A good 1 level dip?

[TabletopGamer]

Is this class a good one level dip for a Wizard or other Int based character especially a caster type?
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/3rd-party-classes/tripod-machine/scholar

I thought so because of Smart Defense, adding Int to AC for a Wizard on top of Mage Armor and the like would be a huge benefit to make you less squishy right?

[anacalgion]

Not really, because all you would really gain is a bit of AC, and that's not worth losing casting for. Also it's 3rd party so you might not even be allowed to take it.

[GameSpawn]

One of the core commandments of optimization is to never give up casting levels. That said, this isn't a terrible decision; if you've got good int, and find yourself getting hit a lot, this could help. Generally speaking, however, spells like blur and mirror image will help you more than a higher AC.

[TabletopGamer]

Also with this could be used with things like Warblade or Swashbuckler that are Focused on INT and this could further improve those classes.

I see this working great in a Gestalt, Scholar 1/Warblade 4//Wizard 5 would be very nice wouldn't it?

[Zanos]

One of the core commandments of optimization is to never give up casting levels. That said, this isn't a terrible decision; if you've got good int, and find yourself getting hit a lot, this could help. Generally speaking, however, spells like blur and mirror image will help you more than a higher AC.
It's only important that you don't lose more than three caster levels. Being one behind puts you on sorc progression for new spells, which is worth it in exchange for 10-15 AC that is untyped and applies to touch attacks. There's a reason why Monk 1 with Kung Fu Genius is suggested as a great dip for wizards.

If you can take this for one level, I think it's worth it.

[Crake]

Also with this could be used with things like Warblade or Swashbuckler that are Focused on INT and this could further improve those classes.

I see this working great in a Gestalt, Scholar 1/Warblade 4//Wizard 5 would be very nice wouldn't it?

the majority of games arent gestalt though, and when it comes to initiators and dips, its almost always better taking 2 level dips than 1 level dips, since 2 levels in a non initiator class still grant an initator level, so either way you only lose 1 initiator level, but you get access to some more class features (generally speaking)

[sleepyphoenixx]

AC is an all or nothing thing. If you're going to invest in it you have to invest a lot (either money or spell slots) to get any real benefit against melee enemies at higher levels.
If you're going that route it can be worth it but against a melee brute with a 26 attack bonus it won't make a difference if you have 15 or 25 AC.
Even if you focus on AC you can generally get it to an acceptable level without sacrificing a level of casting.

Mirror Image and Blur are usually enough if you don't plan on being a gish and cost a lot less.

[GameSpawn]

Also with this could be used with things like Warblade or Swashbuckler that are Focused on INT and this could further improve those classes.

I see this working great in a Gestalt, Scholar 1/Warblade 4//Wizard 5 would be very nice wouldn't it?

I'm not that very familiar with Warblade (or ToB generally), but that seems like a pretty nice build. I think this is actually a pretty nice class to use in gestalt.


It's only important that you don't lose more than three caster levels. Being one behind puts you on sorc progression for new spells, which is worth it in exchange for 10-15 AC that is untyped and applies to touch attacks. There's a reason why Monk 1 with Kung Fu Genius is suggested as a great dip for wizards.

If you can take this for one level, I think it's worth it.

Like I said, it's not a terrible choice. Giving up 1 caster level WILL hurt, even if you're still competitive with the sorcerer. The questions you ask yourself should be "how often am I getting hit?", "how much would having int to AC reduce that?", and "can I reduce that more effectively with another level of spellcasting?". Often, the answer to that last question will be yes.

[Greenish]

There's a reason why Monk 1 with Kung Fu Genius is suggested as a great dip for wizards.I've never seen that suggested as a great dip.

[TabletopGamer]

I know giving up Caster Level is considered a bad thing but this not just grants you the Int to AC buff which is nice as it adds mileage to your Mage Armor.

But also grants you bonuses to Knowledge Checks by half level and free Skill Mastery for one knowledge

Also allows any language to be known even beyond your races languages.

[Zanos]

I've never seen that suggested as a great dip.
Technically you did when you read my post.

[Greenish]

Technically you did when you read my post.Touché....

[Craft (Cheese)]

A good dip for Factotums maybe. Definitely not wizards.

[GameSpawn]

I know giving up Caster Level is considered a bad thing but this not just grants you the Int to AC buff which is nice as it adds mileage to your Mage Armor.

But also grants you bonuses to Knowledge Checks by half level and free Skill Mastery for one knowledge

Also allows any language to be known even beyond your races languages.

I don't want to give the wrong impression; there are a number of interesting builds you could make, using this as a dip for an int based spellcaster, and I'd definitely consider making them. It's just that in terms of raw power, you're probably better off with the caster level.

[LordAshenshield]

This is good with a Warblade build int to ac with no armor restrictions.

[eggynack]

I know giving up Caster Level is considered a bad thing but this not just grants you the Int to AC buff which is nice as it adds mileage to your Mage Armor.

But also grants you bonuses to Knowledge Checks by half level and free Skill Mastery for one knowledge

Also allows any language to be known even beyond your races languages.
It's just a whole bunch of things that aren't spell casting. There're very few things in the game that are better than a level of casting progression, and those are always things that make your casting much better. War weaver and malconvoker are two of the big ones, though incantarix would probably be worth it with a dead level. An AC buff is not war weaver, and it's not malconvoker, and it's certainly not incantarix. It's just an AC buff. An AC buff is an imperfect defense against a limited scope of attacks. It helps very little against spells, and melee bruisers are probably going to be able to crack your shell a decent amount of the time. It's just not all that worth it.

[Phelix-Mu]

It kind of bothers me that AC is really kind of an afterthought in the big scope of optimization. Really kind of underlines how terrible the magic v mundane thing is when not getting hit is really beside the point. (At least not getting hit by virtue of AC, the main mechanic for not getting hit.)

In a game that often has a large amount of combat, its silly that a core mechanic like "d20 to hit X" is pretty irrelevant.

*cries over images of high-level rocket tag and cities blown asunder with TO spell combos*

Oh well.

[Ramza00]

It's only important that you don't lose more than three caster levels. Being one behind puts you on sorc progression for new spells, which is worth it in exchange for 10-15 AC that is untyped and applies to touch attacks. There's a reason why Monk 1 with Kung Fu Genius is suggested as a great dip for wizards.

If you can take this for one level, I think it's worth it.
When you are 17th level 10 or 15 AC doesn't matter, miss chance matters, contingency matters.

When you are at level 1 to 10 AC matters, but answer honestly would you rather have 6 or so more ac or would you rather have the spell friendly fire (level 4) which redirects all ranged attacks included ray spells. Being 1 level behind means 1 less 4th level spell.

[Phelix-Mu]

When you are 17th level 10 or 15 AC doesn't matter, miss chance matters, contingency matters.

When you are at level 1 to 10 AC matters, but answer honestly would you rather have 6 or so more ac or would you rather have the spell friendly fire (level 4) which redirects all ranged attacks included ray spells. Being 1 level behind means 1 less 4th level spell.

I would generally agree with this, except that, in theory, a wizard worth his salt should be able to optimize so far ahead of any kind of expected challenge curve that even missing a spell level or two will probably not be a critical difference.

High-op campaigns (where the DM is making a point of not letting the pcs have the run of the tables) and campaigns involving lots of well-thought-out enemy spellcasters are obvious exceptions.

[LordAshenshield]

So am i to take it none of you cast or prepare mage armor,shield or greater mage armor then?

Scholar is also handy for a knowledge devotion build as it gives a free skill focus on a knowledge of your choice. It also adds half your level to your knowledge checks even if its untrained.

So what i am hearing is wizard cannot benefit from extra knowledge skills or ac based off their casting stat? So PrC that do not have perfect 10/10 spellcasting are worthless?

[Werephilosopher]

There's a reason why Monk 1 with Kung Fu Genius is suggested as a great dip for wizards.

I've never seen this suggested (before now) either, but now I'm wondering why that is. It looks like a pretty decent idea, as it also gives +2 to all saves plus other goodies. But since wizards are misers for feats it's probably hard to lose one on top of the level lost for dipping.

[Greenish]

So am i to take it none of you cast or prepare mage armor,shield or greater mage armor then?Shield has unfortunately short duration. Mage Armour is okay due to low investment required, though Mirror Images, mobility, and miss chances are usually better defenses.


Scholar is also handy for a knowledge devotion build as it gives a free skill focus on a knowledge of your choice.Well, if you're some sort of ray specialist, and having trouble hitting those touch attacks, Knowledge Devotion is okay, but mostly, you can leave that to the beatsticks who have to worry about attack bonuses.


It also adds half your level to your knowledge checks even if its untrained.Why would a wizard have an untrained knowledge skill?


So what i am hearing is wizard cannot benefit from extra knowledge skills or ac based off their casting stat?Sure, wizards benefit from those. They just tend to benefit more from, you know, casting. If you wanted better saves/hp/ac/attack/skills, you'd be playing a class that has those. Wizard has the best spell list in the game for not having much of any of those.


So PrC that do not have perfect 10/10 spellcasting are worthless?It's already been mentioned, there are PrCs worth losing (some) casting for. They just happen to be the PrCs that improve your casting.

[LordAshenshield]

If i was using this for a caster i know you csn lose a spell level or two and not suck.
But i would run this on a cleric and change the casting stat to Int with a feat. Buy yeah wizards clearly suck hard if they miss a level or two of casting.

I have a character build with +10 from int add that to my ac and allow me better knowledge rolls is kinda nice

[Greenish]

No, a wizard who'd lost a caster level or two wouldn't "suck hard". It'd still be a wizard, just a less powerful one, more likely than not. That might be exactly what the doctor ordered.

No one is telling you you're forbidden to dip into the class and get Int to AC, so there's no need to sulk.

[eggynack]

So am i to take it none of you cast or prepare mage armor,shield or greater mage armor then?
They're alright, but I wouldn't ditch a caster level for them. AC defends you against only a couple of attack types, and those things are things that're sometimes worth defending against.

Scholar is also handy for a knowledge devotion build as it gives a free skill focus on a knowledge of your choice. It also adds half your level to your knowledge checks even if its untrained.
It is nice for that. It's just less nice than more spells.


So what i am hearing is wizard cannot benefit from extra knowledge skills or ac based off their casting stat? So PrC that do not have perfect 10/10 spellcasting are worthless?
Well, mostly, yeah. Casting is better than everything else in the entire game, no matter what. If you can boost knowledge or AC without losing casting, that's worthwhile, but if you trade one for the other, that's not. Most levels that don't advance casting are worthless, unless they boost casting in an appreciable way. You can do this thing, if you want. You're fully within your rights to take this odd little dip, and you'll still be one of the most powerful classes in the game. But you'll be worse. That's all there is to it, and there's really no arguing the point. You can be worse. Folks choose to be worse all the time. Just, y'know, be aware of the fact that you're being worse, and proceed at your own risk.

[Lans]

AC is an all or nothing thing. If you're going to invest in it you have to invest a lot (either money or spell slots) to get any real benefit against melee enemies at higher levels.
If you're going that route it can be worth it but against a melee brute with a 26 attack bonus it won't make a difference if you have 15 or 25 AC.
Even if you focus on AC you can generally get it to an acceptable level without sacrificing a level of casting.

This is untrue, if you have the 15 AC then the monster is free to fight defensively, use CE, and use PA.

[ericgrau]

I think it would be good at high level when you can get more out of it and already have plenty of good spells to fall back on. At low level I dunno. And +9 or more touch AC which stacks with other AC is much better than any miss chance out there. Dex adds ~+3, dirt cheap items ~+4, greater mage armor +6 and you're already at 32 for 24 hours without any real optimization or significant investment. Doesn't even count more short term buffs. And the typical high level monster is going to be swinging with a +20 not a +25; not to mention it's lower than that on secondary attacks and so on. By the time they swing with more attack bonus at CR 20 you can also afford more with your ridiculous budget and spells per day.

The common beliefs aren't altruisms that apply even with one of them vs. 15 of something else. There is a crossover point where you say "actually, hmm..."

[EugeneVoid]

In 3.5, it's probably... decent. More wizard levels would probably be better.
I'm not too familiar with pathfinder though.

[anacalgion]

So what i am hearing is wizard cannot benefit from extra knowledge skills or ac based off their casting stat? So PrC that do not have perfect 10/10 spellcasting are worthless?

Basically yeah. I can't see an instance when I'd want AC and knowledge skills over spells. And the only PrCs worth losing casting for are the crazy ones like Anima Mage (yeah, you lose the casting because of a binder dip, not the class, but still).

[TabletopGamer]

I did not just say Wizard now did I. Combined with a Factotum or Warblade would be nice as well, heck Warblade can wear heavy armor and with his INT added to it he just gets that much hardier.

Also this gives you more insensitive get it your int up which gives you the extra spells.

[eggynack]

I did not just say Wizard now did I. Combined with a Factotum or Warblade would be nice as well, heck Warblade can wear heavy armor and with his INT added to it he just gets that much hardier.
Sure, it'd probably be fine for not-casters. Not-casters have leave to dip stuff. It's not the best thing ever, but it's a decent level. It's just not good for wizards, or other full casters.


Also this gives you more insensitive get it your int up which gives you the extra spells.
A wizard has plenty of incentive to boost intelligence already. Keying more things off of intelligence doesn't really boost your casting ability. It just gives you more AC, or whatever other thing you're getting.