[D&D 3.5] Archmage being too "expensive".

[TheRageee]

First of all, this is my first post here.
Hello, I'm Alex and I've been a long time lurker here. I haven't found any answer to my problem so, here I am. Hope this is the right place to post this.

Me and other 2 friends (we are all mastering different campaigns) are arguing about Archmage being too "expensive" in gaining High Arcana.
Despite the prerequisites (which are okay, for me; Skill Focus (Spellcraft) is required for flavour), they think that it's nonsense to lose permanently spell slots to gain High Arcana.
Expecially because most of them are situational and subottimal (Arcane Fire overall).
In my opinion, Arcane Fire is not even worth a 5-level spell slot. The counterspell arcana is very situational, and requires a pretty high slot.
However, I find that gaining for free Reach Spell (Arcane Reach) and a particular version of Sculpt Spell (Shape Master) without any cost in spell slots like all metamagic, is a bit too much.
Their thesis is that there's no other PC that forces you to lose something in order to gain the special abilities of itself.

Have you found any way to optimize Archmage? Would you remove totally the spell slot cost in order to gain High Arcanas? Would it be someway, gamebreaker?

Thank you for answering. :)

(and sorry for any grammar or syntax mistake, not english native)

[noob]

Believe me a wizard who gets to archmage levels have tons of spell slots.
So it is not a problem for them to sacrifice some slots.
The too much expensive part of the archmage is in fact not the spell slots but the feats needed to enter.

[ViperMagnum357]

^Pretty much this. Eating Spell Focus twice and Skill Focus: Spellcraft is just ugly. Losing slots, however, is a decent trade-two Arcane Reach gives you a 60ft range for touch spells, better than anything you can get without risking a familiar-with no level adjustment, very easy choice. And remember mastery of shaping is not Sculpt Spell-it instead allows you to create pockets in your areas of effect, a near-unique ability again with no adjustment, and solving most of your friendly fire issues immediately. Counterspelling, elements, and arcane fire are more personal taste, and Counterpselling does not come into its own until about level 27, when you can take Epic Counterspell and have real spellcaster duels. And Spell Power is interesting-without gestalting, it allows you to push your caster level past your actual level permanently, something you otherwise cannot do without gestalt, shenanigans with Ultimate Magus, or the Reserves of Strength feat.

[bahamut920]

Mastery of Shaping and Mastery of Energy are worth the slots, especially if you do any blasting. Arcane Reach is also usually worth the slot, as well. The problem is that Arcane Fire isn't good even if it was given for free (it might be worth using if it were a swift action, or maybe an immediate to retaliate against an attacker), and Mastery of Counterspelling is only worth it if you focus on counterspelling, which is not something I've seen anyone do ever.

[TheRageee]

Thanks to everyone who replied. I solved the problem by simply leaving it as it is. :)

[Eldariel]

Yeah, it's fine. It's one of the more balanced spellcaster PRCs - it's full casting but the abilities have a cost so it's not strictly better than Wizard, but it has manageable drawbacks. Most of the stronger PRCs are stupid powerful to the point of being strictly better than Tier 1 casters. Archmage is stronger too but at least not strictly so.

Yeah, arcane fire is turd, mastery of counterspelling is niche (fairly good with Battlemagic Perception and Duelward though, great with Divine Defiance), master of elements is situational. On the other hand, Arcane Reach (both times) is strong, Mastery of Shaping is great (Extraordinary Spell Aim - great AMF protection while maintaining your casting), Spell Power is always solid and Spell-like ability is superb (extra 9th level slot with bonuses!). Guess which ones you are gonna pick? Yeah, the class needs to be rated by the good, not the bad options. Though yeah, arcane fire is horrible; if it were 10d6+spell level d6 or something, occasionally worth it.

[Rijan_Sai]

Archmage tends to be worse then some people realize... By RAW, they do not increase caster level!

See here:

Spells per Day/Spells Known

When a new archmage level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he became an archmage, he must decide to which class he adds each level of archmage for the purpose of determining spells per day.

Compare to, say, Loremaster:

Spells per Day/Spells Known

When a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that she adds the level of loremaster to the level of some other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day, spells known, and caster level accordingly.
Emphasis added. Both quotes are the same in the DMG.

Spell Power is pretty much needed to keep up the caster level, then...

[Eldariel]

Archmage tends to be worse then some people realize... By RAW, they do not increase caster level!

See here:


Compare to, say, Loremaster:

Emphasis added. Both quotes are the same in the DMG.

Spell Power is pretty much needed to keep up the caster level, then...

I find it hard to read it that way. Both have the same operational clause "When a new archmage level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained." and "When a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained." Not having the clarifying statement "This essentially means...", which just explains what the clause means, doesn't mean there's any difference in what they gain. Indeed, I'd say it's the opposite; since they both gain the same thing, they do indeed gain the whole pot.

[Rijan_Sai]

I find it hard to read it that way. Both have the same operational clause "When a new archmage level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained." and "When a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained." Not having the clarifying statement "This essentially means...", which just explains what the clause means, doesn't mean there's any difference in what they gain. Indeed, I'd say it's the opposite; since they both gain the same thing, they do indeed gain the whole pot.
Sorry about this:

Spells per Day

When a new arcane trickster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in a spellcasting class he belonged to before adding the prestige class. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained, except for an increased effective level of spellcasting. If a character had more than one spellcasting class before becoming an arcane trickster, he must decide to which class he adds the new level for purposes of determining spells per day.
New spells per day/Increased CL


Spells per Day/Spells Known

When a new archmage level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if he had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he added the prestige class level. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class in which he could cast 7th-level spells before he became an archmage, he must decide to which class he adds each level of archmage for the purpose of determining spells per day.
Spells per day/Spells known

Spell Power

This ability increases the archmage’s effective caster level by +1 (for purposes of determining level-dependent spell variables such as damage dice or range, and caster level checks only). This ability costs one 5th-level spell slot.
Increased CL


Spells per Day

From 2nd level on, when a new eldritch knight level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if she had also gained a level in whatever arcane spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that she adds the level of eldritch knight to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.

If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class before she became an eldritch knight, she must decide to which class she adds each level of eldritch knight for the purpose of determining spells per day.
Spells per day/Increased CL


Spell Power

This special ability increases a hierophant’s effective caster level by 1 for purposes of determining level-dependent spell variables and for caster level checks. This ability can be selected more than once, and changes to effective caster level are cumulative.
Special Ability: Increased CL


Spells per Day/Spells Known

When a new loremaster level is gained, the character gains new spells per day (and spells known, if applicable) as if she had also gained a level in a spellcasting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that she adds the level of loremaster to the level of some other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day, spells known, and caster level accordingly.
Spells per day/Spells Known/Increased CL


Spells per Day

When a new mystic theurge level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in any one arcane spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class and any one divine spellcasting class he belonged to previously. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that he adds the level of mystic theurge to the level of whatever other arcane spellcasting class and divine spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly. If a character had more than one arcane spellcasting class or more than one divine spellcasting class before he became a mystic theurge, he must decide to which class he adds each level of mystic theurge for the purpose of determining spells per day.
Spell per day/Increased CL


Spells per Day

When a new thaumaturgist level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in whatever spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that he adds the level of thaumaturgist to the level of whatever other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.

If a character had more than one spellcasting class before he became a thaumaturgist, he must decide to which class he adds each level of thaumaturgist for the purpose of determining spells per day.
Spells per Day/Increased CL
(Note that, while not OGL, Red Wizard also increases Spells per Day and Caster Level, and has a Spell Power class feature!)

[ayvango]

they think that it's nonsense to lose permanently spell slots to gain High Arcana.
They have their point. It is quite a rare condition. The only examples I could remember is Weapons of Legacy and the Innate Spell feat. Losing spell slot permanently is too radical. I met another approach to the same tradeoff. Every time the character prepares spells she has an option to sacrifice spell slot of X level to get Z benefit to all other spells.

[DrKerosene]

I think there are plenty of PrCs that lose caster levels for little to no benefit, isn't that why the Tier System for PrCs is a thing? Also why losing caster levels is the number one sin for optimizing a caster?

Look at Blood Magus. You lose two caster levels. Slap that on a Wizard or Sorc 10.That costs you three 9th level spells on a Sorc, or two 9th levels an 8th and a 7th on a (generalist) Wizard. But blood magus costs you one less feat to enter (and you can enter earlier than Archmage).

Do I think Blood Magus competes with Archmage for power? No. Do I think Blood Magus has a cool gimmick? Yes.

[Eldariel]

I think there are plenty of PrCs that lose caster levels for little to no benefit, isn't that why the Tier System for PrCs is a thing? Also why losing caster levels is the number one sin for optimizing a caster?

Look at Blood Magus. You lose two caster levels. Slap that on a Wizard or Sorc 10.That costs you three 9th level spells on a Sorc, or two 9th levels an 8th and a 7th on a (generalist) Wizard. But blood magus costs you one less feat to enter (and you can enter earlier than Archmage).

Do I think Blood Magus competes with Archmage for power? No. Do I think Blood Magus has a cool gimmick? Yes.

Why indeed? It's not about the 20th level performance; it's about the road there. Falling behind the curve is really painful when it comes down to the middle point particularly when each spell level means a massive shift in power. 1 level is excusable in some cases (e.g. Malconvoker, War Weaver) but by and large too much for any but the greatest things and 2 levels is already very hard to balance vs. plain Wizard 20. Cool doesn't indeed excuse poor design making it underpowered, which is why it's the #1 rule. Mechanics like Archmage are a much better balance point; they have a real, tangible cost without completely gimping your character (of course, you're still tier 1 so you're only gimped compared to other tier 1s).

[Mordaedil]

Giving the caster no casterlevel increases with the Archmage class makes no sense, since it'd make "Spell Power" High Arcana pointless.

As for being expensive to enter, Master Specialist basically makes it not expensive at all, even if you just take 3 levels or if you take all 10.

[Eldan]

This probably goes back to Archmage being one of the first prestige classes written for third edition, ever. I remember reading a text block back then that said something along the lines of "A prestige class is supposed to be highly specialized and compared to the base class, the character should give up as much as they gain." It might have been the 3.0 DMG, it may have been an article by one of the developers.
The DMG prestige classes, especially, were designed with that in mind. Plus a lot less experience with the system than later ones.
Sadly, "prestige classes have to give something up to get something" was totally tossed out of hte window for a lot of later prestige classes, especially those for full casters. There's so many that gain full spells (which is all that a e.g. a sorcerer gets anyway), plus a ton of other features. I thought it was a good design point.

So, those classes that give something up to get something else are now the good ones, and the rest are crap by comparison.

[Eldariel]

This probably goes back to Archmage being one of the first prestige classes written for third edition, ever. I remember reading a text block back then that said something along the lines of "A prestige class is supposed to be highly specialized and compared to the base class, the character should give up as much as they gain." It might have been the 3.0 DMG, it may have been an article by one of the developers.
The DMG prestige classes, especially, were designed with that in mind. Plus a lot less experience with the system than later ones.
Sadly, "prestige classes have to give something up to get something" was totally tossed out of hte window for a lot of later prestige classes, especially those for full casters. There's so many that gain full spells (which is all that a e.g. a sorcerer gets anyway), plus a ton of other features. I thought it was a good design point.

So, those classes that give something up to get something else are now the good ones, and the rest are crap by comparison.

To be fair, the AM abilities are good and concise enough that it still is a reasonable choice to include even with all sources.

[Eldan]

Oh, absolutely. But you give something up to get something. If that somethign is worth it, that's a decision. It's often not a decision to, say, choose between base wizard and incantatrix, if that's your two options.

[Cosi]

Why indeed? It's not about the 20th level performance; it's about the road there. Falling behind the curve is really painful when it comes down to the middle point particularly when each spell level means a massive shift in power.

This. You can't just look at 20th level. You have to look at all the other levels. Also, with traditional CL loss, you pay for abilities before you get them, which is stupid.


1 level is excusable in some cases (e.g. Malconvoker, War Weaver)

It's not really excusable for Malconvoker. The class is just bad. Casting summon monster is not a good plan, and getting more monsters half the time doesn't make it good (it's not all the time, because when you're down a level the other guy can summon 1d3 monsters). The planar binding buffs are nice, but if you're playing in a game where planar binding is allowed to get buffs, you're probably even less interested in a lost caster level.


Mechanics like Archmage are a much better balance point; they have a real, tangible cost without completely gimping your character (of course, you're still tier 1 so you're only gimped compared to other tier 1s).

Again, this. If you want to try to make PrCs balanced against the Wizard by imposing costs, you should have those costs be fixed number of spell slots, because that is dramatically easier to balance.

[Rijan_Sai]

Giving the caster no casterlevel increases with the Archmage class makes no sense, since it'd make "Spell Power" High Arcana pointless.
How so? You are still getting new spells and spell levels, you're just not getting the numerical increase of the Caster Level. (True, you may need some increase to cast your 9th's, but there are numerous ways to do this and you would only need a minimum of two to reach CL17. Probably the easiest core method would be 1 level of Spell Power and an Orange Ioun Stone.)

Compare to the Red Wizard, who's whole shtick is, to my (very limited) understanding, increasing CL far beyond normal. It makes sense that they would have the Spell Power ability in addition to standard CL increases!

[Bronk]

I think the Archmage class does add caster levels... you can't get higher level spells known or spells per day without it. Plus, there's additional info in the table that jibes with other classes that add caster levels.

The real prestige class you'd want to compare it to would be the divine version, Hierophant, which definitely doesn't add caster levels.

[Rijan_Sai]

I think the Archmage class does add caster levels... you can't get higher level spells known or spells per day without it. Plus, there's additional info in the table that jibes with other classes that add caster levels.

The real prestige class you'd want to compare it to would be the divine version, Hierophant, which definitely doesn't add caster levels.

The Hierophant also has the option for Spell Power...

Hmm... let me check something...

Caster Level (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#casterLevel)

A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to your class level in the class you’re using to cast the spell.

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt) but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check).

Caster Level Checks

To make a caster level check, roll 1d20 and add your caster level (in the relevant class). If the result equals or exceeds the DC (or the spell resistance, in the case of caster level checks made for spell resistance), the check succeeds.


To learn or cast a spell, a bard/sorcerer must have a Charisma score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a bard’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the bard’s Charisma modifier.
---
To prepare or cast a spell, a cleric/druid/paladin/ranger must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a cleric’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the cleric’s Wisdom modifier.
---
To learn, prepare, or cast a spell, the wizard must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a wizard’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the wizard’s Intelligence modifier.

Interestingly enough, in the "spells" section of each class, it describes the requirements to learn/prepare/cast (as appropriate) a spell. In the Magic Overview sections, re: Caster Level, it only says that you must meet the minimum CL to cast a spell, and nothing about learning it.

Most casters gain access to higher level spells at the same time that they gain the spell slots for that level; after reading this, it's not completely inconceivable that a wizard could (potentially) learn up to 9th level spells anytime they have access to learn! (Though they still can't cast them without both high enough level spell slots, and the minimum CL of 17, along with 19 INT.)

[Zaq]

It'd be an interesting (and probably unnecessarily ambitious to the point of being unfeasible) homebrew project to apply Archmage-style rules to other PrCs and see where the balance point is.

I'm basically envisioning that if your goal is to lower the ceiling, you make any other full-casting PrC (well, any other full-casting PrC that you choose to give this treatment to) permanently cost spell slots to access its juiciest abilities. If your goal is to raise the floor, you turn PrCs that previously lost CL into full-casting, but then you make their abilities cost spell slots instead. (The fact that full-casting PrCs and PrCs that lose CL aren't balanced to begin with means that it's problematic to apply this treatment to both at once and expect to get equitable results, but that's 3.5 for you.)

[Grod_The_Giant]

It'd be an interesting (and probably unnecessarily ambitious to the point of being unfeasible) homebrew project to apply Archmage-style rules to other PrCs and see where the balance point is.

I'm basically envisioning that if your goal is to lower the ceiling, you make any other full-casting PrC (well, any other full-casting PrC that you choose to give this treatment to) permanently cost spell slots to access its juiciest abilities. If your goal is to raise the floor, you turn PrCs that previously lost CL into full-casting, but then you make their abilities cost spell slots instead. (The fact that full-casting PrCs and PrCs that lose CL aren't balanced to begin with means that it's problematic to apply this treatment to both at once and expect to get equitable results, but that's 3.5 for you.)
It's not a bad thought; I know Cosi has argued for it before. It lets you draw a direct comparison for abilities-- "this ability is about as powerful as a 4th level spell, so it'll cost a 4th level slot."