Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zacnn 01-19-08, 09:59 AM	The fore mentioned class is basicly the mystic thurge but much better. Why the hell is this?
StevenO 01-19-08, 02:54 PM	Because the class is much more focused and harder to get into.
JaronK 01-21-08, 05:02 AM	I think you mean much worse, right? Look at how many caster levels you lose. It's a horribly underpowered class, and certainly not worth taking. And Mystic Theurge is already weak... and then you nerf it with even fewer caster levels. Ouchie. JaronK
StevenO 01-21-08, 01:19 PM	The True Necromancer is better than the MT provided you are planning an even split. With a 12/12 split over 14 levels the TN has a 15/15 split at 20th level which is what you'd get with the MT if that was the goal. The MT may be better because you can make that a 17/13 split as higher level spells are good but at least the TN offers a host of special features to make up for that difference.
Sinfire Titan 01-21-08, 03:25 PM	I think you mean much worse, right? Look at how many caster levels you lose. It's a horribly underpowered class, and certainly not worth taking. And Mystic Theurge is already weak... and then you nerf it with even fewer caster levels. Ouchie. JaronK True Necromancer can get you 9th level spells by 20th, in both classes. To date, I can only think of one other Mystic Theurge-based class that can do this, and it is Arcane Hierophant. It takes a little bit of trickery to do, but it is possible, more so than Mystic Theurge.
StevenO 01-21-08, 07:21 PM	How does the True Necromancer get you 9th level spells in both classes? Are you forgetting that with 4 of the 14 levels (1,2,6,7) you only advance ONE spellcasting type instead of two? Granted it is possible to get a 16/16 split by taking 10 levels of MT and 4 of TN that often isn't so helpful. Now at the highest levels the TN does gain a few spell like special abilites that mimic 8th and 9th level spells. While there are ways to gain 9th level spell capability in multiple casting type the True Necromancer doesn't feature prominently in any of the ones I can think of.
JaronK 01-21-08, 09:33 PM	True Necromancer can get you 9th level spells by 20th, in both classes. To date, I can only think of one other Mystic Theurge-based class that can do this, and it is Arcane Hierophant. It takes a little bit of trickery to do, but it is possible, more so than Mystic Theurge. How? You need a total of 34 caster levels between two classes (evenly split) to get 9th level spells. Unless you're talking Ur Priest cheese, I'm not sure how the True Necro does this better than an MT (and even then, the MT does that better). Caster power is measured entirely in caster levels, and the True Necro doesn't keep those up. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 12:10 AM	How? You need a total of 34 caster levels between two classes (evenly split) to get 9th level spells. Unless you're talking Ur Priest cheese, I'm not sure how the True Necro does this better than an MT (and even then, the MT does that better). Caster power is measured entirely in caster levels, and the True Necro doesn't keep those up. JaronK It actually Divine Crusader, not Ur-Priest. Divine Crusader has access to Death Domain, and it is easy to get the rest of the prerequisites if you know what you are doing.
JaronK 01-22-08, 12:16 AM	And why exactly couldn't a Mystic Theurge do the same thing... but with more caster levels on the arcane side (and thus significantly more power)? JaronK
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 01:29 AM	And why exactly couldn't a Mystic Theurge do the same thing... but with more caster levels on the arcane side (and thus significantly more power)? JaronK Because it still doesn't have 9th level spells on both casting sides before 21st. Which is the point of the build. I'm still trying to figure it out myself though, so don't ask me for the build. For me, it would be Battle Sorcerer 4/Warblade 1/ Abjurant Champion 2/ Divine Crusader 3/ True Necromancer 10. Let me do the math here: BS 4= 2nd level spells AC 2= 3rd level spells DC 3= 3rd level divine/3rd level arcane. TN 10 nets 5/4 from the levels lost, and 9/7, which still falls short. As I said, I'm still doing the math myself. Maybe Bard's PrC could pull it off? I know there is a build that can do it. There is a way to get full Divine and Arcane casting from TN. I just need to do the dirty work here.
archerpwr 01-22-08, 01:39 AM	Because it still doesn't have 9th level spells on both casting sides before 21st. Why? Are there some prereqs I'm forgetting?
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 01:42 AM	Why? Are there some prereqs I'm forgetting? No, but TN loses 4 CLs, and MT sucks outright, something we both can agree on. Dammit! This is going to bug me all damn night! A Seul/DC may be able to pull it off, if you can find the right Deity to get Summon Undead/Control Undead in the right sides. But it still isn't a full caster. My brain is bleeding from this, I need to take a break from this thread.
JaronK 01-22-08, 01:52 AM	No, but TN loses 4 CLs, and MT sucks outright, something we both can agree on. Erm? MT loses no class levels, TN loses 4. So how can the TN be able to get 9th level spells, when the MT can't? JaronK
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 01:58 AM	Erm? MT loses no class levels, TN loses 4. So how can the TN be able to get 9th level spells, when the MT can't? JaronK That is what I am trying to figure out! I've seen it done without Ur-Priest, as UP can't meet the Domain requirements. I' m just trying to figure it out for myself.
JaronK 01-22-08, 02:00 AM	That is what I am trying to figure out! I've seen it done without Ur-Priest, as UP can't meet the Domain requirements. I' m just trying to figure it out for myself. Considering the massive number of lost levels of True Necromancer, you're going to have a lot of trouble. You could pull it off with Ur Priest/Beholder Mage shenannegans, but MT will still be better. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 02:26 AM	Considering the massive number of lost levels of True Necromancer, you're going to have a lot of trouble. You could pull it off with Ur Priest/Beholder Mage shenannegans, but MT will still be better. JaronK But Ur-Priest can't qualify for TN, which is what this thread is about. Which is what I am trying to do. Honestly, I think a player would be better off with a DN/Death Master/Ultimate Magus. Heavy Necromancy, but it requires Dragon Compendium and HoH, along with Comp Mage to even work. But it would be very effective.
JaronK 01-22-08, 02:39 AM	But Ur-Priest can't qualify for TN, which is what this thread is about. Which is what I am trying to do. Which abilities of the TN are so important to you that it's worth losing so many caster levels? Honestly, I think a player would be better off with a DN/Death Master/Ultimate Magus. Heavy Necromancy, but it requires Dragon Compendium and HoH, along with Comp Mage to even work. But it would be very effective. Pure Dread Necromancer would likely be better. You'd get far more undead controlled. JaronK
DeathlessJuan 01-22-08, 02:32 PM	Hmm, I thought that you needed: Turn Undead Death Domain Cast 2nd level spells (one spell as divine and one spell arcane) Command Undead and something (away from books atm) Im thinking something along the lines of.... Battle Sorcerer 4 / Ur-priest 2 / Prestige Bard 1 / Mystic Therge 3 / Sublime Chord 1 / True Necromancer Take Arcane Disciple: Death Domain as a sorcerer (or prestige bard), this will allow you to get the Death Domain (doesnt have to be on the divine side). Ur-priest 2 gives turn undead and the 2nd level spell needed to qualify. Mystic Therge, well duh, 3rd level arcane and 5th level divine. Prestige bard to grant bard music. Sublime chord gives 4th level casting in arcane. Not to sure of the numbers. Anyone got their books handy?
JaronK 01-22-08, 05:21 PM	Battle Sorcerer 4 can't qualify for Ur Priest, due to skill points and fort save. But again, what TN build is so much better than Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8? What TN abilities are worth the loss of 4 caster levels? None of your builds seem to keep up rebuke undead, so there's no way you'll have a decent control pool that way... making that ability pretty useless. The spell like abilities all still require material components, and are abilities that you'd get as spells anyway through a normal caster build, so that doesn't help either. The Necromantic Prowess abilities only make up for caster levels lost during the class and before taking the class, but don't make up for the actual lost spell levels. Seriously, there's nothing in this class worth all the lost casting levels. Absolutely nothing. Mystic Theurge just does it better... and Mystic Theurges aren't that hot either. If you want an undead creator that can cast everything, use Archivist. If you want to have very good undead (and a ton of them), use Dread Necromancer. There's simply no use for the True Necromancer. JaronK
archerpwr 01-22-08, 05:23 PM	Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8 Coulda sworn the gold standard is Wiz 5/ Mindbender 1/ Ur Priest 2/ MT 10/ filler 2
Katash 01-22-08, 05:48 PM	Actually if you use them BOTH you can get Arcane 8/ Divine 9 casting Wiz1 (Illuminan with improved sigil)/Cler3/TN14/MT2 Take Practised Caster (Wiz) and whatever feats you like (I prefer improved familiar-hippogriff and the rest item creation feats) Your wiz CL are keep in pace wiz normal wiz and your clr don't take much of a hit. You can make a great toolbox caster, item creator with this and if you stick to save or dies can still hold your own in combat. Stick with twilight mithral chainshirt if you feel the need to wear armour. MT/TN builds are never outright killas in combat -thier real utility comes out of their use of spells outside of combat.
StevenO 01-22-08, 06:23 PM	Does everyone promoting the Ur-Priest here like forgetting about the FORT +3 prerequisite? Without a good FORT save class you need at least NINE levels of your typical arcane casting class (with any splits divisible by three) in order to meet that requirement which voids a large number of the "superior" builds presented. There are definitely ways to get more raw spell casting ability than you get with the True Necromancer. Almost universally the only way you'd take TN is from Cleric3/Wizard3 with TW to the end. Granted there are other ways to qualify for the class few (none?) would let you take TN to the end. Now I don't have the Dread Necromancer for comparison but the TN isn't horrible if necromancy is your passion. With the full Cleric3/Wiz3/TN14 build you only end up with a 15/15 casting split which does get you 8th level spells for each class. There may not be many and they aren't 9th level spells but you still have them and this is all that a Mystic Theruge could hope for with an even split. Now the kicker is what your caster level can be for each side. You may only have a CL 15 base but can used Practice Spellcaster for +4 to each side and your Necromancy Spells get to add the bonus for Necromantic Prowess which can get those spells all to CL 23. Not that anyone uses the ability but you'd Rebuke Undead as a cleric 21 which is far above what any of the other high dual casting builds will allow. You may not get 9th level spells but you do gain Energy Drain and Wail of the Banshee as spell like abilities. While the class may not have the spell power of other builds and some other necromancer builds come close the True Necromancer is good for a wide variety of necromantic uses.
archerpwr 01-22-08, 06:24 PM	Does everyone promoting the Ur-Priest here like forgetting about the FORT +3 prerequisite? Coulda sworn the gold standard is Wiz 5/ Mindbender 1/ Ur Priest 2/ MT 10/ filler 2 Nope.
StevenO 01-22-08, 07:09 PM	I see. Now why does the Mindbender actually have a good FORT save to go with the WILL save? No real need to answer because what is is and by RAW that would an easy way to get into Ur Priest earlier with a full arcane caster but while it is definitely a better caster I don't see how the Wiz/MindB/UrP/MT build is a better necromancer than a True Necromancer would be.
JaronK 01-22-08, 07:12 PM	Coulda sworn the gold standard is Wiz 5/ Mindbender 1/ Ur Priest 2/ MT 10/ filler 2 Qualifying for those classes in time is hard due to the skill point requirements of Mindbender and Ur Priest. That said, I was giving a very basic sample build. JaronK
JaronK 01-22-08, 07:32 PM	I see. Now why does the Mindbender actually have a good FORT save to go with the WILL save? No real need to answer because what is is and by RAW that would an easy way to get into Ur Priest earlier with a full arcane caster but while it is definitely a better caster I don't see how the Wiz/MindB/UrP/MT build is a better necromancer than a True Necromancer would be. It has 9th level spells, which yours doesn't. It also gets as spells all the spell like abilities that the TN gets (and since the TN has to pay material costs for spell like abilities, the spells are just as good). It can cast Plague of Undead, which yours can't. Also, 100ft telepathy is awesome. The only advantage of the TN version is some rebuke undead... but it's so little rebuke undead that it's virtually worthless. JaronK
StevenO 01-22-08, 07:35 PM	Qualifying for those classes in time is hard due to the skill point requirements of Mindbender and Ur Priest. That said, I was giving a very basic sample build. JaronK You mean how the a Wizard 5 will need four cross-class skills maxed out to enter Mindbender at 6th level and then need two more almost maxed out along with significant skill points in another couple skills to enter Ur-Priest at 7th level? It isn't impossible if you start as a human with INT 18 but is rather difficult. It reminds me of the Wizard/UnseenSeer/ArcaneTrickster "builds" I've seen. It is amazing how hard some builds get when you start digging into the details. Not that they are all impossible but that getting them to work requires some very specific things that aren't always so common. Then you also have these high level "power" builds that probably shouldn't survive to see 6th level.
zacnn 01-22-08, 07:36 PM	Where is the mindbender and Ur-priest? And what does filler stand for and where is it? Thanks for the replies!:D :D
JaronK 01-22-08, 07:39 PM	You mean how the a Wizard 5 will need four cross-class skills maxed out to enter Mindbender at 6th level and then need two more almost maxed out along with significant skill points in another couple skills to enter Ur-Priest at 7th level? It isn't impossible if you start as a human with INT 18 but is rather difficult. It reminds me of the Wizard/UnseenSeer/ArcaneTrickster "builds" I've seen. It is amazing how hard some builds get when you start digging into the details. Not that they are all impossible but that getting them to work requires some very specific things that aren't always so common. Then you also have these high level "power" builds that probably shouldn't survive to see 6th level. Well, that's why I went with Wizard 10/Ur Priest 2/MT 8. It's a better necromancer than pretty much any TN build, due to actually getting 9th level spells (yay Plague of Undead!). It's also perfectly playable at all levels, as it's mostly just a Wizard. True Necromancer doesn't actually give anything interesting. It's weak as all heck. JaronK
JaronK 01-22-08, 07:40 PM	Where is the mindbender and Ur-priest? And what does filler stand for and where is it? Thanks for the replies!:D :D Complete Arcane and Complete Divine, respectively. Filler just means any other class that progresses arcane casting. Could be more Wizard, could be Fatespinner, could be a variety of things. JaronK
archerpwr 01-22-08, 08:06 PM	You mean how the a Wizard 5 will need four cross-class skills maxed out to enter Mindbender at 6th level and then need two more almost maxed out along with significant skill points in another couple skills to enter Ur-Priest at 7th level? It isn't impossible if you start as a human with INT 18 but is rather difficult. It reminds me of the Wizard/UnseenSeer/ArcaneTrickster "builds" I've seen. It is amazing how hard some builds get when you start digging into the details. Not that they are all impossible but that getting them to work requires some very specific things that aren't always so common. Then you also have these high level "power" builds that probably shouldn't survive to see 6th level. Let's take a look at exactly how many skill points are required: Mindbender: 4 crossclass, so 8*4=32 skill points Ur Priest: 2 more ranks in bluff (class skill for mindbender), Know(arcana) 5 ranks (class skill for every prior level), ditto for planes, ditto again for religion, 8 ranks in spellcraft (always been a class skill so far) = 2+5*3+8=25 more ranks. Total ranks spent: 32+25=57 57/8=7.something With 2+int the entire time, you need an int of 18 with a human or 20 and one age catagory and bumping int at level 4. Damn. From now on I'll be suggesting able learner in that combo. Thanks for pointing that out to me. The combo still works, but needs pretty high stats or able learner to work. Able learner is more reasonable. Edit: My math was wrong. That should be 57/9=6.3333 That means you can do it without aging.
Sinfire Titan 01-22-08, 08:32 PM	Let's take a look at exactly how many skill points are required: Mindbender: 4 crossclass, so 8*4=32 skill points Ur Priest: 2 more ranks in bluff (class skill for mindbender), Know(arcana) 5 ranks (class skill for every prior level), ditto for planes, ditto again for religion, 8 ranks in spellcraft (always been a class skill so far) = 2+5*3+8=25 more ranks. Total ranks spent: 32+25=57 57/8=7.something With 2+int the entire time, you need an int of 18 with a human or 20 and one age catagory and bumping int at level 4. Damn. From now on I'll be suggesting able learner in that combo. Thanks for pointing that out to me. The combo still works, but needs pretty high stats or able learner to work. Able learner is more reasonable. Edit: My math was wrong. That should be 57/9=6.3333 That means you can do it without aging. It never made sense to me that Wizards only get 2+Int, when the entire class is based around Int.
archerpwr 01-22-08, 08:36 PM	It never made sense to me that Wizards only get 2+Int, when the entire class is based around Int. Balance? Wizards should be getting 5-6 skills maxed out from the start. That's plenty for most things.
DeathlessJuan 01-22-08, 08:37 PM	It never made sense to me that Wizards only get 2+Int, when the entire class is based around Int. Its a spellcaster and has Int (which skills are based off of) as spellcasting required ability. I think wizards get plenty of skills already as it is. As for the combo I gave earlier, I will have to get home to look into my book and find something. I *know* I will find something...
StevenO 01-22-08, 08:55 PM	Like I said, meeting skill point requirements for some combos can be a pain. I know about Able Learner but it isn't in a book I have (Races of Destiny I believe) so I pretty much ignore it when class building although you'd better believe the Character Op board people don't. One other thing about Able Learned that can affect things it that using it effectively removes a feat which can also impact some builds or at least their effectiveness. Is the True Necromancer a great class, no. There are certainly ways to gain more power and I would stay away from TN because of the horrible entry combination which would also keep me away from getting MT as soon as possible. If building at a higher level I'd certainly consider a TN as acceptable as a combo class. I see Plague of Undead sited as a reason to want 9th level spells (I'd much rather have Timestop or something non-Necromantic as my first 9th level spell.) but considering you still suffer an undead control cap and it can only be cast optimally under curtain conditions I don't feel it is worth that much praise. One effect of the TN that seems to get overlooked is its Zone of Desecration. Granted it replicates a 2nd level spell it is also an emanation which leaves it immobile and has costly (not really but still) material components to limits its use. The TN is a walking buffer for allied undead without needing to do anything. In a limited aspect the TN IS better than the MT but in the bigger picture the MT is better because it is so much more versatile. The MT's versatility is paid for by its lackluster nature but so many builds can use it were the TN is a much more focused application of the same ideas.
StevenO 01-22-08, 09:12 PM	As for the combo I gave earlier, I will have to get home to look into my book and find something. I *know* I will find something... I don't know what you'd hope to find. Battle Sorcerer 4 / Ur-priest 2 / Prestige Bard 1 / Mystic Therge 3 / Sublime Chord 1 / True Necromancer X just doesn't work on so many levels and would be obscenely complicated besides. The first insurmountable hurdle is getting into Ur-priest; besides not having a high enough FORT which you'll never get you also can't get the prerequisite 8 skill ranks needed to get into any of those PrCs. I also see no point to Prestige Bard except avoiding XP penalties. Even if you get all the first levels figured out so you can take Sublime Chord at 11th level (the earliest anyone can qualify for it) you'd still be better off with MT.
archerpwr 01-22-08, 09:39 PM	Like I said, meeting skill point requirements for some combos can be a pain. I know about Able Learner but it isn't in a book I have (Races of Destiny I believe) so I pretty much ignore it when class building although you'd better believe the Character Op board people don't. One other thing about Able Learned that can affect things it that using it effectively removes a feat which can also impact some builds or at least their effectiveness. http://realmshelps.dandello.net/datafind/feats.shtml A *bunch* of feats can be previewed there. I was surprised that the standard ur priest entry basically requires 18 starting int, able learner, or PH2 retraining abuse.
DeathlessJuan 01-22-08, 10:16 PM	*Just so everyone knows, the True Necromancer I am familiar with is in Libris Mortis. I do not know if it has been reprinted* Well, Battle Sorcerer wont do it. You can get lvl 8 arcane spells and lvl 9 divine spells with Beguiler 4 / *insert class with +2 fort and/or +2 will* / Ur-priest 2 / Mystic Therge 2 / Bard 1 / Sublime Chord 1 / True Necromancer 9 Beguiler (if chosen at lvl 1) nets you 42 skill points (or 49 if human) with 10 Int over 4 levels, if you use duskblade as your filler class, you can meet all the requirements for Ur-priest and take it on lvl 6 (all you need is 32 skill points to meet all the requirements, if class skills). Mystic Therge 2 to get your 3rd level arcane and 4th level divine spells, bard 1 to meet sublime chord prerequisites and True Necromancer 9. True Necromancer nets you +7 to arcane and divine spell over 9 levels. Since you cant take Mystic therge again (it will boost your Beguiler level), that is the best I could come up with with the books I have. Now, if we go Cleric 3 / Wizard 3 / Mystic Therge 10 / True Necromancer 4, we can get 8th level spells on both sides. Man, I wish I could find a pure arcane caster class with a good fort save... If we could do that, we could get lvl 9/lvl 9 spells
StevenO 01-22-08, 11:05 PM	True Necromancer originally appeared in Tome and Blood which is a 3.0 product. It was updated to 3.5 in Libris Mortis and while the prereqs were made easier (now needing 2nd level spells instead of 3rd level ones) the class was greatly improved. Those improvement involved expanding the class to 14 levels but more importantly making most of those levels improve BOTH arcane and divine spellcasting as opposed to the old version which only improved one cast type each level. Now DeathlessJuan's latest build may be possible but again it is unlikely. The big problem may still be getting the 13 ranks in perform to enter S'Chord as Perform isn't a class skill until you get that level of Bard. Even if such is possible another 8 levels of MT will give improve spellcasting more than 9 levels of TN would. The basic Cleric3/Wiz3/TN14 build will produce a 15/15 caster split which means 8th level spells for each side. Going Cleric3/Wiz3/MT10/TN4 will give a 16/16 split (I think I mentioned this much earlier) which isn't a big improvement in terms of casting (you're still at 8th level spells) and has a huge fall off in special abilities and Necromantic Bonus but at least then you only need to take TN5 as your first epic level to get 9th level spells for each side. As pointed out to me the Mindbender, for whatever reason, has a good FORT save to go with a good WILL save along with a casting increase at 1st level. Of course that class confuses where skill points go even more.
DeathlessJuan 01-22-08, 11:41 PM	The big problem may still be getting the 13 ranks in perform to enter S'Chord as Pewrform isn't a class skill until you get that level of BardThis build is very possible, see below. You only need 10 ranks in perform to make S'Chord. Noted below, This build does have enough ranks to make 13 perform, if needed Requirements: (duplicates are bolded where higher) Ur-priest = Bluff 6, Knowledge arcana 5, knowledge the planes 5, knowledge religion 8, spellcraft 8 -Iron Will, Spell focus (evil) -taken at lvl 1 Mystic Therge = Knowledge arcana 6, knowledge religion 6 -no feat requirements Sublime Chord = Knowledge Arcana 13, Listen 13, Perform (any) 10, Profession (astrologer) 6, Spellcraft 6 True Necromancer = Knowledge Arcana 8, Knowledge Religion 8 -Spell focus (necromancy) - Taken at level 6 -Access to death domain (arcane disciple: death domain) - Taken at lvl 3 or 9 Assume Human, INT 12 (reasonable, no?). 32 skills points 1st lvl, +8 for each beguiler level, +4 for each Duskblade level, +4 for Ur-priest, +8 for bard. Bolded words/numbers mean max rank needed for prestiges is met. CC = cross class skill for that level. 1- Beguiler 1- SKills: Bluff 4, Listen 4, Profession (astrologer) 4, Knowledge: Religion 4, Knowledge Arcana 4, Spellcraft 4, Perform 2 CC, Knowledge (the planes) 2 CC - 2- Beguiler 2- Bluff +1 (5), Listen +1 (5), Knowledge: Religion +1 (5), Knowledge: Arcana +1 (5), Spellcraft +1 (5), Profession (astrologer) +1 (5) (save 2 points) (total 2 saved) 3- Duskblade 1: Knowledge: The Planes +3 (5), Perform +1 CC (3) (save 1) (Total 1 saved) 4- Beguiler 3: Bluff +1 (6), Listen +2 (7), Knowledge: Relgion +2 (7), Knowledge: Arcana +2 (7), (save 1 point) (Total 2 saved) 5- Beguiler 4: Listen +1 (8), Knowledge: Religion +1 (8), Knowledge: Arcana +1 (8), Spellcraft +3 (8), Perform +1 CC (4) (total 2 saved) 6- Ur-priest 1: Knowledge Arcana +1 (9), Listen +1 CC (9) (Save 1) (total 3 saved) 7- Ur-Priest 2: Knowledge Arcana +1 (10), Perform +1 CC (5), Listen +1 CC (10) (used 1 saved) (total 2 saved) 8- Mystic Therge 1: Knowledge Arcana +1 (11), Profession (astrologer) +2 (6) (Save 1) (total 3 saved) 9- Mystic Therge 2: Knowledge Arcana +1 (12), Listen +1 CC (11), Perform +1 CC (6) (used 1 saved) (total 2 saved) 10- Bard 1: Knowledge: Arcana +1 (13), Listen +2 (13), Perform +7 (13) (only need 10 ranks) (used all saved) 11- Sublime Chord 1: SKills dont matter 12-20, True Necromancer 1-9: SKills dont matter, 8th lvl/9th lvl arcane/divine castin @ lvl 20 OR 12-19, Mystic Therge 3-10: 9th lvl on both sides 20- Freebie level And yes, Mystic Therge would give better spell levels (9/9) on both sides, since you choose at every level up which casting class to apply the bonus to. Mystic Therge doesnt state that you have to boost what you chose at 1st level. You would still have 1 level left over even :P I still like the Necro's abilities better than 1 caster level
StevenO 01-23-08, 01:24 AM	You do realize you can't "save" skill points between levels don't you? That may mean you need to spend skill points on non-class skills which only count as half ranks.
DeathlessJuan 01-23-08, 01:41 AM	Ahh, yes. I neglected to take that into account. But, meh... Its too late today for me to edit the post and figure all that out again. If I am short, I'll just up the INT to 14 (easy enough) and make due with it (that an extra 13 skills total, prior to lvl 11, more than enough to make up for 'saved' skill ranks). The build is still easily do-able With 32 point buy, you can get stats like this. Str 10, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 16, Cha 16. Ending stats Str 10, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 19*, Cha 19. *Get one of those tomes or books and up you Wis by one more so you have access to lvl 9 divine and arcane spells
JaronK 01-23-08, 01:52 AM	Which brings us back to the OP. True Necromancer is not an MT but better. It's an MT that has worse casting, in favor of a few spell like abilities that, while being thematically nice, are weaker than the spell levels. If you really want an awesome flavorfull necromancer, Dread Necromancer does this. If you want to cast everything as a necromancer, Archivist does this. If you want to cast everything and be a bit weaker, Mystic Theurge does this. And if you want to be weaker still, without 9th level spells of both kinds, then you can be a True Necromancer. Note, by the way, that all the TN builds suck for the first 12 levels or so. JaronK
DeathlessJuan 01-23-08, 02:45 PM	All right. Re-applied the skill points. Assume Human, Int 12. 32 skills on lvl 1 beguiler, +8 every beguiler level, +4 for duskblade, Ur-priest and Mystic Therge level, and +8 for bard level 1- Beguiler 1- SKills: Bluff 4, Listen 4, Profession (astrologer) 4, Knowledge: Religion 4, Knowledge Arcana 4, Spellcraft 4, Perform 2 CC, Knowledge (the planes) 2 CC - 2- Beguiler 2- Bluff +1 (5), Listen +1 (5), Knowledge: Religion +1 (5), Knowledge: Arcana +1 (5), Spellcraft +1 (5), Profession (astrologer) +1 (5) Perform +1/2 CC (2 1/2), Knowledge (planes) +1/2 CC (2 1/2) 3- Duskblade 1: Knowledge: The Planes +2 (4 1/2), Perform +1/2 CC (3), Bluff +1/2 CC (5 1/2) 4- Beguiler 3: Listen +2 (7), Knowledge: Relgion +2 (7), Knowledge: Arcana +2 (7), Knowledge (planes) +1/2 CC (5), Perform + 1/2 CC (3 1/2) 5- Beguiler 4: Listen +1 (8), Knowledge: Religion +1 (8), Knowledge: Arcana +1 (8), Spellcraft +3 (8), Perform +1/2 CC (4), Bluff +1 (6 1/2) 6- Ur-priest 1: Knowledge Arcana +1 (9), Listen +1 CC (9), Perform +1/2 CC (4 1/2) 7- Ur-Priest 2: Knowledge Arcana +1 (10), Perform +1/2 CC (5), Listen +1 CC (10) 8- Mystic Therge 1: Knowledge Arcana +1 (11), Profession (astrologer) +1 (5), Perform +1/2 CC (5 1/2), Listen +1/2 CC (10 1/2) 9- Mystic Therge 2: Knowledge Arcana +1 (12), Listen +1/2 CC (11), Perform +1/2 CC (6), Profession (astrologer) +1 (6) 10- Bard 1: Knowledge: Arcana +1 (13), Listen +2 (13), Perform +5 (11) 11- Sublime Chord 1 - Skills as desired 12-20- Mystic Therge 8/???1 or True Necromancer 9 (9/9 and 8/9 arcane/divine spell levels respectively) And, yes, lvls 1-12 may suck, but this is a good way to get to 9th level casting on both sides (via Mystic Therge). A party wouldn't really mind, as you would be a versatile spellcaster, focused more on utility and buffing than anything else, until lvl 11+, where you can start focusing on damage spells. Lvls 1-5: 4th level casting as a beguiler, not too much loss. Focus in UMD (if you have Int 14+) to help out with other things Lvls 6-7: Adding 2nd level divine casting opens up more magic items for use, including healing spells Lvls 8-9: You are progressing both sides of your casting, 6th level beguilder (or 9th level caster level with practised spellcaster) you can now cast decent buff spells with good duration. Ur-priest grants you access to Divine Power, which allows you to melee decently lvl 10: With practised spell caster, you can boost both caster levels of Ur-priest and Beguiler to 10th level (or 9th with Ur-priest). Otherwise, the bard level nets you nothing but a +1 to knowledge checks, one use of bardic music and inspire courage lvl 11: Sublime chord 1 grants lvl 4 and 5 spells, leaving you only 1 level behind a sorcerer or 2 behind a wizard. ---------- Lvl12-17: Mystic Therge allows you to stay within 1-2 levels behind casters while keeping both sides of spellcasting progressing evenly. lvl 18+: Mystic Therge no longer boosts Ur-priest in spells per day, leaving you able to drop it for a more favorable arcane boosting prestige, or to simple continue taking sublim chord levels (recommended) ---------- Lvl12-20: True Necromancer is not optimal for getting 9th level casting on both sides, but if necromancy is your thing, you can get nice bonuses to caster level and some other abilities (like create greater undead 1/day). Really depends on your flavor
JaronK 01-23-08, 07:03 PM	Considering the MT has almost as good a caster level in Necromancy spells, and can cast as spells all the spell like abilities that the TN gets, I'm still not seeing any advantage to the TN build. And there's the whole "you suck" issue for the first 12 levels. Plus the MT can cast Plague of Undead, which really is an awesome spell (notice it can create skeletons with more than 20 HD, and gives all undead created 12 HP base per HD instead of 6.5). TN really doesn't measure up to the MT... which is sad, because the MT isn't very good either. Hopefully this shows the OP the fact that the True Necromancer just isn't a very good class. JaronK
Sinfire Titan 01-23-08, 07:18 PM	Considering the MT has almost as good a caster level in Necromancy spells, and can cast as spells all the spell like abilities that the TN gets, I'm still not seeing any advantage to the TN build. And there's the whole "you suck" issue for the first 12 levels. Plus the MT can cast Plague of Undead, which really is an awesome spell (notice it can create skeletons with more than 20 HD, and gives all undead created 12 HP base per HD instead of 6.5). TN really doesn't measure up to the MT... which is sad, because the MT isn't very good either. Hopefully this shows the OP the fact that the True Necromancer just isn't a very good class. JaronK Actually, now that I look at the class, it does lose out on 4 CLs, but it has more overall CL than MT. It has 14 levels, not 10, so it still has all of the MT's caster levels, +2 for each side. And it has more class features.
archerpwr 01-23-08, 07:51 PM	Actually, now that I look at the class, it does lose out on 4 CLs, but it has more overall CL than MT. It has 14 levels, not 10, so it still has all of the MT's caster levels, +2 for each side. And it has more class features. Over 14 levels: TN: 14*2-4=24 CL over 14 levels MT+4 levels of full caster prestige: 10*2+4=14 levels
StevenO 01-23-08, 08:12 PM	Considering the MT has almost as good a caster level in Necromancy spells, and can cast as spells all the spell like abilities that the TN gets, I'm still not seeing any advantage to the TN build. And there's the whole "you suck" issue for the first 12 levels. Plus the MT can cast Plague of Undead, which really is an awesome spell (notice it can create skeletons with more than 20 HD, and gives all undead created 12 HP base per HD instead of 6.5). For the MT to be a "better" caster than a TN requires some work and a narrow definition of "better." Ignoring the "crazy" builds that take serious advantage of some PrCs accellerated spellcasting progression the best a MT normally can hope for is a 13/17 casting split which just gets it 9th level spells; for a wizard that is ONE 9th level spell per day (two at most) or two for a cleric with more being uncommon due to multiple casting stats. Now in direct comparison with a TN there are your Energy Drain and Wail of the Banshee although the TN uses both at a higher caster level. A use of Horrid Wilting (which has seen its power drop over editions) equates to one 8th level spell slot meaning the TN has as many 8th level spells as an MT build would. Below 8th level the spells are pretty much the same except that having a base casting level of 15 vs 13 grants another spell of each level 5-7 while 15 vs 17 is only an extra 6th and 7th level spell. Now that the TN's spells and most powerful spell like abilities can match those of a basic MT build that favors one casting type you can look at the other abilities. First is Necromantic Prowess which eventually give the TN a +4 level to all things necromantic; a MT may replicate part of that with Practiced Spellcaster but so could the TN. The second thing is the Zone of Desecration that surrounds the TN makes it a walking buffer for its undead; sure a MT could cast "Desecrate" when and where they need it but that still takes an action and can be defeated by an enemy moving to another location. Although the TN still need to pay for their use it gains a number of create undead abilities which a MT would have to memorize to get use out of. It may rarely be a factor but the TN continues to improve its Rebuking Power while a MT's stagnates; granted many attempts may get burt with Divine feats it can still be useful to convert undead minions of your opponent. Finally, the TN does have a slightly larger HD than the TN which can mean 10 to 18 more hp over 20 levels. Where has Plague of Undead been updated as I find it on LMpg70? I certainly don't see were those bonuses mentioned are exclusive to that spell as creating undead with bigger HD just requires a higher casting level which Necromantic Prowess would provide. There is no question the 3.0 version found in Tome and Blood was terrible but the TN update from Libris Mortis is certainly a decent class for what it tries to do.
archerpwr 01-23-08, 08:20 PM	For the MT to be a "better" caster than a TN requires some work and a narrow definition of "better." Ignoring the "crazy" builds that take serious advantage of some PrCs accellerated spellcasting progression the best a MT normally can hope for is a 13/17 casting split which just gets it 9th level spells; for a wizard that is ONE 9th level spell per day (two at most) or two for a cleric with more being uncommon due to multiple casting stats. Now in direct comparison with a TN there are your Energy Drain and Wail of the Banshee although the TN uses both at a higher caster level. A use of Horrid Wilting (which has seen its power drop over editions) equates to one 8th level spell slot meaning the TN has as many 8th level spells as an MT build would. Below 8th level the spells are pretty much the same except that having a base casting level of 15 vs 13 grants another spell of each level 5-7 while 15 vs 17 is only an extra 6th and 7th level spell. Now that the TN's spells and most powerful spell like abilities can match those of a basic MT build that favors one casting type you can look at the other abilities. First is Necromantic Prowess which eventually give the TN a +4 level to all things necromantic; a MT may replicate part of that with Practiced Spellcaster but so could the TN. The second thing is the Zone of Desecration that surrounds the TN makes it a walking buffer for its undead; sure a MT could cast "Desecrate" when and where they need it but that still takes an action and can be defeated by an enemy moving to another location. Although the TN still need to pay for their use it gains a number of create undead abilities which a MT would have to memorize to get use out of. It may rarely be a factor but the TN continues to improve its Rebuking Power while a MT's stagnates; granted many attempts may get burt with Divine feats it can still be useful to convert undead minions of your opponent. Finally, the TN does have a slightly larger HD than the TN which can mean 10 to 18 more hp over 20 levels. Where has Plague of Undead been updated as I find it on LMpg70? I certainly don't see were those bonuses mentioned are exclusive to that spell as creating undead with bigger HD just requires a higher casting level which Necromantic Prowess would provide. There is no question the 3.0 version found in Tome and Blood was terrible but the TN update from Libris Mortis is certainly a decent class for what it tries to do. I'll just throw out a few counter arguments: 1) Dual Progression classes without using accelerated casting on at least one side is generally bad. In the case of MT and its friend true necro, a 3/3 entry means one thing: blowing chunks. Once we've decided on using a three/three entry we've already thrown away the PC. 2) Specialization. Focused specialist if you swing that way. 3) Energy drain is a really crappy spell. 4) WotB is a really weak spell for level 9. Once level nine spells are up most things should be assumed to be immune to death effects.
DeathlessJuan 01-23-08, 08:29 PM	3) Energy drain is a really crappy spell. 4) WotB is a really weak spell for level 9. Once level nine spells are up most things should be assumed to be immune to death effects. Just a response: 3) Energy drain only appears to be a crappy spell. I can find many uses for it, though, of course it is limited. I'd rather have a limited use spell 1/day than not all. No save, ranged touch attack to deliver, permently drains a character level should they fail the partial save later. I'd say its very good for reoccuring villians, or PvP. 4) WotB is weak for a lvl 9 spell, but its a free level 9th spell. Besides, there are a few spells out there that can be used (while quickened) to make this spell useful. Powerful? No, but in the hands of a skilled mage, it has its place.
JaronK 01-23-08, 08:51 PM	4) WotB is weak for a lvl 9 spell, but its a free level 9th spell. Besides, there are a few spells out there that can be used (while quickened) to make this spell useful. Powerful? No, but in the hands of a skilled mage, it has its place. No, it cost you all other level 9 spells. That's not free at all. Seriously, True Necromancer doesn't grant you anything that the MT can't grant better. JaronK
StevenO 01-23-08, 11:49 PM	I'll just throw out a few counter arguments: 1) Dual Progression classes without using accelerated casting on at least one side is generally bad. In the case of MT and its friend true necro, a 3/3 entry means one thing: blowing chunks. Once we've decided on using a three/three entry we've already thrown away the PC. 2) Specialization. Focused specialist if you swing that way. 3) Energy drain is a really crappy spell. 4) WotB is a really weak spell for level 9. Once level nine spells are up most things should be assumed to be immune to death effects. 1. I wouldn't say dual progression classes without accelerated casting are all bad. That is based off of a couple Complete Mage PrCs but I can agree that playing a character into a PrC that needs a 3/3 split is asking for problems throughout much of his early career. 2. I don't see what that is a counter arguement to. The TN is definitely a specialized class and it stomps all over its similiar rival, the MT. There certainly are other ways to specialize as a "Necromancer" but if you want a combo that is heavy in arcane and divine casting the TN is what you have. 3. Perhaps Energy Drain is less spectacular than many other 9th level spells but it is also one of the things most feared by players. Someone must think it is a powerful effect or why would it occupy a 9th level position on two casting list? If it isn't that good certainly the cleric version would only be 8th level or less. 4. The biggest problem with WotB isn't Immunity to Death effects (most of them can be removed) but its all or nothing nature. If you get the DC high enough that the available targets miss there save it is still one way to clear a pretty tough crowd in a big hurry. Besides a 9th level spell or two what does a Cleric3/Wizard3/M'Theruge10/filler4 do that a Cleric3/Wizard3/TrueNecro14 can't do? Sure there are other ways to build with the MT but these are the builds that offer the truest comparison. I've pointed out the benefits of the TN build so what are the benefits of the MT build or does selection your own 9th level spell outweigh EVERYTHING else the TN has going for it?
JaronK 01-24-08, 02:27 AM	2. I don't see what that is a counter arguement to. The TN is definitely a specialized class and it stomps all over its similiar rival, the MT. Please explain how the TN stomps all over the MT. What does it give that the MT does not? Sure, it has more levels, but it loses so many caster levels that it hardly seems worthwhile. And it gives no exclusive abilities. There certainly are other ways to specialize as a "Necromancer" but if you want a combo that is heavy in arcane and divine casting the TN is what you have. Or MT, or Archivist. Just say "I'm a necromancer" and you've got better arcane or better divine casting (and you can still cast all the fun spells). 4. The biggest problem with WotB isn't Immunity to Death effects (most of them can be removed) but its all or nothing nature. If you get the DC high enough that the available targets miss there save it is still one way to clear a pretty tough crowd in a big hurry. The bigger problem is that you have to sacrifice all (or at least most) of your 9th level spells to get it. Besides a 9th level spell or two what does a Cleric3/Wizard3/M'Theruge10/filler4 do that a Cleric3/Wizard3/TrueNecro14 can't do? Both of those are rather poor builds. Saying a class can do (comparitively) well when made poorly, when it can't do well when made well, is not a good thing. No True Necromancer build can compare, in necromantic abilities, to Necromancer 8/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 10. Sure there are other ways to build with the MT but these are the builds that offer the truest comparison. I've pointed out the benefits of the TN build so what are the benefits of the MT build or does selection your own 9th level spell outweigh EVERYTHING else the TN has going for it? Well, yes. Being able to cast all of those spell like abilities that the TN has, plus getting Plague of Undeath (as well as Gate, Timestop, etc) is far better than, well, a small bonus to necromancer caster level and a useless amount of rebuke undead. JaronK
Broken vacuum 01-24-08, 10:57 AM	Seriously, True Necromancer doesn't grant you anything that the MT can't grant better. While the True Necromancer has several problems, statements like the above are rather silly. The case for the TN not being a good PrC is rather strong, so I do not really get why you need these exaggerations. They just confuse the issue. TN grants you a souped up version of Desecrate as well as rebuking which MT does not. It certainly is not more powerful than attaining 9th level spells, but that is something else Now, a straight Wiz 3/Clr 3/MT or TN X on its own is never as powerful as character focussing on one sort of casting, but in a party it can actually be somewhat desirable. Utilitywise it can have an edge, as it is possible that the same character is required to fill the shoes of both the cleric and the wizard. Ur-Priest with its accelerated casting is attractive in dual-casting builds, but it does have some problems. One being that it is hard to get into from a full casting arcane class. And you do have to have access to it in the first place. Builds like Wiz 5/ Mindbender 1/ Ur-Priest 2/ MT 10/ Something is even worse in that sense as you need either two splat-books and a stellar intelligence score or another book on top of that. From that perspective Wiz 10/ Ur-Priest 2/ MT 8 is better of course, but if what you are after is dual casting, you do not have that for half of your career with this build. And rebuking practically not at all. That being said, the TN loses too many caster levels too soon. They do of course not 'suck' during their first 3 or 4 levels as they are more or less identical to any other caster, but levels 5 to 10 or so are not good. 3rd and 4th level spells are important steps and TNs get them 4 levels behind regular casters and the features of the class that mitigates that somewhat are not available yet. Even if you want a dual-casting utility machine this is a bit much. In the end TNs are not that bad at dealing with undead, but they have to wait too long. Being able to create ghouls at level 8 without having to pay for expensive scrolls is nice, but having to wait until level 9 to be able to cast Animate Dead without resorting to scrolls is rather strange, considering. It is also somewhat strange that they do not catch up to straight clerics when it comes to rebuking until level 15.
JaronK 01-24-08, 12:16 PM	While the True Necromancer has several problems, statements like the above are rather silly. The case for the TN not being a good PrC is rather strong, so I do not really get why you need these exaggerations. They just confuse the issue. TN grants you a souped up version of Desecrate as well as rebuking which MT does not. I wasn't exagerating. The Desecrate thing is roughly equivalent to a single magic item which, by the time you get it, you could probably have afforded already. Sure, it only effects your undead, but any decent necromancer is going to make any nearby undead friendly quite quickly anyway. Rebuking is a useless way of controlling undead unless you max it out, because you can only control undead worth up to half your class level in HD, and undead tend to be pretty poor for their HD (with a CR around half that), so you're usually looking at minions with only 1/4 your CR... if you can keep up Rebuking. But True Necromancer also loses Rebuking levels when qualifying for the class (especially in most of the builds posted in this thread) which means that what they can rebuke is usually too little to care about. So they gain two abilties that really do very little. That's not enough to matter, in my oppinion. From that perspective Wiz 10/ Ur-Priest 2/ MT 8 is better of course, but if what you are after is dual casting, you do not have that for half of your career with this build. And rebuking practically not at all. But you're effective at all levels. And if you wanted effective Dual Casting from low levels, you'd want to be an Archivist with a Warlock cohort. That being said, the TN loses too many caster levels too soon. They do of course not 'suck' during their first 3 or 4 levels as they are more or less identical to any other caster, but levels 5 to 10 or so are not good. 3rd and 4th level spells are important steps and TNs get them 4 levels behind regular casters and the features of the class that mitigates that somewhat are not available yet. Even if you want a dual-casting utility machine this is a bit much. Yeah. Ouch. Worst part... they don't get animate dead until much later than a primary caster, due to lost caster levels. So they can't even be a good necromancer to start! Not even as good as a single class Wizard or Cleric. JaronK
StevenO 01-24-08, 02:18 PM	Please explain how the TN stomps all over the MT. What does it give that the MT does not? Sure, it has more levels, but it loses so many caster levels that it hardly seems worthwhile. And it gives no exclusive abilities. See posts #22, 35, and 48. A True Necromancer loses no more caster levels than a MT build normally does. The only thing the MT has going for it is that it could put four casting increases into one casting type instead of splitting them two/two. Both of those are rather poor builds. Saying a class can do (comparitively) well when made poorly, when it can't do well when made well, is not a good thing. No True Necromancer build can compare, in necromantic abilities, to Necromancer 8/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 10. The OP asked for a comparison between the TN and MT and the only fair way to do that is looking at both with the same entry point. I don't see another good way to build a TN other than Clc3/Wiz3 and an advantage of the MT is its versatility. A drawback to the TN is that it loses caster levels earlier rather than later like the MT does but that is too help prevent some crazy combos. As mentioned earlier is is possible to get a 16/16 casting split using MT and a dip into TN but if TN didn't have those "lost levels" at the beginning that would easily turn into 17/17. I hear the MT can get 17/17 with Arcane Heirophant (or something from Races of the Wild) but I haven't seen the specifics of the other class. Why would anyone go Necro8/UrPriest2/MT10? It would seem to me like the last two levels of MT are wasted because you've already capped out the Ur Priest casting capacity. Well, yes. Being able to cast all of those spell like abilities that the TN has, plus getting Plague of Undeath (as well as Gate, Timestop, etc) is far better than, well, a small bonus to necromancer caster level and a useless amount of rebuke undead. So the MT spending spell slots to do what a TN can do without spending slot makes it better? I acknowledged the MT advantage of choosing your couple 9th level spells but a TN with a 15/15 split still gets more other spells than a MT with a 17/13 split. Given how many people are willing to spend a feat (Practiced Spellcaster) for what is often only a couple more caster levels I certainly believe the +4 to all your Necromantic spells can't be written off. As for a useless amount of Rebuke does this mean the only good thing about Turn/Rebuke is just getting the attempts so they can be "spent" to power divine feats? After taking Necromantic Prowess into consideration the TN is actually better at Rebuking than a full cleric would be. While I have to give a MT credit for getting spells faster in the mid levels that is all it has going for it compared to the TN until you start adding Ur Priest or similiar classes to the MT mix. Before probably levels 9 or 10 both TN and MT are far from optimal choices given the number of caster level each has lost. Between that point and probably 15 or 16th level the MT may gain a slight edge with its higher casting ability in both casting types. After MT is done TN passes it at the highest levels as its spellcasting catches up and its special abilities make it superior for the appointed task. As a note I'd be hard pressed to allow PCs access to the Libris Mortis PrCs to begin with. That leaves the TN as a DM tool which makes it easy enough to use to get the type of villian that can make things interesting.
Broken vacuum 01-24-08, 07:11 PM	So they gain two abilties that really do very little. That's not enough to matter, in my oppinion. The above is quite ok, but what you said before was not. The difference is that here you consider what the TN actually gets that the MT does not and decide from there. Before you claimed that it does not get anything the MT does not which anyone looking at the PrCs can see is not really true. Before you exaggerated and what is more, that exaggeration made your argument worse and possibly incomprehensible to someone not sharing your opinion of the relevant abilities. Preaching to the choir does very little when it comes to convincing non-members. But you're effective at all levels. And if you wanted effective Dual Casting from low levels, you'd want to be an Archivist with a Warlock cohort. For one it is a question of availability, and for the other that would not be available before 6th level at the earliest. Or is the cohort acquired through other means than the leadership feat? Yeah. Ouch. Worst part... they don't get animate dead until much later than a primary caster, due to lost caster levels. So they can't even be a good necromancer to start! Not even as good as a single class Wizard or Cleric. I agree. As I mentioned before it really is very strange considering the flavour of the class.
JaronK 01-24-08, 07:18 PM	The above is quite ok, but what you said before was not. The difference is that here you consider what the TN actually gets that the MT does not and decide from there. Before you claimed that it does not get anything the MT does not which anyone looking at the PrCs can see is not really true. Before you exaggerated and what is more, that exaggeration made your argument worse and possibly incomprehensible to someone not sharing your opinion of the relevant abilities. You're right, I should have said the TN gains nothing significant over the MT, a statement which I stand by. Low levels of Rebuke Undead give very little... losing even a few rebuke undead levels is enough to leave you with no undead worth having, for the most part. The desecrate ability is simulatable with magic items (or just casting Desecrate, since the best use of that spell is creating better undead, and you can just cast it when you need it). The Spell like abilities are just spells that the MT already gets, and the bonus to Necromancy caster levels would be good, except for the loss of caster levels that removes said advantage. None of this is significant to any necromancer build I can think of, whereas being able to cast higher level spells faster (including better Necromancy spells faster) is of extreame importance. For one it is a question of availability, and for the other that would not be available before 6th level at the earliest. Or is the cohort acquired through other means than the leadership feat? I don't see the availability issue with Archivist, if we're talking about True Necromancers being available. Libris Mortis and Heroes of Horror are books where you usually see both books allowed, or neither. Certainly, one is not more common than the other, and they're thematically close enough. Archivists without a Warlock can still easily get all the best undead spells (they're on the Cleric list, in fact Animate Dead is 3rd level there). Once he gets a Warlock, via Leadership, party members, or just paying one, he can get pretty much any good necromancy spell he can think of (along with other great ones), though he does need a 12th level Warlock for that. He'll get pretty much all the best Wizard/Sorcerer spells that way too, if he's clever, but that's for another thread (I don't want to get into another debate about how that works!). But yeah, for casting everything while still being effective at low levels, it's hard to beat the Archivist. JaronK
Broken vacuum 01-24-08, 07:46 PM	Low levels of Rebuke Undead give very little... losing even a few rebuke undead levels is enough to leave you with no undead worth having, for the most part. To be fair, though, the TN does catch up eventually. Too late, in my opinion, but still. The desecrate ability is simulatable with magic items (or just casting Desecrate, since the best use of that spell is creating better undead, and you can just cast it when you need it). What item are you thinking of? I readily admit that I have not had a dedicated undead-maker in my games for a long time, so I might have missed something. The radius of the ability is rather hefty and the selectivity would be rather handy in an undead-heavy game. The Spell like abilities are just spells that the MT already gets, and the bonus to Necromancy caster levels would be good, except for the loss of caster levels that removes said advantage. It is also worth noting that spell-like abilities do not benefit from a lot of the boosts ordinary spells do. Spell Focus (necromancy) being the prime example as it is a prerequisite for the class. None of this is significant to any necromancer build I can think of, whereas being able to cast higher level spells faster (including better Necromancy spells faster) is of extreame importance. Understand that I am not really advocating the TN here, but I do think that you are a wee bit selective. The TN is not just a necromancer class, it is a very specific one. It is not just about undead, it is also about combining arcane and divine necromancy. The end product is not all bad for a certain sort of niche character, the problem is that there are too many levels in the beginning where it performs badly in the areas that is its focus. I don't see the availability issue with Archivist, if we're talking about True Necromancers being available. Libris Mortis and Heroes of Horror are books where you usually see both books allowed, or neither. Certainly, one is not more common than the other, and they're thematically close enough. Archivists without a Warlock can still easily get all the best undead spells (they're on the Cleric list, in fact Animate Dead is 3rd level there). Once he gets a Warlock, via Leadership, party members, or just paying one, he can get pretty much any good necromancy spell he can think of (along with other great ones), though he does need a 12th level Warlock for that. He'll get pretty much all the best Wizard/Sorcerer spells that way too, if he's clever, but that's for another thread (I don't want to get into another debate about how that works!). But yeah, for casting everything while still being effective at low levels, it's hard to to the Archivist. JaronK Availability sometimes comes down to very simple things. I am a good example as I do not have access to Heroes of Horror, but do have access to Libris Mortis. As a general rule I tend to compare things to core. If something is on par with core it is ok in my book. The TN, however, falls somewhat short of this standard.
StevenO 01-24-08, 07:56 PM	On the topic of "Animate Dead" (Clr3,Wiz4) it is true the a TN doesn't gain the ability to cast this spell before 9th level (a cleric gains it at 5th and Wizard at 7th) but it gains the ability to use Create Undead (a 6th level spell) at 8th level which is three levels faster than either a cleric or wizard would.
JaronK 01-24-08, 08:04 PM	To be fair, though, the TN does catch up eventually. Too late, in my opinion, but still. The issue here is that Rebuking is only good early on. If you're level 4, having a pair of 2HD undead to help out is quite nice. The probably have about as many HP as you do, they'll take hits for you, and maybe they have some DR that's quite significant at this level. At level 20, two 10 HD undead are roughly CR 5 unless you've gotten really lucky or creative. They'll get splattered by everything that moves at that level. So getting Rebuking later is just too late for it to matter much. It's like getting the ability to cast Sleep at will as a spell like ability at level 15. It would sure have been awesome 13 levels ago, but now it's just a gimmick. Sure, you could use that Rebuke to get a little specialty undead critter... but Control/Command Undead will handle that for you anyway. What item are you thinking of? Darkskull. Also, the Greater Ring of Desecration, found here: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20021031x The Lesser one is enough for most purposes, though, and it's only 4kgp. Certainly, that's enough to make your better undead, which is the main use. I readily admit that I have not had a dedicated undead-maker in my games for a long time, so I might have missed something. The radius of the ability is rather hefty and the selectivity would be rather handy in an undead-heavy game. The Desecrate ability is only a 20ft emination, just like the spell. As someone who's currently playing a Dread Necromancer (which is an awesome and fun class) I gaurentee you that any decent undead specialist has no problem making damn sure that all undead in play are on his side within a few rounds. At this point, the DM puts undead enemies in our game strictly as treasure for me. As such, the selectivity thing hardly matters. It is also worth noting that spell-like abilities do not benefit from a lot of the boosts ordinary spells do. Spell Focus (necromancy) being the prime example as it is a prerequisite for the class. Ouch, hadn't thought of that. That might mess up the Corpse Crafter line of feats too (which require creating them with a Necromancy spell, IIRC). That would make you noticably worse at undead creation if you use the spell-likes. Understand that I am not really advocating the TN here, but I do think that you are a wee bit selective. The TN is not just a necromancer class, it is a very specific one. It is not just about undead, it is also about combining arcane and divine necromancy. Yeah, I just think the TN fails to do any class concept that a MT, Dread Necromancer, or Archivist couldn't do a lot better. In fact, I'm not convinced it could do a class concept better than an MT. Sure, if you're doing the standard 3/3 lead in and can't use Arcane Heirophant on the way out it's almost as good as an MT, but the loss of 9th level spells just kills it for me. Getting Animate Dead late is bad, but losing out on Plague of Undead is just a killer. Availability sometimes comes down to very simple things. I am a good example as I do not have access to Heroes of Horror, but do have access to Libris Mortis. Huh. Well, either way, I think True Necromancer probably does have the same issues in availability as Archivists. I would guess that as many people lack one as the other. As a general rule I tend to compare things to core. If something is on par with core it is ok in my book. The TN, however, falls somewhat short of this standard. Well, I don't compare to core because of how broken it usually is. My issue with the TN is that it can't really beat the MT for any character concept I can think of. It has more flavor, true, but it lacks actual ability to fullfill the concept. JaronK
JaronK 01-24-08, 08:07 PM	On the topic of "Animate Dead" (Clr3,Wiz4) it is true the a TN doesn't gain the ability to cast this spell before 9th level (a cleric gains it at 5th and Wizard at 7th) but it gains the ability to use Create Undead (a 6th level spell) at 8th level which is three levels faster than either a cleric or wizard would. This is true, though as mentioned it can't apply Corpse Crafter to that spell. That said, it is in fact a noticeable advantage of the class (the others mentioned so far really aren't worth considering, IMO). There is the downside that your lowered casting stats (due to increased MAD) and heavily reduced rebuking make it a lot harder to actually control created critters, though. JaronK
StevenO 01-24-08, 11:21 PM	I'm still trying to figure out what is so great about Plague of Undead. Sure it can raise a lot of undead in a hurry provided there are bodies to animate but the normal limits all still apply. Most Necromancers should already have their undead limit close to filled which makes the spell just a "reload" type tool. At 20th level when you'd finally get the spell 40HD worth of zombie or skeletons may be a lot of hp but even a 20HD skeleton is only CR 8 which shouldn't cause too much hardship.
JaronK 01-24-08, 11:55 PM	I'm still trying to figure out what is so great about Plague of Undead. Sure it can raise a lot of undead in a hurry provided there are bodies to animate but the normal limits all still apply. Most Necromancers should already have their undead limit close to filled which makes the spell just a "reload" type tool. At 20th level when you'd finally get the spell 40HD worth of zombie or skeletons may be a lot of hp but even a 20HD skeleton is only CR 8 which shouldn't cause too much hardship. 1: Notice the undead are summoned with full hitpoints for their HD. This means a base 12 hitpoints per HD instead of 6.5. That's HUGE. It's nearly double hitpoints, in fact, though with Corpse Crafter it's not quite twofold. 2: Animate Dead maxes out at 20HD for raised stuff. Plague of Undead is not restricted like that, letting you have MUCH more powerful undead at your command. Combine this with point 1, and the quality of the undead you can make is just so much more. 3: Also, it's cheap. Woo. So yeah. It's the super powered Animate Dead. JaronK
StevenO 01-25-08, 12:24 AM	I keep looking but I don't see where it states that the Undead CREATED (not summoned, you have to have bodies to begin with) have maximum hp. Using average hp makes them half as tough as you believe. Perhaps it in the errata but neither PoU or Animate Dead specify how strong any given undead can be within the maximum HD limit of the character. I believe both spells are subject to the same maximum which I believe is equal to the caster level. Don't forget that the TN's Necromantic Prowess would add to its maximum. Also remember that all Plague of Undead creates are skeletons and zombies and two 20HD skeletons would still combine for only an EL 10 encounter. I can't argue with the difference in material component cost. No question the 9th level spell saves a bundle as a massive Animate Dead spell but that at the time it takes are really the only good things I see about it. Maybe there is another version of Plague of Undead out there that I'm missing.
JaronK 01-25-08, 12:41 AM	I keep looking but I don't see where it states that the Undead CREATED (not summoned, you have to have bodies to begin with) have maximum hp. Using average hp makes them half as tough as you believe. Where are you looking? I've got Heroes of Horror open right now and the second scentance is pretty darn clear ("maximum hit points for their hit dice). Perhaps it in the errata but neither PoU or Animate Dead specify how strong any given undead can be within the maximum HD limit of the character. Read the Skeleton and Zombie entries in the Monster Manual, which clearly state the maximum HD of a such a creature if it's created by Animate Dead (it's 20). Plague of Undead is, as you say, unrestricted. Very handy for creating 12 headed hydra zombies (24 HD, and 12 attacks as a standard action, woo!). I believe both spells are subject to the same maximum which I believe is equal to the caster level. That's nice. It doesn't say that. Don't forget that the TN's Necromantic Prowess would add to its maximum. Not true. Also remember that all Plague of Undead creates are skeletons and zombies and two 20HD skeletons would still combine for only an EL 10 encounter. But compare 20HD skeletons with 6.5 HP/HD to 30 HD skeletons with 12 HP/HD and you've got something. Now, when it's a Dread Necromancer with corpse crafter creating undead near a desecrated alter, and that skeleton might have 540 hitpoints. Your True Necromancer isn't going anywhere near that. JaronK
Jaxgaret 01-25-08, 12:58 AM	I'm going to go a bit off-topic here: JaronK, have you ever used the class Death Master from the Dragon Compendium? I'm not too sure how it would compare to a Dread Necro as a necromancer just from reading the class entry.
JaronK 01-25-08, 01:00 AM	I'm going to go a bit off-topic here: JaronK, have you ever used the class Death Master from the Dragon Compendium? I'm not too sure how it would compare to a Dread Necro as a necromancer just from reading the class entry. Nope. Never used it, and I don't have that book, so I know nothing about it. I love Dread Necromancers, though. JaronK
Broken vacuum 01-25-08, 07:38 AM	The issue here is that Rebuking is only good early on. If you're level 4, having a pair of 2HD undead to help out is quite nice. The probably have about as many HP as you do, they'll take hits for you, and maybe they have some DR that's quite significant at this level. At level 20, two 10 HD undead are roughly CR 5 unless you've gotten really lucky or creative. They'll get splattered by everything that moves at that level. So getting Rebuking later is just too late for it to matter much. It's like getting the ability to cast Sleep at will as a spell like ability at level 15. It would sure have been awesome 13 levels ago, but now it's just a gimmick. Sure, you could use that Rebuke to get a little specialty undead critter... but Control/Command Undead will handle that for you anyway. I think you underestimate rebuke undead as well as the usefulness of some undead rather severely. Command undead is great for single or few unintelligent undead; multiple and/or intelligent undead are bigger problems. Control Undead is quite all-right, but allows a will-save (just as Command for intelligent undead) and that is the good save of the targets. If the target(s) have so many HD as to be impossible to rebuke, making Control Undead stick can be a problem. Now, there are a lot of undead that you will never be able to command, but that does not mean that you cannot rebuke them and if you are up aginst a lot of undead - especially intelligent - that can come in very handy. Once you make them see your power, discussing services becomes an option. Furthermore, a lot of the intelligent undead have CRs a lot closer to their HD (swarms as well if you look on effective HD when it comes to rebuking) making them nice options for commanding. They seldom work well as meat-shields, but they often do work for utility and sometimes battlefield control. Flip through the monster section of LM and you will see a lot of interesting choices. Bear in mind that there are a couple of easy ways to make your rebuking considerably better. Both Heighten and Empower Turning is in LM and Scepter of the Netherworld together with Rod of Defiance (9k and 13k respectively) expand your available choices considerably. Darkskull. Also, the Greater Ring of Desecration, found here: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20021031x The Lesser one is enough for most purposes, though, and it's only 4kgp. Certainly, that's enough to make your better undead, which is the main use. Not even close to the TN ability that allows you to use your undead tactically to a much greater degree. I suspect that you see creation as its main use at least in part because the small radius of the spell forces your undead to be without its benefit a lot or you to remain very close to them. The Desecrate ability is only a 20ft emination, just like the spell. At first, yes, but from 7th level and onward it is 10 feet per TN level which is a huge increase. Combined with its selectivity it makes it much more useful in a combat situation. As someone who's currently playing a Dread Necromancer (which is an awesome and fun class) I gaurentee you that any decent undead specialist has no problem making damn sure that all undead in play are on his side within a few rounds. At this point, the DM puts undead enemies in our game strictly as treasure for me. As such, the selectivity thing hardly matters. You never encounter hosts of undead, enemy necromancers or similar? Sure with enough rounds (and no accomplished opposed necromancer) you can take control of them, but after a few rounds I expect you and your party to have suffered severely. Especially combined with your statement to the effect that rebuking is worthless later on I have to wonder what kind of undead opposition you are used to. I am not trying to imply that you play in a 'wrong' way or have a DM that coddles you, but playing experiences do differ. If you are used to single or few opponents of mostly unintelligent undead I can see where you are coming from, but otherwise I do not. Ouch, hadn't thought of that. That might mess up the Corpse Crafter line of feats too (which require creating them with a Necromancy spell, IIRC). That would make you noticably worse at undead creation if you use the spell-likes. By RAW it does as far as I have been able to see. House-ruling otherwise is dead obvious, I think, but that does not excuse the oversight. Well, I don't compare to core because of how broken it usually is. Well, I do not see how D&D becomes less broken by incorporating everything published into it, so I think that argument somewhat suspect. I have no real problem with people wanting to compare to everything published as standard if just for the reason that that is what they are using, but I think it less than fair to the individual splat-books. In such a large body of material there is bound to be problematic features that skew the comparison. As a final comment I think StevenO is looking at the Plague of Undead spell published in LM; it does not grant the undead full HP.
StevenO 01-25-08, 02:20 PM	It always becomes easier to bash a class as you expand your pool of references. Seeing how this thread was asking about the True Necromancer I'd take everything else mentioned as coming out of Libris Mortis which contains the Plague of Undead spell just as clear as day. It is impossible to read something in a spell description that isn't there especially when no one bothers to mention the alternate source for a spell when specifically asked. Adding Maximum hp/HD would indeed make the spell stronger but even 40HD of maximum hp skeleton should still be little more than a speed bump at that level.
JaronK 01-25-08, 06:34 PM	I think you underestimate rebuke undead as well as the usefulness of some undead rather severely. Command undead is great for single or few unintelligent undead; multiple and/or intelligent undead are bigger problems. Control Undead is quite all-right, but allows a will-save (just as Command for intelligent undead) and that is the good save of the targets. If the target(s) have so many HD as to be impossible to rebuke, making Control Undead stick can be a problem. Now, there are a lot of undead that you will never be able to command, but that does not mean that you cannot rebuke them and if you are up aginst a lot of undead - especially intelligent - that can come in very handy. Once you make them see your power, discussing services becomes an option. Furthermore, a lot of the intelligent undead have CRs a lot closer to their HD (swarms as well if you look on effective HD when it comes to rebuking) making them nice options for commanding. They seldom work well as meat-shields, but they often do work for utility and sometimes battlefield control. Oh, I agree there are a few undead that are good for rebuking. Slaymates, for example. Still, the ability becomes less and less useful at higher levels, and I think Control/Command Undead is a much better option that covers the same role much of the time. I also think that a TN's caster level loss and lower casting stats make it harder to stick those spells (or have them available when you want them). Flip through the monster section of LM and you will see a lot of interesting choices. Bear in mind that there are a couple of easy ways to make your rebuking considerably better. Both Heighten and Empower Turning is in LM and Scepter of the Netherworld together with Rod of Defiance (9k and 13k respectively) expand your available choices considerably. Fair enough. I may have downplayed the rebuking a bit more than I should have. That said, if you wanted to be a rebuke focused character, you'd be a Cleric or Dread Necromancer, not a True Necromancer or Mystic Theurge. Not even close to the TN ability that allows you to use your undead tactically to a much greater degree. I suspect that you see creation as its main use at least in part because the small radius of the spell forces your undead to be without its benefit a lot or you to remain very close to them. True, I consider the primary use to be hitpoints, mostly because I consider those extra hitpoints so important to keeping minions alive. The extra benefits are somewhat handy, but I think the permanent hitpoints are the biggest deal. At first, yes, but from 7th level and onward it is 10 feet per TN level which is a huge increase. Combined with its selectivity it makes it much more useful in a combat situation. I had in fact missed that part about expanded radius. That's handy. That's the handiest thing I've seen in the class! You never encounter hosts of undead, enemy necromancers or similar? Sure with enough rounds (and no accomplished opposed necromancer) you can take control of them, but after a few rounds I expect you and your party to have suffered severely. Especially combined with your statement to the effect that rebuking is worthless later on I have to wonder what kind of undead opposition you are used to. I've never encountered large hordes of weak undead. It's usually 4 or less undead at a time, each one of a decent threat level. Against a weak horde, I could certainly rebuke (not necessarily to command, but possibly to keep them out of the fight), but then again against a weak horde of undead I'm not worried. My party can smash through a bunch of low CR runts very quickly. I am not trying to imply that you play in a 'wrong' way or have a DM that coddles you, but playing experiences do differ. If you are used to single or few opponents of mostly unintelligent undead I can see where you are coming from, but otherwise I do not. Lately it's been small bunches of medium intelligence undead. I'm now the proud owner of two dex 20 intelligent ghoulish things. Well, I do not see how D&D becomes less broken by incorporating everything published into it, so I think that argument somewhat suspect. I have no real problem with people wanting to compare to everything published as standard if just for the reason that that is what they are using, but I think it less than fair to the individual splat-books. In such a large body of material there is bound to be problematic features that skew the comparison. Ah, here's the deal. In core, they hadn't yet figured out the balance yet. That's why 3 of the top 5 classes (Druid, Wizard, and Cleric) are in core, and only two other classes released in all subsequent books (Archivist and Artificer) can compete. Meanwhile, two of the weakest classes (Fighter and Monk) are also core. The most broken spells are likewise core (Explosive Runes, Timestop, Shapechange), as are the most broken items (Dust of Choking, Candle of Invocation). If you have two creative players who want to really play their characters intelligently (i.e. the characters use the best of their abilities to solve problems) and one wants to play an intellectual mage type while the other wants to play a intellectual sword weilder type, you can't do it in core without one just being obviously better than the other. If you have all books allowed, the sword swinger can play a Warblade and while he won't be quite as strong as the Wizard, he can still contribute. The basic issue is that Core has tons of broken stuff, but not enough balanced stuff. If you play with the rest of the books and just remove the occasionally broken thing, you can actually do so much more... specifically, you can create so many more character concepts without being broken. As a final comment I think StevenO is looking at the Plague of Undead spell published in LM; it does not grant the undead full HP. I keep forgetting the double printing. The Heroes of Horror version is more recent and does grant full HP. JaronK
mobius789 05-05-08, 10:38 PM	I'I don't own the Heroes of Horror book, but I was wondering if it would be possible to simply make a combination out of Cleric/Dread Necromancer/True Necromancer. As far as I can tell it would meet the same requirements, and while sacrificing versitility as a arcane caster you would get greater bonuses concerning undead. Then again, I don't have the full set of rules so I might be wrong.
JaronK 05-05-08, 11:31 PM	I'I don't own the Heroes of Horror book, but I was wondering if it would be possible to simply make a combination out of Cleric/Dread Necromancer/True Necromancer. As far as I can tell it would meet the same requirements, and while sacrificing versitility as a arcane caster you would get greater bonuses concerning undead. Then again, I don't have the full set of rules so I might be wrong. You could do it, but it would be far weaker than a simple Cleric or Dread Necromancer, so I wouldn't recommend it. You're also far weaker concerning undead. For example, Dread Necromancer's best undead command ability (and it's REALLY good) comes at level 8, which you wouldn't get. JaronK
Kain01 11-14-08, 06:38 PM	Just tossing this out there (bored and necro's are a good way to stir summin), it seems to me people always forget about the necromancric prowess ability. Or else they don't think it's all that great. It stacks with every necromantic thing you do (rebuke/spell-like abilities/spells/whatever's left). So a nec 3/cler 3/tn 14 is casting necromancy spells as a lvl 19 character. You add practiced spellcaster to both sides and he's casting as a lvl 23 caster. He's also rebuking undead as a 17th lvl cleric something the mt is still doing at lvl 3. I really think if you do the uttercold necro/tn combo you've got a formidable necromancer on your hands. And if you are doing epics you will get your 9th level spells before 25. Neat trick for mt or tn, grab a mithral chain shirt with the twilight magical ability from book of exalted deeds....no spell failure.
Objulen 11-16-08, 12:05 AM	The TN is, overall, a very weak class. Create Undead and Create Greater Undead aren't very useful. Desecration Aura is good, but there's nothing built into the class to upgrade it, so unless your DM lets you become the equivalent of a shrine dedicated to your deity, you're stilling going to want to cast Desecrate, and casting Desecrate or making a mobile zombie-shrine isn't hard. Necromantic Prowess is good, but all it does it make up for lost rebuking levels and caster levels, even if you invest in Practiced Caster. All of the other spells and spell-like abilities are available to wizards or clerics with the right domain at lower levels. Fixing the true necromancer, however, isn't too hard with a bit of home brewing. First, Precocious Apprentice makes it much better, and actually turns Necromantic Prowess into a real advantage. Secondly, Major Desecration should upgrade the aura as well. Third, remove the first Create Undead and replace it with a material-free Animate Dead, like the Palemaster ability. Speaking of Palemasters, give the True Necromancer undead armor affinity at appropriate levels as well. Finally, give full caster progression in both classes after level 2 in the PrC. Those combined factors make the class playable, though it still won't be as powerful as a cleric, or in some cases, a straight wizard, but it makes up for it with versatility.
Kain01 11-16-08, 01:24 PM	I dunno, I still say that being able to cast arcane AND divine spells is a huge benefit. Who wants to run through a necromancer's uttercold assault and larger than regular wiz/cleric's undead army (albeit nowhere close to the size of a DN's undead army) to find a fully buffed cleric with divine power on him?
Zathress 11-16-08, 02:02 PM	I dunno, I still say that being able to cast arcane AND divine spells is a huge benefit. Who wants to run through a necromancer's uttercold assault and larger than regular wiz/cleric's undead army (albeit nowhere close to the size of a DN's undead army) to find a fully buffed cleric with divine power on him? My PC's certainly didn't want to. When they faced off against the True Necromancer, Vukodlak, multiple times. They had to face a guy with both cleric and arcane buffs the ability to heal himself *Harm himself in the final encounter when he was a Lich* And having played a True Necromancer before I can vouch for their versatility on the PC side. Also you CAN upgrade the True Necromancers desecrate to its greater version. The spell simply says if the desecrated area contains an alter or permanent fixture to your deity the effects are doubled. It doesn't say the alter has to predate the spell. If the True Necro stands next to a permanent fixture to his deity his aura would gain the benefits.
StevenO 11-16-08, 03:54 PM	Looking back I see I've already written too much in support of the TN. It is not the powergamers best choice for a class but it certainly works well as intended for the simple Cleric3/Wizard3 looking to combine their necromantic potential.
Kain01 11-17-08, 12:54 PM	My PC's certainly didn't want to. When they faced off against the True Necromancer, Vukodlak, multiple times. They had to face a guy with both cleric and arcane buffs the ability to heal himself *Harm himself in the final encounter when he was a Lich* And having played a True Necromancer before I can vouch for their versatility on the PC side. Also you CAN upgrade the True Necromancers desecrate to its greater version. The spell simply says if the desecrated area contains an alter or permanent fixture to your deity the effects are doubled. It doesn't say the alter has to predate the spell. If the True Necro stands next to a permanent fixture to his deity his aura would gain the benefits. Wouldn't a holy symbol count for a permanent fixture to your deity? Finally someone else who's used one. Outside of a rogue who's 100% focused in UMD, there isn't a more versatile character in all of 3.5.
Zathress 11-17-08, 01:24 PM	Casting desecrate requires your holy symbol so obviously thats not a permanent fixture. An alter, a shrine, are examples given of permanent fixture. If you can pick it up and stow it in a portable hole then its not really a permanent fixture.
Kain01 11-18-08, 08:13 PM	How about a tarrasque ssized holy symbol that you've merely shrunk?????? o.0 J/k :D
Objulen 11-18-08, 10:05 PM	I dunno, I still say that being able to cast arcane AND divine spells is a huge benefit. Who wants to run through a necromancer's uttercold assault and larger than regular wiz/cleric's undead army (albeit nowhere close to the size of a DN's undead army) to find a fully buffed cleric with divine power on him? At what level? A single class cleric or a Palemaster is going to be better at those strategies than a true necro, especially since you won't want to be anywhere near melee without armor.
Kain01 11-19-08, 11:39 AM	At what level? A single class cleric or a Palemaster is going to be better at those strategies than a true necro, especially since you won't want to be anywhere near melee without armor. Well at level 20 you're only 1 classlevel behind the others at creating undead, and that's if you don't take the practiced spellcaster feat for both sides of spells (which is retarded not to). If you do go the practiced spellcaster route like your supposed to for the MT and TN (and any other dual casting classes), your actually casting any necromancy spell that creates an undead at 3 caster levels higher than a base cleric, a palemaster, and a dread necro. Though the DN's cha bonus trumps anything that any other class that wants to control undead can do. That's why you make a epic TN and give him a lvl 20 lich DN henchman........mwhahahahahaha
1 ton ghost 11-19-08, 02:00 PM	Speaking of increasing necromantic prowess, not sure how apt it is here, but I think Mobs, Undead (DMG II) might be worth a mention in terms of mass low HD undead. That is, more than once it's been mentioned that alot of low HD undead, skeletons & zombies specifically per Animate Dead, are nice at lower lvl play. Not so much higher up. However, given the Mob HD w/ respect to such immense numbers of skeletons/zombies (CR 1/3 & 1/2? respectively), is it feasible to just "pool them up" into a Mob rather than just individual oodles and oodels of "occupied 5 ft squares" of many lesser entities that serve as blockage and little else at higher lvls (not a credible threat to higher lvl enemies)? This is the prefered method for making your typical zombie apocalypse and the like a reasonable EL for adventurers beyond the fighting capacity (having lvl'ed a bit) of a lot of individual zombies that they can wade through w/ great ease considering judicious Turn/Rebuke checks, Cleave, area effect spells, etc. that said higher lvls afford them. Ex) given feats & special abilities, etc., you could be looking at a ton of HD worth of skeletons/zombies for traditional methods w/ net HD/HD exceeding a Mob's (a CR 8 I think) at lower lvls. This may very well exceed a Mob's HD when looking at the sum, but they are truly a force to be reconed w/ when treated as a singular entity (Mob is a gargantuan sized "thing" w/ Trample, Imp. Grab, etc. etc.) vs. alot of weaker individual "units". Is this even possible when consolidating necromantic assets w/ Animate Dead (presumably "under control") to take all those lesser undead and treat them as a Mob or is this the provice of Create Undead or something else?
Objulen 11-23-08, 12:47 AM	Well at level 20 you're only 1 classlevel behind the others at creating undead, and that's if you don't take the practiced spellcaster feat for both sides of spells (which is retarded not to). If you do go the practiced spellcaster route like your supposed to for the MT and TN (and any other dual casting classes), your actually casting any necromancy spell that creates an undead at 3 caster levels higher than a base cleric, a palemaster, and a dread necro. Though the DN's cha bonus trumps anything that any other class that wants to control undead can do. That's why you make a epic TN and give him a lvl 20 lich DN henchman........mwhahahahahaha At epic levels, yes, then true necromancer can be very good. However, that's because it's caught up with both the cleric and wizard. For standard play its still pretty weak. And while a 20th level TN with two Practiced Caster feats will cast necromancy spells at full caster level, it's still a minimum of 5 levels behind a single class cleric or wizard, which is a minimum of one spell level, two for spontaneous casters.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-23-08, 01:41 AM	Actually, you're 2 levels behind, three for spontaneous casters. 5/2=2.5 Someone smarter than I did said it better: Top Ten Reasons True Necromancers Are Bad 1. At 14th level, you are five caster levels behind in both classes, so if the party Fighter took Leadership, and his cohort got Leadership, he’d actually be bringing more Necromancy to the table than you. As a fighter. 2. You have to take the Death Domain as a Necromancer Cleric, which is a waste of a Domain Slot when you are trying to be good at Necromancy. 3. In the early levels, you postpone your access to Animate Dead by 4 levels. 4. At 8th level a True Necromancer can create, but not control Ghouls. A Cleric at that level can control but not create Ghouls. Guess which is better? At 11th level, the True Necromancer gets the ability to control Ghouls, and the Cleric gets the ability to create them, so there’s no point at which this is advantageous. 5. The only unique ability of the True Necromancer class is unimpressive. Desecrate is a great spell, but it’s also a second level spell. 6. True Necromancers eventually get a bonus to Rebuking – at 17th level they have a +1 bonus to their Rebuking level. But at 7th level they have a 3 level penalty to their Rebuking level. So at low levels when rebuking is good they can’t use it, and at high levels when Rebuking doesn’t matter they don’t care. 7. True Necromancers are always going to have underwhelming Save DCs. Between MAD and the fact that they are often forced to use spells that are 3 spell levels lower than what the single-classed casters can use, they’re going to be out enough Save DC that it shows. A lot. 8. As a True Necromancer you have all the disadvantages of both a Cleric (the gods can take away all your spellcasting at any time), and a Wizard (you have Arcane Spell Failure, preventing you from wearing good armor). Also, your BAB and HPs stink when compared to a Cleric. 9. Control pools from Animate Dead actually don’t accumulate between your two classes. It’ right in the spell, if you cast the spell it considers all undead you control from all castings of Animate Dead, not just your Arcane or just your Divine castings of the spell. Some people say differently, and some even quote CustServ, but when was the last time you won an argument with your DM using the line "some guy on a board said that CustServ told him....."? 10. There is almost no synergy between Cleric and Wizard Necromancy. Any synergy you desperately want to find could be replicated by just taking the Apprentice feat at first level and having some Use Magic Device. Get yourself a couple of Wizard Scrolls or something. It’s a better buy than setting 5 caster levels on fire. Smart cookies can even get the right spell effects off monsters for free, no less.
Kain01 11-23-08, 01:43 PM	Actually, you're 2 levels behind, three for spontaneous casters. 5/2=2.5 Someone smarter than I did said it better: A TN at level 20 is a 20th level character that casts arcane and divine spells as a 15th level caster in both respects. Once Necromantic Prowess is thrown in (which I like the T&B version better), he casts as a 19th level caster. And last time I checked 12 (TN) + 3 (Cle/Wiz) + 4 (PS) equalled 19. So at 20th level with practiced spellcaster, your casting spells one level lower than a single class character. Now once you throw in Necromantic prowess, you are casting necromancy spells as a level 23 character, and rebuking undead as a 21st level cleric (14 TN + 3 Cle + 4 NP). And as for the reasons why TN is a bad prestige class list, half of his information and math was incorrect or irrelevant and was picked apart three maybe four pages into the thread.
Kain01 11-23-08, 02:05 PM	Corrected and fixed True Necromancy class. This is the version that should have been placed in 3.5. It even leaves you four levels to play with, if your dm allows it, continue on as an "Epic" TN before level 20, if not toss in 4 levels of Mystic Theurge and voila a TN with some cool abilities and access to 9th level spells. True Necromancer Hit Die: D6 RequirementsAlignment: Any nongood Skills: Knowledge (Arcana) 8 ranks, Knowledge (Religion) 8 ranks Feat: Spell Focus (Necromancy) Spells: Death Knell (Divine), Command Undead (Arcane) Special: Rebuke Undead, Access to Death Domain Class Skills Concentration, Craft, Heal, Knowledge (Arcana), Knowledge (Religion), Profession, Search, Spellcraft Skill Points at Each Level: 2+Int modifier Class Features Weapon/Armor Proficiency: None Spells per Day/Spells Known: At every level a TN gains an additional caster level in 1 arcane and 1 divine Spellcasting class. However he does not gain additional abilities of that class. Rebuke Undead: All levels of TN stack with any rebuking ability the character had prior to becoming a TN. Create Undead: On attaining 2nd level a TN can Create Undead as a spell-like ability, once per day. She can use this power one additional time per day at 5th level and higher. She must still supply the requisite material components. Necromantic Prowess: At 2nd level a true necromancer gains unsurpassed power over death. When she rebukes undead, casts a necromancy spell or a spell from the death domain, or uses a spell-like ability that mimics necromancy spells or a spell from the death domain, her effective caster level increases. Bonus is as follows: +1 at 2nd level, +2 at 4th level, +3 at 6th level, +4 at 8th level, and +5 at 10th level. Zone of Desecration: At 3rd level the TN begins to exert her authority over undead. This aura of supernatural negative energy is identical to the effects of the Desecrate spell, except it only effects allied undead. Create Greater Undead: At 6th level a TN can Create Greater Undead as a spell-like ability, once per day. She can use this ability one additional time per day at 10th level. She must still provide the requisite material component. Major Desecration: Upon attaining 7th level the TN extends her authority over undead. Her supernatural aura of negative energy now extends to a radius of 10 feet per true necromancer class level Animate Dead: Upon reaching 9th level a TN no longer needs material components for animating Undead True Desecrate: Upon attaining 10th level of TN her Desecrate abilities double, as though she were an altar to death herself. Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1 +0 +0 +0 +2 Rebuke Undead 2 +1 +0 +0 +3 Create Undead 1/day, Necro Prowess +1 3 +1 +1 +1 +3 Zone of Desecration 4 +2 +1 +1 +4 Necro Prowess +2 5 +2 +2 +2 +4 Create Undead 2/day 6 +3 +2 +2 +5 Create Greater Undead 1/day, Necro Prowess +3 7 +3 +3 +3 +5 Major Desecration 8 +4 +3 +3 +6 Necro Prowess +4 9 +4 +4 +4 +6 Animate Dead 10 +5 +4 +4 +7 Create Greater Undead 2/day, Necro Prowess +5, True Desecrate
Di_Bastet 11-23-08, 09:30 PM	This is just what I needed. I was really going to ask what was needed to make this class works, maybe just giving him his poor spellcaster levels? I'll copy and paste it into my setting's handbook!
Count Arioch the 28th 11-24-08, 12:09 AM	A TN at level 20 is a 20th level character that casts arcane and divine spells as a 15th level caster in both respects. Once Necromantic Prowess is thrown in (which I like the T&B version better), he casts as a 19th level caster. And last time I checked 12 (TN) + 3 (Cle/Wiz) + 4 (PS) equalled 19. So at 20th level with practiced spellcaster, your casting spells one level lower than a single class character. Now once you throw in Necromantic prowess, you are casting necromancy spells as a level 23 character, and rebuking undead as a 21st level cleric (14 TN + 3 Cle + 4 NP). Yeah, you are still not casting any 8th or 9th level spells. You can blah blah blah about your level, but your spells are crap that everyone stopped caring about 5 levels ago. And as for the reasons why TN is a bad prestige class list, half of his information and math was incorrect or irrelevant and was picked apart three maybe four pages into the thread. No it wasn't. That's a baldfaced lie and you know it. EDIT: Wait a minute, if you think True Necromancer is so awesome, why are you making a better version of it? If you find anyone that disagrees with you so repugnant that you have to lie in order to make them look bad, why are you then saying you agree with us by making an improved version? I think that I don't actually need to listen to anything else you say now.
Zathress 11-24-08, 12:47 AM	Count, your incompetence in the field of effective spell casting knows no bounds. Not to mention your complete lack of understanding of spellcasting progression. A True Necro14/Wiz3/Clr3 Is a 15th level caster in both thus he can cast BOTH 8th level arcane and divine spells. So your statement they can't cast 8th level spells is completely false, they can before epic. Assay Spell Resistance takes care of SR enemies and he certainly has spell slots to spare. The person who made that list was also incompetent in the field of rebuking. A few shadows or spectre can prove vital allies and are easily rebuked. As they are incorporeal most monsters can't possibly hit them with physical attacks unless they gain an actually +1 enchantment to them. When a Wizard or Cleric would have long run out of choice spells the True Necro can keep on going.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-24-08, 01:51 AM	Alright, they can cast 8th level spells. Which means that a true necromancer still casts spells people stopped caring about 5 levels ago. My error did not alter my argument one whit, this is one of the true examples of straw-man arguments on this board. (Most of what people call "straw man" are closer to either "jumping to conclusions", "black and white fallacy" or just flat out "pulling stuff out of their bums".) And you blah blah blah about rebuking shadows. A straight cleric can do so a lot earlier than a true necromancer. That's like saying a wizard is a good fighter because they have a +10 BaB at level 20, ignoring the fact that most people have a +10 BaB considerably earlier. A straight cleric with a wizard cohort brings more necromancy to the table than a true necromancer. Hell, a fighter with a cleric cohort and that cohort taking leadership and having a wizard is still better at spellcasting. The whole "A big pile of crappy spells is better than good spells" has been argued to death, and your side lost every time. If you're too stupid to know that, then you aren't worth my time explaining it to you. And it's funny you keep dismissing THE treatise on necromancy as it exists on 3.5. YOU are the one that doesn't know anything about rebuking.
Kain01 11-24-08, 12:02 PM	Yeah, you are still not casting any 8th or 9th level spells. You can blah blah blah about your level, but your spells are crap that everyone stopped caring about 5 levels ago. As you've been made aware already they do get 8th level spells, and will have ninth level spells for both at level 24. And please show me the weak level 16 mage that can't damage anyone, I'll show you a poorly created/poorly utilized build. Can't fix stupid. What does a Necromancer get with 9th level spells that he doesn't get as a spell-like ability anyway. If your only going by the PHB he's not losing a whole lot. No it wasn't. That's a baldfaced lie and you know it. No really it was, by myself and quite a few other people that disagreed. I may have been off by a page or 20 but most of those arguments are moot. Try reading the whole 20 some odd pages before you open that mouse trap of yours. Hell try reading page two, here's the first post made to counter the top 10. Sorry, the rebuke ability is 1 lvl ahead of the straight cleric. What 10? same as a wizard. A base of 8, so still more than a wizard. Err.. 15 base by my count. Or did i forget something? Well this is a Necromancer Handbook, isn't it? :P You will gain lvl 9 spells in epic lvls, but pick up Practiced Spellcaster. That will make you one lvl behind in cl and 5 lvls in progression. Still, you have spells as both a cleric and a wizard. EDIT--- Fight1/Wiz 4/Urpriest2/True Necromancer13? EDIT--- EDIT: Wait a minute, if you think True Necromancer is so awesome, why are you making a better version of it? If you find anyone that disagrees with you so repugnant that you have to lie in order to make them look bad, why are you then saying you agree with us by making an improved version? I think that I don't actually need to listen to anything else you say now. I didn't make a better version of it, I combined the 3rd and 3.5 edition into one 10 level prestige class. The only thing that this TN can do better is it has access to lvl 9 spells. I only posted it because apparently people out there don't have the imagination or the 5 minutes of time it took to cook it together. I have not once lied about anything and the fact that your calling me a liar when you OBVIOUSLY have not read the entirety of the Necromancer thread makes you a ignorant of this topic, and you should just be quiet now. You never had to listen to me to begin with, I even admitted early on I was bored the other day and this thread was a good way to stir some trouble.
Kain01 11-24-08, 12:22 PM	Alright, they can cast 8th level spells. Which means that a true necromancer still casts spells people stopped caring about 5 levels ago. My error did not alter my argument one whit, this is one of the true examples of straw-man arguments on this board. (Most of what people call "straw man" are closer to either "jumping to conclusions", "black and white fallacy" or just flat out "pulling stuff out of their bums".) Ok saw the second post, and had to comment again. Actually level 8 spells is pretty good. Level 9 spells don't grant you a whole lot. Let's Look at them shall we? 9th-Level Sorcerer/Wizard Spells Abjur Freedom Imprisonment Mage’s Disjunction Prismatic Sphere Conj Gate Refuge Summon Monster IX Teleportation Circle Div Foresight Ench Dominate Monster Hold Monster, Mass Power Word Kill Evoc Crushing Hand Meteor Swarm Illus Shades Weird Necro Astral Projection Energy Drain Soul Bind Wail of the Banshee Trans Etherealness Shapechange Time Stop Univ Wish 9th-Level Cleric Spells Astral Projection Energy Drain Etherealness Gate Heal, Mass Implosion Miracle Soul Bind Storm of Vengeance Summon Monster IX True Resurrection What on either of those two lists is a TN going to miss? He gets Energy Drain and Wail, losing implosion, meteor swarm, and time stop stinks, but really, most of these other spells are fluff. (nobody uses wish unless they have a lax dm) And you blah blah blah about rebuking shadows. A straight cleric can do so a lot earlier than a true necromancer. That's like saying a wizard is a good fighter because they have a +10 BaB at level 20, ignoring the fact that most people have a +10 BaB considerably earlier. A straight cleric with a wizard cohort brings more necromancy to the table than a true necromancer. Hell, a fighter with a cleric cohort and that cohort taking leadership and having a wizard is still better at spellcasting. If I hear this leadership BS again I'm going to shoot myself. NOBODY USES LEADERSHIP IN A REAL GAMING SESSION. Allow me to clarify, no one outside of a fighter class utilizes leadership as a feat, their the only class with enough feats to waste on the cannon fodder that feat grants you. And if it erks you that badly, give the TN leadership. There lets move on. The whole "A big pile of crappy spells is better than good spells" has been argued to death, and your side lost every time. If you're too stupid to know that, then you aren't worth my time explaining it to you. There's an argument with sides going on? Wasn't aware. See last post about the poorly utilized build for my argument here. And it's funny you keep dismissing THE treatise on necromancy as it exists on 3.5. YOU are the one that doesn't know anything about rebuking. A TN rebukes 1 level lower than a cleric at level 20 and is better at epics. I'm dismissing nothing, I've just seen the class in action against straight toons.
Sinfire Titan 11-24-08, 12:51 PM	9th-Level Sorcerer/Wizard Spells Abjur Freedom Imprisonment Mage’s Disjunction Prismatic Sphere Conj Gate Refuge Summon Monster IX Teleportation Circle Div Foresight Ench Dominate Monster Hold Monster, Mass Power Word Kill Evoc Crushing Hand Meteor Swarm Illus Shades Weird Necro Astral Projection Energy Drain Soul Bind Wail of the Banshee Trans Etherealness Shapechange Time Stop Univ Wish 9th-Level Cleric Spells Astral Projection Energy Drain Etherealness Gate Heal, Mass Implosion Miracle Soul Bind Storm of Vengeance Summon Monster IX True Resurrection What on either of those two lists is a TN going to miss? He gets Energy Drain and Wail, losing implosion, meteor swarm, and time stop stinks, but really, most of these other spells are fluff. (nobody uses wish unless they have a lax dm) I've highlight the spells that kick ass, that will make the TN cry for mommy. Most of those are very good (Mass Heal is arguably the worst, but even then it rocks). Oh, and Time Stop does not suck.
JaronK 11-24-08, 01:29 PM	Also, just for the Necromancer thematic reasons, Plague of Undead is 9th level. It's the supercharged version of Animate Dead that breaks the normal HD caps for the spell, costs less, and pumps up the hit points of created minions. Plus... GENESIS! Which is actually quite good with undead, even if you're not totally breaking the game with it. Make a majorly negative dominant, flowing time 365,000 plane. Cast gate and throw your controlled minions into it. Order them to return when you next give them a gate out. Cast gate to get them out in one day, and they will have been there for 1,000 years, enough to give them the evolved template up to 10 times. It's a great way to permanently buff your minions. Just a thought. JaronK
Kain01 11-24-08, 01:59 PM	I've highlight the spells that kick ass, that will make the TN cry for mommy. Most of those are very good (Mass Heal is arguably the worst, but even then it rocks). Oh, and Time Stop does not suck. I know I said losing it sucks. Mage’s Disjunction Grant you Prismatic Sphere Prismatic Wall does the exact same thing, only limited in that it only faces one direction. Put it between you and the enemy. Gate You can plane shift already, and the calling feature is iffy if your summoning anything with some real HD, cause there's a good chance it's not under your control. Teleportation Circle Handy for getting around casteles or cities quickly, but not practical in a combat setting. Pay an npc if this spell is really needed. Dominate Monster What's a necro doing with ench? I'll humor it anyway. Outside of running across a level 17- fighter based monster, most things are going to make this save. Hold Monster, Mass The only things this spell will probably work against the fighter in your party should be able to take out with two cleaves. Shades My necromancers also don't have illusion spells, but I can see their usefulness with necromancy. This particular one, I'll grant ya. Astral Projection Was never a fan of the Dr. Strange/Prof. X astral plane visits, and lets face it, there's nothing there but a whiny old githyanki queen. And besides it's the Astral Plane, so you can get there with plane shift. Etherealness See last part of Astral Projection. Shapechange Grant you Time Stop Really sucks losing this one. Wish Fluff spell that no one uses unless the dm is free with it. (I've yet to cast a wish spell that didn't do the opposite of what I wanted, or didn't kill my character in the process somehow.) Heal, Mass ????????anybody but a TN I would agree with you. On topic though this should be the LAST spell a TN uses. Miracle See wish Ok of the ones you selected, I'll concede on two. So a pure wiz gets 2 extra spells that are useful to him, going by the PHB alone. If you're using other books, why are you not going epic? And I think we have all at least agreed this is a good epic prestige class.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-24-08, 02:21 PM	A TN rebukes 1 level lower than a cleric at level 20 and is better at epics. I'm dismissing nothing, I've just seen the class in action against straight toons. Alright, if I hear people used mamorpuguh slang talking about pen and paper again, I'M going to shoot MYSELF in the foot. It's not a "toon". It's a CHARACTER. Second, level 20 is not the only level that people play on. Let's assume a TN, entering at 3/3 cleric/wiz. We'll assume human, and cleric levels first to take advantage of their superior HP at first level. From levels 1-3, cleric, so same as cleric. From levels 4-6, you do no increase rebuking at all. So you're stuck with 1 HD skeletons (or a ghostly visage if you're lucky) the whole time, while the straight cleric 6 is getting zombies and stuff with rebuking. Alright, the big day, the TN has now entered his PrC! The True Necromancer gets the ability to stack TN levels with other rebuking classes! Except you're still three levels behind. So when the 8th level cleric has a pet shadow now from rebuking, the TN doesn't. (funny how you used that an example of how TN is awesome, when the cleric can do it thee levels ago.) At level 9, the TN gets Necromantic Prowess. Which means from levels 9-11, he's only 2 levels behind rebuking! He finally catches up at level 15, and finally at level 18, the True Necromancer can rebuke at one level higher than the straight cleric. Also, the true necromancer gets the ability to create undead that it has no way of controlling early. and cast a few of the weaker level 9 spells a couple of times a day. She only gives up early access to Animate Dead, reduced rebuking from levels 4-14, ninth levels spells that actually matter (You glib dismissals only proves your ignorance of high level play), spell save DCs, multi stat deficiencies, the list goes on. So, if you want to rebuke at one level higher when undead your CR have hit dice in the thirties, be my guest. I'd rather have rebuking in mid-game, when you can do level-appropriate things with it. But never mind, your character does something cute at 20th level. That means that sucking poop the last 19 means something, never mind that your character probably would have died many times over from lack of things to do.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-24-08, 02:44 PM	No really it was, by myself and quite a few other people that disagreed. I may have been off by a page or 20 but most of those arguments are moot. Try reading the whole 20 some odd pages before you open that mouse trap of yours. Hell try reading page two, here's the first post made to counter the top 10. Actually, I read all 28 pages before answering. Not one logical argument was given to refute THEIR argument (Remember, it's two guys), and the one you quoted was possibly the least coherent response in that thread. No one proved anything wrong, with the exceptions of various rules changes made after the guide was written (Ghoul Gauntlet was reprinted in Spell Compendium and improved slightly, to give an example. But Frank and Keith can't see into the future.) Heck, I proved that YOU don't even have the math right, and you keep spouting off crap about epic levels. There's no semblance of balance in Epic anyway; there's a good reason why the Epic Level Handbook bears the nick "the D&D Joke Book". I bet more DMs allow Leadership than allow Epic play. (Haven't tested it in a scientifically rigorous fashion, but I know several DMs, including myself , that allow Leadership, and only know of two or three that do epic out of the hundreds of DMs I've known.)
Kain01 11-24-08, 05:14 PM	No one proved anything wrong, with the exceptions of various rules changes made after the guide was written (Ghoul Gauntlet was reprinted in Spell Compendium and improved slightly, to give an example. But Frank and Keith can't see into the future.) I only went searching for when the dispute started, and it was page 2. So indeed I was wrong. The top ten list is wrong on several things, the not being able to control ghouls is one of them. A ghoul is a 2HD creature, a level 4 cleric can command/destroy it. The twice as many levels has nothing to do with the rolls, it only has to do your character level. 2hd creature can be destroyed by a lvl 4 cleric. The only way a TN can't control the ghoul is if he has 0 bonus in cha, and then why are you playing a rebuking TOON at all? Heck, I proved that YOU don't even have the math right, and you keep spouting off crap about epic levels. There's no semblance of balance in Epic anyway; there's a good reason why the Epic Level Handbook bears the nick "the D&D Joke Book". I bet more DMs allow Leadership than allow Epic play. (Haven't tested it in a scientifically rigorous fashion, but I know several DMs, including myself , that allow Leadership, and only know of two or three that do epic out of the hundreds of DMs I've known.) Well you have had completely the opposite experiences I have. More Dm's I know would rather play epic than have all the extra little cohorts to take care of. And speaking of leadership, unless your cha is up around 16-18 your only getting a lvl 16 wizard to help you out anyway. Still no access to 9th level spells, so he's just fodder if you ever do fight a true necro. (you should talk to that dm about throwing 30 cr baddies at level 18-20 parties, jeez. If played CORRECTLY most cr 30's will wipe a party of 20's without breaking much of a sweat.) Has anyone ever mentioned that a TN has 73 spell slots before ability bonuses at level 20? (yeah I got that people sometimes stop at 20, but still they'll always have twice as many spells a regular cle/wiz after level 8, and yeah they usually suck up till then)
Count Arioch the 28th 11-24-08, 09:22 PM	I don't know where you're getting "roll" from, in fact, Frank and Keith specifically say that you don't roll, you either command it or you don't. No one is claiming that anyone rolls to command. Alright, let's start out with why you personally don't know how rebuking ACTUALLY works. A ghoul has two hit dice and turn resistance +2. Which means that a cleric needs to be at least level 8 to command one (Remember, Turn Resistance counts as hit dice for turning, rebuking, bolstering, or commanding undead SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#turnResistance) Which means you need to be a level 8 cleric to command one of the buggers (2 hit dice + 2 turn resistance = 4, 2 * 4 = 8). A cleric can do that at level 8. When resolving rebuking attempts, ONLY classes that have the rebuking ability are added in the attempt. SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#turnOrRebukeUndead) A True necromancer does NOT add his wizard levels to his rebuking. That means that you are three levels behind when you enter the class, and gradually start to catch up. A True Necromancer has to be level 10 to be able to do that. (3 levels cleric + 4 levels True Necromancer + 1 Necromantic Prowess = 10.) So, I think that Frank and Keith were off by one. So, there is ONE level, level 10 where the True Necromancer has the advantage in creating and controlling Ghouls, which is lost when everyone hits level 11. That's not worth giving up that much spellcasting power. You also don't understand how Leadership works. You could potentially get a +4 bonus to your leadership score through being a nice guy, having special powers, and being famous. Also, there are feats in various supplements that further augment this. Unless you're running around with very low charisma, you should have a cohort 2 levels below you at all times. At level 20, that's enough to have a cohort that casts level 9 spells. Also, you are clueless about the undead type in general. I'm not saying CR 30 undead. I'm saying 30 HIT DIE undead. For example, a CR 18 Nightcrawler has 25 hit dice. For the undead type, 4 hit dice equals +1 CR, therefore a CR 20 advanced nightcrawler will have 36 hit dice. A CR 16 Nightwalker has 21 hit dice. Advance that to CR 20, and you have 38 hit dice. SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#addingHitDice) If you go through the various monster books, you will find more examples. You don't know how the rules work. Go away. EDIT: Oh, and about having 73 spells? I could go outside my house, and within a few hours time, I could easily collect a thousand rocks. Sure, there's a lot of them, but rocks aren't actually worth anything, and the guy at the liquor store probably won't want to trade his Cabo Wabo for my rocks. That's what a True Necromancer has, he has 73 rocks. While most wizards and clerics have five or six good spells, a True Necromancer has exactly ZERO good spells and 73 really crappy ones that don't matter at the level he plays in. Your assumption that you will catch up at level 24 is based on the assumption that he won't either die or get kicked out of the party when he can't play in the same environment as everyone else. (Not to mention that by RAW, True Necromancers don't have an epic progression AT ALL, only 10 level PrCs do, that's spelled out pretty blatantly in the descriptions. Once you start talking about Epic Progression for True Necromancer, we're in DM house rule territory. That's like arguing that Slaymate companions make Necromancers better, when they exist solely when the DM feels sorry for the character and gives him one, or three.)
Objulen 11-25-08, 11:13 AM	Actually, you're 2 levels behind, three for spontaneous casters. 5/2=2. A 20th level True Necro will cast spells as an 15th level wizard/sorc and a 15th level cleric. If you're a wizard/cleric, that means you're getting 8th level spells for both classes, and you're one spell level behind.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-25-08, 11:40 AM	A 20th level True Necro will cast spells as an 15th level wizard/sorc and a 15th level cleric. If you're a wizard/cleric, that means you're getting 8th level spells for both classes, and you're one spell level behind. Alright, I'm going to say this one more time: Level 20 is NOT the only level people play at! Here's a breakdown of True Necromancer casting per level. For this argument, I'll stick with my previous example of taking 3 levels of cleric first, although what order you take the 3 levels of cleric and 3 levels of wizard isn't that important. Level 1-3 = Level appropriate casting. You are just taking cleric levels. Level 4-6 = Not improving your cleric casting. At level 5, you are one spell level behind what a spellcaster of your level is capable of and expected to do. The bad news is, there's nothing but horsecrap for dinner. The good news is that now there's plenty of it. Levels 7-8: You spellcasting improves as if you took one more level of wizard, and one more of Cleric. So, at level 8 you have 2nd level spells when you SHOULD have 4th level spells. So, that's two. That remains the case until level 11. Levels 11-12: See levels 7-8. At level 12, you are casting 4th level spells when you're supposed to be casting 6th level spells. At level 13, traditional spellcasters are casting level 7 spells, and you are still casting level 4 spells. You alternate between being 2 spell levels lower and being 3 spell levels lower every level until character level 18, then you scootch on up to being one level behind at level 20. So, out of 20 levels: 4 levels = not behind at all 4 levels = behind one spell level 9 levels = two spell levels behind 3 levels = three spell levels behind. You are only behind casters one level or less about 40% of the time, the rest of the time you are two or more levels behind a casters, and 15% of the time you are casting spells three levels behind. All so you can cast a couple spells as SLAs and have desecrate, rather than taking UMD and using scrolls, or taking Arcane Disciple: Evil and just casting it yourself, or any of the thousands of ways you can do that. Hey, you know what's better than casting a couple of 9th level spells as spell-likes? ACTUALLY being able to cast 9th level spells.
Kain01 11-25-08, 11:43 AM	I don't know where you're getting "roll" from, in fact, Frank and Keith specifically say that you don't roll, you either command it or you don't. No one is claiming that anyone rolls to command. Alright, let's start out with why you personally don't know how rebuking ACTUALLY works. A ghoul has two hit dice and turn resistance +2. Which means that a cleric needs to be at least level 8 to command one (Remember, Turn Resistance counts as hit dice for turning, rebuking, bolstering, or commanding undead SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#turnResistance) Which means you need to be a level 8 cleric to command one of the buggers (2 hit dice + 2 turn resistance = 4, 2 * 4 = 8). A cleric can do that at level 8. When resolving rebuking attempts, ONLY classes that have the rebuking ability are added in the attempt. SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#turnOrRebukeUndead) A True necromancer does NOT add his wizard levels to his rebuking. That means that you are three levels behind when you enter the class, and gradually start to catch up. A True Necromancer has to be level 10 to be able to do that. (3 levels cleric + 4 levels True Necromancer + 1 Necromantic Prowess = 10.) So, I think that Frank and Keith were off by one. So, there is ONE level, level 10 where the True Necromancer has the advantage in creating and controlling Ghouls, which is lost when everyone hits level 11. That's not worth giving up that much spellcasting power. You also don't understand how Leadership works. You could potentially get a +4 bonus to your leadership score through being a nice guy, having special powers, and being famous. Also, there are feats in various supplements that further augment this. Unless you're running around with very low charisma, you should have a cohort 2 levels below you at all times. At level 20, that's enough to have a cohort that casts level 9 spells. Also, you are clueless about the undead type in general. I'm not saying CR 30 undead. I'm saying 30 HIT DIE undead. For example, a CR 18 Nightcrawler has 25 hit dice. For the undead type, 4 hit dice equals +1 CR, therefore a CR 20 advanced nightcrawler will have 36 hit dice. A CR 16 Nightwalker has 21 hit dice. Advance that to CR 20, and you have 38 hit dice. SOURCE (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#addingHitDice) If you go through the various monster books, you will find more examples. You don't know how the rules work. Go away. EDIT: Oh, and about having 73 spells? I could go outside my house, and within a few hours time, I could easily collect a thousand rocks. Sure, there's a lot of them, but rocks aren't actually worth anything, and the guy at the liquor store probably won't want to trade his Cabo Wabo for my rocks. That's what a True Necromancer has, he has 73 rocks. While most wizards and clerics have five or six good spells, a True Necromancer has exactly ZERO good spells and 73 really crappy ones that don't matter at the level he plays in. Your assumption that you will catch up at level 24 is based on the assumption that he won't either die or get kicked out of the party when he can't play in the same environment as everyone else. (Not to mention that by RAW, True Necromancers don't have an epic progression AT ALL, only 10 level PrCs do, that's spelled out pretty blatantly in the descriptions. Once you start talking about Epic Progression for True Necromancer, we're in DM house rule territory. That's like arguing that Slaymate companions make Necromancers better, when they exist solely when the DM feels sorry for the character and gives him one, or three.) Ok been awhile since I've looked at the ghoul in the MM, didn't realize the +2 turn resistance....that changes everything. And where did I say that wizard levels stacked? By my logic a 2hd undead gets commanded by a 4 cleric end of story. Nowhere does wizard levels come into it. The resistance was an oversight on my part, and it made me look dumb. I'm man enough to admit that. And in your original post you said cr before the part about hit die in the thirties. Misunderstood it because of poor sentence structure. I have read every book in the game, and I've probably forgotten more about it than most people at Wizards know about it. As for epic progression look at the Mystic Theurge, there is your epic progression. Add in there that your necromantic prowess continues to go up every three levels, and if the dm changes it then they are not following epic progression guidelines. I'll take 73 tanks in a war against 40 any day of the week.
Kain01 11-25-08, 11:56 AM	Alright, I'm going to say this one more time: Level 20 is NOT the only level people play at! Here's a breakdown of True Necromancer casting per level. For this argument, I'll stick with my previous example of taking 3 levels of cleric first, although what order you take the 3 levels of cleric and 3 levels of wizard isn't that important. Level 1-3 = Level appropriate casting. You are just taking cleric levels. Level 4-6 = Not improving your cleric casting. At level 5, you are one spell level behind what a spellcaster of your level is capable of and expected to do. The bad news is, there's nothing but horsecrap for dinner. The good news is that now there's plenty of it. Levels 7-8: You spellcasting improves as if you took one more level of wizard, and one more of Cleric. So, at level 8 you have 2nd level spells when you SHOULD have 4th level spells. So, that's two. That remains the case until level 11. Levels 11-12: See levels 7-8. At level 12, you are casting 4th level spells when you're supposed to be casting 6th level spells. At level 13, traditional spellcasters are casting level 7 spells, and you are still casting level 4 spells. You alternate between being 2 spell levels lower and being 3 spell levels lower every level until character level 18, then you scootch on up to being one level behind at level 20. So, out of 20 levels: 4 levels = not behind at all 4 levels = behind one spell level 9 levels = two spell levels behind 3 levels = three spell levels behind. You are only behind casters one level or less about 40% of the time, the rest of the time you are two or more levels behind a casters, and 15% of the time you are casting spells three levels behind. All so you can cast a couple spells as SLAs and have desecrate, rather than taking UMD and using scrolls, or taking Arcane Disciple: Evil and just casting it yourself, or any of the thousands of ways you can do that. Hey, you know what's better than casting a couple of 9th level spells as spell-likes? ACTUALLY being able to cast 9th level spells. I'll say it again, 9th level spells are not important to this build. Desecrate is the least ability this build gets. What people WANT with this build is a mystic theurge. They want the ability to cast arcane and divine spells. UMD will allow to cast a few that your dm will toss you, but this build gives you 100% of the cleric spell list up to 8th level, and as many spells on the arcane list as your dm's feeling. It is not a min/max class and no one on this board has said so. I have even said that people looking for a min/max build should look elsewhere. But I still say that a TN at any level after 10 will mop the floor against a straight cleric or wizard/sorceror, because I have seen it done on more than a few occassions. At the end of the day the TN is decent prestige class for alot of people playing D&D. But for min/maxers like you that every toon apparently needs to be munchkinned, then it sucks. I'm tired of arguing with idiots.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-25-08, 12:05 PM	I'll take 73 tanks in a war against 40 any day of the week. You don't have any tanks. You have 73 rocks. It doesn't matter how many spells you have, it's how many GOOD spells you have. You are comparing someone with a magnum with 3 bullet to a guy that scraped 73 cow patties from the pasture and is throwing them at the guy with the gun. I mean, seriously. Inflict Minor Wounds is NOT a "tank".
Count Arioch the 28th 11-25-08, 12:08 PM	But I still say that a TN at any level after 10 will mop the floor against a straight cleric or wizard/sorceror, because I have seen it done on more than a few occassions. I'm tired of arguing with idiots. Curses! My mathematical analysis has been foiled by HEARSAY and CONJECTURE! Oh no! I quoted the last sentence because it's funny. I refute everything you've said in the thread, so you resort to namecalling. I think that's bloody brilliant.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-25-08, 08:06 PM	Oh, and another thing: I'm not breaking the rules by saying that True Necromancer doesn't have an epic progression. You are making a house rule by saying it DOES. Your house rule follows a similar class as a model, that just makes it a house rule that's consistent with the current pattern. (Personally, I think Epic Mystic Theurge is utter crap that insures you will suck more and more as the game progresses, but at least by copying it, you're consistent.) Also, only 10 level PrCs have epic progressions. That's in the rules. The rule was made when there weren't PrCs with more than 10 levels in them, so it doesn't take that into account. That might make your house ruling REASONABLE, but it doesn't make it CORRECT. (And correctly, the epic rules as printed are useless. The book might as well have not even been written, considering the massive houseruling epic takes to hold everything together.)
Objulen 11-25-08, 10:58 PM	Also, only 10 level PrCs have epic progressions. That's in the rules. The rule was made when there weren't PrCs with more than 10 levels in them, so it doesn't take that into account. That might make your house ruling REASONABLE, but it doesn't make it CORRECT. (And correctly, the epic rules as printed are useless. The book might as well have not even been written, considering the massive houseruling epic takes to hold everything together.) I don't have my copy of the Epic Level Handbook nearby, but IIRC, it only specifically states that 5 level PrCs don't have epic progressions. It doesn't state one way or another about 14 levels PrCs. Considering the stated reasons for why a 5 level PrC doesn't have an epic progression, I don't see why you'd think that the rules wouldn't allow an epic progression for True Necro by the RAW, especially since the ELH is a 3.0 supplement and the 3.0 True Necro was a 10 level PrC which would have an epic progression by your interpretation.
Objulen 11-25-08, 10:59 PM	Alright, I'm going to say this one more time: Level 20 is NOT the only level people play at! No kidding. But I was talking about a 20th level character. If you're going to say I'm wrong when I'm not, then expect me to make a rebuttal. If you want to say that people don't just play at 20, then say that instead.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-25-08, 11:28 PM	No kidding. But I was talking about a 20th level character. If you're going to say I'm wrong when I'm not, then expect me to make a rebuttal. If you want to say that people don't just play at 20, then say that instead. I'm saying neither. I'm saying that level 20 is 5% of your adventuring career, assuming that you actually get that far, I don't see it happening ever. If you suck 95% of the time, then suck slightly less for the remaining 5%, you still suck. Furthermore, what you do for the first 19 levels is more important. You can't just rattle off what a level 20 character can do without taking into account that you need to survive for 20 levels to get there!
Kain01 11-26-08, 10:35 AM	I'm saying neither. I'm saying that level 20 is 5% of your adventuring career, assuming that you actually get that far, I don't see it happening ever. If you suck 95% of the time, then suck slightly less for the remaining 5%, you still suck. Furthermore, what you do for the first 19 levels is more important. You can't just rattle off what a level 20 character can do without taking into account that you need to survive for 20 levels to get there! According to your own argument all wizards and sorcerors suck at least the first 16 levels of their career, since they can't cast wish or meteor swarm yet. So what's three more levels of suck? As for epic levels read the above about the 5 prestigfe class thing, now you're making crap up. There is guide for epic prestige progression on wizards website that is just as good as any book that they have put out. And I've never played a game where we stopped at 20, 30 is the lowest level character I've ever had. Even in 2nd edition (yes their were rules for epics in AD&D). And there are alot of GOOD 8th level spells out there. Horrid wilting is one of the best spells in the game period, because nothing is immune to evaporation. 9th level spells are not that important to a build such as this, I'm sorry you can't get that, your math may be right, but it doesn't make it relevant.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-26-08, 11:10 AM	You haven't even read my arguments. My argument is that a straight spellcaster will ALWAYS have better spells than a true necromance at every level except for the first three. If you aren't casting 2nd level spells by 3, 3rd level spells by 5, 4th level spells by 7, etc, you are weak. That's what "level appropriate" means. And I'm sorry you don't get that casting spells that everyone else got tired of five levels ago makes you worthless. You are entering the Grand Prix with an Edsel and a Stanley Steamer, and are expecting to compete with the guy with the actual race cars just because you have two and everyone else has one. You can't. Furthermore, the fact that you haven't played at levels lower than 30 makes your argument completely and utterly irrelevant, because you play at a level where balance doesn't even exist. Epic Level is purely dependent on the various house rules the DM has set up. You don't know how to play D&D, you've never even PLAYED it. Your words are worthless, you're just some munchkin kid running around talking sass to your elders. Go away.
TheAntiTroll 11-26-08, 06:01 PM	Count: :clap: To the other guy: Lololol. To add to the list... Horrid Wilting one of the best spells? It's just piddly little blasting. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Kain01 11-26-08, 08:22 PM	You haven't even read my arguments. My argument is that a straight spellcaster will ALWAYS have better spells than a true necromance at every level except for the first three. If you aren't casting 2nd level spells by 3, 3rd level spells by 5, 4th level spells by 7, etc, you are weak. That's what "level appropriate" means. And I'm sorry you don't get that casting spells that everyone else got tired of five levels ago makes you worthless. You are entering the Grand Prix with an Edsel and a Stanley Steamer, and are expecting to compete with the guy with the actual race cars just because you have two and everyone else has one. You can't. Furthermore, the fact that you haven't played at levels lower than 30 makes your argument completely and utterly irrelevant, because you play at a level where balance doesn't even exist. Epic Level is purely dependent on the various house rules the DM has set up. You don't know how to play D&D, you've never even PLAYED it. Your words are worthless, you're just some munchkin kid running around talking sass to your elders. Go away. The main issue here is that there is no right or wrong here. It's preference. And I have played from level 1 to 30, not just all 30 all the time. And there is no hearsay or conjecture, just what I have witnessed in game play. The day I see these supposed race cars take down the steamer I might change my mind, until then my OPINION (yes this a chevy vs. ford argument, or a red vs. blue argument, there is no right answer) is that this is a viable prestige class for many people out there. I'm sorry you have no experience with epic levels because it's not nearly as unbalanced as you think. Believe it or not the ELH with the 3.5 update off the net, along with the errata (all printed up in a notebook that goes with it) is actually decently playable. All in all been a fun conversation with you. But I'm done now. It's apparent I can't convince you it has it's purposes in a game, and you'll never convince me that any class can't be made good with the right builder behind it. To whoever posted about Horrid Wilting, yes a blasting spell that will always hit, with the exception of high spell resistance. Any spell that you never have to worry if your opponent has DR to is decent. I never said it was a complex spell, just effecient.
Kain01 11-26-08, 08:25 PM	You don't know how to play D&D, you've never even PLAYED it. Your words are worthless, you're just some munchkin kid running around talking sass to your elders. Go away. Guarantee I'm older than you and half the people on this board son. I've played every edition of the game. My biggest problem right now is that I've been playing NWN2 more than PnP, so yeah some of my info is probably coming from memory of the game as it's more current on the brain.
Kain01 11-26-08, 10:48 PM	I quoted the last sentence because it's funny. I refute everything you've said in the thread, so you resort to namecalling. I think that's bloody brilliant. Yes eventually the guy standing at the back of the theatre throwing popcorn does get annoying enough to call a name. And you've refuted nothing more than spouting your opinion that a full caster is better than a true necromancer. I disagree with you, so I'm fully aware that I'm beneath your superior intellect oh high and mighty count.
TheAntiTroll 11-27-08, 08:10 AM	Horrid Wilting - do minor to moderate damage, do not impede enemy ability to fight in any way. It fails as hard as every other blasting spell.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-27-08, 09:36 AM	Yes eventually the guy standing at the back of the theatre throwing popcorn does get annoying enough to call a name. And you've refuted nothing more than spouting your opinion that a full caster is better than a true necromancer. I disagree with you, so I'm fully aware that I'm beneath your superior intellect oh high and mighty count. Either bring up more points, concede, change the subject, or stop talking.
vrischika111 11-27-08, 10:42 AM	my 5 cents: 1- don't go cleric 3/wiz 3, before TN but cleric 3/DN4 -> DN rebukes undead and heals undead on touch. -> DN can cast in light armor (with appropriate feat it becomes medium armor: long live the mithral full plate) 2- better, go necropolitan spellstitched (choose SLA : summon undead II and command undead, others are free). Necropolitan makes you loose a level, it's not LA+1,so you're free to regain it over the time (as with lower level, you gain more XP...) in Compl. Arcane, it's said textually than having a spell as SLA fullfills the requirement: "can cast that spell" 3- rebuking sucks... low HD ??? A/ it gives access to divine MM B/ you never heard about bolstering undead ? it makes your minion virtually non-turnable or destroyable
Count Arioch the 28th 11-27-08, 12:43 PM	Vris (I'm not puzzling out your name), it's been argued to death. Using an ability that gives you SLAs to get into a PrC is CHEATING. It's been argued again and again. Also, no one is saying rebuking sucks. I am saying that compared to a cleric, a Dread Necromancer sucks. I am also saying that rebuking is more valuable at low to mid levels than it is at very high levels. Furthermore, using Dread Necromancers as a springboard to True Necromancer isn't that great an idea. You are not only hitting at the DN's weaknesses (spell list is inferior) and not hitting where a dread necro is pretty good (DR + armor + False Life = pretty credible tank early on, not to mention that you only add your charisma bonus three times when it comes to the undead you control via animate dead. However, that does get around the turning issues, so the build isn't without complete merit. However, I cannot reccomend that build from a min-max perspective.)
JaronK 11-27-08, 01:44 PM	Actually, Complete Arcane says on page 73 that SLAs can be used to qualify for PrCs that say "Caster Level X" as a prerequisite, but CANNOT be used for PrCs that say "Cast X Level spells." This is explicit. So no, that won't work. And yeah, I wouldn't do a DN entry. Dread Necromancers have so much more than their spell list... getting only 4 levels of DN misses out on some of their best abilities, including their fear aura, their undead mastery, and their awesome familiar (and yes, the DN familiar is awesome). So, it basically defeats the purpose. That said, Count, you're going too extreme in your arguements, which is why they're not getting through. Getting 8th level spells is not like having rocks... they're quite useful. To play with the metaphor a bit, getting 0 level spells is like having throwable rocks... cute, but not that useful. Getting 1st level spells is like having club armed warriors... they might do something against weak opponents, but they're not that important. Getting 5th level spells is like having musketeers, while getting 7th level spells is like having WWII era tanks and infantry, 8th level spells is like Vietnam era armour, infantry, and planes, and 9th level spells is like the most modern weaponry. Now, is it better to have twice as many Vietnam and before era abilities than to have a few modern tanks and jet fighters? No, not at all, the modern stuff is far superior. However, we're talking about fighting enemies that are equivalent to 15th century warriors... 8th level spells are still totally devastating. 9th level spells would be better of course, but 8th level is plenty. However, the point is that the number of spells is not what's important. Full casters don't run out of spells without a LOT of work from the DM. Single spells can solve whole encounters if the caster is playing smart. Heck, my DN doesn't even cast a spell in most fights, and that's often the case for necromancers, who tend to cast their spells once and then get benefits for days. As such, getting more of something isn't critical... it's the quality that counts. So yes, a True Necromancer is weaker than a straight caster version. What they gain is minimal (extra castings of the weaker spells, a few class abilities that are cute but nothing impressive) and what they lose is quite big (higher level spells). This doesn't make True Necromancers weak... on the contrary, the spells they do have are still far stronger than anything a Fighter or Barbarian could dream of. They are in fact incredibly strong, since they're freaking Clerics and Wizards. They're just not as strong as pure versions of the classes they combine. But they're still strong enough for all but the most optimized game. In fact, I'd recommend the class if the rest of your party is below Tier 1. If your party is Rogue, Fighter, Barbarian, then showing up with a pure Cleric necromancer is overkill... going with True Necromancer might be an improvement as it would help intraparty balance. JaronK
j2 11-27-08, 03:38 PM	One thing that seems to always get lost/buried in these True Necromancer/Mystic Thurge/Arcane Hierophant vs. straight spellcaster debates is the fact that you not only gain more spells and certain class features by taking the prc, but you also gain two completely seperate ways of doing magic that grow simultaneously side-by-side. So, not only do you have a bit less than twice the number of available spells at any given time, but you are a substantial spell caster in both divine AND arcane magic (which really is the whole point of these types of prc's). That has to be worth something, and quite probably worth the loss of the 9th level spells prior to going epic, slightly slower spell progression overall, and the need to invest feats/abilities into two classes. You have the ability to use scrolls, magic items, wands, rods, etc. freely from both classes. You can heal/restore as well as you damage. Your hit die balances between the two classes making you a more stable character than straight wizard. You have eliminated the need for the party to consist of a cleric AND a mage as you thoroughly fullfill both roles. (Thus in theory allowing another player to take a different build like a tank or different specialty class). On solo adventuring, your player can do significant spell damage, heal/cure/restore/prevent on himself, etc. effectively, plus have almost every existing spell to prepare prior to an encounter and nearly every spell contingency during the encounter itself. He can (through spells) combat, escape, heal, then rejoin the combat refreshed if needed in just a few rounds. Diversity of spells allows your spell caster to effectively function as the group's Rogue/Scout, Cleric, Wizard, and even the highlights of some other classes as well, quite possibly eliminating the need for a Rogue type in the party at many levels. Your turning/rebuking (TN), much of your domain powers, spontaneous casting, and some other primary features continue to grow along with the prc. I would be the first to agree with Count's assessment of how slowly/quickly the spell progression increases for a pure caster vs. a prc caster of this type (including the loss of 9th level spells). I also agree there are some soft levels as a result, and those are both good points. However, I don't agree that a TN is weaker than a straight cleric or a straight Wizard generally as a class (I see it as a stronger class than either of those). (This goes for Arcane Hierophant and similar unrelated mesh type prcs like Arcane Trickster for example where I generally also find those mesh prcs superior to the straight build... you lose some, but gain quite a bit). Mystic Thurge on the otherhand doesn't add much beyond the spells, (I believe your turning stops increasing?), so MT may not be so great, except as a flavor enhancer/stepping stone in some builds. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't go straight Wizard 1-20 (with some "straight" prc's enhancing the straight build). If I were trying to build the ultimate mage, that would be the way to go (though I might take sorcerer/ultimate magus in there also). Or, I might go straight DN instead of MT if I were going purely for necromancy (though I might not). But using strictly WOTC products, the ultimate spellcaster, ultimate spellcasting necromancer, ultimate diverse spellcasting druid, ultimate natural mage, etc. would likely focus heavily on those mesh prc's. One thing I haven't seen yet is a prc mesh for wizard/cleric of a "good" nature. Meaning sort of the opposite of a TN, where the cleric's turning abilities, and focus on "good" vs. "evil" abilities grow as well as the dual class spell progression. I haven't finished reading book of exaulted deeds or complete champion yet, so there might be something in those. If anyone knows of a prc that does this (in a similar way to TN/Mystic Thurge style), let me know. PS - ignore the spelling. I didn't feel like looking up how to spell MT, AH, etc.
TheAntiTroll 11-27-08, 03:51 PM	False. Versatility comes from higher level spells. So does power. This gets in the way of both. You will have plenty of spells to last the day without this, so all you've done is weaken every option you will use during the say via lower spell levels, DCs, and everything else that matters to you. Using magic items is called Use Magic Device DC 20, something easily done even with cross class ranks. Wizards have spell based means to boost their survivability immensely. Getting a few more HP simply does not compare. Clerics of course lose HP along with diluting their CoDzillaness. Tank is called drawing fire and taking it, something real casters do. So to summarize, you're all wrong.
j2 11-27-08, 04:44 PM	False. Versatility comes from higher level spells. So does power. This gets in the way of both. You will have plenty of spells to last the day without this, so all you've done is weaken every option you will use during the say via lower spell levels, DCs, and everything else that matters to you. Using magic items is called Use Magic Device DC 20, something easily done even with cross class ranks. Wizards have spell based means to boost their survivability immensely. Getting a few more HP simply does not compare. Clerics of course lose HP along with diluting their CoDzillaness. Tank is called drawing fire and taking it, something real casters do. So to summarize, you're all wrong. Not false - versatility does not come from higher level spells moresoe than having almost double the number of spells available from 2 classes. Unless you use wish and Miracle over and over. As in the Counts example, there are soft levels for gaining spells for sure. But the result of the mesh prc still means more diversity no matter how you argue it. I agree with straight pound for pound SPELL power. But almost double the number of spells from a completely different class (DIVINE AND ARCANE) = a ton more options. That doesn't mean TN is way more powerful than a straight Cleric - I never said that. But it does mean TN can cast way more DIFFERENT TYPE of spells than a caster otherwise could, AND can fullfill the roll of two (or 3) characters at the same time (effectively freeing up a player to fullfill a different roll). I absolutely agree about the HD with regards to straight Cleric, but that was a minor point stating it increases straight Wizard HD by 50%, making that class more solid. My main point is you get DIVINE and ARCANE spells in large numbers of decent power, which lasts not just one or two encounters, but in all situations all day long AND this allows you to fill the role of multiple characters well. There is power in that. There is also power in freeing up another player to take a different roll instead of Cleric or Wizard. THIS is the thing that is almost always overlooked. You are EXTREMELY diverse and decently powerful. (I agree with you and JaronK about the using a few spells per encounter, unless you are solo adventuring in low to mid levels), but after the encounter you can heal. Before the encounter you can divine, travel long distances, prepare thoroughly. During the encounter you can magically escape, heal, and return to the encounter to do more big damage, etc., etc., etc. If one of your friends falls, you can bring him back. All with the same character. You can say I'm all wrong, but you didn't come close to addressing my main point. a 20th TN is obviously not as powerful (spellwise) a mage as a 20th level mage. Nor is he as powerful a cleric as a 20th level cleric spellwise. And surely I agree there are some soft levels as detailed by Count where it may not be as powerful pound for pound. But for roleplayers, who play at different levels, it stacks up very nicely all-in-all, and in some ways is MORE powerful at many levels due to the diversity of the two spell classes plus freeing up another player at the table to play a different character type.
TheAntiTroll 11-27-08, 04:57 PM	Action Economy says hi. Stormwind would like a word with you as well. The single classed caster has enough good spells to last all day, therefore the only thing you are accomplishing is giving yourself weaker spells.
Psychotic_Robot 11-27-08, 05:08 PM	I'm not well-versed enough with dual-casters to make any broad statements about them, but... At what point does "having enough spells" kick in? I'm just curious because the last game I played in that had a dual caster still had us run out of spells. Of course, that was possibly because the DM didn't know how to use the CR system and the party was incompetent overall. Aside from that, TheAntiTroll is correct. The jump in power even from first-level spells to second-level spells is huge. Web is epic win.
j2 11-27-08, 05:19 PM	Action Economy says hi. Stormwind would like a word with you as well. The single classed caster has enough good spells to last all day, therefore the only thing you are accomplishing is giving yourself weaker spells. Weaker spells yes that is absolutely true. Yes a single classed caster does have enough good spells to last all day (IN THEIR FIELD). But saying that's the only thing being accomplished with a mesh prc - I kinda doubt it. Essentially your saying you give up (upward) spell power, but gain nothing in return which doesn't make sense. And that's the whole point. You do gain much. Not sure how to quantify what you gain in numerical pluses and minuses vs. upward spell power as this is comparing apples to oranges. But surely you can't say giving up something for nothing. Once again the dual casting (in classes you couldn't otherwise cast from at those power levels) and freeing up a second player at the table isn't addressed. Both of those are power that need to be included in the side-by-side comparison, but usually aren't mentioned.
TheAntiTroll 11-27-08, 06:00 PM	It only takes a handful of spells to win a combat. Let's say 3 for a hard one, typically it will take less. It is quite possible to win with one spell. Multiply this by 4. Add random utility crap out of low level slots. 1-3 you have the same number of spells either way. 4-6 you miss out on more 2nd level spells and 3rd levels to get more 1st and eventually second level tied to a different and likely lower stat. From there you either scale at this hamstringed rate, or fall further behind at every single level. You do not free up any players as you are still limited by Action Economy. You don't get to heal and win encounters off the same Standard action, the fact that all your actions are less than level appropriate nonwithstanding. You do not gain more spells as you already have enough to last all day. To summarize, learn to read.
j2 11-27-08, 06:06 PM	I'm not well-versed enough with dual-casters to make any broad statements about them, but... At what point does "having enough spells" kick in? I'm just curious because the last game I played in that had a dual caster still had us run out of spells. Of course, that was possibly because the DM didn't know how to use the CR system and the party was incompetent overall. Aside from that, TheAntiTroll is correct. The jump in power even from first-level spells to second-level spells is huge. Web is epic win. I agree partially (along with Count - Count's is the best way I've seen it laid out regarding soft levels). I can't argue DC's, upward spell progression, etc. But I'm not arguing it... I'm agreeing with it, but... at the same time there are levels where you gain by going sideways instead of upward IMO (and that's neglecting to mention the class features of TN or AH). Going slower from 2nd level to 3rd level wizard spell capabilty is a definite loss for that level, as is 4th to 5th for example. But for a really easy example, having the two 1st level classes at 2nd level is better than one second level spell class that casts 2 1st level spells. (In this case you could have 2 cure light wounds, OR 2 magic missles not both as the straight caster). In TN build you would have 1 magic missle and 1 cure light wounds (I know that's overly simplified and number of actual spells is not accurate, but it gets much more beneficial via spells per day if you use the actual spell tables where you get multiple Wizard and multiple Cleric spells per level). In addition, the friend sitting next to you can play a Paladin tank instead of a Wizard simply because you fullfill the Wizard PLUS the Cleric (plus Rogue) role. That's overly simplified, but that's sorta my general point. This all also depends on the type of game you are in. In a hack-n-slash type game when you are facing the big end bosses might favor the straight build due the better ability to overcome spell resistance, slightly higher DC's, etc., but a more diverse campaign (requiring combinations of espionage, roleplaying, city, dungeoneering, overland, planar, etc.) would likely favor the mesh build that could function well in any situation and any environment. 'Though, truthfully, I still see the versatility in the hack-n-slash a great help (back to the dungeon where one character can overcome the magically locked gate, dispel an anti gravity field, do mega area damage to a large group of enemies, enhance the party's tank to take on the big boss, heal everyone when needed, teleport away to heal unconscious friends, cast arrowmind for the ranger, rebuke the undead encountered using them to fight alongside the party, fly over the molto lava, restore damaged abilities, remove poison, etc., etc.), all while freeing up the second player to play a tank (or Ranger, Bard, etc.). Also, the fewer characters in the party, the more beneficial the TN or AH will be (this is also rarely if ever mentioned in these types of posts). Is a straight build a stronger/more powerful caster in their class? Absolutely. But with all factors added in (which is exactly the mesh build's strength), I don't see them as a more powerful character overall.
j2 11-27-08, 06:37 PM	It only takes a handful of spells to win a combat. Let's say 3 for a hard one, typically it will take less. It is quite possible to win with one spell. Multiply this by 4. Add random utility crap out of low level slots. 1-3 you have the same number of spells either way. 4-6 you miss out on more 2nd level spells and 3rd levels to get more 1st and eventually second level tied to a different and likely lower stat. From there you either scale at this hamstringed rate, or fall further behind at every single level. You do not free up any players as you are still limited by Action Economy. You don't get to heal and win encounters off the same Standard action, the fact that all your actions are less than level appropriate nonwithstanding. You do not gain more spells as you already have enough to last all day. To summarize, learn to read. Your points are decent when you take time to post them, however, as far as I can tell I haven't personally attacked you, so I don't see the need for you to personally attack me. Yes I agree with the Action Economy. But having choices with your actions also matters a lot, and is a significant plus of this build. Overly simplifying it... a fighter can use his actions to fight, but a lot of good that does him if he can't magically heal or magically escape an unwinable battle. Having lack of choices with his actions makes him less powerful than say a Cleric under many circumstances. A straight Cleric build may be a powerful healer, but he can't do a lot of things offensively that a TN can. A straight Wizard build is a powerful and diverse offensive threat (and utilitarian). But he sucks at healing/restoring/ressurrecting, and those matter a lot to a low hit point character like a Wizard. There has to be some value (and power) in those options. (A straight build might benefit you if you fight and win a handful of battles with your diverse allies, but what if the battle lasts much longer and uses a good portion of your daily resources as is essentially assumed in DMG?). What if your battle goes badly for you and you need to leave, heal, and return? What if you are solo adventuring or adventuring with one or two companions. What if you used up many of your spells during your daily adventuring, and need those extra spells. What if you used all of one type of spell (damaging, travel, or utility for example) - wouldn't those extra spells be beneficial - especially if you leave slots open to use when needed? What if there is no mage in the group. What if there is no cleric. What about before and after the battle. What about preparing/researching the adventure. What if you do many things other than hack-n-slash. Again, some of your points are good, and I agree with some of them (how could I not?). But generally speaking, those extra things the mesh prc brings are often ignored or assigned no value when one is arguing for the side of the straight build. You're partially correct about the extra player. But, the fewer players in your group, the more important the extra player's class choice options will become.
j2 11-27-08, 07:26 PM	Again, I'm not saying this type of mesh prc is overpowered compared to some straight builds. I am saying that if you add ALL the pluses (many of which are ignored in these types of threads) and the minuses you come out with a powerful character. And in my opinion, I feel TN and AH pound-for-pund are generally a bit more powerful as a whole entity than a straight build, unless the straight build relies on the strengths of their friends to help them diversify. Of course, this whole arguement is unwinnable by either side, unless you can quantify how much power you gain by having greater diversity in different situations, and how much flexibility that offers you and your allies. Stating the obvious: Straight build simply and unquestionably has more powerful spells (either Arcane OR Divine) per level than a TN, but loses power in it's lack of diversity. TN simply is more diverse, and trails behind on upwardly powerful spells (until epic), but gains full spell use and some features from two classes simultaneously.
vrischika111 11-28-08, 03:31 AM	Actually, Complete Arcane says on page 73 that SLAs can be used to qualify for PrCs that say "Caster Level X" as a prerequisite, but CANNOT be used for PrCs that say "Cast X Level spells." This is explicit. So no, that won't work. well if you jump one paragraph ahead: SPECIFIC SPELL REQUIREMENTS A requirement based on a specific spell measures whether the character or creature in question is capable of producing the necessary effect, and as such, invocations and spell-like abilities that generate the relevant effect meet the requirements for specific spell knowledge. For example, a prestige class with a spellcasting requirement of “Must know (or be able to cast) darkness” is met by a warlock who chooses darkness as one of her invocations, or by any creature with darkness as a spell-like ability. Which seems to match the requirements of casting summon undead and command undead (not a casting/spell level) I was not aware it was cheating, I'm quite new to the boards. (but it looks ok by raw :confused: )
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 07:22 AM	'Learn to read.' is not an insult. It is a statement of fact when someone is clearly not reading what is written. A straight Cleric build is a freakin' CoDzilla. If he wants to go on the offensive, he can and easily. A straight Wizard build has incredible offenses and defenses. He doesn't need to worry about himself. If a combat lasts more than 3 rounds, one or more of your party is doing something very wrong. 4 is the standard encounters for a day. The single classed guy can handle 5 or 6, and that's without resource extenders. About the only assumption I'm making here is that you don't have too much dead weight in your party. Because if you do, the TN is screwed and the straight casters might be screwed as well.
Psychotic_Robot 11-28-08, 08:56 AM	Thread summary: 1. Dual-casters are weak. 2. True necromancers are more powerful than mystic theurges. 3. Dual-casting gets more spells per day than normal casting. 4. Dual-casting can be fun, but it's weaker than normal casting.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 08:57 AM	Wait, caster power is measured solely by spell acquisition. So how are true necros better than MTs?
Psychotic_Robot 11-28-08, 09:03 AM	Do they end up behind? I thought they stayed on track. Or maybe it's only the same at level 20. EDIT: Oh, yes, they do. I forgot about their retardo progression where they get screwed every couple of levels. Revision: True necromancers have more class features than mystic theurges. They can also get to a higher caster level. Also, don't the undead HD "pools" from arcane/divine not stack even though they clearly should? So, yes, true necromancer sucks poopdick. You're better off going as a dread necromancer if you want to play a necromancer. It gets interesting class abilities plus lots of undead. (Actually, you're better off going as a cleric if you want to play a necromancer, but I think the dread necromancer is more interesting.)
Kain01 11-28-08, 11:12 AM	J2 forget it. They're right because they will themselves to be. They cannot grasp the concept that the TN is feasible as a dual caster to play. They don't understand that the TN can blast you till you get to him then cast divine power and stand toe to toe with some of the best clerics and rogues out there. Or that during a long dungeon escapade where the dm is trying to make sure you run out of spells before your next encounter that it'll take twice as long w/a TN in the party. I've given up, they have yet to refute anything I've said with anything other than you don't get 9th level spells, so they must be right. And for the record I've even stated this class sucks up to about 10, but they still spout off that 1-3 you get blah blah , 4-6 blah blah blah. And yes Horrid Wilting is a good blasting spell. Did I stutter, did I make a claim that it did anything else? Only that no one can ever become immune to water drying up in their body. DR Dehydration/Blood Evaporation doesn't exist. You want a better example of an 8th level spell that's good? W/out leaving the PHB there's Prismatic Wall, Trap the Soul (when it works), Power Word, Stun (again when it works), Greater Shout, Shadow Evocation, Greater, Iron Body, Polymorph any Object (when it works). Cleric side is Antimagic Field, Earthquake, Fire Storm (yes we all know it's a LOWLY blasting spell), and especially for our TN, Unholy Aura (because he's probably evil). Again I'm not leaving the PHB for these, there are ALOT BETTER out there.
Kain01 11-28-08, 11:15 AM	You're better off going as a dread necromancer if you want to play a necromancer. It gets interesting class abilities plus lots of undead. (Actually, you're better off going as a cleric if you want to play a necromancer, but I think the dread necromancer is more interesting.) Yes you are if all you want to do is control undead. There is more to necromancy though. An Uttercold True Necromancer is pretty awesome to play, I don't care what everyone else that's never played one says.
Psychotic_Robot 11-28-08, 11:50 AM	Kain, blasting sucks. Hardcore. Save-or-lose.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 01:31 PM	Kain, blasting sucks. Hardcore. Save-or-lose. Thank you. There's no such thing as 'long dungeon escapades'. PC casters set the pace of encounters because they're the ones in charge and they're the ones with the resources to get proactive, and when it's time to rest they create the completely safe means of doing so. Though if there were such a thing, they'd still have plenty because it takes very few spells to win encounters unless you're an idiot that thinks blasting is worth actions, therefore there will still be plenty. Also, running out of spells is known as entire party dies, non casters first. After all, HP are a very limited resource and you simply are not surviving two full attacks without real defenses which are only granted by spells. As in Greater Mirror Image, stuff like that. No matter how you spin it, you are wrong. Horrifically, utterly, and completely wrong. Especially since you seem to think blasting is good without some heavy stack of metamagics combined with cost reduction stuff, aka the only way blasting is ever remotely worth considering. Oh and AMF = turn off own class features. Epic Fail. Now stop spreading lies.
Psychotic_Robot 11-28-08, 02:58 PM	This thread is relevant to your interests. (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/design/prestigeClasses/mysticTheurgeHowCanWeFixIt) It also contains much fail. This line hurt me the most: Sorc laid down some love on the Paladin, he [the theurge] healed him up.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-28-08, 04:06 PM	I'd like to take a minute to just say some things on my mind. There will be no such thing as a balanced dual caster. No one would accept it if ever made. The way D&D is set, every doubling of creatures increases CR by 2. (It breaks down with very high numbers, but it's somewhat workable at lower ones.) Which means, a 3rd level character should be as good at 2 first level characters, a 4th level character must be equal to two 2nd level characters, and so forth. A PC has a CR of their own level, by definition. Therefore, every two levels you gain must be a doubling of resources and abilities. A 20th level dual caster has the same CR as a level 18 cleric and a level 18 wizard working together. Which means, if at level 20 you can cast as an 18th level wizard and cleric AND have two sets of actions (maybe an ability to cast both one arcane and one divine spell as a standard action, but not two arcanes or two divines), that means you would be balanced with the 20th level caster. I could live with it, but if WotC ever printed something like that you people would scream bloody murder that it was breaking your games. But the truth is, a dual casting character NEEDS to be able to do that.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 04:13 PM	... PR, did you really have to drag the Paizils into it? I mean I know it's a Fail thread and all, but isn't that a bit extreme? Edit: http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/896/funnypicturespizzarelevrs1.jpg
j2 11-28-08, 05:43 PM	I want to say that I'd be the first to admit (in response to Count's last post) that a dual spell caster of x level is nowhere near as powerful as 2 separate x level casters (mostly due to the actions). I know that wasn't the point, but I want to state that anyway so you don't think I'm a complete idiot on this subject. This is a general observation, not directed at anyone specifically... But here's my question to the folks who are strictly anti dual-casting mesh prc due to upward power wain. At what point do the capabilities of dual casting become worthless vs. going straight one class? In other words at what point does having almost double (30) spells per day and hundreds(?) more available spells in your repetoir (BUT AS IMPORTANTLY spells from a totally different class you can't otherwise access), and the ability to fullfill 3 primary class roles instead of one become useless? By adding mage you also add the ability to perform the role of the Rogue's skill/ability set. My problem is a lot of the "hardcore" anti-dual caster mesh prc folks basically across the board place no value on that at all, and that makes no sense. Is it worth 1 level of spells per day progression?- absolutely. Is it worth 2? - almost for sure. Is it worth 2 8th level and 4 9th level cleric spells at 20th level? That's where these types of arguments fall apart when taking sides in absolutes and ignoring the positives along with the negatives. Here's an example using base spells per day excluding any feats (except practiced spellcaster), no ability modifyers, etc. (and I do keep in mind that practiced spellcaster CD does bring up the caster level to essentially even or very close to it with the straight caster builds, but doesn't increase spells per day. I haven't read the other version of practiced spellcaster, but I assume it's the same.). I'm using Cleric instead of Wizard (Wizard has less spells per level and no domain spell, but Cleric is better ability comparison compared to a TN): Level 2 straight Cleric CL 0 (4), 1st (2+1), vs. 1 Cleric, 1 Wizard CL 0 (3), 1st (1+1) plus WZ 0 (3), 1st (1) Obvious advantage Dual caster Level 3 straight Cleric: CL 0 (4), 1st (2+1), 2nd (1+1) vs. 2 Cleric, 1 Wizard CL 0 (4), 1st (2+1) plus WZ 0 (3), 1st (1) In this case I'd say slight advantage straight cleric, or a even. Level 20 straight Cleric: CL 0 (6), 1st (5+1), 2nd (5+1), 3rd (5+1), 4th (5+1), 5th (5+1), 6th (4+1), 7th (4+1), 8th (4+1), 9th (4+1) vs. 3 Cleric, 3 Wizard, 14 TN (CL 15 each class for spells per day, CL 19 for effects with practiced spellcaster) CL 0 (6), 1st (5+1), 2nd (5+1), 3rd (5+1), 4th (4+1), 5th (4+1), 6th (3+1), 7th (2+1), 8th (1+1) plus WZ 0 (4), 1st (4), 2nd (4), 3rd (4), 4th (4), 5th (4), 6th (3), 7th (2), 8th (1) ###################### For a total of Cleric 20th level. CL 0 (6), 1st (5+1), 2nd (5+1), 3rd (5+1), 4th (5+1), 5th (5+1), 6th (4+1), 7th (4+1), 8th (4+1), 9th (4+1) vs. (dual caster prc mesh): 0 (10), 1st (9+1), 2nd (9+1), 3rd (9+1), 4th (8+1), 5th (8+1), 6th (6+1), 7th (4+1), 8th (2+1) ###################### So, in a straight cleric vs. TN build, you get: TN 0 (+4), 1st (+4), 2nd (+4), 3rd (+4), 4th (+3), 5th (+3), 6th (+2), 7th (even),... 8th (minus 2), 9th (minus 4+1 cleric spells) So net total, you lose 6+1 high level spells, and gain 24 6th level or lower spells PLUS you gain the ability to cast spells from a different class entirely. IMO, is it worth swapping 6+1 high level spells for 24 6th level or lower spells? I definitely don't think so. But is it worth it to also gain a whole new class to cast spells up to 8th level in (adding at least 30 spell slots excluding int modifier) and allow your character the ability to fullfill the roles of 3 different primary classes? (Keep in mind you've gained potential access to hundreds(?) of new spells potentially, that you otherwise couldn't cast at all). I do think so, though it is obviously debatable and depends on your campaign style. The straight numbers get quite a bit better for the TN if you compare straight Wizard vs. TN, but that's probably not as good a comparison, and at epic I believe the TN begins to catch up. And obviously, the spells per day progression isn't just at level 1 and level 20, each level is going to be impacted differently... Which is more useful in early and/or mid and/or high levels? To be able to blast the BBEG better, or to be able to perform the role of 3 characters (to an extent keeping actions in mind) somewhat in and a lot out of combat? Here's one last slightly off topic comment about the HD... At 20th level, perhaps the 6 hd may not make a world of difference. But the 6 HD matter a lot to a lowish level mage. Additionally the loss of HD to the Cleric is not balanced with the gain for the mage. A 40 hp character no matter how well protected can last longer in a battle (and get more spells off) with 60 hp. On the other side, an 80 hp character is not harmed as bad by having 60 hp. Mathematically you gained/lost the same 20 hp. But in the mage, you increased your hp by 50% (aka 50% more actions), where the 80 hp character lost 25% of their hp (25% fewer actions roughly). That matters.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 06:15 PM	:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
j2 11-28-08, 06:19 PM	'Learn to read.' is not an insult. It is a statement of fact when someone is clearly not reading what is written. A straight Cleric build is a freakin' CoDzilla. If he wants to go on the offensive, he can and easily. A straight Wizard build has incredible offenses and defenses. He doesn't need to worry about himself. If a combat lasts more than 3 rounds, one or more of your party is doing something very wrong. 4 is the standard encounters for a day. The single classed guy can handle 5 or 6, and that's without resource extenders. About the only assumption I'm making here is that you don't have too much dead weight in your party. Because if you do, the TN is screwed and the straight casters might be screwed as well. I agree with you that a straight Cleric is very powerful as a class at all levels (much like Druid is), though they surely benefit from the Wizards spells. Wizard has Incredible offenses and defenses, but not at many levels, and the HD are very important (and broader/more spells per day help beef the defenses up) especially at lower to mid levels. About the combat lasting more than 3 rounds... I sort of agree, but again that depends on your level and the number of combatants. Maybe the DM isn't playing the enemy creatively if most encounters go so easily at all levels of play. If you are fighting a smart enemy at lower levels, or a mid-to high level intelligently played enemy who uses all his resources (such as summoning creatures to fight at his side), the individual combat can last significantly longer and be more challenging to the party. But more importantly... On the number of encounters per day... I don't remember specifically, but I believe the intent is for your typical party of characters to have used much of his daily resources during a day of adventuring encounters. Obviously that is not a hard/fast rule, but I believe that is the basic intent when setting number of encounters per day, and is an important piece of the puzzle toward making the overall day challenging. That would make the larger amount of resources of the TN more helpful as the day goes on and the more encounters that have been faced that day. That's also part of the intent of traps/challenges and lesser encounters... to deplete the party's resources prior to facing the BBEG to make it a more fair fight. The ECL isn't intended to be based on fighting one or two encounters per day, but facing multiple encounters and challenges during an adventuring day where the party's resources become progressively depleted, and the spell casters have to make economical decisions as to when/if to use their spells.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 06:30 PM	Wizard 1-2 has AoE save or dies. If it can't act, it can't harm you. Perfect defense. Wizard 3+ gets better tools for that offense as defense job, along with meaningful defenses like Mirror Image, False Life, and so forth. Fun fact: The beatstick only is up 12 HP at this level. A single image of mirror image buffers about that much damage. A False Life spell cast hours prior blocks most of it. I'm not even going to cover higher levels as by this point it's so blatantly obvious you're going to have a hard time even getting to the HP of the Wizard much less taking them away... 3 round combats are the other limit. Standard is 2, optimized is 1. If the combat takes 3 rounds it's because it was a BBEG fight or something several levels higher. If it's longer than that it's most likely because you're on the ropes facing a probable TPK. I have specifically designed encounters for stalling purposes before, that is to say all of the enemies have like a 10% chance to be hit or some crap and it still came out to be 2.4 rounds a combat (5 fights in rapid succession, 12 rounds total). In all the games I play in or run there tends to be at least four fights a day. And there's still some power left, I'd say enough for two more fights. This is without consumables like staves.
Psychotic_Robot 11-28-08, 07:06 PM	PR, did you really have to drag the Paizils into it? I mean I know it's a Fail thread and all, but isn't that a bit extreme? Yes, for I am cruel. J2: You're not understanding. 3e has ultraf*ck issues with the 15-minute workday. As soon as the wizard is low on spells, the party rests with a rope trick. Once he's back up to full, the party can keep going. The only time that the dual-caster is going to really shine is if there's a period when the wizard can't take a rest for whatever reason--if the party has to go through encounter after encounter without a break. The dual-caster can also shine in a situation in which the wizard is ill-prepared, as he has a good chance of having an appropriate spell prepared (not that the wizard won't have scrolls, mind you). There are four situations in which a dual-caster can further shine: 1. Low-level games, and this has already been addressed. 2. When the party isn't optimized (and therefore sucking is tolerated). 3. When there are full casters who can pull the weight of the rest of the party (and therefore sucking is tolerated). 4. When the rest of the party are fighters (and therefore any spellcasting makes one a minor deity). These just aren't likely. Well, #2 is. Personally, I play my wizards very conservatively, usually saving my spells for the BBEG. Would being a dual-caster give me additional longevity? Yes, it would. It would also poop on the party's efficacy, given that my wizard in a Pathfinder game (where #2 is the case; we have two brand new players, one girl who wants to play a shadowdancer, and a cleric who doesn't know math) has saved the day on multiple occasions. Last game, I was fortunate enough to use web and then scorching ray to good effect (and glitterdust would have been better than the latter, but I love scorching ray). If I hadn't used those spells, the party would have been toast. It wouldn't matter if I had been able to cast first-level cleric spells three times per day or whatever--spellcasting retardation is equivalent to death.
TheAntiTroll 11-28-08, 07:13 PM	Heh. To elaborate a little, if there's no cleric or wizard in the party you're stuck pulling dead weight as someone not equipped to do so. If there's neither, you're worse off.
j2 11-28-08, 11:12 PM	Wizard 1-2 has AoE save or dies. If it can't act, it can't harm you. Perfect defense. Wizard 3+ gets better tools for that offense as defense job, along with meaningful defenses like Mirror Image, False Life, and so forth. Fun fact: The beatstick only is up 12 HP at this level. A single image of mirror image buffers about that much damage. A False Life spell cast hours prior blocks most of it. I'm not even going to cover higher levels as by this point it's so blatantly obvious you're going to have a hard time even getting to the HP of the Wizard much less taking them away... 3 round combats are the other limit. Standard is 2, optimized is 1. If the combat takes 3 rounds it's because it was a BBEG fight or something several levels higher. If it's longer than that it's most likely because you're on the ropes facing a probable TPK. I have specifically designed encounters for stalling purposes before, that is to say all of the enemies have like a 10% chance to be hit or some crap and it still came out to be 2.4 rounds a combat (5 fights in rapid succession, 12 rounds total). In all the games I play in or run there tends to be at least four fights a day. And there's still some power left, I'd say enough for two more fights. This is without consumables like staves. I partially agree about the number of rounds in combat - 3 is not unreasonable, but 1 or two rounds per combat seems awful fast (I can see it in higher levels of optimized play or on some encounters, but that doesn't sound very challenging and it doesn't sound like the villians are as optimized as the pc's are?). 4 fights per day is around where I'm at on average (more in a dungeon, less in more civilized terrain), plus extra hinderances that use resources. Typically the encounters I run take longer (some do go very quickly), but I prefer lower levels of play, outdoor scenarios (with larger battle areas where terrain/tactics/distance comes into play), and either very small party's or large ones facing quite a few enemies - or enemies with reinforcements brought by the sounds of battle, alarms, etc.. I also treat the "enemy" as if they are of equal importance to the pc's (meaning they want to win just as badly as the pc's do, and do everything in their power to do so including not fighting). Generally speaking, I think you prefer higher levels of play than I do as most (not all) of your situations regarding TN kind of gear toward that, with more emphasis on the hack-n-slash (that is not an insult). I tend to prefer more story driven, puzzle solving (not puzzles, but storyline puzzles), etc. and a slower developing/highly fleshed out campaign. I try to insert a certain amount of realism (like making the enemies as important as the pc's, and not allowing the pc's the opportunity to rest uninterrupted every time their resources get low). I like to keep the party on their toes. I also enjoy tactical battles. Various hack-n-slash encounter are there regularly, and some dungeon plundering, but are not the primary goal. I like small groups (like a 2 person party), or very large battles, but there's also regularly standard 3-5 character party's. In these scenarios that I tend toward, TN tends to be a stronger choice, as I get to put his overall abilities to better use. (Of course, I still really like well written hack-n-slash adventures like the original GDQ series). So, while I haven't yet heard a compelling enough argument to say a straight caster is superior to a dual casting mesh prc - I know... :banghead: I've heard the arguments, I do understand they both have fairly close value to them. I hear both sides, I understand both sides, and I can understand why each side feels one way or the other, but I have yet to see a winner in this long-ongoing argument. Most will lean toward straight build as superior due to upward power, with the mesh not too far behind. (I have another character I'm trying extremely hard to get upward power for while still retaining a diverse flavor, but the prc's/class combo's just won't mesh). But, I'm leaning the other way with the diversity while retaining substantial power with the dual caster mesh prc. Yes straight build has significant upward power (while losing total access to a 2nd class), yes mesh prc has substantial horizontal power (and loses 6 important high level spells). (BTW, the BBEG who "rules" the campaign world I'm developing is essentially a straight (albiet diabolically insane/corrupt) Mage with some prc's for power, and one of the key players in the current 5 pc party is essentially straight rebuking undead army hoarding Cleric build who runs alongside the TN whose party will eventually branch into a smaller groups). For now, I'll probably cr*p out on the who's better thread and longer winded posts of mine, because it takes too much time away from actually designing, playing, and non-DnD activities :), and IMO has no end in sight.
j2 11-28-08, 11:27 PM	Yes, for I am cruel. J2: You're not understanding. 3e has ultraf*ck issues with the 15-minute workday. As soon as the wizard is low on spells, the party rests with a rope trick. Once he's back up to full, the party can keep going. The only time that the dual-caster is going to really shine is if there's a period when the wizard can't take a rest for whatever reason--if the party has to go through encounter after encounter without a break. The dual-caster can also shine in a situation in which the wizard is ill-prepared, as he has a good chance of having an appropriate spell prepared (not that the wizard won't have scrolls, mind you). There are four situations in which a dual-caster can further shine: 1. Low-level games, and this has already been addressed. 2. When the party isn't optimized (and therefore sucking is tolerated). 3. When there are full casters who can pull the weight of the rest of the party (and therefore sucking is tolerated). 4. When the rest of the party are fighters (and therefore any spellcasting makes one a minor deity). These just aren't likely. Well, #2 is. Personally, I play my wizards very conservatively, usually saving my spells for the BBEG. Would being a dual-caster give me additional longevity? Yes, it would. It would also poop on the party's efficacy, given that my wizard in a Pathfinder game (where #2 is the case; we have two brand new players, one girl who wants to play a shadowdancer, and a cleric who doesn't know math) has saved the day on multiple occasions. Last game, I was fortunate enough to use web and then scorching ray to good effect (and glitterdust would have been better than the latter, but I love scorching ray). If I hadn't used those spells, the party would have been toast. It wouldn't matter if I had been able to cast first-level cleric spells three times per day or whatever--spellcasting retardation is equivalent to death. Last session we played, resources were fairly low in an outdoor encounter. The party was fighting with quite a few enemies coming from different directions, and the battle was going fairly evenly with the party being injured regularly, and it came down to one choice making the difference between TPK and a party win. The party's Cleric (who is the closest thing to a frontline fighter we have) was knocked out quickly. 3 of the other combatants were facing their own sets of enemies. The TN (who had near full hp) had the choice of offensively attacking (and possibly not succeeding) in attacking the Bad Guy who took down the party cleric before the Bad Guy killed the Cleric outright, or run over to the cleric and heal him. In this case the TN moved across the play field putting himself near the Bad Guy, and healed the Cleric who then knocked out the Bad Guy with an offensive spell. Had the TN attempted an offensive spell and failed to do enough damage/incapacitate the Baddie, the Cleric would be dead, and that would have lost the battle for the party. If the Cleric was healed, but didn't kill the bad guy, at least the bad guy was now injured badly enough that the TN could finish him off. In this case one choice from the TN saved the party, and it was a choice the straight caster couldn't have had. Not saying straight caster is bad. But mesh is also very useful.
Kain01 11-29-08, 06:18 AM	I'd like to toss out there, that my parties stop having 3 round encounters after about level 12. Everything after that is something custom made to fight the party as a whole, usually leading to us trying to figure out which one of us can hit who before the real fight 3-4 rounds later. As such most combats my party is involved in are designed to last, and if a DM throws three or more back to back, the party is destined to die. At every gaming session I've been to there have been instances of the dm pushing us through traps and monsters at a pace where spells are gone before the last encounter, and it's really fun making the wizard have to get his daggers/staff dirty every once in awhile. As far as blasters go, if they suck so bad then why are there sorceror's and warlocks? Why does the Necromancer handbook thread suggest the utercold necromancer? That's all they do. Nobody makes a buff n' bash sorceror. J2, you're absolutely correct. There has to be a trade off for a DC PC to work. If the TN ever came out with 9th level spells before level 24 (if you follow the create an epic prestige class guide on wizards.com which is as good as any rulebook out there), they would be too powerful in a level 20 party. Ultimately it comes down to gaming styles, in the campaign where fights are over in one or two rounds, yeah DC PC's are probably not going to stand out. In a campaign where wizard's and clerics run out of spells daily, they're going to do pretty good. Know your DM, and know your campaign.
TheAntiTroll 11-29-08, 07:42 AM	Let's try this once more. There is absolutely nothing in the game that can compare to the highest level spells available at the current level. Nothing. Anything that means you lose 3rd level spells at level 5? Automatically not worth it. The reason is simple. Spells are the strongest things in the entire game, thus losing them for any reason automatically makes you worse off. Doesn't matter if you get a bunch of lower level spells. Still not enough actions to use them all, still inferior, and still force an inferior build due to MAD. So in addition to losing spell levels, you lose spell DCs. 1-2 rounds is standard for combat because all it takes is a single spell to end the entire fight. There's multiple casters casting said spells because if you don't have two casters (arcane and divine) you're stuck dragging around a bunch of dead weight (everyone else just about) even more so than usual. It's possible to have more, but even 2 will do. 3 rounds is about standard for stuff you specifically tried to make hard and stalling. If it's taking more than that it's because you can't fight back effectively. For example your only good party members died, or you haven't found the right button to press to end the fight, or whatever. Even buffed up optimized outsiders only lasted 2.4 rounds an encounter. The worst thing that came out of that series of fights is that a cohort died. Oh noes, Raise Dead at high levels! Other future fights include such things as even more optimized demons, optimized dragons, archers quite capable of one rounding at least one party member at a time... I don't use weaksauce encounters. The hard ones are designed to be almost immune to most of what the PCs can do. They still tear through it though because casters are Just That Awesome. UMD +19 + Staff of Heal. Need I say more? Because you keep repeating that wrongness. Sorcerers exist because the developers were delusional and thought blasting was actually good. Warlocks exist because they were testing a mechanic.
Psychotic_Robot 11-29-08, 04:28 PM	Last session we played, resources were fairly low in an outdoor encounter. The party was fighting with quite a few enemies coming from different directions, and the battle was going fairly evenly with the party being injured regularly, and it came down to one choice making the difference between TPK and a party win. The party's Cleric (who is the closest thing to a frontline fighter we have) was knocked out quickly. 3 of the other combatants were facing their own sets of enemies. The TN (who had near full hp) had the choice of offensively attacking (and possibly not succeeding) in attacking the Bad Guy who took down the party cleric before the Bad Guy killed the Cleric outright, or run over to the cleric and heal him. In this case the TN moved across the play field putting himself near the Bad Guy, and healed the Cleric who then knocked out the Bad Guy with an offensive spell. Had the TN attempted an offensive spell and failed to do enough damage/incapacitate the Baddie, the Cleric would be dead, and that would have lost the battle for the party. If the Cleric was healed, but didn't kill the bad guy, at least the bad guy was now injured badly enough that the TN could finish him off. In this case one choice from the TN saved the party, and it was a choice the straight caster couldn't have had. Not saying straight caster is bad. But mesh is also very useful. This doesn't negate the crapitude of TN. The TN could just be a cleric with the appropriate domains and win the game that way.
j2 11-29-08, 06:15 PM	This doesn't negate the crapitude of TN. The TN could just be a cleric with the appropriate domains and win the game that way. I agree that it doesn't prove anything at all in and of itself. But here's my point in posting my example... In your example your arcane caster used a couple low level spells to completely save his party from TPK. In my example my TN used his cleric healing ability to singlehandedly save his party from TPK. Had he used his arcane ability (that was left) the result very likely would have also been TPK. My point is one character, using one type of class feature (Divine in one example, Arcane in the other) singlehandedly saved the party through one single choice of actions. And in both of those scenarios the TN could have easily fullfilled either role and saved each party by himself simply by switching his method (Divine/Arcane). Obviously not all situations are like that, but sometimes you NEED a cleric (in my case my Cleric was ko'd), and sometimes you NEED a wizard. But, by being able to go Divine or Arcane round by round with the spell use, the TN could have saved each party each time, whereas if the TN had been a straight Wizard in my example, the party would have died. And it sounds that if your Arcane Caster had been a straight Cleric then your party likely would have died. That's the entire point - TN can fullfill both roles when needed, and there are times when that really makes all the difference... thus it has a certain amount of Power attached to that capability - and that's the number one reason that MT is not as weak as the straight upward spell power indicates.
Objulen 11-29-08, 10:22 PM	I'm saying neither. I'm saying that level 20 is 5% of your adventuring career, assuming that you actually get that far, I don't see it happening ever. If you suck 95% of the time, then suck slightly less for the remaining 5%, you still suck. Furthermore, what you do for the first 19 levels is more important. You can't just rattle off what a level 20 character can do without taking into account that you need to survive for 20 levels to get there! You're directing your comments at the wrong person. I already know this, and it has nothing to do with what I was saying. My point was that a level 20 TN is going to be behind the curve compared to a level 20 wizard or cleric by at least one spell level. You should probably make these points to someone who doesn't think that the TN needs some help.
Kain01 11-30-08, 09:29 AM	Let's try this once more. There is absolutely nothing in the game that can compare to the highest level spells available at the current level. Nothing. Anything that means you lose 3rd level spells at level 5? Automatically not worth it. The reason is simple. Spells are the strongest things in the entire game, thus losing them for any reason automatically makes you worse off. Doesn't matter if you get a bunch of lower level spells. Still not enough actions to use them all, still inferior, and still force an inferior build due to MAD. So in addition to losing spell levels, you lose spell DCs. 1-2 rounds is standard for combat because all it takes is a single spell to end the entire fight. There's multiple casters casting said spells because if you don't have two casters (arcane and divine) you're stuck dragging around a bunch of dead weight (everyone else just about) even more so than usual. It's possible to have more, but even 2 will do. 3 rounds is about standard for stuff you specifically tried to make hard and stalling. If it's taking more than that it's because you can't fight back effectively. For example your only good party members died, or you haven't found the right button to press to end the fight, or whatever. Even buffed up optimized outsiders only lasted 2.4 rounds an encounter. The worst thing that came out of that series of fights is that a cohort died. Oh noes, Raise Dead at high levels! Other future fights include such things as even more optimized demons, optimized dragons, archers quite capable of one rounding at least one party member at a time... I don't use weaksauce encounters. The hard ones are designed to be almost immune to most of what the PCs can do. They still tear through it though because casters are Just That Awesome. UMD +19 + Staff of Heal. Need I say more? Because you keep repeating that wrongness. Sorcerers exist because the developers were delusional and thought blasting was actually good. Warlocks exist because they were testing a mechanic. Ok that is the way your dm plays it. I've never had an encounter go that fast. I don't think we've ever fought anything straight out of any MM either, they always have a template or two added on with full hp, and hd increased. Maybe goblins and kobolds at levels 1-2 or something but we still wind up fighting about 75 at a time. Your argument is still that you don't get 9th level spells and I still disagree. The spell DC's can be corrected with a feat, and necromancy dc's are a few levels greater than a straight build. You know the spells this build will be primarily casting. UMD and the staff of heal doesn't get your wizard divine power, or any of the other cleric buffs which is the point of the DCPC. You wizard your enemies from a distance and you buff cleric them when they get close. I still disagree with you about blasting, 50 - 60% of the spell compendiuim is a new way to blast. Our opinions and gaming styles differ, and there's nothing either of us can do to budge the other one. Your probably right for you gaming sessions, but wouldn't last ten minutes in one of mine. If combat's over in 2-4 rounds in yours I could have the fluffiest character in the world and be just fine in yours, suck or no suck.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-30-08, 12:34 PM	Lol @ templated monsters with full HP. Those get screwed by Evard's Tentacles and Acid Fog just like everything else. And 75 kobolds? Assuming they're standard MM kobolds, they' pretty irrelevant or a level 12 party. The reason the Uttercold Assault necro is recommended is because they not only hurt the opposition in a way that can't be protected against by living creatures, they actually constantly HEAL their minions constantly. The blasting is secondary to healing your minions every round. Again, you have no idea how to run a spellcaster.
j2 11-30-08, 05:08 PM	I posted this in another post: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=17345308 But here's a little side topic: A lot of folks say straight Dread Necromancer is preferred over True Necromancer, primarily due to their 8th level ability which allows them to control more undead (ONLY through the casting of Animate Undead), plus such undead have boosted abilities... Essentially they control 4HD plus CHA bonus per caster level, rather than straight 4 HD per level. But at high levels (and even mid levels), don't TN's get a great pool of undead from Animate Dead anyway? And there is a LM or HOH feat that grants the same ability bonus to such undead created. (at 15th caster level (aka character level 20), TN would get two seperate 60 HD pools of animated undead). If you add in practiced spellcaster feat to each class, you would get two 76 HD pools - which is fairly on par with DN (and superior to straight caster). At epic, the TN grows much faster in this regard. This isn't stacking/overlapping - actually it's better than stacking... if you have a comment on why this does/does not work, see the other thread: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=17345308, but be objective. Just because you don't like TN spellcasting, doesn't man the Animate Dead doesn't work this way, and just because you think TN is powerful, doesn't mean Animate Dead does work this way. Added later... So, from a straight "undead army" standpoint, True Necromancer actually is comparible with a Dread Necromancer. Maybe not even, but comparable in this way more so than a Cleric vs. Dread Necromancer, because True Necromancer gets twice the undead of a Straight Cleric build by level 20. (And that doesn't fully count the TN's bonus caster levels from necromantic prowess abilities). So this is another plus for TN over straight Cleric build, and 80+ extra HD of undead minions would surely beef up his power some.
TheAntiTroll 11-30-08, 05:40 PM	It has occurred to me that it is probable the reason why he needs so many spells is because he's wasting them on piddly little blasting instead of real magic. It would explain the drastic differences. In fact, it accounts for all variables I can think of offhand. After all, you'd need a lot of spells to kill encounters too if you thought 1d6/level with a save for half was a valid use of an action, instead of just kind of scratching the enemy a bit. Just to throw more Molotovs on the fire, I'll elaborate a little on what sorts of enemies my PCs face. They're all practically optimized. They are by no means max optimized, but then neither are the characters they're being used against. Certainly, they're better than the garbage in the MM. Here's an example of something that will hurt a bit, but die in 1 round (possibly 2) because it isn't a caster, and casters are Just That Awesome. It is 2-3 levels higher than the party depending on when they fight him. Swift Hunter: Hit and Run Fighter 1/Scout 5/Ranger 12: HD: 17d8+51 + 1d10+3 (139 hp). Init: +15. Speed: 40 feet. (60 when Haste is on) AC: 31 (+9 armor, +6 Dex, +6 shield), touch 24, flat-footed 31. (+4 if 10 foot move, +6 if 20 foot move, +7 if Law Devotion is on defense, +5 vs ranged attacks) BAB/Grapple: +16/+19. Attack: Bow +28* (+7 if Law Devotion is on attack) ranged (1d8+7 + 1d6 fire, cold, electricity, or acid/x3 + 2d6+2 bane + 2d6 unholy + 8 vs arcanists, elves, or humans + 5d6 skirmish if move 10 or + 7d6 if move 20 + 6 if target is flat footed and within 30 feet). Full attack: Bow +28*/+23*/+18*/+13* (+7 if Law Devotion is on attack) ranged (1d8+7 + 1d6 fire, cold, electricity, or acid/x3 + 2d6+2 bane + 2d6 unholy + 8 vs arcanists, elves, or humans + 5d6 skirmish if move 10 or + 7d6 if move 20 + 6 if target is flat footed and within 30 feet) or Greater Manyshot (+7 if Law Devotion is on attack) +20*/+20*/+20*/+20* ranged (1d8+7 + 1d6 fire, cold, electricity, or acid/x3 + 2d6+2 bane + 2d6 unholy + 8 vs arcanists, elves, or humans + 5d6 skirmish if move 10 or + 7d6 if move 20 + 6 if target is flat footed and within 30 feet). Space/reach: 5 feet/5 feet. SA: SQ: Distracting Attack, Spell Reflection. Saves: 20/22/17. (+3 vs energy drain, inflict, death) Stats: 16/22/16/10/16/10. Skills: 9 * 8 = 72. 7 * 12 = 84. 3 * 1 = 3. 72 + 84 + 3 = 159 points, take stealth and perception stuff along with +14 Tumble, 1 rank Knowledge: Arcana for Spell Reflection, throw in some movement skills and skill tricks and whatever for the rest, it really doesn't matter much. Feats: Darkstalker, Endurance, Greater Manyshot, Improved Initiative, Improved Precise Shot, Improved Skirmish, Law Devotion, Manyshot, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Quick Reconnoiter, Rapid Shot, Swift Hunter, Track, Travel Devotion. * Assuming Raptor Arrows with their Bane: Target effect for +2 to hit/+2d6+2 damage. All hits heal 1 HP, max 10/day. 1: Point Blank Shot. H: Precise Shot. 3: Darkstalker. 6: Law Devotion. 9: Greater Manyshot. 12: Improved Skirmish. 15: Travel Devotion. 18: Quick Reconnoiter. Fighter 1: Improved Initiative. Scout 4: Swift Hunter. Ranger 1: Track. Ranger 2: Rapid Shot. Ranger 3: Endurance. Ranger 6: Manyshot. Ranger 11: Improved Precise Shot. Items: +1 Force Seeking Hunting Composite Longbow with auto adjusting bowstring and Least Crystal of Lifedrinking. (51.8k) 5 Unholy Screaming Raptor Arrows. (50,030) [Black (acid), Blue (lightning), Green (acid), Red (fire), White, (cold)] 40 arrows. (2) +2 Strength item. (4k) +2 Dexterity item. (4k) +2 Constitution item. (4k) +2 Wisdom item. (4k) +4 resistance item. (16k) Oil of Greater Magic Weapon +4 (2.4k) Oil of Magic Vestment +4 * 2 (4.8k) Efficient Quiver. (1.8k) Ring of Entropic Deflection. (8k) Boots of Speed. (12k) +1 ghost ward woodwalk quickness mithril chain shirt. (18.6k) +1 ghost ward animated darkwood heavy shield. (16,257) Scout's Headband. (3.4k) Lesser Crystal of Arrow Deflection. (2.5k) Lesser Crystal of Lifekeeping. (1k) Crystal Mask of Mindarmor. (10k) 5 doses of giant wasp poison. (1,050) Scroll of Forestfold. (375) Scroll of Barkskin +4. (450) Scroll of Listening Lorecall. (150) 52.67 gold. This also demonstrates just what sort of build is required to make non casters remotely functional. And it still requires having significantly greater than the normal NPC wealth of 130k to function, still requires consumable novaing to be remotely credible, and will still function as above... that is to say, dead in 1, maybe 2 rounds. At least he has a decent chance of surprise. Also note I had to upgrade and reflavor Raptor Arrows and steal the auto adjust composite ability that comes with Bows of the Wintermoon for the same reason. Doesn't stop the fact his meaningful saves are 20/17 (23/20 vs death) and he'd be taking multiple spells a round. So despite the fact this guy is built to be as durable as possible while still posing a threat within those guidelines... casters are gods, and losing caster levels is made of Fail. /rant
Kain01 11-30-08, 10:00 PM	It has occurred to me that it is probable the reason why he needs so many spells is because he's wasting them on piddly little blasting instead of real magic. It would explain the drastic differences. In fact, it accounts for all variables I can think of offhand. After all, you'd need a lot of spells to kill encounters too if you thought 1d6/level with a save for half was a valid use of an action, instead of just kind of scratching the enemy a bit. Just to throw more Molotovs on the fire, I'll elaborate a little on what sorts of enemies my PCs face. They're all practically optimized. They are by no means max optimized, but then neither are the characters they're being used against. Certainly, they're better than the garbage in the MM. Here's an example of something that will hurt a bit, but die in 1 round (possibly 2) because it isn't a caster, and casters are Just That Awesome. It is 2-3 levels higher than the party depending on when they fight him. This also demonstrates just what sort of build is required to make non casters remotely functional. And it still requires having significantly greater than the normal NPC wealth of 130k to function, still requires consumable novaing to be remotely credible, and will still function as above... that is to say, dead in 1, maybe 2 rounds. At least he has a decent chance of surprise. Also note I had to upgrade and reflavor Raptor Arrows and steal the auto adjust composite ability that comes with Bows of the Wintermoon for the same reason. Doesn't stop the fact his meaningful saves are 20/17 (23/20 vs death) and he'd be taking multiple spells a round. So despite the fact this guy is built to be as durable as possible while still posing a threat within those guidelines... casters are gods, and losing caster levels is made of Fail. /rant Should've lost the crystal of arrow deflection and gotten two scrolls of spell resistance. Would have at least survived an extra round maybe 2 if he was really lucky. And is this guy solo against a 15-16 level party, if so why? He needs a backup caster/buffer at least.
j2 11-30-08, 10:24 PM	So, this is the essential plusses and minuses of the thread - (if I'm missing anything big and important post it): Ignoring Domains which both characters get, Straight Cleric 20 gets: --two 8th level spells, plus four 9th level spells. --Casts spells 1 caster level higher than TN --8hd instead of 6hd CL3/Wiz3/TN14 with practiced caster (x2) gets: --6hd instead of 8hd --24 extra spells 6th level or lower --Can choose between two totally different spellcasting classes and has almost every spell known available to them, allowing him to perform the roll of 3 base character types WITHIN ACTION ECONOMY. --Gets a buffed up ADDITIONAL 104 HD of undead walking "army" from Raise Dead spells (total of 184 HD from both pools including caster level plus necromantic prowess). This puts him comparable to a DN's base undead army if TN has the right undead ability buff feat. --Casts necromantic spells at 23rd level at character level 20. That doesn't sound like the TN is particularly weak against a straight Cleric Build to me.
JaronK 11-30-08, 10:31 PM	You missed a few. The Cleric has greater Rebuke Undead. The Cleric's spells are just plain better (for necromancy there's Plague of Undead, but Shapechange, Gate, and so on are VERY potent). Each spell level gets exponentially better than the last, so losing out on 9th level spells hurts REALLY bad. The TN's undead amount is no where near comparable to the DN. A DN with a Charisma of 30 (reasonable for a 20th level charisma caster with a bunch of other Charisma based abilities... and remember they turn into Liches) has 20 * (4+10) HD in Undead, or 280 HD. That's well over double what a comperable TN would get, and if optimized you're liable to hit triple. The Cleric has two free feats to use however he likes, since the TN had to waste two on Practiced Spellcaster. So yeah, the Cleric is really outclassing the TN there. I know having more spells in general sounds cool, but the truth is that high level spells are encounter enders, so you're not going to be using up the spells that a Cleric has... the TNs extra spells are just, well, extra. The real advantage I'd see for the TN is that they get Animate Dread Warrior. JaronK
j2 11-30-08, 11:33 PM	You missed a few. The Cleric has greater Rebuke Undead. The Cleric's spells are just plain better (for necromancy there's Plague of Undead, but Shapechange, Gate, and so on are VERY potent). Each spell level gets exponentially better than the last, so losing out on 9th level spells hurts REALLY bad. The TN's undead amount is no where near comparable to the DN. A DN with a Charisma of 30 (reasonable for a 20th level charisma caster with a bunch of other Charisma based abilities... and remember they turn into Liches) has 20 * (4+10) HD in Undead, or 280 HD. That's well over double what a comperable TN would get, and if optimized you're liable to hit triple. The Cleric has two free feats to use however he likes, since the TN had to waste two on Practiced Spellcaster. So yeah, the Cleric is really outclassing the TN there. I know having more spells in general sounds cool, but the truth is that high level spells are encounter enders, so you're not going to be using up the spells that a Cleric has... the TNs extra spells are just, well, extra. The real advantage I'd see for the TN is that they get Animate Dread Warrior. JaronK At lower levels I see Cleric Rebuke better, but at higher levels with necromantic prowess, doesn't TN have the edge? But yes, that should be mentioned, because TN trails straight Cleric at many levels. -I agree that there are definite lagging/soft levels in spells by taking DN, and other levels that are more on par. Lagging on 3rd level spells is a major blow for example (as is obviously lagging on 9th). - I don't agree on the double the undead for DN vs TN. TN has 184. DN has 280 with a 30 CHA, but I agree with a magically enhanced CHA (which is reasonable to assume), DN has a distinct advantage. But as far as CL vs. TN, TN actually does have more than double Raise Dead controlled undead (80 vs 184). -2 free feats - agreed. Not powerful enough to overwhelm the character, but they are plusses for straight Cleric. I also didn't mention other TN or Cleric class abilities which would count also (like the greater desecrate you mentioned in another thread).
JaronK 11-30-08, 11:43 PM	Note that with Animate Dead, a Cleric who's trying for it can get 6XHD in undead, using the appropriate domain. JaronK
Count Arioch the 28th 12-01-08, 01:21 AM	When the dm knows those spell's (evard's/acid fog) are coming (and they should most of the time), your opponents shouldn't be effected by them. Wrong. There's nothing the DM can do without making a richard maneuver. If the DM is not following the rules, then this whole debate is utterly pointless, because if your DM is as sucky as you are insinuating, you're not playing D&D, you're playing Magical Tea Party. Try playing by the rules sometime. EDIT: Just to clarify, anything Gargantuan or bigger can ignore Evards, and an AMF can nullify pretty much everything magical. If the DM only throws Gargantuan creatures in the area of an AMF from level 11 on, then that's a richard maneuver. However, the ocassional gargantuan creature or AMF is not automatically a richard maneuver.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 07:13 AM	Should've lost the crystal of arrow deflection and gotten two scrolls of spell resistance. Would have at least survived an extra round maybe 2 if he was really lucky. And is this guy solo against a 15-16 level party, if so why? He needs a backup caster/buffer at least. Scrolls he can't use, and will do jack :censored: :censored: for him because spell resistance is a joke, not a meaningful defense. Looking at my character's sheets again... let's see... one ignores any SR less than 32 aka auto pass. The others ignore any SR lower than about 28 or so because they didn't bother getting feats and items to further help it. Which means it would take a caster level 17th Spell Resistance spell to have any effect at all on this party. And by any effect, I mean block 5% of spells from some of the party. Anyways. He's 2-3 levels higher than the group by himself, thereby serving as a good 'mid boss'. He has a few buffs he couldn't get on his own, which simulates the buff caster without jacking the CR up to full boss levels. It also means he can do his stealth thing without some guy in full plate ruining it.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 07:41 AM	Saying that I am lying is childish and retarded. You have never been to one of my gaming sessions. If the dm spent three weeks preparing a counter build to your character, there is no way the fight would be over in 2-4 rounds. Your spells would never get through, you have to figure out who's counter you can take down. No, it is a statement of fact. You do not encounter 75 enemies at level 1 or 2, and if you do it's called a TPK, not good gaming. If the DM spent weeks making something specifically to counter you that is called an asshat DM. Further, it would only work if you are a one trick pony. As this discussion is about casters, and casters are not one trick ponies they cannot possibly counter everything you can do, therefore you are again lying as that build cannot counter all your tricks or even most of them. Blow them away anyways. Then flip your DM off for being an asshat. I meant Practiced Spellcaster, it puts you at 1 level spellcaster behind pretty much all the way through, yes it's two feats for this build, but this build is worthess without them. Blasting is as effective as everything else if you know your enemy's not immune. Stop assuming I mean that it is the endall beall of spellcasting, it's not. I'm not that stupid. You just dismiss it as though you have never casted a fireball in your entire life. Ok. The original discussion was about save DCs. That feat does jack :censored: for save DCs as save DCs are based on your casting stat and the spell level. Irrelevant. Blasting is an utter and complete joke because all you do is scratch the enemy up a bit without impeding their ability to fight in any way. The same spell slot can negate one or more enemies entirely for the same save. I dismiss it because it is garbage. Casting spells that kind of sort of hurt things with your actions is blatantly inferior to casting spells that :censored: kill people. Practiced Spellcaster has a different purpose, and still amounts to being 2 feats down (more, if TN requires any junk feats) in addition to being down multiple points of save DC and multiple spell levels. I've never used a garbage character, and I've yet to be taken down by a spellcaster muchless a melee character. Your spell DC's will still be in the 30's with the freakin TN, they'll just be at maybe 31 instead of 32. You still have to be a focused caster with true necro, this is not an undead general build, if you want that go dread necro. Optimally you make an uttercold True Necro and have a select few high level undead with you at all times. The Necro lives or dies by his save or die spells. I agree with alot you gentleman have had to say, but I disagree with you that this prestige class is crap. If you spent the time on your normal builds whatever they may be on a TN, you could probably make one that's as good or better than most of your previous spellcaster's. False. First, the DCs would be at least 3 lower, and likely more than that. After all, you're having to divide between two caster stats, and are casting lower level spells. As spells are the thing you have going for you, anything that makes your spells suck makes you suck. TN makes your spells suck. QED. To compare to the current level... Wizard 15 has 8th level spells, and a very high primary stat, likely around 28-30. Cleric 15 has the same thing. TN has... 5th level spells because he loses 5 levels of casting advancement on both sides. 3 points down automatically. Then the fact he has to keep two stats high instead of one results in further reduction... so it's actually more than a 3 point deficiency. Likely 4, or even 5. That's massive. Now, the typical opponents I'm throwing at these guys have saves around 20. Their DCs are in the 30-35 range because they're smart and throwing out Enervations/Sickened/Shaken... which lower saves, and are partially factored into the above. So the difference between a real caster and a TN is the difference between being able to affect enemies somewhat reliably without debuffs and consistently with them and being completely useless without debuffs and only marginally useful with them. That's huge. When the dm knows those spell's (evard's/acid fog) are coming (and they should most of the time), your opponents shouldn't be effected by them. In other words he should make up random arbitrary BS to nerf effective tactics on the spot so you are stuck with piddly little blasting. Again, your DM is an asshat, and so are you if you honestly believe that crap. Yeah 75 kobolds was a bit of an exageration. I understand the point of an Uttercold Assault necro, thanks. I do pretty darn good with spellcaster's, thank you very much. You cannot get through a day without wasting lots of spells. Clearly, you are wrong. Yes this is why encounters go more slowly, I have a cheesy DM, but he makes it fun. A good dm should put that much energy into his campaign. If he doesn't it's not worth playing. Or you can get a Wizard's certified adventure and waltz through it at a level or three lower than they suggest. That might make them fun. You admit your DM is BSing you. Um 9th level spells aren't that much than 8th level spells. :rofl: Still doesn't get you access to ALL of a cleric's buffs, and yes they happen outside of game. A wizard with UMD is not as versatile as this prestige class. But your still capable of standing in the melee like a cleric can with this prestige class, plus blasting....ahem excuse me, save or die spelling occassionally. Standing in the melee is not a valid character role, so if he can't do that, or even if no one can it's not a loss. In fact it may be a gain, as it means you don't have to burn a Heal after the fight. Cleric buffs before combat. Done. The Wizard with UMD only needs to cover the most common stuff like Staff of Heal so that the 'tank' can actually survive two consecutive rounds at his job. Quality and quantity together (why does everyone assume I am going to cast a thousand horrid wilting's, I'm not saying that at all.) Is better than just quality. My brain works fine, it just disagrees WITH THE POINT that this build is a throw away prestige class. I think if properly optimized it can go toe to toe with some of the best focused casters out there, because IT HAS TO BE A FOCUSED CASTER TOO. Yes, it is. Too bad TN doesn't give you that admixture, thereby rendering the rest of that paragraph moot. Lose 2 levels of casting advancement, you are a cohort. Lose 4, you are a cohort's cohort. A Commoner 20 with a Cleric 18 via Leadership who has a Wizard 16 via Leadership is bringing more magic in general and necromancy in particular to the table than you are. You're inferior to the guy who used to get bullied by Fluffy the House Cat. Epic :censored: Fail. Yes if you want to make necromancer that is a general of undeath, please see the dread necro's thread, this prestige class isn't for you. If you want a unique spellcaster that has the option of standing toe to toe in melee (at least as good as a cleric), or standing back throwing spells (like a wizard), or mixing and matching this class is for you. And again I will state you will be cowering behind most of the other members of the party until about level 8-10 depending on how you build it. Which means it does nothing a plain Cleric cannot do, except plain Clerics are not gimped for 40-50% of the level range. Also, it does nothing a Wizard built to be a gish cannot do, except that the gish will not lose nearly as many caster levels. Again, Epic :censored: Fail. I think we agree on alot more points than we disagree on, you just assume that anyone not sharing YOUR opinion is an idiot. I assume anyone who is willingly being dense is an idiot. Everyone else would have gotten a clue from the objective facts by now. Remember, assumed party arrangement is 2 casters out of 4. Even that results in dragging a lot of dead weight, taking less means even more dead weight. Still, it gives a Cleric and a Wizard. A more typical high level party which takes this into consideration and doesn't want to be a bunch of Red Shirts to babysit has a higher ratio of casters. Something like Artificer/Cleric/Favored Soul/Wizard/Psychic Warrior, with two beatstick cohorts. Artificer takes one round, the enemy is now cowering without fail unless very big and/or wise in which case it has a slight chance of avoiding this then has its saves lowered by 5-8 as ranged touch attacks that allow no save. It's now wide open to be blown away by the other 3 casters. Even if it's still there, it can't act. Add more Enervations and Imperious Command if needed, they're both at will abilities. This is just one caster, not even doing anything special.
ORC_Nashira 12-01-08, 09:47 AM	Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from personal attacks and flaming, these are violations of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Kain01 12-01-08, 11:15 AM	No, it is a statement of fact. You do not encounter 75 enemies at level 1 or 2, and if you do it's called a TPK, not good gaming. If the DM spent weeks making something specifically to counter you that is called an asshat DM. Further, it would only work if you are a one trick pony. As this discussion is about casters, and casters are not one trick ponies they cannot possibly counter everything you can do, therefore you are again lying as that build cannot counter all your tricks or even most of them. Blow them away anyways. Then flip your DM off for being an asshat. No that is called good dming. Is he cheesy sometimes, yes. Is it necessary because most things thrown at a party are going to die a quick death, yes. I'd rather my party walk into an anti magic field everyday if it keeps the game interesting. And EVERYTHING POSTED ON HERE HAS BEEN OPINION'S, NOT FACT. There is no such thing as fact in a game where most of the rules are made on the fly determined by the dm. Ok. The original discussion was about save DCs. That feat does jack :censored: for save DCs as save DCs are based on your casting stat and the spell level. Irrelevant. Blasting is an utter and complete joke because all you do is scratch the enemy up a bit without impeding their ability to fight in any way. The same spell slot can negate one or more enemies entirely for the same save. I dismiss it because it is garbage. Casting spells that kind of sort of hurt things with your actions is blatantly inferior to casting spells that :censored: kill people. Practiced Spellcaster has a different purpose, and still amounts to being 2 feats down (more, if TN requires any junk feats) in addition to being down multiple points of save DC and multiple spell levels. Nice of you to come to the defense of the guy that attacked me and got his post removed, he should thank you. As for blasting spells I give up you refuse to accept that in certain circumstances it's just easier to throw the 1 fireball that'll kill a couple of people coming at you instead of wasting bigby's, evard's or whatever else you need to entangle someone or saving your die spells. I know what practiced spellcaster does, I discussed it at length in my post that was deleted. Yes you are 2 feats down, but they are necessary for the build, find a way to get two free feats. Human's one half of that battle. False. First, the DCs would be at least 3 lower, and likely more than that. After all, you're having to divide between two caster stats, and are casting lower level spells. As spells are the thing you have going for you, anything that makes your spells suck makes you suck. TN makes your spells suck. QED. To compare to the current level... Wizard 15 has 8th level spells, and a very high primary stat, likely around 28-30. Cleric 15 has the same thing. TN has... 5th level spells because he loses 5 levels of casting advancement on both sides. 3 points down automatically. Then the fact he has to keep two stats high instead of one results in further reduction... so it's actually more than a 3 point deficiency. Likely 4, or even 5. That's massive. Now, the typical opponents I'm throwing at these guys have saves around 20. Their DCs are in the 30-35 range because they're smart and throwing out Enervations/Sickened/Shaken... which lower saves, and are partially factored into the above. So the difference between a real caster and a TN is the difference between being able to affect enemies somewhat reliably without debuffs and consistently with them and being completely useless without debuffs and only marginally useful with them. That's huge. A Tn should be at most only 4 ability points behind a straight caster in both int and wis, which nets you only a -2 save dc. You forget that the TN has all the same buffs as the straight caster and probably the same equipment. The TN at level 15 has access to 6th level spells, so it's automatically 2 not three. So a regular caster has +4 DC on the TN. Not optimal, but liveable as you said most things will at best have a +18-20 on their saves depending on ability score and having a +5 resistance item at 15. The TN will have rely more heavily on the enervations etc. but are still effective. (again talked about that in my deleted post.) In other words he should make up random arbitrary BS to nerf effective tactics on the spot so you are stuck with piddly little blasting. Again, your DM is an asshat, and so are you if you honestly believe that crap. Anti-Magic fields and decent spell resistance on a drow or similar creature are not BS nerf's. Again you are making assumptions that you have played a campaign with me. You cannot get through a day without wasting lots of spells. Clearly, you are wrong. Yes when the dm wants you to run out of spells you will. You will not get a rest for 48 hours in game time, there is nothing you as a player can do about it. You admit your DM is BSing you. I admitted that he does have to squeeze some cheese and botch a roll or two in order for the encounter to have impact. Again the dm is always right if he says you don't hit you don't hit. If he says your spells bounce off the kobold, it bounces off the kobold. :rofl: Standing in the melee is not a valid character role, so if he can't do that, or even if no one can it's not a loss. In fact it may be a gain, as it means you don't have to burn a Heal after the fight. Cleric buffs before combat. Done. The Wizard with UMD only needs to cover the most common stuff like Staff of Heal so that the 'tank' can actually survive two consecutive rounds at his job. Wow you suck at building anything but spellcaster's if tanking is impossible for you. Look up a monk or anything else that get's spell resistance at a decent pace. Monk's are the ultimate mage killer's if done properly. Yes, it is. Too bad TN doesn't give you that admixture, thereby rendering the rest of that paragraph moot. Lose 2 levels of casting advancement, you are a cohort. Lose 4, you are a cohort's cohort. A Commoner 20 with a Cleric 18 via Leadership who has a Wizard 16 via Leadership is bringing more magic in general and necromancy in particular to the table than you are. You're inferior to the guy who used to get bullied by Fluffy the House Cat. Epic :censored: Fail. Leadership is a bs feat and the best cohort at level 20 isn't packing lvl 9 spells for you look at the chart. You need a 24 or better leadership score and if your mage's cha is that high your going to have a crappy mage. You wouldn't build a sorceror so don't bring that argument to me. Which means it does nothing a plain Cleric cannot do, except plain Clerics are not gimped for 40-50% of the level range. Also, it does nothing a Wizard built to be a gish cannot do, except that the gish will not lose nearly as many caster levels. Again, Epic :censored: Fail. It casts arcane spells, something a plain cleric cannot do. 50% of the level range is pretty harsh when your only one spell level behind most of the time. It casts divine spells, something the wizard can't do. Again it will lose 1 caster level if built properly, and with Ur-Preist Cheese it can have access to lvl 9 cleric spells. But I'm not going into that. I assume anyone who is willingly being dense is an idiot. Everyone else would have gotten a clue from the objective facts by now. I have had different experiences than you in gaming, and you have not made any facts known except that not having lvl 9 spells is bad. Beyond that it's a difference of gaming styles. Remember, assumed party arrangement is 2 casters out of 4. Even that results in dragging a lot of dead weight, taking less means even more dead weight. Still, it gives a Cleric and a Wizard. A more typical high level party which takes this into consideration and doesn't want to be a bunch of Red Shirts to babysit has a higher ratio of casters. Something like Artificer/Cleric/Favored Soul/Wizard/Psychic Warrior, with two beatstick cohorts. Artificer takes one round, the enemy is now cowering without fail unless very big and/or wise in which case it has a slight chance of avoiding this then has its saves lowered by 5-8 as ranged touch attacks that allow no save. It's now wide open to be blown away by the other 3 casters. Even if it's still there, it can't act. Add more Enervations and Imperious Command if needed, they're both at will abilities. This is just one caster, not even doing anything special. You have never faced a properly built Githzerai monk party. Or a group of blackknights with a high level caster that's specialized in counterspelling. Or better yet, when he cast's antimagic field around you for his suprise attack. And you called me the one trick pony. Hi Kettle. Cohorts are still disallowed in my game and most games I know, because no one wants to waste their time with the extra dice rolls. Combat is a small part of role play. But when we do get into a scrap I'd rather have it out, rather than bulldoze my way through everything.
Kain01 12-01-08, 11:19 AM	Scrolls he can't use, and will do jack :censored: :censored: for him because spell resistance is a joke, not a meaningful defense. Looking at my character's sheets again... let's see... one ignores any SR less than 32 aka auto pass. The others ignore any SR lower than about 28 or so because they didn't bother getting feats and items to further help it. Which means it would take a caster level 17th Spell Resistance spell to have any effect at all on this party. And by any effect, I mean block 5% of spells from some of the party. Anyways. He's 2-3 levels higher than the group by himself, thereby serving as a good 'mid boss'. He has a few buffs he couldn't get on his own, which simulates the buff caster without jacking the CR up to full boss levels. It also means he can do his stealth thing without some guy in full plate ruining it. Yeah decent party leader mid-boss, and since he can't use scrolls guess his ac's gonna have to drop by 4 since he can't do the barkskin thng.
Kain01 12-01-08, 11:30 AM	So, this is the essential plusses and minuses of the thread - (if I'm missing anything big and important post it): Ignoring Domains which both characters get, Straight Cleric 20 gets: --two 8th level spells, plus four 9th level spells. --Casts spells 1 caster level higher than TN --8hd instead of 6hd CL3/Wiz3/TN14 with practiced caster (x2) gets: --6hd instead of 8hd --24 extra spells 6th level or lower --Can choose between two totally different spellcasting classes and has almost every spell known available to them, allowing him to perform the roll of 3 base character types WITHIN ACTION ECONOMY. --Gets a buffed up ADDITIONAL 104 HD of undead walking "army" from Raise Dead spells (total of 184 HD from both pools including caster level plus necromantic prowess). This puts him comparable to a DN's base undead army if TN has the right undead ability buff feat. --Casts necromantic spells at 23rd level at character level 20. That doesn't sound like the TN is particularly weak against a straight Cleric Build to me. Only thing your missing is that the animate dead for a TN doesn't stack. Meaning he can't double his limits by casting animate dead as an arcane spell then as a divine spell. The only reason he has a slight edge on controlling undead is because of his 23 caster level for necromancy spells. TN at level 20 has 184 HD of undead he can control Cleric at 20 has 160 hd of undead DN at level 20 assuming a low cha score of 22 can control 400 hd of undead. That Cha bonus is killer for them. The Dread Necromancer really is the absolutely best general of undead out there. I still say a level 24 TN with a rebuked level 20 DN "cohort" is the best antidote to this entire thread.
Kain01 12-01-08, 11:38 AM	Good chatting guys, but you can argue that 9th level are da bomb till your blue in the face. I still disagree and at the end of the day it's obvious neither of us is doing jack to deter the other so I'm bowing out. I'll play my game which is fun and exciting for me, you play your game which is fun and exciting for you, and we'll agree to disagree. Have a good life.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 11:44 AM	Yeah decent party leader mid-boss, and since he can't use scrolls guess his ac's gonna have to drop by 4 since he can't do the barkskin thng. Barkskin is on the Ranger list. He can cast that. Spell Resistance is not on the Ranger list. Even if it actually mattered.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 12:36 PM	No that is called good dming. Is he cheesy sometimes, yes. Is it necessary because most things thrown at a party are going to die a quick death, yes. I'd rather my party walk into an anti magic field everyday if it keeps the game interesting. And EVERYTHING POSTED ON HERE HAS BEEN OPINION'S, NOT FACT. There is no such thing as fact in a game where most of the rules are made on the fly determined by the dm. No, it's called your DM is horrid, otherwise he'd know how to pose a challenge without BS. In other words, he'd do what I'm doing. Also, AMF has a 10 foot radius and must be centered on the caster. Fail. Nice of you to come to the defense of the guy that attacked me and got his post removed, he should thank you. As for blasting spells I give up you refuse to accept that in certain circumstances it's just easier to throw the 1 fireball that'll kill a couple of people coming at you instead of wasting bigby's, evard's or whatever else you need to entangle someone or saving your die spells. I know what practiced spellcaster does, I discussed it at length in my post that was deleted. Yes you are 2 feats down, but they are necessary for the build, find a way to get two free feats. Human's one half of that battle. I have no idea who you're talking about. I am correcting your falsehoods. Fireballs don't kill anything, unless it's so far below you as to be a waste of a spell to even consider (as in something like fighting CR 2 mooks at level 10), or you've made a one trick pony out of a God by making a character who metamagics a Fireball up to level 30 or so, then casts it out of a 7th level slot. Even then you'd still be better off throwing a real spell. Being two feats down from everyone else is being weaker than everyone else, period. A Tn should be at most only 4 ability points behind a straight caster in both int and wis, which nets you only a -2 save dc. You forget that the TN has all the same buffs as the straight caster and probably the same equipment. The TN at level 15 has access to 6th level spells, so it's automatically 2 not three. So a regular caster has +4 DC on the TN. Not optimal, but liveable as you said most things will at best have a +18-20 on their saves depending on ability score and having a +5 resistance item at 15. The TN will have rely more heavily on the enervations etc. but are still effective. (again talked about that in my deleted post.) Partially correct. It takes more equipment to boost two stats than it does one stat. A level 15 TN is a Cleric 3/Wizard 3/TN 9. That's a loss of 3 caster levels on both sides before entering TN, a fourth one on both sides after the second level of TN, and a fifth one on both sides after the seventh level of TN as TN 1 and 6 only advance arcane and TN 2 and 7 only advance divine. Every other level does both. Thus, 5 levels behind. And you will continue to be 5 levels behind for the rest of your career. You get 6th level spells at level 16, right before everyone that knows better gets Gate, Time Stop, Shapechange... 7th level spells at 18, 8th at 20, and 9th never unless you actually play epic, in which case you finally get 9th level spells a level after everyone else gets Epic casting. Also, enemies will not at best have 18-20 saves. That's the average. High end would be like 25 or something. Maybe even 30. I know of the other creatures I have waiting, several do end up with saves in the 27+ range. One has 31/26, another has 26/23, still another has 33/34. So actually that archer guy is pretty low end, but then he's a mundane so what do you expect? So you're down 5 points of save DC which means you're only as good with the routine save debuffs as everyone else is without them. That puts you even more firmly into the dead weight category than being a non caster at these levels because caster + spells don't work = fail. That assumes you are only down 5. It will be higher at higher levels, because inherent bonuses are expensive. It also assumes you're only losing 4 between dividing level up points, and having to afford another enhancement item on top of the routine primary stat and Con. Anti-Magic fields and decent spell resistance on a drow or similar creature are not BS nerf's. Again you are making assumptions that you have played a campaign with me. SR on a drow is laughable. 11 + class levels, considering it gets a CR of 1 just for being a drow. That means a CR 18 drow only has SR 28... which does absolutely nothing to this party at all. Or maybe it has a 5% chance to actually block a spell from some of them, I forget. Either way, no one cares. Anti magic fields require a high level caster to cast this on themselves, thereby shutting off all of their own class features in the hopes they can get within 10 feet of you and stay there to shut off all yours. In other words, that's called the DM has no idea what he's doing, and if you have any idea what you are doing the DM is giving you free XP. Of course, since you are making out as if this were an actual problem you are either spreading lies again, or do not know what you are doing. Both possibilities are equally probable. Now, my BS nerfs comment was in response to something else, so I will close this segment with 'Straw Man less'. Yes when the dm wants you to run out of spells you will. You will not get a rest for 48 hours in game time, there is nothing you as a player can do about it. Resting takes 8 hours. Extradimensional spaces say hi from level 2 spells onwards. The DM can't do a damn thing to stop you unless he is again being an asshat, and a railroader to boot. If you actually had to sleep out in the open, where stuff might be able to attack you you might have raised a valid point. You are running out of spells because you are constantly wasting spells on piddly little blasting. Repeat it until you learn it. I admitted that he does have to squeeze some cheese and botch a roll or two in order for the encounter to have impact. Again the dm is always right if he says you don't hit you don't hit. If he says your spells bounce off the kobold, it bounces off the kobold. Remember that bit about BS nerfs? This is what I mean. At this point your only valid option is to tell Steve to stop being a douchebag, and if he does anything other than acquiesce follow through with The Chair. You yourself are admitting the DM is cheating against you because oh noes, you're doing something that doesn't fit his train tracks. Fail, Epic Fail, and Epic :censored: Fail. All at once. Wow you suck at building anything but spellcaster's if tanking is impossible for you. Look up a monk or anything else that get's spell resistance at a decent pace. Monk's are the ultimate mage killer's if done properly. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: http://x57.xanga.com/81cc5b4317733182361910/o139559818.jpg And I was giving you the benefit of the doubt too. 'Tanking' doesn't work because melee is a pure stat contest and enemies have better stats, therefore they win. Period. The enemy full attacks you, auto hits, and takes well over half your HP off. If you're well built you'll survive one full attack, but your only options are to one round the enemy or get a Heal cast on you every round, otherwise you die. Hell, I have a weak melee brute in front of me and it still auto hits anything with a flat footed AC lower than 50, does 85-134 vs non good and 95-194 vs good, auto grabs you unless immune to grapple (casters have FoM, mundanes are boned), then stuns you for a round at DC 42 (casters are immune, mundanes almost always fail). You've taken 104.025 weighted average damage so far if neutral or evil and 137.275 weighted average damage if evil, which is more than half your HP. You also are assuredly grappled and almost certainly stunned unless immune to those things. That's just the surprise round. This is why mundanes can't hold up. They cannot compete. Oh and if your flat footed AC is lower than that it gets to PA away. 5 damage per point of difference. Merry Christmas. Since I think you're actually serious about the Monk... they get less Spell Resistance than Drow, and less than the spell. It does absolutely nothing. No one cares. Meanwhile they can't hit crap, can't grab crap, can't stun crap... Monks are a total joke character, even with their alleged 'strengths'. They can't kill a fly, much less the best archetype in the game. Claiming they are a remotely credible threat at all demonstrates your immense ignorance and/or willingness to deceive the gullible. Leadership is a bs feat and the best cohort at level 20 isn't packing lvl 9 spells for you look at the chart. You need a 24 or better leadership score and if your mage's cha is that high your going to have a crappy mage. You wouldn't build a sorceror so don't bring that argument to me. Seeing as you're constantly bringing up BS... even if you're right, so what? Of course you're wrong again. Cohorts are 2 levels behind you. At level 6 you get a level 4 cohort. This requires you to have a Leadership score of 6 or better at level 6. Leadership = level + Charisma. Therefore, any level 6 character with a Charisma of 10 qualifies. You can get away with as low as 8 provided you have one of the following: A reputation for fairness and generosity, or a special power. 'Great renown' lets you do it with a Charisma of 6. If for some reason you had a Charisma of 4, a Circlet of Persuasion will still let you do it. Once you do this, your cohort gains levels at exactly the same speed you do. At level 6 they get 2/3rds what you get, and need 2/3rds what you need. So when you level, they level. This follows all the way to 20. By the way, even without that you still get a level 17 cohort, so if for whatever reason you didn't grab it right away the Commoner still gets to bring more spell power in general and necromantic power in particular to the table than your so called 'True Necromancer'. A Commoner outclasses you at your specialty, therefore you fail at character design. Sorcerers, gimped as they are are still superior to a TN as they only lose 1 spell level of progression. It casts arcane spells, something a plain cleric cannot do. 50% of the level range is pretty harsh when your only one spell level behind most of the time. It casts divine spells, something the wizard can't do. Again it will lose 1 caster level if built properly, and with Ur-Preist Cheese it can have access to lvl 9 cleric spells. But I'm not going into that. Smart clerics can cast arcane spells. Smart wizards can cast divine spells. You are still behind many levels of spell progression, still twisting Practiced Spellcaster to mean something it doesn't, and are still demonstrating your incompetence and general Fail. I have had different experiences than you in gaming, and you have not made any facts known except that not having lvl 9 spells is bad. Beyond that it's a difference of gaming styles. Learn to read, it might help you. Also, straw man less. You have never faced a properly built Githzerai monk party. Or a group of blackknights with a high level caster that's specialized in counterspelling. Or better yet, when he cast's antimagic field around you for his suprise attack. And you called me the one trick pony. Hi Kettle. Monks of any class are free experience. Define 'black knights', but if it's some sort of non magical thing it's free experience too. Counterspelling as non Immediate actions is a waste of actions and still only deals with one PC caster out of 2-4 if it works. Which means enemy uses 100% of its meaningful actions to try to negate 25-50% of yours and may or may not work. This is called DM gives you free XP. AMF is again self only, therefore all you have to do is move 10 feet away from him and get the gimp. DM is once again giving you free XP by just allowing you to easily kill the opposition. Delude and deceive less. Kkthx. Cohorts are still disallowed in my game and most games I know, because no one wants to waste their time with the extra dice rolls. Combat is a small part of role play. But when we do get into a scrap I'd rather have it out, rather than bulldoze my way through everything. No one cares that you want to gimp yourself. Nor do they care about your straw men and Stormwinding, so I don't know why you keep posting them. http://www.wilddamntexan.com/kids/demotivators/Strawman.jpg http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/funny-pictures-this-cat-has-street-cred.jpg And you do not.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 12:38 PM	Good chatting guys, but you can argue that 9th level are da bomb till your blue in the face. I still disagree and at the end of the day it's obvious neither of us is doing jack to deter the other so I'm bowing out. I'll play my game which is fun and exciting for me, you play your game which is fun and exciting for you, and we'll agree to disagree. Have a good life. Classic troll bow out. Obvious Troll is Obvious.
Tshern 12-01-08, 12:59 PM	Wow you suck at building anything but spellcaster's if tanking is impossible for you. Look up a monk or anything else that get's spell resistance at a decent pace. Monk's are the ultimate mage killer's if done properly. Frankly, Monks most definitely are not good against mages or anything for that matter. The worst class in the PHB has nothing on casters. Yes when the dm wants you to run out of spells you will. You will not get a rest for 48 hours in game time, there is nothing you as a player can do about it. Cast Rope trick.
TheAntiTroll 12-01-08, 01:11 PM	Frankly, Monks most definitely are not good against mages or anything for that matter. The worst class in the PHB has nothing on casters. Cast Rope trick. Indeed. While you're here though, do you have any idea what's up with /tgd/?
Tshern 12-01-08, 01:23 PM	How it seems to be down? No idea.
JaronK 12-01-08, 03:15 PM	You know, AntiTroll made one point that hasn't been brought up yet, and I can't believe I forgot: your casting stat as a True Necromancer will likely be much lower. If you're coming in the traditional way (Wiz/Clr) then you have to pump up Wis and Int as high as you can, which obviously will not be as high as you might have gotten just Int or just Wis. This lowers your save DCs (a big deal for save or die casters, which Necromancers often are) and means you have fewer bonus spells (including the ones that matter most, the highest level bonus spells). This is actually a serious issue, one that a lot of new Gestalt players often run in to. That's an important point to consider. On the bright side, Necromancers are less hurt by having to lower the priority of Con... they can generally go Necropolitan to fix that issue. JaronK
Tshern 12-01-08, 03:24 PM	And charisma for turning if that is what you want to do.
Tshern 12-02-08, 12:32 PM	Your argument is still that you don't get 9th level spells and I still disagree What is this referring to, Psychic Robot? Some stupid interpretation of Practiced spellcaster?
Psychotic_Robot 12-02-08, 12:39 PM	What is this referring to, Psychic Robot? Some stupid interpretation of Practiced spellcaster? I have no idea. He "disagrees" with the rules. I'm trying to figure out if I can make a fighter cast spells because I disagree that they can't.
TheAntiTroll 12-02-08, 01:22 PM	Or maybe he's denying the simple fact ninth level spells are made of Win and Awesome and losing them means you Fail at Life. He pulled a hit and run trolling after getting smited. Well, at least he serves one useful purpose. Amusement.
Tshern 12-02-08, 03:45 PM	I have no idea. He "disagrees" with the rules. I'm trying to figure out if I can make a fighter cast spells because I disagree that they can't. Roger that. I thought perhaps someone knew what the heck did he mean. TheAntiTroll: Optimization-wise, yes.
Kain01 12-03-08, 11:15 AM	What is this referring to, Psychic Robot? Some stupid interpretation of Practiced spellcaster? It has nothing to do with Practiced Spellcaster (+4 caster level and a feat that this PC can't live w/out though), it has to do with the fact that I disagree with this PC being a garbage prestige class because you lose 9th level spells. I was wrong about a couple of issues because I had forgotten how many things we did houserule when we started 3rd edition to make the game playable, it is way unbalanced. But in the grand scheme of things losing 9th level spells but retaining the ones you will most likely cast as a special ability isn't that big of a deal. And you will be casting those 9th level spells 4 levels later if you go by WOTC epic progression guides online. I only responded to you because you haven't behaved like a 2 year old on this thread. I'll say again that there is no such thing as facts in a game where the rules can change on the whim of one person. I have fun playing the way we do and you can belittle me all you want. Trolling out, for real this time.
TheAntiTroll 12-03-08, 11:23 AM	5 levels ago, and no one cares about house ruled BS. Stop pulling a Faelryinth. The game you want isn't the game that is. Deal with it.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-03-08, 03:40 PM	Wait, there's no point in arguing if one person can change the rules? I'll notify WotC right away, the boards have no reason to exist. If someone being able to change the rules makes discussion of the rules irrelevant, than we can't talk about the game anymore. Which means WotC could save a lot of money by just shutting the boards down entirely, since Kain pointed out they're useless. /sarcasm. Look, Slappy: Just because WotC doesn't send the D&D police to taser you for changing the rules doesn't mean that we can't discuss the rules. And by the rules, TN is worse in EVERY WAY than a traditional necromancer, and epic levels doesn't fix it. Just because your DM punishes people who play the rules by nerfing everything doesn't mean we're wrong.
TheAntiTroll 12-03-08, 04:00 PM	Wait, there's no point in arguing if one person can change the rules? I'll notify WotC right away, the boards have no reason to exist. If someone being able to change the rules makes discussion of the rules irrelevant, than we can't talk about the game anymore. Which means WotC could save a lot of money by just shutting the boards down entirely, since Kain pointed out they're useless. /sarcasm. Look, Slappy: Just because WotC doesn't send the D&D police to taser you for changing the rules doesn't mean that we can't discuss the rules. And by the rules, TN is worse in EVERY WAY than a traditional necromancer, and epic levels doesn't fix it. Just because your DM punishes people who play the rules by nerfing everything doesn't mean we're wrong. Now where the hell is that handful of awesome pic when you need it?
Kain01 12-04-08, 10:27 AM	Wait, there's no point in arguing if one person can change the rules? I'll notify WotC right away, the boards have no reason to exist. If someone being able to change the rules makes discussion of the rules irrelevant, than we can't talk about the game anymore. Which means WotC could save a lot of money by just shutting the boards down entirely, since Kain pointed out they're useless. /sarcasm. Look, Slappy: Just because WotC doesn't send the D&D police to taser you for changing the rules doesn't mean that we can't discuss the rules. And by the rules, TN is worse in EVERY WAY than a traditional necromancer, and epic levels doesn't fix it. Just because your DM punishes people who play the rules by nerfing everything doesn't mean we're wrong. I admitted I was wrong, yet I still get berated. Grow up people.
TheAntiTroll 12-04-08, 10:30 AM	I admitted I was wrong, yet I still get berated. Grow up people. You... did? :confused:
Count Arioch the 28th 12-04-08, 12:35 PM	I admitted I was wrong, yet I still get berated. Grow up people. You never admitted you were wrong. You said that the fact that the rules can be changed means that there's no point in discussing the rules, and you keep emo-leaving the discussion and coming back to call us juvenile names. YOU grow up. Or better yet, leave the conversation. You haven't contributed one thing to this discussion. Leave and let the grown-ups talk.
TheAntiTroll 12-04-08, 12:51 PM	You never admitted you were wrong. You said that the fact that the rules can be changed means that there's no point in discussing the rules, and you keep emo-leaving the discussion and coming back to call us juvenile names. YOU grow up. Or better yet, leave the conversation. You haven't contributed one thing to this discussion. Leave and let the grown-ups talk. :clap:
Kain01 12-05-08, 11:38 AM	You... did? :confused: Yup I only went searching for when the dispute started, and it was page 2. So indeed I was wrong. The top ten list is wrong on several things, the not being able to control ghouls is one of them. A ghoul is a 2HD creature, a level 4 cleric can command/destroy it. The twice as many levels has nothing to do with the rolls, it only has to do your character level. 2hd creature can be destroyed by a lvl 4 cleric. The only way a TN can't control the ghoul is if he has 0 bonus in cha, and then why are you playing a rebuking TOON at all? Ok been awhile since I've looked at the ghoul in the MM, didn't realize the +2 turn resistance....that changes everything. And where did I say that wizard levels stacked? By my logic a 2hd undead gets commanded by a 4 cleric end of story. Nowhere does wizard levels come into it. The resistance was an oversight on my part, and it made me look dumb. I'm man enough to admit that. And in your original post you said cr before the part about hit die in the thirties. Misunderstood it because of poor sentence structure. I have read every book in the game, and I've probably forgotten more about it than most people at Wizards know about it. As for epic progression look at the Mystic Theurge, there is your epic progression. Add in there that your necromantic prowess continues to go up every three levels, and if the dm changes it then they are not following epic progression guidelines. I'll take 73 tanks in a war against 40 any day of the week. Probably should've left off that last sentence and this conversation would've probably ended here. You never had to listen to me to begin with, I even admitted early on I was bored the other day and this thread was a good way to stir some trouble. Felt this was worth repeating as well as, I'll say it again, 9th level spells are not important to this build. Desecrate is the least ability this build gets. What people WANT with this build is a mystic theurge. They want the ability to cast arcane and divine spells. UMD will allow to cast a few that your dm will toss you, but this build gives you 100% of the cleric spell list up to 8th level, and as many spells on the arcane list as your dm's feeling. It is not a min/max class and no one on this board has said so. I have even said that people looking for a min/max build should look elsewhere. But I still say that a TN at any level after 10 will mop the floor against a straight cleric or wizard/sorceror, because I have seen it done on more than a few occassions. At the end of the day the TN is decent prestige class for alot of people playing D&D. But for min/maxers like you that every toon apparently needs to be munchkinned, then it sucks. I'm tired of arguing with idiots. Again I attacked unneccisarily however, I apologize. Guarantee I'm older than you and half the people on this board son. I've played every edition of the game. My biggest problem right now is that I've been playing NWN2 more than PnP, so yeah some of my info is probably coming from memory of the game as it's more current on the brain. Stop attacking me I'll stop attacking you, and I'll say again that I was wrong about some things that I had said. It still doesn't change my opinion that this is a good 5th or 6th character in a party.
TheAntiTroll 12-05-08, 12:21 PM	That's about rebuking, not about TNs being made of Fail. You claim it isn't optimal, and yet can beat real casters. Um, no. Fail. As a 5th or 6th character you have someone who makes every action they take count for less. 5th and 6th slots go to force multipliers that make every action everyone takes count for more. Aka, not you. Fail.
Kain01 12-06-08, 10:36 AM	That's about rebuking, not about TNs being made of Fail. You claim it isn't optimal, and yet can beat real casters. Um, no. Fail. As a 5th or 6th character you have someone who makes every action they take count for less. 5th and 6th slots go to force multipliers that make every action everyone takes count for more. Aka, not you. Fail. I fail, there can we stop now?
Nephlite 12-06-08, 11:48 AM	I fail, there can we stop now? Probably, see before while you kinda admitted you were wrong: you kept changing the goal posts it seemed to others from your post. So few people realized you admitted anything. But anyway, yes, we can stop.
TheAntiTroll 12-06-08, 01:12 PM	I fail, there can we stop now? Ok. :cool:
Kain01 12-07-08, 07:02 PM	Probably, see before while you kinda admitted you were wrong: you kept changing the goal posts it seemed to others from your post. So few people realized you admitted anything. But anyway, yes, we can stop. Frustration and stress settling in I guess. Been a long week....or two.
Tshern 12-10-08, 04:37 PM	It has nothing to do with Practiced Spellcaster (+4 caster level and a feat that this PC can't live w/out though) Practiced spellcaster is an excellent, even if situational, feat and definitely suits the build. No question about that. Ur-Priests are another bunch of people who want every time. I was wrong about a couple of issues because I had forgotten how many things we did houserule when we started 3rd edition to make the game playable, it is way unbalanced. Even if I am really defending the 9th level spells, I have to give you this: You admitted you were wrong. Not many people do that, but you had the guts. In spite of our different opinions, I am giving you respect for this. But in the grand scheme of things losing 9th level spells but retaining the ones you will most likely cast as a special ability isn't that big of a deal. And you will be casting those 9th level spells 4 levels later if you go by WOTC epic progression guides online. I quoted this just to give my opinion. You are getting those 9th spells late, if I am not mistaken, at level 21. That is four levels after the single-classed guys get their big guns. Almost 100kxp before you. Really, that single Shapechange, Time stop, or Astral projection could make all the difference. However, the difference between four and eight Enervations won't. This won't turn your head, but hope you can accept the opinion as just that, a subjective thought. I only responded to you because you haven't behaved like a 2 year old on this thread. I'll say again that there is no such thing as facts in a game where the rules can change on the whim of one person. I have fun playing the way we do and you can belittle me all you want. Trolling out, for real this time. Having fun is the most important thing. In some cases that might require houseruling, but that is worth it if it keeps players and the DM happy.
TheAntiTroll 12-10-08, 05:10 PM	Level 22. 5 levels behind. 23 if you went for delayed progression aka sorcerer and/or favored soul.
Tshern 12-10-08, 05:33 PM	I blame that on my blood alcohol. Doesn't change my overall point really: You can have fun with this build just like you can with any, but 9th level spells are still the thing.
JaronK 12-11-08, 12:16 AM	Am I the only one who read all this and thought "damn, now I have to figure out a way to optimize the True Necromancer"? I'm thinking something involving Beholder Mage and Ur Priest. That ought to solve the casting difficulties with no problem. Enter Beholder Mage via Factotum/Hexblade or something, UMD a scroll of Polymorph Any Object, go nuts from there? I bet you could do it, but I think fast progression classes are the only way to do it really well. JaronK
Tshern 12-11-08, 05:47 AM	You'd need Metamorphic transfer, no? And buying that PAO from a Dweomerkeeper would make the character less of a dispel bait.
Kain01 12-11-08, 11:12 AM	Level 22. 5 levels behind. 23 if you went for delayed progression aka sorcerer and/or favored soul. You'd be right except that dual casters like the MT and TN only get to choose one or the other spelcasting class to upgrade at epic levels (Using MT asa guide since there are no other dual caster's in epic insights.). And since your a 15th level caster as far as spells go by level 20, that means to get to level 17 in both your going to need a minimum of level 24. Ur-Priest is brought up in the revised necro thread somewhere in the 30 page documentary that it has become, and that would get you all 9th level spells by level 22 at least.
DeathlessJuan 12-11-08, 12:19 PM	Am I the only one who read all this and thought "damn, now I have to figure out a way to optimize the True Necromancer"? Nope, I thought the same thing. But I have seen some very good builds that use the True Necro. I don't have the link but I am sure some of you will recognize this Spellstitch Necropolitan Cleric 5 / Warlock 1 / True Necromancer 14 (DMM: Persist and use of the the Mother Cyst). Since you only have to be able to cast two spells (one of them divine and the other arcane) you can qualify for TN without arcane casting classes (per Complete Arcane rules) and use the arcane caster boost for warlock
Count Arioch the 28th 12-11-08, 02:28 PM	Doesn't work. You don't meet the prerequisites to get into True Necromancer with that build.
JaronK 12-11-08, 03:11 PM	You'd need Metamorphic transfer, no? And buying that PAO from a Dweomerkeeper would make the character less of a dispel bait. Yeah, you'd need Metamorphic. But I definitely think something like Factotum 3/Paladin of Tyranny 3/Ur Priest 2/Beholder Mage 1/True Necromancer 11 or so (that's a rough idea, the qualifications may not be right) could be quite good. JaronK
Tshern 12-11-08, 03:19 PM	Doesn't qualify to Ur-Priest though and Metamorphic transfer (IIRC) requires Manifester level 5.
DeathlessJuan 12-11-08, 04:59 PM	Doesn't work. You don't meet the prerequisites to get into True Necromancer with that build. Actually, it does. If you would list the requirements (I am away from the book, for the next 4 hours otherwise I would do so myself), I can point out exactly how you would meet them. I know Command Undead is needed on the arcane side (Able to cast Command Undead, per Complete Arcane Spell-like ability section (ie, warlock) states that if you can mimic the ability, you can qualify for the requirement.) Command undead is one of the spells you can receive as a spell-like ability with spellstiching. The entry for spellstitching states you cast these spells as a sorcerer equal to your HD (therefore as an arcane caster). I forget the requirement for the divine spell but, being 5th level cleric meets it. Since Warlock's have an 'arcane caster level', if you take the class before TN, you can apply the +1 spellcasting level to the warlock. Well, all of this is assuming that no new errata has been released that makes this build impossible. Also, I don't have the rules compendium.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-11-08, 05:07 PM	Actually, it does. If you would, list the requirements (I am away from the book, for the next 4 hours) otherwise I would do so myself. I can point out exactly how you would meet them. REQUIREMENTS To qualify to become a true necromancer, a character must fulfill all of the following criteria. Alignment: Any nongood. Skills: Knowledge (arcana) 8 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 8 ranks. Feat: Spell Focus (necromancy). Spells: Able to cast summon undead II as a divine spell and command undead as an arcane spell. Special: Able to rebuke undead. Special: Access to the Death domain. Like I said, no way that build can qualify, and if you try to explain why, I'll explain in excruciating detail why you're a cheater.
DeathlessJuan 12-11-08, 05:23 PM	REQUIREMENTS To qualify to become a true necromancer, a character must fulfill all of the following criteria. Alignment: Any nongood. Skills: Knowledge (arcana) 8 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 8 ranks. Feat: Spell Focus (necromancy). Spells: Able to cast summon undead II as a divine spell and command undead as an arcane spell. Special: Able to rebuke undead. Special: Access to the Death domain. Alingment: No problem Skills: Since both skills are class skills for the cleric, no problem Feat: Spell Focus (Necromancy) -> Easy enough, let's pick it as 1st level feat Special: Able to rebuke undead (evil or neutral cleric, done) Special: Access to the Death Domain (evil or neutral cleric, done) Spells: Ah, here is where it gets tricky. At the risk of repeating myself, in the Complete Arcane (where it explains how a Warlock's Darkness invocation can meet the requirements for the Darkness arcane spell), it tells you that if you have a spell-like ability that can mimic the effects of a spell, you meet the requirements. Since a Warlock's invocations are spell-like abilities (although, they have arcane spell failure), it goes to reason that having Command Undead as a spell-like ability granted by the spellstitched template would suffice as well. Now, the debate as to whether or not the spell-like abilities granted by the spellstitched template are arcane or not is immaterial. Its up to the DM, but since the spells are granted by an arcane caster AND you are treat your caster level as equal to a sorcerer of your HD, it goes without saying that your spell-like abilities have an arcane source. Since the TN does not state that you need to be able to cast the spell as a 'level 2 arcane spell' or be able to 'cast 2nd level arcane spells', being able to mimic the spell's effects fullfills the requirements. As for adding the +1 arcane spellcasting to warlock, it is explained in the Complete Arcane as well. Summon Undead II as a divine spell -> Easy enough. Like I said, no way that build can qualify, and if you try to explain why, I'll explain in excruciating detail why you're a cheater. Cheater? That's a bit harsh, but enlighten me, please. Sure it stretches the RAI a little but I see no problem with helping out the TN class a bit. Its not overpowered, for example. Money to afford both the conversion to undead and the spellstitching can be extremely tight (if not impossible for that level) but you can lose a bunch of levels if you wanted to.