Runecaster, not more powerful?

[emoplato]

I saw this thread in which someone took a great deal of time to determine the general power of increases of many of the prestige classes. Apparently a Runecaster isn't anymore powerful then a standard cleric even though it doesn't give up anything of importance for permanent maximized trigger spells(time domain) in the class or obtaining it.
Tier System for PrCs - Your help needed

 

[Empirate]

I love the Runecaster and would totally play one if the cleric position weren't perma-taken in my group. I'd put it at +1 to +2 in that index. But I have quite a bit of beef with several of the individual class placements.

 

[emoplato]

Yeah, I didn't mean to sound so sarcastic, I meant what I said in the first part. I do agree their are a few others in their that I don't think they got right. This one just out right ticked me off, arguably in its own right it is more powerful than the Incantatrix.
As for base classes I don't know the entire line up of power, just mainly who is tier 1 and 5.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I must say that I appreciate the Tier system for classes as an illustration and comparison of the versatility of each class. I understand the strengths and weaknesses of the Tier system, but respect what it is trying to do.

When you go onto PrC's though, I think the very first line says it all, "Rating PrCs is difficult." It's taking the abstract concept of the Tier system to something even more complicated.

I'm not surprised that any educated-in-the-ways-of-D&D person would disagree with some or many parts of the ratings.