine spells too. I thought you were supposed to not be using cheese? The "Archivist is the most powerful caster ever" argument is so full of cheese and rule bending it could open up a fondue & massage parlor.
AtsuiShoto 02-20-08, 11:53 AM	Cartigan, your condescending tone is disgusting. Read my sig and absorb it, or please go away.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 11:59 AM	But only for casting that one spell. You are using that spell slot to give up for other spell slots. None of which explains how you can cast 2nd level spells. No, I am simply giving it up. As I said before, this is a Linguistics argument, not RAI. Giving something up isn't using it. And the feat allows you to cast 2nd level spells with this trick. What you are trying to say is that it can't be used for any other purpose. What I am trying to tell you is that giving it up isn't the same as using it.
Shadowhowler 02-20-08, 12:04 PM	There's actually a bunch, though they all depend on your particular definition of "cheese." Ah... perception... there is the key. I suspect what I consider cheese and what most from the CharOp boards consider cheese are as far removed from one another as reality is from my chances of hooking up with Angelina Jolie. I've even seen a triple threat build with 9th level psionic powers in addition to 9th level arcane and divine spells... yehaw. At that point, we've actually got something powerful. *THIS* scares me... it scares me so much, I think I'm to scared to ask how this is done. :hides: And you know what they say, knowing is... 15% of the battle. 80% is kicking ass and taking names, and 5% is looking more awesome than the other guy while you do it. So True... :w00t:
Shadowhowler 02-20-08, 12:21 PM	No, I am simply giving it up. As I said before, this is a Linguistics argument, not RAI. Giving something up isn't using it. And the feat allows you to cast 2nd level spells with this trick. What you are trying to say is that it can't be used for any other purpose. What I am trying to tell you is that giving it up isn't the same as using it. I think the only point worth making with regards to this ongoing argument is that... the build you put forward *IS* in fact debateable... while the Wiz3/Druid3/MT4/AH10 or the Wiz10/Ur-Priest2/MT8 are not in question. You can argue your point, Cartigan can argue his... but I don't hear anyone saying you can't use the above two methods to achive 9th level casting in both classes by 20th. To me, at least part of something be 'not cheese' is that something is non-contraversal... meaning everyone agrees it can be done.
StruckingFuggle 02-20-08, 12:57 PM	*THIS* scares me... it scares me so much, I think I'm to scared to ask how this is done. :hides: Screw that! I wanna know, and I can't be the only one. How was it pulled off?
Cartigan 02-20-08, 01:53 PM	What I am trying to tell you is that giving it up isn't the same as using it. And I am arguing "giving it up in exchange for something" is effectively using it. And the feat allows you to cast 2nd level spells with this trick. How? Screw that! I wanna know, and I can't be the only one. How was it pulled off? Cheddar :shifty:
StruckingFuggle 02-20-08, 02:01 PM	Cheddar :shifty: You can't really say that without seeing the build; and even if you could it does nothing to satisfy my curiosity. :P
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 02:19 PM	And I am arguing "giving it up in exchange for something" is effectively using it. How? Cheddar :shifty: Define your version of Using something. Because it is vastly different from the one I am using for this argument. I've all ready explained how it works, you are the one refuting that it doesn't. Losing something is not using it. It is not having it in the first place, which prevents it from being used at all. Losing something means you don't have it at all, and therefore it cannot be used at all.
Cartigan 02-20-08, 02:43 PM	Define your version of Using something. Because it is vastly different from the one I am using for this argument. I've all ready explained how it works, you are the one refuting that it doesn't. Losing something is not using it. It is not having it in the first place, which prevents it from being used at all. Losing something means you don't have it at all, and therefore it cannot be used at all. The problem is that I say that you are exchanging your supposed spell slot for extra spells where you say that you are supposedly just losing it. Where does it go, why does it go, who knows?! You are using it as a sacrifice (ie you lose it) in order to gain bonuses. Also, how are you allowed to cast 2nd level spells. Precocious Apprentice doesn't give you the ability to cast 2nd level spells and neither does Focused Conjurer, unless I skimmed over that part.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 02:50 PM	The problem is that I say that you are exchanging your supposed spell slot for extra spells where you say that you are supposedly just losing it. Where does it go, why does it go, who knows?! You are using it as a sacrifice (ie you lose it) in order to gain bonuses. Also, how are you allowed to cast 2nd level spells. Precocious Apprentice doesn't give you the ability to cast 2nd level spells and neither does Focused Conjurer, unless I skimmed over that part. Your interpretation is much different from mine. If I had my books on me, I would post the wording of Focused Specialist that allows this exploit. But I am in my Photoshop class, so I can't. And It wasn't previewed in the Excerpts, so I can't do this here. Anyway, I am exploiting a literal interpretation of both the feat and the class feature, and abusing the English language in the process. A very shady trick that no sane DM will allow in a game, but that isn't the point of theoretical optimization.
JaronK 02-20-08, 03:12 PM	You might as well use the Precocious Apprentice "trick." Hey, I was just rattling off options. That said, it's legal to become a Beholder and then take Beholder Mage, while it's not so for most uses of PA (though I kinda like the whole "trade out the slot for other slots" concept). But like I said, I was rattling off options... each person's definition of cheese may vary. Then there is the argument whether or not you are actually granted that ability by Shapechange. There's an arguement by people who don't actually know how it works. Spells are Special Attacks. We know this by reading any monster entry for any monster that has spells... spells always go in the Special Attacks area. They are also Natural Abilities. We know this because they very clearly don't fit in the catagories of Supernatural Abilities, Extraodinary Abilities, or Supernatural abilities, as given by page 180 of the PHB. That same page says that any ability that is not one of the above three must be a Natural Ability. Special Attacks that are Natural Abilities are given by Polymoprh (and by extention, Shapechange), a fact that can be verified by reading "All about Polymorph" on the WotC website. Clear enough? I thought you were supposed to not be using cheese? The "Archivist is the most powerful caster ever" argument is so full of cheese and rule bending it could open up a fondue & massage parlor. No, I was listing off various methods, depending on anyone's version of cheese. That said, I'd love to hear your definition of cheese, because the FAQ on Archivists made it very clear that it's the designer's intent that Archivists gain spells from all sorts of odd sources (it was specifically talking about domain spells, but went on to say that it was the intent that they look all over). Basically, the whole point of the class was a class that works hard to find every spell it can, a divine mystical researcher, so finding spells off domain lists and other unusual lists is actually the point of the class. Now, my definition of cheesy tends to be "using rules in ways clearly contrary to the designer's intent, but still within the bounds of the rules as written." Since the Archivist gaining spells that way is actually the designer's intent, and yet also within your definition of cheesy, I have to wonder what that definition is. For reference material on the subject, there's this article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061212) (note that it's not the same FAQ, which I'm having trouble finding, but it gets the point across: The archivist also has free access only to the basic cleric class spell list, not to the cleric's often potent domain spells. Domain spells, as well as other divine spells not found on the cleric class list, can be learned by the archivist, but doing so takes time and money. and Unlike a cleric, however, an archivist must maintain a book of spells (called a prayer book), which tends to limit her spell selection somewhat (see below). Though an archivist begins play with access only to the cleric spell list, the archivist can add other divine spells (for example, druid spells, ranger spells, paladin spells, or even cleric domain spells) to her prayer book when she finds them on scrolls. The rules don't say so, but it's reasonable to allow an archivist to learn new divine spells from another archivist's prayer book. And then there's the 3.5 Main FAQ, which on page 9 states: Archivist The archivist's prayerbook ability states "an archivist can also add spells found on scrolls containing diving spells to his prayerbook." Does this include domain spells found on scrolls? Yes. The archivists are masters of drawing power from esoteric holy sources. By definition, there are few things more esoteric that a cleric's domain spells. JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 03:14 PM	Your interpretation is much different from mine. If I had my books on me, I would post the wording of Focused Specialist that allows this exploit. But I am in my Photoshop class, so I can't. And It wasn't previewed in the Excerpts, so I can't do this here. Anyway, I am exploiting a literal interpretation of both the feat and the class feature, and abusing the English language in the process. A very shady trick that no sane DM will allow in a game, but that isn't the point of theoretical optimization. Focused Specialist just gives you bonus spells for each spell level you can cast. You are still relying on the shady argument that Precocious Apprentice gives you the ability to cast 2nd level spells. Jaron, I see you cleverly ignored a point you very well know I was making - that your argument that the Archivist can cast all arcane spell is made of world record breaking cheese.
JaronK 02-20-08, 03:14 PM	Also, how are you allowed to cast 2nd level spells. Precocious Apprentice doesn't give you the ability to cast 2nd level spells and neither does Focused Conjurer, unless I skimmed over that part. You might want to reread PA then, because it lets you cast a 2nd level spell. You can cast it multiple times (though only once per day) so you can cast "spells." If the same spell cast multiple times doesn't count as "spells" then the Sorcerer gets REALLY screwed trying to enter this class. JaronK
JaronK 02-20-08, 03:22 PM	Ah... perception... there is the key. I suspect what I consider cheese and what most from the CharOp boards consider cheese are as far removed from one another as reality is from my chances of hooking up with Angelina Jolie. She was at my work a while ago. That said, there is a strange perception on these boards that CO board people are somehow less strict or have an unnatural definition of power and cheese. This is not true. For example, LogicNinja, the guy who wrote what's generally considered to be the single best guide to Wizards (though it's a bit out of date) considers the entire Polymorph line to be unusably overpowered. While I don't consider casting cheesy per se, I do consider much of it overpowered, and in the game I'm DMing the PCs can't use spells. The CO boards are about making your character capable of doing the things that you think your character should be capable of doing, and that's basically it (though often the boards end up making tricks just to see what's legal, but this later gets used in play only if it feels right and fits the character). It's like fashion designers... you put out your crazy ideas on the runway, but what gets worn in real life only uses those ideas as tools to make something more sane. That's why people who come into the CO boards saying "make me a broken character so I can screw over the other players" usually get mocked, kicked out, or otherwise reproached. *THIS* scares me... it scares me so much, I think I'm to scared to ask how this is done. :hides: A dash of Cerebromancer here, a dash of Sublime Chord there, through in a little Ur Priest and Mystic Theurge, and shake well! Triple threat builds are a lot harder to make, so you'd have to look them up for specific builds. Also, I don't use Psionics much so I can't just whip them up off the top of my head. JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 03:23 PM	You might want to reread PA then, because it lets you cast a 2nd level spell. You can cast it multiple times (though only once per day) so you can cast "spells." If the same spell cast multiple times doesn't count as "spells" then the Sorcerer gets REALLY screwed trying to enter this class. No, you are given a spell slot to cast a 2nd level spell, you don't get to cast 2nd level spells. Let's look at what the feat says as qualifying statements: If you cannot cast 2nd-level spells yet, you must succeed on a caster level check (DC 8) to successfully cast the spell Now that is a completely pointless limit if the feat gives you the ability to cast 2nd level spells. In fact, if the feat gives you the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it completely overrides its own drawback! When you become able to cast 2nd-level spells, you lose the previous benefit described above. Instead, you simply have an extra 2nd-level spell slot, Look, the feat even says what I did a second ago. It doesn't give you the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it just grants you a spell slot to cast a 2nd level spell that you would eventually be able to cast.
JaronK 02-20-08, 03:31 PM	Anyway, I am exploiting a literal interpretation of both the feat and the class feature, and abusing the English language in the process. A very shady trick that no sane DM will allow in a game, but that isn't the point of theoretical optimization. As a warning, I don't think Cartigan understands the difference between theory and practice. If you mention it, he'll believe you're trying to actually play it... at least, from what I've seen so far. JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 03:47 PM	As a warning, I don't think Cartigan understands the difference between theory and practice. If you mention it, he'll believe you're trying to actually play it... at least, from what I've seen so far. The problem may be that I find theory without practice pointless. And that I disagree with your interpretation.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 03:50 PM	As a warning, I don't think Cartigan understands the difference between theory and practice. If you mention it, he'll believe you're trying to actually play it... at least, from what I've seen so far. JaronK I've surmised that from my argument in this thread. While I do wish I could play it, I know that any of my players would jump at me for doing so, and would want to be allowed this as well. I may be a lenient DM, but I'm not an idiot. The problem may be that I find theory without practice pointless. And that I disagree with your interpretation. And how many Scientific Theories can actually be tested? Theories are there to set an example and give us something to work off of.
JaronK 02-20-08, 03:54 PM	The problem may be that I find theory without practice pointless. In regards to character creation, theory helps us know what's legal and possible, so that when you're creating a character and you want him to be able to do certain things, you know what's available. After all, isn't the goal that players be able to play characters that match their ideas of how those characters should work? In this case, I've demonstrated a number of possible ways to play dual casting characters. Some won't work for certain games, others will... but if a player wanted to play such a character, they could go through that list and find what works for them, then talk to their DM. If that doesn't work, they can find another such option. And sometimes, theory lets us understand balance. It also helps DMs understand what their players might be trying to do. Though one thing to consider is that I don't know your house rules, and you don't know mine, and neither of us know the house rules of the rest of the people reading. It's quite possible that these builds would all be completely appropriate for some DMs game, assuming the other builds are of similar power level and the DM likes it. If everyone's having fun, who are you (or me?) to criticize? That said, I still want to hear your definition of "cheesy" and "munchkin" since you don't seem to be using the standard definitions (certainly, with regard to Archivists). It might help us communicate. JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 04:00 PM	And how many Scientific Theories can actually be tested? Theories are there to set an example and give us something to work off of. I never said I liked science, or math for that matter. In regards to character creation, theory helps us know what's legal and possible Then I am arguing that your theory isn't legal. And I have outlined why several times.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 04:12 PM	I never said I liked science, or math for that matter. Then I am arguing that your theory isn't legal. And I have outlined why several times. Then you say that our theory has been disproved. I still think it is a viable theory, and so shall others. Who, I don't know. But someone will. And you still haven't answered his question about your definition of Munchkin and Cheesy.
JaronK 02-20-08, 04:26 PM	Then I am arguing that your theory isn't legal. And I have outlined why several times. Which of mine isn't legal? I've commented on Sinfire's theory, and I can see you'd contest that one, but which one of mine is illegal? JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 04:28 PM	Then you say that our theory has been disproved. I still think it is a viable theory, and so shall others. Who, I don't know. But someone will. I have yet to see you, or anyone else, explain how either Precocious Apprentice or Focus Specialist, and especially a combination of the two, lets you cast 2nd level spells before you can as a function of your class. Which of mine isn't legal? I've commented on Sinfire's theory, and I can see you'd contest that one, but which one of mine is illegal? I assumed we were talking about Precocious Apprentice.
Bergtann 02-20-08, 04:35 PM	Cartigan, this is one of those cases where knowing how to back down gracefully makes you look a lot better than losing point after point.
JaronK 02-20-08, 04:41 PM	I have yet to see you, or anyone else, explain how either Precocious Apprentice or Focus Specialist, and especially a combination of the two, lets you cast 2nd level spells before you can as a function of your class. Um... you might want to read PA again then. That's just what it does... it lets you cast 2nd level spells. In fact, you can cast as many second level spells as a 4th level Sorcerer... no more, no less. It furthermore gives you a second level spell slot with specific restrictions (can only be used to cast one specific spell). Focused Specialist trades out that slot for something else, namely a non-migrating slot, which allows it to then qualify for Mystic Theurge. Cheesy, but by RAW it's quite legal, though you have to accept that getting rid of something isn't the same as using it. I assumed we were talking about Precocious Apprentice. I don't have any "theory" about PA. If you're talking about early entry into PrCs using PA followed by Focused Specialist Wizards, that one is Sinfire's theory (though I'm agreeing with it, by RAW. It does seem to work). The closest thing to a "theory" from me in this thread is the Archivist thing, but I think I've proved that one rather resoundingly (with quotes from the designers and everything!), and I sorta assumed that your lack of comment to that signaled you'd either accepted it or just couldn't figure out a way to argue against it. Though again, knowing what you mean by "cheesy" and by "munchkin" would really help here, because we may be argueing at cross purposes. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 04:44 PM	I have yet to see you, or anyone else, explain how either Precocious Apprentice or Focus Specialist, and especially a combination of the two, lets you cast 2nd level spells before you can as a function of your class. I assumed we were talking about Precocious Apprentice. Due to Focused Conjurer's wording, Precocious Apprentice grants 3 2nd level spells, and because of FS's special wording, you lose the slot from PA. Because of how PA is worded, you no longer need to make a CL check when casting 2nd level Conjuration spells. The wording on PA is that if you cast a spell using that spell slot before you would normally be able to cast 2nd level spells, then you make the CL check. FS says you lose a spell slot and gain two in its place. Because they are not the slots granted by PA, you no longer have to make the check. And because that slot given up is specifically tied to a single spell, you can now cast spells unhindered, provided they are from your specialty school. RAI may disagree with this, but RAW says otherwise. The combination swaps out the slot you get to FS in exchange for two more spells/day of your specialty school, and allows you to cast them unhindered. This is ignoring your claim of it not working together, so please don't bring it up. You in effect, lose a spell per day per spell level, and gain two more spells per day per level, provided that they are of your Specialty school. The wording on FS does not specify what slot is lost, and thus takes the first one granted from the Wizard class of each level of Wizard. PA then qualifies as the only spell of 2nd level that you can cast, and FS deletes the slot it grants and grants two new ones. Due to the spell and CL checks being tied specifically to that spell slot, they no longer apply to the ones granted by FS. And due to FS's wording, yet again, when you reach Druid 3 you retain the ability to cast 2nd level Wizard spells, as the slot can't go anywhere if it no longer exists.
Cartigan 02-20-08, 04:51 PM	Um... you might want to read PA again then. That's just what it does... it lets you cast 2nd level spells. In fact, you can cast as many second level spells as a 4th level Sorcerer... no more, no less. It furthermore gives you a second level spell slot with specific restrictions (can only be used to cast one specific spell). No, it doesn't. If PA let you cast 2nd level spells (in the same manner that was a pre-req for classes), then the feat has no drawback. The drawback you of course realize is the caster check to try and successfully cast it. Guess what that is based on? Whether or not you can cast 2nd level spells. If you cannot cast 2nd-level spells yet, you must succeed on a caster level check (DC 8) to successfully cast the spell If the feat gave you the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it would completely invalidate its own drawback. Focused Specialist trades out that slot for something else, namely a non-migrating slot, which allows it to then qualify for Mystic Theurge. Cheesy, but by RAW it's quite legal, though you have to accept that getting rid of something isn't the same as using it. Of spell levels you can cast, which is not 2nd level. Your whole argument is still based around a false assumption.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 04:59 PM	No, it doesn't. If PA let you cast 2nd level spells (in the same manner that was a pre-req for classes), then the feat has no drawback. The drawback you of course realize is the caster check to try and successfully cast it. Guess what that is based on? Whether or not you can cast 2nd level spells. If the feat gave you the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it would completely invalidate its own drawback. Of spell levels you can cast, which is not 2nd level. Your whole argument is still based around a false assumption. This is indeed correct, which is why FS works wonders with it. FS doesn't say you have to be able to cast spells of that level in order to gain the slots, it just requires you to have a spell slot to give up for the extra ones. Because of the way Bonus spells are worded, having a high Int doesn't qualify for ti, but because of PA, this grants 2nd level spells.
Cartigan 02-20-08, 05:01 PM	This is indeed correct, which is why FS works wonders with it. FS doesn't say you have to be able to cast spells of that level in order to gain the slots, it just requires you to have a spell slot to give up for the extra ones. Because of the way Bonus spells are worded, having a high Int doesn't qualify for ti, but because of PA, this grants 2nd level spells. Then we go onto the argument I was posting when you posted... The combination swaps out the slot you get to FS in exchange for two more spells/day of your specialty school, and allows you to cast them unhindered. This is ignoring your claim of it not working together, so please don't bring it up. You in effect, lose a spell per day per spell level, and gain two more spells per day per level, provided that they are of your Specialty school. The wording on FS does not specify what slot is lost, and thus takes the first one granted from the Wizard class of each level of Wizard. PA then qualifies as the only spell of 2nd level that you can cast, and FS deletes the slot it grants and grants two new ones. Due to the spell and CL checks being tied specifically to that spell slot, they no longer apply to the ones granted by FS. And due to FS's wording, yet again, when you reach Druid 3 you retain the ability to cast 2nd level Wizard spells, as the slot can't go anywhere if it no longer exists. Your entire argument is based on "PA gives you the ability to cast 2nd level spells." And were that the case, having a high caster ability would let you cast another 2nd level spell normally and being a specialist would let you cast 2 more 2nd level spells normally. You wouldn't even need Focused Specialist. Based on your use of Focused Specialist, you can cast 9th level spells at first level. If that's wrong, then you can't cast use those slots to cast 2nd level spells either.
JaronK 02-20-08, 05:04 PM	No, it doesn't. If PA let you cast 2nd level spells (in the same manner that was a pre-req for classes), then the feat has no drawback. The drawback you of course realize is the caster check to try and successfully cast it. Guess what that is based on? Whether or not you can cast 2nd level spells. If the feat gave you the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it would completely invalidate its own drawback. Obviously, the intent of the wording was that you could cast 2nd level spells via some other source. You're right... by RAW, it negates its own drawback, but here RAI is actually crystal clear. It's like Dragon Disciples that way. By RAW, the level 10 ability disqualifies you for the class, but that's obviously not the intent. Of spell levels you can cast, which is not 2nd level. Your whole argument is still based around a false assumption. You can cast, for example, Glitterdust, as a second level spell. That's... well, that's a second level spell. And you can cast it. You can cast second level spells. In fact, all PA does is give you a second level spell slot (and then applies a few drawbacks). Argueing that PA does not give a second level spell slot when in fact that's all it does seems a little... bizarre. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 05:10 PM	Based on your use of Focused Specialist, you can cast 9th level spells at first level. If that's wrong, then you can't cast use those slots to cast 2nd level spells either. No, as you have no spell slots available to cast of 9th level. Were there a PA for that, then it would happen the way you say it would. But seeing as you have no spell slots available to sac to FS, it doesn't.
Cartigan 02-20-08, 05:11 PM	Obviously, the intent of the wording was that you could cast 2nd level spells via some other source. You're right... by RAW, it negates its own drawback, but here RAI is actually crystal clear. By RAW, it never explicitly says you gain the ability to cast 2nd level spells, you are asserting it does because of ambiguous wording. I am asserting a different RAW based on what is written in the feat. By RAW, the level 10 ability disqualifies you for the class, but that's obviously not the intent. It's a 10 level class, becoming a dragon is supposed to disqualify you from taking the class. That is the intent. Now if you become a dragon (sort of) at level 5, you would have a point. You can cast, for example, Glitterdust, as a second level spell. That's... well, that's a second level spell. And you can cast it. You can cast second level spells. I can cast Glitterdust as the spell as a racial ability. Can I cast 2nd level spells? No, as you have no spell slots available to cast of 9th level. Were there a PA for that, then it would happen the way you say it would. But seeing as you have no spell slots available to sac to FS, it doesn't. If you then "lose" your 2nd level PA spell slot, you no longer have 2nd level slots to use to cast using specialist wizard, focused specialist, or bonus spells by high ability scores.
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 05:22 PM	If you then "lose" your 2nd level PA spell slot, you no longer have 2nd level slots to use to cast using specialist wizard, focused specialist, or bonus spells by high ability scores. Actually, you still receive the slots from FS, even though you lose PA's slot. This is because FS makes you lose the slot only when the slot is first gained. Priority checks to see if you have the slot to expend to FS, sees one, eats it alive, and spits out the slots from FS. You then have access to 2nd level spells, provided they are from your Specialty school. Due to the wording on Bonus spells, you don't gain anything else until you are at Wiz 3. And due to the fact that the slot has been lost, it can't migrate over to Druid when that hits 3rd level. You may have an argument about PA then losing any effect, but at this point PA is irrelevant. Later on in the AH's career, they may feel the need to use DCFS to get rid of PA, and due to FS only checking for the slot at the level it is gained, you still qualify for AH and MT.
JaronK 02-20-08, 05:26 PM	By RAW, it never explicitly says you gain the ability to cast 2nd level spells, you are asserting it does because of ambiguous wording. I am asserting a different RAW based on what is written in the feat. It says you get a second level spell slot which you can use to cast a 2nd level spell. What's so ambiguous? It's a 10 level class, becoming a dragon is supposed to disqualify you from taking the class. That is the intent. Now if you become a dragon (sort of) at level 5, you would have a point. If you're disqualified from a class, you lose all benefits of the class, regardless of whether you finished the class or not. Thus, upon gaining level 10 by RAW a Dragon Disciple loses all of his class features for the last 10 levels retroactively... which of course loses him the level 10 ability, so he's not a Dragon. Which requalifies him, which disqualifies him, etc. Obviously, not RAI. Same issue here. I can cast Glitterdust as the spell as a racial ability. Can I cast 2nd level spells? Does it say you cast it as a Sorcerer of X level, or that it's a spell like ability? Spell like abilities are gained via races, usually, and that wouldn't work, because it's a spell like ability, not a spell. However, if you were a Black Etheragaunt (who casts as a level 20 Wizard), then yes, you could cast Glitterdust as a 2nd level spell, and would qualify. If you then "lose" your 2nd level PA spell slot, you no longer have 2nd level slots to use to cast using specialist wizard, focused specialist, or bonus spells by high ability scores. Um, no. You have traded it away for Focused Specialist spell slots. It's basically bootstrapping, which is generally cheesy but legal by RAW. You know, I just finally noticed your signature. A guy who's been going off about how he hates the CO boards, and says he doesn't see the point in theoretical optimization... has a link to a very useful thread started on the CharOps boards which was moved to the Theoretical Ops boards for being pure theory in his signature. You're using the resources while simultaneously insulting everyone who created said resources. Hypocritical much? JaronK
Cartigan 02-20-08, 05:31 PM	You know, I just finally noticed your signature. A guy who's been going off about how he hates the CO boards, and says he doesn't see the point in theoretical optimization... has a link to a very useful thread started on the CharOps boards which was moved to the Theoretical Ops boards for being pure theory in his signature. You're using the resources while simultaneously insulting everyone who created said resources. Hypocritical much? Pointless much? That is only there so I can have an easy reference to replacement abilities. The table is not theory, the thread may have devolved into theory but I have never read it - in fact, I have no idea where it is; I only know it is in CharOp because of the basic gleemax theme. I only look at the table and the table contains the feats I want to remember that explicitly let you replace X ability requirement with Y ability. Actually, you still receive the slots from FS, even though you lose PA's slot. This is because FS makes you lose the slot only when the slot is first gained. Priority checks to see if you have the slot to expend to FS, sees one, eats it alive, and spits out the slots from FS. You then have access to 2nd level spells, provided they are from your Specialty school. Due to the wording on Bonus spells, you don't gain anything else until you are at Wiz 3. And due to the fact that the slot has been lost, it can't migrate over to Druid when that hits 3rd level. You may have an argument about PA then losing any effect, but at this point PA is irrelevant. Later on in the AH's career, they may feel the need to use DCFS to get rid of PA, and due to FS only checking for the slot at the level it is gained, you still qualify for AH and MT. Then being a specialist Wizard with PA automatically gives you 2nd level spells, no need to take FS at all.
JaronK 02-20-08, 05:47 PM	Pointless much? That is only there so I can have an easy reference to replacement abilities. The table is not theory, the thread may have devolved into theory but I have never read it - in fact, I have no idea where it is; I only know it is in CharOp because of the basic gleemax theme. I only look at the table and the table contains the feats I want to remember that explicitly let you replace X ability requirement with Y ability. The very people you insulted at the beginning of this thread (myself specifically included here) helped make resources like that. I think I even contributed one or two "stat to Y" bonuses. But you hold yourself superior because you didn't actually read the rest... you just looked at the table that represents hard work on the behalf of the OP and others, used that work without contributing or even thinking about contributing, and ran off. The fact that you didn't even notice where it's from and didn't even bother to contribute or read the rest is not a point in your favor. But yes, it's theoretical optimization. It's in a different layout (a series of potencial abilities, as opposed to sample builds as given in this thread), but it's the exact same thing. The way you use it is the same way everyone else uses said sample builds... they have within them potencial abilities that can be used for characters that are actually played. So yeah, you leach off the work of the CO boards, then turn around and insult the very people who did that work. Instead, try thanking them. Also, an appology would be appreciated. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 05:58 PM	Then being a specialist Wizard with PA automatically gives you 2nd level spells, no need to take FS at all. No, because the second you hit Druid 3, you lose PA's benefits and thus have to take 2 more levels of Wizard. FS makes it so this doesn't happen.
Neraagile 02-20-08, 06:51 PM	First of all, you have turned this into a PA discussion, not a discussion on the Arcane Hierophant (please don't kill me ....) and it would be nice, if you either go with it somewhere else or stop (at least agree to disagree and call it a day....). If you're a human with Heighten Spell, Earth Sense, and Earth Spell as your first three feats. See Races of Stone for details. If you can use a flaw, then you can get in with just one level of Wizard (and 8 levels of Arcane Heirophant), okay, explanation (I saw a "how?" to earth spell somewhere and its a lot less doubious than PA) and btw Jaronk, the build needs to be Wiz 2/ Druid 1 or Wiz 1/ Druid 2, because MT requires 6 ranks in Knowledge (arcana) and (religion) IMO the better way to do it is Wiz 2/Druid 1/MT 7/AH 10 .... that was a sidestep ... okay Earth spell. off the top of my head... Earth Spell: prerequisite: Earth Sense, Heighten Spell benefit: Any spell you heighten is treated as a spell level higher than normal in addition to the normal spell slot ajustment (thus a 0-th level spell will be heightenede to a 1st level spell slot, but effectively a 2nd level spell) + some more gimmicks that can be quite beneficial.
WizO_Mimir 02-20-08, 07:30 PM	Alright, there are several issues with this thread. They are: The topic of conversation for the last 3+ pages has nothing to do with the thread's original topic. People are arguing the same points over and over and over again. People are taking posts personally and becoming agitated. Points one and two I have no control over, other than to put in a request to Community Management to split this thread based on the topics being discussed. I am also going to encourage people to agree to disagree and just move on. Point three has entered the territory of trolling, baiting, and flaming and needs to cease. No one needs to prove their worth by changing someone else's mind. If you cannot disagree politely or carry on a civil dialog, then do not post. Continuing to do so can and will result in a warn (or warns). Post nice!
Jaxgaret 02-20-08, 08:05 PM	I've even seen a triple threat build with 9th level psionic powers in addition to 9th level arcane and divine spells... yehaw. At that point, we've actually got something powerful. Screw that! I wanna know, and I can't be the only one. How was it pulled off? Yeah, seriously, how? That seems impossible in 20 levels. Is there some fast progression Psionic class that I am unaware of? I tried using the obvious combo of Cerebremancer, MT, SC, UP + base classes a while ago... I don't remember it ever getting to 9th-level casting in all three. I think it was 9th in two and 7th/8th in the third, no matter how you slice it.
Jaxgaret 02-20-08, 08:08 PM	I never said I liked science, or math for that matter. You... don't like... science or math? I hope you mean this in the "I don't like studying science or math" sense. Otherwise, what are you doing on the internet or using a computer in the first place then? They're based on science and math.
JaronK 02-20-08, 08:10 PM	First of all, you have turned this into a PA discussion, not a discussion on the Arcane Hierophant (please don't kill me ....) and it would be nice, if you either go with it somewhere else or stop (at least agree to disagree and call it a day....). Rawr, slay him! I mean, um, good point. btw Jaronk, the build needs to be Wiz 2/ Druid 1 or Wiz 1/ Druid 2, because MT requires 6 ranks in Knowledge (arcana) and (religion) Good point. Now, there's a feat that gives you +1 rank in a knowledge skill... I believe it's in cityscape. With retraining, that could be worth doing, in which case you could actually go Wizard 1/Druid 1/Arcane Heirophant 10/Mystic Theurge 8. You'd need to be human with two flaws to make it work (since you need Heighten Spell, Earth Sense, Earth Spell, and the feat for an extra rank), and you'd REALLY want to retrain. But hey, that one I think is well into the cheese zone, as it requires two flaws AND retraining to work well. RAW legal, but it's a bit much. Still, if it's a really high powered game and you REALLY want to be a dual caster without being an Archivist, then it works. The nice advantage there is that you can play it at low levels without being horribly weak... much like an Archivist. Really, any discussion of dual caster class is going to lead to "why not just play an Archivist?" which perhaps answers the original question. No, Arcane Heirophant isn't that powerful, at least compared to another base class, which pretty much does the same thing at higher caster level (though fewer spells per day). JaronK
JaronK 02-20-08, 08:15 PM	Yeah, seriously, how? That seems impossible in 20 levels. Is there some fast progression Psionic class that I am unaware of? I tried using the obvious combo of Cerebremancer, MT, SC, UP + base classes a while ago... I don't remember it ever getting to 9th-level casting in all three. I think it was 9th in two and 7th/8th in the third, no matter how you slice it. Quite honestly, I've seen it done, but since I'm not very familiar with psionics, I can't just pull such a build out. The thread was on the CO boards, and it was called "triple threats" or similar. All you really need is to get a high fort save quickly with a psionic class so as to get into Ur Priest as fast as possible (and then through Cerebremancer to keep raising it). Max divine, then max arcane with psionics. It was impressive to see in action, and it was legal, but I can't give you better details... you'd have to search for it. Of course, the cheap shot way is to just get 9th level psionics and divine casting, then use Persistant Shapechange into a Black Ethergaunt for Arcane casting. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 02-20-08, 08:22 PM	Quite honestly, I've seen it done, but since I'm not very familiar with psionics, I can't just pull such a build out. The thread was on the CO boards, and it was called "triple threats" or similar. All you really need is to get a high fort save quickly with a psionic class so as to get into Ur Priest as fast as possible (and then through Cerebremancer to keep raising it). Max divine, then max arcane with psionics. It was impressive to see in action, and it was legal, but I can't give you better details... you'd have to search for it. Of course, the cheap shot way is to just get 9th level psionics and divine casting, then use Persistant Shapechange into a Black Ethergaunt for Arcane casting. JaronK Can't the Master Transmorgraphist from CArc create a new creature for the purpose of Polymorphing? Isn't there a way to get the abilities fo other creatures included in that new creature, because if so a bit of Psionic cheese to enter that class may be able to grant Full Divine via Solar and 17th Arcane via Etherguant. I am AFB right now, so when I get back tot he books I'll look it up.
Neraagile 02-20-08, 08:46 PM	Master Transmogriffist replaces either: Natural Armor Movements add natural attack add extraordenary attack add extraordenary special quality ability score Arent we still kinda off topic ? Edit: Though one thing I would really like to try with Arcane Heirophant is something with Duskblade, to get the Ultimate Familiar ^^
Jaxgaret 02-20-08, 10:01 PM	Deleted.
archerpwr 02-21-08, 12:17 AM	Of course, the cheap shot way is to just get 9th level psionics and divine casting, then use Persistant Shapechange into a Black Ethergaunt for Arcane casting. JaronK Druid 20: Wis 19 minimum. 9th level spells: All shapechange Equipment of note: Greater rods of extend Notable shapechange forms: Planetar (17th level cleric casting) Black Ethergaunt (17th level wizard casting)
Shadowhowler 02-21-08, 12:22 AM	She was at my work a while ago. :eek: What?!?!?!?
JaronK 02-21-08, 12:35 AM	Druid 20: Wis 19 minimum. 9th level spells: All shapechange Equipment of note: Greater rods of extend Notable shapechange forms: Planetar (17th level cleric casting) Black Ethergaunt (17th level wizard casting) You'd probably want to do it with Divine Metamagic, so I'd go something like Archivist 19/Sacred Exorcist 1 using Divine Persistant Shapechange. But that still doesn't give you psionics. JaronK
JaronK 02-21-08, 12:36 AM	:eek: What?!?!?!? I'm a theater technician (which includes stage, TV, etc). A lot of celebrities have been at my work. JaronK
Shadowhowler 02-21-08, 01:00 AM	I'm a theater technician (which includes stage, TV, etc). A lot of celebrities have been at my work. JaronK Fair enough. I'm only a little bit jealous... it will pass. ;)
archerpwr 02-21-08, 06:14 PM	You'd probably want to do it with Divine Metamagic, so I'd go something like Archivist 19/Sacred Exorcist 1 using Divine Persistant Shapechange. But that still doesn't give you psionics. JaronK Archivist doesn't even need to pull these tricks. It's got all spells in a pure RAW world already. Psionics are balanced (ie weak) enough not to be worth the investment.
JaronK 02-21-08, 06:19 PM	It can be difficult to actually get the spells... an Archivist can shapeshift into a Solar, then craft all the scrolls of cleric spells that it wants. JaronK
Bergtann 02-22-08, 03:44 AM	I would suspect that there might be a slight hitch when the Archivist/Solar prays for spells, and the god goes "Who are you? WTF!" Unless you are doing the "Clerics need not follow a god" variant.
Jaxgaret 02-22-08, 03:59 AM	I would suspect that there might be a slight hitch when the Archivist/Solar prays for spells, and the god goes "Who are you? WTF!" Unless you are doing the "Clerics need not follow a god" variant. Gods have Ultimate True Seeinghttp://www.midischoolhouse.com/trademark.gif when dealing with those who directly pray to them for spells.
JaronK 02-22-08, 04:01 AM	I would suspect that there might be a slight hitch when the Archivist/Solar prays for spells, and the god goes "Who are you? WTF!" Unless you are doing the "Clerics need not follow a god" variant. You know, there's not much that stops the Archivist from actually being from that religeon. Works both by RAW and logically. "Hi Pelor, this is your buddy Bob. I've turned into a Solar for better spell access and greater justice. Can I get a few spells? I've got some undead to smash!" JaronK
Bergtann 02-22-08, 04:06 AM	Good point. I didn't consider that the Archivist could be from the same religon. However, I suspect most gods wouldn't want their worshippers to be able to leapfrog the limits they've set on spell access. It works fine with arcane spells, but the potential hitch for divine ones is that in many gameworlds there is actually an in-game authority overseeing Cleric spell granting. Of course, Ur-priests manage...
JaronK 02-22-08, 04:11 AM	Of course, Ur-priests manage... Indeed, and Solars aren't actually clerics. They just cast as clerics do. They don't get Turn Undead (IIRC). As such, they may not be granted spells... they may just have them. After all, spells for Solars aren't class abilities, they're Natural Abilities, so they're actually inhearent to the creature itself. So it might not come up. JaronK
Bergtann 02-22-08, 04:24 AM	You could say Solars are so close to the divine that they generate Cleric spells on their own.
JaronK 02-22-08, 04:26 AM	I'd assume so, actually. Again, Natural casters, not actual clerics. But even if they are like Clerics enough to need that god, the Archivist can just be sure that he's actually worshiping a good god, and it shouldn't be a problem. JaronK
Neraagile 02-22-08, 07:12 AM	Back to topic.... Arcane Heirophant combines the Familiar and the Animal companion, great stuff! [go home and cry Improved Familiar] (fleshracker, which doesn't have enough power already....)..... combined with some levels of Fleshwarper and you have a really cool famion (familiar/companion).... tentackels and really big .... Actually.... heres something to think about.... Wizard - 3, Druid 4, Arcane Heirophant 3, Beastmaster 6, Fleshwarper 4 .... lots of Abefamions (abberant familar/animal companion):plotting: (what I could think of just out of the blue without any books up ...)
StruckingFuggle 02-22-08, 12:10 PM	Unless you are doing the "Clerics need not follow a god" variant. Small pet peeve... it's not a 'variant', it's an Explicit Core Rule.
Shadowhowler 02-22-08, 01:12 PM	Small pet peeve... it's not a 'variant', it's an Explicit Core Rule. He's got a point, people. Right out of the PHB you have the option to not follow a specific god, but rather worship a force of nature or philosophic 'alignment'. You could worship Law or Evil, or just worship Nature... it's right there for you in the PHB. NOT a variant.
Bergtann 02-22-08, 01:47 PM	Actually, it is. As far as I know, most Clerics follow a god. Both PC and in the gameworld. Hence, a variant on the norm. What it is -not- is a houserule, or an optional rule, or a variant rule.
Shadowhowler 02-22-08, 02:08 PM	Actually, it is. As far as I know, most Clerics follow a god. Both PC and in the gameworld. Hence, a variant on the norm. What it is -not- is a houserule, or an optional rule, or a variant rule. Hmph. First off... subjective experince in this case is not perticularly relevent. I'd grant you that more people tend to have their clerics worship spcific gods then not, but in my experince the split has been about 75/25. Either way, your original post made it sound like not woshiping a spcific god *IS* a variant rule... the sort you might find in Unearthed Arcana. A lot of players think that also. We are mearling pointing out that it is not the case, and the choice to worship a specifc god or an abstract force IS a CORE PHB option, avalible to all.
Xeorsos 02-26-08, 03:15 AM	Here's my opinion on the class: Arcane Hierophant is one of my favorite classes to play, if only for flavor reasons. You give up a sizeable chunk of power for longevity, versatility, and fantastic flavor. Not to mention that the class comes bundled with one of the most powerful companions in the game. You're a dual caster, which means you're dealing with some serious MAD (both of those stats need to be high), and let's face it: Druid casting is weak. It's by far the weakest of all the full casters, because it was created to be an accompaniment to some seriously powerful class features; namely, wild shape. This isn't to say that there aren't any good spells on the Druid list, because there are, it's just that over-all, yeah, it's a weak spell list. Topping off Arcane Hierophant with Mystic Theurge is a great idea if you're wanting to focus on Wizard casting because you'll eventually get 9th level spells... at level 20. It's a great versatility at a great price, and with the way the game scales, it's totally fair. Don't be afraid of letting an Arcane Hierophant into your game. If played well, it can be on par with a standard arcanist. If played poorly, the character won't be able to survive.
Vorsk 03-01-08, 03:05 AM	Ok, everyone has been preaching the Wiz3/Druid3/MT4/AH10 build, but let me ask you a question. How does Mystic Theurge benefit the animal companion, and wildshaping? How do you determine which stat Int or Wis to improve when it comes to primary spell casting? From my knowledge the Mystic Theurge would only give you an animal companion of 13/13 levels, and a equivalent wildshaping of 13 levels. So how is that useful? That is a major draw back in my oppinon. Next, there is also nothing wrong with taking the other following path such as; Druid7/Wizard3/AH10. This build would only give you 7th level arcane spells, and 9th level divine spells. But honestly taking the spell feat Alternate Spell Source allows you to metamagic spells using your divine spell slots, including allowing to dump more stats in your primary stat so you can use your highest spell DC (i.e. Wisdom based). Also by taking this alternate build your animal companion will be an equivalent 17/13 levels, making it far more useful, and your wildshaping is that of a 17th level druid. Its more about balance than focusing on just pure casting levels. Anyhow I do not think the Arcane Heirophant is overpowered, not at all, because the loss in early caster levels & other abilities it balances out when comparing against straight melee/caster classes.
JaronK 03-01-08, 03:16 AM	Ok, everyone has been preaching the Wiz3/Druid3/MT4/AH10 build, but let me ask you a question. How does Mystic Theurge benefit the animal companion, and wildshaping? How do you determine which stat Int or Wis to improve when it comes to primary spell casting? This is one issue with the Arcane Heirophant... the enforced MAD which requires that you lower one of your casting stats (compared to what it would be if you went with one type of casting). And of course, MT does not improve the animal companion or wild shape. So, yeah, that's a definite weakness. From my knowledge the Mystic Theurge would only give you an animal companion of 13/13 levels, and a equivalent wildshaping of 13 levels. So how is that useful? That is a major draw back in my oppinon. In mine as well. When you do that build, you're sacrificing most of the nice Druid class features to the god of dual ninth level spells... it's a sacrifice you have to make. That said, Wild Shaping into 13 HD critters is not horrible, and when it's in addition to 9th level spells in two classes, that's still pretty darn decent. The animal companion isn't going to be much good when you hit 20, but hey, you can still buff him quite impressively. Next, there is also nothing wrong with taking the other following path such as; Druid7/Wizard3/AH10. This build would only give you 7th level arcane spells, and 9th level divine spells. But honestly taking the spell feat Alternate Spell Source allows you to metamagic spells using your divine spell slots, including allowing to dump more stats in your primary stat so you can use your highest spell DC (i.e. Wisdom based). Isn't Alternative Spell Source either 3.0 or Dragon Magazine? I forget which, but I do remember thinking the source was too old or obscure. That said, I don't buy that 4 more levels of Wild Shape HD and Animal Companion is worth losing two whole spell levels. I mean, you can buff your animal with some of those extra spells, and you do eventually get Shapechange on two lists. Anyhow I do not think the Arcane Heirophant is overpowered, not at all, because the loss in early caster levels & other abilities it balances out when comparing against straight melee/caster classes. Well, I think it'll smash any straight melee class. But I agree that it's not going to be as strong as a straight caster, for the most part, for many of the reasons you cited. JaronK
Shadowhowler 03-01-08, 11:14 AM	Well, I think it'll smash any straight melee class. But I agree that it's not going to be as strong as a straight caster, for the most part, for many of the reasons you cited. JaronK I agree... in the sense of a one on one fight, or the ability to nova in one encounter, the D/W/MT/AH comes out a bit behind... but in having full casting in divine and arcane... it is a MONSTER of spell versitility and has a whole lot of them to use. It's an energizer bunny.
heinrich 03-04-08, 06:31 PM	I don't have followed the whole topic, but, reading the last posts I wonder... Some Books, like Epic level and (iirc) Complete divine, give guidelines for prestige classes beyond the level of 10 or 5 or whatever level they normally end. With this a character would be able ot reach Arcane Hierophant levels of 11 and more, wouldn't he? So his level depending abilities would improve. Level Wiz3/Drd3/AH14 would allow at level 20 a wildshape of level 17 Drd.
Sinfire Titan 03-04-08, 10:59 PM	I don't have followed the whole topic, but, reading the last posts I wonder... Some Books, like Epic level and (iirc) Complete divine, give guidelines for prestige classes beyond the level of 10 or 5 or whatever level they normally end. With this a character would be able ot reach Arcane Hierophant levels of 11 and more, wouldn't he? So his level depending abilities would improve. Level Wiz3/Drd3/AH14 would allow at level 20 a wildshape of level 17 Drd. Sorry, but this wouldn't happen until you are in the Epic levels. So the build would have to end AH at 20th, and enter the Epic progression at 21st.