re-tiering sorcerer

[michaelmichael]

Do channel charge abilities let sorcerer break into the top tier? Using a WBL metric, compared with a generalist wizard, we have

2 pearls of power of each level, and
2 scrolls of each level,

To bring wizard spells known and per day into line with sorcerers'.

Its commonly posted that further scrolls give the wizard a severe options advantage, while uncanny forethought gives them the same versatility.

But from this point, could a sorcerer take channel charge and keep up by buying all the same scrolls? They might need to invest in some other means of keeping the scrolls compact and organized, perhaps using a nonstandard scroll medium like a crystal. They would be dependent on this item for their increased versatility, but so is a wizard on his spellbook. If we count each additional spell known to a wizard as equal to a scroll of that spell for purposes of WBL, then do we close the gap between them?
:thog:

[Kylarra]

Channel charge seems to only work on things that actually have charges, wands and staves, so you'd have to keep buying up staves (assuming you want spells with level > 4) and unless your DM is extremely generous with "partially charged" wands/staves, highly unlikely to be a cost efficient means of expanding your repertoire.

[Fuhrmaaj]

Channel charge seems to only work on things that actually have charges, wands and staves, so you'd have to keep buying up staves (assuming you want spells with level > 4) and unless your DM is extremely generous with "partially charged" wands/staves, highly unlikely to be a cost efficient means of expanding your repertoire.

This is also why Rogues aren't Tier 1. If buying items which let you replicate Wizard abilities was sufficient to get into Tier 1, then anything with UMD would be Tier 1. The fact that the Wizard gets Wizard spells for a one-time cost, usable for eternity is why he's Tier 1. This means that if nothing is happening on a particular day the Wizard can prepare non-combat spells and have a non-combat day. If anybody else wanted to do that, then they'd have to shell out a fee for every spell cast.

[michaelmichael]

Channel charge seems to only work on things that actually have charges, wands and staves, so you'd have to keep buying up staves (assuming you want spells with level > 4) and unless your DM is extremely generous with "partially charged" wands/staves, highly unlikely to be a cost efficient means of expanding your repertoire.

well, scrolls are priced at 25 per cl*sl, and a multicharge staff power sits at 93.25 per cl*sl after the first two powers, so it is less than 4 times as much.
Using the use activated single charge formula, you have a modifier of only 50, which can be halved after the first two abilities if you group the spells to make use of the multiple similar ability rules. This suggests it could be only about twice as costly for a properly built sorcerer to have a particular spell compared to a wizard. Basically it would be making a more economical version of the know-stone and runestaff items from the magic item compendium.

Consider a tenth level party with WBL of about 50k per member. The sorcerer is down in spells known by 3 5th level, 2 4th, 1 3rd, and maybe 2 more 1st. This gives a cost difference of 7,800gp. For the wizard, he needs 1 5th level slot, 2 4th , 3 3rd and 2 2nd and 2 1st. This comes to 84,000gp. It could be argued that slots are overvalued at 1k * lv^2. This leaves the sorcerer 42,200 gp for scrolls, and the wizard -34,000gp.

At level 20, with 750k WBL, the slot cost for the wizard goes to a whopping 562k for pearls of power, leaving 188k for scrolls, while the sorcerer can buy the same amount of spell access as the wizards 188k gets him for 372k, leaving 328k of extra WBL.
:thog:

[Kylarra]

I can only assume we're working with another custom item of UMD++ here, because otherwise we're looking at a check that is all too easy to fail and draining your single charged custom magical staff of spellsIwant. So yeah, given a permissive DM, you can go ahead and start trying to make these checks at level 8(9 really since that's when you get another feat).

Keep in mind that a wizard that really wants to know additional spells/day can just be a focused specialist and/or craft the pearls/scrolls for half the price and a nominal exp cost.

[Fuhrmaaj]

well, scrolls are priced at 25 per cl*sl, and a multicharge staff power sits at 93.25 per cl*sl after the first two powers, so it is less than 4 times as much.
Using the use activated single charge formula, you have a modifier of only 50, which can be halved after the first two abilities if you group the spells to make use of the multiple similar ability rules. This suggests it could be only about twice as costly for a properly built sorcerer to have a particular spell compared to a wizard. Basically it would be making a more economical version of the know-stone and runestaff items from the magic item compendium.

Consider a tenth level party with WBL of about 50k per member. The sorcerer is down in spells known by 3 5th level, 2 4th, 1 3rd, and maybe 2 more 1st. This gives a cost difference of 7,800gp. For the wizard, he needs 1 5th level slot, 2 4th , 3 3rd and 2 2nd and 2 1st. This comes to 84,000gp. It could be argued that slots are overvalued at 1k * lv^2. This leaves the sorcerer 42,200 gp for scrolls, and the wizard -34,000gp.

At level 20, with 750k WBL, the slot cost for the wizard goes to a whopping 562k for pearls of power, leaving 188k for scrolls, while the sorcerer can buy the same amount of spell access as the wizards 188k gets him for 372k, leaving 328k of extra WBL.
:thog:

This has nothing to do with how the tier system works (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0) or why each class is in its tier. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0)

The tier system is not based on character wealth at all. The difference between tier 1 and tier 2 is simply versatility and not endurance. In your example, the adventuring parties get into four combats an adventuring day (on average). In half of the battles, the Sorcerer/Wizard casts Evard's Black Tentacles and instantly wins, in the other half the Sorcerer/Wizard casts Cloudkill and instantly wins. The difference is that the Wizard has been flying all day with Overland Flight. Now the adventuring day is over.

So the parties go back to town to sell their loot. The Wizard casts Mage's Private Sanctum (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesPrivateSanctum.htm) to protect the party from being scried on. Then he casts a dozen other spells he knows which are useful outside of combat because he has no better use of his spell slots. The next day the party does not adventure and the Wizard does all that stuff again, but has more free slots to do it with.

The Sorcerer knows 1 5th-level spell (Prismatic Spray), 2 4th-level spells (Evard's and something), 3 3rd-level and some other stuff. The Sorcerer will probably want at least 2 combat spells per level (just in case), so he needs to get a Knowstone or Runestaff or whatever if he wants to be as versatile as the Sorcerer. The Wizard does not need to cast as many spells as the Sorcerer does because he already wins each combat in one turn on average. It might take 2 turns, but the Wizard can afford to cast 8 spells on any given day. It's really not a big deal.

Everyone understands the cost to replicate the abilities of the other class, but the difference is that the Sorcerer casts too frequently given that he casts so little. At least a Wizard/Incantatrix (or whatever) could persist some buffs of the spell slots he won't use in combat. The Sorcerer can barely afford to learn those extra spells with class levels and needs to learn blasting spells with runestaves or what have you so that his spell list does not become obsolete.

Hope that explains it well enough.

EDIT: Chose the wrong spell. Fixed it.

[Fuhrmaaj]

Let me argue each point explicitly.


well, scrolls are priced at 25 per cl*sl, and a multicharge staff power sits at 93.25 per cl*sl after the first two powers, so it is less than 4 times as much.
Using the use activated single charge formula, you have a modifier of only 50, which can be halved after the first two abilities if you group the spells to make use of the multiple similar ability rules. This suggests it could be only about twice as costly for a properly built sorcerer to have a particular spell compared to a wizard. Basically it would be making a more economical version of the know-stone and runestaff items from the magic item compendium.

No game I've ever been in lets you buy Staves which don't exist, or buy Wands/Staves a charge at a time. The rules for the value of each charge exist so you can sell those items, not so you can buy them. You must either use a scroll, or buy an item such as a Runestaff which lets you use your own spell slots instead. Some groups may be more lenient, but I don't know of any which lets you do this.


Consider a tenth level party with WBL of about 50k per member. The sorcerer is down in spells known by 3 5th level, 2 4th, 1 3rd, and maybe 2 more 1st. This gives a cost difference of 7,800gp. For the wizard, he needs 1 5th level slot, 2 4th , 3 3rd and 2 2nd and 2 1st. This comes to 84,000gp. It could be argued that slots are overvalued at 1k * lv^2. This leaves the sorcerer 42,200 gp for scrolls, and the wizard -34,000gp.

This is not how the wizard works. He has no need for all of those extra slots so he won't buy them. Any Pearl of Power a Wizard uses is typically so the Wizard can apply another buff to himself and not so he can pretend he's a Sorcerer. I might get a Pearl of Power which lets me use Prismatic Spray twice so that I have a free slot to persist Bite of the Weretiger. How much does a Sorcerer have to pay for that? Well, one 7th-level scroll daily.

[michaelmichael]

I can only assume we're working with another custom item of UMD++ here, because otherwise we're looking at a check that is all too easy to fail and draining your single charged custom magical staff of spellsIwant. So yeah, given a permissive DM, you can go ahead and start trying to make these checks at level 8(9 really since that's when you get another feat).

Keep in mind that a wizard that really wants to know additional spells/day can just be a focused specialist and/or craft the pearls/scrolls for half the price and a nominal exp cost.

Of course. The difference in versatility between the two classes can be written in terms of the amount of WBL it would take for one to mimic the other. At least that is the theory.

@Fuhrmaaj :

I am merely pointing out that the relative versatility of the classes depends on the character wealth. If neither character ever gets any treasure, the spells known by the wizard are simply 4 at each spell level beyond first, a very marginal versatility advantage. If spellbooks grow of trees, obviously this changes things. Copying scrolls into a book is an example of translating WBL from one form into another. Item creation is another method of translating WBL.
The point of this exercise is to define the range of wealth at which sorcerer and wizard could reach parity. The questions are:

How much money does a wizard need to be tier 1?

How much money does a sorcerer need to be tier 1?

:thog:

[Grendus]

Honestly, when well built a sorcerer is probably T1 within regular WBL. A great example is Saphs sorcerer Aiden in the Seven Kingdoms campaign, at any given time he had upwards of 40-50 spells he could cast (and unlike the wizard he could cast most of them repeatedly, which came in real handy when he had to pull off three boss battles in the same day). This isn't to say that an optimized sorcerer is more powerful than a wizard, merely that it meets the prerequisites for T1.

[Jack_Simth]

Do channel charge abilities let sorcerer break into the top tier?Ah... not really, no. If you allow the custom-creation of low-charge staves, and full WBL, then *maybe*, but even then, you'd basically be lowest on the tier of tier-1.

Now, a sufficiently generous reading of the Arcane Preparation feat, on the other hand....

[Pyro_Azer]

Also note that with enough optimization, it's generally possible to go up a tier, and if played poorly you can easily drop a few tiers, but this is a general averaging, assuming that everyone in the party is playing with roughly the same skill and optimization level. As a rule, parties function best when everyone in the party is within 2 Tiers of each other (so a party that's all Tier 2-4 is generally fine, and so is a party that's all Tier 3-5, but a party that has Tier 1 and Tier 5s in it may have issues).
Emphasis mine.

With proper optimization a sorcerer can indeed be tier 1. However, if the same levels of optimization are applied to a wizard that wizard will outclass a sorcerer. Also I feel it bears noting that there are ways for wizards to gain additional spells without spell books being for sale everywhere. Collegiate wizard from complete arcane if a good example of this.

[Grendus]

Emphasis mine.

With proper optimization a sorcerer can indeed be tier 1. However, if the same levels of optimization are applied to a wizard that wizard will outclass a sorcerer. Also I feel it bears noting that there are ways for wizards to gain additional spells without spell books being for sale everywhere. Collegiate wizard from complete arcane if a good example of this.

I never said that with enough optimization sorcerers beat wizards. I just said they can make T1 with standard WBL. The question was how much wealth was needed to reach T1 - if you have standard WBL and have access to the magic mart, a well built sorcerer can be flexible enough to be called T1 - capable of breaking the game in multiple ways at any given time.

[conorwatches]

The way I see it is the tiering system is based more on the structure of the class and not one or two feats. A wizard is built to be able to hold onto many different spells and able to prep in a way that suits them. A sorcerer on the other hand is made to have less spells to choose from but able to repeat whenever needed. The tiering system needs to be looked at in a more general sense because most classes have a build that can make them powerful and flexible. Lets look at it this way, at first level wizards are able to cast around 2 or 3 first level spells a day. Well a fighter with a crossbow and a sword is now the most powerful and flexible. Does that one example mean fighters are now tier 1?

[Pyro_Azer]

I never said that with enough optimization sorcerers beat wizards. I just said they can make T1 with standard WBL. The question was how much wealth was needed to reach T1 - if you have standard WBL and have access to the magic mart, a well built sorcerer can be flexible enough to be called T1 - capable of breaking the game in multiple ways at any given time.
You didn't, this is true. However, michaelmichael alluded to this here:


I am merely pointing out that the relative versatility of the classes depends on the character wealth. If neither character ever gets any treasure, the spells known by the wizard are simply 4 at each spell level beyond first, a very marginal versatility advantage. If spellbooks grow of trees, obviously this changes things. Copying scrolls into a book is an example of translating WBL from one form into another. Item creation is another method of translating WBL.
The point of this exercise is to define the range of wealth at which sorcerer and wizard could reach parity. The questions are:

[Fuhrmaaj]

Of course. The difference in versatility between the two classes can be written in terms of the amount of WBL it would take for one to mimic the other. At least that is the theory.

The wizard does not need to mimic the sorcerer. That's like asking how much money does the sorcerer need to spend to mimic the rogue and then suggesting that they are the same tier if the sorcerer needs to spend more money.


I am merely pointing out that the relative versatility of the classes depends on the character wealth. If neither character ever gets any treasure, the spells known by the wizard are simply 4 at each spell level beyond first, a very marginal versatility advantage.

The versatility of the wizard does not depend on character wealth. He only needs to have enough money to buy enough spellbooks to contain his spells. If he can meet that demand, he will be more versatile than any Sorcerer who has the same amount of money because he knows 2 or 4 spells of his highest level. Then the wizard will likely specialize (because evocation is next to worthless) which means the difference in spells known will be 1 per spell level at most. Some people will also take Focused Specialist to get rid of the difference altogether.

How do Sorcerers get to pick any spell on their list and learn as much as a Wizard? They don't. There are some ACFs which grant some bonus spells here and there, but you'll never quite get there.



If spellbooks grow of trees, obviously this changes things. Copying scrolls into a book is an example of translating WBL from one form into another. Item creation is another method of translating WBL.

Some campaigns will limit this knowledge transfer, but generally we're talking spell level x 50 gp + 100 gp if you need another spellbook. This effect is permanent. For a Sorcerer to replicate a spell, it's either a wand, a staff or a scroll (which for reference is spell level x caster level x 25 gp). Wands may only be used up to 4th-level, Staves may only be used up to 7th-level and the spell you desire must show up on a Staff in a book (though guidelines for creating a staff exists if your DM allows it).



The point of this exercise is to define the range of wealth at which sorcerer and wizard could reach parity. The questions are:

Theoretically, they will reach parity when money is obsolete because you have so much of it. This occurs because either can buy infinite scrolls of whatever to perfectly replicate one another. Practically, they will reach parity when the Sorcerer can cast a number of unique spells per day equal to what the Wizard can cast.


How much money does a wizard need to be tier 1?

100gp + 100gp per additional spellbook. Wizard gains additional function if the party receives wealth and the Wizard gets a share.


How much money does a sorcerer need to be tier 1?

Here (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19873034/Treantmonks_guide_to_Wizards:_Being_a_God) is Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: Being a God. If you want to figure out how much money a Sorcerer needs to be tier 1, then simply make a Sorcerer and learn spells which occur on the prepared list. Then, but the cheapest item which lets you cast the other ones. Recall that the CL of those items won't level up with you, so some buffs won't be as effective as the Wizard's while you guys level. The problem is that if you spend all your WBL on having spells in items, then you aren't buying what a Wizard is actually buying at those levels.

I'll do the 5th-level Wizard for you just so you can see what happens.

Sorcerer knows 0th - 6, 1st - 4, 2nd - 1, 3rd - 0
Wizard knows 0th - all, 1st - 4, 2nd - 4, 3rd - 2

Additionally, the Wizard has purchased 2 more 1st-level, 1 more 2nd-level and 2 more 3rd-level spells. This costs: 2(1x50) + 1(2x50) + 1(3x50) = 350gp. He has spent an additional 8,750gp on items as listed in the description.

0th-level
The Sorcerer can cast all the same cantrips, but has more flexibility with them.

Cost: none

1st-level
Need to buy probably a wand of Mage Armor at least at CL 5 (I would prefer something that lasts couple hours, but let's start here), and then a wand of Silent Image because it is as effective in wand form as it is in casted form (for the most part).

Cost: 5x1x25 + 1x1x25 = 150gp/day in scrolls or 5x1x750 + 1x1x750 = 4500gp (90gp/day for one charge of each)

2nd-level
This will be a wand of Rope Trick. I honestly believe that you're better buying this at CL 9 so you can sleep and meditate in the trick, save money until you can do that instead. But for posterity's sake, I'll do at CL 5 just like the Wizard.

Cost: 5x2x25 = 250gp for a scroll 5x2x750 = 7500gp for the wand (150gp/charge) + 3000gp for Rod of Extend (lesser). This must be bought so the rope trick can last all day, but the Wizard has to do it too.

3rd-level
You're going to have to choose spells which don't level very well as a wand here. At this level, everything which requires a saving throw, does it at DC 14 iirc unless you get a Staff. The Glitterdust was affected by Sculpt and has also been prepared at 2nd-level so you need a rod for that. I'm not sure, but I don't think you can cast spells from spell trigger items until you're a high enough level to cast them. But just for a laugh.

Cost: 3(5x3x25) = 1125gp for the scrolls or 3(5x3x750) = 33,750gp (675gp/charge) for a wand.

Total cost for this portion
Scrolls: 150(1st)+250(2nd)+1125(3rd) = 1,525gp
Wands (per charge): 90 + 150 + 675 = 915gp

You must spend three times this amount in order to make it until your next level up.

Scrolls: 4,575gp
Wands: 2,745gp

The wands can't be purchased all at once due to restrictions on WBL, so I'll refer to the scrolls. If you could afford to purchase a wand earlier, then you would be able to discount 4 charges per level from your WBL. I don't think you'll be able to afford all those wands yet, and this problem gets bigger as you level and some of your wands will become obsolete due to low CL or the spell level just being too low.

So compare that to 350 (scribing cost) + 100 (spellbook) = 450gp for the wizard. The difference so far is 4,575 - 450 = 4,125gp.

Now we stick on the Rods of Extend (lesser) and the Sorcerer has spent 7,575gp out of 9,000gp allowed at this level. You need that Wand of Benign Transposition for 750gp in order to prove your versatility (8,325/9,000) and you can't afford a Cloak of Charisma or a Shirt of Resistance.

So let's compare statistics. You have lower skills on account of Charisma being tied to your casting instead of Intelligence. You have lower saves because you couldn't afford a Shirt of Resistance (and the wizard could). The Wizard gets +1 spell per level from specialization and could get another from Focused Specialist if he wants (the example wizard does). The wizard also has a Headband of Intellect (+2), which grants an additional 1st-level spell. This spell either gives the Wizard equal 1st-level spells or one more than the Sorcerer.

But let's not forget that the Sorcerer has an additional 2nd-level spell slot, not to mention that all these spells from scrolls lets the Sorcerer preserve his spell slots. Well the reality is that the Wizard can cast at least one good spell per battle and can instantly manage a BBEG with Bands of Steel so he probably doesn't need anything else. If the Wizard is poor at managing his spell selection, he can trade his Headband of Intellect for a Pearl of Power (2nd). This lowers his 1st-level spells by one, so he can trade his Cloak of Resistance for a Pearl of Power (1st) as well.

But the Wizard still has a lot more skill points than the Sorcerer. Also, the Wizard is better suited for more adventuring days.

Hopefully you actually give this wall of text a good read and it makes sense. I tried to break it down into as much simple detail as I could. Let me know if there's something else you need.

EDIT: I should mention that at this point, the Sorcerer is possibly tier 1 until he uses his scrolls up. But the Wizard is a better tier 1 because he can handle more adventuring days before leveling and has generally better items, saves, etc.

[michaelmichael]

The wizard does not need to mimic the sorcerer. That's like asking how much money does the sorcerer need to spend to mimic the rogue and then suggesting that they are the same tier if the sorcerer needs to spend more money.

This would actually be an interesting way to do it. I suspect the rogue would have to spend considerably more to mimic a sorcerer than vice versa.



The versatility of the wizard does not depend on character wealth. He only needs to have enough money to buy enough spellbooks to contain his spells.


Buying spellbooks costs money, generally speaking.



Some campaigns will limit this knowledge transfer, but generally we're talking spell level x 50 gp + 100 gp if you need another spellbook. This effect is permanent. For a Sorcerer to replicate a spell, it's either a wand, a staff or a scroll (which for reference is spell level x caster level x 25 gp). Wands may only be used up to 4th-level, Staves may only be used up to 7th-level and the spell you desire must show up on a Staff in a book (though guidelines for creating a staff exists if your DM allows it).

I've played a wizard in a campaign where the DM never allowed any spell copying before. It makes a big difference. Sane DM's usually don't allow unlimited copying at casting prices, but most will allow staves, since they obey strict rules. Staves allow up to level 9s btw. I would say the copying cost formula greatly undervalues spellbooks as a part of WBL, just as pearls of power overvalue slots at high level. For any given spell A runestaff effect is costed at 8 times that of a scroll. However other more efficient means of permanently accessing a spell are available such as channel charge and similar feats, possibly reducing the ratio to as small as 2 to 1. Basically because item creation can mimic so many class abilities, it seems like a reasonable metric to quantitatively compare classes via the WBL that someone would need to fill that role entirely with items. I would consider the bonus feats the wizard gets almost more significant than the spell selection since they are harder to mimic with item creation, though that depends on what feats you pick. Since you regard the number of unique spells as the primary measure, it seems a simple analysis would say that a sorcerer with at most twice the WBL of a wizard of the same level should be about equally powerful.
:thog:

[JaronK]

If you want a T1 Sorcerer, well, Shadowcraft Mage will get you there pretty darn effectively. Dragonwrought Kobolds can help this process out as well.

JaronK

[Fuhrmaaj]

If you want a T1 Sorcerer, well, Shadowcraft Mage will get you there pretty darn effectively. Dragonwrought Kobolds can help this process out as well.

Sometimes I wonder if you feel that this whole tier system has grown out of your hands. I also feel like the best way to become T1 is through PrCs.


This would actually be an interesting way to do it. I suspect the rogue would have to spend considerably more to mimic a sorcerer than vice versa.

Well, the Rogue can eventually mimic all of the Sorcerer's abilities. There are some abilities which the Sorcerer can't mimic such as Improved Uncanny Dodge. The reality is that you need to take PrC levels to mimic higher tiers, and that the tier system accounts for that already. It's not a WBL thing.


Buying spellbooks costs money, generally speaking.

I think you would agree that 100gp every so often is nitpicking. The cost is really not breaking the bank.


I've played a wizard in a campaign where the DM never allowed any spell copying before. It makes a big difference.

You can copy from Scrolls. It will mean the Wizard pays a little more money, but I think most DMs allow scrolls. Also, if the Wizard can't use scrolls then the Sorcerer can't either, which invalidates this exercise.


Sane DM's usually don't allow unlimited copying at casting prices, but most will allow staves, since they obey strict rules. Staves allow up to level 9s btw.

You're right, I was thinking of schemae. Most DMs allow scrolls, and don't allow you to make your own staves. I would also like to mention the importance of staves to an item-reliant character. Wands, scrolls and the like don't let you use your own casting abilities and have a minimum DC which makes them useless for any spell which asks for a save. Staves do let you use your own casting abilities, so you'll need to buy those instead in order to properly cast spells. This is part of the versatility of the wizard who doesn't need this junk, he just casts at the best of his ability and buys cheap wands if it's a spell which doesn't get better with higher CL.


I would say the copying cost formula greatly undervalues spellbooks as a part of WBL, just as pearls of power overvalue slots at high level.

Agreed. I don't think WotC realized how few spells per day you really need to get by. The Wizard just has the perfect progression, and if you have high enough INT to get bonus spells then you're set. A couple spells per day at highest level, and three at the level below is probably sufficient for a controller wizard. We haven't begun to look at the gish or any other type of wizard. Another nice thing about the wizard is that he can do a couple of these things at once.


For any given spell A runestaff effect is costed at 8 times that of a scroll. However other more efficient means of permanently accessing a spell are available such as channel charge and similar feats, possibly reducing the ratio to as small as 2 to 1.

Creating runestaves is a debated topic for a few reasons, but again not all DMs will let you make them anyhow. I also think that runestaves work out to be much cheaper than that consider their highest level effect costs spell level^2 x400, and additional spells may be added for spell level^2 x200. I would suggest that DMs which allow you to create these things will allow wizards to occasionally add spells to their spell book.

Channel Charge requires UMD and doesn't have an effect on actually buying the item. Staves are expensive. If you want to make custom staves to duplicate the wizard's spell list, and then use channel charge to let you use spell slots instead of charges then that will let you buy the staff once. It does not let you buy partially charged magic items.


Basically because item creation can mimic so many class abilities, it seems like a reasonable metric to quantitatively compare classes via the WBL that someone would need to fill that role entirely with items. I would consider the bonus feats the wizard gets almost more significant than the spell selection since they are harder to mimic with item creation, though that depends on what feats you pick. Since you regard the number of unique spells as the primary measure, it seems a simple analysis would say that a sorcerer with at most twice the WBL of a wizard of the same level should be about equally powerful.

I would like to argue that the sorcerer who uses their WBL to try to be as versatile as a wizard is probably T3 because he loses his sorcerer nukes and trades his focus for a smattering of other abilities. He's not as good as the wizard at anything really, and is heavily dependent on DM adjudication as well as a steady stream of gp to keep being sub-optimal.

Feats and class features are king in 3.5. Money just lets you be more effective at your role. If you've ever played the Artificer then you know how hard it can be to duplicate other classes with magic items. It's hard for the Artificer to do it all at the same time, and it only works for him because he can craft everything.

In my earlier analysis, the Sorcerer is still much weaker than the wizard because his save DCs aren't as high. If you throw out the WBL restrictions for the Sorcerer, then it costs more than twice the WBL for the Sorcerer to mimic the Wizard exactly for the adventuring days. But don't be fooled into believing that this means the Sorcerer is as versatile as the Wizard. The Wizard can do other things on non-adventuring days because he's not item-dependent. Don't forget that every time you cast from an item, you lose money so you probably want to save that for adventuring days.

I would say that the reality is that WBL is a poor metric for changing tiers because it is very limited in function. Like JaronK said, you'll need to take levels in a PrC which grants versatility and that's a perfectly valid thing to do in most campaigns.

[JaronK]

Sometimes I wonder if you feel that this whole tier system has grown out of your hands. I also feel like the best way to become T1 is through PrCs.

It was always designed as a tool, and good tools are always improved on by others and used to make greater things that the tools themselves. It's a sign of success that it's grown way beyond me.

JaronK