Effects Of Adjusting Spell Slot Progression On Caster Tiers

[Strill]

Is it possible to cleanly adjust the tier level of casters just by switching up their spell slot progression?  Say, for example, tossing out the spell slot progression at a few levels.

I ask this because I've heard people say that a pathfinder Mystic Theurge, sans early-access tricks, is on-par with a tier 3 or tier 4 class.

[wotmaniac]

Sounds legit.

Take the bard, for example.  Yeah, sure a lot of bard being a Tier 3 has to do with the skill list and Bardic Music, but a LOT of it has to do with the spell progression. 
MT estimated at a T3-4 has to do with the fact that you're behind 1-2 spell levels.

/2cp

[YouLostMe]

Remember that spells scale exponentially. Abilities like solid fog, freedom of movement, and divine power are things no tier 3 or tier 4 class is going to have day-to-day. Even effects like fly, water breathing, and stone shape are hard to get on your average warblade or psychic warrior. This means that you can nerf casters by delaying their access, and it might help rein them in for a few levels, but as soon as those spell effects pick up speed the T1 classes are going to crazytown again.

What's worse, it creates a host of new, annoying problems to deal with. For example, level 1 T1 characters are going to suffer when they absolutely don't need to. Your level 1 wizard with nothing but cantrips is just a pathetic version of the fighter, and that's bad. On the flip side, T1 characters with actual class features are still going to have those class features, like the druid's Fighter++ animal companion and wildshape. I doubt they're going below tier 3 no matter how many spells you steal away.

The reason people say mystic theurge is on par with a t3-t4 class is because there's not much of a place to put the MT and they want to categorize it somewhere. In reality, Divine 4 / Arcane 4 / MT 10 steps all over a fighter or warblade party with level 7 spells like finger of death and control weather. But the process of getting there is just terrible, and a level 7 character going for MT will probably feel about as useful as a rogue or maybe psywar. If you play a game with an MT between levels 4-9, you'll probably notice it doesn't feel very useful. If you play a game with an "MT" (a single-classed caster) between levels 1-3, or a legit MT at levels 10+, you will notice it's fairly strong. So when "tier-ing" the MT, people probably associate it with multi-classing casters who get no class features.

TLDR: Not clean at all. Sorry.

[wotmaniac]

Sorry, YouLostMe, but by your logic and your very own examples, why is bard not T1?

[Baad Speeler]

Sorry, YouLostMe, but by your logic and your very own examples, why is bard not T1?

Not true

Remember that spells scale exponentially. Abilities like solid fog, freedom of movement, and divine power are things no tier 3 or tier 4 class is going to have day-to-day. Even effects like fly, water breathing, and stone shape are hard to get on your average warblade or psychic warrior.

According to that, they could also be tier two classes. All he said was they aren't T3 or T4.

[Raineh Daze]

Sorry, YouLostMe, but by your logic and your very own examples, why is bard not T1?

Not true

Remember that spells scale exponentially. Abilities like solid fog, freedom of movement, and divine power are things no tier 3 or tier 4 class is going to have day-to-day. Even effects like fly, water breathing, and stone shape are hard to get on your average warblade or psychic warrior.

According to that, they could also be tier two classes. All he said was they aren't T3 or T4.

So why is Bard not T1/T2, then? The question only needs three characters of adjustment.

[YouLostMe]

Sorry, YouLostMe, but by your logic and your very own examples, why is bard not T1?

Because it scales slower, is more MAD, has a lower max spell level, has fewer spells per day, uses a spells-known mechanic, and its spell list is worse. When the bard is ready to use freedom of movement, he's level 10, gets one use per day, and it's one of only 2 level 4 spells he can ever cast. Of course freedom of movement is cool, but it's one of the best spells a bard can learn at that level.

When the sorcerer gets freedom of movement at level 10 (2-level nerf), he can use it four times a day. But it's nowhere near his strongest spell -- he could instead pick up black tentacles or solid fog. When the favored soul gets freedom of movement, it's in competition with divine power and lesser planar ally. And this is just as the edge of the acceptable range. At level 20, the nerfed sorcerer could be throwing around time stop and mage's disjunction while the bard's best trick is irresistible dance at DC-3 (or worse since he's more MAD).

Now I don't want to comment on what "tier" the nerfed casters would be. I would still consider the nerfed sorcerer "tier 2", but it's obviously worse than the regular sorcerer despite its power. All I can say is that this kind of fix is definitely not clean. There are problems at both edges of play, there are problems with class features not getting dropped, and there's the problem of encouraging no-save-just-lose tactics even harder which I would argue is worse for the game's health overall. All in all, I think the elegance of simply delaying spell access is far outweighed by the difficulties it presents, and (to go a step further) would argue that any successful fix of those classes will require a lot of dirty work.

[wotmaniac]

@ YouLostMe:
I think you're being kinda incoherent.  Where did "2-level nerf" come from?  Is that some standard that I missed?  That doesn't make any kind of sense in any current context.  That doesn't even lose a spell level.
Also, in the MT example you referenced, (without early-entry shenanigans) you can't even get 9th-level sorc spells until level 21+, at best.  7th-level spells don't come on until at least level 17 ..... I hardly think that's game-breaking towards non-casters.
Yes, just delaying the progression has a few cascading problems.  Slowing the progression, however -- depending on how exactly it's done -- can work just fine.  I'd recommend the bard level progression, plus add 7th-level spells at 20th-level; give the sorc/wiz spell list, and a more aggressive spells known & per-day than the bard; medium bab, toss on a couple more class-skills; and boom, you're done.

[YouLostMe]

I meant "2-level nerf" as the sorcerer with two levels less for the purposes of casting. It was an example I made up based on the OP's "tossing out the spell slot progression at a few levels" in which I assumed that 2 levels (at some point in the sorcerer's progression) were removed such that that a level 10 nerf-sorcerer casted like a level 8 regular-sorcerer.

wotmaniac, at level 17, what do you expect your warblade and psywar to be doing that rivals an MT? A martial adept at level 17 has just gained the ability to heal, deal 100 extra damage, or use an SoD on a hit. A level sorc 4 / favored soul 4 / MT 9 can literally build a crude fortress, pierce almost all illusions, shut down most non-flying, non-ethereal mooks, or make fighting without FoM effectively impossible. And because he's got a gazillion slots he can drop one of his highest-level spells every round in most fights with room left over to solve every puzzle his party could even dream of dealing with.

Delaying and slowing the progression might able to drop a character down a tier. But it won't be common across casting classes, it will encourage no-save-just-lose harder than before, and it will hurt certain archetypes far more than others. So while it's possible (I have never argued against this) that you could make classes less overbearing by adjusting spell slots, it will most definitely not be clean. Absolutely no way. Bard casting on a wizard makes them worse than a sorcerer, but they can probably still outperform the beguiler. Bard casting on a druid makes them laugh because they're still miles beyond any tier 3 class.

[Baad Speeler]

There are two levers you can really play with to nerf primary casters.

The first one is the number of dirty tricks they have access to. Things like saying wizards MUST be focused specialists, and screw you, druids don't get access to all spells, all the time.

The other possible lever you can really play with without having to rewrite spell casting mechanics as we know them is spell progression. If a sorcerer having access to time stop at level 20 is too much for a DM to deal with, their game fell apart from the barbarian's at will death effect long before the party's pointy hat was capable of stopping time or the dude with the holy symbol started telling Death to go screw himself.

[wotmaniac]

I meant "2-level nerf" as the sorcerer with two levels less for the purposes of casting. It was an example I made up based on the OP's "tossing out the spell slot progression at a few levels" in which I assumed that 2 levels (at some point in the sorcerer's progression) were removed such that that a level 10 nerf-sorcerer casted like a level 8 regular-sorcerer.

And this is where things go sideways -- it misses the thrust of what the OP was getting at.  This doesn't even lose a spell level (@ lvl-20, that is) -- that was my point of contention with that example.

wotmaniac, at level 17, what do you expect your warblade and psywar to be doing that rivals an MT? A martial adept at level 17 has just gained the ability to heal, deal 100 extra damage, or use an SoD on a hit.

Yes, they essentially have what amounts to an at-will death effect -- that's how hard they're swinging their sword (more so for warblade; psywar simply has more versatility).

A level sorc 4 / favored soul 4 / MT 9 can literally build a crude fortress, pierce almost all illusions, shut down most non-flying, non-ethereal mooks, or make fighting without FoM effectively impossible. And because he's got a gazillion slots he can drop one of his highest-level spells every round in most fights with room left over to solve every puzzle his party could even dream of dealing with.

Okay, so you've got some Batman going on; but 1) I think you're being a bit hyperbolic with your frequency, 2) nothing you've mentioned is inherently game-breaking. 
I mean, seriously -- Move Earth is a nifty, imagination-dependent utility/BFC spell ... not a HUGE deal, and at that level, is not exactly a Gordian Knot.  Also, if you haven't got FoM (or at least a serviceable substitution thereof) by level 17, you have failed at life -- just go home and cry yourself to sleep.  That Wall of Iron?  Yeah, that "death effect" I mentioned above also works for knocking that shit down, and in pretty short order. 
1 more level on that build gives you 7th-level spells; which, at that level, there are plenty of defenses against .... though I will admit that this is where things are getting a bit dicey.  The rails don't completely come off for 2 more levels when 8th-lvl spells come on line ... which is why my suggestion stops at spell level 7.

So while it's possible (I have never argued against this) that you could make classes less overbearing by adjusting spell slots,

Actually, it seems like that is what you're arguing.  Just sayin'.

Bard casting on a wizard makes them worse than a sorcerer, but they can probably still outperform the beguiler.  Bard casting on a druid makes them laugh because they're still miles beyond any tier 3 class.

And this is another point at which we part ways with each other.  First of all, I personally think that relegating Beguiler to T3 is window-licking retarded; thus, using that as a measure of the "T3 standard" is equally retarded.  But like I said, that's just a personal assessment.  Second, no, bard-progression casting - regardless of the spell list (assuming base classes, of course) - absolutely cannot match a beguiler; not on this planet, nor any other -- this assertion of yours is just objectively and patently untrue.

[YouLostMe]

And this is where things go sideways -- it misses the thrust of what the OP was getting at.  This doesn't even lose a spell level (@ lvl-20, that is) -- that was my point of contention with that example.

I don't even think the OP mentioned losing a spell level at level 20. Checking again, I can see he definitely didn't mention losing a spell level at any point. What he did say was "tossing out the spell slot progression at a few levels", which means a caster at level 10 casts as though they were level 10-X, where X is the number of levels that were tossed out. I picked X = 2 because it's a serious hit to the sorcerer that will probably make them feel bad for playing no matter where you put the 2 dead levels, but you could make that number bigger and the problems will get delayed to higher levels.

Yes, they essentially have what amounts to an at-will death effect -- that's how hard they're swinging their sword (more so for warblade; psywar simply has more versatility).

Uh, no. They have one ability (that they might pick up) which requires them to be adjacent to an enemy, use a full-round action to make a jump check, then make an attack roll, then let the opponent make a fortitude save based on the initiator's strength (no other stat), and then it doesn't even work against enemies immune to critical hits or death effects. At will be used at best once per round. It is in almost all ways worse than the ability our MT got 2 levels ago.

A level sorc 4 / favored soul 4 / MT 9 can literally build a crude fortress, pierce almost all illusions, shut down most non-flying, non-ethereal mooks, or make fighting without FoM effectively impossible. And because he's got a gazillion slots he can drop one of his highest-level spells every round in most fights with room left over to solve every puzzle his party could even dream of dealing with.
Okay, so you've got some Batman going on; but 1) I think you're being a bit hyperbolic with your frequency, 2) nothing you've mentioned is inherently game-breaking. 
I mean, seriously -- Move Earth is a nifty, imagination-dependent utility/BFC spell ... not a HUGE deal, and at that level, is not exactly a Gordian Knot.  Also, if you haven't got FoM (or at least a serviceable substitution thereof) by level 17, you have failed at life -- just go home and cry yourself to sleep.  That Wall of Iron?  Yeah, that "death effect" I mentioned above also works for knocking that shit down, and in pretty short order.

1 more level on that build gives you 7th-level spells; which, at that level, there are plenty of defenses against .... though I will admit that this is where things are getting a bit dicey.  The rails don't completely come off for 2 more levels when 8th-lvl spells come on line ... which is why my suggestion stops at spell level 7.

You can't handwave move earth by saying "it's not game-breaking". A standard action single-target SoD isn't gamebreaking at this level of play, but our candidates here don't get that either. This terrible version of the MT controls the battlefield better, kills targets harder, and provides stronger defenses than any other tier 3 class. And it does that with only it's top 2 levels of spells.

And remember, this isn't about the MT fighting the warblade (in which the MT wouldn't waste iron walls because he's not a fool). This is about how much the MT contributes to the adventure/fight compared to the warblade. And the answer to that is: "Way the fuck more". And I'm glad you can see that 7th and 8th level spells really do leave tier 3 characters in the dust. Even though that sort of thing can happen with 4th level spells and a little creativity, I'm glad we can agree that the MT does not drop classes to tier 3 or tier 4 as I originally said.

Actually, it seems like that is what you're arguing.  Just sayin'.

I recommend looking at the TLDR in my original response to this thread. My responses here are about how clean the process will be. I'm not dumb enough to think that if you nerfed the wizard's casting by 18 levels he wouldn't be about as useful as a fighter or monk, but that has no bearing on whether or not the process would be considered "clean" because then it would also make wizard players feel awful and dumpster dive for abusive spells.

Bard casting on a wizard makes them worse than a sorcerer, but they can probably still outperform the beguiler.  Bard casting on a druid makes them laugh because they're still miles beyond any tier 3 class.

I used it as the comparison because the beguiler is the strongest of the "tier 3" classes and indeed deserves a lot more credit than its given. But that wizard is still beating the beguiler.

I think you're getting caught up on the "Less levels, less powah" idea. It's simply untrue. 90% of a class's power comes from the spell list. If the bard was given fullcaster gems it could go up a tier with certainty. A wizard's huge flexibility, powerhouse spell list, and enormous array of potential solutions definitely makes them stronger than the beguiler until you do crazy things like force them down to ranger access. Now this change also makes wizards feel terrible because they'll probably suck even worse at lower levels, but in the long run their spells at 2/3 the beguiler's level can be used a hell of a lot better. This assertion of yours is actually what's untrue.

EDIT: Also, I'm talking specifically about the wizard and druid (though I think the cleric works too). If a sorcerer got nerfed to 2/3 casting, the best "tier 3" classes like beguiler and dread necro could probably beat him, but the bard and psywar would still look bad.

[wotmaniac]

The main thrust of the OP seems to involve the loss of spell levels -- that's the way I read it (both past and present tense), so that's what I'm going with.  It seems unfair/disingenuous to use "delayed, but still gets 9th-level spells pre-epic" as a working premise/example. 
And that's all I have to say about that point.

I think you misunderstand me about "melee death effect" .... I was drawing an equivalency -- they're doing so much damage at that level (or at least should be), that it might as well be acting like a 1/round death effect.  And there's at least a handful of routes to that kind of damage.

And you're right -- this isn't about caster-vs-martial deathmatch.  It's about each character fulfilling his role.  Yes, I am getting "caught up on the 'less levels, less powah' idea", so to speak (at least, I'll concede to that characterization, for the sake of the argument) .  And yes, a martial combatant doesn't have the flexibility/versatility; and this is indeed a shortcoming of the system. 
However, you can have all of the spells on your spell list; but if you only ever get 6-7th level spells (with a smooth progression, of course), the game will generally stay in the "playable" zone .... and there's no way a "nerfed" caster (i.e., actually losing spell levels) simply isn't out-damaging a serious BDF (at least he better not be .... remember, we're talking about equal levels of optimization here, which the Tier system is explicitly based on). 
If you want to talk about broken spells, then talk about seriously ban-ably broken spells.  It isn't "hand-wavy" to discount the game-breaking potential of Move Earth -- it just a recognition of the limits of that spell.

I also think that you are still seriously underestimating the potential of both the beguiler and the bard.  The point I'm getting at here has to do with the "3rd rail" of the skill system -- UMD.  Say whatever you want about the skill, it is what it is, and it is on the class list for both those classes, and is thus an inherent part of how those classes work.  Yes, rogues get that shit too; but they're missing a big thing that really makes UMD awesome for those other 2 classes: actual spell slots, which makes that much more useful at a much cheaper price tag than for non-caster UMDers.  And it completely unshackles those 2 classes from the restrictions of their respective spell lists -- a distinction that, I believe, is very relevant to your position.

[YouLostMe]

If you think the OP is saying that this is about reducing the highest-level spell someone can cast, then I can't tell you it's not. But the author of the OP might be considering the potential for wizard - 2 ~= sorcerer or sorcerer - 2 ~= bard up to level 18, and you have no way of showing he's not right now. There isn't much to argue there, but I consider your interpretation plenty-valid and I don't have anything to add to this either.

At level 17, the enemies that show up in droves have 50-200 HP. The enemies that you should be facing regularly can double that with extra defenses on top. Unless you think every warblade is doing something like shock trooper and full power attack, I simply cannot see how they're even getting close to a 1/round death effect. Most enemies will go down in 1-2 rounds if a party of 4 focuses them, but you have to not get wrecked beforehand, get to the target, hit them, and only then does potential damage come into account. The warblade is in a party that needs to fight inevitables in pairs and those dudes are hard to close in on. It's a lot more reliable just to hit them with finger of death.

I know you think that maxing out at 6th-7th levels puts a hard cap in the "playable" zone, but it really isn't true. I don't know what to tell you other than the fact that you're measuring the wrong metrics. Spell flexibility is a big deal, spell lists are a titanic factor in influencing class power, and the combination of good spells with enormous flexibility goes far, far, far further than you think it does. When the equal optimization is literally just "let's pick spells that will help me survive and win fights", a wizard 1 or 2 spell levels behind a beguiler is still noticeably better in the way that a regular wizard is noticeably better than the sorcerer even if they're in vaguely the same playing field. And move earth isn't really game-breaking. It's just strong enough to put the MT significantly above his warblade/psywar/bard companion (in a similar way that the warblade is above the fighter).

You are putting a whole lot on the benefits of UMD, which is weird because this if the first time it's been brought up and has little to do with the argument at hand, but I'll engage it... UMD is used to emulate class features so you're allowed to use an item, or to emulate a spell known so you can use an item. Wizards certainly won't get the former, but they already get the latter by virtue of having those spells on their class list. They can't easily use items that depend on commune or righteous might, but they can still use items of transformation or contact other plane and the chances of getting screwed is very low. Heck, taking UMD off the beguiler's list wouldn't even take them out of the sorcerer's playing field because that's not the reason the beguiler's on par with the sorcerer in the first place.

To reiterate my main point: You could definitely reduce the spell progression of the wizard to that of a bard -- in fact, the Tome Assassin does this in addition to only allowing illusion, necromancy, and divination spells. And those limitations could certainly knock the nerf-wizard down a peg, but it's not going to be clean. The balance level of this wizard looks hazy (it is the majority of our argument) even now, and we're not considering all of the other problems like dumpster diving, crappy optimization floors,  casting tricks independent of spell level, and how other class features factor into the nerf. There is absolutely no way this change would cleanly adjust the tiers of classes.

[wotmaniac]

Okay, so "clean" is your concern.  That's totally fair.  I'll admit that my approach is "quick and dirty"; so ..... fair enough?

[YouLostMe]

I think it's fine so long as you recognize that. I know players (and am one of the players) who would see a bardizard casting and immediately turn to buffs and no-save-just-lose spells. I also know players who would still use fireball and magic missile because it's cool (and then perform about as well as a monk). As a DM, I think those outcomes are bad to the point that I wouldn't want the bardizard at my table. But my life certainly isn't the only data point that fixes should be designed around, so if your fast method works for your table then I can't really contend with that.