Wizard/Archivist

[umbergod]

I am adding to my pool of ready to play characters for an upcoming campaign, and one idea I had was an elven lorekeeper of sorts, like a librarian, only magically powered. I planned to theurge my way up, but wasnt sure how to go about it. I want to avoid anything broken or of the cheesy smell, as my DM has blatantly told me if I make a broken character he'll kill it.

So long story short, what would be the best route to theurging a wizard/archivist without shenanigans

[eggs]

Which side of the "shenanigans" line do early entry tricks all on?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Illumian, Krau/anything, Improved Sigil: Krau, Wizard+Archivist 3/ Mystic Theurge 10/ Sacred Exorcist 1/ Paragnostic Apostle etc. Krau fixes your caster level, saving you two feats on Practiced Spellcaster. Improved Sigil: Krau allows you to count a 1st level spell from each class as a 2nd level spell, enabling you to qualify for MT.

[umbergod]

Well, nothing that is super cheesy. Generally if its RAW, and not super broken, odds are he might allow it. Nothing like Versatile Spellcaster to allow you to simulate casting higher level spells than you actually can

[Gavinfoxx]

You do know that you can get all arcane spells as divine spells with an Archivist anyway, right? You don't need Wizard to do it. You can even cast them as arcane spells with Southern Magician or Alternate Spell Source.

[umbergod]

Assuming the DM allows me to gain access to arcane spells as an Archivist.

[Hirax]

Wizard1/archivist2/theurge10/wildrunner1/arcane hierophant6

Choose your method of early entry into theurge. Although it requires you sink a feat into endurance to qualify for wildrunner, which in turn allows you to qualify for hierophant. Achieves 17th and 18th level casting in both classes, though.

[eggs]

Nothing like Versatile Spellcaster to allow you to simulate casting higher level spells than you actually can
That makes things tricky. Without shenanigans, MTs basically can't expect to cast nearly as well as similarly-leveled members of their base classes - even when it comes to cross-class spells.

But assuming some arrangement of a Archivist 3/Wizard 3 entry:
At low levels, you could use CL-independent buffs, debuffs and battlefield control spells like Enlarge, Rays, clouds or webs. Even if they lag a couple levels behind, they should still be useful.
The PHB2 has a few immediate action defenses, which can be a bit cheesy (the Abrupt Jaunt ACF and the Celerity line of spells). But survivability can be tricky for MTs (the class really prolongs the "frail low-level caster" stage), so you might want to consider getting those as early as is reasonable.

Good luck!

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

If you would be stuck going Wizard 3/ Archivist 3/ MT, just forget it and go single-classed Archivist. Between Adept (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/adept.htm), Divine Bard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#bardVariantDivineBard) , Shugenja, and the Paladin, Ranger, and Blackguard spell lists, plus any arcane caster with Southern Magician can make a divine scroll of an otherwise arcane-only spell, you can get pretty much any spell you want (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3545.msg110500#msg110500). Edit: At level 14 you can use Leadership to get a Warlock cohort who can make a UMD check to fulfill any spell prerequisite for item creation, so you can make scrolls and have him contribute the spell to get literally any spell you want.

If you're going for early entry, Illumians (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a&page=2) actually fit the keeper-of-knowledge archtype better than Elves anyway. With that early entry costs you only one feat, with the bonus of keeping your caster levels at your character for free level until you finish MT.

[Gavinfoxx]

Assuming the DM allows me to gain access to arcane spells as an Archivist.

Well... that's why you have to negotiate with your DM regarding this. Ask him, before the game starts:

1.) How hard will it be to get cleric scrolls?
2.) ... Cleric domain scrolls from common domains?
3.) ... Cleric domain scrolls from obscure domains?
4.) ... Cleric/Druid Initiate (feat) scrolls?
5.) ... Adept scrolls?
6.) ... Ranger scrolls?
7.) ... Paladin Scrolls?
8.) ... Divine Bard scrolls?
9.) ... Cloistered Cleric scrolls?
10.) ... Divine Magician scrolls?
11.) ... Nentyar Hunter scrolls?
12.) ... Shugenja scrolls?
13.) ... Healer scrolls?
14.) ... Runescarred Berserker scrolls?
15.) ... Emissary of Barachiel scrolls?
16.) ...Wizard scrolls, divine via geomancer / alternate spell source / southern magician?
17.) ...Sorcerer-only scrolls, divine via geomancer /alternate spell source / southern magician?
18.) ... Trapsmith scrolls, divine via geomancer / alternate spell source / southern magician?
19.) ... Teflammar Shadowlord scrolls, divine via geomancer /alternate spell source / southern magician?
20.) ...Sand Shaper scrolls, divine via geomancer / alternate spell source / southern magician?

Get the answers from your DM, about whether there are price / cost multipliers for those, or some you can't get at all and would require adventuring, and then you can realize if you need any arcane at ALL...

[Kavurcen]

I keep circling back to foluchan lyrist, but I know you wouldn't qualify. That class is such a tease...

[Khedrac]

Interesting how most people seem focused on shenanigans when you asked them not to, ah well one person's essential is another's cheese.

Big question - what levels will the campaign run from and to?

A straight Wiz 3/Arc 3/MT 10 is not too bad until 16th level, yes you are behind the pure casters, but that's sort-of the point of MT - variety not raw power. Where it falls down is 3 to 6 or 7 and 17 to 20, as you start fairly weak and slow, and at the end have a real problem getting dual casting which means one of your casting sides is about to dip fairly severely thus weakening the character.
In short a 1-8 campaign basically makes MT a waste of time, and X to 20 makes you have to think about the top. A 1 level dip of Wildrunner will get you into Arcane Heirophant, whilst the dip is bad, the feat tax is minimal and the skills not a big issue for an int primary character.

As for non-cleric or Druid divine spells, good luck. I would expect most DM's to laugh at Paladin or Ranger scrolls being at all common (as who would ever take Scribe Scroll in those classes?) and as for stuff further down the list they will probably laugh at them even being available, I know I would unless I was playing in a setting where Oriental access was present and the feat "Southern Magician" was common. Your best bet for things like them is to get another PC to take the classes and feats to create them and then get them to make them - which rather removes the need.

I am currently playing a non-optimized Arcane Heirophant and I am finding it useful to be Sorceror for the arcane half even though it slowed access. When we hit a tough high-SR opponent I was still spamming lesser sonic orbs at it when the wizard in the party (even less optimized) had run out of things worth casting. Spontaneous casters have a very different sort of flexibility to prepared casters and it can be nice to have both.

[Spuddles]

Interesting how most people seem focused on shenanigans when you asked them not to, ah well one person's essential is another's cheese.

Theurges tend to suck without shenanigans. OP hasn't given us much to work with regarding his DM's houserules....

[umbergod]

There arent many house rules in effect. Avoiding illumian simply b/c in this campaign setting, odds are I would not last long as a weird glowing white humanoid with no neck and a floating head.

the game is starting out at 3rd level and the hope is that it runs long enough for us to retire our characters at level 20 (we all think epic is where it gets too silly)

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, that means you are starting with L3 WBL... and thus you should ask the DM for cost multipliers for scrolls from those more obscure sources and such... that should help you get an idea. If the cost multipliers aren't that high, you could just go straight archivist and cast whatever spells you want.

[Psyren]

There arent many house rules in effect. Avoiding illumian simply b/c in this campaign setting, odds are I would not last long as a weird glowing white humanoid with no neck and a floating head.

That's a Lumi (MM3) not an Illumian (RoD).

Illumians are just humans with lights orbiting their heads. And if you douse your lights, you'll pass for human with no problems.

[umbergod]

That's a Lumi (MM3) not an Illumian (RoD).

Illumians are just humans with lights orbiting their heads. And if you douse your lights, you'll pass for human with no problems.

Well, that shut me up :P I will definitely ask my DM (roommate) about Illumians, perhaps explain their origin as an arcane induced mutation that bred true among humans or something

[Bloodgruve]

Not sure if this would count as shenanigans but...

Archivist1/Wizard1/Beguiler(or other spontaneous caster)18 + Versatile Spellcaster.

Any spell recorded into your Spellbook/Prayerbook should be fair game to Versatile Spellcaster. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks, and same should go for Archivist. A first level wizard can have a 9th level spell in his spellbook with the right spellcraft check.

GL
Blood~

[Mjollnir075]

I believe it really depends on what level this campaign is going to be. I lurked these boards for a while and all the info I found about MT said it was a trap, due to not getting dual 9s. However, if you doubt that your campaign will go above these levels, it really isn't a problem. I played a MT recently that my DM thought was way overpowered, simply because I had a figurative billion spells at my command. The one thing you really need to realize about MT is action economy. If you aren't playing a very optimized game, you will only be able to cast 1 (2, with quicken spells and whatnot) spell per round. You have staying power, but for short combats you won't really benefit from most of the spells you have.

Just my two cents.

[molten_dragon]

Theurges tend to suck without shenanigans.

That's quite an exaggeration. Theurges don't suck, with or without shenanigans. They aren't generally as powerful as single-classed casters, but considering how much more powerful casters are than most everything else in the game, that still leaves theurges as solid characters. Even if you just go Archivist 5/Wizard 5/MT 10, you'll still end up with 8th level spells from both classes. It's not ideal from an optimization perspective, but there's a lot of space between 'well optimized' and 'sucks'.

[molten_dragon]

Assuming the DM allows me to gain access to arcane spells as an Archivist.

This is extremely important when playing an archivist, since without access to other divine spells, they're just underpowered clerics.

I just started playing an archivist myself, and before I decided to play one, I sat down with the DM to discuss what spells I'd have access to and how I'd go about getting access to them. You should do the same.

[Ashtagon]

Theurges tend to suck without shenanigans. OP hasn't given us much to work with regarding his DM's houserules....

They may suck compared to single-class casters, but they are still solidly tier 3, if not tier 2.

Sometimes a little perspective is needed.

[Yuki Akuma]

Well, no, not really.

The problem is that you get spells several levels late, when the monsters are 'balanced' on the assumption that you will have 5th level spells at level 9, and such.

Sure, at level 20, it's pretty good, but while leveling up, it's a pain.

[Ashtagon]

Well, no, not really.

The problem is that you get spells several levels late, when the monsters are 'balanced' on the assumption that you will have 5th level spells at level 9, and such.

Sure, at level 20, it's pretty good, but while leveling up, it's a pain.

Except for being a lower spell level, how is a 4th level save-or-suck different from a 5th-level save-or-suck spell?

[molten_dragon]

Well, no, not really.

The problem is that you get spells several levels late, when the monsters are 'balanced' on the assumption that you will have 5th level spells at level 9, and such.

Sure, at level 20, it's pretty good, but while leveling up, it's a pain.

If you can't make your lower level spells useful at higher levels, you aren't trying hard enough.

I recently played in a campaign where I was playing a wizard. We were 15th level I think at the end of it, and I was still frequently using 3rd and 4th level spells in combat, and they were quite effective.

Theurges aren't that bad leveling up. The only levels where they really have a little trouble is 3-6 or maybe 3-7, when they start advancing their second class, but haven't yet hit the theurge class to start advancing both. Everywhere else they play fine.

[Psyren]

Except for being a lower spell level, how is a 4th level save-or-suck different from a 5th-level save-or-suck spell?

Targeting restrictions are one factor. For instance, a Wiz 7 has access to Charm Monster, giving him a potent weapon against a rampaging Frost Giant's relatively weak Will save (CR 9.) The Wiz 3/Arc 3/MT 1, on the other hand, is still on 2nd-level spells, giving him less viable tools to deal with the same scenario even if he has more spells in aggregate.

Metamagic is another. Our Wiz 7 has higher slots, allowing him to Heighten, Extend or otherwise boost lower spells in ways the MT cannot.

And finally, spells gain power exponentially, not linearly. To use your own example, SMV can be used for its own roster of powerful creatures (Bearded Devils, Hound Archons, Medium Elementals etc) or multiples of SMIV, getting you up to 4x as much bang for your buck with each casting.

[Ashtagon]

Targeting restrictions are one factor. For instance, a Wiz 7 has access to Charm Monster, giving him a potent weapon against a rampaging Frost Giant's relatively weak Will save (CR 9.) The Wiz 3/Arc 3/MT 1, on the other hand, is still on 2nd-level spells, giving him less viable tools to deal with the same scenario even if he has more spells in aggregate.

Metamagic is another. Our Wiz 7 has higher slots, allowing him to Heighten, Extend or otherwise boost lower spells in ways the MT cannot.


I notice you carefully picked your example for a level of spells that is lacking in solid save-or-sucks.

Nonetheless...

Glitterdust is a nice way to blind a giant, and still targets that weak Will save. Once blinded, he should e easy pickings. Hideous laughter is another easy way to make the giant suck, by making him prone.

Playing a caster well isn't about using the biggest hammer in the toolbox, it's about knowing all the tools in that box.

[Psyren]

I notice you carefully picked your example for a level of spells that is lacking in solid save-or-sucks.

Not really, I just picked one off the top of my head.

Your own example is erroneous because intended-entry MTs are 2 spell levels behind a single-class caster, not 1. You should be comparing 3rds to 5ths, not 4ths to 5ths.

As for your toolbox point, the single-classed wizard can throw his Hideous Laughters from twice as far away, or make his Glitterdusts harder to resist. Or leave them unmodified (as your MT would have to) and prepare more powerful higher-level spells instead.

[eggs]

If we're comparing it to T3s, the Duskblade, Incarnate and ToB classes can hit things hard, kind-of fly, kind-of teleport and make high skill rolls.

Beside the damage, there are very few points where a Wizard 3/Archivist 3/Mystic Theurge can't do all those things at least equally well. But instead of the damage, the MT has improved control like Glitterdust, Entangle and Web; improved buffs and debuffs like Enlarge Person, Girallon's Blessing and Rays of Enfeeblement/Stupidity/Dizziness; and enough utility spells to expect to have a tool for the job.

Then Planar Bindings, Polymorphs, Haunt Shifts, Magic Jars, Teleports, etc. come into the picture, and it starts getting pretty hard to compare them at all.

The biggest problem the slow-entry MT has is its prolonged low-level caster experience. But in the same way that a savvy Wizard player can still dominate at ECL 1, the MT can get through it without too much trouble. At high levels, it's hard to pretend it's not well above what seems to be the preferred Bard/Warblade/Binder power curve.

[crazyhedgewizrd]

MTs are 2 spell levels behind a single-class caster, not 1. You should be comparing 3rds to 5ths, not 4ths to 5ths.

This kind of depends on the level, at even levels you are 1 spell level behind and at odd levels you are 2 spell levels behind.
But this can be overcomed by reading scrolls or using magical devices.

[Gavinfoxx]

The thing with the Archivist though... if you are starting at over level 1, with a bunch of money, you NEED to know how much you could have bought obscure scrolls, and to have a long talk with the DM. The archivist is one of the more DM-intervention-required classes out there... so we are just waiting on an update of the OP about how the talk with the DM went, what the cost multipliers are, etc.

[umbergod]

well my DM is my roommate, however, this week we are mostly opposite schedules, he's always 1st shift and this week I'm 2nd shift so I'm leaving as hes coming home from work, and when I get home he's sleeping :P I Will try talk to him about archivist and what I will have available and how hard/more expensive spells will be to get in divine scroll form on my day off

[Ashtagon]

Not really, I just picked one off the top of my head.

Your own example is erroneous because intended-entry MTs are 2 spell levels behind a single-class caster, not 1. You should be comparing 3rds to 5ths, not 4ths to 5ths.

Charm monster is a 4th level wizard spell. I was looking at 2nd level wizard spells. Your point?


As for your toolbox point, the single-classed wizard can throw his Hideous Laughters from twice as far away, or make his Glitterdusts harder to resist. Or leave them unmodified (as your MT would have to) and prepare more powerful higher-level spells instead.

I don't dispute that a single-class wizard is more powerful that a MT. My point is that a MT still has enough tools to break any level-appropriate fight he might encounter, despite having "weak" spells. The core problem isn't that the MT is weak (it's not); it's that the single-class caster is obscenely strong.

[Spuddles]

That's quite an exaggeration. Theurges don't suck, with or without shenanigans. They aren't generally as powerful as single-classed casters, but considering how much more powerful casters are than most everything else in the game, that still leaves theurges as solid characters. Even if you just go Archivist 5/Wizard 5/MT 10, you'll still end up with 8th level spells from both classes. It's not ideal from an optimization perspective, but there's a lot of space between 'well optimized' and 'sucks'.

Being three caster levels behind sucks vs. SR, vs. dispels, being a full spell level behind sucks when your party is cursed and you don't get remove curse (or break enchantment, etc.), having less space to metamagic. And split caster stats, unless you're going cerebremancer (favorite dual caster ever).

15% less likely to break SR is a bummer. A big bummer. That's like wearing a chainshirt and light shield.

If you don't mind having a bucketload of level-behind utility spells, theurges are fine.

I used to think theurges weren't so bad, but then I started playing them, and without early entry shenanigans, you really feel the lack of level appropriate spells. Having to wait 3 extra levels for bread and butter spells like Heal or Solid Fog hurts. Even the loss of 3d6 on a fireball is noticeable, if you're in a group that expects fireballs to land amongst swarms of mooks. On either end of the optimization scale, you're feeling the loss of high level spells and caster level.


Targeting restrictions are one factor. For instance, a Wiz 7 has access to Charm Monster, giving him a potent weapon against a rampaging Frost Giant's relatively weak Will save (CR 9.) The Wiz 3/Arc 3/MT 1, on the other hand, is still on 2nd-level spells, giving him less viable tools to deal with the same scenario even if he has more spells in aggregate.

Metamagic is another. Our Wiz 7 has higher slots, allowing him to Heighten, Extend or otherwise boost lower spells in ways the MT cannot.

And finally, spells gain power exponentially, not linearly. To use your own example, SMV can be used for its own roster of powerful creatures (Bearded Devils, Hound Archons, Medium Elementals etc) or multiples of SMIV, getting you up to 4x as much bang for your buck with each casting.

This has been my experience playing theurges in real life with DMs that adapt difficulty to our playstyle.


If we're comparing it to T3s, the Duskblade, Incarnate and ToB classes can hit things hard, kind-of fly, kind-of teleport and make high skill rolls.

Beside the damage, there are very few points where a Wizard 3/Archivist 3/Mystic Theurge can't do all those things at least equally well. But instead of the damage, the MT has improved control like Glitterdust, Entangle and Web; improved buffs and debuffs like Enlarge Person, Girallon's Blessing and Rays of Enfeeblement/Stupidity/Dizziness; and enough utility spells to expect to have a tool for the job.

Then Planar Bindings, Polymorphs, Haunt Shifts, Magic Jars, Teleports, etc. come into the picture, and it starts getting pretty hard to compare them at all.

The biggest problem the slow-entry MT has is its prolonged low-level caster experience. But in the same way that a savvy Wizard player can still dominate at ECL 1, the MT can get through it without too much trouble. At high levels, it's hard to pretend it's not well above what seems to be the preferred Bard/Warblade/Binder power curve.

You're forgetting about losing 15% more stuff to dispels.


Charm monster is a 4th level wizard spell. I was looking at 2nd level wizard spells. Your point?

Maybe he was thinking of Hold Monster or Dominate Person. In either case, a somewhat poor choice to use on a Frost Giant.

[Psyren]

Charm monster is a 4th level wizard spell. I was looking at 2nd level wizard spells. Your point?

My point is that Wiz 3/Arc 3/MT 1 is ECL 7, yet only has 2nd-level spells - the same level at which a straight Wizard would just be getting access to 4ths.



I don't dispute that a single-class wizard is more powerful that a MT. My point is that a MT still has enough tools to break any level-appropriate fight he might encounter, despite having "weak" spells. The core problem isn't that the MT is weak (it's not); it's that the single-class caster is obscenely strong.

You were responding to Yuki Akuma's point that monsters tend to be based around the (reasonable) assumption that an adventuring party has certain tools available to them at certain levels. Slower access to these tools is why leveling with a theurge can be a pain. For instance, if the DM would normally be attacking the party with a pack of Gorgons, he may have to revise this strategy for a party that has no access to Break Enchantment yet.

I'm not at all saying theurges are weak (compared to a lower-tier class like Fighter); I was saying that they can require more work from the DM than simply eyeballing CRs.

[molten_dragon]

Being three caster levels behind sucks vs. SR, vs. dispels, being a full spell level behind sucks when your party is cursed and you don't get remove curse (or break enchantment, etc.), having less space to metamagic. And split caster stats, unless you're going cerebremancer (favorite dual caster ever).

15% less likely to break SR is a bummer. A big bummer. That's like wearing a chainshirt and light shield.

If you don't mind having a bucketload of level-behind utility spells, theurges are fine.

I used to think theurges weren't so bad, but then I started playing them, and without early entry shenanigans, you really feel the lack of level appropriate spells. Having to wait 3 extra levels for bread and butter spells like Heal or Solid Fog hurts. Even the loss of 3d6 on a fireball is noticeable, if you're in a group that expects fireballs to land amongst swarms of mooks. On either end of the optimization scale, you're feeling the loss of high level spells and caster level.

I've played them before, and they play just fine most places. You're really exaggerating how far behind a single-classed caster they are. Like I said, they definitely fall behind a single-classed caster, but they'll still outshine most non-casters. "Not well optimized" does not always translate into "sucks". If you can't make your theurge contribute, you probably couldn't make a single-classed caster contribute either, because you simply aren't using your spells intelligently.

[Yuki Akuma]

Not having Stone to Flesh or Break Enchantment or Wish yet isn't a matter of intelligence. No matter how intelligent you are, if you lack the basic tools the monster assumes you have, you contribute less.

I'm not saying you shouldn't play a Mystic Theurge. But if you do, and you're expected to fill one or both of the main caster jobs, make sure to carry around some scrolls of important spells you should be able to cast by your level, were you single-classed.

Mystic Theurges make great backup casters, but mediocre main casters. Does that make sense?

[Ashtagon]

Not having Stone to Flesh or Break Enchantment or Wish yet isn't a matter of intelligence. No matter how intelligent you are, if you lack the basic tools the monster assumes you have, you contribute less.

Which monster (aside from the tarrasque, which is basically a deus ex machina monster anyway) requires the party to have wish?

[Yuki Akuma]

The only monsters I can think of are Devourers and Barghests... neither of which have a CR high enough that you'd be expected to have Wish when fighting them.

Oh, well.

(Devourers can also be foiled with Limited Wish, though, but even that's acquired a few levels higher than their CR.)

[eggs]

You're forgetting about losing 15% more stuff to dispels.
That still doesn't make them less versatile or powerful than Incarnates or Warblades; it just makes them more annoying to play. And I will definitely acknowledge that they're annoying to play.

[Spuddles]

That still doesn't make them less versatile or powerful than Incarnates or Warblades; it just makes them more annoying to play. And I will definitely acknowledge that they're annoying to play.

Ah, fair enough.