Caster Level Variant [Archive] - Wizards Community

Caster Level Variant [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Chimaera2000
05-30-05, 01:44 PM I liked the Magic Rating variant from Unearthed Arcana a lot (one of D & D's flaws is how it hurts multiclass casters, IMO), but my opinion is that it didn't go far enough. With that in mind, I've come up with a variant that does something similar in that in treats your caster level like your base attack bonus. Here goes!

Base Caster Level variant

Under this variant, your caster level is determined to varying degrees by each of your classes, races, and templates, not just single spellcasting classes. In this way, it treats your caster level like your base attack bonus, using the same rating system of "good," "fair," and "poor." A summary of these ratings is given below:

Caster Level
Level Good Fair Poor
1st +1 +0 +0
2nd +2 +1 +1
3rd +3 +2 +1
4th +4 +3 +2
5th +5 +3 +2
6th +6 +4 +3
7th +7 +5 +3
8th +8 +6 +4
9th +9 +6 +4
10th +10 +7 +5
11th +11 +8 +5
12th +12 +9 +6
13th +13 +9 +6
14th +14 +10 +7
15th +15 +11 +7
16th +16 +12 +8
17th +17 +12 +8
18th +18 +13 +9
19th +19 +14 +9
20th +20 +15 +10

"Good:" Bard, cleric, druid, wizard, sorceror.
"Fair:" Paladin, ranger
"Poor:" Barbarian, fighter, monk, rogue, racial Hit Die or level adjustment*.

Example: a Half-Fiendish Ogre has 4 Hit Die and total level adjustment of +6, having an ECL of 10. Because its racial Hit Die and level adjustments for race and template use the "poor" column for caster level, it has a caster level of 5.

*Note: Creatures with the racial ability to cast spells (such as the rakshasa) have a caster level of either half their ECL or that provided by their spellcasting ability, whichever is higher.

Example: A nymph has an ECL of 13 and casts spells as a 7th-level druid. Her caster level from her druid levels is higher than her caster level from her ECL (6) and so she retains her caster level of 7. Were she to have five more Hit Dice (increasing her ECL to 18), she would have a caster level of 9, which would then apply to all her spellcasting abilities.

Increases in caster level do not grant more spells per day or spells known, nor does it allow you to use wands and scrolls without making Use Magic Device checks unless you could do so already.

Any comments?
Chimaera2000
05-31-05, 09:34 PM I just came up with a system that even accounts for creatures with racial spellcasting abilities. I'm actually quite excited about this variant; it means that your rogue/wizard can be viable on his way to becoming an arcane trickster, and your vampire wizard can actually be decent with his spells without having to burn a feat on Practiced Spellcaster. It looks balanced, too! (Did I mention I was happy about this variant? ;) )

Anyway, comments, questions, and criticism are all appreciated.
J Milburn
06-01-05, 02:00 PM Well, spells from alternative classes come from different sources. For example, being in touch with nature (druid) should not help hone your inborn natural talent. (sorcerer)

Another point is that wizards and sorcerers are alot more 'magical' than bards, and even the divine casters.

I can see this working for rangers and druids, also including clerics to the nature gods.
J Milburn
06-01-05, 02:02 PM Oh, and with paladins crossed with LG clerics, and possibly some of the new base classes, like evokers with warmages.
Chimaera2000
06-08-05, 05:08 PM Well, spells from alternative classes come from different sources. For example, being in touch with nature (druid) should not help hone your inborn natural talent. (sorcerer)

Another point is that wizards and sorcerers are alot more 'magical' than bards, and even the divine casters.

I can see this working for rangers and druids, also including clerics to the nature gods.

Oh, and with paladins crossed with LG clerics, and possibly some of the new base classes, like evokers with warmages.

I can see the point you're trying to make, but the problem is that it restricts a lot of options for PC's who use this variant, and isn't 3rd edition all about options? Though this variant is designed mainly with mechanical considerations in mind, you can look at it this way thematically as well:

Consider a multiclass fighter/wizard who wants to enter the spellsword prestige class. Let's say that he begins his career as a fighter, then begins taking wizard levels in preparation for becoming a spellsword. When he begins taking wizard levels, do his combat abilities cease to advance? As we see from all classes having an increasing base attack bonus, the answer is obviously no. What this example demonstrates is that despite this character's lack of direct focus on combat abilities as he trains as a wizard, he still learns a few things along the way to hone his old talents through his overall experience as an adventurer.

Now, let's say that this same character began as a wizard, then became a fighter afterwards. Following the same logic above, it makes sense to say, "If my character's fighting ability still increases while I focus more on spellcasting, why can't the reverse be true?" After all, despite his lack of focus on arcane studies, his old abilities still improve because of his overall adventuring experience. That is, thematically, what this variant tries to get across. It doesn't matter if you were a bard, wizard, rogue, or anything else; as you increase in level, your overall adventuring experience allows you to hone your magical talents, if you so choose that path. Likewise, a race with an ECL greater than zero is considerably stronger than a lesser race; who's to say that their innate abilities can't be translated (to some degree) into a talent for spellcasting?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Chimaera2000 05-30-05, 01:44 PM	I liked the Magic Rating variant from Unearthed Arcana a lot (one of D & D's flaws is how it hurts multiclass casters, IMO), but my opinion is that it didn't go far enough. With that in mind, I've come up with a variant that does something similar in that in treats your caster level like your base attack bonus. Here goes! Base Caster Level variant Under this variant, your caster level is determined to varying degrees by each of your classes, races, and templates, not just single spellcasting classes. In this way, it treats your caster level like your base attack bonus, using the same rating system of "good," "fair," and "poor." A summary of these ratings is given below: Caster Level Level Good Fair Poor 1st +1 +0 +0 2nd +2 +1 +1 3rd +3 +2 +1 4th +4 +3 +2 5th +5 +3 +2 6th +6 +4 +3 7th +7 +5 +3 8th +8 +6 +4 9th +9 +6 +4 10th +10 +7 +5 11th +11 +8 +5 12th +12 +9 +6 13th +13 +9 +6 14th +14 +10 +7 15th +15 +11 +7 16th +16 +12 +8 17th +17 +12 +8 18th +18 +13 +9 19th +19 +14 +9 20th +20 +15 +10 "Good:" Bard, cleric, druid, wizard, sorceror. "Fair:" Paladin, ranger "Poor:" Barbarian, fighter, monk, rogue, racial Hit Die or level adjustment. Example: a Half-Fiendish Ogre has 4 Hit Die and total level adjustment of +6, having an ECL of 10. Because its racial Hit Die and level adjustments for race and template use the "poor" column for caster level, it has a caster level of 5. Note: Creatures with the racial ability to cast spells (such as the rakshasa) have a caster level of either half their ECL or that provided by their spellcasting ability, whichever is higher. Example: A nymph has an ECL of 13 and casts spells as a 7th-level druid. Her caster level from her druid levels is higher than her caster level from her ECL (6) and so she retains her caster level of 7. Were she to have five more Hit Dice (increasing her ECL to 18), she would have a caster level of 9, which would then apply to all her spellcasting abilities. Increases in caster level do not grant more spells per day or spells known, nor does it allow you to use wands and scrolls without making Use Magic Device checks unless you could do so already. Any comments?
Chimaera2000 05-31-05, 09:34 PM	I just came up with a system that even accounts for creatures with racial spellcasting abilities. I'm actually quite excited about this variant; it means that your rogue/wizard can be viable on his way to becoming an arcane trickster, and your vampire wizard can actually be decent with his spells without having to burn a feat on Practiced Spellcaster. It looks balanced, too! (Did I mention I was happy about this variant? ;) ) Anyway, comments, questions, and criticism are all appreciated.
J Milburn 06-01-05, 02:00 PM	Well, spells from alternative classes come from different sources. For example, being in touch with nature (druid) should not help hone your inborn natural talent. (sorcerer) Another point is that wizards and sorcerers are alot more 'magical' than bards, and even the divine casters. I can see this working for rangers and druids, also including clerics to the nature gods.
J Milburn 06-01-05, 02:02 PM	Oh, and with paladins crossed with LG clerics, and possibly some of the new base classes, like evokers with warmages.
Chimaera2000 06-08-05, 05:08 PM	Well, spells from alternative classes come from different sources. For example, being in touch with nature (druid) should not help hone your inborn natural talent. (sorcerer) Another point is that wizards and sorcerers are alot more 'magical' than bards, and even the divine casters. I can see this working for rangers and druids, also including clerics to the nature gods. Oh, and with paladins crossed with LG clerics, and possibly some of the new base classes, like evokers with warmages. I can see the point you're trying to make, but the problem is that it restricts a lot of options for PC's who use this variant, and isn't 3rd edition all about options? Though this variant is designed mainly with mechanical considerations in mind, you can look at it this way thematically as well: Consider a multiclass fighter/wizard who wants to enter the spellsword prestige class. Let's say that he begins his career as a fighter, then begins taking wizard levels in preparation for becoming a spellsword. When he begins taking wizard levels, do his combat abilities cease to advance? As we see from all classes having an increasing base attack bonus, the answer is obviously no. What this example demonstrates is that despite this character's lack of direct focus on combat abilities as he trains as a wizard, he still learns a few things along the way to hone his old talents through his overall experience as an adventurer. Now, let's say that this same character began as a wizard, then became a fighter afterwards. Following the same logic above, it makes sense to say, "If my character's fighting ability still increases while I focus more on spellcasting, why can't the reverse be true?" After all, despite his lack of focus on arcane studies, his old abilities still improve because of his overall adventuring experience. That is, thematically, what this variant tries to get across. It doesn't matter if you were a bard, wizard, rogue, or anything else; as you increase in level, your overall adventuring experience allows you to hone your magical talents, if you so choose that path. Likewise, a race with an ECL greater than zero is considerably stronger than a lesser race; who's to say that their innate abilities can't be translated (to some degree) into a talent for spellcasting?