PDA

View Full Version : Ruathar (elf friend), worst PrC ever!



taltamir
2010-03-13, 02:45 AM
Ruathar (RotW122) - medium BAB, D6 HD, 2 good saves, 3/3 casting. get all knowledge skills and survival which allows the warlock to qualify for Sentinal of Bharrai (BoED69) at level 8 instead of 13 (take a 1 level dip in elf friend) without sacrificing caster progression.

The abilities it grants are:
LVL1: elves magically recognize you are one and are thus are friendly by default unless they see you do something evil.
LVL1: get one time gift of ~1000gp item of their choice from a limited list (which would be rude of you to sell).
LVL2: Low light vision
LVL2: racial bonus +2 to spot, search, & listen (stacks with Elven keen senses if already an elf)
LVL3: +1 sacred bonus to attack and saves while outside, aboveground, at night.
LVL3: Live 50% longer before dying of old age.

Basically, the abilities utterly suck. I'd rather take 3 more levels of sorcerer than elf friend, 3 more levels of familiar progression are better than the "abilities" it offers.

For a warlock, it doesn't just have to compete with other PrCs, it has to compete with the base abilities a warlock gets, such as DR and ER and so on... while they aren't too good and easily surpassed by better abilities, the abilities elf friend gives are so utterly bad the warlock base abilities has them beat.

I don't think I have ever seen more useless class abilities, the monk abilities make the elf friend abilities look sad and pathetic.

Pluto
2010-03-13, 02:53 AM
Witchborn Hunter would like to have a word.


Empty levels with 3/4 BA and a couple extra skill points don't hurt Clerics or Sorcerers.

(I'd rather have the extra skill points on my fam than the higher-level abilities, anyway.)

The proficiency makes Abjurant Champion entry even easier.

It hardly promises much and even though it's bland, it makes decent filler levels almost anywhere.

Thurbane
2010-03-13, 02:56 AM
How can any 3/3 casting PrC compete in suckitude with the 5/10 casting progression PrCs? Would you really say that Ruathar is worse that Green Star Adept?

Kylarra
2010-03-13, 02:56 AM
Yay hyperbole? It's still competing with survivor and risen martyr amongst many other poor PrCs.

Ruarthar isn't great by any stretch of the imagination, but as a prc you can just fall into at level 6, and still retain fullcasting while being D6 HD and giving 4+int skills... yeah I can't say it's bad at all. :smalltongue: Familiar progression is always done via obtain familiar feat if you care about it at all anyway.

Akal Saris
2010-03-13, 02:58 AM
Well, I like it because it's the easier PrC to qualify for ever. If I recall, the reqs are:

a skill at 9 ranks
OR
+6 BAB
OR
Casts 3rd level spells

It's the perfect filler for some full casting classes, notably the warmage and sorcerer.

Compare a sorcerer 9 to a sorcerer 6/ruathar 3: you gain another +3 to your reflex save, another +2 to your skills/level, and bump your HD from a d4 to a d6. The basic chassis along with the mediocre class abilities definitely outweign familiar progression for me. Sorcerer 6/Ruathar 2/Fatespinner 1, for example, would be a decent use of the PrC.

It's not something I'd be excited to enter, but as filler before you enter another PrC, it's a very flexible tool for any full caster that can stomach hanging out with elves all the time.

I'd also consider it in a very low-magic setting, I suppose. And in Dragonlance, a human wiz 4/white robe 1/ruathar 1 would get two cheap magic items! Watch out, bad guys!

taltamir
2010-03-13, 03:00 AM
How can any 3/3 casting PrC compete in suckitude with the 5/10 casting progression PrCs? Would you really say that Ruathar is worse that Green Star Adept?

ok, point :P
Its worse then not taking any PrC at all though.

Thurbane
2010-03-13, 03:03 AM
Compare a sorcerer 9 to a sorcerer 6/ruathar 3: you gain another +3 to your reflex save, another +2 to your skills/level, and bump your HD from a d4 to a d6.
Not to mention all the PrCs it allows entry to that might otherwise cost caster levels or feats...Fiend Blooded, Abjurant Champion among others already listed.

...and, you know, there's always that chance that some PrCs are there primarily for flavor, rather than crunch. Although I know that kind of talk is frowned upon around here. :smallbiggrin:

Mongoose87
2010-03-13, 03:04 AM
How is it worse? You get a couple goodies, more skill points, more BaB and more HP.

KellKheraptis
2010-03-13, 03:04 AM
Actually...ironically that might be the glue needed to hold one of my builds together while snagging 16 BAB by 20 (one of the Batman Warmages, the REALLY cheesy one). If I get more info, I'll post it, since I can meet the requirements for 3rd level spells with a starting spontaneous character (and enter by 2nd, though most likely will delay one level for the BAB).

Pluto
2010-03-13, 03:05 AM
Its worse then not taking any PrC at all though.
I could have a Wizard 7/Loremaster/Archmage or a Wizard 5/Ruathar 2/Loremaster/Archmage.

Wizard lets the familiar talk to other animals (which someone in the party can do already).

Ruathar gets 2 more HP, 2 1/3 higher Reflex saves, some trinket and 4 extra ranks and a useful expanded skills list to share with the familiar (Diplomacy, Spot, Listen, Hide, Move Silently).

I don't know about you, but I'd take the latter any time.

edit:
Or, if the Gish thing is a selling point for GSA, Wizard 5/Ruathar 3/Fullcaster 1 qualifies for Abjurant Champion without blowing a MWP feat or forcing an elf race. Sure it's slow to develop, but it's definitely more effective.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 03:06 AM
...and, you know, there's always that chance that some PrCs are there primarily for flavor, rather than crunch. Although I know that kind of talk is frowned upon around here. :smallbiggrin:
BURN THE HERETIC! just kidding. it IS a flavor only class, half of its abilities are pure flavor, the "elf friend" ability and the "live longer" ability for example are pure fluff.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 03:08 AM
I could have a Wizard 7/Loremaster/Archmage or a Wizard 5/Ruathar 2/Loremaster/Archmage.

Wizard lets the familiar talk to other animals (which someone in the party can do already).

Ruathar gets 2 more HP, 2 1/6 higher Reflex saves, some trinket and 4 extra ranks and a useful expanded skills list to share with the familiar (Diplomacy, Spot, Listen, Hide, Move Silently).

I don't know about you, but I'd take the latter any time.

wizard also gives familiar an extra +1 to Nat Armor. and are you saying there is no other PrC in existance the wizard can take at level 6?

Pluto
2010-03-13, 03:11 AM
and are you saying there is no other PrC in existance the wizard can take at level 6?No.

I'm disagreeing with your statement that the Ruathar is strictly worse than straight-classing.

Especially with the Sorcerer and Cleric, but even in Wizard builds, where it has class abilities to compete with.

Thurbane
2010-03-13, 03:12 AM
Besides, familiars as a class feature is for chumps. You trade that away for an ACF, and then take the Obtain Familiar feat so that all of your arcane caster levels count towards your familiar's abilities. :smalltongue:

Kylarra
2010-03-13, 03:12 AM
wizard also gives familiar an extra +1 to Nat Armor. and are you saying there is no other PrC in existance the wizard can take at level 6?False Dilemma. Your claim is that Ruathar is the worst PrC ever. Probably hyperbolic in nature, but still that's the premise you've presented. The counter to that is not that Ruathar is the strongest possible option, but simply that Ruathar is not the weakest option. So don't try to refute counterarguments by disproving the former, as that would be a strawman.


Besides, familiars as a class feature is for chumps. You trade that away for an ACF, and then take the Obtain Familiar feat so that all of your arcane caster levels count towards your familiar's abilities. :smalltongue:Or trade it for a feat and use that feat to take obtain familiar. :smallamused:

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-13, 03:17 AM
Ruathar (RotW122) - medium BAB, D6 HD, 2 good saves, 3/3 casting. get all knowledge skills and survival which allows the warlock to qualify for Sentinal of Bharrai (BoED69) at level 8 instead of 13 (take a 1 level dip in elf friend) without sacrificing caster progression.

The abilities it grants are:
LVL1: elves magically recognize you are one and are thus are friendly by default unless they see you do something evil.
LVL1: get one time gift of ~1000gp item of their choice from a limited list (which would be rude of you to sell).
LVL2: Low light vision
LVL2: racial bonus +2 to spot, search, & listen (stacks with Elven keen senses if already an elf)
LVL3: +1 sacred bonus to attack and saves while outside, aboveground, at night.
LVL3: Live 50% longer before dying of old age.

Basically, the abilities utterly suck. I'd rather take 3 more levels of sorcerer than elf friend, 3 more levels of familiar progression are better than the "abilities" it offers.

For a warlock, it doesn't just have to compete with other PrCs, it has to compete with the base abilities a warlock gets, such as DR and ER and so on... while they aren't too good and easily surpassed by better abilities, the abilities elf friend gives are so utterly bad the warlock base abilities has them beat.

I don't think I have ever seen more useless class abilities, the monk abilities make the elf friend abilities look sad and pathetic.

Well, in case you haven't noticed, Ruathar is dip-tastic. It is meant to be; in fact, there are several builds that benefit from that dip, since it has almost a holy trilogy of goodness:

First, it has very, very, VERY easy requirements. That alone is good.

Second, it has several nice things that you mentioned but apparently didn't gave the needed importance. 3/4 BAB makes you, sure, lose one point of BAB...not like a caster would care, and oddly enough, a Gish build takes a very odd benefit from it. d6 HD isn't very good, but then again, it's not a d4; it also has 4+Int skill points and a list that may grant a benefit to a Gish whom may not have Listen or Spot, let alone perhaps Perform.

Third, it is full spellcasting. Note how many classes around, specifically classes meant for Gishes, have both regular to good BAB AND full spellcasting progression.

Tactically getting one level of Ruathar helps, however, on classes that may require several skill points to enter. The first I recall is Sublime Chord; you can enter early on, get Listen as a class skill and add as many points as possible to it to cover the insane skill requirements of the PrC without losing much.

Ruathar is not meant to be taken as a serious PrC. It should be taken as a filler PrC, but a much solid filler than taking classes in another class or PrC and potentially shooting yourself in the foot. It won't help Wizards, Sorcerers or Bards if it matters to you, but I know a few Gish classes who wouldn't mind getting in.

Now, go to Races of Stone, look at Stoneblessed and tell me Ruathar doesn't kick the living daylights out of that class. The only actual benefit of Stoneblessed is that you can count as a Gnome for purposes of Shadowcraft Mage; the rest doesn't even cut it.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 03:18 AM
No.

I'm disagreeing with your statement that the Ruathar is strictly worse than straight-classing.

Especially with the Sorcerer and Cleric, but even in Wizard builds, where it has class abilities to compete with.

Alright, then lets compare to my assertion that straight wizard or sorc is better than ruathar.
level 7 improved familiars (eladrin coure being an example) are better then level 5. and +1 to nat armor of familiar, min int of 9 (instead of 8) for familiar (no relevant with most improved familiars); also speak with other animals of kind (if you use improved familiar, this is irrelevant).

This is what ruathar has to compete against; normally you would say "ANY full casting class whatsoever beats that". But ruather brings, +2 HP, +2 ref save, +4 skill points, a trinket, low light vision, and +2 to spot, search, & listen.
Frankly I'd rather get the better familiar and the +1 to its nat armor.


Well, in case you haven't noticed, Ruathar is dip-tastic. It is meant to be; in fact, there are several builds that benefit from that dip, since it has almost a holy trilogy of goodness
I pointed out myself that its skillpoints allow a warlock to take a 1 level dip in oder to qualify for a good PrC earlier.


Besides, familiars as a class feature is for chumps. You trade that away for an ACF, and then take the Obtain Familiar feat so that all of your arcane caster levels count towards your familiar's abilities. :smalltongue:

heh, ok, if you are allowed to that then its definitely a good point. in that case ruathar is strictly better because you literally give up nothing


Or trade it for a feat and use that feat to take obtain familiar.
ok, now that I definitely don't see any DM okaying.

Pluto
2010-03-13, 03:20 AM
Also, Ruathar is a prestige class, which is a benefit in and of itself.

That can make it useful for dodging Exp. Penalties.

(Typically, this will only apply to weaker builds. But in those cases, every bit helps.)

Hecore
2010-03-13, 03:21 AM
Assuming a campaign with some Elves, the 'consider you friendly' has some potential - if nothing else it should grant you the surprise round pretty much 100% of the time if you want to attack any elf - even evil ones.

Thurbane
2010-03-13, 03:21 AM
Or trade it for a feat and use that feat to take obtain familiar. :smallamused:
I think that's a houserule, though. I don't think there is any official source that allows trading a familiar for a general feat?

Dhavaer
2010-03-13, 03:28 AM
I think that's a houserule, though. I don't think there is any official source that allows trading a familiar for a general feat?

I'm sure there's a flaw called 'Forlorn' somehwere that loses your familiar or animal companion. No idea of the source, though.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-13, 03:28 AM
I pointed out myself that its skillpoints allow a warlock to take a 1 level dip in oder to qualify for a good PrC earlier.

Then it can't be the "worst PrC ever", as you claim, if it has an utility (and a nice utility at that). I know it's a tad difficult to believe, but a weird and hilarious method to allow a Paladin to get around 8th or 9th level arcane spellcasting required the aid of Ruathar (although not exactly dependant on it, though the three levels work fine enough). I learned that way the utility of Ruathar; I needed a very specific set of abilities and BAB and spellcasting levels that no other PrC other than Ruathar could provide, and that's basically because I was holding Abjurant Champion for later on, and both Spellsword and Eldritch Knight forced me to lose a spell level which I couldn't allow.

Also, you get a free item. The cloak sucks, so does the other item (boots?); but, the longsword can be altered to whatever you want; Magic Item Compendium gives you a reasonable idea on what you can do with a +1 longsword. It's a crunch-forced method to get a free magical weapon, of all things!

Superglucose
2010-03-13, 03:34 AM
ok, point :P
Its worse then not taking any PrC at all though.
Um... two good saves vs one good save, d6 HD, +2 to spot/listen, 2 extra skill points per level, and medium BAB are pretty good when you consider what, say, straight wizard would get:

Well I traded the familiar for Abrupt Jaunt, so I get...

taltamir
2010-03-13, 03:35 AM
now that I think about it, I think I meant fullcasting PrC ever... I know it sounds like backpedaling without wanting to admit to having been wrong, but its the truth. Obviously a class where you lose caster levels without tremendous gain in return is worst.


Um... two good saves vs one good save, d6 HD, +2 to spot/listen, 2 extra skill points per level, and medium BAB are pretty good when you consider what, say, straight wizard would get:

Well I traded the familiar for Abrupt Jaunt, so I get...

obviously if you traded your familiar thats a different case.
my point was explicitly that familiar progression beats the ruathars class features.


Alright, then lets compare to my assertion that straight wizard or sorc is better than ruathar.
level 7 improved familiars (eladrin coure being an example) are better then level 5. and +1 to nat armor of familiar, min int of 9 (instead of 8) for familiar (no relevant with most improved familiars); also speak with other animals of kind (if you use improved familiar, this is irrelevant).

This is what ruathar has to compete against; normally you would say "ANY full casting class whatsoever beats that". But ruather brings, +2 HP, +2 ref save, +4 skill points, a trinket, low light vision, and +2 to spot, search, & listen.
Frankly I'd rather get the better familiar and the +1 to its nat armor.

Superglucose
2010-03-13, 03:42 AM
I am not particularly skilled in familiar-fu, but if I remember correctly not every wizard takes a familiar even if he isn't trading it out. Specifically, if they're intending on multi-classing anyways...

Granted it's not on the level of say, Incantatrix or Initiate of the Seven Fold Veil, but it doesn't strike me as being significantly worse than, say, Loremaster.

faceroll
2010-03-13, 03:56 AM
Alright, then lets compare to my assertion that straight wizard or sorc is better than ruathar.
level 7 improved familiars (eladrin coure being an example) are better then level 5. and +1 to nat armor of familiar, min int of 9 (instead of 8) for familiar (no relevant with most improved familiars); also speak with other animals of kind (if you use improved familiar, this is irrelevant).

This is what ruathar has to compete against; normally you would say "ANY full casting class whatsoever beats that". But ruather brings, +2 HP, +2 ref save, +4 skill points, a trinket, low light vision, and +2 to spot, search, & listen.
Frankly I'd rather get the better familiar and the +1 to its nat armor.

Um, you can be warmage 7 and get an eladrin coure. Improved familiar has little relation to your actual wizard level, all it cares about is caster level. And improved familiars tend to suck for non-gishes. They're squishy, offer a handful of mildly useful Sp abilities, and give you no bonus. Also, if you plan on taking improved familiar, you can't actually pick up a useful familiar, like a rat or hummingbird, because then you have to lose it before you get improved familiar, along with a bunch of exp. Improved familiar is also taking your 6th or 9th level feat slot, which is when feats start to pick up for casters.

So not only is improved familiar a pretty horrible choice for a straight caster, but it doesn't interfere at all with Ruathar (expect losing a bit of natural armor, which doesn't matter, and one point of int, which has no mechanical effect).

You are also vastly underestimating the value of having spot, move silently, hide, listen, and diplomacy on you skill list. If you are a wizard, you can pump the potatoes out of these. Since your familiar also benefits, you virtually get to make two checks vs. hiding creatures and take the better result. Diplomacy is also extraordinarily useful for someone that typically dumps dex. Hide and move silent means that a kobold caster is again virtually undetectable. The items are also nice. Take three levels in this class as a small creature, and you can be making hide checks at at least +26 by level 8. That's awesome! As good as a rogue, but you also have full casting! If you didn't go dragonwrought on a kobold, you can get the hide check above 30. And that's with nothing more than 3 levels in a prc without requirements and a shrink person spell.

Ruathar is an awesome class, up there with loremaster and archmage. It's what prestige classes should be.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 04:34 AM
Naturally you will take the improved familiar feat at level 1, go without a familiar or an ACF for 7 levels, then take your good familiar at level 7.
Familiars are not that squish for non gishes, their HP and HD don't care how many classes you have taken that grant familiar, levels in fighter count towards familiar HP and HD.

If familiars care only about your overall caster level, and not your levels in classes that grant familiar, then this is indeed a nonpoint and I was mistaken. There is also the suggestion that has been made to swap familiar for an ACF and then take familiar the feat, which means all arcane casting levels count towards familiar progression.

mmm, actually this makes me wonder. If it is just caster level, will temporary increasing your caster level allow you to bind a higher level familiar earlier? for example, an eladrin coure requires caster level 7, would a 5th level wizard with an item that grants +2 CL be able to bind one then? and have it remain when the item is removed?


So not only is improved familiar a pretty horrible choice for a straight caster
Not only do they have powerful abilities, they can cast spells themselves and use items with UMD, letting you further break action economy. I have had a recent game where me and my familiar and my sentient spellbook combining swift and standard and immediate actions took more actions a round in combat than the entire rest of the party combined. (yea, that was a bad thing... you shouldn't overshadow the party that way)


You are also vastly underestimating the value of having spot, move silently, hide, listen, and diplomacy on you skill list.
By RAW, you only have them on your list for that few levels, then they are back to crossclass skills with future PrCs. I admit those are useful abilities though.


Ruathar is an awesome class, up there with loremaster and archmage. It's what prestige classes should be.
Loremaster is an awesome class, archmage is an awesome class, ruathar? ruathar isn't. its not as bad as I first thought... and if you traded your familiar for an ACF then its certainly better than straight wizard; its even better than a straight wizard if you didn't trade your familiar if you are correct about the improved familiar rules. But its not in the same class as loremaster and archmage.

Saph
2010-03-13, 04:46 AM
One of my standard builds is Arcane Caster 6 / Ruathar 3 / Abjurant Champion x. Ruathar gets you the extra BAB and weapon proficiency faster to get into Abjurant Champion, boosts your skills, and is fun if you happen to like elves.

As for how terrible it is, I used the above character in a few of my Test of Spite matches. I think being able to beat opponents like that with a Ruathar build disproves your theory of it being a bad PrC. :smalltongue:

faceroll
2010-03-13, 05:16 AM
Naturally you will take the improved familiar feat at level 1, go without a familiar or an ACF for 7 levels, then take your good familiar at level 7.

That's a suboptimal build.


Familiars are not that squish for non gishes, their HP and HD don't care how many classes you have taken that grant familiar, levels in fighter count towards familiar HP and HD.

One half of a wizard's HP is no HP at all. Familiars don't even get hit dice. That's why a duskblade with a winter wolf is so badass.


If familiars care only about your overall caster level, and not your levels in classes that grant familiar, then this is indeed a nonpoint and I was mistaken. There is also the suggestion that has been made to swap familiar for an ACF and then take familiar the feat, which means all arcane casting levels count towards familiar progression.

Right. You brought up something that doesn't matter and isn't relevant, as if it somehow made Ruathar weaker. If anything, your familiar gets stronger by taking Ruathar levels, since its hp and BAB will both go up.


Not only do they have powerful abilities, they can cast spells themselves and use items with UMD, letting you further break action economy. I have had a recent game where me and my familiar and my sentient spellbook combining swift and standard and immediate actions took more actions a round in combat than the entire rest of the party combined. (yea, that was a bad thing... you shouldn't overshadow the party that way)

You can do that with a raven familiar and not waste feats. You could do that with obtain familiar on a dread necromancer. Ruather has nothing to do with familiars.



By RAW, you only have them on your list for that few levels, then they are back to crossclass skills with future PrCs. I admit those are useful abilities though.

Their max ranks, though, are going to be level +3.


Loremaster is an awesome class, archmage is an awesome class, ruathar? ruathar isn't. its not as bad as I first thought... and if you traded your familiar for an ACF then its certainly better than straight wizard; its even better than a straight wizard if you didn't trade your familiar if you are correct about the improved familiar rules. But its not in the same class as loremaster and archmage.

It'd be better if it was a 5 or 10 level class, admittedly, but it's just as good as loremaster & archmage, since there aren't any wasteful feats going into it.

Grumman
2010-03-13, 05:22 AM
Yay hyperbole? It's still competing with survivor and risen martyr amongst many other poor PrCs.
I've yet to see someone make this claim that actually read the PrC. Risen Martyr doesn't have to compete, because at the point where you have the option of entering the PrC, you have no other choices. Risen Martyr isn't an alternative to Planar Shepard, it's an alternative to staying dead.


Assuming a campaign with some Elves, the 'consider you friendly' has some potential - if nothing else it should grant you the surprise round pretty much 100% of the time if you want to attack any elf - even evil ones.
Someone who would use their reputation as a Ruathar to ambush elves would not be a Ruathar. Your character disappears in a puff of logic, and I shred your character sheet.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 07:16 AM
Someone who would use their reputation as a Ruathar to ambush elves would not be a Ruathar. Your character disappears in a puff of logic, and I shred your character sheet.

Astute observation... its worse then just reputation though. ruathars have been magically bonded to the elven race as a whole after doing a great service to them.

Kylarra
2010-03-13, 10:24 AM
I've yet to see someone make this claim that actually read the PrC. Risen Martyr doesn't have to compete, because at the point where you have the option of entering the PrC, you have no other choices. Risen Martyr isn't an alternative to Planar Shepard, it's an alternative to staying dead.Given how dreadfully awful Nimbus of Light is, you're pretty much gunning for a PrC that requires you to die. :smallamused: You also need to speak Celestial, but that's much less of an opportunity cost. If it just required two exalted feats instead of Nimbus, then I could consider it an alternative to being dead of sorts.

Ruathar, at least, has the advantage of pretty much any class qualifying for it, regardless of trying, bar the fluff part of course.


I'm sure there's a flaw called 'Forlorn' somehwere that loses your familiar or animal companion. No idea of the source, though.Only your familiar, and Dragon 333, Dragon 327 also has loner, which is pretty much the same thing but familiar or AC.

I was actually joking, but a DM allowing you to give up one of your 2 flaw slots for simply having all of your arcane caster levels count towards familiar advancement isn't implausible either.

imperialspectre
2010-03-13, 10:29 AM
Easy qualification, small benefits above baseline, and a precious couple extra skill points for those poor sorcerers.

What's bad about it? I'd say the benefit-to-cost comparison is at least as good as Loremaster or Archmage.

boomwolf
2010-03-13, 10:41 AM
Astute observation... its worse then just reputation though. ruathars have been magically bonded to the elven race as a whole after doing a great service to them.

Nitpick-drow are elves too, and slaying them is considered a great service by many other elves.

Fun thing about elves is that they got more factions then African nations. its not hard to be a Ruathar and still be an enemy to some of them.

taltamir
2010-03-13, 10:57 AM
Nitpick-drow are elves too, and slaying them is considered a great service by many other elves.

Fun thing about elves is that they got more factions then African nations. its not hard to be a Ruathar and still be an enemy to some of them.

yes, but drow aren't exactly going to like you for being an elf friend :P.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-13, 11:16 AM
I like the Ruathar!

There's a lot of Elf-only PrCs, and I don't want to play an Elf, which makes Ruathar a great choice.

Eldariel
2010-03-13, 11:17 AM
I like the Ruathar!

There's a lot of Elf-only PrCs, and I don't want to play an Elf, which makes Ruathar a great choice.

By RAW it qualify you as an Elf, though that's certainly a reasonable houserule (though it's ridiculously stronger than Stoneblessed at that point, having full casting).

taltamir
2010-03-13, 11:26 AM
I like the Ruathar!

There's a lot of Elf-only PrCs, and I don't want to play an Elf, which makes Ruathar a great choice.

An elf can be a Ruathar. He must help another elf faction / nation, or he must help a non elf save his own nation, at which point the entire party qualify for ruathar regardless of race.
Elf ruathars are called star-friends instead of elf-friends.
And the ruathar +2 racial bonus to spot, search, and listen stacks with an elf's racial bonus to the same.

Optimystik
2010-03-13, 11:48 AM
taltamir, I told you yesterday in the Warlock thread that this PrC isn't nearly as bad as you thought it is. Perhaps you believe me now?

taltamir
2010-03-13, 11:30 PM
taltamir, I told you yesterday in the Warlock thread that this PrC isn't nearly as bad as you thought it is. Perhaps you believe me now?

yes.
its not great, but the extra skills are useful to qualify for other PrCs earlier.
And I was wrong about the familiar rules so this is actually better than a straight sorc/wizard.
But its not even close to being as good as loremaster or archmage.

arguskos
2010-03-13, 11:46 PM
I'm sure there's a flaw called 'Forlorn' somehwere that loses your familiar or animal companion. No idea of the source, though.
Not sure if someone beat me to this (likely), but Forlorn is from a Dragon Magazine, #333. Check it out here (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Forlorn).

FishAreWet
2010-03-13, 11:47 PM
loremaster or archmage.

How late can you entry into those? Now watch me qualify for Ruathar at level 1. Or 3 with less cheese.

imperialspectre
2010-03-14, 12:21 AM
yes.
its not great, but the extra skills are useful to qualify for other PrCs earlier.
And I was wrong about the familiar rules so this is actually better than a straight sorc/wizard.
But its not even close to being as good as loremaster or archmage.

Reading comprehension is good. I said that the benefit-to-cost comparison is as good, because both loremaster and archmage have onerous qualification requirements. Ruathar has basically zero entry requirements, insofar as you qualify for the crunch requirements on time basically by not being a monk. For a cost of basically nothing, easier PrC qualification and two good saves is a good deal.

Herbstfarben
2010-03-14, 04:02 AM
How late can you entry into those? Now watch me qualify for Ruathar at level 1. Or 3 with less cheese.

How? Does it involve making the DM angry?

Kelb_Panthera
2010-03-14, 04:40 AM
How? Does it involve making the DM angry?

Depends on how the DM likes the flavor of cheese I imagine. After all he's talking about either having BAB higher than your character level, having a skill push 5 points past max ranks, or using one of the well-known early entry spellcaster tricks, such as improved sigil krau and/or precocious apprentice.

Herbstfarben
2010-03-14, 04:48 AM
Precocious apprentice gives you a 2nd level spell. You need 3rd level. What am I missing?

Kelb_Panthera
2010-03-14, 05:06 AM
Precocious apprentice gives you a 2nd level spell. You need 3rd level. What am I missing?

Okay I'll spell it out for you. A first level Illumian wizard with precocious apprentice has one 2nd level spell. If he also takes improved sigil krau via flaw, he can cast that one spell as a 3rd level spell, thus "3rd level spells" as a 1st level character. There may be other ways, but this is the one I know.

Eldariel
2010-03-14, 07:07 AM
Okay I'll spell it out for you. A first level Illumian wizard with precocious apprentice has one 2nd level spell. If he also takes improved sigil krau via flaw, he can cast that one spell as a 3rd level spell, thus "3rd level spells" as a 1st level character. There may be other ways, but this is the one I know.

The Dragonsblood Pool + Sanctum Spell trick from Doc Roc works just fine.

imperialspectre
2010-03-14, 09:40 AM
Versatile Spellcaster + Improved Krau Sigil works on Beguiler, Warmage, and Dread Necromancer; for other spontaneous casters, you have to be able to sneak Heighten Spell in and therefore need flaws.

Eldariel
2010-03-14, 10:20 AM
Versatile Spellcaster + Improved Krau Sigil works on Beguiler, Warmage, and Dread Necromancer; for other spontaneous casters, you have to be able to sneak Heighten Spell in and therefore need flaws.

Or Dragonsblood Pool + Sanctum Spell. No flaws.

Emmerask
2010-03-14, 11:05 AM
How is it worse? You get a couple goodies, more skill points, more BaB and more HP.

Exactly itīs actually a fairly good prc... yes compared to the completely op prcs its weak but that does not mean the prc is bad.

fullcasting -> good
2 good saves -> nice!
med bab -> good
d6 hd -> sweet

so for the abilities:

elves consider you one of their own -> depending on the campaign this can be extremely helpful
well the gift is not that good ^^
low light vision -> can be substituted by a spell or / item but still not that bad
+2 spot/search/listen -> always useful
+1 bonus at night that stacks (mostly) -> why not itīs good
live 50% longer -> adds a bit of fluff why not ^^


I can not see any reason why you rather want to stay sorcerer then taking that prc... okay there is the familiar route some casters go that would be a reason ^^

Petrocorus
2010-03-14, 02:23 PM
Then it can't be the "worst PrC ever", as you claim, if it has an utility (and a nice utility at that). I know it's a tad difficult to believe, but a weird and hilarious method to allow a Paladin to get around 8th or 9th level arcane spellcasting required the aid of Ruathar (although not exactly dependant on it, though the three levels work fine enough). I learned that way the utility of Ruathar; I needed a very specific set of abilities and BAB and spellcasting levels that no other PrC other than Ruathar could provide, and that's basically because I was holding Abjurant Champion for later on, and both Spellsword and Eldritch Knight forced me to lose a spell level which I couldn't allow.


Could you post your build?


Versatile Spellcaster + Improved Krau Sigil works on Beguiler, Warmage, and Dread Necromancer; for other spontaneous casters, you have to be able to sneak Heighten Spell in and therefore need flaws.

You mean you use Versatile Spellcaster + Heighten Spell to be able to cast one of your 2nd lvl spell as a 3rd level one, and that works for qualifying?


Or Dragonsblood Pool + Sanctum Spell. No flaws.

Where can i find these feats?

Eldariel
2010-03-14, 03:32 PM
Where can i find these feats?

Dragonsblood Pool is a magical location in Complete Mage, Sanctum Spell is an adjustment +0 Metamagic in CArc. In your Sanctum, Sanctum Spells count as 1 level higher (and outside it, 1 level lower). Gets you level 2 spells. Dragonsblood Pool requires ability to cast level 2 spell and gives you a level 2 slot. Then, in your Sanctum, this gives you level 3 slot. Cheap, efficient. Hell, you can go up to level 4 spells this way by getting a level 3 slot from Dragonsblood Pool and using Sanctum to qualify you for 4s.

Petrocorus
2010-03-14, 04:44 PM
Dragonsblood Pool is a magical location in Complete Mage, Sanctum Spell is an adjustment +0 Metamagic in CArc. In your Sanctum, Sanctum Spells count as 1 level higher (and outside it, 1 level lower). Gets you level 2 spells. Dragonsblood Pool requires ability to cast level 2 spell and gives you a level 2 slot. Then, in your Sanctum, this gives you level 3 slot. Cheap, efficient. Hell, you can go up to level 4 spells this way by getting a level 3 slot from Dragonsblood Pool and using Sanctum to qualify you for 4s.

So, you find a pool, you make it your sanctum, you gain a 2nd lvl spell slot then you find another pool, make it your sanctum, gain a 3rd lvl spell slot and you use it to qualify as Ruathar? That's it?

And DM really allow this?

Eldariel
2010-03-14, 04:58 PM
So, you find a pool, you make it your sanctum, you gain a 2nd lvl spell slot then you find another pool, make it your sanctum, gain a 3rd lvl spell slot and you use it to qualify as Ruathar? That's it?

And DM really allow this?

By strict reading, you just pick Sanctum Spell. The fact that you have the feat alone makes you able to cast level 2 spells. Then you use Dragonsblood Pool for a level 2 slot. It can be used twice so you could get a level 3 slot, but at level 2 slots, with Sanctum Spell, you already have the ability to cast level 3 spells. You don't need to use it twice to qualify as able to cast level 3 spells.

ScionoftheVoid
2010-03-14, 05:21 PM
And DM really allow this?

That will always vary by DM, so we don't know is the answer.

On Ruathar. It's like Wizard into Loremaster but for any class and with slightly less benefit. It almost cannot be a bad thing.

Petrocorus
2010-03-14, 05:30 PM
By strict reading, you just pick Sanctum Spell. The fact that you have the feat alone makes you able to cast level 2 spells. Then you use Dragonsblood Pool for a level 2 slot. It can be used twice so you could get a level 3 slot, but at level 2 slots, with Sanctum Spell, you already have the ability to cast level 3 spells. You don't need to use it twice to qualify as able to cast level 3 spells.

But you also need Heighten spell to cast the 1st lvl spell that are the only you know?

Eldariel
2010-03-14, 05:36 PM
But you also need Heighten spell to cast the 1st lvl spell that are the only you know?

No. You need Sanctum Spell and Dragonsblood Pool. Sanctum Spell makes your spells count as 2nd level spells, Dragonsblood Pool then gives you a second level slot. Then you prepare a Sanctum Spell in that slot; now you count as able to cast 3rd level spells.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-14, 06:07 PM
Could you post your build?

There are two main methods, but only one gets the expected results. They both imply getting Sublime Chord, but one does it by a vague reading of a feat that implies a very solid benefit when applied.

The main method is having a Human with Able Learner a high Int score (or Nymph's kiss) get the first few levels in Paladin (up to level 5, to be precise, but you can ignore the 5th level if necessary if you add one full BAB class or PrC). Get Harmonious Knight and worship Milil to get Perform as a class skill; since Able Learner allows you to bypass the cross-class restriction (you get Perform as a class skill so your maximum skill ranks increase to 3+Level), you get one of the tougher prereqs around. Get enough ranks in Knowledge (arcana) and Knowledge (religion) to qualify to Knight of the Weave by level 6; at that moment, take Initiate of Milil as your 6th level feat.

The reading of Initiate of Milil adds your cleric or paladin level to your bard level for purposes of acquiring bardic music (but not bardic music daily uses); however, the wording doesn't explicitly states that you have to be a Bard to get the benefit from this feat, and the prerequisites only require you having either Cleric 1st or Paladin 4th, which you qualify already. So, essentially, you get Bardic Music through a feat, and bypass the strongest restriction for Sublime Chord (actually having Bardic Music). You get Knight of the Weave for the 3rd level spell requirement along with the Spellcraft requirement; Ruathar allows you to get Listen as a class skill, plus a lot of skill points you can use. If you manage to qualify for Ruathar early on, you can use the remaining Knight of the Weave class skill points on Listen to get the insane 13 ranks on Listen. Once you get that, you get one single level of Sublime Chord and from there attempt to complete BAB 16.

Theoretically, the method would be Paladin (Harmonious Knight) 5/Knight of the Weave 1/Ruathar 1/KotW 3+/Sublime Chord 1 (using Initiate of Milil as a method of gaining "Bardic Music")/Abjurant Champion 5/Sublime Chord 1+/Spellsword 1/Ruathar 2+. Since you get effective Sublime Chord spellcasting levels from 11-20, you get 9th level spells at character level 19th and keep a lot of benefits while at it.

The safer way, although you'd get 9th level spells exactly at level 20 would be Bard 1/Paladin 5 (get Initiate of Milil and Devoted Performer on the way)/Knight of the Weave 4/Ruathar 1/Sublime Chord 1/Abjurant Champion 5/Sublime Chord 1+/Ruathar 2 or Spellsword 1/Ruathar 1. Both get the minimum Gish requirements (9th level spells and 16 BAB).

The importance of Ruathar is that the requisite spellcasting classes (either Knight of the Weave or to a certain extent Suel Arcanamach if you get enough feats) are 3/4 classes, so gaining more than 5 levels is detrimental (since there are few classes that have full BAB and full spellcasting that are easy to access). Ruathar still loses a point of BAB at the beginning, but you can follow the path later and still gain two points of BAB (much like two levels in Sublime Chord grant you a point of BAB) and full spellcasting, which is a bonus on Gish builds. Since it's an easy-entry build, it allows you to get pretty early on without much trouble; the skill points help with the intensive skill rank tax of Sublime Chord, and the saves help a lot. The acquired benefits aren't so great, but you can do something out of low-light vision, extended age and a free longsword as a human Gish. So, you essentially get a lot of benefits and leapfrog to lose as little BAB as possible.

Petrocorus
2010-03-14, 06:07 PM
No. You need Sanctum Spell and Dragonsblood Pool. Sanctum Spell makes your spells count as 2nd level spells, Dragonsblood Pool then gives you a second level slot.
OK, that, i get, finally.



Then you prepare a Sanctum Spell in that slot; now you count as able to cast 3rd level spells.
But that, i don't, I get that your 2nd lvl spell slot count as 3rd lvl, but you need to use a 2nd lvl spell in that slot. But if you're lvl 1 you don't know a 2nd lvl spell?

Amphetryon
2010-03-14, 06:12 PM
But that, i don't, I get that your 2nd lvl spell slot count as 3rd lvl, but you need to use a 2nd lvl spell in that slot. But if you're lvl 1 you don't know a 2nd lvl spell?Say hello to Precocious Apprentice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041114a).

Bets on ninjas?

Pluto
2010-03-14, 06:18 PM
But if you're lvl 1 you don't know a 2nd lvl spell?
Remember that 2nd level slot from the Dragonsblood pool?

Or: Wizards "know" every spell in their spellbooks.
Only the spells granted by leveling require the Wizard to be able to cast them.

(So a Wizard can use Sanctum spell to open the Dragonsblood pool for a second level slot. Then he can buy a scroll of Summon Monster II and scribe it into his spellbook. Then he can prepare a Sanctum Summon Monster II, which counts as a third level spell. Then the DM can smack the player with a DMG.)

Petrocorus
2010-03-14, 06:30 PM
Say hello to Precocious Apprentice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041114a).

Bets on ninjas?

My bad, i thought it was only for wizard.



Remember that 2nd level slot from the Dragonsblood pool?

Or: Wizards "know" every spell in their spellbooks.
Only the spells granted by leveling require the Wizard to be able to cast them.

(So a Wizard can use Sanctum spell to open the Dragonsblood pool for a second level slot. Then he can buy a scroll of Summon Monster II and scribe it into his spellbook. Then he can prepare a Sanctum Summon Monster II, which counts as a third level spell. Then the DM can smack the player with a DMG.)

Wait, Dragonsblood pool is for spontaneous spellcaster. There is a trick to have wizard cast spontaneously at 1st lvl?

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-14, 06:42 PM
Haven't read the entire thread, but speaking of bad PrC's, Risen Martyr is hilarious. You do something naughty? You die. You stick it out and be a goody-goody-two-shoes? You also die. Not to mention that the class is made out of suck even without the whole 'Heads you lose, tails I win' thing. 1/2 BaB and no spellcasting advancement? With bad class features? This was probably one the old April Fools day ideas they shoved into a book to save space.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-14, 06:59 PM
Haven't read the entire thread, but speaking of bad PrC's, Risen Martyr is hilarious. You do something naughty? You die. You stick it out and be a goody-goody-two-shoes? You also die. Not to mention that the class is made out of suck even without the whole 'Heads you lose, tails I win' thing. 1/2 BaB and no spellcasting advancement? With bad class features? This was probably one the old April Fools day ideas they shoved into a book to save space.

Umm...in that case, they would have made the Avenger (an actual April Fools joke) replace both this class AND the Slayer of Domiel.

It's basically like the Dragon Disciple pre-epic; in the end, you technically trascend deathless and become a Celestial. Did you know you can be destroyed by an evil Cleric or a neutral Cleric that rebukes undead?

Pluto
2010-03-14, 07:50 PM
Wait, Dragonsblood pool is for spontaneous spellcaster. There is a trick to have wizard cast spontaneously at 1st lvl?Ah, I misunderstood the situation. Don't mind me.

Petrocorus
2010-03-15, 05:15 AM
Ah, I misunderstood the situation. Don't mind me.

Oh i don't. I'm trying to understand all that tricks.

taltamir
2010-03-15, 05:23 AM
Haven't read the entire thread, but speaking of bad PrC's, Risen Martyr is hilarious. You do something naughty? You die. You stick it out and be a goody-goody-two-shoes? You also die. Not to mention that the class is made out of suck even without the whole 'Heads you lose, tails I win' thing. 1/2 BaB and no spellcasting advancement? With bad class features? This was probably one the old April Fools day ideas they shoved into a book to save space.

I am told this is because the class is an alternative to "unlimited raise dead"... if your DM wants to ban resurrection spells but wants to allow you to come back with heavy penalties, this class does that. It is absolutely horrible class, its only feature is that you can take it while dead, and taking it brings you back to life.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-15, 06:26 AM
The other way to qualify at first level is
A) Be a dread necromancer with a metamagic feat
B) Become a necropolitan (draining most of the xp out of you, down to level 1)
C) Now that you're all undead and tainted, take eldritch corruption (free, since taint is delicious)

Presto! You can now cast any of your first level spells as third level spells by sucking the souls out of your fellow party members

Tyndmyr
2010-03-15, 06:49 AM
Wait, Dragonsblood pool is for spontaneous spellcaster. There is a trick to have wizard cast spontaneously at 1st lvl?

Yeah, there was a feat somewhere that allowed a wizard to cast one spell slot spont.

So, I presume this trick requires flaws.

Me, I just used Precocious Apprentice and Sanctum Spell. Now I have a second level spell that counts as a third level spell.

Edit: Oh, and on topic, yes, this is actually a pretty good PrC. Easy entry requirements, strictly better than base classes, and full casting. It's lacking any truly broken options, but I would rank it as among the top PrCs that aren't entirely broken(Yknow, tainted casters, Planar Shepherd, etc).

Petrocorus
2010-03-15, 07:04 AM
Me, I just used Precocious Apprentice and Sanctum Spell. Now I have a second level spell that counts as a third level spell.


That works by RAW!? Because that would help me greatly.
I'm trying to work on a ranger-ish elven generalist and Ruathar would help me a lot.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-15, 07:10 AM
By strict reading, you just pick Sanctum Spell. The fact that you have the feat alone makes you able to cast level 2 spells. Then you use Dragonsblood Pool for a level 2 slot. It can be used twice so you could get a level 3 slot, but at level 2 slots, with Sanctum Spell, you already have the ability to cast level 3 spells. You don't need to use it twice to qualify as able to cast level 3 spells.

By my reading of a Dragonsblood pool, you cannot use it twice.


No single creature can have more than one bonus spell slot from a dragonsblood pool at a time.

That said, Precocious Apprentice + Sanctum Spell + Dragonsblood Pool would get you a level 3 slot, and you could then put a level 3 spell in it, yielding the ability to cast level 4 spells, at character level 1 (requires a race with a bonus feat, such as human or strongheart halfling, or a flaw). Add in heighten spell and you could do it without any additional aid.

Tyndmyr
2010-03-15, 07:23 AM
That works by RAW!? Because that would help me greatly.
I'm trying to work on a ranger-ish elven generalist and Ruathar would help me a lot.

I don't see why it wouldn't. You get that one lonely 2nd level spell. Apply sanctum spell to it, and it counts as +1 spell level(+0 mm, so you're still good) within your sanctum only.

Stacking dragonsblood on top of that would give you an additional level 3 slot, in case your DM takes the strict reading of "cast x level spells"...but many do not, because it doesn't mesh with how they appear to be used everywhere else.

Petrocorus
2010-03-15, 08:00 AM
I don't see why it wouldn't. You get that one lonely 2nd level spell. Apply sanctum spell to it, and it counts as +1 spell level(+0 mm, so you're still good) within your sanctum only.


I understand that it count as a 3rd lvl spell when you cast it, but i'm not sure you can really consider it as a 3rd lvl spell for prerequisite for a PrC.That's what i am wondering.
With Precotious Apprentice, you know a 2nd lvl spell that you can cast as a 3rd lvl spell with Sanctum or Dragonsblood + Heighten.
But i really wonder if it is RAW to say that you can cast a 3rd lvl spell while you're aren't able to cast a spell which is listed as 3rd lvl?
Is there an official comment on this? Something that can convince a DM?

I feel like it would be to use Precotious, learn Continual Flame and say: "i can cast a 3rd lvl spell since Continual Flame is 3rd lvl on the cleric spell list." and qualify for a PrC that doesn't specify 3rd lvl arcane spell like Ruathar. Or even better, See Invisibility is a 3rd lvl Bard arcane spell.

Tyndmyr
2010-03-15, 08:08 AM
Sanctum Spell specifically says that it counts as a spell of one level higher for all purposes but slot prepared. I really don't know how they could say it any clearer. It's prepared as a second level spell, but cast as a third level spell*.

*When in sanctum. Tyndmyr is not responsible for lost access to PrC abilities if sanctum is destroyed. Rare side effects include rashes, nausea, burning, and DMG shaped bruises.

taltamir
2010-03-15, 09:10 AM
The other way to qualify at first level is
A) Be a dread necromancer with a metamagic feat
B) Become a necropolitan (draining most of the xp out of you, down to level 1)
C) Now that you're all undead and tainted, take eldritch corruption (free, since taint is delicious)

Presto! You can now cast any of your first level spells as third level spells by sucking the souls out of your fellow party members

well that will go over REAL well with the elves :P

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-15, 09:20 AM
Oddly enough, Precocious Apprentice, Elven Generalist wizard, and Sanctum spell will do the following:

Level 2 Sanctum Spell > becomes a level 3 spell.
Dragonsblood Pool > get a level 3 Slot.


The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day. Unlike the specialist wizard ability, this spell may be of any school.

So the Generalist may now prepare 2 level 3 spells. Prepare 2 Sanctum spells. Now they count as level 4 spells. You now have 2 level 4 spells, which qualifies under the most strict interpretation of "Able to cast level 4 spells."

An alternate interpretation would be that Elven generalist gets you a level 4 spell (which cannot be sanctum spelled, as that would make its level not equal to the highest level you can cast). Heighten a grease spell for better DC's, or something.

Congratulations, now you can enter Sacred Mystic with 3 levels, only 1 of which needs to be wizard. (less if you use Early Entry shenanigans with bardic inspiration)

Kylarra
2010-03-15, 09:23 AM
I am told this is because the class is an alternative to "unlimited raise dead"... if your DM wants to ban resurrection spells but wants to allow you to come back with heavy penalties, this class does that. It is absolutely horrible class, its only feature is that you can take it while dead, and taking it brings you back to life.The problem with that reasoning is that it requires you to have taken Nimbus of Light, a rather craptastic feat. If it "only" required you to have taken 2 exalted feats, rather than Nimbus+1 other exalted feat, then maybe, maybe, I could accept that line of reasoning as vaguely plausible.

taltamir
2010-03-15, 09:26 AM
The problem with that reasoning is that it requires you to have taken Nimbus of Light, a rather craptastic feat. If it "only" required you to have taken 2 exalted feats, rather than Nimbus+1 other exalted feat, then maybe, maybe, I could accept that line of reasoning as vaguely plausible.

if your DM warns you ahead of time that there is no resurrection, period. Except for characters who use this class... then you might have taken it. (although, unless he assess heavy penalties on newly created characters I Don't see why bother... and even then, better start up all over again from level 1 with a more survivable character)

Tyndmyr
2010-03-15, 09:37 AM
I would rather spend three feats avoiding death than preparing for it.

Kylarra
2010-03-15, 09:38 AM
if your DM warns you ahead of time that there is no resurrection, period. Except for characters who use this class... then you might have taken it. (although, unless he assess heavy penalties on newly created characters I Don't see why bother... and even then, better start up all over again from level 1 with a more survivable character)It's a feat that gives you +2 to diplomacy and sense motive with good characters and turns you into a lamp. When you're outclassed by negotiator (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#negotiator) and 1sp item, you know it's a horrible feat.

Petrocorus
2010-03-15, 09:45 AM
Oddly enough, Precocious Apprentice, Elven Generalist wizard, and Sanctum spell will do the following:

Level 2 Sanctum Spell > becomes a level 3 spell.
Dragonsblood Pool > get a level 3 Slot.

How can you use dragonsblood pool as an elven generalist?




Congratulations, now you can enter Sacred Mystic with 3 levels, only 1 of which needs to be wizard. (less if you use Early Entry shenanigans with bardic inspiration)

What is Sacred mystic?

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-15, 10:07 AM
well that will go over REAL well with the elves :P



What, are you racist against people powered by negative energy? You know what kind of elves are racist? The drow, that's who. Are you saying you're some kind of drow elf? No, I thought not.

Hmpf. Some people.

Fitz10019
2010-03-15, 10:33 AM
More importantly, doesn't Ruathar also make you taste bad to Bulettes?
:P

Xenogears
2010-03-15, 10:55 AM
The problem with that reasoning is that it requires you to have taken Nimbus of Light, a rather craptastic feat. If it "only" required you to have taken 2 exalted feats, rather than Nimbus+1 other exalted feat, then maybe, maybe, I could accept that line of reasoning as vaguely plausible.

Well if you took VoP at lvl 1 you probably ran out of exalted feats by now and took nimbus. So thats why you would have the feat. I mean really. When your choices are that limited being a living lamp starts to sound good...

Kylarra
2010-03-15, 11:19 AM
Well if you took VoP at lvl 1 you probably ran out of exalted feats by now and took nimbus. So thats why you would have the feat. I mean really. When your choices are that limited being a living lamp starts to sound good...If you took VoP at first level, taking Risen Martyr is pretty bad too since you'll need all the useful class features you can get. :smalltongue:

LichPrinceAlim
2010-03-15, 01:49 PM
Risen Martyr is a joke, however Apostle of Peace isn't...

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 03:11 PM
Risen Martyr is a joke, however Apostle of Peace isn't...

Apostle of Peace is very much a joke. All of their spells require a holy symbol that they aren't allowed to possess.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-15, 04:09 PM
Apostle of Peace is very much a joke. All of their spells require a holy symbol that they aren't allowed to possess.

Well, considering they can take a piece of wood they took from a tree and sharpened with a stone found somewhere and carved until the frickin' holy symbol becomes a scar...

Still, some of their best spells need costly material components, so they're still screwed on that one. They could have done fine with Vow of Peace and Vow of Nonviolence, but they just HAD to add Vow of Poverty, which makes no sense nor relevance other than to nerf a character with easy access to 9th level spells (in a very limited way, not like Ur-Priest who has become along with Sublime Chord into pathways of power at insane speeds)

So yeah, I agree; nothing short of a joke. But still better than Risen Martyr >.<

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 04:32 PM
Well, considering they can take a piece of wood they took from a tree and sharpened with a stone found somewhere and carved until the frickin' holy symbol becomes a scar...

That's frequently cited as a way around it, but doesn't work.

VoP forbids all possessions with very specific exceptions, not just the ones that have a cost in the DMG. If clothes weren't listed on the feat, you'd have to walk around naked; that's how bad it is. Holy symbols are not listed, even hand-carved ones.

An AoP is SoL, RAW.

Gamgee
2010-03-15, 04:37 PM
Sounds like "Elf Friend" class is better suited as a template. Something you could bestow upon players for free after a major story arc or something involving elves.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-15, 04:49 PM
That's frequently cited as a way around it, but doesn't work.

VoP forbids all possessions with very specific exceptions, not just the ones that have a cost in the DMG. If clothes weren't listed on the feat, you'd have to walk around naked; that's how bad it is. Holy symbols are not listed, even hand-carved ones.

Which is odd, since it's not a material possession, it's self-scarification which would work well with that idea of ascetism. Eh, maybe because it's unofficial, but well...

What I find mostly hilarious is the lack of errata on it. I mean, only three things are errata'ed, and Vow of Poverty is not even considered to be errata'ed, not to mention that obvious failure that is adding three feats instead of two to Apostle of Peace. I mean, the guy in the picture is violating his own Vow of Poverty (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20031004b)! And this has remained as such for 5 Hells-be-damned years!

And even then, it *still* doesn't suck as bad as Risen Martyr.

Now, can we please return to the original post, or at least have taltamir change the title to "Risen Martyr, worst PrC ever!"?

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 04:52 PM
Now, can we please return to the original post, or at least have taltamir change the title to "Risen Martyr, worst PrC ever!"?

Discussing worse PrCs than Ruathar is still on-topic, because we're refuting the premise of the thread.

Speaking of bad PrCs, anybody play a Blighter lately?

Kylarra
2010-03-15, 04:52 PM
Actually, a holy symbol could be your quarterstaff or one of the other simple weapons you're allowed to possess. It never says exactly what a holy symbol is, so it's not implausible that say a god of traveling would have a quarterstaff as a symbol, etc etc.

hamishspence
2010-03-15, 04:55 PM
There is a 0th level cleric spell that allows you to temporarily summon a holy symbol- in Complete Champion.

If a summoned holy symbol isn't a possession (since it goes away when the spell expires)- this might resolve the problem.

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 04:57 PM
Actually, a holy symbol could be your quarterstaff or one of the other simple weapons you're allowed to possess. It never says exactly what a holy symbol is, so it's not implausible that say a god of traveling would have a quarterstaff as a symbol, etc etc.

The trouble is that WotC intended lack of a holy symbol to be a drawback to VoP. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060616a)

It was intended to hose all non-druid divine casters, not AoP in particular.

Kylarra
2010-03-15, 05:01 PM
The trouble is that WotC intended lack of a holy symbol to be a drawback to VoP. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060616a)

It was intended to hose all non-druid divine casters, not AoP in particular.WotC intends a lot of things.:smalltongue: Including VoP being an actually viable option at all.

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 05:05 PM
WotC intends a lot of things.:smalltongue: Including VoP being an actually viable option at all.

To be fair, I'm fine with hamish's solution - if temporary things did violate the vow, Incarnum wouldn't work either.

But VoP is silly anyway. :smallsigh:

Anyway my question, while worded facetiously, was genuine - How does a Blighter stack up against a Ruathar?

JaronK
2010-03-15, 05:19 PM
I'd say the Shining Blade of Heironeous has to be the single worst PrC. 10 levels loses 5 caster levels, and all you get are a very small number of short term weapon buffs that take standard actions to activate. I once made a challenge to see if anyone could make a build that used the SBoH in such a way that the base classes in the build couldn't just replace the SBoH levels and make a better build... the only winner was someone who replaced a completely dead level of Paladin with a single level of SBoH, and even that wasn't much better.

JaronK

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-15, 05:28 PM
Hmm...something I considered...

How about having the AoP get his holy symbol spun to the very simple robe he's allowed to wear? As in, the character would need those clothes, but in no moment it is mentioned the exact definition. You'd lose your holy symbol if you lose the clothing, but the idea is that at least you have clothing.

That, or etch it yourself into the quarterstaff as mentioned before. Nothing says it cannot be ornate; it only says it has to be something along the lines of a quarterstaff, and that's basically a recommendation. For all means, you could have a club which actually costs nothing...

Oslecamo
2010-03-15, 05:33 PM
Speaking of bad PrCs, anybody play a Blighter lately?

This has to be the winner. It's so bad that even one of my newbie friends who played a druid who ran around firing heavy crossbows and waterballs (it deals damage! Ok, subdual damage, but yay nuke!) looked at the class and understood it sucked.

ScionoftheVoid
2010-03-15, 06:14 PM
This has to be the winner. It's so bad that even one of my newbie friends who played a druid who ran around firing heavy crossbows and waterballs (it deals damage! Ok, subdual damage, but yay nuke!) looked at the class and understood it sucked.

It doesn't suck so much if you really screw with the flavour, but you may as well just use Ur-Priest at that point. You miss Shapechange, IIRC, but you don't need to have plenty of plants (which the fluff suggests you should hate) around to get your casting at all. Basically if you are willing to have a Blighter who brings plants with them and then burns them every day just to function then use the Ur-Priest. It does the same thing but better. It's in the same book even (complete Divine).

Geomancer and Mystic Theurge without early entry are probably up there for "Worst Prestige Class", both without early entry is disturbing to think about (for me). Pyrokineticist is pretty bad for anything that hasn't qualified using a psi-dip. Illumine Soul would look terrible if it and the book it would come from existed. The Ectopic Adept would be horrific beyond words if it existed, which it doesn't. The Complete Psionic is a terrible nightmare, nothing more. You saw nothing!

Gametime
2010-03-15, 06:30 PM
I'd say the Shining Blade of Heironeous has to be the single worst PrC. 10 levels loses 5 caster levels, and all you get are a very small number of short term weapon buffs that take standard actions to activate. I once made a challenge to see if anyone could make a build that used the SBoH in such a way that the base classes in the build couldn't just replace the SBoH levels and make a better build... the only winner was someone who replaced a completely dead level of Paladin with a single level of SBoH, and even that wasn't much better.

JaronK

I don't know if I'd say worst, but it definitely wins most boring. At least classes like Mindbender get some cool abilities to go with their horrible, horrible caster level loss. The Shining Blade gets crappy weapon enchants. For a limited time per day. That take actions. Wooooooooo!

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-15, 06:32 PM
Geomancer and Mystic Theurge without early entry are probably up there for "Worst Prestige Class", both without early entry is disturbing to think about (for me). Pyrokineticist is pretty bad for anything that hasn't qualified using a psi-dip. Illumine Soul would look terrible if it and the book it would come from existed. The Ectopic Adept would be horrific beyond words if it existed, which it doesn't. The Complete Psionic is a terrible nightmare, nothing more. You saw nothing!

Oh, darn! So that sweet dream of the Ardent is a dream? Aw shucks, now what will Jaron do with his Tier list if the Spell-to-Power...erm...what's it's name, Erudite is a thing of fiction?

Then again, when a prestige class (Soulbow) is better than it's original class (Soulknife) by almost a wide margin...

Also, Mystic Theurge >>>>>> Geomancer. At least the later, without early entry, allows you 7th level spells on both areas. Done the right way, you get 9th level spells in both areas...if you don't mind being evil or worshipping a dead god and starting as a singer in the local pub...

tonberrian
2010-03-15, 06:48 PM
Then again, when a prestige class (Soulbow) is better than it's original class (Soulknife) by almost a wide margin...

Soulbow is like Swiftblade - available online (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060403a&page=2) as a free enhancement to the game. I've never heard of this "Complete Psionic" of which you speak. :smalltongue:

Also, more on topic, my contender for the worst PrC ever is the Yathrinshee - like Mystic Theurge, but missing 4 levels for both Divine and Arcane casting for a handfull of rather useless and easily duplicable abilities. She could do almost the same things, but more often and better, if she hadn't given up the spell levels!

Gametime
2010-03-15, 06:59 PM
Classes with poor dual progression can't be the worst. Consider the Master of the Unseen Hand, a spellcasting prestige class with no progression.

Sure, it's fun for ghosts, but for normal players...

Petrocorus
2010-03-15, 07:56 PM
For dual casting class, arcane hierophant look good to me.
For 1 druid caster lvl and one feat, precocious apprentice, you can win 11 caster lvl as wizard or sorcerer.

Optimystik
2010-03-15, 08:20 PM
At the risk of derailing the thread, I have to say that I'm convinced the people that hate Complete Psionic haven't actually read it.

Yeah the PrCs suck, but that's just one chapter guys. It still has great powers, classes, feats and fluff. (Minus the illithid heritage stuff :smalltongue:)

On topic: the best Theurges imo are the ones you can extend with MT - Arcane Heirophant, Noctumancer, and Eldritch Disciple.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-16, 01:33 AM
The greyguard PrC (with a liberal reading) lets you actually ignore things like your vows for Apostle of Peace, making it less awful.


Classes with poor dual progression can't be the worst. Consider the Master of the Unseen Hand, a spellcasting prestige class with no progression.

Sure, it's fun for ghosts, but for normal players...

Master of the Unseen Hand + Chained telekinesis.

21 full attacks using your CL as your BAB.

It's very good at what it does.



For the worst prestige class, I'd have to say the solar channeler from Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde. You lose caster levels... for the ability to burn turning attempts and become weaker a few times per day. Yeah.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 01:51 AM
Here, in alphabetical order, are the worst PrCs in the game....


Acolyte of the skin CA
Apostle of Peace BoED
Arcane Archer DMG
Bereft ToM
Blighter CD
Bonded Summoner Mini
Brimstone Speaker ToM
Cavestalker (Druid entry) DotU
Defiant PlH
Dirgesinger LM
Duelist DMG
Entropomancer CD
Evangelist CD
Eye of Lolth DotU
Fochlucan Lyrist (unless Evasion is gained without dips, then Up One Tier) CAdv
Forest Master F&P
Green Star Adept CA
Incarnum Blade MoI
Insidious Corruptor (Arcane Spellcaster entry) DotU
Lifedrinker BoVD
Master of the Unseen Hand CW
Metamind (w/o capstone abuse) XPH
Mindbender (except for 1 level dips) CA
Mindspy CW
Necrocarnate (w/o infinite essentia abuse) MoI
Ollam CAdv
Reaping Mauler CW
Solar Channeler Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde
Spinemeld Warrior (incarnum entry) MoI
Talon of Tiamat Drc
True Necromancer LM
Wavekeeper Stormwrack
Witchborn Binder MoI
Wonderworker BoED
Yathrinshee PGtF



Ruathar isn't even close. It's solidly neutral, and a bit boring, but remember that Sorcs don't get any class features, so anything they can qualify for easily that advances spellcasting fully is technically a step up.

Pluto
2010-03-16, 01:56 AM
Here, in alphabetical order, are the worst PrCs in the game....
You have caster-progression classes on this list at all?
Weird.

taltamir
2010-03-16, 02:01 AM
its funny WOTC states a wizard is "not in a million years" on their list there. A wizard with eitedic spellcaster ACF requires no spellbook (although, he cannot afford the incense to learn new spells, he better take collegiate and make do with 4 spells known a level)... but as I was saying, such a wizard fares a lot better than a cleric who cannot use a divine focus.

Mongoose87
2010-03-16, 02:04 AM
Also, Mystic Theurge >>>>>> Geomancer. At least the later, without early entry, allows you 7th level spells on both areas. Done the right way, you get 9th level spells in both areas...if you don't mind being evil or worshipping a dead god and starting as a singer in the local pub...

Oh, God, how bad the Geomancer is! There's a fellow I play with who plans on taking his next level in it. He's always raving about how he'll be casting arcane spells in full plate. He's gone and ruined what started as a competent Cleric by first trying to make him a grappler, then by diluting him with Wizard levels. I don't even think he's using some of the Geomancer's mechanics right, and I could care less, since he's going to be making his character so awful.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 02:10 AM
You have caster-progression classes on this list at all?
Weird.
They're compared to the base class not taking the PrC in the first place. Ronin (for CW Samurais) is judged by a different standard than Mindbender (for Sorcerers). Often times, too, those "worst" PrCs are not so much horrible as just nonfunctional at what they try to do. See my sig for more details.

This thread (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5093.0) might also be of interest.

taltamir
2010-03-16, 02:12 AM
Geomancer and Mystic Theurge without early entry are probably up there for "Worst Prestige Class", both without early entry is disturbing to think about (for me). Pyrokineticist is pretty bad for anything that hasn't qualified using a psi-dip. Illumine Soul would look terrible if it and the book it would come from existed. The Ectopic Adept would be horrific beyond words if it existed, which it doesn't. The Complete Psionic is a terrible nightmare, nothing more. You saw nothing!

I thought you meant "geometer" for a second, I was thinking "what is wrong with geometer?"... but then I noticed its the other geo one... I have seen it before, but I only now noticed its a "dual progression" that only advances one side at a time.
As intended, you need to be wizard 3/cleric 3 (or the like) and then the next 10 levels advance casting for only one of those two (or worse, split it up between them)... and your power? some minor mutations, +1CL in specific terrain type, and you get to cast spells with ASF (of spell level = geomancer level -1) and choose whether you want to use divine focus or arcane material component.

Wow that is bad. wouldn't be too horrible if it fully advanced both casting classes though.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-16, 02:48 AM
Here, in alphabetical order, are the worst PrCs in the game....


Acolyte of the skin CA
Apostle of Peace BoED
Arcane Archer DMG
Bereft ToM
Blighter CD
Bonded Summoner Mini
Brimstone Speaker ToM
Cavestalker (Druid entry) DotU
Defiant PlH
Dirgesinger LM
Duelist DMG
Entropomancer CD
Evangelist CD
Eye of Lolth DotU
Fochlucan Lyrist (unless Evasion is gained without dips, then Up One Tier) CAdv
Forest Master F&P
Green Star Adept CA
Incarnum Blade MoI
Insidious Corruptor (Arcane Spellcaster entry) DotU
Lifedrinker BoVD
Master of the Unseen Hand CW
Metamind (w/o capstone abuse) XPH
Mindbender (except for 1 level dips) CA
Mindspy CW
Necrocarnate (w/o infinite essentia abuse) MoI
Ollam CAdv
Reaping Mauler CW
Solar Channeler Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde
Spinemeld Warrior (incarnum entry) MoI
Talon of Tiamat Drc
True Necromancer LM
Wavekeeper Stormwrack
Witchborn Binder MoI
Wonderworker BoED
Yathrinshee PGtF

I'd debate Wonderworker as worthless unless you already have 9th level spells and few spell slots (read; Sublime Chord 10) or going Epic. It's one of the few PrCs (aside from the bipolar Dragon Disciple) that grants spell slots; measured well, you can end up with more spell slots than usual. If you go Epic (just in case you want to), you lose something that a feat can replace pretty well, but you get up to 7 spell slots (and three of them of your highest level, to boot). It becomes hilarious if you get 10th or 11th level spell slots (get 10th level spells through Sanctum Spell! Then, by Wonderworker 3, you get 12th level spell slots. Might...need to question whether that tactic works or not, though)

It is pointless for psions, though. Power point progression is horrible, though you *do* get a few more points than usual post-epic.

Is that list taken from the list of tier -2 prestige classes on the PrC Tier list? It seems familiar, what with the format... Or maybe Tier -1 and Tier -2; I don't recall Tier -+0 in the list, tho.

faceroll
2010-03-16, 02:50 AM
You have caster-progression classes on this list at all?
Weird.

Yeah, I don't get it. Wizard5/cleric5/ mystic theurge 10 is better than warblade 20, and everyone gushes over warblades.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 03:24 AM
I'd debate Wonderworker as worthless unless you already have 9th level spells and few spell slots (read; Sublime Chord 10) or going Epic. It's one of the few PrCs (aside from the bipolar Dragon Disciple) that grants spell slots; measured well, you can end up with more spell slots than usual. If you go Epic (just in case you want to), you lose something that a feat can replace pretty well, but you get up to 7 spell slots (and three of them of your highest level, to boot). It becomes hilarious if you get 10th or 11th level spell slots (get 10th level spells through Sanctum Spell! Then, by Wonderworker 3, you get 12th level spell slots. Might...need to question whether that tactic works or not, though)

It is pointless for psions, though. Power point progression is horrible, though you *do* get a few more points than usual post-epic.

Is that list taken from the list of tier -2 prestige classes on the PrC Tier list? It seems familiar, what with the format... Or maybe Tier -1 and Tier -2; I don't recall Tier -+0 in the list, tho.
That's the "Down Two" category from the current version, yes. The "Down One" category is several times longer.

I've analysed Wonderworker here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5093.msg219800#msg219800), and come to similar conclusions. It gets its ranking because it sucks at what it's intended to do (give more Exalted feats), and near-worthless at the point where it becomes available. You're right that it can be very good for a Cleric17 looking to maximize his 9th level spells though, and is even better in epic. However, we don't generally count epic for these purposes.


Yeah, I don't get it. Wizard5/cleric5/ mystic theurge 10 is better than warblade 20, and everyone gushes over warblades.
1) Mystic Theurge is not on that list.

2) W5/C5/MT10 is significantly worse than W10 or C10. The fact that it's still competitive is beside the point. The power comes from the base classes; the PRC itself stinks. Or, by way of analogy: a Planar Sheppard could take Combat Casting and Endurance and still break the game, but that doesn't make those feats good, it just means an already-powerful character can take them and still be able to function.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-16, 03:26 AM
Yeah, I don't get it. Wizard5/cleric5/ mystic theurge 10 is better than warblade 20, and everyone gushes over warblades.

I'd prefer Wizard 3 / Cleric 7 / MT 10, personally, as that way, you'll actually get level 9 spells.

faceroll
2010-03-16, 03:33 AM
I'd prefer Wizard 3 / Cleric 7 / MT 10, personally, as that way, you'll actually get level 9 spells.

My point was that even with 8th level spells, you're still better than half the classes in the game. With moderate to heavy feat investment, you can get 9th level spells on the wizard side.

Emmerask
2010-03-16, 03:36 AM
This has to be the winner. It's so bad that even one of my newbie friends who played a druid who ran around firing heavy crossbows and waterballs (it deals damage! Ok, subdual damage, but yay nuke!) looked at the class and understood it sucked.

Hmmm well as a blighter you could actually get faster access to 9th level spells (level 15 to be exact 5 druid + 10 blighter) compared to druid level 17.

Is there some addition to the spelllist in some book? because the list is pretty short (and not that good)^^ Or maybe use some tricks to get more spells ? then the prestige class would actually be good although you loose some nice druid stuff :smallsmile:

faceroll
2010-03-16, 03:37 AM
1) Mystic Theurge is not on that list.

Whatever, my point still stands.


2) W5/C5/MT10 is significantly worse than W10 or C10. The fact that it's still competitive is beside the point. The power comes from the base classes; the PRC itself stinks. Or, by way of analogy: a Planar Sheppard could take Combat Casting and Endurance and still break the game, but that doesn't make those feats good, it just means an already-powerful character can take them and still be able to function.

That's a terrible analogy. If taking combat casting or endurance progressed the most broken aspect of the game, then they would be broken. Planar Shepard is broken because it progresses broken elements of game design AND makes them more broken.

Imagine if you were in front of a judge for robbery, and the judge frowns at you and says, "sonofzeal, 10,000 dollars is a lot of dollars to steal," and you reply "yeah, but at least I didn't burn his house down." Like wtf man, what sort of defense is that?

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 03:46 AM
Whatever, my point still stands.
I have absolutely no idea what your point is.


That's a terrible analogy. If taking combat casting or endurance progressed the most broken aspect of the game, then they would be broken. Planar Shepard is broken because it progresses broken elements of game design AND makes them more broken.

Imagine if you were in front of a judge for robbery, and the judge frowns at you and says, "sonofzeal, 10,000 dollars is a lot of dollars to steal," and you reply "yeah, but at least I didn't burn his house down." Like wtf man, what sort of defense is that?
And you've completely missed mine.

Wiz20 is superior to basic MT builds. Therefor MT is an inferior PrC class, because it hurts rather than helps, even if the character is still playable.

Planar Sheppard with decent feat choices is superior to Planar Sheppard with Combat Casting and Endurance. They're still sucky feats, even if the character is ungodly powerful.

You can't say "well I can use it and still be powerful" because someone overpowered enough can use anything and still be powerful. If Wiz5/Clr5/MT5 is more powerful that Warblade, that's because Wizard and Cleric are powerful enough to compensate for the mediocrity of MT.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-16, 03:47 AM
That's the "Down Two" category from the current version, yes. The "Down One" category is several times longer.

I've analysed Wonderworker here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5093.msg219800#msg219800), and come to similar conclusions. It gets its ranking because it sucks at what it's intended to do (give more Exalted feats), and near-worthless at the point where it becomes available. You're right that it can be very good for a Cleric17 looking to maximize his 9th level spells though, and is even better in epic. However, we don't generally count epic for these purposes.

I'd say that, but you only get two extra feats and a bit more skill points in exchange for staying on the Cleric side. I don't say that choosing the right exalted feats won't do anything (it all depends on which feats you decide to get). You get exactly the same amount of spell slots a Cleric would get, except that you can add those to 8th and 9th level spells and get much bigger benefits along with Heighten Spell and...well, more 8th level spells (about 4 more instead of a mere 1 or 2 plus the rest on weaker-level spells).


I'd prefer Wizard 3 / Cleric 7 / MT 10, personally, as that way, you'll actually get level 9 spells.

Why not Wizard 5/Mindbender 1/Another Arcane PrC 1/Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 10? You get 9th level arcane spells, telepathy, 7th level divine spells and lots of stuff to do (albeit delayed).

faceroll
2010-03-16, 03:56 AM
I have absolutely no idea what your point is.

1/2 caster prcs still get you 8th level spells, which are better than just about everything.


And you've completely missed mine.

Nope, I haven't. I disagree with how you're using the +1/-1 metric for prestige classes.


Wiz20 is superior to basic MT builds. Therefor MT is an inferior PrC class, because it hurts rather than helps, even if the character is still playable.

It's inferior to a full spell casting class, sure, but it's better than virtually every prestige class in, say, complete warrior. Greenstar adept or Entropomancer are better than most (all?) prestige classes in comp war, by simple virtue that they progress casting.


Planar Sheppard with decent feat choices is superior to Planar Sheppard with Combat Casting and Endurance. They're still sucky feats, even if the character is ungodly powerful.

Yeah, I read that the first time. And it's not like that all. It's like having two feats, one gives you +1 to casting spells, the other gives you +2 to casting spells. One is certainly better than the other, but because +2 is more than +1, +1 doesn't somehow become not broke.


You can't say "well I can use it and still be powerful" because someone overpowered enough can use anything and still be powerful. If Wiz5/Clr5/MT5 is more powerful that Warblade, that's because Wizard and Cleric are powerful enough to compensate for the mediocrity of MT.

I'm not arguing that wizard5/fighter15 makes fighter great. I'm saying even half progression of the best progression is still really, really good. Since there are full progressions out there, it makes it a sub-optimal choice, in the same way embezzling 1,000,000 dollars is sub-optimal to embezzling 1,000,000,000 dollars.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 04:12 AM
Nope, I haven't. I disagree with how you're using the +1/-1 metric for prestige classes.
Excuse me? I defined the metric. I came up with it, posted it, got feedback, worked with it, created the entire system. I MADE the metric. And you're disagreeing with me about how I'm using my metric? Seriously?

Look, I very deliberately defined it so that PrCs that hurt their entry classes are poor, while PrCs that boost their entry classes are good. This is intuitive; Blighter is a horrible PrCs even though it gives spellcasting, and Soulbow is a great PrC because it helps salvage Soulknives in a big way. Perpetuating the pissing contest between casters and noncasters is meaningless to me; I wanted to make something that could help people find what's good for them and avoid what's bad for them. A lot of people have put a lot of effort into cataloging what's out there, using my metric, and as far as I've ever seen it's far and above the most sophisticated and complete PrC rating system publicly available for 3.5.

If you want to post your own system for measuring PrCs, go right ahead. I won't stop you. I'll even help, if it shows promise. But until then, I'm going to be happy using my own definitions and my own system.

faceroll
2010-03-16, 04:38 AM
Excuse me? I defined the metric. I came up with it, posted it, got feedback, worked with it, created the entire system. I MADE the metric. And you're disagreeing with me about how I'm using my metric? Seriously?

Yah dood. You want some salami with those italics? We could make a sandwhich out of all that slanted indignation.


Look, I very deliberately defined it so that PrCs that hurt their entry classes are poor, while PrCs that boost their entry classes are good.

Exactly. This is why I think you're misusing your metric. In terms of "is x or y broken," the relationship is different than "how does x + y compare to x + z?" You're metric is basically (x+y)/2x > (x+z)/2x. You're standardizing, which is an incredibly useful and powerful tool, but I think it's inappropriate for this pissing contest.


This is intuitive; Blighter is a horrible PrCs even though it gives spellcasting, and Soulbow is a great PrC because it helps salvage Soulknives in a big way. Perpetuating the pissing contest between casters and noncasters is meaningless to me; I wanted to make something that could help people find what's good for them and avoid what's bad for them. A lot of people have put a lot of effort into cataloging what's out there, using my metric, and as far as I've ever seen it's far and above the most sophisticated and complete PrC rating system publicly available for 3.5.

If you want to post your own system for measuring PrCs, go right ahead. I won't stop you. I'll even help, if it shows promise. But until then, I'm going to be happy using my own definitions and my own system.

Your system is great for optimizing, but in doing so, doesn't address the fundamental design flaws in D&D (which, I agree, don't need to be addressed in discussions of optimization). If someone said "hey, I am going to play a wizard 10/entropomancer10", we could tell him that compared to wizard 20, he is making a very, very poor choice, but in terms of absolute power, he could be making worse decisions.

taltamir
2010-03-16, 04:51 AM
you're = You Are
Your = that which belongs to you (aka, "your system")


Your system is great for optimizing, but in doing so, doesn't address the fundamental design flaws in D&D (which, I agree, don't need to be addressed in discussions of optimization). If someone said "hey, I am going to play a wizard 10/entropomancer10", we could tell him that compared to wizard 20, he is making a very, very poor choice, but in terms of absolute power, he could be making worse decisions.

And? his system is very useful and sensible.
if he wanted to use the system to shoehorn the pissing contest between casters and non casters, he would have wasted all his time because he could just go ahead and say "fullcasting PrCs good, non casters bad, non casting PrCs for non casting base classes worst" and be done with it. His system is good as is.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 04:52 AM
Yah dood. You want some salami with those italics? We could make a sandwhich out of all that slanted indignation.



Exactly. This is why I think you're misusing your metric. In terms of "is x or y broken," the relationship is different than "how does x + y compare to x + z?" You're metric is basically (x+y)/2x > (x+z)/2x. You're standardizing, which is an incredibly useful and powerful tool, but I think it's inappropriate for this pissing contest.



Your system is great for optimizing, but in doing so, doesn't address the fundamental design flaws in D&D (which, I agree, don't need to be addressed in discussions of optimization). If someone said "hey, I am going to play a wizard 10/entropomancer10", we could tell him that compared to wizard 20, he is making a very, very poor choice, but in terms of absolute power, he could be making worse decisions.
You're welcome to put your money where your mouth is and try to make your own system, with your own definitions, and start rating things by it. Until you do, I will continue to refer to Blighter and Entropomancer and Green Star Adept and True Necromancer as terrible PrCs, because I believe they utterly fail to do what they set out to do, and that they drag characters down. I believe that's what makes PrCs horrible; they aren't standalone classes that function on their own merit, they're additions to previous characters that were already doing just fine, or more than fine, or less than fine, without them.

If you really think I'm wrong, make your own system. Define your terms, defend your logic, and see what people think.

faceroll
2010-03-16, 05:02 AM
you're = You Are
Your = that which belongs to you (aka, "your system")

What's the point of this? I misuse your in what, one post, and you have to give me a grammar lesson? Did you miss all the places where I used it correctly? Do you know where your shift key is?


You're welcome to put your money where your mouth is and try to make your own system, with your own definitions, and start rating things by it. Until you do, I will continue to refer to Blighter and Entropomancer and Green Star Adept and True Necromancer as terrible PrCs, because I believe they utterly fail to do what they set out to do, and that they drag characters down. I believe that's what makes PrCs horrible; they aren't standalone classes that function on their own merit, they're additions to previous characters that were already doing just fine, or more than fine, or less than fine, without them.

If you really think I'm wrong, make your own system. Define your terms, defend your logic, and see what people think.

I'm just saying "worst prestige class in the game" shouldn't include anything with spellcasting. "Worst standardized prestige class in the game", sure. But in terms of absolutes, I don't think it's right to standardize. And can we argue without all the ego? The whole appeal to authority thing is kinda lame.

taltamir
2010-03-16, 05:07 AM
What's the point of this? I misuse your in what, one post, and you have to give me a grammar lesson? Did you miss all the places where I used it correctly? Do you know where your shift key is?
Don't be insulted, anyone can make a mistake; and for most people english isn't their native language. I am correcting you because you repeatedly made the same mistake. Now you will not make that mistake again. I will appreciate it if people correct me as well so that I learn.

faceroll
2010-03-16, 05:18 AM
Don't be insulted, anyone can make a mistake; and for most people english isn't their native language. I am correcting you because you repeatedly made the same mistake. Now you will not make that mistake again. I will appreciate it if people correct me as well so that I learn.

I have made the mistake exactly once in this whole thread.
There's a special place in hell for inconsequential grammar nazis, did you know that? :smallfurious::smallfurious::smallfurious:

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 05:26 AM
I'm just saying "worst prestige class in the game" shouldn't include anything with spellcasting. "Worst standardized prestige class in the game", sure. But in terms of absolutes, I don't think it's right to standardize. And can we argue without all the ego? The whole appeal to authority thing is kinda lame.
Then don't talk about me misusing "the" metric, in what very much appears to be in reference to my own. Saying I'm not using my own metric correctly is arrogant in the extreme, and I think I have every right to be offended.

I maintain that when I say "worst PrC class", I means "the PrC that is worst to take", not "the PrC that the worst possible character takes", as the latter has a whole bunch of other confounding factors. I will recognize that you mean the reverse (or something like it), but that doesn't change my opinion or my definitions. By my definitions then, which are a matter of public record, "worst prestige class in the game" can very well include things with spellcasting.

What then, by your standard, is the "worst PrC in the game"? What is your metric, how do you measure?



(Oh, and "appeal to authority" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority) is an entirely separate thing. Saying "well Obama says PrCs should be rated thusly", when Obama has no qualification to talk about PrCs (despite his qualification in other areas), that's an appeal to authority. Saying "I'm qualified to make statements about the system I designed" isn't even in the same ballpark.)

faceroll
2010-03-16, 05:38 AM
Then don't talk about me misusing "the" metric, in what very much appears to be in reference to my own. Saying I'm not using my own metric correctly is arrogant in the extreme, and I think I have every right to be offended.

I'm sorry your offended, but the being the inventor of something does not preclude you from misusing you're invention.


I maintain that when I say "worst PrC class", I means "the PrC that is worst to take", not "the PrC that the worst possible character takes", as the latter has a whole bunch of other confounding factors. I will recognize that you mean the reverse (or something like it), but that doesn't change my opinion or my definitions. By my definitions then, which are a matter of public record, "worst prestige class in the game" can very well include things with spellcasting.

What then, by your standard, is the "worst PrC in the game"? What is your metric, how do you measure?

I'd rank by how closely you can progress/mimic full casting for a system that measures ultimate power rather than power compared to base class. I think the worst prestige class would be something like dwarven defender. It mostly aggravates the problems of being melee. It be more or less how much +casting the class gives you. I want to say something about yore system, but I think I'm out of ways to misuse the second person possessive. I guess I'll just say that in ranking the absolute power of prc's (and I agree with how problematic that would be), putting warhulk and incantatrix in the same class rubs me the wrong way. I readily agree that both are a +2 to their respective base classes, but they are still like 5 tiers apart (for the base class system).


(Oh, and "appeal to authority" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority) is an entirely separate thing. Saying "well Obama says PrCs should be rated thusly", when Obama has no qualification to talk about PrCs (despite his qualification in other areas), that's an appeal to authority. Saying "I'm qualified to make statements about the system I designed" isn't even in the same ballpark.)

What do you call it when you say "hey, nice painting, but I think this is a little foreshortened," and the artist says "you try painting a masterpiece everyone loves, then!"?

Optimystik
2010-03-16, 05:43 AM
I agree with sonofzeal actually - Prestige class effectiveness has to be measured by the base class' power, not absolute power. Saying Green Star Adept is a better PrC than Soulbow because it's riding a better chassis (Wizard vs. Soulknife) is simply not a fair statement. By salvaging a bad class, Soulbow is doing a better job as a PrC than one that degrades a good class.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 06:06 AM
I'm sorry your offended, but the being the inventor of something does not preclude you from misusing you're invention.
I am not misusing my invention. Have you even read it? I am judging exactly the way it lays out. What I'm failing to do is to use some other system that you'd prefer.


I'd rank by how closely you can progress/mimic full casting for a system that measures ultimate power rather than power compared to base class. I think the worst prestige class would be something like dwarven defender. It mostly aggravates the problems of being melee. It be more or less how much +casting the class gives you. I want to say something about yore system, but I think I'm out of ways to misuse the second person possessive.
There are literally hundreds of PrCs in the game. The number that give no spellcasting whatsoever is huge.

Also, I'd say your maxim is a bit flawed. "Vigilante" grants spellcasting but stinks, and "Soul Eater" doesn't grant spellcasting but rocks. Even just in base classes, I'd say Barbarian is a better class than Healer, despite the latter getting full spellcasting with good spells-per-day and free access to its spell list and the former getting not even a (Su).

Dwarven Defender's alright though, as he's only "trapped" in place as long as he wants to be (and fatigue is eminently manageable). I'd say Reaping Mauler and Duelist are worse; I'd rather fight a Duelist or Reaping Mauler than a Dwarven Defender (since he actually does a pretty good job at shrugging off magic too), and I'd rather have a Dwarven Defender on my team. We'd just make him walk first.


What do you call it when you say "hey, nice painting, but I think this is a little foreshortened," and the artist says "you try painting a masterpiece everyone loves, then!"?
I'd call it a challenge. This is something that should, theoretically, be within your ability to do. It shouldn't take you a prohibitive amount of time or effort, and you don't need any specialized training.

Also, I heard no "nice painting" or even an "I think". What I got was "you're doing it wrong". If I came up to Picasso and told him he was misusing Cubism, I'd expect a face full of paint, and I think he'd be entirely within his rights to demand I try to do better.

Delta
2010-03-16, 06:12 AM
I'd rank by how closely you can progress/mimic full casting for a system that measures ultimate power rather than power compared to base class.

So, say, for example a Wizard PrC giving no special features at all while granting full casting would, in your book, still be superior to a melee PrC granting a ton of useful features, simply due to the fact that a caster is superior to a melee fighter, even though taking the first PrC would be significantly worse than just staying a pure Wizard?

Although of course you can judge PrCs that way, I don't think it will lead to any useful results. A PrC IMHO cannot reasonably be judged on an absolute power scale, because it can only exist in a build in combination with a base class, so it should always be judged in a kind of relation to said base class.

Skaven
2010-03-16, 06:18 AM
Ruathar (RotW122) - medium BAB, D6 HD, 2 good saves, 3/3 casting. get all knowledge skills and survival which allows the warlock to qualify for Sentinal of Bharrai (BoED69) at level 8 instead of 13 (take a 1 level dip in elf friend) without sacrificing caster progression.

The abilities it grants are:
LVL1: elves magically recognize you are one and are thus are friendly by default unless they see you do something evil.
LVL1: get one time gift of ~1000gp item of their choice from a limited list (which would be rude of you to sell).
LVL2: Low light vision
LVL2: racial bonus +2 to spot, search, & listen (stacks with Elven keen senses if already an elf)
LVL3: +1 sacred bonus to attack and saves while outside, aboveground, at night.
LVL3: Live 50% longer before dying of old age.

Basically, the abilities utterly suck. I'd rather take 3 more levels of sorcerer than elf friend, 3 more levels of familiar progression are better than the "abilities" it offers.


I would much rather get this than 3 sorcerer levels. More skills better HP, better attack bonus, 2 good saves.. plus some other things.

I forget my familiar is even there most of the time. Its useless for the most part.. in fact often a liability. Sometimes I don't even get a familiar and don't miss it. Sorcerer is a blank slate of a class, and bonus spellcasting is always welcome..

Optimystik
2010-03-16, 06:23 AM
I forget my familiar is even there most of the time. Its useless for the most part.. in fact often a liability. Sometimes I don't even get a familiar and don't miss it. Sorcerer is a blank slate of a class, and bonus spellcasting is always welcome..

Better yet, you want to dump your familiar. The Obtain Familiar feat is keyed off of CL, making it better than the actual class feature. You can pick any PrC that advances casting without worrying about familiar progression, AND you get a useful ACF in place of the regular familiar, especially as a wizard.

Even as a sorcerer, you can go with Metamagic Specialist or grab that Forlorn flaw (Dragon?) and trade your familiar in for a much-needed feat - which you can then use to pick up your familiar again and join any PrC you want.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-16, 06:25 AM
Especially since familiar advancement often is more of a liability than a benefit.

Petrocorus
2010-03-16, 06:49 AM
Better yet, you want to dump your familiar. The Obtain Familiar feat is keyed off of CL, making it better than the actual class feature. You can pick any PrC that advances casting without worrying about familiar progression, AND you get a useful ACF in place of the regular familiar, especially as a wizard.


Does this work for generalist wizard?


And for speaking of the Theurge, Cleric 3/ Wiz 1 / MT 16 with precocious apprentice for qualifying gives Cleric CL 19 and Wiz CL 17. I think it's pretty good and RAW?

Optimystik
2010-03-16, 06:59 AM
Does this work for generalist wizard?

I can't seem to find any ACFs that allow them to give up their familiar actually.


And for speaking of the Theurge, Cleric 3/ Wiz 1 / MT 16 with precocious apprentice for qualifying gives Cleric CL 19 and Wiz CL 17. I think it's pretty good and RAW?

MT only has 10 levels - you can't go beyond that until epic, which you won't be at Clvl 14.

Petrocorus
2010-03-16, 07:03 AM
MT only has 10 levels - you can't go beyond that until epic, which you won't be at Clvl 14.

Aaargh, i thought it was possible before epic.
So, it's a dead end?

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 07:10 AM
Aaargh, i thought it was possible before epic.
So, it's a dead end?
MT is often a dead end, yes. Geomancer and True Necromancer sometimes help fill that gap a little bit, and Arcane Heirophant if you were going Druid/Wizard, but otherwise... yeah. It's rough.

Petrocorus
2010-03-16, 07:39 AM
MT is often a dead end, yes. Geomancer and True Necromancer sometimes help fill that gap a little bit, and Arcane Heirophant if you were going Druid/Wizard, but otherwise... yeah. It's rough.

So, that's only really useful to take after arcane hierophant.

SpikeFightwicky
2010-03-16, 08:08 AM
Actually, a holy symbol could be your quarterstaff or one of the other simple weapons you're allowed to possess. It never says exactly what a holy symbol is, so it's not implausible that say a god of traveling would have a quarterstaff as a symbol, etc etc.

But once your quarterstaff is a holy symbol, it becomes a wooden holy symbol, and is worth 1 gp. :smallbiggrin:

Also, is Dragon Disciple not considered bad (from your list)? It seems like a lot of work (and dead levels of sorc or bard) to get the half-dragon template over the course of 10 levels.

Math_Mage
2010-03-16, 08:10 AM
I'm sorry your offended, but the being the inventor of something does not preclude you from misusing you're invention.


Which does not lead to the conclusion that sonofzeal is misusing his invention--that is a fallacy falling somewhere between proving the negative and denying the antecedent. (Aside--does anyone know a technical name for this? In response to a specific claim, it is argued that the claim is not always true in the general case, so must be false in the specific case.) Nor is this what you have been arguing, contrary to your claim; you have been saying that sonofzeal's system is wrong, not that he is misusing his system.

Also, the "I'm sorry you're offended" line is a poor apology. Understandable; you think you're in the right. But the next apology you give should be for something you've done, rather than for someone else's attitude towards your actions.


I'd rank by how closely you can progress/mimic full casting for a system that measures ultimate power rather than power compared to base class. I think the worst prestige class would be something like dwarven defender. It mostly aggravates the problems of being melee. It be more or less how much +casting the class gives you. I want to say something about yore system, but I think I'm out of ways to misuse the second person possessive. I guess I'll just say that in ranking the absolute power of prc's (and I agree with how problematic that would be), putting warhulk and incantatrix in the same class rubs me the wrong way. I readily agree that both are a +2 to their respective base classes, but they are still like 5 tiers apart (for the base class system).

But this is a poor way to actually *compare* prestige classes across builds, as it does not illuminate prestige class quality so much as base class quality. Returning to formal speech, you are committing the fallacy of division, saying that because a caster is better than a non-caster, a casting prestige class is better than a noncasting prestige class. Ignoring the problems with the premise, this is still faulty logic.


What do you call it when you say "hey, nice painting, but I think this is a little foreshortened," and the artist says "you try painting a masterpiece everyone loves, then!"?

You know, I knew the name once, but it's completely slipped my mind. The implication that only experts are qualified to judge the output of experts is a very specific kind of reverse ad hominem--and yes, it *is* very closely related to argument from authority.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 08:31 AM
You know, I knew the name once, but it's completely slipped my mind. The implication that only experts are qualified to judge the output of experts is a very specific kind of reverse ad hominem--and yes, it *is* very closely related to argument from authority.
I suppose one could consider it a form of Credentialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credentialism). What I said though, was (I thought) more along the lines of "if you don't like it, fix it", which is a bit different than his characterization and not really Credentialist, imo.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-16, 08:43 AM
Dwarven Defender's alright though, as he's only "trapped" in place as long as he wants to be (and fatigue is eminently manageable). I'd say Reaping Mauler and Duelist are worse; I'd rather fight a Duelist or Reaping Mauler than a Dwarven Defender (since he actually does a pretty good job at shrugging off magic too), and I'd rather have a Dwarven Defender on my team. We'd just make him walk first.


But I fixed the Reaping Mauler issue: take Leviathan Hunter first so you can get that feat as a bonus feat so you can be larger than meduim.

It doesn't make the class awesome, but at least you can be larger and keep your stuff (without LH Prc you can't be larger than meduim due to feat Preqs).
I made a thread about 2 month ago Or something. I'm sorta suprised none of CO people thought of it: I seemed to be the 1st one to fix it.

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 08:57 AM
But I fixed the Reaping Mauler issue: take Leviathan Hunter first so you can get that feat as a bonus feat so you can be larger than meduim.

It doesn't make the class awesome, but at least you can be larger and keep your stuff (without LH Prc you can't be larger than meduim due to feat Preqs).
Most classes can be improved through op-fu, and PrCs more than most when a lot of their downsides are tied to requirements that can be mitigated or bypassed. I'll agree LH/RM is a big step up from the standard entry, but I'd still say the PrC is horrible in that, by itself, it completely fails to do what it's intended to do.

I have every respect for people who find ways to make horrible things effective though.

Kylarra
2010-03-16, 09:53 AM
But once your quarterstaff is a holy symbol, it becomes a wooden holy symbol, and is worth 1 gp. :smallbiggrin:
Interestingly enough though, it doesn't matter if it also counts as a wooden holy symbol, because there's nothing saying that you can't have wealth, so long as that wealth is represented in simple weapons. :smallbiggrin:

Simple weapons are explicitly allowed to be carried, so the fact that it's also your holy symbol is just gravy.

Well the real solution is to use a steel weapon, because there's no price listing for a steel holy symbol, so thus it can't cost anything. :smallwink:

Optimystik
2010-03-16, 09:57 AM
Well the real solution is to use a metal weapon, because there's no price listing for a metal holy symbol, so thus it can't cost anything. :smallwink:

Silver is a metal :smalltongue:

Kylarra
2010-03-16, 09:57 AM
Silver is a metal :smalltongue:Yep, but silvered weapons cost more. :smallwink:

Cyclocone
2010-03-16, 10:04 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't you just take Worldly Focus?
I know, Feat Tax. But it gets you into Sovereign Speaker, so meh.

Jayabalard
2010-03-16, 10:38 AM
Some of the people in this thread are getting a bit overwrought. Let's just pause. Let's just take a step back. No, I was wrong, I'm sorry, take a step forward. Now, take a step back. Step forward. Back. And then we're cha-cha-ing!


Which does not lead to the conclusion that sonofzeal is misusing his invention--that is a fallacy falling somewhere between proving the negative and denying the antecedent. (Aside--does anyone know a technical name for this? In response to a specific claim, it is argued that the claim is not always true in the general case, so must be false in the specific case.)Perhaps one of the propositional fallacies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Propositional_fallacies)?

Often those sorts of arguments wind up being a form of false dilemma.

Gametime
2010-03-16, 11:17 AM
Some of the people in this thread are getting a bit overwrought. Let's just pause. Let's just take a step back. No, I was wrong, I'm sorry, take a step forward. Now, take a step back. Step forward. Back. And then we're cha-cha-ing!



I prefer to jump to the left, myself. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yarYjuN-m8I)

At any rate, personal issues aside, my understanding was that Sonofzeal's purpose in "ranking" the prestige classes was to make it clear which ones were worthwhile to enter and which were not. Saying that classes which advance spellcasting are generally better than those which do not is true, but utterly useless for this purpose; even if a Wizard/Green Star Adept ends up more powerful than, say, a Paladin/Hellreaver, almost no wizard is ever going to want to take GSA because it's worse than the basic option.

At a certain point, a prestige class ranking based on absolute power just becomes a reposting of the base class tiers, with maybe an extra few tiers added to compensate the Incantatrixes and Risen Martyrs of the world.

SpikeFightwicky
2010-03-16, 12:32 PM
Interestingly enough though, it doesn't matter if it also counts as a wooden holy symbol, because there's nothing saying that you can't have wealth, so long as that wealth is represented in simple weapons. :smallbiggrin:

Simple weapons are explicitly allowed to be carried, so the fact that it's also your holy symbol is just gravy.

Well the real solution is to use a steel weapon, because there's no price listing for a steel holy symbol, so thus it can't cost anything. :smallwink:

Then that would be awesome! If you can snag smite, use your holy-symbol staff for extra emphasis :smallbiggrin:

Heck, even if you don't have smite that would be awesome.

Tyndmyr
2010-03-16, 12:43 PM
Well the real solution is to use a steel weapon, because there's no price listing for a steel holy symbol, so thus it can't cost anything. :smallwink:

Heh, I wouldn't want to set a precedent that "anything not listed is free".

God only knows what horrible results would come of that.

Kylarra
2010-03-16, 12:47 PM
Heh, I wouldn't want to set a precedent that "anything not listed is free".

God only knows what horrible results would come of that.You mean like eschew materials -> Ice assassin on gods? :smallwink:

We already have an unfortunate precedent there.

Tyndmyr
2010-03-16, 12:53 PM
I agree with sonofzeal actually - Prestige class effectiveness has to be measured by the base class' power, not absolute power. Saying Green Star Adept is a better PrC than Soulbow because it's riding a better chassis (Wizard vs. Soulknife) is simply not a fair statement. By salvaging a bad class, Soulbow is doing a better job as a PrC than one that degrades a good class.

This is the only possible way to rank PrCs. Otherwise, if you include the power of the base classes, you face the obvious dilemma of "Which base class?". There are a near-infinite amount of possible builds and combinations, trying to definitively measure the power of them all is ludicrous.

It's simply easiest and most useful to rate PrCs on what they, themselves provide.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-16, 03:08 PM
I prefer to jump to the left, myself. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yarYjuN-m8I)


But you don't get anywhere. It is the Timewarp after all.

Pluto
2010-03-16, 04:51 PM
This is the only possible way to rank PrCs. Otherwise, if you include the power of the base classes, you face the obvious dilemma of "Which base class?". There are a near-infinite amount of possible builds and combinations, trying to definitively measure the power of them all is ludicrous.
True, but by ranking the PrC's in terms of comparison to a specific presupposed base, the rankings themselves become fairly meaningless.


I mean, take Arcane Archer.

You enter it with a Fighter and a Sorcerer dip and you get a few new tricks, some more skills and you get a +5 weapon a little sooner. It's not great, but it's not terrible.

If you enter with a Wizard and you take all ten levels, what you get is terrible.

If you enter with a 17th level Wizard and use Imbue Arrow to abuse Time Stop, you could very well wind up stronger than a straight Wizard.



Likewise, look at the Metamind.

Wilder/Metamind without Practiced Manifester is pretty bad, but it still has more freedom with its PP caps than pretty much anything else within the EPH.

Ardent/Metamind is perfectly viable.

Psion/Metamind with Practiced Manifester isn't even too bad. Most Psions IME spend most of their time manifesting augmented low-level Powers. The Metamind augments hard.



Or Mindbender.

It's definitely weaker than straight wizard or Beguiler.

But with Warlock entry, it trades some BA and Dark Invocations for a souped-up Dominate Monsters and Telepathy. It's not a great trade, but it works.

A Hexblade runs out of class abilities at about the time it can enter Mindbender and fading its combat abilities out for Mindbender's enchantment SLA's can let a character stay useful into high levels at perhaps a slightly higher power level.





I think the only way to actually have such a metric provide a useful and meaningful result is to individually assess every combination. Which is frankly unreasonable. I don't mean any disrepect to Zeal, but I find his tiers to be too generalized to be useful.

(And when looking for the Worst PrC, I'd look for the one that made the worst character, rather than the one that would be the worst choice for a character, but whatever. That part's not really important so long as people state which mentality they're working under.)

Gametime
2010-03-16, 05:21 PM
I think the ranking of prestige classes is useful so long as you keep in mind that the "default" entry is assumed for almost every ranking. Entering as early as possible (or nearly as early as possible) from a class or combination or classes that either most easily meets the prerequisites or, more rarely, best synergizes with the prestige class's features.

On the other hand, no ranking of classes or prestige classes or what have you is ever going to be truly useful as a shorthand for "good" or "bad". The fact that the "best" classes almost all have an insane variety of abilities to pick from only compounds the issue that one wizard need not be very much like another.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-16, 05:33 PM
Thunder Guide - Worst PrC ever?

One of its class abilities is somebody writing a newspaper article about you.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-16, 05:35 PM
I have absolutely no idea what your point is.


And you've completely missed mine.

Wiz20 is superior to basic MT builds. Therefor MT is an inferior PrC class, because it hurts rather than helps, even if the character is still playable

Not true.

Basic MT built: Wiz 3/Archivist 3/MT 10/ Archmage 3/Random Casting PRC 1

Level 9 wizard spells, level 7 cleric spells. Allows for a wide variety of additional abilities. Take in Spell domain, for example, and have Anyspell, which gives even more wizard versatility, or or Inquisition domain, which provides dispel buffs.

The weakness of MT isn't in the class itself. The benefits it provides are strictly better than what wizard has. If you had a ACF that allowed you to trade wizard feats for Cleric spell advancement, very few people wouldn't take it.

The weakness lies in the requirements. The 3 levels of cleric in the build are what weakens it.

Let's look at the breakdown for MT levels:

{table=header]Level | Wizard spell level (Pure Wizard)/Cleric Spell level (Pure Wizard) | Wizard spell level (MT)/Cleric Spell level (MT)
6 | 3/0 | 2/2
7 | 4/0 | 2/2
8 | 4/0 | 3/3
9 | 5/0 | 3/3
10 | 5/0 | 4/4
11 | 6/0 | 4/4
12 | 6/0 | 5/5
13 | 7/0 | 5/5
14 | 7/0 | 6/6
15 | 8/0 | 6/6
16 | 8/0 | 7/7[/table]
(Note, table evaluation only goes to level 16, as that's the archetype of the MT's simplest entry path and progression.)
Yes, the Wizard has access to spells a level earlier. However, the MT has access to more. For example, a level 12 Wizard has access to level 6 wizard spells, such as True Seeing, Acid Fog, Wall of Iron, and Disintegrate (I hope nobody claims I'm picking the crappy level 6 spells, lol).

That same character, as a Theurge, has access to 5th level cleric spells, including True Seeing, Spell Resistance, Plane Shift (which the pure wizard will get at level 13), and Raise Dead.

Yeah, it's a tradeoff, but by the time you get several levels in Theurge, it really does bounce back from that initial hit of cleric levels.

With optimization, those requirements are lessened, bringing more light to the effectiveness of the MT's actual features.

Wiz 1 / Archivist 1 / MT 10

is a valid optimized build, using a bit of early entry, and, at level 12, will be casting the same spell level of wizard spells as a pure wizard.

Petrocorus
2010-03-16, 06:30 PM
With optimization, those requirements are lessened, bringing more light to the effectiveness of the MT's actual features.

Wiz 1 / Archivist 1 / MT 10

is a valid optimized build, using a bit of early entry, and, at level 12, will be casting the same spell level of wizard spells as a pure wizard.

What early entry tricks do you use?

Starbuck_II
2010-03-16, 06:33 PM
What early entry tricks do you use?

Focused Specialist Wiz 1 with Precocious Apprentice has multiple 2nd lv spells
or
Elven Generalist Wiz 1 with Precocious Apprentice has multiple 2nd lv spells

Says you need 2nd spells: you need to either
a) cast a 2nd lv spell
b) be able to cast more than 1 2nd lv spell

This fulfills both (so no one can dissent this method).

I'm not sure what lets him cast 2nd lv Divine though.

T.G. Oskar
2010-03-16, 06:47 PM
This is the only possible way to rank PrCs. Otherwise, if you include the power of the base classes, you face the obvious dilemma of "Which base class?". There are a near-infinite amount of possible builds and combinations, trying to definitively measure the power of them all is ludicrous.

It's simply easiest and most useful to rate PrCs on what they, themselves provide.

That's if you use Jaron's Tier system.

To measure the impact that a PrC has on a base class, the best method is the ToS tier system. Since it makes an analysis based on the build itself, it determines how the combination will fare. You can then separate the overall build into its constituent parts, and analyze each separately, then compare and contrast: how X class or X & Y classes cooperate with A PrC or A & B PrC, the boosting effect of feat choices, and the effect of magic items as complement. That way, you're nearing the reach of actual raw power of the build itself, not the raw power of the class (which depends in great deal on the player's skill) and you can determine the weight of each part. It is a much more potent analysis, IMO.

However, and to defend sonofzeal's creation: since to measure the actual effect requires to use a different tier system and then make much more complex calculations, sonofzeal's Tier system is well considered as a guideline on approximate effectiveness. If a PrC says it has "+2 to tier", then it's because, in estimation, the effect it will have over the tier of the constituent class will be more than good. It doesn't explain how exactly it'll do so, or else you'd have to use percentage and compare to a table, then determine at which exact point the percentage implies a rise in tiers, and that is far too complex to even consider.

Thurbane
2010-03-16, 09:16 PM
Yah dood. You want some salami with those italics? We could make a sandwhich out of all that slanted indignation.

There's a special place in hell for inconsequential grammar nazis, did you know that? :smallfurious::smallfurious::smallfurious:
Not to pour fuel on the fire, but these are two of the funniest comments I have ever read on these forums. I LOL for real. :smallbiggrin:

Thurbane
2010-03-16, 09:34 PM
BTW, everyone has different ways to play the game, and enjoys the game on different levels. While no one wants to deliberately play a useless chaarcter (well, OK, maybe some people do, for some reason), I personally believe that dissecting the mechanics of a game to the Nth degree does a great job of making it "un-fun" in general. It's like watching a "making of" a movie and seeing how all the effects are done - it can sometimes hurt your enjoyment, ot suspension of disbelief.

Char op is one thing, but when people spit venom at each other about a disagreement over one of the user-made ranking systems, the fun-loving gamer inside me dies a little each time.

For an example: we recently wrapped up a long running EttRoG game (over 18 months), in which the party consisted of a Monk, Fighter, Beguiler, Druid and Dragon Shaman. Despite reams of evidence to the contrary, the Monk and Fighter both managed very meaningful and consistent contributions to the adventure, both in and out of combat. The Druid often felt like he was "dragging the chain" in combat situations. And most of us felt the Beguiler was a little overpowered, if anything. This absolutely flies in the face of all the topics you read on the internet. It's obviously because some of the group really aren't optimizers, but that's my point. Some people run on the assumption that the game simply cannot be fun without fully optimized characters. My basic point is that you should never make assumptions about the group dynamic and play styles of groups that you've never met.

Of course, it's easy to sit back and assume my group are a bunch of n00bs, and are "doing it wrong", but the fact remains that we've had a lot of fun playing these characters for close to two years. Yes, we'd get our asses handed to us on a plate in tournament or inter-group PVP games, but since we don't engage in those activities, that's pretty much irrevelant to us.

There's nothing wrong with char-op in the slightest (thought I should add that in for when I'm hung, drawn and quartered for my comments, and have Stormwind forcibly hurled in my face), but my stance is that it's perfectly possible (for some people) to enjoy the game without min-maxing a character to infinity and back.

Thanks for your time, and let the slaughter commence! :smallbiggrin:

sonofzeal
2010-03-16, 11:07 PM
Not true.

Basic MT built: Wiz 3/Archivist 3/MT 10/ Archmage 3/Random Casting PRC 1

Level 9 wizard spells, level 7 cleric spells. Allows for a wide variety of additional abilities. Take in Spell domain, for example, and have Anyspell, which gives even more wizard versatility, or or Inquisition domain, which provides dispel buffs.

The weakness of MT isn't in the class itself. The benefits it provides are strictly better than what wizard has. If you had a ACF that allowed you to trade wizard feats for Cleric spell advancement, very few people wouldn't take it.

The weakness lies in the requirements. The 3 levels of cleric in the build are what weakens it.

Let's look at the breakdown for MT levels:

{table=header]Level | Wizard spell level (Pure Wizard)/Cleric Spell level (Pure Wizard) | Wizard spell level (MT)/Cleric Spell level (MT)
6 | 3/0 | 2/2
7 | 4/0 | 2/2
8 | 4/0 | 3/3
9 | 5/0 | 3/3
10 | 5/0 | 4/4
11 | 6/0 | 4/4
12 | 6/0 | 5/5
13 | 7/0 | 5/5
14 | 7/0 | 6/6
15 | 8/0 | 6/6
16 | 8/0 | 7/7[/table]
(Note, table evaluation only goes to level 16, as that's the archetype of the MT's simplest entry path and progression.)
Yes, the Wizard has access to spells a level earlier. However, the MT has access to more. For example, a level 12 Wizard has access to level 6 wizard spells, such as True Seeing, Acid Fog, Wall of Iron, and Disintegrate (I hope nobody claims I'm picking the crappy level 6 spells, lol).

That same character, as a Theurge, has access to 5th level cleric spells, including True Seeing, Spell Resistance, Plane Shift (which the pure wizard will get at level 13), and Raise Dead.

Yeah, it's a tradeoff, but by the time you get several levels in Theurge, it really does bounce back from that initial hit of cleric levels.
The problem I have with it is that it only "catches up" right at the end of the class, after putting you categorically behind for the rest of it. There's a "sweet spot" around levels 13-16 where you compare well, but unless you can find another dual-advancement to qualify for then you start rapidly tailing off as you continue to pay the price (three lost spellcasting levels) but don't gain any more benefits.

You start terrible in the 5-7 range, become merely poor in the 8-12 range, can claim rough parity in the levels 13-17 range, and then trail off in the 17-20 range as everyone else gets 9th level spells, and more of them, several levels before you.



With optimization, those requirements are lessened, bringing more light to the effectiveness of the MT's actual features.

Wiz 1 / Archivist 1 / MT 10

is a valid optimized build, using a bit of early entry, and, at level 12, will be casting the same spell level of wizard spells as a pure wizard.
Optimization can help. You'll notice that I acknowledge that - optimizer skill can do wonders for otherwise-poor options (like MT). Some of the early entries are highly suspect, but I very much like the Illumian method.

However, nothing short of Inspire Greatness + Psychic Reformation cheese will get you in at level 2, or did you forget the 6 ranks requirement?

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-16, 11:58 PM
To answer a couple points:

Sanctum Spell, by itself, can qualify both 2nd arcane and 2nd Divine. While in your sanctum, your level 1 spells are considered level 2 for all purposes, other than the slot they take up. Thus, put 2 level 1 wizard spells as sanctum, 2 level 1 cleric spells as sanctum, and you have the ability to cast 2nd level in both.

Illumian tricks also work well, though.

You start terrible in the 5-7 range, become merely poor in the 8-12 range, can claim rough parity in the levels 13-17 range, and then trail off in the 17-20 range as everyone else gets 9th level spells, and more of them, several levels before you.
As shown, there is parity at level 12. At this level, MT gets a new level of spells (6th level spells). At level 13, MT still has 6th level spells, while wizard gets 8th, actually COSTING you a bit of parity. MT always compares most favorably to straight casters at even levels.


Optimization can help. You'll notice that I acknowledge that - optimizer skill can do wonders for otherwise-poor options (like MT). Some of the early entries are highly suspect, but I very much like the Illumian method.MT isn't a poor option. It's a great option with poor requirements. You don't need to ramp up or abuse the powers of the class in any way to make it shine. You just need to mitigate the entry cost. The optimization isn't in getting the most out of the abilities. It's in getting the abilities for the lowest investment.


However, nothing short of Inspire Greatness + Psychic Reformation cheese will get you in at level 2, or did you forget the 6 ranks requirement?
I was actually thinking Psyref+IG, but the point is just as valid with the following build:

Wiz 2 / Archivist 1 / MT 10. (will be 1/2 a spell level behind on arcane, and 1 spell level behind on divine)

Also, I want to note: MT is often compared unfavorably to a straight wizard, and that is the justification for calling it weak.

It's no more like a straight wizard than it is like a straight cleric. It rips practically an entire class's worth of features out and staples them onto another class.

The closest comparison to what it actually is?

A gish. A character with some arcane power, and some melee ability. A blend of two playstyles.

That's what MT should be compared to, and it compares relatively favorably, in that context.

Petrocorus
2010-03-17, 01:39 AM
However, nothing short of Inspire Greatness + Psychic Reformation cheese will get you in at level 2, or did you forget the 6 ranks requirement?

These are psionic powers?

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-17, 01:47 AM
These are psionic powers?

Inspire Greatness is a Bardic Ability. You pay a bard to do it for you, and then get Psychic Reformation used on you when you have it, to reallocate skill points based on higher hit dice.

Frosty
2010-03-17, 02:47 AM
Inspire Greatness is a Bardic Ability. You pay a bard to do it for you, and then get Psychic Reformation used on you when you have it, to reallocate skill points based on higher hit dice.

And real DMs allow players to use this kind of abuse (and precocious apprentice) to qualify for PrCs early? I wouldn't want to play with those DMs. casters are powerful enough already. If we allow casters to optimize to tier 1 and beyond, where does that leave the classes that start out at tier 4 or 5?

If this is RAW, then this is one of those Oberoni Fallacy things. Yeah there's a problem, but I don't see any sane DM allowing the exploit.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-17, 04:12 AM
And real DMs allow players to use this kind of abuse (and precocious apprentice) to qualify for PrCs early? I wouldn't want to play with those DMs. casters are powerful enough already. If we allow casters to optimize to tier 1 and beyond, where does that leave the classes that start out at tier 4 or 5?

If this is RAW, then this is one of those Oberoni Fallacy things. Yeah there's a problem, but I don't see any sane DM allowing the exploit.

The same trick can be used for melee classes, by the by.

Precocious Apprentice isn't really a bad method. It has a feat cost, and works for few classes. Sanctum spell, I'd be a bit more worried about.

Petrocorus
2010-03-17, 04:24 AM
The same trick can be used for melee classes, by the by.

Precocious Apprentice isn't really a bad method. It has a feat cost, and works for few classes. Sanctum spell, I'd be a bit more worried about.

I myself still don't understand sanctum spell. Casting a 2nd lvl spell as a 3rd is not really casting a 3rd lvl spell. Even if by a strict reading of the rules, it count for prerequisite, it still bothers me. Precocious apprentice is clear, you're actually capable of knowing and casting a 2nd lvl spell, so, it's really designed as a early entry thing.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-17, 05:00 AM
I myself still don't understand sanctum spell. Casting a 2nd lvl spell as a 3rd is not really casting a 3rd lvl spell. Even if by a strict reading of the rules, it count for prerequisite, it still bothers me. Precocious apprentice is clear, you're actually capable of knowing and casting a 2nd lvl spell, so, it's really designed as a early entry thing.

The thing is, when you cast a sanctum spell, it IS a higher level spell. Cast a sanctum magic missile, and it IS a level 2 spell. It's just cast from a level 1 slot. That's how it works.

Emmerask
2010-03-17, 05:10 AM
The thing is, when you cast a sanctum spell, it IS a higher level spell. Cast a sanctum magic missile, and it IS a level 2 spell. It's just cast from a level 1 slot. That's how it works.

The text in complete arcane only talks about effective spell level not spell level so I would say no to that^^
wotc also talks about effective spell level when you use +1 etc metamagic feats :smallwink:

one of the examples where they use the term effective spell level:

"For example, a 7th level wizard is capable og casting 4th-level spells. She could empower a 2nd-level spell, or still a 3rd-level spell, or empower and still a 1st-level spell. She couldn't empower a 3rd-level spell or still a 4th-level spell (since doing either of those things would raise either spell's effective spell level to 5th)."

Petrocorus
2010-03-17, 05:22 AM
The thing is, when you cast a sanctum spell, it IS a higher level spell. Cast a sanctum magic missile, and it IS a level 2 spell. It's just cast from a level 1 slot. That's how it works.

Yes, by RAW, i understand, but i think that a lot of DM may not be convinced.
Not for qualifying to prestige class.

Is there any official comment on this?

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-17, 05:26 AM
Yes, by RAW, i understand, but i think that a lot of DM may not be convinced.
Not for qualifying to prestige class.

Is there any official comment on this?

The official comment is that it is a higher level spell for all purposes.

Qualification is one of those purposes.

Officially, it works.

I agree, that it probably shouldn't, but in most cases, I don't think it does any major harm.

Optimystik
2010-03-17, 05:29 AM
Yes, by RAW, i understand, but i think that a lot of DM may not be convinced.
Not for qualifying to prestige class.

Is there any official comment on this?

None is really needed. If Precocious Apprentice is allowed to work, then Sanctum Spell will also work.
Obviously your DM can be selective, but the only real reason to get this feat is PrC qualification anyway. If it's not allowed, simply try a different method (Earth Spell, Illumian) or pick a different build altogether.


Your spells are especially potent on home ground.
Prerequisite: Any metamagic feat.
Benefit: A sanctum spell has an effective spell level 1 higher than its normal level if cast in your sanctum (see below), but if not cast in the sanctum, the spell has an effective spell level 1 lower than normal. All effects dependent on spell level (including save DCs) are calculated according to the adjusted level.

Emmerask
2010-03-17, 05:30 AM
Yes, by RAW, i understand, but i think that a lot of DM may not be convinced.
Not for qualifying to prestige class.

Is there any official comment on this?

No by raw it is completely unclear too.
It is semantics which means one person says it is treated as a x level spell therefore it is a x level spell, while the other says it is treated as a x level spell for all effects but it is still an x-1 level spell. RAW is not clear on that one :smallwink:
Same goes for the 1d2 crusader which too is in a gray zone with the treating a 1 as a 2.

Until that is customer service has given an answer to that Iīm not aware of ;)

/edit

effective spell level is also used by wotc for metamagic like empower which clearly does not make magic missile(for example) a higher level spell :smallwink:

/edit2

precious apprentice actually gives you a "real" second level spell and spellslot so I donīt see why there should be any dependency like if that works that must too :smallwink:

Optimystik
2010-03-17, 05:39 AM
effective spell level is also used by wotc for metamagic like empower which clearly does not make magic missile(for example) a higher level spell :smallwink:

Incorrect - the only core metamagic that actually increases ESL is Heighten Spell, and it can only increase up to your normal maximum. Sanctum Spell can increase past that if you start with a spell already at your maximum.

"Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#heightenSpell)

Please note the second part (starting with "all effects...") which is worded in the exact same way as the similar clause in Sanctum Spell.

Emmerask
2010-03-17, 05:46 AM
"For example, a 7th level wizard is capable of casting 4th-level spells. She could empower a 2nd-level spell, or still a 3rd-level spell, or empower and still a 1st-level spell. She couldn't empower a 3rd-level spell or still a 4th-level spell (since doing either of those things would raise either spell's effective spell level to 5th)."

Quote from wotc ;)
and to me that says it is treated as a x level spell nowhere it does specifically say that the spell becomes a x level spell :smallwink:
if the text would say it increases the level of the spell it would be another matter completely but effective level does sound like is treated to me

Optimystik
2010-03-17, 05:56 AM
Quote from wotc ;)

So was mine, did you click the link?


and to me that says it is treated as a x level spell nowhere it does specifically say that the spell becomes a x level spell :smallwink:

Heighten and Sanctum actually do become "X level spells" for all intents and purposes; this is because of the "all effects dependent on spell level" clause, which only they use. It is empower, maximize et al. that do not have this clause, and therefore do nothing more than occupy higher slots without changing effective level.

Emmerask
2010-03-17, 06:04 AM
So was mine, did you click the link?


missed the link sorry just thought that you underlined the whole text very nicely^^
but I clicked it now :smallsmile:




Heighten and Sanctum actually do become "X level spells" for all intents and purposes; this is because of the "all effects dependent on spell level" clause, which only they use. It is empower, maximize et al. that do not have this clause, and therefore do nothing more than occupy higher slots without changing effective level.


and there is the difference I think for all intents and purposes is wrong because the text only mentions certain purposes (ie effects, dc and globe of inv) which to me still does not mean that it actually becomes spell of said level only that it is treated as such for certain stuff (which is a big difference).

But I do understand your train of thought and Iīm not saying you are wrong (but not right either ^^) because both answers are valid depending on how you read it :smallwink: