"ECL" of a Wizards w/o spells?

[Segev]

Obviously, the RAW state that your ECL as a character is your number of class levels, if you aren't a race with an LA. We also know that this is clearly an imperfect measure: a Tier 1 (wizard) is going to be a tougher challenge than a Tier 4 (fighter) even if both are the same (15th) level.

Therefore, a wizard without spells would, by RAW, be the same ECL as a wizard with them. However, a wizard 20 without spells is also clearly not really playable in a 20th level party.

The reason I bring this up is that I've got a concept for a wizard who was 20th level, but used Disjunction and took out an artifact...and it permanently cost him his spellcasting.

While there are a number of ways to refluff and rebuild to design a character with that backstory, I'm interested first in judging an "effective" level. If we accept that this character is now Tier 3 or 4, because all he has left is his hit dice, BAB, saves, feats (not counting the now-useless item creation and metamagic ones), stats, and skills, what level party could this 20d4 HD character adventure with while neither overshadowing them nor being totally useless dead weight?

[bjoern]

Doesn't disjunction just wipe magic items and effects? Or is it some kind of special effect for plot purposes? I'd say that a wizard who can't cast any spells is just a fighter with UMD (maybe)

At level 20 your BAB is +10, so between that and your saves and WBL, Id say you'd be around 10th or 12th level fighter. Granted you don't have any useful fighter feats, but that could be balanced out with WBL.

[Coidzor]

He's like a really limited weapon selection Warrior 10 in terms of HP and BAB, I think, with the knowledge skills of a knowledge-focused Expert 20 but none of the more generally applicable skills aside from sagery... Int alone makes him pretty good at crafting most things the party might need.

[Yogibear41]

Pretty sure its better to be a 10th level fighter with good physical ability scores, than to be a 20th level commoner with a good will save and a high int score.

[heavyfuel]

Ok, first, this isn't how tiers work, not by a long shot. Tiers don't analyse specific builds, they analyse classes as a whole (which why Monk is T5, but is a very reasonable 2lv dip for martial classes.)

Now that this is out of the way, the wizard is probably as good as a lv 12 or so fighter because despite the lack of spells and BAB, he still has all that huge WBL he attained from reaching lv 20. Sure, some of it is lost because scrolls, wands, staffs and whatnot are wasted, but he can still sell these and get something like a +5 quarterstaff and other things in the necessary magic item list.

[bjoern]

And if he's playing with a mid level party, he could retrain some of his dead feats for useful ones, unless that defeats the back story.

[Segev]

Disjunction has a specific clause about risking losing your spellcasting powers if you use it to (successfully) destroy an artifact.


And yes, I know how the Tiers work, but if you were to take the wizard class and strip out the spellcasting, it stops being a Tier 1 class.


Other than that, thanks for the analysis; it roughly agrees with my own.

Taken straight, the concept would be that the wizard, no longer able to adventure with his former party in a useful capacity, seeks out a new life. He can't quite retire; his enemies from his adventuring days catch wind eventually of his now vulnerable state. So he seeks out a party wherein his remaining skills can be useful. Possibly gaining a level of rogue (technically becoming Epic at level 21, now) in the process. Putting him at at least fitting in with an ACL 12 party, maybe even ACL 13 or 14, depending on whether he makes particularly good use of his epic feat.

Obviously, though, such a design is horrifically wonky on a number of mechanical levels when it comes to balancing it with a party, especially if Epic feats are on the table.

So, the next question is the one I deliberately glossed over initially: how WOULD you build such a character to represent the right amount of knowledge and "power" (mostly in terms of fighting prowess as represented by a wizard 20's BAB, and his skills and stats)?

We can assume that, for whatever level party he's joining, his frantic escapes from some of his foes forced him to sell off his WBL items until he has a remarkably appropriate amount of wealth for the party's level

edit: And, if you CAN come up with a way to make a balanced build that uses 20 levels of spell-less wizard, 1 level of rogue, etc., with a mid-level party and keep it playable, that'd be fascinating. (/edit)

Also, incidentally, if you look at the average amount of loot a DM is supposed to give per encounter and compare it to the WBL chart, you'll find that the former adds up to more than the latter by the start of the given levels. A certain amount of consumable items being used up is assumed in the WBL tables already.

[Vhaidara]

Look at Elminster (Fighter 1/Rogue 2/Cleric 3/Wizard 24/Archmage 5). You're basically moving his early years to his late years (Wizard 20/Rogue 1).

Also, you're essentially getting a 20th level commoner with class skills and a good Will save. And vaguely more proficiencies.

[Twilightwyrm]

I'm interested first in judging an "effective" level. If we accept that this character is now Tier 3 or 4, because all he has left is his hit dice, BAB, saves, feats (not counting the now-useless item creation and metamagic ones), stats, and skills, what level party could this 20d4 HD character adventure with while neither overshadowing them nor being totally useless dead weight?

...How low an opinion of basically all other classes do you have that you consider a Wizard WITHOUT spells to be Tier 3-4?

[Vhaidara]

...How low an opinion of basically all other classes do you have that you consider a Wizard WITHOUT spells to be Tier 3-4?

Well, you have the WBL of a 20th level character, and can still use spell completion items.

[Segev]

...How low an opinion of basically all other classes do you have that you consider a Wizard WITHOUT spells to be Tier 3-4?

I'm not sure why that would imply a low opinion of other classes. Wizards without spells lack their primary class feature. Compare to an equal-level, say, monk. The monk has a bigger HD, better BAB, and more class features. Even if the monk is not a very good class, it's still better than a wizard without spells, isn't it?

As far as using spell-completion items, that's always been unclear to me. The wizard has lost his spellcasting ability. Are we sure he CAN still use said items? He's no longer a spellcaster. UMD would probably still work by the RAW, though.

[Vhaidara]

I'm not sure why that would imply a low opinion of other classes. Wizards without spells lack their primary class feature. Compare to an equal-level, say, monk. The monk has a bigger HD, better BAB, and more class features. Even if the monk is not a very good class, it's still better than a wizard without spells, isn't it?

Yes. The objection is to the claim that a no-spell wizard is T3-T4. Monk is T5.


As far as using spell-completion items, that's always been unclear to me. The wizard has lost his spellcasting ability. Are we sure he CAN still use said items? He's no longer a spellcaster. UMD would probably still work by the RAW, though.

I would argue that while you lost your spellcasting abilities, you still have your spell list.

[bjoern]

Something else to think about is if you start at level 20 and the party is at 10. They are going to level about twice as fast as you. So your 20 levels of wizard that we are counting as 10 of fighter will keep bogging you down xp wise. And you will become less and less useful as things go along.
Unless this is a short campaign with little leveling.

[Segev]

Something else to think about is if you start at level 20 and the party is at 10. They are going to level about twice as fast as you. So your 20 levels of wizard that we are counting as 10 of fighter will keep bogging you down xp wise. And you will become less and less useful as things go along.
Unless this is a short campaign with little leveling.

Indeed, this is the case. And would be the only thing that would make me wonder if actually allowing the epic Wizard 20/Rogue X/PrC Y to have epic feats was balanced out by that.

But it's also the source of the acknowledgement that, for playability purposes, it may need to be some other class and set at the actual party level.



And fine, call it Tier 5. I was trying to be conservative in how far down I put it. After all, Fighter is Tier 4.