Beguilers (3.5): Overpowered?

[Duke of Urrel]

Do you believe that beguilers are overpowered as a class? Why or why not?

If you believe beguilers are overpowered, do you think an acceptable remedy would be to make beguiler spells Charisma-based rather than Intelligence-based? Why or why not?

[Agincourt]

No. So many of their spells are mind-affecting, entire classes of creatures are immune to their spells. For creatures that aren't immune, a high will save reduces their effectiveness.

They're definitely less powerful than a wizard or a sorcerer. If, though, you are comparing them to a rogue, then, yes, there is a good argument that they are over-powered.

[Kuulvheysoon]

It's all relative. Compared to a vanilla Fighter? Definitely.

Compared to a wizard, or a druid? Not a chance.

[Telonius]

Do you believe that beguilers are overpowered as a class? Why or why not?

If you believe beguilers are overpowered, do you think an acceptable remedy would be to make beguiler spells Charisma-based rather than Intelligence-based? Why or why not?

To the second part ... even if beguilers were overpowered, making them charisma-based wouldn't really do much to fix things. If anything, it might make them more powerful.

Switching the casting stat to Charisma would just make them take a smaller Intelligence score. Even if they completely dump Int to 8, they'd still get 5 skill points per level (if it's something other than a human). If you take two of those skills as being search and disable, you'd have three left ... which is exactly enough room for Diplomacy, Use Magic Device, and Bluff. Arguably the three most useful/abusable skills in the PHB. All Class Skills. All keyed off of Charisma - which is now going to be higher than it was before the change.

[ddude987]

I second that power level is relative. Overall Beguilers are one of the weaker full casting classes however compared to no casting they are still powerful.


To the second part ... even if beguilers were overpowered, making them charisma-based wouldn't really do much to fix things. If anything, it might make them more powerful.

Switching the casting stat to Charisma would just make them take a smaller Intelligence score. Even if they completely dump Int to 8, they'd still get 5 skill points per level (if it's something other than a human). If you take two of those skills as being search and disable, you'd have three left ... which is exactly enough room for Diplomacy, Use Magic Device, and Bluff. Arguably the three most useful/abusable skills in the PHB. All Class Skills. All keyed off of Charisma - which is now going to be higher than it was before the change.

If youre taking those skills you are missing on spell craft and concentration which as a caster are important. Or are Beguilers very different?

[Chronos]

Their spellcasting is fine. Their full-spontaneous access to their whole list is nice, but it's balanced by the fact that the list is short and their spells are all so similar.

The only problem with the beguiler is that they overshadow rogues too much. To remedy this, I would reduce their skill points to 4, remove their inherent trapfinding ability, and add the Find Traps spell to their list. That way, they could still pinch-hit as a skillmonkey if needed, but they'd be notably inferior to rogues at it.

Switching their casting to Charisma would make them a little less skillful, too, but it would also put them into too-direct competition with bards, the other high-skills charisma-based casting class with mostly illusion and enchantment spells.

[Muggins]

I second that power level is relative. Overall Beguilers are one of the weaker full casting classes however compared to no casting they are still powerful.
Of course they're still better. Magic is still the best scaling system in DnD.

If youre taking those skills you are missing on spell craft and concentration which as a caster are important. Or are Beguilers very different?
You don't have to pour all your points into the same five skills. Mix and match to suit your DM's playstyle and you'll do fine.

[Duke of Urrel]

The only problem with the beguiler is that they overshadow rogues too much. To remedy this, I would reduce their skill points to 4, remove their inherent trapfinding ability, and add the Find Traps spell to their list. That way, they could still pinch-hit as a skillmonkey if needed, but they'd be notably inferior to rogues at it.

Good ideas! Most other commenters agree that beguilers aren't generally overpowered, but I agree that they somewhat step on the toes of rogues.


Switching their casting to Charisma would make them a little less skillful, too, but it would also put them into too-direct competition with bards, the other high-skills charisma-based casting class with mostly illusion and enchantment spells.

Good critique!

[shortround]

Switching their casting to Charisma would make them a little less skillful, too, but it would also put them into too-direct competition with bards, the other high-skills charisma-based casting class with mostly illusion and enchantment spells.
Would it, though? Sure both classes have a lean to Illusion and Enchantment, but the Bard also has some reasonable Conjuration and Transmutation, too, not to mention that Bards are better suited to buffing . They have similar a chassis, but I think that if a Bard and a Beguiler were in the same party, they'd get along pretty well and would be able to contribute in their areas of specialty while also being able to help each other because of their overlap. More than anything, though, I like the consistency of spontaneous casting being Charisma based and switching the Beguilers casting stat would make him match up with his Dread Necromancer and Warmage brothers.

More on-topic, though, I believe Beguilers are definitely in a comfortable place in terms of balance. Magic outshines mundane, but that goes without saying. If I were to balance the Beguiler against his mundane counterpart, I'd want to buff the Rogue rather than nerf the Beguiler. Or I'd suggest the Factotum.

[Namfuak]

Good ideas! Most other commenters agree that beguilers aren't generally overpowered, but I agree that they somewhat step on the toes of rogues.


I don't think they do. Beguilers are mainly useful for being the party debuffer/battlefield controller (and a bit of buffing) during combat, and make good skillmonkeys out of combat. Rogues, if not directly out of the box but with a bit of splat support, are pretty good damage dealers if they know how to set up sneak attack, and are good skillmonkeys out of combat. Both can be almost equally effective skillmonkeys, so it isn't "overshadowing" so much as "fulfilling the same role." Saying that they step on rogues' toes is sort of like saying a cleric steps on a druid's toes because both can heal effectively. They don't need to be in a party together, and if two players are dead set on being a rogue and a beguiler, they can even work together to specialize in different fields of skills - the beguiler could be the party face and UMD expert, with some search and disable device to aid another on the rogue, while the rogue does the trapfinding and disabling.

In short, I think that it's a bad metric to say that a class is overpowered or steps on another class' toes just because it does something that the other class does.

[Keneth]

Beguilers are fine as they are. Why spoil a perfectly good class?

[Bakeru]

One one hand, a Beguiler has a huge number of spells known for an spontaneous caster.
On the other hand - most of said spells are "will negates", so against the wrong enemies, they can be as good as useless. A lot are also mind affecting, making them literally useless in many situations.
Oh, and it's generally focused on illusion and enchantment, so on higher levels, mind blank and true seeing reduces a Beguiler's options a lot.
Also, they have barely any room for optimisation outside of prestige classes.

When it comes to stepping on the rogues toes - well, they're both trapfinding skillmonkeys, with the Beguiler maybe a bit ahead due to quite possible having more skill points (his lesser default skill points are easily counterbalanced by being an int-based caster), and also having access to quite a few utility spells.
But the Beguiler doesn't really get a chance to step on these toes because the Factotum already stomped them so hard it left cracks in the ground. And even so, neither a Beguiler nor a Rogue can master every skill, so it's more than possible to specialise in entirely different things.
And in combat, they're entirely different, so that's not even a relevant comparison.

[Duke of Urrel]

Thanks for the comments. You've given me a lot to think about! I am thinking of creating an Evil beguiler as a NPC to face my PCs, so I have lots of other concerns that are only tangentially connected to the questions I asked at the top of the thread.

I agree with the general observation that magic is more powerful than any other class feature in the game, including a wide skill set. I think as a DM, I need to think about in-game solutions to that: Areas of anti-magic or wild magic, abjurations and spell resistance, and lots of opportunities for skill-monkeying. I don't think the solution is to make skills more powerful, because part of the challenge to using a skill is difficulty and the chance that it may fail, just as part of the challenge to using a spell is the chance that spell resistance or a saving throw against it may succeed. Moreover, I like the idea that skill-monkeys should differ from each other by specializing, and they won't specialize or differ much if we give them all enough skill points to max out most of their skills.

I still like the idea that beguilers should use Charisma to cast their spells, and I have received one positive response to that. Does anybody think this change would make beguilers too weak? On the other hand, Telonius has argued that this change would make beguilers even more powerful. Feel free to add your own two cents. As you can see, I'm on the fence in many ways here.

[Bakeru]

I still like the idea that beguilers should use Charisma to cast their spells, and I have received one positive response to that. Does anybody think this change would make beguilers too weak? On the other hand, Telonius has argued that this change would make beguilers even more powerful. Feel free to add your own two cents. As you can see, I'm on the fence in many ways here.It would make them less generalised skillmonkeys, but it wouldn't change that they have some (all?) of the most powerful skills on their class list, that said skills would get even more powerful (so, they'd just be more specialised in them) and most of all, their casting wouldn't get any weaker.

The only difference between having to max out intelligence and having to max out charisma is how many skill points you get as a bonus, and they don't really need that many extra skill pointy, already having a basis of 6 skill points per level.

So, basically, it'd be a minor nerf to skill-versatility, but it would encourage specialisation in those skills the Beguiler would take anyway by making them even stronger.
If anything, yes, I'd say it'd make them slightly more powerful, but I don't think it'd be that much.
Fluff would probably improve, given that every other spontaneous arcane caster is cha-based.

[Story]

Duskblades are also an Int based spontaneous caster.

[Bakeru]

Duskblades are also an Int based spontaneous caster.Oh, right. And from the same book, too!

[Barsoom]

Beguilers are perfectly fine as they are. If its overshadowing Rogues you worry about, it's pretty much an eternal curse of D&D. Warblades overshadow Fighters, Swordsages overshadow Monks, etc.

Or, instead of trapfindery focus, the Rogue player can focus his build on combat and sneak attaks (Rogue/Swashbuckler with TWF, Daring Outlaw and Craven. A couple of Swordsage levels for a good measure). Now you have something sufficiently different, and no one isn't stepping on any toes.

[gorfnab]

Beguilers are fine as they are. Why spoil a perfectly good class?
+1

Beguiler is Tier 3 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=tf1au2o2c3gv9f83df33e52ub3&topic=5293)


Why Tier 3s are in Tier 3 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=340ir7q6gt8t23o4tdb5osu833&topic=4890.0)

Cons: A Beguiler, like a rogue, is very vulnerable to certain types of enemies unless they can cover their gaps with specialized magical items. Mindless creatures, those immune to Enchantments or Illusions, creatures with blindsight, true seeing, high SR, or even a high will save can be tough for Beguilers to beat.

Illusions and Enchantments derive much of their power from the creativity of the player and the cooperation of the DM. A player who just wants to blast his enemies will not do well with a beguiler. A DM whose NPC's always attempt to subvert commands and who are all paranoid of illusions can cripple a Beguiler.

While the Beguiler knows more spells than a sorcerer, and is absolutely better than a Sorcerer who takes only Enchantment and Illusion spells, it lacks the versatility of Sorcerers or Wizards to have the right tool on hand for every situation.

While superior in mundane combat to low level sorcerers and wizards, the beguiler is still one of the weakest combatants in the game, and the Surprise Casting class feature is almost a trap to lure unsuspecting players near their enemies where they can be crushed. -Braithwaite

Pros: Beguiler is probably the most flexible of the three "specialist Sorcerers", the other two being Dread Necromancer and Warmage.

For an arcane caster, the beguiler is reasonably hardy. Light armor is roughly equal to a sorcerer's Mage Armor, without taking up a spell slot. Weapon proficiencies similar to a rogue and d6 hit points per level mean that at low level the Beguiler can be marginally better in combat than a wizard.

The beguiler is a top of the line skill monkey. They really have more than 6 skill points per level, because Int is their casting stat, and they are almost obliged to keep it as high as possible anyway. They have trapfinding. If they decide to ignore parts of their excellent skill list, they can cover the gaps with their flexible spell list. For example, a beguiler with low hide can replace it with invisibility or silent image, or a beguiler with bad social skills can recover with charms, Suggestion, or Dominate. Use Magic Device can be used to mask some of their weaknesses.

The beguiler is a full caster. They automatically know every spell on their spell list, and their spell list can be widened by a number of feats, prestige classes, and the advanced learning class feature. At each spell level their list includes a number of excellent spells. They get some free metamagic feats and their cloaked casting ability helps them overcome enemy defenses when casting on opponents who are denied their dex bonuses.

The beguiler is capable of doing one thing quite well. It is excellent at neutralizing opponents with charms and illusions. When that is inappropriate, it can still contribute with Trapfinding, Use Magic Device, or a handful of buff spells. -Braithwaite

[Deophaun]

Fix the rogue, not the beguiler.

[Jeff the Green]

Beguilers are perfectly fine as they are. If its overshadowing Rogues you worry about, it's pretty much an eternal curse of D&D. Warblades overshadow Fighters, Swordsages overshadow Monks, etc.

Or, instead of trapfindery focus, the Rogue player can focus his build on combat and sneak attaks (Rogue/Swashbuckler with TWF, Daring Outlaw and Craven. A couple of Swordsage levels for a good measure). Now you have something sufficiently different, and no one isn't stepping on any toes.

Or the beguiler can trade away his trapfinding for something like antiquarian, or just not use it, and focus on social skills/UMD. Beguilers generally want a positive Charisma modifier anyway so they win opposed checks on their Enchantments, so they might as well put it to use.

[Kaeso]

In dnd 3.5e terms you literally need to be a god to be considered overpowered. Wizards and Clerics barely don't reach that point.

[Fyermind]

There are enough skills that you can have two skill monkeys without having them overlap. It is a common misconception that the if someone other than a rogue can find traps the rogue becomes immediately useless. Rogues have the ability to actually deal damage, making them good companions to beguilers.

Also, stealth parties are fun.

[Barsoom]

There are enough skills that you can have two skill monkeys without having them overlap. It is a common misconception that the if someone other than a rogue can find traps the rogue becomes immediately useless. Rogues have the ability to actually deal damage, making them good companions to beguilers.

Also, stealth parties are fun.Rogue and beguiler sneak to surprise enemies. Beguiler casts Grease to put enemies off balance. Rogue draws bow and shoots enemies full of holes. Good time is had by all!

[HunterOfJello]

Beguilers are fine as is. They're a great alternate class for the rogue role without actually making the rogue obsolete.

[Chronos]

Oh, sure, you could have a beguiler and a rogue who use different skills. But you could also have a beguiler and another beguiler who use different skills. You still have to ask what the rogue is for.

[Fyermind]

The rogue deals damage. Besides, beguilers are very hard to build with much variation. You can have about two forms of useful rogues.

[Frosty]

Oh, sure, you could have a beguiler and a rogue who use different skills. But you could also have a beguiler and another beguiler who use different skills. You still have to ask what the rogue is for.Is this like asking why you'd want a Paladin and a Crusader in the same party when you can just have 2 Crusaders?

[137beth]

In dnd 3.5e terms you literally need to be a god to be considered overpowered. Wizards and Clerics barely don't reach that point.

Depends on what kind of power/versatility you want. If you make a melee class which is like the fighter but gets +1000 to attack/damage rolls, it is still low tier 4-high tier 5, because it lacks the versatility of a true tier 4 like rogue or ranger, but it is overpowered/gamebreaking, because when it can contribute it usually kills stuff in one attack.

[Thurbane]

I just find them an un-fun class in my games. As already noted, they out-rogue the Rogue. Int-based spontaneous casting just goes against the grain of the vast majority of other spontaneous casters, especially their two closest relatives, the Warmage and the Dread Necromancer.

Finally, they often get downplayed because so many of their spells are mind affecting, but then for no real thematic reason I can think of, spells like Glitterdust, Solid Fog, Haste, Slow, Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Dispel Magic, Spell Turning and Time Stop pop up on their list.

Also, let's not downplay the power of mind affecting spells. The vast majority of opponents at mid to low levels will be susceptible, and Will is often their worst save.

In the two games I've played in with a Beguiler involved, spamming Confusion has brought so many groups of enemies to it's knees.

As I said, not saying they are overpowered, especially compared to many other full casters, but yeah, can be painful as a DM.

[Keneth]

The vast majority of opponents at mid to low levels will be susceptible, and Will is often their worst save.

Nope. There should be plenty of immune creatures to throw around at all levels, and Will save is rarely the worst save. Fortitude is usually better, but Reflex is routinely worse than both of them.

[Zovc]

As already noted, they out-rogue the Rogue. Int-based spontaneous casting just goes against the grain of the vast majority of other spontaneous casters, especially their two closest relatives, the Warmage and the Dread Necromancer.

Most people in this thread are actually arguing that the Beguiler doesn't really outclass the Rogue.

As far as going against the grain, all of your examples are true. However, the Duskblade is Int-based, and is in the same book. Anyways, that's literally one word you have to change if you really want as a DM (though people have already said if anything, you're probably making the Beguiler better by changing the casting stat to Charisma).


Finally, they often get downplayed because so many of their spells are mind affecting, but then for no real thematic reason I can think of, spells like Glitterdust, Solid Fog, Haste, Slow, Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Dispel Magic, Spell Turning and Time Stop pop up on their list.

Meh, I like offering Beguilers Expanded Learning (a la Warmage ACF in PHBII) so that they can pick up other non-enchantment, non-illusion spells of their choice. I think whether or not the spells you listed belong are ultimately personal preference, and again, a DM could easily erase/replace them.


Also, let's not downplay the power of mind affecting spells. The vast majority of opponents at mid to low levels will be susceptible, and Will is often their worst save.

In the two games I've played in with a Beguiler involved, spamming Confusion has brought so many groups of enemies to it's knees.

As I said, not saying they are overpowered, especially compared to many other full casters, but yeah, can be painful as a DM.

This example right here...

Couldn't any Wizard or Sorcerer have done that, too? I wonder if Clerics can get Confusion as a domain spell...?

Saying a spell is too good doesn't mean that a class that gets to use it is too good.

[Thurbane]

This example right here...

Couldn't any Wizard or Sorcerer have done that, too? I wonder if Clerics can get Confusion as a domain spell...?

Saying a spell is too good doesn't mean that a class that gets to use it is too good.
I find that Beguilers tend to spam spells like Confusion more than other casters simply because they can. A Wizard has to memorize it; a Bard or Sorcerer has to spend a precious spell known. A beguiler just has it, as well as every other 4th level spell on his list at his fingertips - and yes, I know, that's the schtick of classes like Beguilers, Warmages, and Dread Necros - all your spells at your fingertips at any given time.


Nope. There should be plenty of immune creatures to throw around at all levels, and Will save is rarely the worst save. Fortitude is usually better, but Reflex is routinely worse than both of them.
Of course there are, but in most campaigns I've played in there is a spread of enemies, especially in pre-generated adventures. It can break verisimilitude if the DM needs to throw hordes of undead and constructs around just to get past spamming of mind affecting spells.

And true, Reflex is often a poor save as well, but the results of failing a Will save are more often auto-lose than from a failed Reflex save.

Again, I'm not saying Beguilers are overpowered, just somewhat problematic in my practical experience with them - which could well be due to the style of games I play in.

[Amphetryon]

I just find them an un-fun class in my games. As already noted, they out-rogue the Rogue. Int-based spontaneous casting just goes against the grain of the vast majority of other spontaneous casters, especially their two closest relatives, the Warmage and the Dread Necromancer.

Finally, they often get downplayed because so many of their spells are mind affecting, but then for no real thematic reason I can think of, spells like Glitterdust, Solid Fog, Haste, Slow, Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Dispel Magic, Spell Turning and Time Stop pop up on their list.

Also, let's not downplay the power of mind affecting spells. The vast majority of opponents at mid to low levels will be susceptible, and Will is often their worst save.

In the two games I've played in with a Beguiler involved, spamming Confusion has brought so many groups of enemies to it's knees.

As I said, not saying they are overpowered, especially compared to many other full casters, but yeah, can be painful as a DM.
I think having Beguiler be INT-based helps them fulfill the "skill Caster" Rogue/Arcane archetype they are obviously meant to occupy, and offsets some of the issues with their spell load (more on this below). They may "out-Rogue the Rogue," but given that a Swordsage and virtually every other Caster outside the Healer and Warmage can do the same thing if they put their minds to it, I'm not sure how damning that is. Beguilers are a higher Tier than Rogues based on versatility and spell-power, after all.

I find Solid Fog, Haste/Slow, Ethereal Jaunt, Spell Turning, and Time Stop perfectly in keeping with the theme of a misdirection-based caster, which seems perfectly legitimate for a "Beguiler."

I think the "vast majority of opponents" at any given level is a highly DM-specific concept; in the games where I've seen them, the party faced ample amounts of Undead, Constructs, and other opponents who were outright immune to the mind-affecting spells on the Beguiler's list at all levels of play, which the Player saw as a definitive inconvenience. Please note, I'm not saying the DM included these specifically to hamper the Beguiler; they were already in the planned encounters based on the proposed adventure and setting.

[Story]

Anyways, that's literally one word you have to change if you really want as a DM

Nitpick: It's more than one word.

[Draz74]

Most of Thurbane's list of spells are somewhat questionable thematically, but Ethereal Jaunt is a "sneaking" spell just as surely as Invisibility is.


There are enough skills that you can have two skill monkeys without having them overlap. It is a common misconception that the if someone other than a rogue can find traps the rogue becomes immediately useless. Rogues have the ability to actually deal damage, making them good companions to beguilers.

Also, stealth parties are fun.

Heh, now I kinda want to design a stealth party. Nightbringer Druid, Rogue, Factotum, Beguiler, Swift Hunter, Swordsage, and maybe an Elocator of some sort? (Hmmm, throw in an Unseen Seer or a Trickery Cloistered Cleric/Human Paragon, and that would be enough character concepts for two sneaky parties. Oh, and I also like Umbral Disciples.)

[Spuddles]

Thanks for the comments. You've given me a lot to think about! I am thinking of creating an Evil beguiler as a NPC to face my PCs, so I have lots of other concerns that are only tangentially connected to the questions I asked at the top of the thread.

I agree with the general observation that magic is more powerful than any other class feature in the game, including a wide skill set. I think as a DM, I need to think about in-game solutions to that: Areas of anti-magic or wild magic, abjurations and spell resistance, and lots of opportunities for skill-monkeying. I don't think the solution is to make skills more powerful, because part of the challenge to using a skill is difficulty and the chance that it may fail, just as part of the challenge to using a spell is the chance that spell resistance or a saving throw against it may succeed. Moreover, I like the idea that skill-monkeys should differ from each other by specializing, and they won't specialize or differ much if we give them all enough skill points to max out most of their skills.

I still like the idea that beguilers should use Charisma to cast their spells, and I have received one positive response to that. Does anybody think this change would make beguilers too weak? On the other hand, Telonius has argued that this change would make beguilers even more powerful. Feel free to add your own two cents. As you can see, I'm on the fence in many ways here.

Against a party, they might be a little overpowered. Will save or lose control of your character & illusions are some of the nastiest, most frustrating abilities out there.

Personally I like games where players can be turned into mindslaves or goo, so ymmv.

[Chronos]

Mindless creatures aren't really a problem for a beguiler, because even though they're immune to half his spell list, they're extra-vulnerable to the other half. A mindless creature will always accept an illusion at face value, rather than stopping to think "does that make sense?".

The problem only comes in when you've got monsters that are immune to mind-effecting but still intelligent, and those usually don't show up much at low levels.

[tiercel]

If beguilers have a problem with creatures naturally immune to mind-affecting effects, rogues have a problem with creatures naturally immune to sneak attack. (Supplements give rogues more workarounds for their problem, but beguilers already have a reasonable spell list they can use even with less-than-ideal targets.)

If beguilers have a problem with mind blank or true seeing, rogues have a problem with any effect that grants concealment.

And honestly, by time a beguiler reaches the level where it is reasonable that some of his foes might have access to mind blank, leading with greater dispel magic against buffed foes is probably the right move anyway. (Heck, greater arcane sight is on the beguiler list, so the beguiler knows exactly who to spell-nuke.)

Beguilers are a nice class, but one that makes rogues even a little more problematic by offering yet another class that is more rogue-y than the rogue is. (Also, as others have mentioned, beguilers are sort of class-in-a-box; one beguiler is much like the next, barring the occasional "Killer Gnome" Shadowcraft Mage build.)

A problem with rogues is that to unleash significant amounts of SA damage, they often have to take their squishy d6 HD, light armor, and no buff spells into melee range and absorb full attacks (in order to try and land full attacks). Beguilers get the same HD, same armor, plus buff spells, and get to hang in back with the cool kids and lob spells.

Yes, yes, I know about the tier system, yadda yadda (we don't really need tiers per se to know that spellcasters always win etc); but the beguiler can pretty much match the rogue for straight-up skillmonkeying even w/o magic AND still has a better schtick than the rogue when it comes to battlemat time.

So I can see why some people would feel that the beguiler "out-rogues the rogue," especially folks who like the famous "lives by his wits not by mighty magic" roguish archetype but are disappointed to find that not only does magic do it better, once again, but magic does it just as well without magic and even moreso with the actual spells.

[Thurbane]

Just curious what people think about the compared spell lists of Beguiler, Warmage and Dread Necro who share the same casting mechanic?

Warmage is the obvious loser. But how do Beguiler and Dread Necro compare?

I think Beguiler wins on the sheer versatility of it's spells, but Dread Necro has some great attacking spells and minionmancy going for it....

[Frosty]

Dead Necros can also get infinite healing iirc with Necropolitan?

[Deadline]

Dead Necros can also get infinite healing iirc with Necropolitan?

Or the Tomb-tainted soul feat. But the infinite healing doesn't come from their spell list, it comes from Charnel Touch.

Dread Necros get access to the Summon Undead spell line, which are pretty solidly awesome.