D&D 5E 3/4 Caster: Its Absence and Design Space in 5E

[Aldarc]

An open discussion question for polite musings.

Currently, 5e D&D has full casters (i.e., wizard, bard, druid, cleric, sorcerer), half-casters (i.e., artificer, paladin, ranger), and even 1/3 or one-third (e.g., Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, etc.). Absent within this quarter-based schema is a 3/4 or three-quarters caster. Is there a reason that 5e either chose not to design a 3/4 caster and is there room in the game for such a progression? Furthermore, would any of the existing classes have been better off as 3/4 casters than their current spell progressions?

 

[tetrasodium]

They wanted to make a level x spell have a certain power rather than basing it on progression and class thst got it. Then there were "iconic" spells that ignored it entirely. Afteficer bard and maybe ranger should have been 3/4 casters that leaned harder on their noncaster abilities and if needed spells could be rejiggered to have the right power levels when they were obtained for a class. I might throw in warlock too, but their casting is a mess that makes it a tough comparison. Sorcerer could have been given much more interesting design as 3/4 caster too.

One rekevant disappointing thing that the bard thread doesn't seem to bring up is that making so many things full caster &changing scaling to be at cost instead of based on level you wind up with jack of all trades types thst are just as magical & knowledgeable as full casters in the realm of that full caster's expertise plus appealing class & archetype abilities potentially with a better primary caster stat (ie cha over int).

 

[DEFCON 1]

Mechanically, spells are merely nothing more than a long, variable list of class features you can choose from at each level. So if you change what type of caster you have, to maintain balance you would replace the spells slots you lost/gained with equivalent single ability class features.

So for each class just determine what unchanging set features they should have instead a variable list that comes from "spells" and you'll have your answer as to what should be 3/4th casters (or even if such a thing is necessary).

 

[Fanaelialae]

I would say probably because it's an awkward design space.

It's not that you couldn't do it. However, it's close to the power of a full caster, without being as good as a full caster. That means you need to fill the power budget with something, but it can't be too big a something. Ideally, whatever you do add should probably have good internal synergy with other parts of the class, else you'll just end up with a class that's overall significantly weaker than other classes. Which limits what you can do in terms of design.

 

[ECMO3]

An open discussion question for polite musings.

Currently, 5e D&D has full casters (i.e., wizard, bard, druid, cleric, sorcerer), half-casters (i.e., artificer, paladin, ranger), and even 1/4 or quarter-casters (e.g., Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, etc.). Absent within this quarter-based schema is a 3/4 or three-quarters caster. Is there a reason that 5e either chose not to design a 3/4 caster and is there room in the game for such a progression? Furthermore, would any of the existing classes have been better off as 3/4 casters than their current spell progressions?

I like the current system and it would be somewhat difficult to implement a 3/4 caster if you allow multiclassing. I do think the current classes are appropriately positioned. I know some think Bard should get fewer spells, but personally I like the current iteration better than previous versions.

The current system is very flexible and I think you can make a good themed 3/4 caster by multiclassing a full caster another character. Arcane Trickster-Wizard/Bard/sorcerer is an example. Cleric-Paladin and Ranger-Druid are others. These are easy to do thematically.

 

[NaturalZero]

I think there are a ton of classes that would have been more elegant as 3/4ths casters with more features as opposed to the mix that we got for nostalgia's sake. A 3/4 necromancer class that got baked-in undead building would be better than a wizard subclass with 99.9 the same stuff as every other wizard. Likewise for a hypothetical illusionist that could have topped out at 7th level spells but had a dedicated suite of at-will and encounter illusion fun to mess with. Honestly, I think we would have had a more interesting set of classes if they developers weren't afraid to break up the wizard and sorcerer into more focused concepts with unique features.

 

[Steampunkette]

Honestly... I'd love to see a system where the different casters feel different without losing a great deal of power through the use of gulfs of power.

Wizard, Sorcerer: Full casters. Their spells range from level 1 to level 9.
Clerics, Druids: 3/4 casters. Their spells range from level 1 to level 7.
Bards: 1/2 casters. Their spells range from level 1 to level 5.
Warlocks: Same as they currently are.

But here's the catch: A level 7 Cleric spell, or level 5 Bard spell, is the same level of power as 9th level Wizard spells.

What you're getting by spreading the spellcasting levels out like that is twofold.

1) "Spell Gaps". Because a Bard gets 2nd level spells around the same time a Wizard gets 3rd level spells, there's a big gap in the Bard Progression between when they get 1st level and 2nd level spells, making room for greater class feature design room in that space. Things like a more robust Inspiration/Music/Performance system to provide support and effects outside of spellcasting.

2) Less Resources. Because a Bard only gets up to 5th level spells, they'll have less available spell slots than a Wizard or Sorcerer will over the course of the day, making other systems and features more important to their overall three-pillar functionality.

The cost, however, is also two part:

1) You have to assign different levels to the spells you create for each class. Wish, or it's equivalent, now needs to be Sor/Wiz9, Cle/Dru7, Bard5. (I know Druids don't get Wish, I was just using it as an example of how it'd have to be broken out.)

2) Designing spells becomes more complex as you have to decide which classes should or shouldn't have them and whether or not different classes should get earlier access. Right now, for example, Druids gain Control Weather as an 8th level spell. Under this system they get 6th level and 7th level spells. Should it be pushed up in power to their final tier of casting or placed below the level range at which Wizards get it.

You also have to deal with some player confusion over how strong spells are and questions about why a Bard's 5th level spell is as strong as a Wizard's 9th level spell, though I also feel like that could be resolved fairly easily with 2-3 paragraphs of design rationale in the "Magic" section of the book.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

The problem I see with a 3/4 is that the spell slot progression will be the same as a full caster until the few last level that arent played very much.

Then you cant give them Extra attack at 5th level, because they'll be better than a 1/2 caster, but cant give it later than 6th level, because there's a bunch of archetypes that gives Extra attack at 6th on a full caster chassis.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Just an idea:

The Alchemist Artificer is probably the closest to a 3/4 caster, so:

• Cantrip
• Spell slots up to 5th level.
• Free X per day uses of some low-levelish spells at mid level.
• Free X per day uses of higher level spells. (So a 3/4 caster could have one cast of a 6th and 7th level spells per day, a little like the warlock's Arcanum)
• Damage boost at level 5th, but no extra attack, maybe closest to Divine Strike from the cleric.
• Some non-spells, but magic related features.

 

[Charlaquin]

Point of order: the three types of caster in 5e (apart from warlock) are full casters, half casters, and one third casters. They all follow exactly the same spell slot and spell level progression, full casters just advance along that path every level, half casters every other level, and third casters every third level. This is done in part for multiclassing purposes so instead of having to juggle multiple different spell slot progression paths that you’re progressing along in your different classes, you can just have one path that you advance along whenever you gain 1, 2, or 3 levels in an appropriate class.

Under this system, how would you even make a caster that sat between full and half? At what levels would you advance your spell slot progression?