Feat: Theurge

[Certon]

Feat: Theurge - Character level is used to determine the level of any spell cast.

Example: Tix is a 10 Sorcerer/10 Favored Soul with the Theurge Feat. Any divine or arcane spell cast by Tix would be considered cast at the 20th level of proficiency (barring caps in the spell description, of course.)

[dkyle]

No. Ridiculously overpowered.

Even a Mystic Theurge in PnP doesn't get full 20 CL in both classes. They can get ~15, and that means spending 10 levels on a PrC, not just spending a single feat.

Mystic Theurge could be implemented as a PrE in DDO, I suppose, but that would be pretty complicated.

[Cyr]

No. Ridiculously overpowered.

Even a Mystic Theurge in PnP doesn't get full 20 CL in both classes. They can get ~15, and that means spending 10 levels on a PrC, not just spending a single feat.

Mystic Theurge could be implemented as a PrE in DDO, I suppose, but that would be pretty complicated.

I think you are misreading the suggestion. It looks to me to be a suggestion about a feat that only applies to the caster level of any spells cast by a character and not upon their access to enhancements, spell points, and spells known/memorized. This is not the same as being a 20th level caster (which would be an issue).

[voodoogroves]

If Practiced Spellcaster (1 feat, +4 to CL in one class but won't raise it above character level) isn't necessary then a feat that does that in more is overkill.

[karl_k0ch]

No. Ridiculously overpowered.

Even a Mystic Theurge in PnP doesn't get full 20 CL in both classes. They can get ~15, and that means spending 10 levels on a PrC, not just spending a single feat.

Mystic Theurge could be implemented as a PrE in DDO, I suppose, but that would be pretty complicated.

Note that the OP is not proposing that you get the spell progression of those classes.
He is just proposing a variant of the already existing mechanic to be found in the spellsinger's Song of Arcane Might.
You could do it as a line of enhancements which grant a +1 enhancement bonus to the level of spells, with an appropriate minlevel of the corresponding divine and arcane caster classes.

The hardest part in this might be to code the requirements in the right way. (No kidding; iirc, the current version only allows one "One of ..." phrase for enhancements.)

I'm too slow.

How about this: One Feat "Theurge", which gives +1 or +2 per spell level (prereq being arcane and divine caster) and which unlocks an Enhancement line where each Enhancement gives you +1 to CL and where the maximum level of the enhancement is capped by the lowest level of divine or arcane classes.

[ckorik]

I believe the idea is so you can raise the DC with heighten and thus a 10 wiz/10 clr would not be gimp *just* because the DC's are bad.

[wonkey]

Have to agree. Seems way OP to me.

Isn't this like a free Heighten, except way better (because it goes by character level, not caster class level) on every spell?

[Lorien_the_First_One]

If Practiced Spellcaster (1 feat, +4 to CL in one class but won't raise it above character level) isn't necessary then a feat that does that in more is overkill.

On a podcast the devs came right out and said "this will ever happen, we think its a bad idea" for practiced spellcaster so I don't think they would go for any similar feat/enhancement/PrE

[Certon]

I understand the reaction to my suggestion, as it most likely would be too powerful for PnP D&D.

In DDO, however, everything is toughened up to such a level that unless you are a specialist (or find an obscure niche the designers accidentally created and take advantage of the odd synergy) oftentimes you are snubbed and labeled a 'gimp.' Just read the character builder forums and see that in many instances, there is only one way to build your character, and that is the most efficient way.

Theurge would change the DC of a spell as the caster level would equal the character level. It would increase the damage of spells, as the caster level would equal the character level. It would not, however, avail the character more spell points than they already had, and would not open up feats or enhancements they wouldn't normally get (unless it was a prerequisite for another feat.)

What does this mean? It means that a 15 fighter/5 Wizard could cast a 10-die fireball. It means that same fighter, with the Extend Spell feat, can cast a 2 minute Haste spell. At 20th level, is that REALLY overpowered?

[voodoogroves]

Given the very very very very very few ways you can change your caster level, yes that is overpowered.

[samthedagger]

Imagine a brd/fvs/sor. Now I might be okay with the Practiced Spellcaster feat. But the OP's suggestion takes it way too far.

[Certon]

Imagine a brd/fvs/sor. Now I might be okay with the Practiced Spellcaster feat. But the OP's suggestion takes it way too far.

OK, let's imagine a 7/7/6 BRD/FVS/SOR.

4 1st level bard spells
4 2nd level bard spells
2 3rd level bard spells
4 1st level divine spells
3 2nd level divine spells
2 3rd level divine spells
4 1st level sorcerer spells
2 2nd level sorcerer spells
1 3rd level sorcerer spell

So, a 20th level character that can only cast up to 3rd level spells (all of which are damage capped on die) is too powerful? How? This would not be nearly as powerful as, say, the Archmage PRE, where for 1SP you can cast a maximized, empowered, heightened Magic Missile spell with focus for insane amounts of damage.

[voodoogroves]

Don't pick an arbitrarily bad mix. A Bard 9 / Ranger 7 / Something 6 is going to suck as a caster, plain and simple.



Why not Cleric 12 / Wiz 7? Full strength wall of fire, blade barrier, heals, blah blah blah ... oh and banishes like a champ too. I'd love my Tukaw to have a CL 20 polar ray. I'd love full spell-pen on "whatever".

Please, let me dip and get a full-strength Jump, Tumble, Ex. Retreat, Nightshield, Divine Favor, Blah Blah Blah Blah. Cleric 18 / Sorc 1 / Bard 1 ... whatever.

Any of the 12 / 6 / 2 battlecaster builds esp. those where the 6 is ranger or paladin ... now get full CL on those few divine spells. Like Divine Favor. Those builds can't hit DCs so avoid them anyway, but would love more CL for better spells. Full resist energy with minimal investment (since it scales).


The one or two ideas you have may not be broken, but if you take a step back and look I'm sure you can see tons of ways to exploit that.

[Certon]

Don't pick an arbitrarily bad mix. A Bard 9 / Ranger 7 / Something 6 is going to suck as a caster, plain and simple.

Why not Cleric 12 / Wiz 7? Full strength wall of fire, blade barrier, heals, blah blah blah ... oh and banishes like a champ too. I'd love my Tukaw to have a CL 20 polar ray. I'd love full spell-pen on "whatever".

Please, let me dip and get a full-strength Jump, Tumble, Ex. Retreat, Nightshield, Divine Favor, Blah Blah Blah Blah. Cleric 18 / Sorc 1 / Bard 1 ... whatever.

Any of the 12 / 6 / 2 battlecaster builds esp. those where the 6 is ranger or paladin ... now get full CL on those few divine spells. Like Divine Favor. Those builds can't hit DCs so avoid them anyway, but would love more CL for better spells. Full resist energy with minimal investment (since it scales).

The one or two ideas you have may not be broken, but if you take a step back and look I'm sure you can see tons of ways to exploit that.

Cleric 12/Wiz 7? If you want decent spell pen at high levels, you'd still need to dump almost all your points into WIS and INT, leaving very little for CON, and enhancement-wise, you'd get very little elemental enhancement at 7th level, gimping your FW quite a bit.

I agree though, it really would help palys and rangers that were multiclass, but in the case of their spells, I don't know how dramatic an effect it would have. I'll have to look into it just for fun.

[Phidius]

Cleric 12/Wiz 7? If you want decent spell pen at high levels, you'd still need to dump almost all your points into WIS and INT...

Spell Penetration isn't based on your casting stat, it's based on your caster level.

[dkyle]

Theurge would change the DC of a spell as the caster level would equal the character level.

Cleric 12/Wiz 7? If you want decent spell pen at high levels, you'd still need to dump almost all your points into WIS and INT, leaving very little for CON, and enhancement-wise, you'd get very little elemental enhancement at 7th level, gimping your FW quite a bit.

I think you have Spell Pen and DCs confused. Caster level has nothing to do with DC, and ability scores have nothing to do with Spell Pen.

DCs are Spell Level + Ability modifier + items/feats/enhancements
Spell pen is Caster level + items/feats/enhancements

A Cleric 12/Wiz 7 would focus on one class for DCs (probably the Cleric), and go high in that class's DC score (probably WIS). Even with 8 starting INT, they could easily cast 4th level wizard spells. Firewall doesn't have a DC.

[Cyr]

On a podcast the devs came right out and said "this will ever happen, we think its a bad idea" for practiced spellcaster so I don't think they would go for any similar feat/enhancement/PrE

Yeah a dev said that. To be fair though I recall a dev talking up how much fun their batman build was in the past also. A single dev against something does not mean something will not happen in the future.

[voodoogroves]

I think you have Spell Pen and DCs confused. Caster level has nothing to do with DC, and ability scores have nothing to do with Spell Pen.

DCs are Spell Level + Ability modifier + items/feats/enhancements
Spell pen is Caster level + items/feats/enhancements

A Cleric 12/Wiz 7 would focus on one class for DCs (probably the Cleric), and go high in that class's DC score (probably WIS). Even with 8 starting INT, they could easily cast 4th level wizard spells. Firewall doesn't have a DC.

Yep. Full damage Wall of Fire, Blade Barriers. You could dump WIS too, really, and just beat on the reflex guys with an axe.

[moritheil]

If Practiced Spellcaster (1 feat, +4 to CL in one class but won't raise it above character level) isn't necessary then a feat that does that in more is overkill.

Yeah. I think some form of Practiced Spellcaster would actually be OK (if the feat gave +1 CL and the remaining +3 was an AP line) but even I find the suggestion here unpalatable.

[Certon]

Spell Penetration isn't based on your casting stat, it's based on your caster level.

Big mistake on my part. I meant DC. :/