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

[Steampunkette]

You say this as if this was the only reason it got dumped as opposed to there being multiple reasons it got dumped in 4e.

Basic Melee Attack was it's own "At Will Power".

You can argue that spells having different levels for different classes was part of the reason Vancian Casting and literally every other class ability or combat function got a complete overhaul and revamp to fit a whole new design structure... It just wouldn't be a particularly compelling argument.

13th Age was designed by Jonathan Tweet (3e Lead Designer) and Rob Heinsoo (4e Lead Designer) to essentially be a spiritual hybrid of 3e and 4e D&D.

Like I said: Not 3e. It also capped out at 10th level and you only ever had 7-12 spell slots available with at most 3 levels of spells available. 6-9 if you were a Sorcerer because reasons.

They were developing a wildly different system to D&D and comparing the two is disingenuous. Even if former D&D Devs worked on it.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Fair. It does have an opening to create Dead Levels. Though the core idea is explicitly to fill those Dead Levels with something specific to the class, such as Bardic Performances or some kind of Cleric Rite or something similar. Just something to better differentiate the classes outside of their spellcasting.

The problem I see with that is that it creates a much more uneven progression.

Let's use the 5e bard as a baseline. Before adding extras to the new bard, it is on par with the bard at level 1 and level 2, but lags behind rather significantly at levels 3 and 4. This pattern repeats every 4 levels.

If you add more abilities at levels 3 and 4, to compensate for the new bard falling behind, then they could end up overpowered at levels 5 and 6 (when they would be on par with a bard, even without the extra features).

Additionally, it sounds like you might be intending to replace depth with breadth, which doesn't really work. You can't just have the bard do more stuff. That stuff should be on par with the spellcasting they would otherwise get. But you can't really do that in a balanced way because they're getting those spells soon anyway, just on a delay.

It doesn't really create more space for new abilities. If you wanted to do that, IMO, you would be better off making them a half caster. Then the bulk of the power in their kit could come from bardic performances (or whatever).

 

[Steampunkette]

The problem I see with that is that it creates a much more uneven progression.

Let's use the 5e bard as a baseline. Before adding extras to the new bard, it is on par with the bard at level 1 and level 2, but lags behind rather significantly at levels 3 and 4. This pattern repeats every 4 levels.

If you add more abilities at levels 3 and 4, to compensate for the new bard falling behind, then they could end up overpowered at levels 5 and 6 (when they would be on par with a bard, even without the extra features).

Additionally, it sounds like you might be intending to replace depth with breadth, which doesn't really work. You can't just have the bard do more stuff. That stuff should be on par with the spellcasting they would otherwise get. But you can't really do that in a balanced way because they're getting those spells soon anyway, just on a delay.

It doesn't really create more space for new abilities. If you wanted to do that, IMO, you would be better off making them a half caster. Then the bulk of the power in their kit could come from bardic performances (or whatever).

In your example: Without new abilities at 3/4, they still lag behind at 5th level when they gain 3rd level spells because they don't have 2nd level spells, either, so they cast their 3rd and 1st level spells while a Wizard is throwing 3rd and 2nd. It wouldn't "Repeat every 4 levels" it would just be a continuing weakness after 3rd level when you took something away from the class without giving them something back... which is just bad game design.

And yes... you could make them "Too Strong" at 5th level if you make their 3rd/4th level ability too strong... but that's because you didn't balance that level 3/4 ability against the loss of 2nd level spells, not because there's anything inherently bad or wrong with swapping out an increase of spellcasting availability for a separate class ability.

It's just a specific pitfall that any class design inherently has.

Making them Half-Casters also doesn't avoid these exact same pitfalls, either. "Let's just make them Half-Casters without changing anything else" will dramatically weaken the class, and making them Half-Casters and giving them too-strong class abilities to offset the loss will make them too strong at a given level.

As to replacing Depth with Breadth... The reverse, actually. At 2nd level a Bard can take buffs, debuffs, enchantments, damaging spells, control spells, illusions, divination, and communication spells. Instead of that Breadth of availability, they'd be getting a smaller number of more tailored class functions that would lean in on Buff/Debuff, Enchantment, and Illusion.

At least in my proposal.

 

[NotAYakk]

5e actually has these tiers, it just isn't in slot progression.

Tier 1: Full slot progression, features that give you more known spells and slots.
Tier 2: Full slot progression, fewer known spells and slot boosting features.
Tier 3: Half slot progression.
Tier 4: 1/3 slot progression.

Wizards with arcane recovery, ability to learn any number of spells into their spellbooks, and casting stat+level spells prepared, are an example of Tier 1.

Arcane recovery means that a wizard gets an extra (level/2) slots per long rest.

Druids and Clerics do not get arcane recovery. They prepare off the entire druid spell list. The circle of the land gets an arcane recovery rough equivalent.

Bards are known spell casters, as are sorcerers. Bards have no bonus way to get more slots. Sorcerers have fewer spells known than even Bards, but get metamagic that grants a few more bonus slot levels than Arcane Recovery does per day.

In Tasha's, Clerics gained the ability to convert unused channel divinities into roughly as many slots as Arcane Recovery grants.

Bards are clearly T2 (while they get arcane secrets, they have fewer slots and fixed spells known). Sorcerers might be T2 due to their extreme shortage of spells known; metamagic slot recovery isn't much better than arcane recovery. Druids are T2 compared to clerics/wizards as they get no more spells prepared and no slot recovery mechanism.

Wizards T1 status depends on finding spells being relatively easy. Clerics, post-tashas, are the clearest T1, as they are a prepared whole-list spellcaster with decent slot recovery.

Which gives us the following spellcaster tiers:

T1: Wizard/Cleric/Druid(Land)
T2: Druid/Bard/Sorcerer
T3: Artificer/Paladin/Ranger
T4: EK/AT
with regards to "how many spell slots and how many spells".

 

[tetrasodium]

The 6th-9th level spells and slots tend to have easier ability to warp campaigns.

In a whiteroom sure... Otherwise..

• If a given spell is on the class list
  • If that spell is known, prepared, or scribed and prepared
    • and a situation presents itself where the gm intentionally or inadvertently creates a job for aquaman

You can see a clear example of this in Descent into avernus wherethe party enters avernus without the need for a 13th level wizard warlock sorcerer druid or cleric to cast the seventh level planeshift spell with it's macguffin grade component in order to enter or exit avernus.

 

[Aldarc]

Basic Melee Attack was it's own "At Will Power".

You can argue that spells having different levels for different classes was part of the reason Vancian Casting and literally every other class ability or combat function got a complete overhaul and revamp to fit a whole new design structure... It just wouldn't be a particularly compelling argument.

This is a non sequitur to my point though about how there can be multiple reasons than your asserted one for why the 3e spell system was abandoned in 4e, isn't it?

Like I said: Not 3e. It also capped out at 10th level and you only ever had 7-12 spell slots available with at most 3 levels of spells available. 6-9 if you were a Sorcerer because reasons.

They were developing a wildly different system to D&D and comparing the two is disingenuous. Even if former D&D Devs worked on it.

Comparing the two is not disingenuous, @Steampunkette, just because you find the comparison inconvenient. It was based on the OGL. There is a section in the book that talks about how it compares to 3e and 4e. The idea that comparing 13th Age to 3e is somehow disingenuous is absurd.

 

[Steampunkette]

This is a non sequitur to my point though about how there can be multiple reasons than your asserted one for why the 3e spell system was abandoned in 4e, isn't it?

Your statement implied that the spell level shifting between classes was one of the reasons. In that context it is not a nonsequitor, but a rebuttal to that point so broad it encapsulates every possible aspect of everything that was changed.

Comparing the two is not disingenuous, @Steampunkette, just because you find the comparison inconvenient. It was based on the OGL. There is a section in the book that talks about how it compares to 3e and 4e. The idea that comparing 13th Age to 3e is somehow disingenuous is absurd.

Trying to create REASONS for 13th Age to change from the 3e Kinda-Vancian System to their own Quasi-Vancian system and blame it on spells being different levels for different classes is the disingenuous bit.

Particularly since you reference one of the 4e Designers who -already- completely revamped D&D once in a way that, as previously noted, is so broadly changed that nearly any explanation under the sun can be invented to fit within a guess at motivation.

Rob Heinsoo decided Vancian Casting was so terrible (With it's class-different-spell-lists) that he created a wholly new system wherein everyone gets their own unique spell list and then hated that SO BADLY he worked with Jonathon Tweet to walk back his design choices in creating -another- new system which took "The best of both systems".

By capping the levels at 1/2 (1/3rd for 4e standard) the normal range, savagely curtailing available spell slots, and then sticking with the at-will/daily/recharge theme...

It's incredibly different from 3e. Being that it learned lessons from 3.5e and 4e before trying something else wildly different. Trying to use it as an example of why the different classes no longer get the same spells at different levels is... once more...

Okay. Maybe disingenuous is a bit harsh, since it implies that you're not being sincere.

Let's go with "Misguided", instead.

 

[NotAYakk]

In a whiteroom sure... Otherwise..

• If a given spell is on the class list
  • If that spell is known, prepared, or scribed andprepared
    • and a situation presents itself where the gm intentionally or inadvertently creates a job for aquaman

You can see a clear example of this in Descent into avernus wherethe party enters avernus without the need for a 13th level wizard warlock sorcerer druid or cleric to cast the seventh level planeshift spell with it's macguffin grade component in order to enter or exit avernus.

The point of level 6-9 spells warping campaigns is that the DM doesn't anticipate it.

Like, a game where the players are trapped in another plane, with an entire plot on how to get back home.

If any PC has planeshift (or even banishment), they can get back home. The campaign's plot is derailed.

Many 6-9th level spells have this capability:
6th level spells: Contingency, Find the Path, Forbiddance, Globe of Invulnerability, Guards and Wards, Harm, Hero's Feast, Magic Jar, Mass Suggestion, Word of Recall, True Seeing, Transport via Plants, Mass Suggestion, Soul Cage.
7th level spells: Etherealness, Forcecage, Magnificent Mansion, Plane Shift, Simulacrum, Teleport, Symbol, Sequester, Mirage Arcane
8th level spells: Animal Shapes, Antimagic Field, Clone, Control Weather, Demiplane, Dominate Monster, Mind Blank
9th level spells: Astral Projection, Gate, Imprisonment, Shapechange, True Polymorph, True Resurrection, Wish

Some of these are more niche than others, this list is not complete, but they are all the kind of thing that could derail entire plots in relatively unexpected directions.

 

[Aldarc]

Your statement implied that the spell level shifting between classes was one of the reasons. In that context it is not a nonsequitor, but a rebuttal to that point so broad it encapsulates every possible aspect of everything that was changed.

Trying to create REASONS for 13th Age to change from the 3e Kinda-Vancian System to their own Quasi-Vancian system and blame it on spells being different levels for different classes is the disingenuous bit.

Particularly since you reference one of the 4e Designers who -already- completely revamped D&D once in a way that, as previously noted, is so broadly changed that nearly any explanation under the sun can be invented to fit within a guess at motivation.

Rob Heinsoo decided Vancian Casting was so terrible (With it's class-different-spell-lists) that he created a wholly new system wherein everyone gets their own unique spell list and then hated that SO BADLY he worked with Jonathon Tweet to walk back his design choices in creating -another- new system which took "The best of both systems".

By capping the levels at 1/2 (1/3rd for 4e standard) the normal range, savagely curtailing available spell slots, and then sticking with the at-will/daily/recharge theme...

It's incredibly different from 3e. Being that it learned lessons from 3.5e and 4e before trying something else wildly different. Trying to use it as an example of why the different classes no longer get the same spells at different levels is... once more...

Okay. Maybe disingenuous is a bit harsh, since it implies that you're not being sincere.

Let's go with "Misguided", instead.

You know what, @Steampunkette ? I don't care anymore. I have better things to do than to argue with someone who needs to be right.

 

[tetrasodium]

The point of level 6-9 spells warping campaigns is that the DM doesn't anticipate it.

Like, a game where the players are trapped in another plane, with an entire plot on how to get back home.

If any PC has planeshift (or even banishment), they can get back home. The campaign's plot is derailed.

Many 6-9th level spells have this capability:
6th level spells: Contingency, Find the Path, Forbiddance, Globe of Invulnerability, Guards and Wards, Harm, Hero's Feast, Magic Jar, Mass Suggestion, Word of Recall, True Seeing, Transport via Plants, Mass Suggestion, Soul Cage.
7th level spells: Etherealness, Forcecage, Magnificent Mansion, Plane Shift, Simulacrum, Teleport, Symbol, Sequester, Mirage Arcane
8th level spells: Animal Shapes, Antimagic Field, Clone, Control Weather, Demiplane, Dominate Monster, Mind Blank
9th level spells: Astral Projection, Gate, Imprisonment, Shapechange, True Polymorph, True Resurrection, Wish

Some of these are more niche than others, this list is not complete, but they are all the kind of thing that could derail entire plots in relatively unexpected directions.

If your players are willing to take spells in order to nope out of the campaign it says more about the GM's lack of awareness than the spells themselves. "find your way home" is simply not a suitable challenge for a party of level 11-20 PCs. The other spells you list still boil down to the lack of slot progression and the need to have the right one prepared at the right time when the right situation comes up. Actual gameplay just doesn't play out like the contrived forewarned with PC's built to suit whiteroom situations wotc overweighs for so much of high level 5e.