Limiting Spell Selection

[gr8artist]

Everyone says that the problem with casters is the spells, not so much the number of spells or strength of spells. That to bring a caster down a few pegs, you need to restrict what spells are available to him.
I'm running a PF campaign, and would like the Playground's opinion on a few things.

First, roughly what percentage of spells would need to be removed to knock all casters down a tier? 20%?
Secondly, would you take the same percentage of spells away from the bard, paladin, or magus that you take away from the cleric, druid, and wizard?
Last, and most importantly, are there any spells in particular that you would ban if you were running a campaign? I want the best of the best (or worst of the worst, depending on your outlook), the ones that every optimizer loves, and every DM hates.

I know there are other threads covering a similar topic. If you know of a good one, feel free to link it here.

[NoACWarrior]

While I found PF to be somewhat better than 3.5 in the spells department, I also recognized that it was because the number of spells just isn't there (unless you direct port).

Limiting the spell list is exactly what beguiler, warmage, and dread necromancer does. As for the optimal tier to play in, alot of people say t3, where as some say t2 and others say t4.

I personally like t3.

Limited offerings to particular spells from one spell school can cap a spell caster to t3 or t4 (warmage). But the issue will be why would you let someone play a wizard when you will limit thier spells.

For balance?

There are things you can do like limit availability of scrolls and other wizard spell books, that would greatly hamper adding spells to a book other than 2 at every level. You could also limit the spells learned at each level, but you still get into the "control for balance" issues with your PCs.

Spells which give the caster the most options are some of the worst offenders of the power tier system, with summoning and polymorph the foundation. I would personally limit polymorph and summoning to something reasonably powerful - or make it so that they much choose a single form to use with it for the day. As for summoning, I would instead limit it to a single creature (no multiples at one time), with only 1 summon at a time, and the choice of what to summon limited to one particular type a day.

[Keneth]

First, roughly what percentage of spells would need to be removed to knock all casters down a tier? 20%?

Up to 80% for T3, assuming you take out most of the biggest offenders.

[grarrrg]

Everyone says that the problem with casters is the spells, not so much the number of spells or strength of spells. That to bring a caster down a few pegs, you need to restrict what spells are available to him.
I'm running a PF campaign, and would like the Playground's opinion on a few things.

First, roughly what percentage of spells would need to be removed to knock all casters down a tier? 20%?
Secondly, would you take the same percentage of spells away from the bard, paladin, or magus that you take away from the cleric, druid, and wizard?
Last, and most importantly, are there any spells in particular that you would ban if you were running a campaign? I want the best of the best (or worst of the worst, depending on your outlook), the ones that every optimizer loves, and every DM hates.

I'd leave Paladin/Ranger alone. They're OK as-is.
The 2/3 casters could maybe be bumped down a touch, but are mostly fine (for the purposes of this discussion, a Summoner is considered a Full Caster, and not a 2/3 caster).

The sticky part is just what do you mean by "restrict spells"?
Making an "approved" list is one way to go, but gets very bogged down in the details. Better off just banning a handful of the most powerful.
Limiting the number of Spells known is another way to go, but if you nerf too hard, then the Prepared casters become strictly worse than the Spontaneous.

And most importantly, so long as they have access to level 9 spells there will still be power issues. A well chosen level 9 spell (or two) can still keep them at Tier 2+.

[gr8artist]

How much could you accomplish by having the Wizard/Sorc and other 9th SL casters drop down to the Bard progression (capping out at 6th SL)?

[grarrrg]

How much could you accomplish by having the Wizard/Sorc and other 9th SL casters drop down to the Bard progression (capping out at 6th SL)?

'Full' casters would become slightly weaker than 'normal' 6th level casters. Most don't have the class features to make up for it.

Compare a Bard and Sorcerer. Bards have Performance, and the Skill Monkey thing, and 3/4 Bab. They have options. A Sorcerer stuck with 6th levels spells has...whatever random junk his Bloodline gives. That's about it.
Granted, a 6th-Sorcerer has better spell selection, and are still very much Tier 3, but they lose a LOT.

Then you have the issue of "what if I bump down normal 6th level casters?", and it just becomes a very sticky area, and everything keeps shifting, and maybe we should just give the Fighter some spells, but then the Paladin feels bad, and oh no I've gone cross-eyed.