Spell casters loosing caster levels is comp to ?

[Eman Resu]

If making a spell caster/manifester build of what ever class, a very popular beleif, and rightfully so, is to never sacrifice a level of spell caster. That is to not give up access to higher level spells for any reason, barring a rare (there must be some) few.

So with this in mind, when creating any non-caster build what would be the synonym, the comp? For martial builds is it BAB? hit points? feats?
For rogues is it skill pionts, high level class features, sneak attack d6's?

What would be the "dont loose this" for a gish (a partial martial & arcane spellcaster) or a martial/divine combo. Does it go back to get highest level spells ASAP! even with a gish, and the more levels of spellcaster you are the better? So the opposite would be true the least levels of any other the stronger you character, this would mean that any other class is simply a dilution, watering down the main strength of any pc and thats, spellcasting?

Ive always made pc's off of a "lifepath" and picked builds to suit his/her history...or its campaign specific, and classes are pre determined by DM. Ive played almost all classes, and I almost always multiclass, considering what levels of spell casting I have as a freak blessing of some sort.

Eman Resu

 

[Empirate]

Basically, the reason for the "don't lose caster levels" optimization commandment is that spellcasting scales so nicely with level. In fact (as has been stated time and again), spellcasters increase in power on a more or less geometric scale.

A second level spell isn't just a first level spell +1. It's something no first level spell can accomplish. You can't Glitterdust people or hide in a Rope Trick at 1st level. When, at 3rd/4th level, you suddenly can, that's a huge BUMP in power and versatility. Casters get this BUMP with every new spell level they obtain. Only rarely can anything else match this.

By comparison, noncasters mostly get "same, but a little better" stuff every level. A 3rd/4th level Rogue does more sneak attack, not a totally different, more powerful, and more versatile kind of sneak attack. Getting more sneak attack is good, obviously. It just doesn't give you any capability you didn't have before. Also, at your new level, the monsters you meet are bound to be tougher, so you need that extra SA die just to keep up.

For this reason, "don't lose SA dice" is not an optimization commandment. The same goes for BAB, saves, etc. I'd be hard pressed to come up with something similar for noncasters, in fact.

"Make sure you can always do your job, but don't lose too much versatility in concentrating on doing it" might be it. This may seem much, much more general than "don't lose spellcasting levels", but it really isn't. Because a level of spellcasting does exactly that.



BTW, the analogue with ToB classes would probably be "don't lose initiator levels". But even ToB maneuvers aren't so good that you wouldn't want to mix in some non-sublime class levels.

 

[Eman Resu]

Basically, the reason for the "don't lose caster levels" optimization commandment is that spellcasting scales so nicely with level. In fact (as has been stated time and again), spellcasters increase in power on a more or less geometric scale.

A second level spell isn't just a first level spell +1. It's something no first level spell can accomplish. You can't Glitterdust people or hide in a Rope Trick at 1st level. When, at 3rd/4th level, you suddenly can, that's a huge BUMP in power and versatility. Casters get this BUMP with every new spell level they obtain. Only rarely can anything else match this.

By comparison, noncasters mostly get "same, but a little better" stuff every level. A 3rd/4th level Rogue does more sneak attack, not a totally different, more powerful, and more versatile kind of sneak attack. Getting more sneak attack is good, obviously. It just doesn't give you any capability you didn't have before. Also, at your new level, the monsters you meet are bound to be tougher, so you need that extra SA die just to keep up.

For this reason, "don't lose SA dice" is not an optimization commandment. The same goes for BAB, saves, etc. I'd be hard pressed to come up with something similar for noncasters, in fact.

"Make sure you can always do your job, but don't lose too much versatility in concentrating on doing it" might be it. This may seem much, much more general than "don't lose spellcasting levels", but it really isn't. Because a level of spellcasting does exactly that.



BTW, the analogue with ToB classes would probably be "don't lose initiator levels". But even ToB maneuvers aren't so good that you wouldn't want to mix in some non-sublime class levels.

ToB ?
Part of this stems from a group perception, us old game geeks were making note of a trend amongst my gaming groups (2) younger participants. Some players will stick with what they know/love, and others will try new things, while still yet the powergamers will always be searching books for feat/class/attribute/magical combos to dominate game play, and this is the group beginning to swell in ranks. Its almost always spell casters/manefesters that dominate from 8th level on, rarely a multiclassed spellcaster. Only a few stubborn hold outs (myself until of recent included) will continue to play none spell casters thru to high level. But in recent games it was clear that the spellcasters ruled the group, their will be done, and the rest of us were there to fill in for role playing. 1 game got to 19th level and the party fighter, and the party rogue both commented how they felt like lap dogs after 15th level.

Maybe this is the reason for us retiring groups in the early twilight of double digits in level, 90% of the time? The comparative fun waves bye bye by then. And to be honest with you, the funnest/most entertaining/longest lasting campaigns weve had, have been with wizards/clerics/druids/sorcerers/warmages/psions eg "full" spellcasters, no more than 1/2 your levels. This created a lower magic campaign world, yes, but all classes flourished. Beguilers and Duskblades now stood out and were more viable/survivable. Only the bigbadevilguy was allowed to single class the spellcaster/manefester...and this made everything more challenging including monsters that you would typically mow over in other balanced campaigns, now were truly challenging. Maybe a suggestion for you to try...not that spellcasting is a problem, just something new for ya to give a whirl!

 

[Dandu]

ToB is short for Tome of Battle. It is a wuxia/shonen inspired book with warriors who use maneuvers, which are sort of like spells. It makes melee above level (whatever you find them to stop being fun) fun.

 

[Borthos]

Honestly, I love the martial classes because I can take a character concept (which I come up with waaaaayyyy too many...) and run with it. Most of my characters don't care much for magic because they've been around long enough to know that while magic reigns supreme, there will always be a need for skill with weapons, for any reason the person hiring you has.

Sometimes you want to be the guy jumping into melee and distracting people, sometimes you want to be the guy who runs into the biggest guy in the enemy territory and locks swords in a clash of titans, or whatever you want it to be. But, if you go melee, know that you won't "go nova" as it's called and hit for hundreds if not thousands of damage at one time, but you'll go home knowing you protected the party glass cannon and helped win the day. None of my characters have any illusions of grandeur where they're the most damage dealin-est, BBEG killin-est, mage outdoing-est, people out there but they know two things: The Wizard's middle name is always Squishy, and my personal motto in gaming, "If brute force doesn't work, Use more brute force."

But to answer your question, for a primary melee character, losing BAB is kind of painful, but not a game breaking loss. HP and anything relating to AC is, however, because your role in the party will be the tank or the distraction, and if you die a lot, you're not doing the party any favors.