Why not stacking caster levels?

[Draugin]

Anyone can tell me why they didn't make caster levels stack in 3.5?
I mean, not as a house rule, but as a part of the system and SRD (like BAB, as someone pointed out).
It's simple, it's easy.
There would be no need of a mystic theurge abomination or other metaclasses to fix multiclass spellcasters weaknesses.
You'd stack caster levels only for determining spell effects and item creation, because the number of spells known/spells per day is a class feature based on class level.

If you feel that this could lead to some abuses, you could rule that divine caster levels don't stack with arcane ones. Even so, this would give some interest to suboptimal class combinations such as bard/wizard (a mage who studies recitation?) or even sorcerer/wizard.
I don't think this could lead to abuses because you lose access to high level spells, and many spells have a cap. So a 10th/10th wizard/bard would not cast as a 20th wizard, but at least he would have some chances to break SR.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

No idea why they didn't -- maybe the concept was too radical.

I think it would be a better fix (so long as it ONLY affected effective caster level-type stuff) than some of the PrC silliness, but I may not see the full pciture.

 

[kengar]

I think it's to keep Divine and Arcane Magic distinct. Why would your Wizard spells be more powerful if you'd abandoned your arcane studies and become a priest?

 

[sithramir]

hmm

Cleric/arcane caster makes no sense as the cleric spells are just granted by your god so for defeating SR if you are casting a typical fireball while also being clerical you only have knowledge equivalent of the level of mage you are because the rest was wasted kissing your gods butt.

Bard/wizard and sorc/wizard wouldn't work because bard is essentially a sorcerer which means his spells come to him "naturally" and he's not the typical studying out of a spellbook so even though the spellls are the same (because having 2 different settings for them would be stupid) they are ideally supposed to be different even though affects are the same.

Maybe bard/sorcerer could work for this but thats about it

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So, Rogue`s BAB and Barbarians BAB shouldn`t stack?

A Rogue fights stealthy, sneaking behind his enemy and attacking exactly in his weakest moment, while a Barbarian just howls his battle hymn and charges into combat, hacking and slashing anything to pieces that didn`t get up the next tree in time...

Or, counterarguments for you:
Why shouldn`t wizard and clerics caster levels not stack? Sure, while gaining wizard levels, the cleric was unable to concentrate on his gods power and his belief, but he didn`t waste the god`s precious power for wonders and miracles, instead gaining some power on its own, to be a better worshipper - so, when he tries to overcomes spell resistance, his wizard training helps a lot, but the god, knowing he has a trusty servant, does also bestow a bit of his power to break the defenses.

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[Steverooo]

Arcana Unearthed

This is exactly what I understand Monte Cook is doing... Levels stack, regardless of class; there is only one Magic.

 

[Draugin]

Cleric/arcane caster makes no sense as the cleric spells are just granted by your god so for defeating SR if you are casting a typical fireball while also being clerical you only have knowledge equivalent of the level of mage you are because the rest was wasted kissing your gods butt.

This could seem a reason, but the deity could choose to help you with extra power, or maybe you are truly a mystic theurge or whatever it is (and without the need of a useless PrC).
There are many metagaming explanations that could be found easily. Many D&D rules rely heavily on metagaming explanations (such as "why can't wizards cast healing spells?") so I don't feel bad adding one. One that I think it's better than some PrC patches.

Bard/wizard and sorc/wizard wouldn't work because bard is essentially a sorcerer which means his spells come to him "naturally" and he's not the typical studying out of a spellbook so even though the spellls are the same (because having 2 different settings for them would be stupid) they are ideally supposed to be different even though affects are the same.
Maybe bard/sorcerer could work for this but thats about it [/B]

I completely disagree. A sorcerer/wizard could be a natural talent who decides to start learning magic to channel it more efficiently. A bard/wizard could be a mage who's found a new way to cast spells with music, and so on.
Yes, I know that you can make for each option a nice prestige class, but why do you have to do it if the system could permit it with only this "little" change? It would be more efficient and smoother.

 

[Draugin]

Re: Arcana Unearthed

This is exactly what I understand Monte Cook is doing... Levels stack, regardless of class; there is only one Magic.

Great Monte. I think I'll mix and match 3.5 and Arcana Unearthed stuff. So sad they didn't put him and the other original designers into the revision team (and I don't know why).

 

[Umbran]

This idea makes sense if there's only one "magic", and only one table for how many spells you can cast in a day. It's easy, but it lumps all spellcasters together - a paladin and bard cast spells as well as a wizard). If you want to maintian some differences (so that you can balance superior melee performance against spell use, for example) keeping differences makes some sense.

 

[Draugin]

This idea makes sense if there's only one "magic", and only one table for how many spells you can cast in a day. It's easy, but it lumps all spellcasters together - a paladin and bard cast spells as well as a wizard). If you want to maintian some differences (so that you can balance superior melee performance against spell use, for example) keeping differences makes some sense.

I do not understand. Why this could make sense only if there were a single table for spells? I said that stacked caster levels wouldn't increase your spells known/spells per day.
A 4th level wizard/4th level cleric would cast as many spell as with the current rules. But for the purpose of determining dispel magic, dice damage etc. he would be considered as a 8th level caster. Consider he's losing a lot of powerful high level spells, and consider that the Mystic Theurge is official (unless they delete it from the book of reality), so there is no point in "arcane and divine magic are different".
But if you don't like the idea of stacking divine and arcane, I suggest to keep them separated, and it remains a good rule.