Losing caster levels (or, spellcasters taking a level of non-spellcasting classes)

[Gnome Berzerker]

Everywhere you look, people suggest "don't lose caster levels" and "you're just weakening your character" when someone suggests a primary spellcaster take levels in a class that doesn't advance his/her spellcasting (either continuing with the class, or taking a PrC with "+1 Caster Level").


I'm wondering what advice I could get around here on the matter. I'm playing in a campaign where I know we won't be going epic, or even high level (I'd venture to guess level 12 would probably never happen).

I'm playing a Dwarven Cleric (of Haela Brightaxe, the deity of Luck and War in the FRCS). The prerequisites for getting into this Cleric PrC are all three "save boost" feats, plus Dodge.

Anyway, to make a long story short, I can qualify for this PrC 3 levels early by taking a level of Fighter (for the dodge feat).

Does anybody think losing that one caster level will really make a huge difference?

 

[hong]

Losing one or two caster levels is okay. Losing three caster levels starts to hurt. Losing four caster levels is usually never good, assuming your concept is that of a specialist spellcaster.

The effect tends be most marked at high levels, since that's when the disadvantages become most apparent: no top-level spells, lower caster level (for penetrating SR and resisting dispels), less damage per spell. Since you say you're unlikely to reach high levels, this would not be so important for you.

It also depends on what sort of multiclassed combo you're talking about. A fighter/cleric is actually pretty strong, since the cleric buffs complement the fighter BAB, HD and feats quite well. A fighter/wiz would be a different case.

To sum up, I'd go ahead and take that one fighter level.


[EDIT: Why is this a Meta thread?]