Can Legacy Champion really aid double advancement prestige classes?

[Particle_Man]

Because it seems almost too good to be true, but the only interpretation I can think of where it isn't true is if one can't duplicate a feature of a second class when that feature merely duplicates the feature of a third class.

Could one have, for instance, a cleric 3/incarnate 1/Sapphire hierach 10/legacy champion 6 and, by the LC duplicating the SH abilities, end up with the spells per day and spellcasting level of an 18th level cleric and the soul melds, essentia and theoretical bindings (should one somehow find ways to open some chakra, via feats or spells) of a 16th level incarnate?

Or more prosaically, could one have a cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 10/legacy champion 4 and have the spells per day of a 16th level cleric and a 16th level wizard?

[Ashtagon]

Legacy champion can advance the spellcasting ability of a dual-casting prestige class such as the two that you call out. However, there is another restriction in play which you did not acknowledge. Pre-epic, prestige classes cap out at level 10 (or 5, or 3, or something else for some very odd ones). The build you describe can't work, because it relies on advancing your dual-caster prestige classes to epic levels before you are able to take epic class levels.

[Mr Adventurer]

Though you'd still get caster level I think?

[Ashtagon]

Though you'd still get caster level I think?

Not even that. Once your effective character level in the dual-caster class hits level 10, you can't take any more levels (either actual levels or virtual levels) until you hit epic.

Really, this is akin to asking how the Dire Charge feat benefits a level 7 dwarf fighter. It doesn't, because it is an epic feat, and so a level 7 dwarf fighter simply can't take it. You character builds as written can't pick the dual-caster class as valid targets for the legacy champion class feature, because those have already reached the pre-epic maximum.

[Dagroth]

Actually, just because you're advancing the effects of the Prestige Class, you're not actually advancing the level of it.

There is no rule that says you have to take Mystic Theurge after 3 levels of Cleric and 3 levels of Wizard. You could go 5 & 5 and then take Mystic Theurge. According to the Epic Rules, 10 Epic levels of Mystic Theurge would max out your casting for Cleric & Wizard in that case.

According to the rules, you can take Cleric 3, Wizard 3, Mystic Theurge 10 and Legacy Champion 4. That would give you spellcasting as a 17th level Cleric & 17th level Wizard. 6 Epic Levels of Mystic Theurge would give you the spellcasting of a 20th level Cleric & 20th level Wizard.

Heck, you could take Cleric 3, Wizard 3, Mystic Theurge 10 and then Rogue 2 & Fighter 2 if you really wanted. You'd cast as a 13th Level Cleric & Wizard and would need 14 Epic Levels of Mystic Theurge... but you're allowed to do that.

There's nothing in the game that says you can't take Druid 3, Wizard 3, Mystic Theurge 10 & Geomancer 4... and, if you balanced your progression in Geomancer, you'd cast as a Level 15 Druid & Level 15 Wizard (might as well just take Druid up to 5 & Wizard up to 5 with that). Then you'd take 10 Epic Levels of Mystic Theurge to get spellcasting of 20th in each.

Other than the class itself only having 10 levels, there's nothing in game that says you can't advance the spellcasting before level 20.

Edit:

You character builds as written can't pick the dual-caster class as valid targets for the legacy champion class feature, because those have already reached the pre-epic maximum.

Where does it say this? Other than the class only having 10 levels, it doesn't say anything about it.

[Uncle Pine]

Where does it say this? Other than the class only having 10 levels, it doesn't say anything about it.
It's in the ELH. I don't have a quote at the moment, but I think Ashtagon is (sadly) spot-on. Sadly because I really like Hellfire Warlocks but dislike bloodlines, which are the only truly viable ways to increase its ability beyond the 3 levels of the class since Legacy Champion and Uncanny Trickster don't actually work.

However, something you can still do with the two classes is getting 1.5 IL/level. How? Advance an initiator class. You then get +1 IL from the advanced class and +0.5 from the Legacy Champion.

[Particle_Man]

Bloodline just gives caster level though, not extra spells per day, right?

Legacy Champion seems to give the whole ball of wax, so long as you wait until character level 21 before taking LC. Or even 20, since LC doesn't advance anything on its first level anyhow.

[Dagroth]

It's in the ELH. I don't have a quote at the moment, but I think Ashtagon is (sadly) spot-on. Sadly because I really like Hellfire Warlocks but dislike bloodlines, which are the only truly viable ways to increase its ability beyond the 3 levels of the class since Legacy Champion and Uncanny Trickster don't actually work.

However, something you can still do with the two classes is getting 1.5 IL/level. How? Advance an initiator class. You then get +1 IL from the advanced class and +0.5 from the Legacy Champion.

The SRD doesn't say anything about it... just that when you take Epic Levels of Mystic Theurge, it only advances one class each level (Arcane on odd numbered class levels, Divine on even numbered class levels).

Now, you could argue that is what Legacy Champion would do...

But what if you went this path:
Cleric 3, Wizard 3, Mystic Theurge 4, Legacy Champion 4 (increasing Mystic Theurge), Mystic Theurge 6.

The important thing here is you're not actually advancing the class beyond 10 levels. You're just adding another 4 levels of "advance spellcasting for Arcane and Divine both"

Of course, Legacy Champion being used this way (and many of the other ways it is suggested to be used) is a cheese-stuffed crust cheese pizza with extra cheese, a side of cheese and someone asking "do you want cheese with that?"

[Uncle Pine]

The SRD doesn't say anything about it... just that when you take Epic Levels of Mystic Theurge, it only advances one class each level (Arcane on odd numbered class levels, Divine on even numbered class levels).
It's actually on the SRD as well:

Epic Level Basics
Epic characters—those whose character level is 21st or higher—are handled slightly differently from nonepic characters. While epic characters continue to receive most of the benefits of gaining levels, some benefits are replaced by alternative gains. A class can be advanced beyond 20th level. A ten-level prestige class can progress beyond 10th level, but only if the character level is already 20th or higher. A class with fewer than ten levels cannot progress beyond the maximum for that class, regardless of character level.

[Segev]

The key is that you're not advancing the 10-level PrC even to level 10, necessarily. If you go MT 5, LC 10, you've not taken MT to 15.

LC just lets you add the benefits of the class it advances; it doesn't advance the class. Just like MT doesn't advance Wizard and Cleric; it only advances their spells/day and CL.

A Wiz 3/Clr 3/MT 10 is NOT a level 13 wizard and a level 13 cleric; he's a level 3 wizard and a level 3 cleric and a level 10 mystic theurge, and has the casting prowess of a level 13 wizard and a level 13 cleric.

Likewise, a Hellfire Warlock 3/LC 10 is not a level 13 hellfire warlock, even though he has the hellfire blast prowess of a level 13 hellfire warlock.

No class has been taken Epic by an MT 5/LC 10 (or whatever). This means that no epic feats are available, no epic rules come into play.

[Ashtagon]

But what if you went this path:
Cleric 3, Wizard 3, Mystic Theurge 4, Legacy Champion 4 (increasing Mystic Theurge), Mystic Theurge 6.

The important thing here is you're not actually advancing the class beyond 10 levels. You're just adding another 4 levels of "advance spellcasting for Arcane and Divine both"

Just as a point of clarity, legacy champion advances the class of your choice each level except 1st. Mystic theurge advances one arcane and one divine class by one level each level.

At level 10, this character casts as a cleric 7/wizard 7, and is a mystic theurge 4.
At level 14, he casts as a cleric 10/wizard 10, and is (virtually) a mystic theurge 7.
At level 17, he casts as a cleric 12/wizard 12, and is (virtually) a mystic theurge 10.

At level 18 when he tries to take another mystic theurge level, the rules divide by zero if you allow him to take that level. He is still pre-epic, and you are attempting to give him what amounts to an epic character level, thanks to the way you assigned your legacy champion bonus.

If this situation happened in a game I was running, I'd only allow him to take the mystic theurge level if the PC simultaneously retrained the way the legacy champion bonus was assigned.

[Particle_Man]

Hmmm, it seems there is dispute in this area at least. Was it ever touched upon in an FAQ or Sage Advice or something like that?

[Segev]

No FAQ or Sage Advice to my knowledge, but it's simple logic. LC isn't saying, "Take a level of another class." It's saying, "Advance the benefits of this class as if you'd taken a level."

There are some things that are simply "do this every time you gain a level of this class." Those things advance based on LC saying "gain X as if you'd gained a level in Y class."

I don't think LC advances the "get A at N level" abilities, like "monks gain Tongue of Sun and Moon at level 12 (IIRC, may be forgetting right level." If it did, the only issues it would create is if you were trying then to go BACK into the old class, as that would start overlapping those specific-level abilities.

Regardless, anybody claiming MT 1/LC9, taking one more level of LC is going to make MT "go epic" is simply wrong. It isn't requiring you to look anywhere but at the text of MT, which says that you advance your CL and spells/day for one arcane and one divine class at every level.

If you're using LC to advance MT, then the reduced evaluation of its rules text amounts to, "At every level of LC, gain spells per day and caster level in one arcane class and one divine class in which you've already got levels." Because it's copied that text out of MT. It isn't advancing MT. It's simply gaining the benefits as if you'd advanced MT.

[Uncle Pine]

No FAQ or Sage Advice to my knowledge, but it's simple logic. LC isn't saying, "Take a level of another class." It's saying, "Advance the benefits of this class as if you'd taken a level."

That's not actually what Legacy Champion says. The relevant quote is:

Class Features: At each level except 1st and 7th, you gain class features and an increase in effective level as if you had also gained a level in a class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level.
You gain an effective level as if you had also gained a level in another class. If you are a Rogue 8, advance it once with Legacy Champion and then go back to it for a level, you get a special ability, not SA +5d6 and trap sense +3 (you gained those during the last level). If you are a Mystic Theurge 10 and try to advance it with Legacy Champion pre-epic your effective level in the Mystic Theurge class would become 11, but that can't happen because you are not an epic character*.
There are very few instances in 3.5e in which the word "effective" is used and this is one of those (the other one I can think of is Sanctum Spell).


*If I'm reading it correctly, there is actually one exception to this since the ELH specifies that you can progress 10-level PrCs "only if the character level is already 20th or higher". In other words, you can advance Mystic Theurge 10 to 11 at 20th level.

[Particle_Man]

*If I'm reading it correctly, there is actually one exception to this since the ELH specifies that you can progress 10-level PrCs "only if the character level is already 20th or higher". In other words, you can advance Mystic Theurge 10 to 11 at 20th level.

Wouldn't that mean "already 20th level before adding the next level" so that you would be able to add the MT 11 level only if you were becoming at least 21st character level (that is, about to add a level to at least 20th character level)?

[Dagroth]

I'd forgotten about the dead levels of LC... I was just throwing out numbers for example purposes.

For the exact wording from Uncanny Trickster: "At each level after 1st, you gain class features (including spellcasting ability) and an increase in effective level as if you had also gained a level in a class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level."

So, if you have Wizard 4 and use Uncanny Trickster 2 to emulate Wizard... Not only do you get 3rd level spells, but you get 2 new learned spells and a Metamagic Feat.

Is that was is being said here?

It seems like using LC to raise Ultimate Magus would be better because of this text: "At each level except 1st, 4th, and 7th, you gain new spells per day and an increase in caster level (and spells known, if applicable) as if you had also gained a level in both a prepared arcane casting class and a spontaneous arcane casting class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of those classes would have gained."

By the wording, every level after 7th increases both classes spells per day, spells known & caster level... no matter how many "effective" levels that is.

---------------

On the other hand, I don't see any reason not to allow LC or UT to increase Mystic Theurge. The biggest advantages are... gets you to level 20 & increases both casting classes past level 20 rather than one at a time like Epic (ha!) Mystic Theurge.

[Uncle Pine]

Wouldn't that mean "already 20th level before adding the next level" so that you would be able to add the MT 11 level only if you were becoming at least 21st character level (that is, about to add a level to at least 20th character level)?

That is arguable, as according to level up guidelines (PHB 58) the class you advance in is decided at step 1. and you only gain the class features at step 9. Therefore, should you be something like Wizard 4/Cleric 5/Mystic Theurge 10 and take Legacy Champion as your last pre-epic level, you'd be a 20th level character (Wizard 4/Cleric 5/Mystic Theurge 10/Legacy Champion 1) by the time you advance Mystic Theurge, thus satisfying the clause "being a character of 20th level or higher".

[Troacctid]

Of course advancing Mystic Theurge beyond 10 is decidedly unhelpful in any case, thanks to how the class is designed.

When an odd-numbered mystic theurge level above 10th is gained she gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable), as if she had gained a level in an arcane spellcasting class she belonged to previously, up to the maximum spells per day and spells known by that class. Her caster level in that class also increases by +1. When an even-numbered mystic theurge level above 10th is gained she gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable), as if she had gained a level in a divine spellcasting class she belonged to previously, up to the maximum spells per day and spells known by that class. Her caster level in that class also increases by +1.
You do get a bonus Epic Feat at Mystic Theurge 16, so it's not technically strictly worse than just alternating levels of the base classes. Is it worth losing a buttload of caster levels? No.

[Particle_Man]

Is the Epic MT split advancement meant to be a template for other epic double advancer prestige classes? Should an epic SH advance incarnate levels on odd level advancements and cleric levels on even level advancements?

[OldTrees1]

Is the Epic MT split advancement meant to be a template for other epic double advancer prestige classes?

Yes


Should an epic SH advance incarnate levels on odd level advancements and cleric levels on even level advancements?

No

Meant to be and should are asking different questions. Often, especially with epic, we would say something like the designers should have meant something else.

[Vizzerdrix]

Of course, Legacy Champion being used this way (and many of the other ways it is suggested to be used) is a cheese-stuffed crust cheese pizza with extra cheese, a side of cheese and someone asking "do you want cheese with that?"

Only it isnt. The only time a build like this will come out ahead is in meat grinder style games, and can even deter dreaded party npc infestations. In fact without early entry a MT build will quickly feel out gunned by any full caster. On top of that they have to get bogged down even further with a legacy weapon and the mess those come with. You also make yourself MAD in most cases.

[VisitingDaGulag]

There is no rule that says advancing an 11th level in a 10 levels long class makes it an epic PrC. Nor is there a rule that stops all level-dependent class abilities from ceasing to function at 11th level. However it is true that certain Epic PrCs are an 11th level of a nonepic 10 level PrC.

Logic.

[Ashtagon]

There is no rule that says advancing an 11th level in a 10 levels long class makes it an epic PrC. ...


Despite the 20th level limit indicated in the PHB, you can advance a class level beyond 20th by using the rules in this book. You can also advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class (such as those presented in the DMG) beyond 10th level, but only if your character level is already 20th or higher. You cannot advance the class level of a class with fewer than ten levels beyond the maximum described for that class, regardless of your character level.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

For context, this is part of a collection of paragraphs discussing epic class levels.

[SirNibbles]

The key is that you're not advancing the 10-level PrC even to level 10, necessarily. If you go MT 5, LC 10, you've not taken MT to 15.

LC just lets you add the benefits of the class it advances; it doesn't advance the class. Just like MT doesn't advance Wizard and Cleric; it only advances their spells/day and CL.

A Wiz 3/Clr 3/MT 10 is NOT a level 13 wizard and a level 13 cleric; he's a level 3 wizard and a level 3 cleric and a level 10 mystic theurge, and has the casting prowess of a level 13 wizard and a level 13 cleric.

Likewise, a Hellfire Warlock 3/LC 10 is not a level 13 hellfire warlock, even though he has the hellfire blast prowess of a level 13 hellfire warlock.

No class has been taken Epic by an MT 5/LC 10 (or whatever). This means that no epic feats are available, no epic rules come into play.

I fully agree with this. A Mystic Theurge 10/Legacy Champion 5 would have the abilities of a Mystic Theurge 14.

___

However, Epic Mystic Theurge simply isn't worth it (whether you get it by actually advancing Mystic Theurge beyond 10th level or by using Legacy Champion to boost the abilities beyond a 10th level Mystic Theurge). The alternating advancement is the same as just taking the base classes or prestige classes that advance spellcasting, switching between Arcane and Divine each level. With the base classes or other prestige classes, you get more class features than you do with Mystic Theurge with the same spellcasting advancement.

Epic Mystic Theurge is pointless as it is written.

___

The highest combined Arcane/Divine CL you can get at 20, as far as I know, is 19/18. A Bamboo Spiritfolk (for Trackless Step) [Oriental Adventures page 14] Wizard 2/Archivist 1 (with Alternate Source Spell and Precocious Apprentice) qualifies you for Mystic Theurge at 4th level. By 10th level you can take Arcane Hierophant until 19, then take Mystic Theurge again at 20 for a build of Wizard 2/Archivist 1/Mystic Theurge 7/Arcane Hierophant 10.

Since Arcane Hierophant is a 10 level class with no designated Epic variant, it is advanced according to the rules on page 8 of the ELH.

"Any class features that increase or accumulate as part
of a repeated pattern (such as a rogue’s sneak attack or
the number of times per day a barbarian can rage)
also continue to increase or accumulate after 20th
level at the same rate."

Thus, Arcane Hierophant continues to gain one level each of Arcane and Divine spellcasting at 11th level and beyond.

[Mato]

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.Yes, if you cut part a key portion of the text that disagrees with you it very clearly supports what you want it to say.



Regardless of the method by which you achieve 21st level, once you reach that point you are considered an epic character. Epic characters—those whose character level is 21st or higher—are handled slightly differently from nonepic characters. While you continue to gain most of the benefits of gaining levels, some benefits are replaced by alternative gains.

Despite the 20th-level limit indicated in the Player’s Handbook, you can advance a class level beyond 20th by using the rules in this book. You can also advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class (such as those presented in the DUNGEON MASTER’S Guide) beyond 10th level, but only if your character level is already 20th or higher. You cannot advance the class level of a class with fewer than ten levels beyond the maximum described for that class, regardless of your character level.The rule set you're quoting from is ignored by any 3.5 rules source and specifically says you handle things differently than you would for a none-epic character before explaining how the epic-only advancement rules work.

You cannot prove those rules apply to a none-epic character.

Class Features: At each level except 1st and 7th, you gain class features and an increase in effective level as if you had also gained a level in a class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level. The specific class features you gain include spells per day (and spells known, if applicable), improved chance of turning or destroying undead, metamagic or item creation feats, bonus feats, monk special abilities, sneak attack progressions, and so on, depending on the class. You do not, however, gain the benefit of your previous class’s Hit Dice, attack progression, skill points, or saving throws. If you had more than one class before becoming a legacy champion, you must decide to which class to add each level for the purpose of determining class abilities.


ORDER OF RULES APPLICATION
The D&D game assumes a specific order of rules application: General to specific to exception. A general rule is a basic guideline, but a more specific rule takes precedence when applied to the same activity. For instance, a monster description is more specific than any general rule about monsters, so the description takes precedence. An exception is a particular kind of specific rule that contradicts or breaks another rule (general or specific). The Improved Disarm feat, for instance, provides an exception to the rule that an attacker provokes an attack of opportunity from the defender he’s trying to disarm (see Disarm, page 45).And it's possible to prove legacy champion grants specific class features and that it's specific entry would disregard a general, outdated, rule that doesn't even necessarily apply in the first place.

[Ashtagon]

"You can also advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class (such as those presented in the DUNGEON MASTER’S Guide) beyond 10th level, but only if your character level is already 20th or higher. ."

Have there been reprints with different text? Because that sentence seems to suggest a character of level 1-20 cannot take 11th level in a prestige class that is written as 10 levels.

[Mato]

"You can also advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class (such as those presented in the DUNGEON MASTER’S Guide) beyond 10th level, but only if your character level is already 20th or higher. ."Yes, the epic character entry that tells you to use the epic class features section to figure out how to epic progress an epic character, which is progressed differently than a none-epic character, says that. And while I am thinking of it, the ESRB rating for Neverwinter Nights 2 is Teen, conclusively I must have just proved D&D is not for kids.

You could actually have a quote that says "You may never ever ever ever have more than 10 level in a class." but as a general rule it is ignored by any more specific rule, such as legacy champion's specific class entry that says you gain certain class features.

But I feel you still don't understand what's being said here so let me try to reach you as a follow GitP member using the GitP-style of debating, arguing pointless semantics that you could never refute or convince me I'm wrong about: A wizard 5 / shadowcraft mage 5 / legacy champion 5 only have five levels in shadowcraft mage and is not a 19th level character and more than a wizard 15 / archmage 4 is supposed to be a 24th level character. You are specifically obtaining the class features of a class (which would be none) and improving other class related calculations, not actually progressing the class and obtaining double levels.

[Segev]

The crux of it is that LC says you gain "an effective level," not that you gain "a level." You are NOT an MT 6 if you were MT 5 and took a level of LC that advances MT. You're an MT 5 with an effective level of 6.

LC can't get you into Epic MT. It can, however, make you an effective level 11+ non-epic MT.

You would continue to advance all abilities that are level-dependent of MT, including spell slot/level advancement.

You would not get any benefits of being an epic character, nor any class benefits of epic MT.

In fact, if you wanted class benefits of epic MT after you got into epic levels, you'd have to take at least one level of epic MT before you could advance them with LC.

[OldTrees1]

The crux of it is that LC says you gain "an effective level," not that you gain "a level." You are NOT an MT 6 if you were MT 5 and took a level of LC that advances MT. You're an MT 5 with an effective level of 6.

LC can't get you into Epic MT. It can, however, make you an effective level 11+ non-epic MT.

You would continue to advance all abilities that are level-dependent of MT, including spell slot/level advancement.

You would not get any benefits of being an epic character, nor any class benefits of epic MT.

In fact, if you wanted class benefits of epic MT after you got into epic levels, you'd have to take at least one level of epic MT before you could advance them with LC.

Citation of evidence that LC creates effective levels that did not previously exist?

General Rule: Classes only have the number of levels they show in the table.
Specific Rule: At each level except 1st and 7th, you gain class features and an increase in effective level as if you had also gained a level in a class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level.

I do not see that specific rule as contradicting the general rule. When you are at effective level 10 in a 10 level prestige class, you are still lacking permission to create an 11th level so that you can gain an effective level as if also gaining a level in the class.

[Segev]

Citation of evidence that LC creates effective levels that did not previously exist?I'm not really sure what you're asking for, here.


General Rule: Classes only have the number of levels they show in the table.Citation needed.

Specific Rule: At each level except 1st and 7th, you gain class features and an increase in effective level as if you had also gained a level in a class to which you belonged before adding the prestige class level.This rule is, in fact, the important one.


I do not see that specific rule as contradicting the general rule. When you are at effective level 10 in a 10 level prestige class, you are still lacking permission to create an 11th level so that you can gain an effective level as if also gaining a level in the class.I don't see the general rule.

That said, we all tend to assume it, and I'm not really disputing it.

An effective level quite clearly is not an actual level, however. If it were, we'd just be told that LC lets you take levels of other classes, full stop.

An effective 11th level of MT doesn't grant any specific class features, but it advances those features which are expressly dependent on level, e.g. any which say "at each level of MT, you gain spells per day and spells known and a caster level in one arcane and one divine class." (Or however it's worded.)

To put a fine point on it, while I fully believe it's how the RAW work, I think that we're in an area of legalism that requires "if your DM allows it" anyway, simply because whether a DM agrees it's in the RAW or not will have limited bearing on whether he allows it, but for some DMs, whether he agrees it's in the RAW or not may be determined by whether he wants to allow it.

[Ashtagon]

Even if you have Mt level 11+, at that point it stops advancing both spellcasting progressions simultaneously and instead advances only one at a time. That applies whether it's actually or effective level.

[OldTrees1]

I'm not really sure what you're asking for, here.
I was asking you to cite evidence for the unshared premise you are basing your argument on. Aka demonstrate a rule citation that explicitly allows LC to generate content in the form of effective levels for non existent levels. So you did make an attempt later in your post.


An effective level quite clearly is not an actual level, however. If it were, we'd just be told that LC lets you take levels of other classes, full stop.

An effective 11th level of MT doesn't grant any specific class features, but it advances those features which are expressly dependent on level, e.g. any which say "at each level of MT, you gain spells per day and spells known and a caster level in one arcane and one divine class." (Or however it's worded.)
Where is the citation that an effective 11th level of MT exists or, if it doesn't exist, a citation that LC creates an 11th level so that it can grant an effective 11th level?

The section I quoted seems tied to "as if you took a level" which makes no specific trumps general claim on non existent levels (21st level non epic Wizard, 11th level non epic MT, 4th level Hellfire Warlock, ...). So if LC can grant effective levels that don't exist, the citation would be elsewhere. Or if those levels do exist, that citation would also be elsewhere.


To put a fine point on it, while I fully believe it's how the RAW work, I think that we're in an area of legalism that requires "if your DM allows it" anyway, simply because whether a DM agrees it's in the RAW or not will have limited bearing on whether he allows it, but for some DMs, whether he agrees it's in the RAW or not may be determined by whether he wants to allow it.

Without commenting on whether I believe it is RAW or not, I agree with the rest of this statement.

[Segev]

It boils down to the fact that an effective level is just a mathematical construct. It doesn't actually require there to be a corresponding "real" level. It's something that says, "for purposes of class features for this class, you add 1 to the level you actually have in this class."

You haven't taken an 11th level in MT. You've taken a level of LC, which, assuming it's not the 1st or 7th level of LC, causes you to count as an 11th level MT for purposes of class features. The MT class is quite clear that every level of it gives +1 divine/+1 arcane caster level as class features.

[OldTrees1]

It boils down to the fact that an effective level is just a mathematical construct. It doesn't actually require there to be a corresponding "real" level. It's something that says, "for purposes of class features for this class, you add 1 to the level you actually have in this class."

You haven't taken an 11th level in MT. You've taken a level of LC, which, assuming it's not the 1st or 7th level of LC, causes you to count as an 11th level MT for purposes of class features. The MT class is quite clear that every level of it gives +1 divine/+1 arcane caster level as class features.

The 1st paragraph contains the unshared uncited premise. I could just as easily say:

It boils down to the fact that an effective level is just a mathematical construct. It does require there to be a corresponding "real" level that could have been taken. It's something that says, "for purposes of class features for this class, you add 1 to the level you actually have in this class."

Regardless of my position between these 2 premises, I can recognize that you have not yet provided an argument that would be acceptable to those that don't share that uncited premise of yours.

[Dagroth]

I was asking you to cite evidence for the unshared premise you are basing your argument on. Aka demonstrate a rule citation that explicitly allows LC to generate content in the form of effective levels for non existent levels. So you did make an attempt later in your post.


Where is the citation that an effective 11th level of MT exists or, if it doesn't exist, a citation that LC creates an 11th level so that it can grant an effective 11th level?

The section I quoted seems tied to "as if you took a level" which makes no specific trumps general claim on non existent levels (21st level non epic Wizard, 11th level non epic MT, 4th level Hellfire Warlock, ...). So if LC can grant effective levels that don't exist, the citation would be elsewhere. Or if those levels do exist, that citation would also be elsewhere.

By your own logic, LC should not advance Hellfire Warlock... which is considered a valid option on these boards.

Or is it just because MT is a 10 level Prestige Class that specifically does have an Epic Level Progression?

By the way, the citation that an 11th level of MT exists... Epic Level Handbook (though you don't actually want it. It sucks worse than going MT does in the first place).

[Segev]

Hm. That is a valid argument. However, I think the fluzziness of that premise and its contrary is why the "it's really going to come down to the DM" argument is the only real one we can support.

The rules say you can't take levels of a PrC past their printed ones...but they don't say you can't have effective levels past them. Now, you can try to argue that there don't exist levels past the printed ones, but that's not what the rules specify; they just say that you can't continue taking them. That you have to have a 10-level PrC progression and be epic to take epic progressions of them.

The reason I say that an effective level gets around this is simply that you're not breaking the one rule that I'm aware of that limits you in this regard: you're not actually taking more levels of the PrC than are printed in the table. You're just counting as if your level in that PrC were higher than it actually is.

For the same reason that "caster level" can exceed your HD or even your ECL, your "effective level" in a class can exceed your actual levels in that class. And as long as you never have more actual levels than are printed, you're not breaking the rules.

[OldTrees1]

By your own logic, LC should not advance Hellfire Warlock... which is considered a valid option on these boards.

Or is it just because MT is a 10 level Prestige Class that specifically does have an Epic Level Progression?

By the way, the citation that an 11th level of MT exists... Epic Level Handbook (though you don't actually want it. It sucks worse than going MT does in the first place).
LC advancing Hellfire Warlock above 3rd is by no means a categorically accepted claim on these boards. Segev's argument for the advancement of MT by LC is the common argument for advancement of HW by LC. That argument relies on a premise that is not categorically accepted on these boards which might be the only reason the conclusion is not categorically accepted.

My logic was not one conclusion or the other. My logic was pointing to the unshared premise and checking to see of Segev could solve it via a citation. Segev has surprised me in the past, so I thought it worth a shot.

By the way, we were talking about an 11th level of non Epic MT. 10 levels of MT are known and then it starts as Epic MT (just like 3 levels of HW are known and then nothing).


Hm. That is a valid argument. However, I think the fluzziness of that premise and its contrary is why the "it's really going to come down to the DM" argument is the only real one we can support.
Solidly Agree.

[Segev]

So far as I know, there's no explicit statement that, "By the way, if you're using some other means of advancing PrCs than just taking more levels of them, you can explicitly take 11+ levels of 10-level PrCs."

But I don't think anybody should expect that; there are a LOT of rules interactions and loopholes that lack such explicit language, and there absolutely is a school of thought that shuts those down for that reason. The issue with most of that "shut-down" logic is that it requires a somewhat arbitrary line of what is "by the rules" and what is "a loophole."

Here, the acknowledged loophole is "effective level." I suppose a good way to examine it would be to ask, "if we accept that there is not a distinction, what happens on the other side of the coin? You take LC sufficient to gain 5 levels of MT after taking 5 real levels of MT; what happens when you go and try to take one more level of MT? You clearly haven't taken 10 levels of MT; your stat sheet lists only 5. You have not even gotten all the skill points and class skills you could have from doing so. Where do the rules say you cannot take another level of MT past 5? Well, if we say there's no difference between "effective levels" and actual levels, the rule's there: you've got 10 levels of MT. But how can you have 10 levels of MT and 6 levels of LC and 6 levels of wizard+cleric and not be level 22? (3 wiz, 3 clr, 5 MT, 6 LC = level 17). Thus, we wind up with a contradiction if we say "effective levels are levels," because it starts doubling up on it.

So, no, I can't show an explicit rule saying effective levels are not real levels, but I can demonstrate a contradiction if we assume they are.

[Dagroth]

In point of fact, if Segev is the DM in his group... or I'm the DM of my group... there is a rule that says LC can advance Hellfire Warlock & Mystic Theurge.

It's in the DMG. Everyone knows what it is.

[Segev]

In point of fact, if Segev is the DM in his group... or I'm the DM of my group... there is a rule that says LC can advance Hellfire Warlock & Mystic Theurge.

It's in the DMG. Everyone knows what it is.

Eh, that's getting back to "it's up to the DM," which we've all already agreed is true.

[Gruftzwerg]

There is no rule that says advancing an 11th level in a 10 levels long class makes it an epic PrC. Nor is there a rule that stops all level-dependent class abilities from ceasing to function at 11th level. However it is true that certain Epic PrCs are an 11th level of a nonepic 10 level PrC.

Logic.

^This. The so called rule in the epic handbook ain't a global rule, just a guide. Cause there exists "Void Disciple", a prc with 13 regular levels.

[Ashtagon]

^This. The so called rule in the epic handbook ain't a global rule, just a guide. Cause there exists "Void Disciple", a prc with 13 regular levels.

"You can also advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class (such as those presented in the DUNGEON MASTER’S Guide) beyond 10th level, but only if your character level is already 20th or higher."

That rule actually exists. It specifically addresses only 10-level prestige classes.

There is another rule that says that prestige classes of less than 10 levels should not have epic levels defined above what their base description states. Rules lawyers can of course jump in and say that there's nothing to say they can't have normal levels defined above their base description, although I feel that's akin to saying there's nothing in my 1st level human warrior's statblock that says he can't fly.

There are a few prestige classes that progress beyond level 10 in their base description (prestige bard/ranger/paladin, void disciple, possibly others). There isn't anything specifically allowing them an epic (or normal) progression beyond what is defined in their base description (by RAW, only 10-level prestige classes are allowed an epic progression).

Going off-RAW though, I'd allow an epic progression for any class that has 10+ levels in its base description.

[VisitingDaGulag]

Bah this stupid boards now cuts out all quotes inside the thing you want to quote?

"There is no rule that says advancing an 11th level in a 10 levels long class makes it an epic PrC"

"you can advance a class level beyond 20th by using the rules in this book."

"You can advance the class level of a ten-level prestige class ... only if your character level is already 20th"

"You cannot advance the class level of a class with fewer than ten levels beyond the maximum described for that class, regardless of your character level.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.Those three things are clear cut but they nontheless do not say that advancing a 10th level class's class features into its 11th level makes it epic. You can of course take an epic progression if it is available, but that is different.

[Ashtagon]

So the header labelled "Epic Levels and Prestige Classes" didn't clue you in that they might be talking about epic prestige classes?

I'm beginning to think the RACSD thread needs an update.

[Segev]

So the header labelled "Epic Levels and Prestige Classes" didn't clue you in that they might be talking about epic prestige classes?

I'm beginning to think the RACSD thread needs an update.

No, that's not what anybody's saying.

What they're saying is that you're never taking an 11th level of Mystic Theurge. You're taking a level of Legacy Champion, which happens to give all the benefits of another level of Mystic Theurge. Not of Epic Mystic Theurge. Just of Mystic Theurge. The fact that you count as having 11 levels of it doesn't matter, because you're not breaking the level cap on MT. You're just getting the benefits you would if you had 11 levels of it. Without actually having an 11th level.

[Ashtagon]

Fair enough. You get another level of MT. But level 11 of MT pre-epic does not exist. It is entirely undefined. The benefit of getting something that does not exist is... nothing.

[Segev]

Fair enough. You get another level of MT. But level 11 of MT pre-epic does not exist. It is entirely undefined. The benefit of getting something that does not exist is... nothing.

It isn't undefined. Every level of MT gives you +1 level of divine/+1 level of arcane casting. Therefore, every level of LC that advances as MT gives the same. It doesn't matter if this is your 11th time getting that benefit. You still get it. The text trumps the table, and the text says you get this benefit every level. The fact that the table doesn't extend that far is irrelevant.

[OldTrees1]

It isn't undefined. Every level of MT gives you +1 level of divine/+1 level of arcane casting. Therefore, every level of LC that advances as MT gives the same. It doesn't matter if this is your 11th time getting that benefit. You still get it. The text trumps the table, and the text says you get this benefit every level. The fact that the table doesn't extend that far is irrelevant.

The text does not contradict the table and thus is not trumping anything. The table says MT has 10 levels. The rules say for every level of MT you get the class features for that level -> The text details those specials are the +1/+1 per class level. The text is not commenting on how many levels exist -> We turn to the table which does comment on how many levels exist. 10 levels exist.

So the 11th level of MT does not exist. At this point we return to "Do you have explicit permission by RAW to benefit from a virtual level of a level that does not exist in RAW?". However since we already went there...

[Segev]

You don't need explicit permission. The text of the class says you get the +1/+1 benefit every level of MT you take. LC allows you to advance that benefit as if you'd advanced MT, without actually advancing MT. It's no different than having one or more of any number of abilities which let you increase your CL; if you're a level 20 wizard and have one or more of those abilities, you don't see that CL calculation capped at 20 just because "level 21 wizards don't exist pre-epic, so there's no wizard CL 21."

[OldTrees1]

You don't need explicit permission. The text of the class says you get the +1/+1 benefit every level of MT you take. LC allows you to advance that benefit as if you'd advanced MT, without actually advancing MT. It's no different than having one or more of any number of abilities which let you increase your CL; if you're a level 20 wizard and have one or more of those abilities, you don't see that CL calculation capped at 20 just because "level 21 wizards don't exist pre-epic, so there's no wizard CL 21."

The form of:

" At this point we return to "X". However since we already went there..."

Was a nod to the previous discussion where neither position had an argument that could convince the other. That has not changed by restating part of one of the arguments.

[daremetoidareyo]

Maybe a recontextualization is in order. If you are wizard 3/archivist 3/ mystic theurge 1/ legacy champion 10, mystic theurge 3, you never invoke the problem of epic mystic theurge. You simply added 8 levels of MT casting, followed by 3 more legit levels of mystic theurge casting.

[Ashtagon]

Maybe a recontextualization is in order. If you are wizard 3/archivist 3/ mystic theurge 1/ legacy champion 10, mystic theurge 3, you never invoke the problem of epic mystic theurge. You simply added 8 levels of MT casting, followed by 3 more legit levels of mystic theurge casting.

And here we get to repeat the point that adding the benefits of an 11th level to a 10-level prestige class without using epic rules is a "divide by zero" situation.

I suspect this debate has run its course, several times.

[Segev]

And here we get to repeat the point that adding the benefits of an 11th level to a 10-level prestige class without using epic rules is a "divide by zero" situation.

I suspect this debate has run its course, several times.

Yes, but when only one side is restated, it begs the other to respond: There is no "divide by 0" because there is a definition for what one gets for any level, regardless of what number it is, of MT. They get those benefits. They don't get any "level-specific" benefits, since none are listed, but they get anything that one gets at every level of the class. Because those remain defined.

[Ashtagon]

We're at an "I think, you think" point in this thread. I'm going to bow out now, because it's become pointless. It's not conceding any kind of "defeat" in this debate. It's simply that more entertaining things exist for my time.

[Quertus]

Here's my take, trying to process RAW as code. Please correct me if any of this is wrong:

1) at each level, you are allowed to take a level in any class you qualify for {if it still has levels available}. (Rules)

2) You qualify for LC. (Given)

3) You have not maxed out the LC prestige class (given).

4) You can take a level of LC. (1-3)

5) LC gives you a level in any class you have previously taken.

6a) You attempt to take a(n effective) level that exists / is defined.

6b) You attempt to take a(n effective) level that does not exist / is not defined.

Taking an 11the level of MT is defined. In fact, it is defined twice - once in the prestige class, once in the ELH. Assuming no one would allow the claim that RAW says that a 50th level character taking MT11 follows the non-epic rules rather than the epic rules, we have the answer as to which of those is the "correct" 11th level.

How could this reading fail? Well, if taking a virtual level inherits all the error checking code of taking an actual level. If it does, then LC will return a "no, you cannot take an 11th level of MC (yet)", exactly the same as if you had tried to take it in step 4.