[3.P] Tier 3 (and below) casters fighting once a day

[ImperatorK]

How much better would Tier 3 (and below) casters be from other Tier 3 (and below) classes if there was only one fight a day, thus allowing them to nova?

[Jackinthegreen]

The maximum would still likely be T3 unless certain optimizations were involved that would already push the caster to T2 if the option to nova wasn't available.  T2 is more about rewriting reality but in a limited number of ways (and T1 gets a larger variety of ways) while top end T3 is simply pushing reality to its limits.

[ImperatorK]

You misunderstood. I'm not asking if they go up a tier. I'm asking how much powerful are they from other tier 3 classes.

[SorO_Lost]

That makes no sense. T3 is full of things like the Paladin, Duskblade and Hexblade. Dusk already has more than enough Spells per day, same with the Hex really, their limitations are born from their lower level Slots. So really you're just asking if the Paladin can Smite Evil every round how powerful is he, and we already have PrCs that allow him to do that. So the answer is very little, but it's more fun to play knowing you won't blow your load too early.

Now on Pathfinder's front, didn't they already convert to Encounter based recharging?
Edit - Now, it's 4th style marking. Smite works again X creatures per day, for the first attack every single round.
Still no change through.

[Nanshork]

That makes no sense. T3 is full of things like the Paladin, Duskblade and Hexblade. Dusk already has more than enough Spells per day, same with the Hex really, their limitations are born from their lower level Slots. So really you're just asking if the Paladin can Smite Evil every round how powerful is he, and we already have PrCs that allow him to do that. So the answer is very little, but it's more fun to play knowing you won't blow your load too early.

Now on Pathfinder's front, didn't they already convert to Encounter based recharging?

Nope, Pathfinder is still all per day.

[SorO_Lost]

Nope, Pathfinder is still all per day.

Yeah went to look it up.

Edit - Now, it's 4th style marking. Smite works on X creatures per day, for the first attack every single round.

Actual Edit - Paladin is T4, silly me. T3 is full of Bard, Beguilers, Dread Necromancers, Warmages and Martial Adapts. You know, people with 6 Slots per level per day and recovery mechanics anyway.

[StreamOfTheSky]

That makes no sense. T3 is full of things like the Paladin, Duskblade and Hexblade. Dusk already has more than enough Spells per day, same with the Hex really, their limitations are born from their lower level Slots. So really you're just asking if the Paladin can Smite Evil every round how powerful is he, and we already have PrCs that allow him to do that. So the answer is very little, but it's more fun to play knowing you won't blow your load too early.

Basically this.  It'd make no difference to T3 and below, but it would make T1-2 even more ludicrously broken.

Nope, Pathfinder is still all per day.

PF actually has less encounter-based resources than 3E, if anything they seem deathly allergic to the idea (probably b/c they set themselves up as "the 4E alternative").  Heck, they even took Barbarian rage, possibly the only encounter-based resource in core 3E (at least in the sense that you can never use it more than once per encounter, ever...except for the reserves of strength from PHB2 which if anything is even more purely encounter-based anyway), and made it strictly a daily resource.

[SorO_Lost]

SotS they made Rage mostly better.

D&D Barbarian Rage can only be used once per day, which is typically defined to be 4 Encounters per day, and any remaining time in the duration after the encounter is over is wasted.

PF said you can Rage a X number of rounds spread out as you choose. This number is 4+(lvl*2)+ConMod which at the very least gives you Rage for two encounters or more. I mean if four people need six or more Full-Round actions at a level where a single successful hit kills you something is going Pelor-awfully bad.

They did nerf it through, instead of being unnamed bonuses it's now Moral.

[StreamOfTheSky]

They did nerf it through, instead of being unnamed bonuses it's now Moral.

They also made it so going unconscious ends the rage (and can thus kill you, even if you didn't think you were in danger before) and then introduced a feat tax (Raging Vitality) to give you the option of keeping the rage while unconscious. 

Never said the PF version of rage was a bad change overall, though.  It is mostly better, I always hated that rage could NEVER be used more than once per encounter.  Hell, I once had a dervish get screwed out of using dance again (same principle) despite having tireless dance, in a 36+ round "encounter" that took us fighting through every room of a fortress without a break, it was very annoying.  I was just pointing out that not only has PF avoided per encounter stuff like maneuvers and factotum inspiration like the plague, they actually even changed the only core ability that is encounter-limited (also per day, but seriously...a feat is +2 uses and a level 2 spell gave you a use per cast...it wasn't hard to have rages per day = encounters per day) into a strictly per-day resource.  They really don't like per-encounter. 

[Samwise]

I keep wondering about the "reverse":
How much would it slow casters down if there were 10-15 encounters per day?

[SorO_Lost]

Atypically, they burn out their Spells and slope downwards in usability.

Then an optimizer steps in and find the lowest level Spells that get the job done. - Like Web is ever popular. - and considers it a challenge.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Then an optimizer steps in and find the lowest level Spells that get the job done. - Like Web is ever popular. - and considers it a challenge.

I've played casters in such long day scenarios.  My friend that DMs the most loves mega-dungeons, and my normal play group considered it a point of pride to not need to stop to rest unless we absolutely needed to, always saving some "big gun" spells for an expected boss fight at the end, to boot.  BFC is indeed generally the way to go for offense.  Use a few spells for big effect and be patient while the martials wrap things up, perhaps calling upon a reserve feat in the mean time.  10 min/level and longer buffs are also huge.  If you're looking to storm through the whole place in one go, you already plan to get through things quick.  Having a dozen powerful buffs at stake is a great motivator to push on as soon as everyone can.  I suppose having a DM that uses far more creatures than traps also influences things.  Nothing turns a party into sluggish paranoid ball of molasses more than some random trap in the floor somewhere.  So dull...  Encounter-assisting traps like Dungeonscape suggests using are much more interesting.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

PsyWar has about 1/3 ppoints as a Psion,
but that's before bonus ppoints,
which closes the gap towards about 1/2.

So on 1 encounter per day, the PsyWar
could nova nearly double the ppoints
that a Psion would blow on 4/enc's per day.
Otherwise it feels like a normal PsyWar.
No change in Tier.

Bard - otoh - would get more mileage out of it.
Shoot off all your top end spells at once, no worries.
Probably no change in Tier, but better within Tier.

[DavidWL]

With optimization, the casters are *much* better, without optimization, not that much better.

Add Miracle, Celerity, etc. to a fixed spell list through various tricks (Wyrm Wizard, Domains, etc.), play with metamagic abuse with insane prestige classes (Incantatrix, etc.) and they can still break the game.  It requires a bit more work.

Best,
David

[Keldar]

I keep wondering about the "reverse":
How much would it slow casters down if there were 10-15 encounters per day?

Moderately.  Eventually the players would learn the sweet spot for spell use.  The problems would occur in two areas first: HP recovery and partial spellcasters.  At some point healing resources would be chewed up, likely before all spells were out, putting characters that tend to need more healing in greater danger.  (And encouraging the "Clerics are for Healing" mentality that makes people hate playing Clerics.)  Partial casters, like Rangers and Paladins, would simply not have enough spells to supply one a fight and would fall even further behind.  While full casters would still be able to afford two spells or more a fight.

Of course it would also make 1st level Wizards even more wretched to play.   

[Samwise]

Moderately.  . . .

Of course it would also make 1st level Wizards even more wretched to play.   

Which . . . is pretty much my intent, especially that last.
For the healing, I'd expect to shift the burden onto consumables so clerics could do something else with their time, but the rest I'd want to let stand.