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

[tetrasodium]

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.

that 7:5 no not always & looking at the high end complicates things with class defining spells that were not shared around on every spell list. Back in 3.5 bard was a 2/3 caster to the 1:1 full caster wizard. at level 8 bard got 3rd level spells including an amazing version of glibness. That came alongside some first second third & 4th level wizard/cleric/druid spells. Some like speak with animals, & see invis the bard was getting later than others, other spells like scrying, remove curse, lesser geas, & others the bard was getting earlier. The full half & 2/3 caster split got more involved in exciting ways for the party though & those get into your other points IMO. Sometimes a level 7 cleric spell might be comparable to a 5th level bard spell, but the bard should also be getting solid class/archetype abilities so a level 3 ceric spell might be comperable to a level 3 bard spell instead

ins

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.

Instead of looking at an almost never cast spell that was sor/wiz9 & now more, the old cats grace & bull's strength are much better & more nuanced examples of spells that would have an impact in what should be a sizable plurality if not outright majority. As full casters sor/wiz/cleric/druid would get them at level 3 while the fractional casting paladin & ranger got them at level 10. That would free up the full caster from needing to cast them in groups still casting it in addition to allowing those classes to self cast it in groups where a full caster couldn't usually justify devoting that many slots to those spells.

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.

It adds up over the course of a campaign though.

• Level 4: full caster=4 casting levels progression. 3/4 caster only 3 levels.
• Level5 : 3/4 caster=4 casting levels progression.
• Level 8: full caster=8 casting levels progression. 3/4 caster only 6 levels.
• Level 10: 3/4 caster=8 casting levels progression.
• Level 12: full caster=12 casting levels progression. 3/4 caster only 9 levels.
• Level 15: 3/4 caster=12 casting levels progression.

That has sizable impacts on available spell slots as well as what levels spells are gained

 

[Zio_the_dark]

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?

Probably a bit like 3rd edition BAB for cleric, rogues etc... progress 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 4 levels.

 

[Charlaquin]

Probably a bit like 3rd edition BAB for cleric, rogues etc... progress 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 4 levels.

Yeah, I guess so. Just seems a bit awkward to me, which I imagine is why it isn’t at thing in 5e, even though it might have been a good fit for the bard and/or the artificer.

 

[Ancalagon]

there used to be 2/3 casters... (and as @Charlaquin pointed out, the EK and others are 1/3 casters, not 1/4). So perhaps 2/3 caster with good cantrips (since most of the half casters don't have them for, uh, reasons) would do?

 

[DeviousQuail]

I designed a "half-full" caster as a variant of the sorcerer. It's certainly more than a half caster but less than a full caster. Class and subclass features are the same for all levels. Spell slot progression is normal from 1 to 10. From 11 onwards the class gets no more spell slots. However, at each level from 11 on up the sorcerer can choose two spells they know to permanently get the benefits of one metamagic feature without the sorcery point cost.

Sorcerer aside, a 2/3 caster could be built along the lines of full progression to 10 and then some kind of augmentations/other features from 11 to 20.

 

[Steampunkette]

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?

For my suggestion:
Sorc/War/Wiz: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17
Cler/Dru: 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 15, 17
Bard: 1, 5, 11, 15, 17

And then things like Arcane Tricksters and Eldritch Knights would be unchanged. Rather than ever getting high tier magic, they're stuck gaining low-tier magic at higher levels.

So instead of getting Spells at 5th level or 13th level, the Cleric and Druid would get some special class feature. Meanwhile the Bard would gain cool stuff at 3, 7, 9, and 13 which better define their class.

Though it'd also be kinda cool to see a setup where slots phase out based on level... Where Cantrips are the bread n' butter of caster types but rather than just gaining more and more slots for the day, you lose lower-level slots as you gain higher levels and wind up with the same 10-12 spell slots for your entire career, but they're just higher and higher level.

So at level 1 you'd only have 1st level stuff, still, but by level 7 or 9 you no longer have any first level spell slots, and it just progresses like that so you wind up with a "Band" of 3-4 spell levels you're able to cast. You can still -use- lower-level spells, of course. Things like Knock or whatever. But they fade in usefulness and importance and become rituals or invocations that you always have access to, or something.

Like... you can still upcast stuff, like Fireball or whatever, if you know it and/or have it in your spellbook by casting it -from- the spellbook... But you no longer memorize them or cast them at their lowest-level using slots. Which would only work on specific ultility magics rather than being a blanket "All low level magic" thing, hence the ritual/noncombat suggestion.

 

[Li Shenron]

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?

Well there is also no 1/4 caster in the game, and there is no 2/3 caster or 4/5 caster...

Except that there ARE all those kinds of proportions if you want, just allow multiclassing and you can more of less have them all.

 

[Aldarc]

Well there is also no 1/4 caster in the game, and there is no 2/3 caster or 4/5 caster...

Except that there ARE all those kinds of proportions if you want, just allow multiclassing and you can more of less have them all.

This correction has already been made.

 

[Li Shenron]

This correction has already been made.

Those archetypes definitely aren't 1/4 casters, as they cast spells up to 4th level, they are between 1/3 and 1/2, but it doesn't really matter.

 

[cbwjm]

A 3/4 caster would only miss out on 9th level spells, I've felt that a 2/3 caster would fit well in the game and top out at 7th level spells, I actually have a spreadsheet somewhere with the spell progression. I'd have probably preferred the bard on a 2/3 spell casting track with more class features over making them a full caster.