PDA

View Full Version : How to create a Tier 5 Spellcaster? [3.5e]



DodgerH2O
2011-09-30, 06:02 PM
Since the search engine decides to ignore the number 5, and without that number the search gets an alarming number of hits that don't give me what I want, I figured I'd ask directly here.

While nobody in their right mind would want to do it (slight sarcasm here, but it seems to be the consensus on these boards), how would one attempt to create a Wizard and/or Cleric type class that fit Tier 5? I know that some 4s are kicking around, but this is a thought experiment... sort of. I'm working on a low-magic campaign and while I'm NOT intending on making magic-users quite as inflexible as T5 indicates it would be helpful to see examples of such so I know what to avoid creating.

dragonsamurai77
2011-09-30, 06:05 PM
Healer is considered Tier 5.

Coidzor
2011-09-30, 06:07 PM
Give **** for spell list, sabotage their ability to expand it to get anything good, block off their ability to qualify for spell-list expanding PrCs.

Simple, but time-intensive to do if you want them to still contribute at all meaningfully ever.

Alternatively: Take Shadowcasting and its limitations per day, add in Truenaming's lolno rules to cripple it when it is around.

DodgerH2O
2011-09-30, 06:47 PM
Give **** for spell list, sabotage their ability to expand it to get anything good, block off their ability to qualify for spell-list expanding PrCs.

Simple, but time-intensive to do if you want them to still contribute at all meaningfully ever.

Alternatively: Take Shadowcasting and its limitations per day, add in Truenaming's lolno rules to cripple it when it is around.

Wait what? I'd never actually read the Shadowcaster class before... combining that with the Truenaming stuff would create a class that fits the flavor of a low-magic game, but I don't think anyone would really enjoy it.

Elfstone
2011-09-30, 06:52 PM
Wait what? I'd never actually read the Shadowcaster class before... combining that with the Truenaming stuff would create a class that fits the flavor of a low-magic game, but I don't think anyone would really enjoy it.

I think that is what he was getting at.

JaronK
2011-09-30, 06:56 PM
Well, okay, Healer's already there. So you have a few choices.

A) Focus the spells towards something that's not critically central to the game. The Healer's already got in combat healing covered... I guess you could make a weaker version of a Warmage if you wanted for the blasting angle. Maybe a counterspell specialist that only has counterspell casting and anti spell buffing? So the guy would have one area where he's pretty good, and otherwise not so much.

B) Here's a fun idea that might work... make an MMO style pet class. Basically, a caster where all his spells only work on his "pet" which is a summonable thing (let's say 1 minute cast time to summon it, permanent duration unless dismissed). Could be a skeleton, could be an elemental, could be an outsider... whatever. But he uses his spells on his pet, which is normally too weak to be any good but with buffs gets decent. However the caster himself has to keep himself out of harms way, and the pet has a restricted range from the caster. Look at the UA Undead Companion feature for Necromancers for a starting pet inspiration, or the Death Master's companion as another idea.

C) Have a caster with a lot of spells that are really useful for general life, but not so much for adventuring. Spells like Create Food and Drink and Purify Food and Drink and spells to make land fertile and bless marriages and cause rain and so on. Basically, all the sort of stuff that would make a medieval peasant really happy, but isn't so good for slaying giants and dragons. Could be hilariously fun, in fact.

D) Make a caster that's actually quite decent, but only within one sort of terrain (with no ability to take that terrain with them). Some sort of hyper Druid, for example, whose abilities only work in heavily forested and jungle areas.

JaronK

Seerow
2011-09-30, 07:05 PM
B) Here's a fun idea that might work... make an MMO style pet class. Basically, a caster where all his spells only work on his "pet" which is a summonable thing (let's say 1 minute cast time to summon it, permanent duration unless dismissed). Could be a skeleton, could be an elemental, could be an outsider... whatever. But he uses his spells on his pet, which is normally too weak to be any good but with buffs gets decent. However the caster himself has to keep himself out of harms way, and the pet has a restricted range from the caster. Look at the UA Undead Companion feature for Necromancers for a starting pet inspiration, or the Death Master's companion as another idea.


You'd have to be careful of the pet. A pet class could easily be tier 3, or even tier 2, depending on how such a class was handled. Especially if you have full 9th level spells usable to buff and support the pet.

GunbladeKnight
2011-09-30, 07:06 PM
Giving them a spell's known list akin to the sorcerer, but basing them off 2 ability scores (Int for bonus spells and spellcasting, Cha for save DCs. Seriously, really Shadowcaster?) would be a start. Remove shapeshifting spells, gate, and wish/miracle or limited wish would also help. There are probably other spells people can abuse.

JaronK
2011-09-30, 07:07 PM
You'd have to be careful of the pet. A pet class could easily be tier 3, or even tier 2, depending on how such a class was handled. Especially if you have full 9th level spells usable to buff and support the pet.

You'd have to make the right spell list to make this reasonable. For example, the pet might be a Tiny Elemental to start, and you'd have spells that would temporarily make him into a larger sort of elemental. No throwing Shapechange on your pet and turning him into a Solar.

JaronK

jiriku
2011-09-30, 09:37 PM
Give it a spell progression that only runs up to 4th or 5th level spells, limited spells known from a small list, modest to low spells per day, split-attribute casting, a poor chassis (low HD, only 1 good save, poor base attack, 2 skill points per level), and few or no class features. Make sure the spell list includes few or no open-ended spells with multiple applications. Done.

Not much fun to play, though.

ericgrau
2011-09-30, 10:31 PM
Well first off, you're heading for dangerous territory as D&D is practically built around magic. Even the noncasters will be screwed from lack of magic items. I have something in my sig to deal with that part.

Second you need 4th level spells at bare minimum to deal with a lot of monsters. Really 5th level would be nice, or you can bump a few necessities like break enchantment and raise dead down a level. And if you give slowed casting progression you at least need magic items or high level NPCs to provide them at the normal player level. Limit alter self/polymorph forms to core or else a highly policed list. Those are the essentials IMO, everything below could be wildly changed.

-------- (wild idea cutoff point) ---------

I'd suggest one or more magician classes with slow caster progression. Basically caster level = 1/2 * level. New spell level every 5 levels (1,6,11,16). However give them the ability to craft magic items using twice their caster level (i.e., equal to character level), even without the required spells, even if those spells are up to 9th level, as long as those spells are on that player's class list. Scrolls, wands and staffs do not get this bonus. Allow custom magic items of nearly every spell. This gives a reason why players don't need to find the strongest caster in the world just to undo a medusa fight. And any class can buy these items. Since casters are now more of a utility role I'd suggest giving access to multiple spell lists (or all spell lists if there's only one magician class). That way they're almost like a magician-"skillmonkey" support guy rather than a powerhouse. The slow casting progression already hurts a LOT.

That's a minimum magician. Faster progression is possible if you don't want to hate on casters so much. Remember actual humans have to play this game, so something (be it sufficient spell level or giving them something else in their place) has to make it worthwhile to play. I'd be tempted to give casters only a minor ding and play on as usual rather than overhauling the entire system, but I'm not one to give the OP something he didn't ask for. Thus I posted a minimum to hopefully avoid destroying the system entirely.

DodgerH2O
2011-09-30, 10:45 PM
I'm impressed by the ideas, gives me a good basis to work from. As mentioned, I don't intend to do T5 casters, but I'd like to see what they look like to avoid them. And it's kinda an interesting concept to work with. Essentially anyone used to playing any other caster would feel like they were locked in a kennel with all their toys taken away, and that's not what I want, but that's kinda what happens with T5 I guess.

Also something to consider, a world like this probably would have a minimal amount of magical critters also. There may be only one of each type and the party would be likely to seek out or create a specific item to fight it.

Paulcynic
2011-10-01, 12:42 AM
If you're allowing Wizard-like casters in your campaign, keep them as written, but really choke off the means of learning a new spell. After 1st level, remove the 2 free spells learned, and then make it a really big deal for the player to get his hands on scrolls/tomes/other Wizard's knowledge. This effectively means that Wizard-like casters will have new spell slots but few if any spells to use them with, dropping them to T3ish. If you get rid of Item Creation feats altogether (other than Scribe Scroll), then they're a solid T4.

Alternately, you can require them to make scrolls for a cost, and all spells are cast from, and consume said scrolls.


If you're allowing Sorcerer-like casters, allow them to learn new spells as normal and to keep their Bloodline powers (if any), but increase all casting to one full round. Reduce the number of spells that they can cast per day to half the listed number for their level. They were already T2, this should drop them to T3.


Seems like a quick and dirty way to create some T4-T3 casters without completely overhauling each class.

Phosphate
2011-10-01, 01:59 AM
I think I've seen this feat someplace else...but you can severely cripple spellcasters by making all spells that normally take 1 standard round to cast take x full rounds, where x is their level...and then reduce the DC of Concentration checks against interrupting spellcasting. This will still leave buffers at T2 or more, but that can also be easily solved by this tiny thing here:

"Only a character that has the ability to cast x level spells can be affected by the positive effects of x level spells cast by others."

Cespenar
2011-10-01, 04:13 AM
Take Adept and limit it to spells of only one school.

Knaight
2011-10-01, 04:44 AM
"Only a character that has the ability to cast x level spells can be affected by the positive effects of x level spells cast by others."

This hurts non casters more than anything else. Now buffers can only buff casters, so it weakens them there, but not nearly as much as turning all death effects, petrification, negative levels, so on and so forth into permanent, unalterable states for noncasters.

nonsi
2011-10-01, 05:37 AM
"Only a character that has the ability to cast x level spells can be affected by the positive effects of x level spells cast by others."

No offense, but I sincerely believe this is the single worst house rule I've ever seen.

Hanuman
2011-10-01, 05:39 AM
Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the rest of the party is weak in that situation and the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.
Focus: Multiclass, poor stat array, bad items for your job.

Coidzor
2011-10-01, 05:40 AM
"Only a character that has the ability to cast x level spells can be affected by the positive effects of x level spells cast by others."

Best buffs are self-only. Buffing the party is not going to raise the tier of the character, generally speaking.

Phosphate
2011-10-01, 08:20 AM
It might look counter-intuitive, but works like a charm. The buffs that increase physical stats become useless, and so do the ones that enhance mental stats/spellcasting in general (remember, casting time=spell level full rounds).

It is also good if you make magical healing work worse on non-spellcasters.

And obviously creatures that have spell like pseudo/cvasi-kill abilities (like petrify) have their CR increased.

Tiers are not just about cutting or increasing power. By doing this, although buffers themselves don't take too much of a toll as much as power is concerned, they surely lose a lot of usefulness.

Knaight
2011-10-01, 08:37 AM
And obviously creatures that have spell like pseudo/cvasi-kill abilities (like petrify) have their CR increased.

Damage can take out a noncaster just fine, and with utter finality under this rule. A caster, meanwhile, can be brought back from the dead. The extent to which being able to be brought back from the dead, unpetrified, have curses removed, so on and so forth is a power boost once those things are removed from default is a power up is staggering.

Phosphate
2011-10-01, 08:52 AM
No, Raise Dead is not a buff.

Knaight
2011-10-01, 09:11 AM
The original wording was:

"Only a character that has the ability to cast x level spells can be affected by the positive effects of x level spells cast by others."

Raise Dead is a positive effect. Stone to Flesh is a positive effect. Remove Curse is a positive effect. Regeneration is a positive effect. So on and so forth.

Phosphate
2011-10-01, 10:52 AM
You can refuse to be raised. Therefore, it can be defined as not always good.

erikun
2011-10-01, 11:29 AM
You can refuse to be raised. Therefore, it can be defined as not always good.
You can make a saving throw to avoid being healed. Therefore, it can be defined as not always good.

However, that does not mean that allowing your self to be raised - or healed, or buffed - is therefore not a buff or a positive effect. Either any spell with a positive side effect is affect and thus Fighters cannot be raised, or any spell with a saving throw is unaffected and thus Fighters can be targetted by Enlarge Person/Bull Strength and similar spells.

I have to agree with the others; this absolutely kills what benefits non-casters previously possessed. Clerics can't buff Fighters (or the rest of the party) and so are forced to rely on buffing themselves. Wizards can't give Enlarge Person to the Fighter, and thus should party with Clerics and Druids instead. This may lower the power of T1 spellcasters, but with the complete inability to benefit from any spellcasting beyond save-or-suck taking out the enemies, mundane non-casters suffer far worse.

GunbladeKnight
2011-10-01, 11:51 AM
It might look counter-intuitive, but works like a charm. The buffs that increase physical stats become useless, and so do the ones that enhance mental stats/spellcasting in general (remember, casting time=spell level full rounds).

With their duration being minute/level after the initial cast (and persist spell later), they are not useless. Also, Clerics and druids benefit from physical stats since they can be front-line fighters. Your "fix" sets them up to easily outshine fighters, and even paladins, since their buffs that could have been used on the others will now only affect them.

The quickest two ways to drop a spellcaster in tiers is to limit their spell choices (either by a spells known or trimming the spell list), or by introducing MAD to them.

Seerow
2011-10-01, 12:03 PM
Yeah I'm with the majority here, restricting buffs only to people capable of casting said buffs doesn't nerf the high tier casters, it nerfs the **** out of low tier non-casters who were already hurting.



If you want to limit the power of buffing, make the spellcaster have to sustain the spell after it's cast. For example, with Shadowrun, every spell you sustain gives you a -2 to all other actions you take, so if you want to sustain 3 buffs, you're taking a -6 to everything.

I'd go for a conversion of that rule, making each sustained spell reduce the caster's caster level by 2 for each spell effect he has active. (This works better if you can tie caster level into the primary effect of most spells, but if nothing else this makes a guy with a ton of buffs much easier to dispel than the guy with just 1 or 2).



Alternatively, you can make a restriction on the number of buff spells a character can be under at a time. Like character level/2 (round up) in spell levels may be active on the character at once. This requires however going back to the problem the thread is currently arguing: What defines a buff spell. Because you don't want someone to have to be level 9 before they can be affected by Raise Dead, for example. And you don't want people to be able to max out on buffs to prevent debuffs from being applied to them.




That said, as mentioned above removing the ability to non-casters hurts non-casters far more than casters. Restricting buffs that can be active on somebody hurts non-casters as well, especially if the caster is now saying "Well I'd like to buff you but I don't want to make myself useless doing so. Sorry". I say this to reinforce the idea that you need to do more than just restrict buffs if you want to keep things balanced. You still need to either gut the spell lists, or buff non-caster abilities, or both.

Ziegander
2011-10-01, 02:04 PM
Here's a fun idea that might work... make an MMO style pet class. Basically, a caster where all his spells only work on his "pet" which is a summonable thing (let's say 1 minute cast time to summon it, permanent duration unless dismissed). Could be a skeleton, could be an elemental, could be an outsider... whatever. But he uses his spells on his pet, which is normally too weak to be any good but with buffs gets decent. However the caster himself has to keep himself out of harms way, and the pet has a restricted range from the caster. Look at the UA Undead Companion feature for Necromancers for a starting pet inspiration, or the Death Master's companion as another idea.

I'm very intrigued by this idea... I think I'll work on it.

Starbuck_II
2011-10-01, 04:19 PM
A) Focus the spells towards something that's not critically central to the game. Maybe a counterspell specialist that only has counterspell casting and anti spell buffing? So the guy would have one area where he's pretty good, and otherwise not so much.

JaronK

Surprised no one has done this yet.
Complete Arcane, PHB 2, Magic of incarnum, and Complete Mage really boost the Anti-spell caster.

You have spells like:
Arcane Turmoil
Bothersome Babble
Discordant Malediction
Fever Dream
Otiluke's Suppressing Field
Spellcaster's Bane
Tenacious Dispelling
Chain Dispel
Dispelling Touch
Mana Flux
Slashing Dispel
Stifle spell
Suppress Magic

Grant some Counterspell/dispelling abilities. 3/4th BAB since they don't have much attack spells. Spotaneous like Beguiler/Known all list.

DodgerH2O
2011-10-03, 09:57 PM
Playing with the "Pet Class" mentioned earlier gave me an idea that I'll probably work around into the final game somehow, but the basics are as follows:

Tentative Class Name: Elementalist (Yes, there's a ton of these, but whatever)

It operates similar to a DFA in its powers/day and limited set of spells, similar to a Sorc in spontaneous casting, and has a "Pet" similar to the Animal Companion, but with specific differences.

For higher tiers, it would have MAD, namely a spellcasting stat and a pet stat.

The basic concept is that the class follows one of the 4 "Classical" Elements, Earth, Fire, Air, Water, and gains spells appropriate to that element as well as having the ability to summon a "Pet" elemental that it can buff with spells. The elemental would start out small and weak, and grow with its summoner's abilities. Unlike an Animal Companion, it could be summoned again if destroyed (up to a certain number of times/day, depending on spellcaster level/ability) but the summon would take an amount of time that would make it prohibitively difficult to recast mid-combat.

Spells/SLAs would be multi-purpose. For example, a level 0 spell (or minor SLA) that creates a ray of elemental damage could be used as an attack spell or target the pet elemental to heal say, 1d4 damage. A level 3 spell, say, Fireball (or equivalent) could be cast onto a pet Fire Elemental to increase its size category (and corresponding abilities). These sorts of buffs may be limited in scope by caster level and/or stat such as CHA. The focus on most of the abilities would be blasting, rather than utility, but would give the class some ability to help in a fight even if their pet is destroyed.

The Elementalist itself would have poor HD, BAB, Saves, and Skills, and the pet would be fairly useless outside of combat, giving it a niche that would be able to keep it out of T3, and depending on other restrictions (spell selection) could allow a T5 that had its own flavor.

Coidzor
2011-10-03, 10:34 PM
saves are mostly irrelevant to tier, so you don't have to tank their saves entirely.

Seerow
2011-10-03, 10:35 PM
saves are mostly irrelevant to tier, so you don't have to tank their saves entirely.

Wait what, I thought Monk's saves pushed them up to tier 3 :smallconfused:

Steward
2011-10-03, 10:36 PM
I like your idea, but I'm concerned that a lot of players might enjoy it. Maybe instead of having it rely on two stats, have it rely on three? Like, s/he needs Charisma to summon her elemental, Intelligent for her spells per day, and Wisdom for the save DCs? Limit how quickly the elemental scales -- it shouldn't be effective in combat past about 5th level. And when the elemental is destroyed -- and it will be, once you make sure its Armor Class is in the toilet and its buffs have too short a duration to be useful -- have the backlash inflict some ability damage to the caster.

Use the Truenamer as a model. I thought the goal is to make a class so feeble that the DM has to create a house-rule or a custom item just to help it survive.

Coidzor
2011-10-03, 10:42 PM
I like your idea, but I'm concerned that a lot of players might enjoy it. Maybe instead of having it rely on two stats, have it rely on three? Like, s/he needs Charisma to summon her elemental, Intelligent for her spells per day, and Wisdom for the save DCs? Limit how quickly the elemental scales -- it shouldn't be effective in combat past about 5th level. And when the elemental is destroyed -- and it will be, once you make sure its Armor Class is in the toilet and its buffs have too short a duration to be useful -- have the backlash inflict some ability damage to the caster.

Use the Truenamer as a model. I thought the goal is to make a class so feeble that the DM has to create a house-rule or a custom item just to help it survive.

I dunno, that seems to be veering into T6ish territory.

Knaight
2011-10-03, 11:06 PM
Wait what, I thought Monk's saves pushed them up to tier 3 :smallconfused:

The monk isn't anywhere near tier 3. That said, the saves are relevant, as they do help the monk survive long enough to do stuff - which would be more relevant if their stuff actually worked half decently.

Seerow
2011-10-03, 11:07 PM
The monk isn't anywhere near tier 3. That said, the saves are relevant, as they do help the monk survive long enough to do stuff - which would be more relevant if their stuff actually worked half decently.

Apparently I need to lay my sarcasm on a little thicker. Maybe I need to start making my sarcastic posts in a different color. Like anything I post that is sarcastic is blue. Or something.

Knaight
2011-10-03, 11:57 PM
Apparently I need to lay my sarcasm on a little thicker. Maybe I need to start making my sarcastic posts in a different color. Like anything I post that is sarcastic is blue. Or something.

Start by weeding out all the comments that say, with complete seriousness that monks are good, the tier system is worthless, so on and so forth so you don't blend in so well.

Seerow
2011-10-03, 11:59 PM
Start by weeding out all the comments that say, with complete seriousness that monks are good, the tier system is worthless, so on and so forth so you don't blend in so well.

I think making my posts blue would be better.

Yitzi
2011-10-04, 06:32 AM
So, to the OP:

1. Give the spellcaster access to only one type of spells (e.g. blasting, debuffs, etc.) and only from a class list that is ok but not great (e.g. a blaster casts from the druid list, a buffer from the cleric list, a debuffer from the bard list.)

OR

2. Give him the spells/day and spells known of a bard, and no non-spell class features.

Eldan
2011-10-04, 06:35 AM
How to make the Fighter of Casters:

You get one single spell known, from a limited list of so-so spells. Every odd level, you can exchange your known spell for a spell of the new level.

This spell can be used at will.

Every fourth or so level, you gain a bonus feat. Probably from a limited list of metamagics.

Ziegander
2011-10-04, 08:22 AM
How to make the Fighter of Casters:

You get one single spell known, from a limited list of so-so spells. Every odd level, you can exchange your known spell for a spell of the new level.

This spell can be used at will.

Every fourth or so level, you gain a bonus feat. Probably from a limited list of metamagics.

Hmm... very interesting. Now, I've got to try this out too. :smallredface:

The Fighter of Casters

Alignment: Any
Hit Die: 1d10

{table=head]Level|BAB|Fort|Ref|Will|Special |
Spell Level

1st|+1|+2|+0|+0|Adroit Adept|
1st

2nd|+2|+3|+0|+0|Occult Accomplishment|
1st

3rd|+3|+3|+1|+1||
1st

4th|+4|+4|+1|+1|Adroit Adept|
2nd

5th|+5|+4|+1|+1||
2nd

6th|+6/+1|+5|+2|+2|Occult Accomplishment|
3rd

7th|+7/+2|+5|+2|+2||
3rd

8th|+8/+3|+6|+2|+2|Adroit Adept|
3rd

9th|+9/+4|+6|+3|+3||
4th

10th|+10/+5|+7|+3|+3|Occult Accomplishment|
4th

11th|+11/+6/+1|+7|+3|+3||
4th

12th|+12/+7/+2|+8|+4|+4|Adroit Adept|
5th

13th|+13/+8/+3|+8|+4|+4||
5th

14th|+14/+9/+4|+9|+4|+4|Occult Accomplishment|
5th

15th|+15/+10/+5|+9|+5|+5||
6th

16th|+16/+11/+6/+1|+10|+5|+5|Adroit Adept|
6th

17th|+17/+12/+7/+2|+10|+5|+5||
6th

18th|+18/+13/+8/+3|+11|+6|+6|Occult Accomplishment|
7th

19th|+19/+14/+9/+4|+11|+6|+6||
7th

20th|+20/+15/+10/+5|+12|+6|+6|Adroit Adept|
7th
[/table]

Class Skills (2 + Int modifier): Appraise, Concentration, Craft, Knowledge (Arcane), Knowledge (Religion), Ride, and Spellcraft.

Weapon & Armor Proficiency
A Fighter of Casters is proficient with all simple and martial weapons as well as with light, medium, and heavy armor. A Fighter of Casters is proficient with shields but not with Tower Shields.

Adroit Adept (Sp): A Fighter of Casters uses spells as spell-like abilities, learning a new spell of a level available to him (as indicated in the spell level column above) from the Fighter of Casters spell list at 1st, 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th levels. He may use these spell-like abilities at will, he has a caster level equal to his class level, and the save DCs of spell-like abilities used in this way is 10 + 1/2 class level + Constitution modifier.

At 4th level and every even level thereafter a Fighter of Casters may choose to learn a new spell in place of one he already knows. In effect, he "loses" the old spell in exchange for the new one. He may swap only a single spell at any given level.

SPELL LIST

1ST
Command, Deathwatch, Detect X Alignment, Doom, Endure Elements, Identify, Magic Weapon, Remove Fear

2ND
Aid, Align Weapon, Bear's Endurance, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Death Knell, Make Whole, Status

3RD
Entropic Shield, False Life, Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Shield of Faith, Speak with Dead, Spider Climb

4TH
Bane, Bless, Delay Poison, Protection from X Alignment, Remove Paralysis, See Invisibility, Shield Other, Vampiric Touch

5TH
Blur, Cure Light Wounds, Disrupting Weapon, Greater Command, Heroism, Jump, Resist Energy

6TH
Clairsentience*, Dispel X Alignment, Neutralize Poison, Prayer, Protection from Arrows

7TH
Death Ward, Heroes' Feast, Invisibility Purge, Slay Living, True Strike

*As Clairaudience/Clairvoyance.


Occult Accomplishment
At 2nd level and every four levels thereafter, a Fighter of Casters gains a bonus feat drawn from the list below. He must meet all prerequisites for feats gained this way. These feats are in addition to those gained as a character of any class advances levels.

At 4th level and every even level thereafter a Fighter of Casters may choose to gain a new feat from the list in place of one already gained in this way. In effect, he "loses" the old feat in exchange for the new one. The feat being exchanged must not be a prerequisite for any feats not exchanged. He may swap only a single feat at any given level.

BONUS FEATS

CA = Complete Arcane; CAdv = Complete Adventurer; CC = Complete Champion; CD = Complete Divine; CM = Complete Mage; CS = Complete Scoundrel; CW = Complete Warrior; ToM = Tome of Magic.

SRD
Combat Casting, Empower Spell-like Ability, Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Magical Aptitude, Quick Draw, Spell Focus, Greater Spell Focus, Quicken Spell-like Ability, Spell Penetration Greater Spell Penetration.

CW
Improved Familiar.

CAdv
Appraise Magic Value, Danger Sense, Mobile Spell-Casting.

CA
Arcane Defense, Arcane Mastery, Double Wand Wielder, Heighten Spell-like Ability, Maximize Spell-like Ability, Obtain Familiar, Reckless Wand Wielder, Wandstrike.

CS
Improved Familiar.

CM
Battlecaster Defense, Battlecaster Offense, Delay Potion, Favored Magic Foe, Insightful Divination, Magic Device Attunement, Metamagic Spell Trigger, Toughening Transmutation.

CC
Knowledge Devotion.

ToM
Defense Against the Supernatural, Supernatural Crusader, Supernatural Opportunist.

Eldan
2011-10-04, 08:27 AM
Wow. This is more Gish-y than I thought, really. My idea was to give him no weapon proficiencies and blast spells instead, but this is just as bad :smalltongue:

Hey, here's an idea:

You take the warlock, and don't give him any invocations, other than Eldritch Blast. He can not gain any invocations via Extra Invocation, except for Blast Shape and Essence Invocations.

I call it The Explodicist.

Ziegander
2011-10-04, 08:41 AM
Wow. This is more Gish-y than I thought, really. My idea was to give him no weapon proficiencies and blast spells instead, but this is just as bad :smalltongue:

Yup. You can lower the HD to d6, lower the BAB to poor, trade good Fort for good Will, and then give Adroit Adept at 1st, 2nd, and every even level, expand the spell list (juuuust a bit), give Occult Accomplishment at 3rd and every four levels thereafter, and probably give something else at 5th and every four levels thereafter (like a +1 caster level boost). That's probably closer to what you were thinking.

Yitzi
2011-10-04, 09:14 AM
How to make the Fighter of Casters:

You get one single spell known, from a limited list of so-so spells. Every odd level, you can exchange your known spell for a spell of the new level.

This spell can be used at will.

Every fourth or so level, you gain a bonus feat. Probably from a limited list of metamagics.

That's the something of casters, but that something is not "fighter". For all their flaws, the one big advantage that fighters have (well, in comparison to other nonspellcasters*) is versatility. The Fighter of Casters would get access to numerous spells usable at-will, but they'd all be weak.

*Manifesters count as spellcasters here, and I'm not sure about initiators.

Eldan
2011-10-04, 09:25 AM
That's the something of casters, but that something is not "fighter". For all their flaws, the one big advantage that fighters have (well, in comparison to other nonspellcasters*) is versatility. The Fighter of Casters would get access to numerous spells usable at-will, but they'd all be weak.

*Manifesters count as spellcasters here, and I'm not sure about initiators.

Well, not really. I saw the spell more as the equivalent of a fighter attacking in melee. You do that every turn, just with a bit of variety to it. Which is the metamagic feats.

Seerow
2011-10-04, 10:06 AM
That's the something of casters, but that something is not "fighter". For all their flaws, the one big advantage that fighters have (well, in comparison to other nonspellcasters*) is versatility. The Fighter of Casters would get access to numerous spells usable at-will, but they'd all be weak.

*Manifesters count as spellcasters here, and I'm not sure about initiators.

Versatility? A fighter? Really?


Fighters may be flexible, in that they can represent a dozen different concepts by picking different feats, but Versatile is not a word I'd use to describe any fighter.

If anything to make a "Fighter of Casters", I'd give the caster a much more limited selection of SLAs, but make the SLAs more powerful. The more SLAs you choose, the weaker they all get (so you can have one SLA that is a save or die with a 60ft range and high save DC, or 2 SLAs where one is a save or die with a moderate DC and one is a debuff with a moderate DC, or 3 SLAs where one is a ranged damage spell, one is a debuff, and one is some minor mobility boost).

Yitzi
2011-10-04, 10:27 AM
Well, not really. I saw the spell more as the equivalent of a fighter attacking in melee. You do that every turn, just with a bit of variety to it. Which is the metamagic feats.

Maybe if he got a metamagic feat every other level, and could choose to get an extra spell instead of a feat...


Versatility? A fighter? Really?


Fighters may be flexible, in that they can represent a dozen different concepts by picking different feats, but Versatile is not a word I'd use to describe any fighter.

Why not? With 11 bonus feats over the course of 20 levels, they can afford to get enough feats to be good at pretty much every major physical attack type (including at least a few combat maneuvers) out there.

Seerow
2011-10-04, 10:37 AM
Why not? With 11 bonus feats over the course of 20 levels, they can afford to get enough feats to be good at pretty much every major physical attack type (including at least a few combat maneuvers) out there.

Most of the areas that Fighters are expected to go into because it is actually worthwhile for them to do so are expected because they require more feats than the fighting styles other classes typically take. Things like chain tripping, or Jack B Quick. Hell even charging, if you go all in, can take up a pretty solid chunk of feats. A single fighting style can easily consume the majority of the Fighter's feats. If you try to pull off 3 different fighting styles, you're either going to be REALLY bad at 2 of them, or you're going to be pretty bad at all 3, because all you'll have are the feats everyone else has, without the class features they're personally using to back it up.

Yitzi
2011-10-04, 12:23 PM
Most of the areas that Fighters are expected to go into because it is actually worthwhile for them to do so are expected because they require more feats than the fighting styles other classes typically take. Things like chain tripping, or Jack B Quick. Hell even charging, if you go all in, can take up a pretty solid chunk of feats. A single fighting style can easily consume the majority of the Fighter's feats. If you try to pull off 3 different fighting styles, you're either going to be REALLY bad at 2 of them, or you're going to be pretty bad at all 3, because all you'll have are the feats everyone else has, without the class features they're personally using to back it up.

You'll be worse at any one of them than a specialist, but you can use whichever one is best for the situation.

Now, it just so happens that most of the time the trade-off isn't worth it, which is why fighters are such a low tier. But barring high-feat-requirement combos (which are often highly dependent on which splatbooks are allowed), the fighter's strength is supposed to be (at least as far as I can tell) the ability to switch between what are effectively totally different builds (each highly effective in the right situation) at a moment's notice.

After all, even chain tripping requires only 4 feats (combat expertise, improved trip, combat reflexes, weapon proficiency), and that's not enough to justify going full fighter. The only advantage a full fighter gets is that he can take enough situationally powerful feats to almost always have the right answer. (Now, if only enough situationally powerful feats existed...)

Coidzor
2011-10-04, 07:35 PM
I think making my posts blue would be better.

Blue is a good color. I like blue. :smallsmile:

That Fighter of Casters example is a great chassis for a familiar, even if it can't buff it so good.