2/3 spellcasting progression

[HamsterKun]

How would you work out a 2/3 spellcaster?

[Unoriginal]

What would you want a 2/3 spellcaster to do?

[bid]

Why would there be a 2/3 caster?
If paladin/ranger are half-martial, what features would a third-martial get?

Beyond that, AT/EK have the same spell slots as casters of 1/3 level rounded up. It should be mathematically obvious.

[Spacehamster]

2nd attack at 6th level and level 7 spells at level 19 where a 1/3 caster get level 4 spells I guess.

[bid]

2nd attack at 6th level and level 7 spells at level 19 where a 1/3 caster get level 4 spells I guess.
You mean like valor/bladesinger?
What's the point of 2/3 then?

[HamsterKun]

What would you want a 2/3 spellcaster to do?

I had in mind a modified Bard (nerfing the magic a bit but buffing Bardic Inspiration a bit) or a Mageknight (think of Final Fantasy's Red Mage).

[Spacehamster]

You mean like valor/bladesinger?
What's the point of 2/3 then?

Probably let it have stronger martial capabilities/martial buff spells than the ones you listed or something, I dunno I’m just helping the guy brainstorm how a 2/3 caster could work.

[Arkhios]

Closest thing to a 2/3-caster that comes to my mind is to copy spellcasting progression from 3rd edition (or, actually, Pathfinder because it did away with expendable cantrips) bard:


1st class level: Cantrips & 1st level spells
4th class level: 2nd level spells
7th class level: 3rd level spells
10th class level: 4th level spells
13th class level: 5th level spells
16th class level: 6th level spells
19th class level: 7th level spells(*)


*:The standard spell slots progression is "binary" by nature, meaning that the spell levels are actually as follows: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9; calculating them up, we get 10 actual spell levels, not 9.
While 2/3 out of 10 is 6.7 (or 7, rounded up), in the binary layout, 7 sits squarely at 6th spell level. On one hand, a 2/3-caster shouldn't get 7th level spells at 19th level, but on the other, they should. It's weird, I know.
Edit: After mulling it over, I lean towards they shouldn't. Cantrips are bit of an oddball, in that they start as very weak, making sense as 0-level spells, but gradually get very strong while still remaining at-will resource. In a way, Cantrips can be said to be both 0 and 10th level spells, something that every spellcaster has mastered entirely. Thus, it makes sense to "ignore" 0-level and 10th-level from the spellcasting progression, and so the 2/3 caster should have only up to 6th level spells, because 2/3 out of 9 is 6.

Ardently following the binary method, you "could" start with Cantrips at 1st level, followed by 1st-level spells at 4th level, 2nd-level spells at 7th level, 3rd-level spells at 10th level, 4th-level spells at 13th level, 5th-level spells at 16th level, and finally 6th-level spells at 19th level.
However, that would be very weird, compared to any other caster (in a way, you could say that fighting styles are the Cantrips for paladins and rangers). Anyway, I would advise against it.

Also, this way, 1/3-casters would have a small advantage on their side, because they gain 1st-level spells one level earlier (but, then again, Cantrips 2 levels later), and for a while remain equal with 2/3-caster, until they're left behind in pacing.

Because 2/3-caster implies better spellcasting than 1/3-caster or 1/2-caster, they should get 2nd-level spells before either of those, but not earlier than full-casters. Between 1/2-casters and full-casters, the only possible level for that is 4th. This leads me to think that it's obvious to follow the "3rd-edition/Pathfinder" bard's progression for this.

I know it seems weird to leave 19th level without progress in spellcasting, but I'd say it's a great opportunity for a sub-class cap-stone feature.

[Bjarkmundur]

This thread made me realise I actually know nothing about 5e :x

[Yunru]

How would you work out a 2/3 spellcaster?

Use the multiclass table, but round up each grouping instead of down.
So, not accounting for when you want to get Spellcasting:
Level 1 is a Level 1 caster
Level 2 is a Level 2 caster
Level 3 is a Level 2 caster
Level 4 is a Level 3 caster
Level 5 is a Level 4 caster
Level 6 is a Level 4 caster
Level 7 is a Level 5 caster
Level 8 is a Level 6 caster
Level 9 is a Level 6 caster
...
You get the picture.
Every third level you don't advance a caster level.

[RSP]

...and so the 2/3 caster should have only up to 6th level spells, because 2/3 out of 9 is 6.


You’re omitting that 1/3 of 9 is 3, but 1/3 casters still get 4th level spells. Considering that, it would make sense that 2/3 casters get 7th level spells.

[Arkhios]

You’re omitting that 1/3 of 9 is 3, but 1/3 casters still get 4th level spells. Considering that, it would make sense that 2/3 casters get 7th level spells.

A valid point, though I didn't omit it on purpose. I'm aware of it, just didn't pay enough attention to it when I wrote the analysis. I stand corrected.
If someone's interested in the math behind it, it's that the single-class spellcasters round their levels up in order to calculate their spell slot progression. For a full-caster you don't see it occur, but with any of the partial casters, it's more clearly visible.
IMHO, it seems weird, but it works, I suppose.

As for the silly oversight I made, I blame the summertime transition which took place at saturday-sunday night. And, I'm sure we all know what Garfield thinks about Mondays. I concur.

[Wildarm]

How would you work out a 2/3 spellcaster?

Multiclassing already addresses this fairly well I think. Plenty of ways of mixing it for example:

Caster 14/Non-Caster 6
Caster 8/Half Caster 12

Maybe give us an idea of what you're looking to do. From a pure spellcasting progression standpoint, any multi-class with a full caster as the dominant part will act identically to a 2/3 caster. You will always have a dead level for spell slot progression at some point and those are effectively your non-caster multiclass levels in this model.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You could base it off the 3.5 Bard progression (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/bard.htm), but honestly I'd say stick with 5e's half caster template. Maybe drop in an Arcane Recovery type feature if you need a bit more magical oof.

[Paeleus]

Unpopular opinion: the warlock is 5e's 2/3 caster.

Lowered magical.... er, capabilities? compared to full casters (lower number of spell slots between rests, albeit the short rest slot recovery comes into play with the variable adventuring day, limit on upcasting spells to 5th level, and even the petty fact of having a single use of their Mystic Arcanum per short rest at levels 19 and 20).
Enhancement of martial combat/niche-utility compared to full casters (weapon, shield, and armor proficiency for hexblade/bladepact, improved familiar with chainpact, broadened access to spells with Tomepact, invocations).

You may disagree and that's fine. It seems weird that 1/2 and 1/3 casters have more spell slots at compared levels. I could also be convinced that the warlock is the red headed stepchild of 5e's class design, maybe due to the wonky layout a 2/3rds caster would look like if designed in line with it's 1/2 and 1/3 counterparts as discussed previously in this post.

[bid]

Unpopular opinion: the warlock is 5e's 2/3 caster.
Meaningless opinion. Warlocks don't get their spell slots twice as fast as AT/EK.

OP wants to boost bard's features and pay with reduced spell slots. Let's not derail the thread with a point that has nothing to do with that.

[HamsterKun]

Closest thing to a 2/3-caster that comes to my mind is to copy spellcasting progression from 3rd edition (or, actually, Pathfinder because it did away with expendable cantrips) bard:


1st class level: Cantrips & 1st level spells
4th class level: 2nd level spells
7th class level: 3rd level spells
10th class level: 4th level spells
13th class level: 5th level spells
16th class level: 6th level spells
19th class level: 7th level spells

A 2/3-caster would have to have cantrips at 1st level, but actual Spellcasting at 2nd level; otherwise you'd actually LOSE a spell slot upon multiclassing into it.

[Yakk]

1 2 - - - - - - - -
2 3 - - - - - - - -
3 3 - - - - - - - -
4 4 2 - - - - - - -
5 4 3 - - - - - - -
6 4 3 - - - - - - -
7 4 3 2 - - - - - -
8 4 3 3 - - - - - -
9 4 3 3 - - - - - -
10 4 3 3 1 - - - - -
11 4 3 3 2 - - - - -
12 4 3 3 2 - - - - -
13 4 3 3 3 1 - - - -
14 4 3 3 3 2 - - - -
15 4 3 3 3 2 - - - -
16 4 3 3 3 2 1 - - -
17 4 3 3 3 2 1 - - -
18 4 3 3 3 2 1 - - -
19 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 - -
20 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 - -


At level 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20 you don't gain any spell advancement.

Having 2 spells at level 1 is questionable. 1/2 casters gain spells at level 2, 1/3 casters gain spells at level 3; 2/3 casters should gain spells at level 1.5. So either 0 or 1 spells might make more sense than 2.

So I might do:


1 1 - - - - - - - -
2 2 - - - - - - - -
3 3 - - - - - - - -

instead. Being a slot behind a "full caster" at level 1 and 2 jutsifies more front-loaded non-spell based power, and with that setup you never have the spellcasting capabilities of a full caster.

For multiclassing, what I'd do is introduce a special rule that if you have a level in this class you always have at least one level 1 spellslot, even if multiclass rules otherwise say you don't.

[Yunru]

At level 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20 you don't gain any spell advancement.

What? No, a 2/3 caster doesn't gain spell advancement at levels 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, or 18. Why you added 17 and 20 I don't know.

[Yakk]

I calculated the spells that the 2/3 caster would get.

I pointed at the levels where they don't gain any new spell slots.

At level 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 and 19 they gain a new spell level.

At level 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 it is a duplicate of the previous level, as 2/3 (rounded up for single class) doesn't increment at those levels.

At level 17 and 20 the master spell table you advance on ... doesn't change.

So 3,6,9,12,15,17,18,20 are "dead" levels with no new spells.

If we do 1,2,3 first levels spells at level 1,2,3 the dead levels become 6,9,12,15,17,18,20.

ASI occurs at 4/8/12/16/19. So that eliminates 12 as a dead level.

So 6/9/15/17/18/20 should be "feature" levels.

Level 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 and 19 are "gain a new level of spells" so those levels should have basically no features.

5 and 11 are traditional "offensive boost" levels.

[qube]

How would you work out a 2/3 spellcaster?14 lore bard lvl 6 fighter. is a 2/3 caster and alternative valor bard as melee bard trading in
spells (starting from 5th level, you get 2/1/1/-/- instead of 3/2/2/1/1)
Bardic Inspiration (d12)
Sing or Rest (d12) ... comes down to 1 hp per short rest per party member that heals)
(4 less spells know, but, since you don't have 8th or 9th level spells, you don't spend "known spell"slots on that)
Magical Secrets (2 extra spells from any class ... but you also get that at 14)
Superior Inspiration ...1 bardic inspiriation at start of combat if you're depleted ...(meh)
for, MC fighter
6 bonus hp (as it has a higher hit die) & second wind (heal 1d10+6 hp per short rest)
medium armor & shields (& martial weapons - but you already have longsword)
extra attack
fighting style
action surge
fighter subclass (I'm thinking commanding strike, as you're a bard)

... of course if you want to seriously put pressure on your bonus actions, instead of fighter(battlemaster) 6, take fighter (battlemaster) 3 rogue (mastermind) 3 - trading in extra attack and some hp, for the ability to do the help action at range, and as bonus action.
(it's not inspiration, but giving advantage as bonus action comes quite close :) )

[Arkhios]

A 2/3-caster would have to have cantrips at 1st level, but actual Spellcasting at 2nd level; otherwise you'd actually LOSE a spell slot upon multiclassing into it.

Uhh.... What? Would you like to explain what made you come to this conclusion? Because that makes no sense whatsoever.

Let's say you are a Sorcerer and wish to multiclass into a 2/3-caster (presumably your "bard").

1 + 2/3 (round down, as usual with multiclassing rules for partial casters) = 1 (2/3 is still there, it just doesnt count towards more slots at first level)

You don't lose anything you had before. You just don't get more slots — yet.

Same thing happens with Wizard 1 multiclassing into an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster(1 + 1/3 ≈ 1).
It's nothing new.

...Besides, do note that the 3.5 bard did NOT get 7th level spells at 19th level. I merely added them because it would fit an apparent pattern.

[Hytheter]

A 2/3-caster would have to have cantrips at 1st level, but actual Spellcasting at 2nd level; otherwise you'd actually LOSE a spell slot upon multiclassing into it.

I don't see how that would be the case. +2/3 is always going to boost your total caster level to at least the next whole number.

Besides, the Artificer already establishes a precedent for Multiclassers losing spell slots......

[Arkhios]

Besides, the Artificer already establishes a precedent for Multiclassers losing spell slots......

For what it's worth, I believe that was merely an oversight.

Or, perhaps it's only that people are clinging too much onto what they see on the artificer table instead of referring to spellcasting rules when multiclassing.

If you multiclass from other spellcaster to a half-caster, you simply ignore the spell slot tables of each individual classes and foreverafter refer to the multiclass table instead.

So, if a Wizard 1 were to multiclass into Artificer, adding half your artificer level (round down) would mean you don't get more slots until 2nd Artificer level. You'd still have those slots you had from Wizard 1, because your total Spellcaster level would be 1 (½). Nothing is going to take them away from you.

Also, do remember that even Artificer doesn't get more spell slots at second level, because that's when a half-caster truly counts as a 1st-level spellcaster. Artificer has only a one-level head-start compared to paladins and rangers, but it evens out at 2nd level.

However, I realise it gets wonky with multiclassing AT/EK with Artificer, which also seem like ideal combinations. But then again, that's why I think it was an oversight from the designers. Personally, I would say that Artificer would do fine with only Cantrips at 1st level.

[Hytheter]

So, if a Wizard 1 were to multiclass into Artificer, adding half your artificer level (round down) would mean you don't get more slots until 2nd Artificer level. You'd still have those slots you had from Wizard 1, because your total Spellcaster level would be 1 (½). Nothing is going to take them away from you.

It's not a concern for full or even half casters, but for 1/3 casters. By the multiclassing rules, a level 4 Eldritch Knight with one level of Artificier is a 1st level caster (1 1/3 + 1/2 = 1 5/6, rounds down to 1) even though Eldritch Knight 4 is actually a 2nd level caster, so RAW you do lose a spell slot.

Personally, I feel caster levels should round upwards in the first place - that's how every partial caster class works normally.

[Tanarii]

It's not a concern for full or even half casters, but for 1/3 casters. By the multiclassing rules, a level 4 Eldritch Knight with one level of Artificier is a 1st level caster (1 1/3 + 1/2 = 1 5/6, rounds down to 1) even though Eldritch Knight 4 is actually a 2nd level caster, so RAW you do lose a spell slot.
It's worse than that. You round down before adding, you don't add the fractional levels then round down. It's 1-1/3 round down to 1, plus 1/2 round down to 0, equals 1.

It's particularly noticible for EK/AT 5 + Ranger or Paladin 1, which have a caster level of 1, not 2. Or a EK 5/AT5 is total caster level 2, not 3.

Similarly with a 2/3 caster class it'd really be noticible at EK 4, 2/3-caster 7. That's 1-1/3 --> 1, plus 4-2/3 --> 4, or caster level 5. Not 1-1/3+4-2/3 = 6.

[bid]

It's particularly noticible for EK/AT 5 + Ranger or Paladin 1, which have a caster level of 1, not 2. Or a EK 5/AT5 is total caster level 2, not 3.
Yeah, it's pretty bad but you'd need paladin 3 for your example since paladin 1 is... not a caster.

But the add-and-round-up method fixes more than it damages, and most of the damage is the difficulty of 1/2+2/3=7/6 . Any caster X / EK 3 is 2 caster level behind, even if caster X / EK 4 is still 2 caster level behind instead of 3, nothing's going to break.

[Yakk]

It is multiclassing away that can cost spell slots.

A 2/3 caster who multiclasses into a non-caster ends both at level 1 up with 0 first level spells, as you round down your multiclass spell caster level, while effectively round up while single classed.

Hence my hacks; my 2/3 caster table has 1 first level spell at level 1, and when multiclassing it always has at least 1 first level spell slot.

[bid]

A 2/3 caster who multiclasses into a non-caster ends both at level 1 up with 0 first level spells, as you round down your multiclass spell caster level, while effectively round up while single classed.
Nope. A wizard 3 / fighter 2 has the exact same spell slots as a wizard 3.

[Hytheter]

It is multiclassing away that can cost spell slots.

A 2/3 caster who multiclasses into a non-caster ends both at level 1 up with 0 first level spells, as you round down your multiclass spell caster level, while effectively round up while single classed.


You only use the multiclass spell slots table if you have two classes that actually have the spellcasting feature. Otherwise what you say would be true for literally every partial caster - a level 3 Paladin would lose a caster level's worth of slots by multiclassing into Barbarian for instance. But that's not how it works.

"Your capacity for spellcasting depends partly on your combined levels in all your spellcasting classes and partly on your individual levels in those classes. Once you have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class, use the rules below. If you multiclass but have the Spellcasting feature from only one class, you follow the rules as described in that class. "

[Yakk]

Ok, ok, then a Paladin (1/2 caster) multiclasses into a theoretical 2/3 class, and gets 0 spells (1/2 rounded down is 0, 2/3 rounded down is 0).

Or the theoretical 2/3 class multiclasses into Paladin, and loses its level 1 spells.

[Shuruke]

You could base a 2/3 caster off of warlock ?

Take out mystic arcanum if u want and add multi attack at 5 and then something like Hunter Ranger 11 feature or the Teleport between attacks of Planar defender.

This would give 5th or higher casting up to u

And only a sometimes 3 attack a turn

[bid]

Ok, ok, then a Paladin (1/2 caster)
Paladin 1 is not a caster.