Mystic Theurge

[SlashRunner]

I was just wondering... would Wizard 3/Archivist 3/Mystic Theurge for the rest allow you to cast EVERY spell in the game? Since Theurge gains spells as if it were a member of both classes, meaning that it would have access to all spell levels, and both Archivist and Wizard can scribe scrolls. If you could do this, would this be a decent character build, or would it be totally gimping yourself?

[TroubleBrewing]

Totally gimping yourself. Go Archivist with a Wizard cohort via Leadership instead.

[Noneoyabizzness]

Still will miss some arcane like wu jen bard etc.

And since can only get to mt 10 preepic mightnot get 9th.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Just a single-classed Archivist can get every spell he would ever want. Get Leadership for a Warlock cohort, when he hits level 12 he can help you make a scroll of any divine spell in the game. Or just find a Warlock 12+ for hire and pay him to help you.

If you insist on playing a multiclass caster, use Illumian with Krau/anything and take Improved Sigil: Krau, and go Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ Mystic Theurge instead.

[SlashRunner]

Gaaah! Too many sources! I'm somewhat new, and I'm having trouble keeping up with the 10,000,000,000 splatbooks that D&D has. How do you guys know all this stuff? Do you actually buy all the splatbooks?

[ericgrau]

Many do but often only 5% of a book shows up in build suggestions. If you don't have access to so many books I'd keep it simple and try the original archivist with wizard cohort suggestion. Sure you won't have every spell in the game, but you'll have plenty of variety.

[TroubleBrewing]

Well, 3.5 has been out since around 2001, so most of us have had 10 years to build up a massive collection of splatbooks, magazines, and most importantly, hands-on experience with said books.

I've got a friend who can quote passages word-for-word out of the PHB. It's a little disconcerting.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Gaaah! Too many sources! I'm somewhat new, and I'm having trouble keeping up with the 10,000,000,000 splatbooks that D&D has. How do you guys know all this stuff? Do you actually buy all the splatbooks?

3.5 is almost eight years old, that's a long time to learn about the game. Don't ask if anyone bought all the books, though the right answer is yes. Here's a list (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/lists) for which book contains much of what we reference. Google can usually find a source on anything else.

Illumians (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a&page=2) are in Races of Destiny, they get two power sigils which create a runeword as one of their racial abilities. The Krau sigil gives you +2 caster level but no higher than your character level for all of your spellcasting classes, similar to the feat Practiced Spellcaster found in Complete Divine and Complete Arcane. The feat Improved Sigil: Krau allows you to increase the spell level of two spells you can cast by one each, as though by Heighten Spell. At Wizard 1/ Archivist 2, you pick a 1st level spell from each class, and those two spells are considered 2nd level spells for all purposes, which qualifies you for the spellcasting prerequisite of Mystic Theurge.

[Nohwl]

you can get by with just a few books. most important ones are probably spell compendium, magic item compendium, and tome of battle. use the srd (www.d20srd.org), and you don't really need the core books.

edit: i don't want to start a debate about tome of battle.

[SlashRunner]

Personally, I don't like it. It makes D&D's already steep learning curve WAAAAY steeper, and the extreme multitudes of different character options sort of detracts from the flavor of the game, if you ask me. As a person and a gamer, I'm rather prone to metagaming and tend to start optimizing all my characters once I've figured out a game, but I'm not oblivious to roleplaying. Having some PrC's is fine, but it just looks ridiculous when you have characters walking around in a fantasy world who are a mix'n'match collection of obscure PrC's that just happen to make your character uber-strong.

[Tvtyrant]

Oh? I think it would be a strange world where people have had 10,000+ years to learn how to kill things effectively but choose to gimp themselves instead. It would be like modern humans abandoning combat training!

Not saying your wrong mind you, but metagaming goes both ways.

[SlashRunner]

I'm not saying people should gimp themselves, but many of the optimized builds I've seen on the internet are just plain difficult to justify, RP-wise. People can train to be able to kill things more effectively, but with so many dips, it just starts to defy any kind of logic.

[Koury]

Name a build that can't be justified. I'm actually curious too, not just being a jerk. :smalltongue:

Also, inb4stormwind

[Tvtyrant]

Well there is three ways to look at it:

1. Levels describe a set of skills you have obtained. In this case there is only a marginal difference between a level in Ranger and a level in Barbarian, so multiclassing like mad on paper is totally legit in game.

2. Classes act the same in the game as they do on paper. In this case people would have searched through all of the levels looking for ways to get stronger and "builds" and "guides" would probably exist almost identically to how they do in RL.

3. Classes=Jobs. Usually accompanied by having to see a "trainer" to level up. In which case yes it probably would be metagamey.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

In-character, there is no such thing as 'level' or 'class' or especially 'prestige class', there is only what a character is capable of. There's a Scout class in Complete Adventurer, but long before that book was published I'd played a Ranger/Barbarian/Horizon Walker who called himself a scout because that described his capabilities. He could sneak around, get along in the wild, and fight both in melee and at a distance. For that type of character, I would prefer a similar build over using the Scout class any day. In-character, both have similar capabilities though their style of combat varies, but an in-character scout by trade has absolutely nothing to do with the out-of-character scout class.

Most prestige classes can be self-taught in-character. Whether through intense training or independent research or long hours in meditation, there are only a few prestige classes which must be learned from another character. That certain prestige classes specify that training from an existing (class name) is required, it should be assumed that those are the exception and that the norm is that all other prestige classes are self-taught. In that case, dipping a prestige class in merely the development of a different set of skills. Whether the character chooses to expand on those same skills (often at the expense of further developing other skills) or to learn yet another set of skills is that character's choice. Forcing a character to continue taking more levels of a prestige class is the metagame choice, letting characters dip classes is the opposite.

[Coidzor]

3. Classes=Jobs. Usually accompanied by having to see a "trainer" to level up. In which case yes it probably would be metagamey.

Except it's actually making a metagame concept an in-game, real concept which is a surefire way to run into issues. So it's metagamey in the extreme even without people planning out their builds in advance so they don't have to play something that requires no multiclassing or PrCing in order to do whatever they want to do.

[Bang!]

Personally, I don't like it. It makes D&D's already steep learning curve WAAAAY steeper, and the extreme multitudes of different character options sort of detracts from the flavor of the game, if you ask me.
I hear you.

I used to enjoy character building on the internet. It's essentially a series of puzzles with no limit in terms of goals and with a huge set of pieces to try to fit together. That involves a lot of dumpster-diving through sourcebooks for pieces that can pull a build together. It's a very fast way to accidentally memorize contents from a lot of books. But that completely went against the playstyle of every group I've met (most people I've actually gamed with use the core books/srd with maybe a splatbook or two per table).

So I got to the point where I had most of the mechanical information from D&D 3.X memorized, and could sketch out a build to match just about any concept in a couple minutes, but it didn't matter because I'd get funny looks and complaints if I tried it in a game.

It just ended up being easier to homebrew or tweak existing base classes that did what I wanted for each character. It made negotiations with DMs more straightforward, as well (the decision of whether a near-full BA character with near-full spellcasting should be allowed in a game became a decision about whether to allow that specific character, rather than a debate over rejecting the game rules). Incidentally, this approach completely destroys the idea of a class system, a change I'm more than willing to accept.

---

re: OP: A Spell to Power (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070629a) Erudite (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060406a)/Archivist (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20051007a&page=3)/Psychic Theurge (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040925b) would come closer to 'all spells,' and would toss in every psionic power to boot. Maintaining progression through levels 15-20 would require some trickery that would deserve at least a couple dirty looks, but it's possible. (Alternate Source Spell + Cerebremancer is the most straightforward route*. [Monastic Servant of Auppenser (http://www.candlekeep.com/library/articles/leof_msoa.htm) would only get 7th level manifesting, but it would get some very attractive class features instead.)

*EDIT:
Or Early Entry tricks + Legacy Champion. That's probably easier.

ETA:
Except it's actually making a metagame concept an in-game, real concept which is a surefire way to run into issues. So it's metagamey in the extreme even without people planning out their builds in advance so they don't have to play something that requires no multiclassing or PrCing in order to do whatever they want to do.
It's metagamey and weird, but according to the PHB "Your character’s class is his or her profession or vocation." Then there are all the weird metagamey prerequisites that pop up (drinking with members of the Drunken Master class is the first to come to mind). It doesn't make a whole lot of sense as far as immersive in-game coherence, but the Class = Jobs viewpoint isn't capital-W-Wrong.

[SlashRunner]

I still don't understand why that's gimp though. Can anyone explain it?

[Tvtyrant]

Except it's actually making a metagame concept an in-game, real concept which is a surefire way to run into issues. So it's metagamey in the extreme even without people planning out their builds in advance so they don't have to play something that requires no multiclassing or PrCing in order to do whatever they want to do.

I know we never agree on anything ever, but the point of my post was that it was only metagamey in one of three ways of approaching it.

[Bang!]

I still don't understand why that's gimp though. Can anyone explain it?
Wizard 3/Archivist 3/MT X is 3 levels behind a straight archivist or wizard in terms of spell progression. Higher level spells are dramatically more powerful than lower level spells. They often replicate lower-level spells from other lists. A straight-classed Wizard could cast more powerful spells than a W3/A3/MT until level 20.

A straight-classed Wizard could even generate many of the same spell effects through that period through effects like Summon Monster, Planar Binding, Dominate, Shapechange and independent research.

That said, anything with as much prepared spellcasting as that MT should have a solution for just about anything. It's hardly "gimped," unless you're comparing to full prepared spellcasting classes.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I still don't understand why that's gimp though. Can anyone explain it?

Party is level 7:
Prepared spellcasters have 4th level spells, and prestige classes that grant, you know, class features.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 4 has 3rd level spells.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 1 has 2nd level spells.

Party is level 11:
Prepared spellcasters have 6th level spells, and more (prestige) class features.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 8 has 5th level spells.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 5 has 4th level spells.

Party is level 17:
Prepared spellcasters have 9th level spells, and have maxed out a 10-level prestige class that grants something awesome at the 10th level.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 10/ ??? 4 has 8th level spells, and some (prestige) class features.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 10/ ??? 1 has 7th level spells.

[navar100]

Wizard 3/Archivist 3/MT X is 3 levels behind a straight archivist or wizard in terms of spell progression. Higher level spells are dramatically more powerful than lower level spells. They often replicate lower-level spells from other lists. A straight-classed Wizard could cast more powerful spells than a W3/A3/MT until level 20.

A straight-classed Wizard could even generate many of the same spell effects through that period through effects like Summon Monster, Planar Binding, Dominate, Shapechange and independent research.

That said, anything with as much prepared spellcasting as that MT should have a solution for just about anything. It's hardly "gimped," unless you're comparing to full prepared spellcasting classes.

Right. Mystic Theurge is not atrocious unless you just can't abide by not having access to or as much 7th/8th/9th level spells as single class spellcasters or even at lower levels with the highest level spell possible, i.e. at 9th level you are not casting 4th and 5th level spells like a single class wizard could. Mechanically you could say a single class spellcaster is more powerful, but there is no objective judgement to that, only personal subjective tolerance. To play the character, are you comfortable with the idea of not being able to cast the spells you could have if you played a single class spellcaster?

[Tvtyrant]

Plus you get an ungodly amount of spell slots that you can waste on quickened low level spells :P

A Wizard 16 has 28 spell slots without calculating extras from int or specialization (as the thuerge would get these as well). A Wizard 3/Cleric 3/MT 10 gets 53 slots, including the same amount of level 7 slots as a straight Wizard. You also get to swap out 30 of your spells everyday to anything on the Cleric list while getting to pick Wizard only spells for their list.

It isn't optimized but a MT is at least Tier 2 with a Wizard and a Cleric.

[Coidzor]

It's metagamey and weird, but according to the PHB "Your character’s class is his or her profession or vocation." Then there are all the weird metagamey prerequisites that pop up (drinking with members of the Drunken Master class is the first to come to mind). It doesn't make a whole lot of sense as far as immersive in-game coherence, but the Class = Jobs viewpoint isn't capital-W-Wrong.

Or, rather, just because there's some tenuous basis through the text of the game books doesn't make it not wrong for making the game more borked when things get ruled universally to be that way rather than the cases which are already squirrely.

[Bang!]

Or, rather, just because there's some tenuous basis through the text of the game books doesn't make it not wrong for making the game more borked when things get ruled universally to be that way rather than the cases which are already squirrely.
Yes.

And it's more than a few niche cases. The DMG lists methods of training for PrC organizations, many classes are associated with in-game groups, almost every class entry has generalizations of how members of the class act and how they are treated in-game, and later books have Knowledge tables in class entries which wouldn't make much sense if classes didn't have in-game realities.

[Eldariel]

Right. Mystic Theurge is not atrocious unless you just can't abide by not having access to or as much 7th/8th/9th level spells as single class spellcasters or even at lower levels with the highest level spell possible, i.e. at 9th level you are not casting 4th and 5th level spells like a single class wizard could. Mechanically you could say a single class spellcaster is more powerful, but there is no objective judgement to that, only personal subjective tolerance. To play the character, are you comfortable with the idea of not being able to cast the spells you could have if you played a single class spellcaster?

The question was which was stronger power-wise though. Which is invariably the single-classed caster, since higher level spells solve more scenarios than more lower level spells (which, incidentally, is the source of the oldest of D&D min/max maxims "Thou shalt not lose caster levels", which may not strictly apply in all cases anymore but is still a v. good guideline; mayhaps the better formulation now is "Whenever you're about to lose a caster level, ask yourself what exactly you're getting for it"), which is the definition of power in the game. Higher level casters are more versatile than a lower level multicaster; somewhat hilarious but true.

[ericgrau]

Already fully derailed? Ok I'll bite. Eh the main issue seems to be the 15 minute work day. The single class caster has 3 spells of his highest level (sometimes 2). And 4 of the next level. Worst case scenario the MT is 2 spell levels behind and has 8 and 12. 7 spells later the MT has both the same spell level and twice as many options, which is hands down more versatile.

Best case scenario those numbers are 4 and 5 vs. 6 and 8. 4 spells later it's the same situation.

The main cause of that are monsters that sit there and wait for you like good little mindless NPCs waiting to hand over xp and loot. B/c as many save point strategies as there may be, there are at least as many to track the PCs down and break them.

Even if the MT tries to work with the 15 minute work day by loading up on quicken (a level 10-12+ strategy mind you), those numbers are still 3-4 and 2, enough to still have a big impact on a single fight if there's nothing later. If you could reduce it to, say, 1 round with quicken by loosening up the pre-reqs that should help rebalance things for the sake of DMs who don't want to bother with ruthless planning and ambushing monsters. So... try 1 CL behind making those numbers 3 and 1 instead, or half that with quicken. Maybe at lower levels grant some kind of sudden quicken bonus feat.

[Veyr]

It has nothing to do with the 15-minute workday. A Wizard can last longer without rest than most classes at high levels, because they have more than enough spell slots as it is. A Mystic Theurge trades higher level slots for lower level slots that the Wizard didn't need anyway.

Tsukiko might go to sleep with more spell slots than Red Cloak prepares in the morning, but this is exactly the point — Red Cloak's still going to sleep with plenty of spells left most mornings. Her extra spell slots are wasted because she can't burn through all of them, and even if she could (heavy use of Quicken), they'll not be as potent as the Wizard or Cleric's higher level spells.

[ericgrau]

Sigh I fell for the bait, and even declared it in the first sentence. See there I wasted time showing exactly how many spells it takes for the wizard to become without a doubt weaker and it didn't matter. No more derailed MT, monk, fighter, sorcerer, etc. threads for me. Bad, bad time waster. I should know better.

[Veyr]

No, what you're missing is that the Wizard can get through the average four-encounter day on four spells. Seven is a luxury he can afford to spend. The Mystic Theurge is categorically weaker.

[SlashRunner]

So should I just go straight single-classed Wizard to 20?

[Bang!]

So should I just go straight single-classed Wizard to 20?Probably not, but it's hard to give advice without some parameters.

Is there a specific concept you have in mind? What sort of power level are you aiming for? What sources are you using? Is there a theme you want to focus on?

[sreservoir]

Party is level 7:
Prepared spellcasters have 4th level spells, and prestige classes that grant, you know, class features.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 4 has 3rd level spells.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 1 has 2nd level spells.

Party is level 11:
Prepared spellcasters have 6th level spells, and more (prestige) class features.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 8 has 5th level spells.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 5 has 4th level spells.

Party is level 17:
Prepared spellcasters have 9th level spells, and have maxed out a 10-level prestige class that grants something awesome at the 10th level.
Illumian Wizard 1/ Archivist 2/ MT 10/ ??? 4 has 8th level spells, and some (prestige) class features.
Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT 10/ ??? 1 has 7th level spells.

the fact that you're only using odd levels is a bit unfair to the MTs, especially the illumian, who is actually only a single level behind the curve, which isn't actually so bad. must be better than going sorcerer 20!

[Noneoyabizzness]

Gaaah! Too many sources! I'm somewhat new, and I'm having trouble keeping up with the 10,000,000,000 splatbooks that D&D has. How do you guys know all this stuff? Do you actually buy all the splatbooks?

had most all of them until june 2007. only book I bought after that fr 3.5 was rules compendium and undermountain.


as far as learning curves, there is no way to lose unless you roll monk 20

and even then depending on the game you can still have fun with it

[Coidzor]

the fact that you're only using odd levels is a bit unfair to the MTs, especially the illumian, who is actually only a single level behind the curve, which isn't actually so bad. must be better than going sorcerer 20!

Yeah, but the lack of real class features is definitely a pertinent point... a disadvantage it shares with a full-class sorcerer. Mildly ahead due to 1st level wizard and archivist class features, but those are first level features.

[holywhippet]

Still will miss some arcane like wu jen bard etc.

And since can only get to mt 10 preepic mightnot get 9th.

You could pick up the bard spells if you went archivist instead of cleric and made use of a divine variant bard.