Homebrew Classes Tiers

[LordOfCain]

I would like to know the tiers of the classes in this google doc link (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h1kAEzAqMS-r3hTkKy16BR1cKA5Iox4oPe0hK7j2KN4/edit?usp=sharing). Thanks for your assistance.

[Jormengand]

I would like to know the tiers of the classes in this google doc link (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h1kAEzAqMS-r3hTkKy16BR1cKA5Iox4oPe0hK7j2KN4/edit). Thanks for your assistance.

I don't have permission to access it.

[LordOfCain]

I don't have permission to access it.

Sorry for the inconvenience. I believe it should be fine now.

[Jormengand]

I can't actually work out how they cast spells, but the answer is probably two since they look like they learn them, rather than just preparing them.

[LordOfCain]

I can't actually work out how they cast spells, but the answer is probably two since they look like they learn them, rather than just preparing them.

Sorry if it is a tad unclear: I am still editing it. They spend research points to be able to cast that spell one time per day.

[Jormengand]

Sorry if it is a tad unclear: I am still editing it. They spend research points to be able to cast that spell one time per day.

Huh, so actually, it's like the worst parts of both spontaneous and prepared, and they cast off a seventh stat, and gain penalties to three of the other stats? That still doesn't drag them below T2, it just makes them a really unfun T2.

[LordOfCain]

Huh, so actually, it's like the worst parts of both spontaneous and prepared, and they cast off a seventh stat, and gain penalties to three of the other stats? That still doesn't drag them below T2, it just makes them a really unfun T2.

I added some more drawbacks for casting higher level spells. Or really just edited them into the Doc. I had already planned them. As well as additional penalties for using metamagic. (metamagic levels apply twice to the DC of the caster level check you must make)

[Jormengand]

I added some more drawbacks for casting higher level spells. Or really just edited them into the Doc. I had already planned them. As well as additional penalties for using metamagic. (metamagic levels apply twice to the DC of the caster level check you must make)

Okay, time for Grod's Law (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?328767-More-realistic-D-amp-D-Economy/page4&p=17613518#post17613518):

You cannot, and should not, balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use.

[LordOfCain]

Okay, time for Grod's Law (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?328767-More-realistic-D-amp-D-Economy/page4&p=17613518#post17613518):

You cannot, and should not, balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use.
Hmmm.... IMHO I don't think that they would be that annoying to use...

[Jormengand]

Hmmm.... IMHO I don't think that they would be that annoying to use...

You're a bad wizard-sorcerer-truenamer-thing, one in twenty of your spells make you roll to shoot yourself in the foot, and you can take permanent damage to your primary casting stat just because the dice hate you. Oh, and your primary casting stat forces all other stats to be bad, so when you give up on trying to utter maneuvers manifest invocations cast spells, you can't do anything else, either. A DC 30 will save is bloody hard (failing about 3/4 of the time), so any ninth-level spell will really hurt, and one in about 1200 spells will cause a triple-1 by themselves, whereas you only need about 300 spells to get a triple-1 normally, meaning that a MAG 18 occultist can cast roughly 2700 spells before his MAG is too low to cast cantrips.

On another note, what lists do magi learn from?

[LordOfCain]

You're a bad wizard-sorcerer-truenamer-thing, one in twenty of your spells make you roll to shoot yourself in the foot, and you can take permanent damage to your primary casting stat just because the dice hate you. Oh, and your primary casting stat forces all other stats to be bad, so when you give up on trying to utter maneuvers manifest invocations cast spells, you can't do anything else, either. A DC 30 will save is bloody hard (failing about 3/4 of the time), so any ninth-level spell will really hurt, and one in about 1200 spells will cause a triple-1 by themselves, whereas you only need about 300 spells to get a triple-1 normally, meaning that a MAG 18 occultist can cast roughly 2700 spells before his MAG is too low to cast cantrips.

On another note, what lists do magi learn from?
Cleric and Assassin (Assassin spells counting as one level higher.)

Quote Originally Posted by Jormengand View Post
You're a bad wizard-sorcerer-truenamer-thing, one in twenty of your spells make you roll to shoot yourself in the foot, and you can take permanent damage to your primary casting stat just because the dice hate you. Oh, and your primary casting stat forces all other stats to be bad, so when you give up on trying to utter maneuvers manifest invocations cast spells, you can't do anything else, either. A DC 30 will save is bloody hard (failing about 3/4 of the time), so any ninth-level spell will really hurt, and one in about 1200 spells will cause a triple-1 by themselves, whereas you only need about 300 spells to get a triple-1 normally, meaning that a MAG 18 occultist can cast roughly 2700 spells before his MAG is too low to cast cantrips.

On another note, what lists do magi learn from?
I made it so that the magique damage is temporary but if you have two points of magique damage from the same source at the same time, then it becomes one point of permanent magique damage. I will change the DC 30 will save to DC 25.

[LordOfCain]

Anyone other than Jormengard have an opinion? Thank you.

[johnbragg]

Anyone other than Jormengard have an opinion? Thank you.

Any mechanic where a character suffers permanent damage from a die roll is a bad, unfun thing.

You've got a negative feedback mechanism for 9th level spells, and a separate one for "spells that cost more than 20 research points", which I think means 7th and 8th level spells (7^2/2 = 24.5 research points.) Do you need two separate mechanisms there, on top of the regular spell failure mechanic? IF you want spell failure to hurt, maybe just standardize it at 1 point of (Pick-a-stat) damage per spell level?

I'm getting old and crotchety, and I'm biased against systems that add new numbers to track, especially if they operate differently than other d20 mechanisms. I think you'd agree that "simple and elegant" does not describe your system. But I will keep going. I'm not a fan of adding a 7th ability score, but you seem attached to the idea.

I think the idea is that you want a caster a lot less flexible than the Sorcerer, with the same spell load every day. It's hard to read the table for the Occultist, but I'd recommend adding a column with the total number of REsearch points at each level. Also, a table showing Research Point values would help.



Spell LEvel
Research Points


1
1


2
2


3
5


4
9


5
13


6
18


7
25


8
32


9
41

[LordOfCain]

Any mechanic where a character suffers permanent damage from a die roll is a bad, unfun thing.

What should I replace it with to make it around the same drawback but more fun?

[johnbragg]

What should I replace it with to make it around the same drawback but more fun?

First of all, not permanent. The worst D&D I ever played was in one of my first campaigns in 2E, where the DM finally relented and let me play a second character--5 or 6 levels after I had rolled him up. So he was way behind on hit points, and died and had to be Raised. Which meant losing a point of Con, which meant fewer hit points. Which meant he died more often, and had to be RAised again.

Ability damage is an option. Hit point damage. Fatigue. There are a bunch of conditions in the SRD you could apply.

[noob]

You're a bad wizard-sorcerer-truenamer-thing, one in twenty of your spells make you roll to shoot yourself in the foot, and you can take permanent damage to your primary casting stat just because the dice hate you. Oh, and your primary casting stat forces all other stats to be bad, so when you give up on trying to utter maneuvers manifest invocations cast spells, you can't do anything else, either. A DC 30 will save is bloody hard (failing about 3/4 of the time), so any ninth-level spell will really hurt, and one in about 1200 spells will cause a triple-1 by themselves, whereas you only need about 300 spells to get a triple-1 normally, meaning that a MAG 18 occultist can cast roughly 2700 spells before his MAG is too low to cast cantrips.

On another note, what lists do magi learn from?

I feel how much I failed the Yet another chaos magi.
Well maybe I will change a little my event table(I will try to reduce that one negative level per level in the class -1).

[johnbragg]

The way you have the research points and spell points mechanic written, I don't really know that I understand what's going on.

Since you're doing this in real time, do me a favor: Break the backlash mechanic into a separate paragraph from the research points/spells per day thing.


n order to be able to cast a spell, they must spend their research points to learn a spell. It costs spell level squared divided by two points to learn a spell (round up). 0th Level spells cost ½ of a research point. They can only cast a spell that they have researched once per day, however, they may spend the appropriate number of research points to be able to cast it another time per day.

Assuming that you spend your research poitns as soon as you earn them, with a +2 in MAgique:
CL Spells
1 2 1sts
2 3 1sts
3 3 1sts 1 2nd
4 3 1sts 2 2nds
5 4 1sts 3 2nds

Before I bother building out a 20-level path, is that what you have in mind?

[LordOfCain]

The way you have the research points and spell points mechanic written, I don't really know that I understand what's going on.

Since you're doing this in real time, do me a favor: Break the backlash mechanic into a separate paragraph from the research points/spells per day thing.



Assuming that you spend your research poitns as soon as you earn them, with a +2 in MAgique:
CL Spells
1 2 1sts
2 3 1sts
3 3 1sts 1 2nd
4 3 1sts 2 2nds
5 4 1sts 3 2nds

Before I bother building out a 20-level path, is that what you have in mind?
Yep that is exactly what I have in mind BUT you could get like 10 firsts and no second level spells if you really wanted that.

[johnbragg]

And then at the end of the Occultist, this happens:


The occultist may designate a pool of research points to be “spell points” and be able to cast spells with those points. For every three research points an occultist designates as spell points the occultist must pay an additional research point. With those spell points the occultist may cast spells on the fly with the same cost as using research points to learn that spell would cost.

What? What spells can he cast with those points? The ones he already researched? The way I THINK this works is, say you have a 1st level occultist with a 15 Magikque stat, with 3 Research Points. He learns 2 spell, say magic missile and sleep and has one Spell Point, which he can use to cast magic missile or sleep?

This mechanic is not well explained, and the most obvious interpretation isn't one that makes me say, "yes that looks like fun to play" or "yes that's a lot simpler than Core Class X" or "that's a good way of limiting that Tier 1 class' power."

[LordOfCain]

And then at the end of the Occultist, this happens:



What? What spells can he cast with those points? The ones he already researched? The way I THINK this works is, say you have a 1st level occultist with a 15 Magikque stat, with 3 Research Points. He learns 2 spell, say magic missile and sleep and has one Spell Point, which he can use to cast magic missile or sleep?

This mechanic is not well explained, and the most obvious interpretation isn't one that makes me say, "yes that looks like fun to play" or "yes that's a lot simpler than Core Class X" or "that's a good way of limiting that Tier 1 class' power."
You use research points to be able to cast a spell 1/day. The spell points are optional. You may invest research points into spell points to get more versatility but at a higher price than having the ability to cast a fixed spell 1/day.

[johnbragg]

Yep that is exactly what I have in mind BUT you could get like 10 firsts and no second level spells if you really wanted that.

OK. One tip to reduce one piece of unnecessary math: Instead of pricing the Research Cost at SL*2/2, price it at SL*2 and double the number of Research Points you get.

And in looking at a class for "what Tier is this in", you usually look at the most obvious way to build the class to get power. That means getting the highest level spells you can. The build is permanent, so there's a real cost to not taking a second level spell when second level spells are level-appropriate.

And I think you're also expecting players to "save up" research points, if they want to ever cast higher level spells.

IF your aim is to take higher level spells out of the game, just play E6. IT works, and it's fun.

[johnbragg]

You use research points to be able to cast a spell 1/day. The spell points are optional. You may invest research points into spell points to get more versatility but at a higher price than having the ability to cast a fixed spell 1/day.

But did I even do it right? I think I did it right, but I'm not 100% sure. 3 Research points, you can learn sleep, magic missile and enlarge person 1/day, or sleep and magic missile, and 1 slot open for either sleep or magic missile?

[LordOfCain]

But did I even do it right? I think I did it right, but I'm not 100% sure. 3 Research points, you can learn sleep, magic missile and enlarge person 1/day, or sleep and magic missile, and 1 slot open for either sleep or magic missile?

If you get a spell point you can cast any first level spell with it. But you would need to spend 3/2 of a research point per spell point. (changed from 4/3) So you could have magic missile 1/day and two effective spell slots (either 2 first or 4 cantrips) that can be anything.

[LordOfCain]

I slightly offset the research point progression of the magus to account for upping the BAB to 3/4.

[johnbragg]

...so if you have a Spell Point, you can use it to cast ANY first level wizard spell?

So a 1st level Occultist with +2 Magique uses 3 research points to buy 2 spell points, and then gets to cast 2 1st level wizard spells from anywhere in the Spell Compendium?

[LordOfCain]

...so if you have a Spell Point, you can use it to cast ANY first level wizard spell?

So a 1st level Occultist with +2 Magique uses 3 research points to buy 2 spell points, and then gets to cast 2 1st level wizard spells from anywhere in the Spell Compendium?

Or other splat books but yes... Should I increase the cost?

[johnbragg]

Or other splat books but yes... Should I increase the cost?

I don't think you should do it. The biggest complaint about Tier 1s, and especially arcane casters, is that they have access to too many different spells. Read any of the caster-supremacy-debate threads, and someone will bring up Schrodinger's Wizard, who happens to have the exact right spell prepared. You're building that into your class.

[LordOfCain]

I don't think you should do it. The biggest complaint about Tier 1s, and especially arcane casters, is that they have access to too many different spells. Read any of the caster-supremacy-debate threads, and someone will bring up Schrodinger's Wizard, who happens to have the exact right spell prepared. You're building that into your class.

Shouldn't increase the price or shouldn't have it all?

[johnbragg]

Shouldn't increase the price or shouldn't have it all?

Probably shouldn't have it at all. Maybe should have it once to a few times a day (linked to MAgicque bonus?).

Have you read the FActotum class? They have a similar ability to cast anything, ARcane Dillettante, a couple of times per day. FActotum was a well-received class. An arcane caster with more on-the-fly flexibility than the wizard, would not be.

[LordOfCain]

Probably shouldn't have it at all. Maybe should have it once to a few times a day (linked to MAgicque bonus?).

Have you read the FActotum class? They have a similar ability to cast anything, ARcane Dillettante, a couple of times per day. FActotum was a well-received class. An arcane caster with more on-the-fly flexibility than the wizard, would not be.
I will limit it to a number of spells per day equal to your magique bonus.

[johnbragg]

I think you should start with a goal. You have Core Wizards and Sorcerers and Clerics. You have the Spontaneous Divine Caster and the Spell Points rules from UA. You've looked at how the psionic classes work. (IF not, you should go do that, because existing, playtested classes are probably going to be better designed than your homebrew. Your homebrew is half-baked, UA and splatbook systems are at least completely baked. Or whatever.)

What is your design goal that you want the Occultist and the Magus to do, that prepared and spontaneous Vancian casting doesn't do, that psionics doesn't do, that refluffing the Warlock or Dragonfire Adept doesn't do?

Because I'm not sure that the basis of your system here is good. IF the foundation isn't good, then slapping patches on top of patches, to adjust to every different criticism isn't going to get you anywhere.

[LordOfCain]

I think you should start with a goal. You have Core Wizards and Sorcerers and Clerics. You have the Spontaneous Divine Caster and the Spell Points rules from UA. You've looked at how the psionic classes work. (IF not, you should go do that, because existing, playtested classes are probably going to be better designed than your homebrew. Your homebrew is half-baked, UA and splatbook systems are at least completely baked. Or whatever.)

What is your design goal that you want the Occultist and the Magus to do, that prepared and spontaneous Vancian casting doesn't do, that psionics doesn't do, that refluffing the Warlock or Dragonfire Adept doesn't do?

Because I'm not sure that the basis of your system here is good. IF the foundation isn't good, then slapping patches on top of patches, to adjust to every different criticism isn't going to get you anywhere.

I added some feats. However, in answer to your question, I am trying to nerf full casters. I would like full casters to not out shadow average optimization (not by GitP standards) mundane characters. One of my previous attempts at this can be found at this uniform resource locator (http://blog.lordofcain.com/the-magic-of-runes-d20-supplement).

[johnbragg]

I added some feats. However, in answer to your question, I am trying to nerf full casters. I would like full casters to not out shadow average optimization (not by GitP standards) mundane characters. One of my previous attempts at this can be found at this uniform resource locator (http://blog.lordofcain.com/the-magic-of-runes-d20-supplement).

OK, now we have a design goal.

So some more flowchart type questions.

1. ARe you sure you need to nerf Tier 2s?
2. Do you need to mess with traditional D&D prepared casting for prepared casters?

1. Are you sure you need to nerf Tier 2 casters (Sorcerors)? By Word of JaronK, PCs up to 2 tiers apart can coexist pretty easily, and my opinion is that you can manage a Tier 2 caster fairly easily. IF they take a problematic spell, that's one issue to deal with, either by gentlemen's agreement or houserule or by banning or whatever. A 10th level Sorcerer has 15 spells known, a 15th level has 27.
2. If you're also committed to doing something because you don't like memorizing spells, then everything is more complicated.

[LordOfCain]

OK, now we have a design goal.

So some more flowchart type questions.

1. ARe you sure you need to nerf Tier 2s?
2. Do you need to mess with traditional D&D prepared casting for prepared casters?

1. Are you sure you need to nerf Tier 2 casters (Sorcerors)? By Word of JaronK, PCs up to 2 tiers apart can coexist pretty easily, and my opinion is that you can manage a Tier 2 caster fairly easily. IF they take a problematic spell, that's one issue to deal with, either by gentlemen's agreement or houserule or by banning or whatever. A 10th level Sorcerer has 15 spells known, a 15th level has 27.
2. If you're also committed to doing something because you don't like memorizing spells, then everything is more complicated.

1. I would like a game with casters to remain viable even with high optimization through high levels.
2. Hm... I think that it would be easier to make a lower tier sorcerer without prepared casting...
1. As per question 1. I would like high optimization from casters and non-casters to be viable.
2. Um... I don't mind memorizing spells.

[johnbragg]

1. I would like a game with casters to remain viable even with high optimization through high levels.
2. Hm... I think that it would be easier to make a lower tier sorcerer without prepared casting...
1. As per question 1. I would like high optimization from casters and non-casters to be viable.
2. Um... I don't mind memorizing spells.

I"m not exactly clear on your design goal for high-level casters, but I'm going with the nerf-the-casters part. Edit: Oh, you want the *game* to remain viable. Gotcha.

I'm going to suggest a framework and see what you think.

1. Tier 2 Spontaneous Casters. Leave the Sorcerer alone. Add a Divine Sorcerer with features.
2. "Arcane/Divine Generalist Casters" Prepared Casters use the Bard spells per day table, advanced one level. (You could add 7th level spells to the chart at 18th level, or not)
3. "ARcane/Divine Gish" types get one spell per day per spell level, and get a new spell level every odd level, from a very limited selection of spells.

Spontaneous Divine Casters, to me, are squishy magic-user types. (d4 or d6 HD, 1/2 BAB) They need class features and powers or they're pretty sad.

Gish types are mostly warriors, with a few flashy signature spells. (d8 HD, 3/4 BAB). You may consider Arcane Channelling, like a Duskblade for these guys, or something similar.

That gives you a tradeoff spectrum of power vs versatility at Tier 2 vs Nerfed-Tier-1, and a tradeoff of combat power vs magical power for the gish vs the other options.

[johnbragg]

I like your Runelord, though.

[LordOfCain]

I like your Runelord, though.

Thanks, any idea if it would work in the same party as a occultist?

[johnbragg]

Thanks, any idea if it would work in the same party as a occultist?

HArd to say, because right now the Occultist is still a mess that I can't give an evaluation on. You want to nerf wizards, then turn around and let them cast any spell ever published.

[LordOfCain]

HArd to say, because right now the Occultist is still a mess that I can't give an evaluation on. You want to nerf wizards, then turn around and let them cast any spell ever published.

Any wizard or ranger spell... But yeah... that does need to be nerfed. I probably will limit it to just ranger spells. (if that is an adequate fix)

[johnbragg]

I would recommend starting over with the Occultist.

1. Do you really want to add a 7th stat?
2. Why are you scrapping the VAncian WOTC "Spells Known/Spellbook" / "Spells per day" setup in favor of Research Points, which in some cases become Spell Points?

The answer isn't to try to patch what you already did, changing the insanely powerful "any wizard spell" to the very meh "any ranger spell".

Figure out what you want the Occultist to look like and be able to do. Then figure out what mechanics you need to make that happen.

[LordOfCain]

I would recommend starting over with the Occultist.

1. Do you really want to add a 7th stat?
2. Why are you scrapping the VAncian WOTC "Spells Known/Spellbook" / "Spells per day" setup in favor of Research Points, which in some cases become Spell Points?

The answer isn't to try to patch what you already did, changing the insanely powerful "any wizard spell" to the very meh "any ranger spell".

Figure out what you want the Occultist to look like and be able to do. Then figure out what mechanics you need to make that happen.

1. I think instead of having a mental stat having a stat dedicated specifically to your connection to magic would be more realistic.
2. To make casters have to choose their layout and be able to choose to not get 3rd/4th/etc. level spells (or as many) to get more of a lower level/higher level/etc. spell.

[johnbragg]

1. I think instead of having a mental stat having a stat dedicated specifically to your connection to magic would be more realistic.
2. To make casters have to choose their layout and be able to choose to not get 3rd/4th/etc. level spells (or as many) to get more of a lower level/higher level/etc. spell.

Ok. Then instead of connecting Spells Known and Spells per day in a kludgy way, don't connect them.

Be prepared, however, that the structure of the game, namely the thousands of WOTC written and WOTC-approved spells, makes trading lower level spells for higher level spells pretty much always the right choice. If casters have the practical ability to trade lower level spells for higher level spells, then you make the "casters nova, five minute workday" problem worse.

[LordOfCain]

Ok. Then instead of connecting Spells Known and Spells per day in a kludgy way, don't connect them.

Be prepared, however, that the structure of the game, namely the thousands of WOTC written and WOTC-approved spells, makes trading lower level spells for higher level spells pretty much always the right choice. If casters have the practical ability to trade lower level spells for higher level spells, then you make the "casters nova, five minute workday" problem worse.

That is why I made the price of casting higher level spells increase exponentially.

[LordOfCain]

Ok. Then instead of connecting Spells Known and Spells per day in a kludgy way, don't connect them.

Be prepared, however, that the structure of the game, namely the thousands of WOTC written and WOTC-approved spells, makes trading lower level spells for higher level spells pretty much always the right choice. If casters have the practical ability to trade lower level spells for higher level spells, then you make the "casters nova, five minute workday" problem worse.

Should I increase the cost of higher level spells? Like add the spell level to the existing cost or something or is my spell level^2/2 (round up) fine?

[johnbragg]

Should I increase the cost of higher level spells? Like add the spell level to the existing cost or something or is my spell level^2/2 (round up) fine?

I *think* the cost for higher level spells is good, assuming that you want to severely limit the casting of higher level spells. (I'd have to lay it out on a table comparing the bump you get at each level compared to the cost of level-appropriate spells.)

I think you're repeating the THAC0 mistake, with SL^2/2 instead of SL^2 and double the amount of Spell Points or REsearch Points or whatever the Occultist or MAgus has to spend. Dividing by two creates unnecessary math, and the reality is you'll have players who struggle with doing 5th grade math in their heads, and that makes it harder for them to play your class. When you can eliminate a step, do it. 3E BAB > 2E THAC0, 3E AC 20 > 2E AC 0 even though they're mathematically identical.

SL^2 creates a power curve where the steepest tradeoff is at the lowest levels. You need 4 1sts to buy a 2nd, but only 2.25 2nds to buy a 3rd, 1.77 3rds to buy a 4th, 1.68 4ths to buy a 5th, 1.44 5ths to buy a 6th, 1.33 6ths to buy a 7th, 1.25 7ths to buy an 8th, 1.25 8ths to buy a 9th. (I can't be bothered to find my calculator, so those might be off by a few percent.) Was that a goal, or is that just how the numbers worked out?

If you want to increase the costs of high-level spells even more, I'd go with 2^SL, or 2^(SL-1)) instead of SL^2/2.

The way you have Research Points set up, and originally had Spell Points set up, you're giving maximum build flexibility, with minimal daily flexibility. An Occultist who has Researched fireball and resist energy(fire), say, doesn't have any way to cast 2 resist energy(fire) as far as I understand. Would be nice to have more fire resistant PCs when you're going off to fight a Fire-Infused Owlbear, but too bad, I guess?

But an NPC Occultist of the same level could use those spell levels to cast polymorph or black tentacles, because he just got statted up the morning of the game, so who cares how he got to be 8th level in the first place.

[LordOfCain]

I *think* the cost for higher level spells is good, assuming that you want to severely limit the casting of higher level spells. (I'd have to lay it out on a table comparing the bump you get at each level compared to the cost of level-appropriate spells.)

I think you're repeating the THAC0 mistake, with SL^2/2 instead of SL^2 and double the amount of Spell Points or REsearch Points or whatever the Occultist or MAgus has to spend. Dividing by two creates unnecessary math, and the reality is you'll have players who struggle with doing 5th grade math in their heads, and that makes it harder for them to play your class. When you can eliminate a step, do it. 3E BAB > 2E THAC0, 3E AC 20 > 2E AC 0 even though they're mathematically identical.

SL^2 creates a power curve where the steepest tradeoff is at the lowest levels. You need 4 1sts to buy a 2nd, but only 2.25 2nds to buy a 3rd, 1.77 3rds to buy a 4th, 1.68 4ths to buy a 5th, 1.44 5ths to buy a 6th, 1.33 6ths to buy a 7th, 1.25 7ths to buy an 8th, 1.25 8ths to buy a 9th. (I can't be bothered to find my calculator, so those might be off by a few percent.) Was that a goal, or is that just how the numbers worked out?

If you want to increase the costs of high-level spells even more, I'd go with 2^SL, or 2^(SL-1)) instead of SL^2/2.

The way you have Research Points set up, and originally had Spell Points set up, you're giving maximum build flexibility, with minimal daily flexibility. An Occultist who has Researched fireball and resist energy(fire), say, doesn't have any way to cast 2 resist energy(fire) as far as I understand. Would be nice to have more fire resistant PCs when you're going off to fight a Fire-Infused Owlbear, but too bad, I guess?

But an NPC Occultist of the same level could use those spell levels to cast polymorph or black tentacles, because he just got statted up the morning of the game, so who cares how he got to be 8th level in the first place.

I'll implement the change about doubling research points and making it just spell level squared when I get back to my desktop. Thanks. I think some of the new feats add some versatility.