[3.PF] No spells above level 7 exist- What prestiege classes are viable?

[The Vagabond]

Let's say that, past level 15 or 16, while you get spells per day, you don't get spells like that (Though you still get the slots- You can put metamagiced lower level spells in there). That would give a Wizard 5 effective dead caster levels, where he gets NOTHING. What prestiege classes are viable because of that fact?

[noob]

You could take a dead last level of the fatespinner(bonus +-10 to one throw per day)(of course you take the four previous levels before that because they increase spellcasting) then take rainbow servant depending on the interpretations(with one of them it allows to have all the spells) or take one bard level and sublime chord for extra high level spontaneous spells(or maybe use spellsinger to qualify).
Sorry it was PF I will research the prc list of PF.
Noble scion looks cool because it gives a higher level cohort(if the GM let you use prestige)
Else I do not really see any other prestige class who does advance slower spellcasting than wizard which is not uninteresting.

[Troacctid]

Generally, it's not losing 9th level spells that's the problem, it's delaying 5th and 6th level spells (or whatever). The fact that you sort of catch up eventually is less relevant than the fact that you spend a significant portion of your career being behind.

Considering that you're still including 9th level spell slots for metamagic, I'm not sure it's even fair to say you catch up eventually. I mean, we're talking Quickened 5th level spells, Twinned 5th level spells, Maximized 6th level spells, Repeated 6th level spells...that's a big game.

[Brova]

Some of the 5/10 casting classes are okay. There are problems though. First, you still get your progression shafted (unless you do some sort of shenanigans). Second, a lot of the 5/10 classes do stuff that's good early (Bonded Summoner) which means you're still paying full price. Third, there are a lot of PrCs that are just not good. Mindbender (except the 1st level people were taking anyway) doesn't actually let you do anything you couldn't do just by being an Enchanter.

Honestly, I think bumping everyone up to 10/10 (or whatever) progression is probably better. Or at least a necessary competent if your mission is to get people to take more PrCs. Also, I might let Druids pick either Wild Shape or Animal Companion to advance when they take PrC levels.

[Hiro Quester]

This might be the kind of situation in which a swiftblade (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070327) would be a very good option.

It loses a few caster levels, but has awesome class features that sort of make up for that. Including a capstone that acts like time stop.

So if you aren't getting 8th or 9th level spells anyway, this tradeoff become a very good deal.

[Kraken]

Generally, it's not losing 9th level spells that's the problem, it's delaying 5th and 6th level spells (or whatever). The fact that you sort of catch up eventually is less relevant than the fact that you spend a significant portion of your career being behind.

Considering that you're still including 9th level spell slots for metamagic, I'm not sure it's even fair to say you catch up eventually. I mean, we're talking Quickened 5th level spells, Twinned 5th level spells, Maximized 6th level spells, Repeated 6th level spells...that's a big game.

Seconding this, as an example it's why theurges end up not working out as spectacularly as people dream, even via super early entry shenanigans such as wizard1/cleric1/theurge10. It takes a pretty big incentive to make something worth being behind a level on spells, strictly in terms of optimal play. Of course, I love me some swiftblade too, so by all means go for it, they're tons of fun once they get going, just don't underestimate the number of times you'll be saying, 'oh, if I weren't behind on spell levels I would have...'

[P.F.]

Seconding this, as an example it's why theurges end up not working out as spectacularly as people dream, even via super early entry shenanigans such as wizard1/cleric1/theurge10. It takes a pretty big incentive to make something worth being behind a level on spells, strictly in terms of optimal play. Of course, I love me some swiftblade too, so by all means go for it, they're tons of fun once they get going, just don't underestimate the number of times you'll be saying, 'oh, if I weren't behind on spell levels I would have...'

How much of this is objective relative character power, and how much is a subjective psychological effect?

I'm not even saying that the psychological drawback (O if only I hadn't taken that prestige class) isn't a valid consideration; but I spent about 10 levels of ninja saying the exact same thing ... except I wasn't multi-classed. It was as if the DM, my party, and even the game itself were conspiring to anticipate my abilities and then obviate them once acquired. Every encounter for me was "ooh, just wait until next level, I'll be able to ..."

Essentially, if a player didn't know any better, how much objective power would they really lose in exchange for the added versatility?

Or put another way, would it cause them to fall from tier 1 to tier 2? Would a Wizard or Cleric with the spell list truncated to 7th-level-minus really be a lower tier?

[Troacctid]

Easy. Just compare your delayed-progression character against a single-classed character of the same level. Which one is more powerful, and by how much? That's what you're giving up.

[P.F.]

Easy. Just compare your delayed-progression character against a single-classed character of the same level. Which one is more powerful, and by how much? That's what you're giving up.

Sure, it's easy to say, if I were single-class I could cast disintegrate (or whatever), but I'm not sure how to evaluate the relative benefits of having, say, access to 7th level sorcerer spells versus having access to both wizard and cleric spells of 6th level and under at the same ECL.

[Troacctid]

Sure, it's easy to say, if I were single-class I could cast disintegrate (or whatever), but I'm not sure how to evaluate the relative benefits of having, say, access to 7th level sorcerer spells versus having access to both wizard and cleric spells of 6th level and under at the same ECL.

If you're not sure which is better and they don't seem easily comparable, then the tradeoff probably isn't too harsh. But let's look at something like Warpriest (Complete Divine). Compare a Cleric 11 to a Cleric 7/Warpriest 4. You're behind a full spell level, losing access to 6th level spells. In exchange, you got +1 to attack rolls and the ability to use remove fear and mass cure light wounds each once per day. Except, hang on, the Warpriest got one casting of mass cure light wounds, but she missed out on a spell slot that she could have used to cast it spontaneously and two 6th level spell slots that could have been used for spontaneous mass cure moderate wounds. And she's also down a 3rd and 4th level spell slot to boot! Clearly a crappy trade.