how many caster level losses can you take as a full caster for optimisation?

[sideswipe]

obviously straight wizard/cleric/druid is a strong build. any of the previous with a full casting prestige is good too.

there are prestiges like the war weaver and wyrm wizard that lose a caster level but give great new choices for optimisation like war weaver for buffing builds.

so how low would you go on a straight caster build to gain a powerful ability like the weave or similar.

[Feint's End]

Up to 3 cl lost so you still get 9th level spells. Nothing beats those. But in order to be worth losing 3 cl the class better be enormously powerful (like a mix of dweomerkeeper and incantatrix).

[eggynack]

I agree that three is the maximum assuming you take those losses right at the end of the build, but I'd probably avoid more than one or two in the middle. Slowing down is such a big deal, and while you might not feel the pain later, by the time you don't you're already restructuring the universe with your brain and don't care as much about the benefit either.

[Boost]

Take the Practiced Spellcaster feat. It won't make up for spells per day or what spell levels you have access to, but for your caster level, it raises it by up to +4 if you have up to 4 levels in non-spellcasting classes. That will make your damage with your spells and other level-dependent variables remain the same as if you hadn't multiclassed.

And if you, say, end up being a level 15 character who only has access to level 7 spells because your spellcasting class is only level 13, you can just use scrolls or staves of level 8 spells and still cast them just fine as if you were level 15.

[Hiro Quester]

Maybe four levels, if your capstone ability is equivalent to the 9th level spell you'd learn anyway.

I'm thinking of swiftblade for a gish sorcerer. Loses four caster levels, so it caps at 8th level spells.

But the last level includes an improved time stop (you have control over the number of rounds of time stop, by casting haste as different level spells; this predictability is a significant advantage over the 1d4+1 rounds of regular time stop).

So if time stop is the ninth level spell you'd learn anyway (and for many it would be), this might be just as good as ninth level spellcasting.

If not a tiny bit better, since you have the duration control, and you could get this at 16th level in some builds.

[eggynack]

Take the Practiced Spellcaster feat. It won't make up for spells per day or what spell levels you have access to, but for your caster level, it raises it by up to +4 if you have up to 4 levels in non-spellcasting classes. That will make your damage with your spells and other level-dependent variables remain the same as if you hadn't multiclassed.

And if you, say, end up being a level 15 character who only has access to level 7 spells because your spellcasting class is only level 13, you can just use scrolls or staves of level 8 spells and still cast them just fine as if you were level 15.
These things just don't really make up for what you're losing. Caster level is nice and all, but it's not anything like having those higher level spells, and items can do some work, but they can be ridiculously expensive when you're copying high level spells. It's just not sustainable.

[Troacctid]

I wouldn't lose more than two on a Wizard or one on a Sorcerer. And even then, it would pain me.

Sure, you can theoretically lose as many as three and still get 9th level spells, but then when the campaign ends at level 16, you'll have egg all over your face.

[sideswipe]

Take the Practiced Spellcaster feat. It won't make up for spells per day or what spell levels you have access to, but for your caster level, it raises it by up to +4 if you have up to 4 levels in non-spellcasting classes. That will make your damage with your spells and other level-dependent variables remain the same as if you hadn't multiclassed.

And if you, say, end up being a level 15 character who only has access to level 7 spells because your spellcasting class is only level 13, you can just use scrolls or staves of level 8 spells and still cast them just fine as if you were level 15.

i know the feat. this is more a debate about the comparisons of powerful abilities and access to levels of spellcasting then a boost in effective level for fireball and durations. which compared to the other two (though its not a choice) is piddly and weak.

[sideswipe]

I wouldn't lose more than two on a Wizard or one on a Sorcerer. And even then, it would pain me.

Sure, you can theoretically lose as many as three and still get 9th level spells, but then when the campaign ends at level 16, you'll have egg all over your face.

i'm more in line with this way of thinking. i currently have a wizard with 1 level drop and i'm feeling it.

[OldTrees1]

There is always a price at which I would trade 1 more caster level. This price depends on many factors (most noticeably the ratio of power between adjacent spell levels which in turn is dependent on both the optimization range and optimization levels of your group).

Personally I was willing to forgo 2 spell levels (4 caster levels behind before 18th level) in exchange for lichdom xor 1 spell level (1 caster level behind and a spontaneous caster) in exchange for Circle Magic(cl 40). I barely noticed being 1 spell level behind and, while I did notice being 2 spell levels behind, I felt the list of passive benefits to be worth it.

[Tvtyrant]

As many as you like, as long as you are aiming to be good at something other than casting. 11 levels of Druid and then jumping into Master of Many Forms may not be the most optimal thing ever, but you are still better than a Warblade and you can now combine Bite of the Werebear with a Sun Giant for 53 strength, free power attack, a con of 33, etc. Power attack for full every round with a large two hander and enjoy life.

Is a straight Druid stronger? Sure. But losing caster levels only weakens you relative to your maxed out potential, you will still be strong compared to any none caster class and by the book enemies.

[Doctor Awkward]

If you are trying to be a full caster who specializes in being a spellcaster and generally is the guy who does spells, the answer is generally zero.
Caster level determines spell effectiveness, duration, and how hard you are to dispel. If all you are doing is being a spellcaster there is no excuse for losing one.

Now, if you have something specific that you want in addition to being a spellcaster (like, "I want to be a spellcaster who can also <blank>"), then the general answer is three, since a cleric, wizard, and druid will still get 9th level spells. For sorcerer, it's two, since they must be level 18 to get 9th level spells.

Even then, if you are going to claim to be an optimized full spellcaster with <blank> on the side, you need the Practiced Spellcaster feat. It doesn't matter what other feat you are giving up. Make room.

If you really, really, really can't, then whatever feat or class feature you are getting in exchange better be one hell of an I.W.I.N. Button

[atemu1234]

obviously straight wizard/cleric/druid is a strong build. any of the previous with a full casting prestige is good too.

there are prestiges like the war weaver and wyrm wizard that lose a caster level but give great new choices for optimisation like war weaver for buffing builds.

so how low would you go on a straight caster build to gain a powerful ability like the weave or similar.

Any non-epic optimisation build I make loses at most three caster levels.