Thoughts on a Caster Fix

[Karoht]

The following is an idea based on some of the changes Pathfinder made to specific classes.

In Pathfinder, certain classes have an excellent unique customization system. The best examples are probably Barbarian and Rogue actually. Barbarian gets Rage Powers and Rogues get Talents and Advanced Talents (Ninjas use Tricks but are interchangeable with Rogue Talents). You trade nothing away to gain these abilities, they are built into the progression. Every even level you get a Rage Power/Talent, every odd level you still get a Feat.

What if...
What if casters had a selection of options in much the same manner. One of those options might be to progress in the level of spells they can cast. Provide a bunch of other options as well, the sort of fun and unique stuff that casters often multiclass to pick up in the first place.
But make it a significant trade off. A wizard might be able to cast 9th level spells. On the other hand, he might be satisfied only knowning 6th level spells, and taking some features that are more fun.
A Druid might chose to only be able to cast 7th level spells but gain access to Planar Bubble.
This would (likely) not affect spell slots in any meaningful way. At worst you might have a caster who can only cast Xth level spells but has access to 9th level slots for the purposes of metamagic.

Now, I can't list off enough features like this in order to fully flesh this out. And naturally, features AS powerful could and should be created for other classes that need them, such as the lower tiered classes. Such a system could also work in reverse, as a platform for granting classes access to things like ToB styled Maneuvers.

Class Diversity VS Balance
Class Tiers probably still wouldn't go away exactly. A Fighter isn't likely to pick locks to solve a problem in the way that a Wizard just casts a spell and trivializes the Rogue. A Fighter might be able to pick up Trapfinding and Disable Device, but unless that fighter blows skill points and stats on it isn't likely to be very good at it. But the option is there. A Wizard would have the option to pick up no spells at all really, if they enjoyed the other feature options that much.

[prufock]

I can't see any way this would be effective, because spells are completely and utterly the most powerful part of the class. A caster is only going to trade away spells if he's getting something as powerful or more powerful.

Fixed-list or limited-list casters are, in my opinion, the way to go. Beguiler, Dread Necro, some sort of fixed Warmage are all good options.

Another possibility I've been toying with sort of mixes sorcerer progression, letting you select your spells from one school, and giving other abilities based on your school. The weaker schools get more powerful class features. IE Divination gets the strongest, conjuration and transmutation get the weakest. You'd have Advanced Learning at every 4 levels as well, with which you can take one spell outside your school. I've yet to flesh this out, but I think it has potential to be a low tier 2, high tier 3.

[HammeredWharf]

I don't see the point. If I wanted my wizard to rage, I could take a level of barbarian. Most mundanes are similarly front-loaded and the best ones (ToB classes) are already very dip-friendly. Besides, how would this fix casters? They could still pick spell level advancement at every level and be OP.

[Karoht]

I can't see any way this would be effective, because spells are completely and utterly the most powerful part of the class. A caster is only going to trade away spells if he's getting something as powerful or more powerful.Some would, others wouldn't. It's a trade off system. Some will like what they see and feel this or that ability is worth it or is more fun oriented, or they won't like it and pick spell casting. I'm operating from the position that one doesn't have to take away the option for spell advancement in order to knock down the caster's power. Merely providing an option is all I'm saying. It isn't taking away spell casting and it isn't saying they aren't allowed to have 9th level casting. It's just saying that they don't have to take 9th level casting, here are some other options which one may or may not find worthwhile. Not optimal but still potent and effective and potentially flavorful.

If a player wants to optimize, they're probably going to. Taking away their options only causes arguments and resentment (if done wrong, if done right the player and DM can both be happy). Giving all players more options (on all classes, not just casters) means that maybe, certain players hit a point of optimization they are comfortable with, and then start picking things more for fun or quality of life or utility.
"Drive for show, putt for Moe"

Consider the Pathfinder Barbarian example with Rage Powers. Rage Powers can be ignored and the Barbarian can instead get extra feats if they chose. The Rage Powers are arguably the better option (build goals dependant of course) as the Rage Powers can provide things that the feats can not. At the same time, just because something is optimal doesn't mean that it is always taken. You know that out there somewhere is someone playing a Barbarian who has mostly or completely traded off Rage Powers for feats, because that's what they prefer for one reason or another.

If such options were provided for casters in place of advancing to the next spell level of spells, I think some people would at least consider those options, and some would take them and some would not.

Example for example sake:
Arcane Fusion doesn't exist in Pathfinder. What if, upon reaching the appropriate level, the Sorcerer could either take access to 5th level spells (which would not include Arcane Fusion), or take Arcane Fusion as an Spell Like Ability usable X times per day? This in addition to probably a few more options. And in a level or two they could still pick up 5th level spells anyway, and their spell slots wouldn't be affected. Yes, taking 5th level spell access as early as possible is more powerful, but Arcane Fusion (in a system that doesn't normally allow it) means the character is a bit more unique and presents some different options.



Another possibility I've been toying with sort of mixes sorcerer progression, letting you select your spells from one school, and giving other abilities based on your school. The weaker schools get more powerful class features. IE Divination gets the strongest, conjuration and transmutation get the weakest. You'd have Advanced Learning at every 4 levels as well, with which you can take one spell outside your school. I've yet to flesh this out, but I think it has potential to be a low tier 2, high tier 3.That could be fun on it's own.

[prufock]

Some would, others wouldn't. It's a trade off system. Some will like what they see and feel this or that ability is worth it or is more fun oriented, or they won't like it and pick spell casting. I'm operating from the position that one doesn't have to take away the option for spell advancement in order to knock down the caster's power. Merely providing an option is all I'm saying. It isn't taking away spell casting and it isn't saying they aren't allowed to have 9th level casting. It's just saying that they don't have to take 9th level casting, here are some other options which one may or may not find worthwhile. Not optimal but still potent and effective and potentially flavorful.

What we're talking about here is akin to ACFs. I like options, don't get me wrong, but if it comes down to Arcane Fusion vs 9th level spells, I know what I'm taking. Making the tradeoffs balanced would be tricky, but possible. I assume you're trying to lower the power of casters, so the trade-off has to be tempting enough to lose a spellcasting level.

[Karoht]

What we're talking about here is akin to ACFs. I like options, don't get me wrong, but if it comes down to Arcane Fusion vs 9th level spells, I know what I'm taking. Making the tradeoffs balanced would be tricky, but possible. I assume you're trying to lower the power of casters, so the trade-off has to be tempting enough to lose a spellcasting level.I can see that you understand what I'm getting at. Again, without designing a bunch of these (taking up a lot of my time and headspace) I probably can't offer you a good enough example that is 'balanced' but still a tempting trade off. Again, Pathfinder doesn't have things like Celerity, some would argue that Celerity is quite valuable, but I'm not going to try and assign it one for the purpose of this discussion.
Counterbalance all of this with the knowledge that these features would be unique, you wouldn't have another way of getting them or replicating them. That 'special snowflake' factor has a value to some players as well.

However, I would point out that such options would not affect your spell slots gained, and possibly not your spells known. So you would still have 9th level spell slots, just no ability to use them for the purpose of casting 9th level spells. So you could in theory still apply metamagic options to your best spells known. I'm pointing this out solely for the purpose of indicating that one is not completely halting their progression in spell casting, just one aspect of it, albeit probably the most important part.

I would speculate that a restructuring of caster spell lists would be required, probably across all casters. The same would apply to non-casters, particularly if Tome of Battle material were to be applied somehow.


@HammerdWharf
Cool name.
I get that you don't want your Wizard to Rage. Never said that would be a thing. I said features unique to the classes, probably orientated towards specializations as well. What specialization of Wizard do you enjoy? Abjuration? Conjuration?

[HammeredWharf]

@HammerdWharf
Cool name.

The random nickname generator of GFWL was made by a genius.


I get that you don't want your Wizard to Rage. Never said that would be a thing. I said features unique to the classes, probably orientated towards specializations as well. What specialization of Wizard do you enjoy? Abjuration? Conjuration?

Oh, raging as a wizard would be nice, if it were more reasonable than the rage mage PRC. But never mind that. What I mean is that I can get plenty of options by multiclassing and/or PRCs, especially if I don't mind losing caster levels. I've played some pretty suboptimal combos just for fun and for not being OP compared to the party's monk. I've played an evoker who banned conjuration. I've played an animal companion -focused druid with beastmaster levels. I've played a master of many forms. Master specialist is there for all wizard specializations and if it doesn't work, you can take levels of abjurant champion, force missile mage, master transmogrifist, void disciple, etc. What you're suggesting would basically be the equivalent of a bunch of PRCs that don't offer full casting level progression and we all know those don't fix casters.

[Karoht]

Oh, raging as a wizard would be nice, if it were more reasonable than the rage mage PRC. But never mind that. What I mean is that I can get plenty of options by multiclassing and/or PRCs, especially if I don't mind losing caster levels. I've played some pretty suboptimal combos just for fun and for not being OP compared to the party's monk. I've played an evoker who banned conjuration. I've played an animal companion -focused druid with beastmaster levels. I've played a master of many forms. Master specialist is there for all wizard specializations and if it doesn't work, you can take levels of abjurant champion, force missile mage, master transmogrifist, void disciple, etc. What you're suggesting would basically be the equivalent of a bunch of PRCs that don't offer full casting level progression and we all know those don't fix casters.Depends on your definition of fixed. Like you said, you've taken PRC's and don't mind the casting nerf. This is basically the same thing, just within one class. Kind of like a 'build your own PRC' but not.

And again, contrast this with the knowledge that all the other classes would be getting more options as well.

[Lanaya]

It's nice from a fun perspective, but it doesn't actually fix the problems with casters. In fact, the only possible change balance-wise would be to make them even more overpowering. If you take the current T1-T2 casters and give them the option to swap out their spells for something else, they'll take that option if it's somehow even stronger than spells and won't take it otherwise.


If a player wants to optimize, they're probably going to. Taking away their options only causes arguments and resentment (if done wrong, if done right the player and DM can both be happy).

People who don't want to optimise and single handedly win whole adventures already aren't doing that, and people who do want to optimise are going to do it no matter what. The former category aren't an issue, the latter category get even more overpowered and obnoxious with your changes. Yeah, it's nice to add more options and it's fun and stuff, but don't label it as a caster fix, because it isn't. It's making casters even more overpowered and then hoping that your players are mature enough to play them in fun ways rather than trying to break the system. Which is fine, because most players are that mature, but it's not actually fixing the issues you claim to be fixing.

[Phelix-Mu]

As mentioned above, this isn't really a "fix" so much as a nifty and appealing way for casters to nerf themselves in exchange for something interesting and potentially useful to some builds (but probably not as useful as more spells, because spells are so stupidly useful that the game spontaneously inverts before growing a sandwich board and ranting about the end of days).

I'd like the idea, except that it is essentially "more options for casters." This is fine if you are also giving many new options to mundanes, but, generally speaking, casters have enough options (including plenty of ways to make themselves less effective, should they wish to do so).