PDA

View Full Version : what does a wizard lose for PrC?



taltamir
2009-09-30, 07:50 PM
What does a wizard actually LOSE for taking a PrC?
As far as I can tell:
1. their metamagic every 5th level... which is more than made up for by the more metamagics in the PrC
2. their familiar progression...
3. do they lose the 2 free spells added to spellbook per level of wizard gained? I thought they do, but someone told me that they don't since it is a feature of their spellcasting (And they get +1 spellcaster level and spells known).

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-30, 07:51 PM
3 is not a valid point. Most PrCs say that you gain spells known as a wizard of your level.

kamikasei
2009-09-30, 07:54 PM
They say you gain "spells known, if applicable". However, wizards don't have a "spells known" progression by level as spontaneous casters do. They have a "spellbook" class feature, separate from "spells", which specifies that they can add to their spellbook when they gain wizard levels. This is not the same thing as spells known, though depending on the DM and player it might be reasonable to treat them as equivalent.

Gorgondantess
2009-09-30, 07:54 PM
Oh, well, sometimes you have to jump through hoops to meet the entry requirements, but other than that, nothing.
Now, just look at a sorceror- all they lose is familiar progression, coz they don't even get all the metamagic stuff.

ericgrau
2009-09-30, 07:55 PM
Not much. Any smart powergamer wizard will PrC. Then again, that tends to be true of all classes. The greatest thing by far that you lose from a caster PrC is being forced into the pre-reqs, not the class features of your old class. For example I've learned to dislike loremaster since you need to get so many divination spells, a 2nd and 3rd item creation feat, and skill focus. But most other PrCs tend to be well worth it. Sorcerers seem like they lose virtually nothing compared to a wizard, but actually they have a harder time meeting pre-reqs so they lose more.

kamikasei
2009-09-30, 07:58 PM
a 2nd and 3rd item creation feat


Any three metamagic or item creation feats

Not sure what you mean. I would read this as needing any three feats of any combination of metamatic and item creation, but even if you read it as requiring all to be of one type you don't need three item creation feats...

ericgrau
2009-09-30, 08:01 PM
To clarify, I can see one item creation feat as being useful. Beyond that, it gets difficult to get full mileage out of every feat. There are wealth limitations, meeting more item pre-reqs, etc.

Korivan
2009-09-30, 08:03 PM
They end up having to take a few Feats that, depending on the PrC, they wouldn't have taken. Look at the Initiate of the Seven Fold Veil. Two feats in spell focus Abjuration. Meh.

But in general, many PrC's are well worth it. However there are a few PrC's mentioned in the Complete Arcane and Complete Mage Suck or fail to live up to what you lose. Arcane Archer, Dragon Disciple, and the Green Star Adept all...ptttttttt

ericgrau
2009-09-30, 08:05 PM
Wow, are there even any good abjuration spells that have saves that aren't (harmless)?

Korivan
2009-09-30, 08:10 PM
Wow, are there even any good abjuration spells that have saves that aren't (harmless)?

None come to mind. But the Initiate's abilities more then make up for the feat drain.

madtinker
2009-09-30, 08:10 PM
I don't really optimize, I go for playing the character. If it makes sense for that character to play like a PrC, then its worth it. If not, then its not.

Lycanthromancer
2009-09-30, 08:10 PM
Wow, are there even any good abjuration spells that have saves that aren't (harmless)?

Only one of the really broken ones. And guess what? I prepared them this morning.

kamikasei
2009-09-30, 08:11 PM
To clarify, I can see one item creation feat as being useful. Beyond that, it gets difficult to get full mileage out of every feat. There are wealth limitations, meeting more item pre-reqs, etc.

Yes, but you don't have to take three item creation feats. (And since you have Scribe Scroll already, it's no great cost to take Craft Wondrous Item, and then taking a metamagic feat for your fifth-level bonus is an easy way to meet the prereqs - if you go with my interpretation at least.)


I don't really optimize, I go for playing the character. If it makes sense for that character to play like a PrC, then its worth it. If not, then its not.

Okay. But what question are you answering?

TelemontTanthul
2009-09-30, 08:11 PM
I think the fact that wizards and sorcerers don't exactly lose anything in taking a PrC is backed up by the fact that most Epic Level Characters that you hear about are spellcasters.

For example, I notice that in a lot of the books I read about FR, wizards and sorcerers are always causing the trouble, and threatening to destroy the world and such. And yet, we never hear of fighters that are as epic. It is rare to see a martial character causing as much mayhem and destruction.

Korivan
2009-09-30, 08:15 PM
For example, I notice that in a lot of the books I read about FR, wizards and sorcerers are always causing the trouble, and threatening to destroy the world and such. And yet, we never hear of fighters that are as epic. It is rare to see a martial character causing as much mayhem and destruction.

.....Your right! I can recall dozens of fighters spanning Forgotten Realms, and plenty of TOR books not based of d20, and while many had a Bad @$$ rating above 10.6, none had the potentiall to destroy the world, or even effect it on a global scale without somekind of serious magical boost.

ericgrau
2009-09-30, 08:16 PM
Yes, but you don't have to take three item creation feats. (And since you have Scribe Scroll already, it's no great cost to take Craft Wondrous Item, and then taking a metamagic feat for your fifth-level bonus is an easy way to meet the prereqs - if you go with my interpretation at least.)

Oh whoops, forgot about the metamagic option. Then it's not so bad for wizards. Tough for sorcs, though, since they're 2 feats behind. Wizards can even put that scribe scroll to good pre-req use. I once tried for minimum level entry into lore-master on a sorc then when I saw all my feats and a bunch of my spells selected for me I just gave up.



Okay. But what question are you answering?

He's probably putting RP first, and doesn't want to PrC out when it doesn't fit his RP goals. Even though you don't lose much for grabbing a PrC. Kind of puts a hole into the argument that making a good build and RPing aren't exclusive. When you need to pick a certain prestige (or among a limited number of prestiges) to be strongest, and that doesn't necessarily match every character concept, then it does interfere.

kamikasei
2009-09-30, 08:19 PM
Tough for sorcs, though, since they're 2 feats behind.

Sure, but they're sorcerers. They've got no business going for a class called "Loremaster", the flash gits.


I think the fact that wizards and sorcerers don't exactly lose anything in taking a PrC is backed up by the fact that most Epic Level Characters that you hear about are spellcasters.

Don't understand the connection. You don't have to take a PrC to reach high levels.

Akal Saris
2009-09-30, 09:12 PM
The opportunity cost of taking a good feat instead of a crummy prereq feat is a big one.

In PF, for example, the only core caster PrC is loremaster - and I'd rather keep on going straight conjurer than waste feats on Skill Focus (Knowledge XYZ) and 3 metamagic feats. It might be worthwhile for a generalist wizard in PF though, since they can auto-apply metamagics a few times/day.

But in any game where at least C. Arcane and C. Mage are available, there's very little - if any - that a wizard loses by Prcing out at 6th (or 4th for master specialist).

taltamir
2009-09-30, 09:24 PM
They say you gain "spells known, if applicable". However, wizards don't have a "spells known" progression by level as spontaneous casters do. They have a "spellbook" class feature, separate from "spells", which specifies that they can add to their spellbook when they gain wizard levels. This is not the same thing as spells known, though depending on the DM and player it might be reasonable to treat them as equivalent.

that is what I thought. But others disagree with the point... either way it is a very small thing to give up...

Really, it seems that the ONLY thing that they give up is familiar progression... but... familiars always have half your HP, regardless of HD... and they have HD the same as YOUR HD AFAIK... so that means that they still gain HD, but not int or nat armor or special abilities?

deuxhero
2009-09-30, 09:29 PM
To clarify, I can see one item creation feat as being useful. Beyond that, it gets difficult to get full mileage out of every feat. There are wealth limitations, meeting more item pre-reqs, etc.

Wizards start with scribe scrolls (that is one) an item creation feat and a metamagic or 2 metamagic feats is far from unlikely for a wizard to have in any case. It requires skill focus, but you can either get that though gold via complete scoundrel (I think) and you get it back a few levels in (your higher prerequisites may make your feat option even better than what you gave up for skill focus)

SparkMandriller
2009-09-30, 09:32 PM
He's probably putting RP first, and doesn't want to PrC out when it doesn't fit his RP goals.

But like 90% of casting PrCs can be described just like a single class wizard. :/ A wizard is a guy who wanders around casting spells. A wizard/archmage is a guy who wanders around casting spells. I'm not seeing a difference here.

sonofzeal
2009-09-30, 09:33 PM
But like 90% of casting PrCs can be described just like a single class wizard. :/ A wizard is a guy who wanders around casting spells. A wizard/archmage is a guy who wanders around casting spells. I'm not seeing a difference here.
Especially true of "Master Specialist".

Rainbownaga
2009-09-30, 09:37 PM
Only one of the really broken ones. And guess what? I prepared them this morning.

What's wrong with prismatic wall/sphere?

taltamir
2009-09-30, 09:44 PM
But like 90% of casting PrCs can be described just like a single class wizard. :/ A wizard is a guy who wanders around casting spells. A wizard/archmage is a guy who wanders around casting spells. I'm not seeing a difference here.

exactly...

Milskidasith
2009-09-30, 09:46 PM
Well I guess if you are a regular wizard, you can't just suddenly say you are an archmage... or suddenly become an "initiate" of the sevenfold veil without ever hearing about the sevenfold veil before... but that's mostly just the fluff you can get from the name, and it's the same problem with multiclassing; suddenly getting new abilities is just weird.

taltamir
2009-09-30, 09:50 PM
Well I guess if you are a regular wizard, you can't just suddenly say you are an archmage... or suddenly become an "initiate" of the sevenfold veil without ever hearing about the sevenfold veil before... but that's mostly just the fluff you can get from the name, and it's the same problem with multiclassing; suddenly getting new abilities is just weird.

sure you can "suddenly" become an archmage... its just a mage who has sacrificed some powers for others... its no different than "suddenly" gaining the ability to cast higher level spells, or any of the other abilities "suddenly" gained... if anything, PrC abilities make more sense to gain spontanously (like, any gish oriented one since you already have both classes), than gain a NORMAL level and NORMAL level abilities (aka, spells and SU abilities).

DragoonWraith
2009-09-30, 09:59 PM
I typically adapt the fluff of every class in my progression for the character anyway. For example, took Ur-Priest for a geomancery-type caster - he wasn't stealing powers from gods, he was drawing upon the divine power left-over from Creation. Before Ur-Priest, he was a Warlock - no fiendish blood or evil pact or whatever, it was just that the powers he could draw from the world were subtle, but pervasive - like Invocations.

Another example, a Sorcerer I have is going to take Loremaster. He isn't, and won't suddenly become, a historian or librarian that the Loremaster typically appears to be, he's got no interest in that kind of thing. What he likes are stories, and so he goes for stories. So even though he's taking Loremaster, he's remaining similar to his own character concept - even though it's closer to Bard than Loremaster.

I mostly look for fitting mechanics, and only pay attention to WotC's fluff if it interests me.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-30, 10:10 PM
Well I guess if you are a regular wizard, you can't just suddenly say you are an archmage...

So don't say you're an archmage. You don't announce that you've gone up a level so your spells will do more damage, so why would you announce that you've taken levels in a prestige class?

I really don't understand this forum sometimes. Someone claims he's in things for the roleplaying, yet he can't even RP aquiring new powers? I dunno, I really don't.

ericgrau
2009-09-30, 10:43 PM
But like 90% of casting PrCs can be described just like a single class wizard. :/ A wizard is a guy who wanders around casting spells. A wizard/archmage is a guy who wanders around casting spells. I'm not seeing a difference here.

Unless the PrC's abilities don't fit his character concept, exactly like he said. Maybe he wants to be able to do something else. It's not about it being impossible to RP an archmage, it isn't, it's about wanting to RP something else and finding out that you're weaker than someone who combines 6 PrCs from 4 books because those 6 fit well together. So then there's a trade-off between roleplaying and power, unless you want to make your character concept revolve around your build.

Gralamin
2009-09-30, 10:56 PM
To clarify, I can see one item creation feat as being useful. Beyond that, it gets difficult to get full mileage out of every feat. There are wealth limitations, meeting more item pre-reqs, etc.

I'd just like to mention that a Crafter is a very viable build, since If you Make up to a level behind, you will overall end up with more wealth at almost no cost.

That being said, Artificer does FAR better of a job if you want to craft.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-30, 11:05 PM
Unless the PrC's abilities don't fit his character concept, exactly like he said. Maybe he wants to be able to do something else.

Absolutely vital to his character that he has to touch people for some of his spells to go off rather than being able to cast them from a distance, is it? Or is it important to him that his spells be not as powerful as, um, the spells cast by that other guy? I'm sorry, I tried to come up with a way to present spell power in game, but I actually couldn't manage it.


Ah, I shouldn't be arguing this. Next thing y'know I'll be as bad as half the regulars on this forum, just goin' from thread to thread looking for opportunities to denounce things without even caring what the topic is. Must avoid that. Must avoid that. Very important.

Ozymandias9
2009-10-01, 12:40 AM
Absolutely vital to his character that he has to touch people for some of his spells to go off rather than being able to cast them from a distance, is it? Or is it important to him that his spells be not as powerful as, um, the spells cast by that other guy? I'm sorry, I tried to come up with a way to present spell power in game, but I actually couldn't manage it.

I've actually considered working up a wizard that needs touch for all spells and seeing how I did with it. Its an interesting concept with some interesting folklore behind it, primarily in the early medieval german tradition.

More generally, you can do a lot of customization on a wizard by just limiting your spell choices. And depending on what limits you set for yourself (only elemental spells? only protective spells? Only mind effecting illusion and enchantment?) many PrCs may merely become less lucrative, either from a mechanical benefit angle or from a "why would my character choose a class with this fluff" angle.

From an even simpler angle, a specific character may not be in it for the acquisition of power. Not every doctor wants the highest paying or most well respected specialty: some doctors just want a small family practice where they can get by with limited continuing education.

taltamir
2009-10-01, 01:01 AM
there is absolutely NOTHING about an archmage that is "character concept" or "RP" compared to a wizard... It is merely a question of whether he learned to convert some spells to range attacks or make holes in them or such... heck, with the exception of spell like ability, those are reproducable by stand alone feats. You still call yourself a wizard, you just have ranged touch attacks instead of normal... woooo...

As for limiting yourself, tried it. It is not as "cool" as it sounds, and even then, just homebrew something...

Sliver
2009-10-01, 01:12 AM
The losing familiar progression thing.. I read around here somewhere that you can take the flaw that takes away the familiar, and with the feat take the obtain familiar one, so that your familiar advances no matter if you PrC out.. Does that work?

taltamir
2009-10-01, 01:24 AM
there is a feat that gives you a familiar based on your HD instead of your wizard level only...
and there are bonuses (which suck and quickly become obsolete) for giving up a familiar forever...

I don't think the two can be combined though. but you could just take the one feat and get your familiar progression back

Thurbane
2009-10-01, 01:29 AM
3 is not a valid point. Most PrCs say that you gain spells known as a wizard of your level.
I have seen it argued in RAW discussions, even on this very site, that the 2 spells a Wizard gets to add to his spellbook for free each level do not count as "spells known" for this purpose.

DragoonWraith
2009-10-01, 01:49 AM
There definitely is not any rule that explicitly states whether or not it is, but the text does refer to the fact that "a wizard may know any number of spells." This, obviously, is referring to the spellbook, implying that the spellbook is the wizard's list of "spells known". I don't think it's unreasonable as a house rule to tone down some wizard PrCs, maybe, but seriously, to actually argue that you do not get them by RAW is just an unbelievable stretch, IMO. Every indication suggests that PrCs that advance spells known include these two bonus spells; it's just disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-01, 02:21 AM
Absolutely vital to his character that he has to touch people for some of his spells to go off rather than being able to cast them from a distance, is it? Or is it important to him that his spells be not as powerful as, um, the spells cast by that other guy? I'm sorry, I tried to come up with a way to present spell power in game, but I actually couldn't manage it.


Ah, I shouldn't be arguing this. Next thing y'know I'll be as bad as half the regulars on this forum, just goin' from thread to thread looking for opportunities to denounce things without even caring what the topic is. Must avoid that. Must avoid that. Very important.

I'm with you on this one.

Sure, not all character concepts are going to be perfectly balanced. Not much to be done about that, short of house ruling. However, there's sufficient diversity in mechanically decent options for PrCs that you shouldn't actually be gimping yourself unless your IC reasons are such that they would be normally expected to gimp you.

"Oh, you swore off using your innate sorcerorous power to use only your wizardly training, eh?" *smack* "Of COURSE you're weaker now."

Lycanthromancer
2009-10-01, 02:29 AM
there is a feat that gives you a familiar based on your HD instead of your wizard level only...
and there are bonuses (which suck and quickly become obsolete) for giving up a familiar forever...

I don't think the two can be combined though. but you could just take the one feat and get your familiar progression backI wouldn't say 'suck' for some of them. The conjuration specialist ACF (10' teleport as an immediate action several times per day) and that one that allows you to store your spells inside your head (negating the need for a spellbook at all) are REALLY nice at all levels. Also, that one that lets you summon as a Standard action.

There are others, but I don't recall most of them ATM.

taltamir
2009-10-01, 03:13 AM
I wouldn't say 'suck' for some of them. The conjuration specialist ACF (10' teleport as an immediate action several times per day) and that one that allows you to store your spells inside your head (negating the need for a spellbook at all) are REALLY nice at all levels. Also, that one that lets you summon as a Standard action.

There are others, but I don't recall most of them ATM.

i don't remember the one that lets you store spells without a spellbook...

taltamir
2009-10-01, 03:16 AM
I'm with you on this one.

Sure, not all character concepts are going to be perfectly balanced. Not much to be done about that, short of house ruling. However, there's sufficient diversity in mechanically decent options for PrCs that you shouldn't actually be gimping yourself unless your IC reasons are such that they would be normally expected to gimp you.

"Oh, you swore off using your innate sorcerorous power to use only your wizardly training, eh?" *smack* "Of COURSE you're weaker now."

this reminds me my first ever DnD character... in NWN...
I was a wizard/sorc/bard... the "ultimate" arcane caster... and I couldn't figure out why I suck so bad... (I didn't realise things like total character level, level caps, scaling XP gain, scaling enemies, and mechanics in general) plus I assumed they somehow stack.

Rixx
2009-10-01, 03:48 AM
In Pathfinder, Wizards also lose their bonus domain abilities, and Sorcerers lose their bloodline powers and bonus spells.

ericgrau
2009-10-01, 04:13 AM
I'm with you on this one.

Sure, not all character concepts are going to be perfectly balanced. Not much to be done about that, short of house ruling. However, there's sufficient diversity in mechanically decent options for PrCs that you shouldn't actually be gimping yourself unless your IC reasons are such that they would be normally expected to gimp you.

"Oh, you swore off using your innate sorcerorous power to use only your wizardly training, eh?" *smack* "Of COURSE you're weaker now."

Multiple class options is great for plenty of build and RP options. Multiple prestige/feat combo tricks aren't, as they limit options (build and RP). I mean the powergaming stuff, that works only one specific way, not just any old build. And if one person gets them and others don't that one person will be stronger. That's how it gets exclusive. But if you don't allow crazy char op builds it's no longer an issue.

I mean anyone who picks a character concept and then finds a nice build to match, like one person mentioned, may get screwed if that's not one of the uber combos. 1 or 2 prcs may work and still provide enough options, as long as they aren't OP and everyone is doing it to avoid power imbalance.

PhoenixRivers
2009-10-01, 04:47 AM
Wow, are there even any good abjuration spells that have saves that aren't (harmless)?

Spell Compendium:

Maw of Chaos.

Sor/Wiz 9, and quite possibly one of the more nasty Direct Damage spells in the game, as it also has a status effect element, and persists for multiple rounds.

At level 17, it's 17d6 damage to anything in a 10 foot emanation area to anything that doesn't have the Chaotic subtype (that's subtype, not alignment. Think Demons). If you take damage, it's a will save or be stunned for a round. And the emanation lasts for 17 rounds.

Now, throw a Make Manifest, Mass, Maw of Chaos, and a Forcecage down in the vicinity of an enemy, and most anything goes down quickly.

Eldariel
2009-10-01, 06:03 AM
Wow, are there even any good abjuration spells that have saves that aren't (harmless)?

Mostly, in addition to the Maw, the Dismissal-line of effects. Anti-Magic Ray isn't entirely horrible either (it's in Spell Compendium) and few others exist. Then there are of course Explosive Runes and Repulsion and such. But yeah, Spell Focus: Abjuration is definitely from the weaker end of those effects.


@Rivers: I'd always add Dimensional Lock to the death cage, along with readied action to cast a new Forcecage if the old one is breached.