Full casters Reduced to Bard Progression

[Grytorm]

What would happen to game balance if the flexible list full casters had their spell progresion changed to something around a bard's spell progresion? Would the game be more balanced then?

[Doc_Maynot]

Well, first off. Everyone and their mother would use the Chameleon PrC. It'd be like Ur-Priest meets Beholder Mage that lets you be both once you have 7 levels.
Take that out or nerf it's casting progression? It should be interesting to see tested.

[Promises Kept]

Really, it's not very different from banning them out. You still have access to 9th's from other sources (Traditional Fast-Casters, Sublime Chord, Feat Shenanigans, etc.) and the base casters become relatively useless compared to say, an Adept. So, nobody takes them, every other broken trick still exists, and Psions remain gods, with access to 9th level powers (which are arguably just as strong as 9th level spells, if not stronger). It does little for balance in that it only torches part of the uppermost levels of power and versatility, leaving other ways to reach that level untouched (I'm looking at you, Rainbow Warsnake). If you remove 7th-9th level casting from your game entirely, higher levels become extremely dangerous, because the best immunities (like Mind Blank) become unavailable then. Oh, and Druid remains viable, because it's Druid. Really, attempting to balance the system by targeting classes is nigh-impossible. You have to rework the spells themselves from the ground up if you want to achieve "balance," which is why nobody's ever really done it. 3.5e is unbalanced on such a fundamental level that trying to balance the system as a whole would render it unrecognizable. As an aside, though, restricting what players can choose to play can certainly keep the party balanced among each other, which is enough for a DM who tailors encounters to be winnable by party abilities.

[Larkas]

What would happen to game balance if the flexible list full casters had their spell progresion changed to something around a bard's spell progresion? Would the game be more balanced then?

More balanced? Certainly. If you're removing 7th-9th level spells and powers (as I'm assuming you're doing, and not merely forcing T1/2 to have Bard progression), you're removing the most broken spells from the game. Balanced? Not at all. Casters are still much more versatile than non-casters, and there are still some broken spells at lower levels.

Bottom line, you're bringing the classes closer together power-wise, but they were miles apart to begin with.

[Psyren]

One danger is that certain spells the game expects you to have at level X will become delayed to level (X + Y) instead. For example, lycanthropes and mummies become much more dangerous opponents if you're stuck waiting an extra 2-3 levels to be able to remove curses, and flying enemies become more dangerous if you're waiting 2 extra levels to be able to send the fighter up after them.

[Ansem]

{{scrubbed}}

[Larkas]

Just to complement what I said earlier (and to an extent what Psyren said): there are lots of broken spells at those levels, but they are by no means the only spells at those levels. Some relevant, balanced spells might be missed in a regular game.

Eh, that's what incantations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm) are for, I guess.