Mystic Theurge cheese. tiefling edition

[Tsriel]

First off, the prevalent information.

Long explanation short, a character that's got access to 2nd level spell-like abilities can access the MT PrC much faster than most other races. A whole three levels in fact. That may not seem like a big deal, but in terms for PFS play, in which I'm designing a character for, it is.

I was thinking of going with a tiefling for a race with possibly taking different racial subtypes to customize my stats towards the build's strength. I know it's not the best choice of race for a MT stat wise, but I do like the thought of a character dabbling in more things that he really should. If I can finagle it, I'm aiming to link both caster classes together under one casting stat. Oracle|Sorcerer comes straight to mind, running both caster stats of Charisma.

A couple issues with that, the first one being Charisma. It's not very useful as a stat save for social interactions, something I'm not particularly looking to focus in. Next up, Oracle curses. Running under the assumption that these won't improve because I'm not actually taking oracle levels (maybe?), it'll be a real drawback depending on choice. Personally, I'm favoring Legalistic in that regard. Lastly, I'm completely a spontaneous caster which does cost me in terms of flexibility. Of course, the spells I do take I'll have alot of casts for.

Another option for being SAD, Sorcerer|Cleric. I can go with Empyreal and cast sorcerer spells off of Wisdom instead of Charisma, which is awesome. That being said, it strikes me as a little odd to be celestial focused if I'm a distant offspring from the pits of hell. It'd work great with an aasimar though! Anyway, having cleric would give me a measure of flexibility and some channeling power (which I don't think will continue to progress) in addition to having solid will saves.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any other possible combinations off the top of my head that are SAD. More traditional combos, like the Wizard|Cleric run off of both Intelligence and Wisdom. That's a full preparation caster, however, so it offers grips of versatility, which kinda makes up for having to focus in two casting stats. Wizard|Oracle also fits here, but doesn't have the flexibility of the iconic paring.

So while my head is swimming with possible combinations between the four classes, as well as which bloodlines, mysteries, school specializations, domains, and archtypes, I throw it out to the web for some ideas. Which combinations would you take and why?

[X-Codes]

Ehh, I see problems here...

1) You have the ability to cast Darkness, but what level is Darkness?  You don't have a spell list on which Darkness is at a particular level, you just have the ability to use that spell.  As such, even though you have the ability to cast Darkness, you don't have the ability to cast 2nd-level spells, and certainly not 2nd-level Arcane spells or 2nd-level Divine spells.

2) If you do not have an existing ability to cast spells in an Arcane (or Divine) spellcasting class, you don't gain the ability to cast spells in whatever Arcane (or Divine) spellcasting class you want at the first level of MT, because you did not belong to that class before your first level of MT.

3) I would very much shy away from using characters for PFS that have heavy rules-lawyering involved.  Unless your PFS group is small enough to basically only need 1 GM and you never play it outside your local PFS group, then maybe it's not so bad, but taking a character like this to a convention is going to spur someone into an argument against your character's validity.

In any case, if you go this route and get your game masters to play along, the best entry would be Cleric 2/Sorcerer 1.  It isn't necessarily that much stranger to be descended from both Celestials AND Fiends than one or the other.  If anything, you could say that a family that has shown that sort of disregard for the cosmic nature of their mates would suddenly start caring just because you're *maybe* 1/16th fiend or something.

[Tsriel]

Ehh, I see problems here...

1) You have the ability to cast Darkness, but what level is Darkness?  You don't have a spell list on which Darkness is at a particular level, you just have the ability to use that spell.  As such, even though you have the ability to cast Darkness, you don't have the ability to cast 2nd-level spells, and certainly not 2nd-level Arcane spells or 2nd-level Divine spells.

This particular item has been a topic of debate for awhile within the PFS community. However, the developers at Paizo stated that it does count for the purpose of prerequisites and requirements as evidenced in the link above. As for it being a very rules-lawyery world, I can't deny that. Believe me when I say that it often forces me to carry copious amounts of bookmarks and printed materials (usually from FAQs) to back up my characters' abilities, mostly when I go to conventions though. I honestly hate that about PFS. I don't live in a small town nor am I apart of a small group, but thankfully we have alot of cool people and chill GMs in the area that focus more on fun rather than being a rules nazi.

2) If you do not have an existing ability to cast spells in an Arcane (or Divine) spellcasting class, you don't gain the ability to cast spells in whatever Arcane (or Divine) spellcasting class you want at the first level of MT, because you did not belong to that class before your first level of MT.

That much is obvious.

Your statement here does bring up a minor issue, which will likely force me to push the PrC a level back. In a closer look at the FAQ item below about whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine, the dev team clearly stated an order of operations in terms of an identifier whether a spell is arcane or divine. It clearly states arcane takes presidence. That means if I wanted to speed PrC, I'd have to take three levels of divine along with one level of arcane in order to meet the prereqs of being able to cast both 2nd level divine and arcane spells.

That does create a small gap between the spell levels of each class. Hmm... I'm currently building a few models to see how it looks. I do like the Cleric|Sorcerer combo though. I've always liked the Cleric class although I have little to no experience with Sorcerer. I just never rolled any up. However, the sorcerer aspect does add abit of punch to the mix. It's a toss-up between Arcane and Draconic bloodlines though.

[X-Codes]

However, the developers at Paizo stated that it does count for the purpose of prerequisites and requirements as evidenced in the link above.

No, all that link says is that a creature with Dimension Door as an SLA qualifies for a feat/PrC that requires the ability to cast, specifically, Dimension Door.  It doesn't say that the same creature can take a feat or PrC that requires the ability to cast 4th-level Arcane Spells because it doesn't say Dimension Door is a 4th-level Arcane Spell.

[Frogman55]

However, the developers at Paizo stated that it does count for the purpose of prerequisites and requirements as evidenced in the link above.

No, all that link says is that a creature with Dimension Door as an SLA qualifies for a feat/PrC that requires the ability to cast, specifically, Dimension Door.  It doesn't say that the same creature can take a feat or PrC that requires the ability to cast 4th-level Arcane Spells because it doesn't say Dimension Door is a 4th-level Arcane Spell.

It also says that allowing SLAs to count as pre-reqs can allow for early entry cheese, and that the cheese is kosher (as long as you don't eat ham alongside). Given a narrow interpretation (i.e. 'Darkness' only counts for 'Darkness,' not 'A level 2 arcane spell'), then what early entries are still possible in PFS?

I'm not sure they'd feel a need to include that edit if they were only looking at the narrow interpretation.

[edit]In fact, the only PrC that requires a specific spell that doesn't have skill or BAB requirements that preclude early entry via this method is the Agent of the Grave, and that's from an adventure path and isn't a legal PFS option.

It's also worth noting that this FAQ says quite plainly that the use of SLAs can allow you to cast 2nd or third level spells. (Keeping in mind that a second level SLA doesn't count as being able to cast first level spells).

Douchey Con-GMs aside, this looks like a legal method, well supported by the FAQs. Now to find a Pathfinder PrC that doesn't suck. That'll be way harder than convincing an irritable GM.

[SorO_Lost]

 I'd rather not contribute to Pazio's traffic so have a quote.

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?
Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

There is absolutely nothing in there supports the idea you can cast Spells of X level, the question very specifically states that spell not casting X level of spells. The following text directly and flat out refers to and makes of point of stating it counts for meeting the DDoor requirement, no more, no less. End of story.

Also funny story.
pa·ren·the·sis (n): a word, clause, or sentence inserted as an explanation or afterthought into a passage that is grammatically complete without it, in writing usually marked off by curved brackets, dashes, or commas.

However, spellcasting ability is not inclusive: it is possible to be able to cast 3rd-level spells but not 2nd-level spells. If you can only cast 3rd-level spells, that does not meet the requirement of "able to cast 2nd-level spells."

Your adding emphasis to an explanation attempting to validate the idea you can cast 3rd level Spells without access to 2nd (such as sublime cord) which has nothing to do with the point or question.

Also

The absolutely correct answer is "spell-like abilities are not spells, and therefore do not count as spells for anything that requires actual spellcasting."

*drops the mic*

[RelentlessImp]

Sorry, did you really just use Sean "Kay, I'm a Shitlord" Reynolds to prove a point? It kind of detracts from the point itself.

[linklord231]

A word of advice: never get involved in a debate about how Pathfinder rules work, because the rules change often.  One designer says one thing, then a few weeks later the FAQ gets updated saying the exact opposite.  Then they release errata updating the rules to say something contrary to both previous rulings. 

[SorO_Lost]

Sorry, did you really just use Sean "Kay, I'm a Shitlord" Reynolds to prove a point? It kind of detracts from the point itself.

Is Sean the douche bag? I mean besides all of them, I get my authors confused.

Point being the entry being incorrectly read comes form PF's FAQ. One of the few things PF did correctly was allow the forums to vote in their FAQ subjects. The post that led to that entry contains a summery of previous debates across thread, current rules & FAQ entries, and yes a link to Sean's post can be found in the first page of the thread. Their community already discussed this and if the OP did even a little research he'd know their answer.

You should also know D&D operates much in the same way. SLAs can meet specific Spell Requirements but not Spellcasting requirements, the only differance between D&D & PF in this area that I know of is in D&D SLAs are not Arcane or Divine while in PF they are (and yet still ignore arcane spell failure for some reason).

[JohnnyMayHymn]

err......      wizard|archivist   go all INT

[vaz]

The nearest I can find to the Arcane Divine is;

"Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster’s spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order." from -http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm

Considering that sorcerer's and wizard's cast arcane spells, and cleric's cast divine, something like a Shyft's SLA to Plane Shift is considered Divine.

Conversely though, as it's a permissive system, it never explicitly states that it actually IS an Arcane or Divine spell - it just IS an SLA, and that's what it is. An ability that is like a spell.

[Meiliken]

The absolutely correct answer is "spell-like abilities are not spells, and therefore do not count as spells for anything that requires actual spellcasting."

*drops the mic*

I myself think this is amusing since for the warlock class, the errata says their SLA of the eldritch blast counts as a 1st level spell, so that is one instance where specific trumps general, so really I'd say it's up to whomever ones DM is to decide if SLA=spells.  It is certain though that a SLA can be countered/dispelled by a spell, so if that is the case, so can the reverse, which basically means SLA are spells, just handled a bit differently.  Eh, guess it's really up to however one wants to play it though.

[RelentlessImp]

Sorry, did you really just use Sean "Kay, I'm a Shitlord" Reynolds to prove a point? It kind of detracts from the point itself.

Is Sean the douche bag? I mean besides all of them, I get my authors confused.

Vow of Poverty and his response to the backlash. That's all.

[Tsriel]

Oh boy... I've inadvertently opened Pandora's Box... 

Rather than get into endless debate about what exactly a spell-like ability is, I'm more focused on MT combos, like this suggestion below:

err......      wizard|archivist   go all INT

Honestly would've never considered a bard archtype to go MT. I like the concept of being a god of knowledge. I built something similar using an Arcane Bloodline sorcerer and a Lore Oracle. The downside with that is having to take the Fiendish Heritage feat so I could max out charisma. Your combo setup would be far better at knowledge stuff though.

Just for the lulz, I did make an aasimar (broke my guidelines, I know) with an earlier posted combo in mind. I put together a cleric|sorcerer taking the Evangelist archtype of the cleric side and melding it with a Celestial Bloodline sorcerer using Empyreal alternate bloodlines to run all spell casting off of Wisdom. Initial outlook is that of a hybrid with serious buffing power mixed with blasting/control potential.  I'm loathe to admit it, but this is my favorite so far. 

[vaz]

If you want cheese;

Phaerimm Hatchling (1HD, 2LA bought off), 2 Flaws
Factotum 1/Ardent 1/Swordsage 1/Ardent +1/Ur-Priest 1/Psychic Theurge 8/Legacy Champion +3/PsiTheurge +1/Legacy Champion +3

Pick up Qualifying feats, Magic Mantle for Ardent, Practised Spellcaster (Ardent), Practised Manifester (Ardent), and Versatile Spellcaster (to qualify for Psi-Theurge). I'm not quite sure if skills fit in, but with Factotum, Ardent's K. All helps out.

Ardent has a ML of 19, (11+4+4), and as such, if you stagger it correctly (i.e final level of PsiTheurge at ECL17 or later, you get access to 9th level powers)
Ur-Priest has Effective 10, so 9th level spells
Sorcerer is equal to HD, so obviously, 9th level spells.
Swordsage IL 14.5 = 7th level powers.

So, Triple 9ths, with 7th level Maneuvres. With some bloodlines abuse, you might be able to achieve 9th level Initiator as well, but I don't know them well enough to comment. If you can find a way to get the required Skills, then Swordsage 2 instead of Factotum 1/SS1 nets you 8th level maneuvres.

[SorO_Lost]

Ahh Phaerimm, so abusive. TDs, Phaerimms and Sharns are probably the most horrible broken Races in D&D, with Mindflayers & Beholders close behind due to their Racial PrCs.

[Power]

Tsriel, please rename the thread title to disclose that this is a Pathfinder thread. Otherwise we assume by default this is 3.5 or possibly 3.5+PF. The 3.5 Archivist is not a Bard, for instance.

Is Sean the douche bag? I mean besides all of them, I get my authors confused.

They're all assholes, but Sean's douchebaggery might well be in a league of its own.

Point being the entry being incorrectly read comes form PF's FAQ. One of the few things PF did correctly was allow the forums to vote in their FAQ subjects. The post that led to that entry contains a summery of previous debates across thread, current rules & FAQ entries, and yes a link to Sean's post can be found in the first page of the thread. Their community already discussed this and if the OP did even a little research he'd know their answer.

It's well-agreed upon by this stage that the FAQ ruling does indeed permit early entry into PrCs, a single 2nd-level SLA counting as the ability to cast second-level spells. There have been other indicators of this among the FAQs as well. The forum post you linked is irrelevant. If it's not FAQ, it's not an official ruling. The FAQs came to be so that forum posts could be ignored in favor of a single authoritative ruling instead of shit like "hey look I have 3 dev posts giving 3 different opinions on this issue" including possibly multiple posts from the same dev interpreting the same rule different ways depending on what is being asked because Paizo is like that.

[SorO_Lost]

t's well-agreed upon by this stage that the FAQ ruling does indeed permit early entry into PrCs, a single 2nd-level SLA counting as the ability to cast second-level spells.

The forum post you linked posted is irrelevant. If it's not FAQ some posters talking, it's not an official ruling.

There is nothing in the text to actually support the argument other than the FAQ doesn't care if you can enter PrCs. Big whoop.

If it's so agreed upon, post your own there thread for official clarification and watch them up vote it into certainty. Unless of course you, like the rest, refuse to do such. Maybe because you and they already know the real answer and couldn't stand it becoming publicized certainty?

I can sweeten the deal for you, post it and get a ruling otherwise and you can tell me about how right you were.