What casting/manifesting PrCs become viable with full casting/manifesting?

[Endarire]

Intro
Greetings, all!

Since I've dwelled on many of the same PrCs so often due to their casting progression, I'm curious how things change if more PrCs granted full casting/manifesting.

Scenario #1
What PrCs that progress casting or manifesting but not at every level (like Green Star Adept, Mindbender, and Ultimate Magus) would singificantly improve into the territory of serious consideration for full casters or manifesters if they instead granted full casting or manifesting? For the sake of our discussion, assume all PrCs that progressed casting or manifesting at all instead granted full casting or manifesting. (This includes the SRD's Hierophant since it sorta progresses casting.) Any PrC that doesn't already progress casting/manifesting - like Sublime Chord or Bloodclaw Master - still doesn't.

Scenario #2
For a second example, what PrCs become especially viable if ALL PrCs fully progress casting and manifesting? (Soulmelds, maneuvers, stances, binding, and other mechanics aren't affected.) How do things change otherwise?

Note: You don't gain spells, powers, etc. via this scenario. You only progress what you already had.

Scenario #3
For a third example, what PrCs become especially viable if ALL PrCs fully progress all mechanics a la Legacy Champion? That means casting, manifesting, incarnum stuff, initiator stuff, binding stuff, etc.

Note: You don't gain spells, powers, etc. via this scenario. You only progress what you already had.

[Mike Miller]

In my games, I make it such that all partial casting PrCs are full progression. So far, nothing has really changed. I expected more from it.

Your second scenario is odd. So... Frenzied berserker is a full casting PrC? Martials that take a PrC suddenly gain casting of their choice? Weird.

[MisterKaws]

In my games, I make it such that all partial casting PrCs are full progression. So far, nothing has really changed. I expected more from it.

Your second scenario is odd. So... Frenzied berserker is a full casting PrC? Martials that take a PrC suddenly gain casting of their choice? Weird.

"Casting" in that case refers to martial maneuvers.

[Psyren]

True Necromancer would be pretty good for dual 9s with full casting

Malconvoker would be even more OP

[Anthrowhale]

Remarkably little seems to go wrong if you make all partial casting classes do full casting. The core issue here is that the set of full-casting prestige classes are quite good.

The most problematic ones seem to be partial dual advancing classes changing to full dual advancing. Yathrinshee for example seems a bit scary due to the high caster level easily generated and Ultimate Magus seems modestly more powerful do to Augment Casting.

Edit: perhaps another category is those which grant access to a new set of spells? Prestige Paladin or Silver Pyromancer become noticeably more interesting for example, and Rainbow Servant settles the text/table dispute.

[Cosi]

Making partial casting PrCs full casting strikes me as an obviously good idea. There exist PrCs that are better than straight (Wizard/Cleric/Sorcerer/Probably Not Druid), so all insisting on keeping the Green Star Adepts and Acolytes of the Skin of the world down does is make those classes less viable and make people who like them sad. I think the best PrC is Swiftblade, but most of it isn't super relevant for a non-gish (oh boy! you get a skirmish bonus!). Mindbender is arguable broken, but that's because minionmancy is dumb.

Making everything full casting is interesting. One class that springs to mind is Warshaper. Multimorph + polymorph is basically a mini-shapechange. I think the best entry is Changeling Cleric 6/Warshaper 5 with the Spell domain for greater anyspell -> draconic polymorph. Changeling lets you qualify (and arguably nets you Flashmorph as well), and you can make draconic polymorph Persistent. You'd think Druid would be good, but it looks like Warshaper doesn't progress your Wild Shape. Obviously Druid/MoMF is insane. I bet there are other classes like Warshaper with a benefit that's good for casters, but normally prohibitive (one thing that springs to mind: polymorph or Wild Shape into a Giant Octopus + anything that gives a per-attack rider). It also makes most theurge PrCs obsolete as you can just take whatever the non-Theurge PrCs are.

[Crichton]

It also makes most theurge PrCs obsolete as you can just take whatever the non-Theurge PrCs are.


Wait, are we assuming that making a PrC fully advance casting means that it fully advances both sides of a theurge type casting? So Incantatrix, for example, would fully advance arcane and psionic casting/manifesting, if you had those before, so no reason to ever take Cerebremancer? I hadn't assumed that from the OP. Or am I misunderstanding your meaning?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

"Casting" in that case refers to martial maneuvers.That's not casting. That's martial maneuvers. They're completely different. It's like you're trying to put out a fire by using chlorine trifluoride instead of water because they're both kinda liquidy, so they must be the same thing, right?

[Cosi]

Wait, are we assuming that making a PrC fully advance casting means that it fully advances both sides of a theurge type casting? So Incantatrix, for example, would fully advance arcane and psionic casting/manifesting, if you had those before, so no reason to ever take Cerebremancer? I hadn't assumed that from the OP. Or am I misunderstanding your meaning?

I probably should have been clearer. I meant for non-spell stuff (like Binding, or Incarnum), you don't have to take the casting Theurge PrCs and can instead take the standard PrCs for those systems because they will also progress your casting.

[Particle_Man]

Pathfinder actually has a way to do this via the feat prestigious spellcaster applied the appropriate number of times. So in pathfinder it would save some builds a few feats. :smallcool:

[Luccan]

If Spellsword offered full caster progression, I think it would be a more common gish PRC choice (specifically for normally non-melee casters like wizards or sorcerers). Your BAB doesn't have to be super high, so a single level in fighter and you can enter by level 7. You would only lose one CL, which I know "thou shalt not", but it does become much more viable and probably better than Eldritch Knight, which loses you two CL and doesn't have class features.

[frogglesmash]

That's not casting. That's martial maneuvers. They're completely different. It's like you're trying to put out a fire by using chlorine trifluoride instead of water because they're both kinda liquidy, so they must be the same thing, right?
What? How are they not basically spells for fighters?

[Malphegor]

Mindbender would be worth more than a one level dip if it progressed spells more. It basically gives you a bunch of the heavy hitter Enchantment spells but extremely limited number of charges per day, with the capstone being a permanent duration Dominate spell. It’s a cool prc, ideal for the wizard who wants to master the mental arts... Except any wizard would probably be better at mind control by just continuing as a wizard.

Even with the optional ‘use it on a psionic’ character, that’s 5 levels where you’re getting a charge/day SLA instead of advancing your psionic gubbins.

The 100ft telepathy with such easy requirements on the first level is AWESOME, but the rest of this prc cripples people hard.

Progressing spells more would make it worth it.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

What? How are they not basically spells for fighters?You mean aside from most of them being nonmagical +XdY damage when you attack? Yeah, that's really magical, right there.

[frogglesmash]

You mean aside from most of them being nonmagical +XdY damage when you attack? Yeah, that's really magical, right there.

I mean, sure, the end effects are different, but you've still got a leveled list of discrete effects further divided into schools/disciplines. The magnitude of the abilities is often based on caster/initiator level, and the saves are based on the level of the effect. On top of all that the entry's for the maneuvers are formatted very similarly to spell entries. Maybe this is a controversial position, but it seems clear to me that maneuvers were intended to be the martial analogue to spellcasting.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I mean, sure, the end effects are different, but you've still got a leveled list of discrete effects further divided into schools/disciplines. The magnitude of the abilities is often based on caster/initiator level, and the saves are based on the level of the effect. On top of all that the entry's for the maneuvers are formatted very similarly to spell entries. Maybe this is a controversial position, but it seems clear to me that maneuvers were intended to be the martial analogue to spellcasting.So, does that mean that since warlocks don't use the 1+9 tier format, their invocations and whatnot aren't magic?

Just because something uses a certain format for balancing as you gain levels doesn't mean that it's the same as other things that are formatted that way. Saying it is is either misinformed or disingenuous, at best.

[Crichton]

You mean aside from most of them being nonmagical +XdY damage when you attack? Yeah, that's really magical, right there.

*Cracks open Tome of Battle, turns to Maneuver lists, starts reading*


- dazzle creatures around you
- deal fire damage on melee attack
- summon fire elemental behind your foe to flank
- gain fire resistance
- heal yourself on melee attack
- teleport through shadows
- turn inivisible
- cone shaped fire damage
- remove literally any effect/condition



I mean, sure not all of them are overtly magical, but a whole bunch of them really are

[frogglesmash]

So, does that mean that since warlocks don't use the 1+9 tier format, their invocations and whatnot aren't magic?

Just because something uses a certain format for balancing as you gain levels doesn't mean that it's the same as other things that are formatted that way. Saying it is is either misinformed or disingenuous, at best.

????

I hope, for your sake, that you're being disingenuous, because you have completely misinterpreted everything I said.

1. Nothing I said addressed whether anything was magical or not.
2. Many maneuvers are magical in nature, further discrediting your warlock example.
3. Warlocks do use a tired list, it's not 1-9, but a) I never specified that value, and all warlock, a b) invocations do have effective spell levels.
4. Neither I, nor anyone in this thread has claimed that casting and initiating are identical, furthermore things don't need to be identical to each other to be analogous to each other.


Let me spell out my position as clearly as possible:
Though the effects of martial maneuvers may differ greatly from those of spells, the underlying mechanics were clearly inspired by, and intended to be the martial equivalent to vancian spellcasting. I do not think that martial maneuvers are identical to spells, merely that they fill a similar role for their intended character archetype.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

????

I hope, for your sake, that you're being disingenuous, because you have completely misinterpreted everything I said.

1. Nothing I said addressed whether anything was magical or not.
2. Many maneuvers are magical in nature, further discrediting your warlock example.
3. Warlocks do use a tired list, it's not 1-9, but a) I never specified that value, and all warlock, a b) invocations do have effective spell levels.
4. Neither I, nor anyone in this thread has claimed that casting and initiating are identical, furthermore things don't need to be identical to each other to be analogous to each other.


Let me spell out my position as clearly as possible:
Though the effects of martial maneuvers may differ greatly from those of spells, the underlying mechanics were clearly inspired by, and intended to be the martial equivalent to vancian spellcasting. I do not think that martial maneuvers are identical to spells, merely that they fill a similar role for their intended character archetype.The only similarity between the two is that they have a tiered list. Even the magical maneuvers are (Su). None of them are one-shot-use abilities, or use or are affected by SR, PR, components, XP or GP costs, or most descriptors (aside from, I believe, only [Fire]). The only reason they're in schools is to help players determine which classes they belong to.

Mundane martial characters have levels, BAB, and saves. Does the fact that spellcasters also have levels, BAB, and saves mean that they, too, are mundane martial characters?

I think people are drawing conclusions where they don't exist simply because both are class options that are set into tiered lists, according to class and level. That doesn't mean that maneuvers are spells or that initiators are spellcasters any more than having levels, BAB, and saving throw bonuses means that spellcasters are also mundane characters.

[frogglesmash]

The only similarity between the two is that they have a tiered list. Even the magical maneuvers are (Su). None of them are one-shot-use abilities, or use or are affected by SR, PR, components, XP or GP costs, or most descriptors (aside from, I believe, only [Fire]). The only reason they're in schools is to help players determine which classes they belong to.

Mundane martial characters have levels, BAB, and saves. Does the fact that spellcasters also have levels, BAB, and saves mean that they, too, are mundane martial characters?

I think people are drawing conclusions where they don't exist simply because both are class options that are set into tiered lists, according to class and level. That doesn't mean that maneuvers are spells or that initiators are spellcasters any more than having levels, BAB, and saving throw bonuses means that spellcasters are also mundane characters.

1. Caster Level, Spell Level, Spell Schools, Spells, Spells Known and spell preparation are all things for which initiators have direct equivalents.
2. Maneuvers are one shot abilities. Once you use a maneuver you need to ready i.e. prepare it before you can use it again.
3. Spell components, being affected by SR, and descriptors are not necessary traits for classifying something as a spell, so saying something is similar to spells because it lacks these traits is incorrect.
4. Having a reason for being in schools does not prevent the fact that they are in schools from being a similarity.
5. Levels, BAB, and Saves do not fill the same roll as CL or IL
6. No one is claiming that maneuvers are spells, or that initiators are spellcasters



Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords describes a system of special
combat “spells..."


Maneuver: A maneuver is a specific, one-shot effect that a
martial adept initiates. In this way, a maneuver is functionally similar to a spell.


Initiate: A martial adept uses a martial maneuver by initiating it. So instead of casting a spell or manifesting a power, a character initiates a maneuver.


Initiator level is functionally equivalent to caster level.


"Blade Magic" is clearly intended be analogous to spellcasting, and was clearly designed with that in mind.

[Cosi]

I'm not sure what point is be argued (if it's "does this apply to initiators", it seems obvious that the answer is "ask OP"). As far as "are maneuvers spells" goes, it's perfectly possible to define things that way, but at that point you've lost the bulk of the descriptive power involved in calling something a "spell". If "spell" refers to mechanical structure, rather than power source, you get results that contradict our intuition about what "spells" means. As such, it's probably not helpful to say "maneuvers are spells", even if you can define things so that it's true.

[frogglesmash]

I'm not sure what point is be argued (if it's "does this apply to initiators", it seems obvious that the answer is "ask OP"). As far as "are maneuvers spells" goes, it's perfectly possible to define things that way, but at that point you've lost the bulk of the descriptive power involved in calling something a "spell". If "spell" refers to mechanical structure, rather than power source, you get results that contradict our intuition about what "spells" means. As such, it's probably not helpful to say "maneuvers are spells", even if you can define things so that it's true.

I'm arguing that initiating, and spellcasting fill similar roles, but for different character types, and that initiating was designed with that it mind, and therefore when Misterkaws said "'Casting' in that case refers to martial maneuvers," he wasn't being as offensively ignorant as MaxiDuRaritry seems to think.

[Endarire]

Updated scenario #2!

Soulmelds, maneuvers, stances, binding, and other mechanics aren't affected.

[magic9mushroom]

I think the best PrC is Swiftblade, but most of it isn't super relevant for a non-gish (oh boy! you get a skirmish bonus!).

Um.

Blurred Alacrity = Displacement.
Arcane Reflexes = +lots to init.
Evasive Celerity = 50% chance targetted spells fail, like super-Greater Blink.
Diligent Rapidity = Freedom of Movement.
Perpetual Options = EXTRA SPELL PER TURN.
Fortified Hustle = the above are all (Ex) (Arcane Reflexes already was).

That's over half the class features being exceptionally good for fullcasters. Sure, Spring Attack and Bounding Assault are useless (spoiler alert: they're not great even for gishes), Innervated Speed is only really amazing prior to 9s, and Swift Surge/Sudden Casting are better for gishes (hardly useless for fullcasters), but the big draws are the casty features (well, and the chassis).

Swiftblade with full casting is crazy. The only wizard PrC I'd take over it is Tainted Scholar, and it's a near thing.

[Cosi]

Yes, you get some nice defensive abilities. They're good, but worse than the pile of buffs that you get from being an Incantatrix. It's not a bad class, but the only class features that are on par with Supernatural Spell, Shadow Illusion, Metamagic Effect, or even lesser abilities like Circle Magic are the +Init and the extra action. And the latter comes online at 15th level. It's a good class. It's arguably as a good as the best existing PrCs. But it's in no way better than them.

One interesting implication of #3 is using divine casting PrCs for arcane casting (or vice versa). Obviously stuff like Cleric/Incantatrix for stupid numbers of Persistent Spells is good, but Warmage/Divine Oracle/Sovereign Speaker is pretty sweet. You get a huge number of additional spells known, plus some domain powers. It's probably not as a good as the Rainbow Servant capstone, but it's a much smoother power progression than Rainbow Servant.

[magic9mushroom]

Yes, you get some nice defensive abilities. They're good, but worse than the pile of buffs that you get from being an Incantatrix.
No, they really aren't. True Seeing, anti-Ethereal stuff, Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field all have no effect on the defensive abilities of Swiftblade.

It's not a bad class, but the only class features that are on par with Supernatural Spell, Shadow Illusion, Metamagic Effect, or even lesser abilities like Circle Magic are the +Init and the extra action. And the latter comes online at 15th level. It's a good class. It's arguably as a good as the best existing PrCs. But it's in no way better than them.
Metamagic Effect appears to be only Effect spells, and Incantatrix costs you a school. Shadow Illusion requires serious tricks to do anything more than give versatility.

Supernatural Spell I'll grant, because removing XP and material costs is fun and it has the same "lol no Dispel" thing going on. I did forget that. And, as I said, there's still Tainted Scholar. Still, making something that's preferable to Incantatrix is a pretty big red flag.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Huh. Scenario #3 means that you load up on as many 1 level PrC dips as humanly possible, then use the first to progress a base class, the second to progress the first (which progresses the base class), the third to progress the second to progress the first (which progresses the base class), and so on. Soon you'll be progressing a dozen or more PrCs (and at least one base class), or even more, if you're piling on double-progression classes (in which case the increase in progression becomes a logarithmic function).

[Cosi]

No, they really aren't. True Seeing, anti-Ethereal stuff, Dispel Magic and Antimagic Field all have no effect on the defensive abilities of Swiftblade.

They have a reduced effect, not no effect. Anything other than the (admittedly nice) suite of bonuses you get from haste is exactly like what the Incantatrix gets, except it doesn't last for 24 hours. And, frankly, it's not like your Ex abilities are enough to make fighting in an antimagic field not stupid. You still don't have offensive abilities.

There are definitely advantages to the Swiftblade. Your core buffs are substantially more slot-efficient than anyone else's and more resilient. But it's nowhere close to Incantatrix. Frankly, I'm not even sure it's close to Red Wizard. CL 40 is de facto immunity to dispels, you can stagger your hours/level buffs to not cost slots, and Heighten Spell + Reserve Feats is at least as good as the random bonus feats and +1s Swiftblade hands out.


Metamagic Effect appears to be only Effect spells, and Incantatrix costs you a school.

No it doesn't. I don't even understand how you read it as saying that. Metamagic Effect gets whatever you want. It does cost you a school, but that's not that big of a deal. Also, Incantatrix comes online earlier that Swiftblade does. At 8th level an Incantatrix can have polymorph, greater mirror image, and swift fly up 24/7, while the Swiftblade has a conditional 20% miss chance, a conditional +1 to hit/AC/REF, and ... Spring Attack! Most of the PrCs I listed pay off faster than Swiftblade. The first big deal ability you get is the Init bonus at 10th level, at which point the Incantatrix has had Metamagic Effect for two level and the Dweomerkeeper has had Supernatural Spell for a level. The Shadowcraft Mage doesn't get Shadow Illusion until 10th level, but that's because of a level req, so an Incantatrix/Shadowcraft Mage only delays it to 11th level -- which is still four levels before the Swiftblade's extra action.


Shadow Illusion requires serious tricks to do anything more than give versatility.

I mean, sure, but it gives you an absolutely absurd amount of versatility. With just Spell Mastery + Signature Spell (which, yes, two dead feats, but remember that Swiftblades have to take Dodge and Mobility), you can spontaneously cast silent image, meaning your high level spells are whatever you prepare, plus a powerful offensive option (minor creation as a Standard Action is absurd), access to every SLA on the summon monster list, access to every Evocation (including contingency), and silent image (which is actually a very good spell, though admittedly you don't need high level slots for that).

[magic9mushroom]

No it doesn't. I don't even understand how you read it as saying that. Metamagic Effect gets whatever you want.

It applies to a "persistent spell effect that is already in place", and requires you to be "adjacent to or within the spell effect". "Spell effect" is a somewhat-unusual term (the usual one for a spell affecting a creature for a duration is "ongoing spell"), and the adjacency criterion doesn't really jive with the idea of a spell on a creature or object (surely in that case you'd have to be adjacent to the creature or object). And then, of course, all the examples given are effect spells, and the ability is named "Metamagic Effect" and is a separate ability from the later and 1-2/day "Instant Metamagic".

The ability's worded vaguely, certainly, but I don't see any indication that it's supposed to apply to spells cast on creatures or objects.


CL 40 ain't immunity to dispels. There are ways to hit that reliably (although it takes some effort). And then there's Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

[Cosi]

*snip*

Yes, and because it specifies a "persistent spell effect", you can't use it to apply Persistent Spell. Sorry, but none of that makes any sense at all. It's reading a restriction onto the ability that is evident nowhere in the text. The ability is clearly analogous to Cooperative Metamagic, to which none of your arguments apply. Except, I suppose, that it too is a different ability from Instant Metamagic, and potentially that you might have written it differently.


CL 40 ain't immunity to dispels. There are ways to hit that reliably (although it takes some effort). And then there's Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

Yes, it isn't total immunity. But it's immunity against any opposition not specifically specialized to counter you. And it applies to all your spells, rather than the three or four spell effects the Swiftblade gets out of haste. And it does other stuff, like letting you cheat on spell slots by abusing hours/level duration spells or insta-kill enemies with holy word. Is it always better? Of course not. But it's better often enough that you're going to have trouble convincing people that the Swiftblade is out of the Red Wizard's league.

[Jack_Simth]

Viable? Very nearly all of them.

Seriously. With most caster-based builds, it's the casting that does the heavy lifting. Yes, the PrC features are generally nice, but a standard Sorcerer-20 who elected not to take the familiar is an entirely viable build at most tables. OK, yes, it's not particularly "optimal". But "optimal" and "viable" are different things. Easier to say which are still bad (for example: Green Star Adept: losing your Con score sucks, there's much better ways to get construct immunities).

Which ones become tasty? Eh. That'd take some delving to sort out. Most of the partial casting PrC's don't get much attention in optimization circles for a reason. Master Transmorgifist would probably make a nice showing.

[Quertus]

Your second scenario is odd. So... Frenzied berserker is a full casting PrC?

That's exactly what I thought when I read it!

Would a Cleric who dips Barbarian to become a Frenzied Berserker actually be a viable and interesting build?

[magic9mushroom]

That's exactly what I thought when I read it!

Would a Cleric who dips Barbarian to become a Frenzied Berserker actually be a viable and interesting build?

No. Every time you take damage, save (DC 10+damage) vs. Frenzy. You can't cast while Frenzied.

Cleric/Hulking Hurler is far more interesting (quite viable for one level even without HH progressing casting, if Half-Minotaur is on the table).

[Psyren]

Which ones become tasty? Eh. That'd take some delving to sort out. Most of the partial casting PrC's don't get much attention in optimization circles for a reason. Master Transmorgifist would probably make a nice showing.

We could start with most of the 8/10 or 9/10 ones (or similar variations like 8/9) that are still considered good enough to take today - making those full-casting would probably push them up a tier. (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=1573.0)

[Aniikinis]

I have little to add other than Scenario 3 is something I've been seriously tempted to implement to see how borked it makes the game along with tweaking some prerequisites so that they can be entered with other "casting" types. EX: Human Warlock with Wild Talent going into Sanghirne

I will say, however, that suddenly being an archer ranger that PrCs out means you still get your (albeit kinda crappy) spells.

[Falontani]

Rage mage becomes vastly more fun
Duskblade/Horc Paragon/Rage Mage would be a fun melee to run.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

No. Every time you take damage, save (DC 10+damage) vs. Frenzy. You can't cast while Frenzied.Weeeeeell...

https://www.dandwiki.com/w/images/e/e4/Musclewizard.jpg

[Telonius]

For Scenario 3: Arcane Archer and Dragon Disciple are the first two that jump to mind.