|
In my experience, 4th level spells start to get powerful. I would see the OP's suggestion as possible but mathematically more complicated. However, if the player insists on multiclassing, this is already an accepted point.
Having an improved caster level for other spellcasting classes makes sense to me. I would not give the character any ability to cast higher-level spells than the current rules, though. There still has to be some drawback (higher spell levels) for the versatility and number of spells possible with multiclassing.
I also would not have the character improve in caster level for taking levels in rogue, for example. The PC may be using his old talents to continue adventuring, but his focus of study has shifted away from spellcasting. The benefits of that study are the new class abilities (and hit die, skill points, etc.), and don't need to also include abilities of the caster class.
I had a thought for the issue of a 12th level fighter taking a level of wizard and suddenly casting spells as a 7th level caster. It's a bit more work to keep track of, but what about only counting other classes as 1/2 level for levels taken AFTER you have a spellcasting class. This will still let a 12th Ftr/1 Wiz cast spells as a 7th level wizard, but only if you take your 1st level as wizard.
If you take wizard at level 13, you're a 1st level caster - if you then add 6 more fighter levels, you're a 4th level caster.
Thoughts?
No, no, a thousand times no. Let's look at some of the glaring flaws in this proposal.
1: Needless complexity. My biggest complaint with this multiclassing proposal is already that it's too complicated. I run a lot of games for players who don't know their rules very well, maybe have never read the rules, and I want character stuff to be as easy to explain as possible. Simplicity doesn't override balance or fun, but it's important. Your proposal adds an extra step to the CL-calculating process, one which the OP already complicates. Boo.
2: Subverts reverse-engineering. As often as possible, design should make characters reverse engineerable. That is, all that should matter is what they are now, not what they were at every intermediate stage. D&D doesn't have perfect reverse engineerability, but it comes close. There's no reason for some Fighter12/Wizard1 characters to be randomly worse than others, and many reasons not to. Making NPCs, playing NPCs from published adventures, and reconstructing PCs when a character sheet goes missing are all way easier If I don't need to ask what levels you got when.
3: Solves a non-problem. I know you don't like the idea of a fighter suddenly becoming a powerful caster, but two points. First, remember how the CR system works. Every 2 levels you fight an EL which potentially includes fighting twice the same thing you used to fight two levels ago. This means that every 2 levels a D&D character is supposed to *double* his power, and adding 1 level should increase it roughly half again. Does getting a few first-level spells make a fighter 50% stronger? Flavor-wise, look at the first-level spells. There's nothing there inappropriate for a newly minted mage. That fighter probably isn't using Magic Missile anyway, so all giving him the caster level does is give his spells reasonable duration and make them not get auto-dispelled.
I don't mean to lay into your personally; it's just that this proposal is a good example of problems that I see a lot, and have been meaning to address. There are a lot of proposed "fixes" here that don't follow the rules of good game design, and their proliferation can make it hard to get anything done.
EDIT: As to the OPs proposal, sure. I'm ambivalent about the proposal. It helps multiclassed casters, which is a step in the right direction, but it does it in a complicated way. It's fine as a house rule, but may not belong in the published set, because it adds complexity while not going far enough to make multiclassed casters actually attractive. Honestly you could just run with Caster Level = Character Level and have no issues.
|
|
The rule being outlined here is simple, elegant, and, unfortunately, far too easy to abuse, in my opinion. Think of it this way: if I can take levels in other classes and get free spellcasting to go with them, I'll give every rogue a level of wizard from now on, and every fighter a level of cleric or sorcerer. The world will be full of cleric 2/fighter 18 characters, and wizard 2/rogue 18s. The -1 to BAB doesn't come close to steering me away from all that free spellcasting. No one WON'T have a level of spellcasting. That would work for a highly-magical homebrew world, but it goes against the basic model of D&D.
Overall, there are a lot of existing PrC's that give multiclass caster options. Some of them are quite lame (bladesinger and spellsword should give 7/10, not 5/10 for example) -- I won't argue that -- but some of them do exactly what they're intended to do (mystic theurge). OK, maybe eldrtich knight needs a boost in HD, too, but overall, the system in place works OK.
The way we've always played PrCs that skip a level here and there when acquiring new spells is that your caster level with the spells you've already got still increase on those "off levels".That probably works quite well as a houserule -- I like the idea -- but officially, on levels with no increase listed you get no new spells and no free bump to caster level, either.
P.S.: The prestige bard is in the system reference document. The prestige ranger and prestige paladin are worth a look as well.
By "All that free spellcasting", you do know you're only talking about 4 0 level spells and 2 1st level spells (plus 1 Domain spell) that the Fighter 18 / Cleric 2 you mentioned can cast, right? And the Rogue 18 / Wizard 2 can cast only the spells that a 2nd level Wizard gets. Yeah, they can cast those pitiful few spells as if they were a level 11 caster instead of level 2, but why is that so game breaking for 20th level characters?
I think you may be confusing Caster Level with getting new spells known, as seen in many PrCs. That isn't what we are talking about. We are only saying that your effective caster level with the spells you can already cast goes up a bit, but you do NOT get new spells known unless you take the caster class.
And I too don't like the "only increase after taking the level", for all the reasons given. We need to keep it simple.
|
No. Just no.
BAB is a common theme amongst the classes because it represents your ability to target something, whether through martial skills ala Fighter, or aiming as a Wizard. It represents your ability to get past the opponent's defenses, something all classes share. Allowing all classes to have some multi-class caster capability is not needed, nor desired. Like other posters have said, there would be no reason NOT to have one level of caster, especially with the experience penalties gone.
A nice suggestion, but bad in execution.
No. Just no.
BAB is a common theme amongst the classes because it represents your ability to target something, whether through martial skills ala Fighter, or aiming as a Wizard. It represents your ability to get past the opponent's defenses, something all classes share. Allowing all classes to have some multi-class caster capability is not needed, nor desired. Like other posters have said, there would be no reason NOT to have one level of caster, especially with the experience penalties gone.
A nice suggestion, but bad in execution.
I suggest you read the suggestion again, bearing in mind that caster level here really just means caster level, not spell progression.
I don't seem to understand the need for multiclass bonuses of any sort. Maybe I'm old fasioned, but spellcasting levels should increase caster level, not non-spellcasting levels. Taking levels of Fighter gives a better BAB progression and bonus feats, taking levels of Wizard give higher caster level, higher level of spells and more spells per day. Is it that some people want everything? They should play gestalt characters.
I understand that it is just caster level increases, not spells per day or access to higher level spells, but when you multiclass you are making a choice of one class or another. If a Wizard has levels of Fighter should he get extra fighter bonus feats for levels of Wizard? If not, then a character shouldn't get Wizard bonuses for levels of Fighter. You pick one or the other. A pure caster should be better than a half-caster at magic and a pure fighter should be better than a half-fighter at fighting.
Stacking class features is the realm of feats, such as Practised Spellcaster or the Oulaw one that stacks Rogue and Swashbuckler. There are several that stack Monk levels with divine and arcane spellcaster levels. They shouldn't be standard rules for everyone. And there should be some sort of cost to stacking class features, such as a feat with some pre-reqs.
-Jack
|
|
I suggest you read the suggestion again, bearing in mind that caster level here really just means caster level, not spell progression.No. Just no.
BAB is a common theme amongst the classes because it represents your ability to target something, whether through martial skills ala Fighter, or aiming as a Wizard. It represents your ability to get past the opponent's defenses, something all classes share. Allowing all classes to have some multi-class caster capability is not needed, nor desired. Like other posters have said, there would be no reason NOT to have one level of caster, especially with the experience penalties gone.
A nice suggestion, but bad in execution.
I took another quick look, and see where I misread. I saw another reply alluding to multiclassing an (example) Wizard 2/Rogue 18 and having level 6 spells, but I guess that was just another suggestion.
Even if it was just caster levels, I would say that it should still be left to the purview of other caster classes and prestige classes to provide bonus caster levels. Even if you wanted to give a Fighter that ability (which I disagree with, you're no longer training as a wizard when you take that class level), it should be less than 1/2 progression, since that is what some prestiges related to spellcasting get.
I think you may be confusing Caster Level with getting new spells known, as seen in many PrCs. That isn't what we are talking about. We are only saying that your effective caster level with the spells you can already cast goes up a bit, but you do NOT get new spells known unless you take the caster class.
(perks up)Good!!! I had indeed misunderstood, and you've allayed my concerns. I had thought the original point was to get free spell progression as part of your other class advancement: more spells/day, higher level spells, etc. That's what I was against. On the other hand, if all you want to do is give caster level (CL only, not actual spellcasting) a bump every so many cross-class levels, I'm entirely in favor.
|
By "All that free spellcasting", you do know you're only talking about 4 0 level spells and 2 1st level spells (plus 1 Domain spell) that the Fighter 18 / Cleric 2 you mentioned can cast, right? And the Rogue 18 / Wizard 2 can cast only the spells that a 2nd level Wizard gets. Yeah, they can cast those pitiful few spells as if they were a level 11 caster instead of level 2, but why is that...
giving a monk the ability to cast mage armor for one hour due to a 1 level dip into wizard is ok but under the system presented here that would be mage armor for 11 hours which might as well be all day. low level spells can be very versatile especialy if they last a long time; sticking with the monk consider chill touch (lasting 11 rounds) shield, cure light wounds, magic weapon, etc. sure there not game breaking but what about a fighter who takes a level in wizard for true strike just think of the potential damage he could dish out with power attack and great cleave. And just to take this thread into the non SRD classes by selecting warlock 1/fighter 19 would have a 6d6 ranged touch attack at will!
Even if you wanted to give a Fighter that ability (which I disagree with, you're no longer training as a wizard when you take that class level), it should be less than 1/2 progression, since that is what some prestiges related to spellcasting get.
One of the stated goals of Pathfinder design is reducing the need for prestige classes.
giving a monk the ability to cast mage armor for one hour due to a 1 level dip into wizard is ok but under the system presented here that would be mage armor for 11 hours which might as well be all day. low level spells can be very versatile especialy if they last a long time; sticking with the monk consider chill touch (lasting 11 rounds) shield, cure light wounds, magic weapon, etc. sure there not game breaking but what about a fighter who takes a level in wizard for true strike just think of the potential damage he could dish out with power attack and great cleave. And just to take this thread into the non SRD classes by selecting warlock 1/fighter 19 would have a 6d6 ranged touch attack at will!
A 6d6 Ranged Touch deals 21 damage. Nothing you fight at level 20 cares. Plus, anythign with SR will still be immune because the caster level is still mad low.
Mage Armor, while nice, doesn't stack with the Bracers of Armor that a level 20 monk should be toting. Chill Touch IIRC does cold damage, which everyone and thier mother will avoid with cold resistance or spell resistance. And you'd be giving up monk progression, in this specific case DR. Cure Light Wounds? are you kidding me?
Seriously, people, *think* about what level 20 play is like before you post level 20 examples.
I took another quick look, and see where I misread. I saw another reply alluding to multiclassing an (example) Wizard 2/Rogue 18 and having level 6 spells, but I guess that was just another suggestion.
That was for my post, and I was mistaken--mostly because it been a while since I've read the BoNS. Sorry about that.
A monk with a one-level dip casting a long-lasting mage armor on himself is no more a problem than the full-casting party wizard casting a long-lasting mage armor on the monk.
A monk with a one-level dip casting a long-lasting mage armor on himself is no more a problem than the full-casting party wizard casting a long-lasting mage armor on the monk.
Mage Armor is a personal range spell. It cannot be cast on someone else.
-Jack
One of the stated goals of Pathfinder design is reducing the need for prestige classes.
Not to be a jerk but reducing does not mean eliminate. I think that the PrCs of Mystic Theurge and some sort of Martial/caster should exist, and be PrCs not be something that is fixed by some odd mechanic.
Practiced Spellcaster anyone? Or something akin to it. I see no reason to make multi-classing casters gain spell caster levels while they are taking fighter levels.
Heck, if I have a 19th level fighter, 1st level sorcerer my 1 level of sorcerer grants me the ability to cast as long as a 7th level sorcerer with this model.
Heck why not! I'll just take 1 level of cleric, and 1 level of arcane and cast as with a duration of 7th level cleric and 7th level arcanist with my 18th level fighter.
Woooo mystic-headbashing-theurge here I come!
|
|
Not to be a jerk but reducing does not mean eliminate. I think that the PrCs of Mystic Theurge and some sort of Martial/caster should exist, and be PrCs not be something that is fixed by some odd mechanic.
One of the stated goals of Pathfinder design is reducing the need for prestige classes.
This idea in no way eliminates the usefulness or power of a Mystic Theurge, though. The massive benefit of that class is gaining new spells known for both an arcane and divine class at the same time.
Let's examine the 2 characters, each 16th level:
Character A: Wizard 3 / Cleric 3 / Mystic Theurge 10
This guy has the spell lists of a Wizard 13 /Cleric 13, and casts the spells at either 13th level (3.5 rules) or 14th level (these rules). However, he only has the special bonus Pathfinder abilities these classes now get at 3rd level each.
Character B: Wizard 8 / Cleric 8
This guy has the spell lists of only a Wizard 8 / Cleric 8, 5 full levels lower in each class than the Theurge. He casts those spells at either 8th level (3.5) or 12th level (these rules), either way it is still lower than the Theurge. The only benefit he gets is that his special Wizard and Cleric abilities are at 8th level each instead of 3rd, meaning his turning undead, Specialty powers, bloodlines, whatever are a little stronger than the Theurge's. But IMO that still doesn't make up for a total of 10 levels worth of spells gained and 2 levels of ACL and DCL that the Theurge gets in return.
IMO, it is no contest, the Theurge is still far better, and this change only narrows the CL gap somewhat. It certainly doesn't replace the PrC or equal it in power at all.
Mage Armor is a personal range spell. It cannot be cast on someone else.
-Jack
Sorry but I think you are wrong Jack. Check it here
Be creative
|
|
Practiced Spellcaster anyone? Or something akin to it. I see no reason to make multi-classing casters gain spell caster levels while they are taking fighter levels.
Heck, if I have a 19th level fighter, 1st level sorcerer my 1 level of sorcerer grants me the ability to cast as long as a 7th level sorcerer with this model.
Heck why not! I'll just take 1 level of cleric, and 1 level of arcane and cast as with a duration of 7th level cleric and 7th level arcanist with my 18th level fighter.
Woooo mystic-headbashing-theurge here I come!
First, Practiced Spellcaster was already mentioned. This just helps it along so you don't need to take that feat so many times (literally every single Feat you get, barring bonus feats)
Second, your math is wrong... your ACL for a 19/1 split would be 9, not 7, under the revised, simplified version we are now discussing.
And as was said before, So What??? You will be able to cast a couple 1st level spells at less than half your character level, and oh yeah, better take off your armor unless you want a major chance to botch one of your 3 spells for the day!
And wow, I bet those 3 1st level spells, as if cast by a 9th level character, will REALLY put the fear o' god into the foes you are fighting at 20th level!
A monk with a one-level dip casting a long-lasting mage armor on himself is no more a problem than the full-casting party wizard casting a long-lasting mage armor on the monk.Mage Armor is a personal range spell. It cannot be cast on someone else.
-Jack
The range of mage armor is given as "Touch" with a target of "Creature touched" in the D&D 3e Player's Handbook, the 3e SRD, the D&D 3.5 Player's Handbook, and the 3.5 SRD. Its AD&D 1e predecessor, armor, in Unearthed Arcana, has a range of "Touch" and an Area of Effect of "One creature". In the AD&D 2nd edition Player's Handbook, armor similarly has a range of "Touch" and an Area of Effect of "1 creature".
Perhaps you are confusing it with shield, which is a "personal range" spell or equivalent in every incarnation of D&D since Supplement I: Greyhawk was published?
One possible reason I can think of for allowing non-spellcasting classes to increase CL for multi-classed characters is that even as a Fighter/Wizard, the character is still using magic, still casting spells.
Unless you're actively restricting multi-class spellcasters from using the abilities of their old class, then there's no reason that they wouldn't still get some benefit from that class. Just because a single classed fighter isn't going to spend any time trying to understand spells doesn't hold for a fighter/wizard, who needs to spend some time each day dealing with his spellcasting.
For a barely connected real-world example, if I devote 2 years to learning to paint metal minis, and then start devoting 8 months out of a year to video games, those remaining 4 months that I'm spending painting are still going to enable me to increase my skill at that hobby.
I had an idea for a system that enabled multi-class characters to have a single class ability from a non improving class improve with levels in the new class (i.e. wizard taking fighter levels choosing to have his spellcasting or bonus feats increase by one wizard levelevery 2-3 fighter levels), but it's something that's far too complex to easily fit within the intent of the Pathfinder RPG.
So, a Wizard 6/ Cleric 4/ Rogue 3 has an ACL (Arcane Caster Level) of 9 (6+2+1) and a DCL (Divine Caster Level) of 8 (3+4+1).
I've house ruled something like this since nearly the beginning of 3rd edition.
My math worked a bit differently as I tried to keep it simple. I assumed that all spell casting is essentially the same and in a world of vast magic (and magic drawing on growing potential with levels) that casting proficiency can go up just as BAB does for casters.
So, I added a BCB, Base Casting Bonus to each class. Fighters, barbarians, rangers, rogues and paladins got BAB of +1/level got a BCB of +1 / 2 levels. Wizards, clerics, druids and sorcerers got +1 per level. Bards I gave the BCB progression as the BAB. I wasn't sure how that would work but in close to 8 active years of playing I never had someone make a bard so I didn't get to test it. For other multiclassing though it worked very well.
Sure, some tried min maxing. I even tried a high level mini campaign twice to try out some house rules and found the cleric 10/wizard 10 worked fine as did the Fighter 17 / Sorcerer 3. Sure, the spells were always maxed out on caster level but the limitation of the lower level spells in the high level game made it work just fine. If there was any problem it was that I felt the Cleric 10 / Wizard 10 was still under powered due to no high level spells.
For those who either as single or multiclassed still had taken a low BCB build I allowed a feat that let them take +3 caster level up to a max of their HD but it could only be taken once. I did find it a bit unbalanced at lower levels and that implementation needed tweaking but I think feasible as a basic approach.
Wasn't something very similar done in Unearthed Arcana?
The Magic Rating variant is OGL content from UA in the SRD.
Wasn't something very similar done in Unearthed Arcana?The Magic Rating variant is OGL content from UA in the SRD.
I believe that the Official SRD (as opposed to the Hypertext SRD which isn't put out by Wizards of the Coast), which is at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35 does not include anything from UA...
It may not be in the "Official" SRD, but the majority of Unearthed Arcana is Open Game Content.
It may not be in the "Official" SRD, but the majority of Unearthed Arcana is Open Game Content.
Now if the poster is just saying, no need for a rule just use the one in UA that's okay but I believe the basis of this thread is that people want to see it added to Paizo's final product:
The variant CL by class table does not come come from any of the books listed in the d20System System Reference so I am not sure how you think the variant CL Chart open content? The mechanism of assigning variant CL to differnt class levels I believe is OGL but using that chart is not. Similiar to say creating a feat which adds negative energy to a spell but you couldn't print in a book a copy of the Black Lore of Moil [Metamagic Feat] from Complete Arcane.
|
It may not be in the "Official" SRD, but the majority of Unearthed Arcana is Open Game Content.Now if the poster is just saying, no need for a rule just use the one in UA that's okay but I believe the basis of this thread is that people want to see it added to Paizo's final product:
The variant CL by class table does not come come from any of the books listed in the d20System System Reference so I am not sure how you think the variant CL Chart open content? The mechanism of assigning variant CL to differnt class levels I believe is OGL but using that chart is not. Similiar to say creating a feat which adds negative energy to a spell but you couldn't print in a book a copy of the Black Lore of Moil [Metamagic Feat] from Complete Arcane.
It does not matter if it is in the SRD. It has been declared Open Content (see the open content section on the credits page of Unearthed Arcana. Anything in UA that is not a proper noun, trademark, artwork, trade dress or related to Displacer Beasts, Slaads, Githyanki, Githzerai, Beholders, Gauth, Mind Flayrers and Yuan-Ti is Open Content) and is thus available to be used in its entirety by other publishers, as long as they identify the source, as per the OGL. The SRD is a short hand, summary product. It is not the entirety of WotC open content.
It does not matter if it is in the SRD. It has been declared Open Content (see the open content section on the credits page of Unearthed Arcana. Anything in UA that is not a proper noun, trademark, artwork, trade dress or related to Displacer Beasts, Slaads, Githyanki, Githzerai, Beholders, Gauth, Mind Flayrers and Yuan-Ti is Open Content) and is thus available to be used in its entirety by other publishers, as long as they identify the source, as per the OGL. The SRD is a short hand, summary product. It is not the entirety of WotC open content.
Never noticed that on the credits page because I don't usually read credit pages... my bad.
|
|
Never noticed that on the credits page because I don't usually read credit pages... my bad.
It does not matter if it is in the SRD. It has been declared Open Content (see the open content section on the credits page of Unearthed Arcana. Anything in UA that is not a proper noun, trademark, artwork, trade dress or related to Displacer Beasts, Slaads, Githyanki, Githzerai, Beholders, Gauth, Mind Flayrers and Yuan-Ti is Open Content) and is thus available to be used in its entirety by other publishers, as long as they identify the source, as per the OGL. The SRD is a short hand, summary product. It is not the entirety of WotC open content.
Well, my pdf copy was hanging and that was all I had to read. At least that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it like Sovereign Glue.
To be quite honest I did DM a campaign where I used the UA Magic Rating by Class but modified as follow:
Only Column A and B (That is to say non-spellcaster didnt add in).
Arcanist and Dive Spellcaster tracked seperately.
So a Cleric would benifit from Druid, Favored Soul, Paldin and Ranger but not from Wizard or Fighter. And the characters were always free to use that feat that adds +4Cl up to HD (I'm tired from being up all night so the name won't come to me at the moment and I am too lazy to go across the room and open a book right now).
If I remember right, the only character that took advantage of the variant rule was a Monk/sorceror/PrC.
What about this approach (to prevent to 1 level dip in order to gain caster levels)?
A multiclassed caster adds 1 level of spellcasting ability for every 2 class levels beyond 4th taken in another class (levels 6, 8, 10, 12, etc).
Some examples:
Wizard 1/Fighter 4: Spellcasting abilities of a 1st level wizard
Wizard 1/Fighter 10: Spellcasting abilities of a 4th level wizard
Wizard 1/Fighter 18: Spellcasting abilities of an 8th level wizard
Wizard 10/Fighter 4: Spellcasting abilities of a 10th level wizard
Wizard 10/Fighter 10: Spellcasting abilities of a 13th level wizard
Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Fighter 4: Spellcasting abilities of a 1st level wizard and cleric
Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Fighter 18: Spellcasting abilities of a 8th level wizard and cleric
Wizard 6/Cleric 6/Fighter 10: Spellcasting abilities of a 10th level wizard and 10th level cleric
The Practiced Spellcaster feat would still be useful, working exactly as it currently does.
I really like the idea of improving caster levels when multiclassing,
My preference:
Non-casters: +1/2 class level
casters: +1 class level
Rule a)
Arcane and divine caster level are separated.
Arcane/Divine casters count as "non-casters" for the other spell casting branch
Rule b)
You can only double your primary classes caster level as a maximum.
So a fighter 10/wizard 3 won't have a caster level of 8 (3+(10/2)) but a CL of 6.
I dislike the idea of increasing caster levels without some additional payment by the character. I would just like to make one thing clear from my point of view. Characters should not gain new spell slots or spells known from this kind of Caster Level increase. It should not stack when calculating class abilities (Domain and School powers). Just wanted to make that clear.
There are some advantages to having a Caster Level stat, much like Base Attack Bonus is a stat. Again referencing the Unearthed Arcana Magic Rating. Primarily it would give Non-Casters a Magic Rating which they could then use to select Item Creation feats. This would open up the Magical Sword Smith archetype without requiring that said smith also be a Wizard. The down side is this automatically makes the Pathfinder setting more magical. Look at a Commoner/Adept multiclass that for what this means to common folk of the setting.
Personally I do not think that this should be a free add-on system that applies to all classes. This would be better handled by a Feat(Tree) or Prestige Class or both. Currently Caster Level does not having a meaning to all classes.
While the default is to look at a Wizard/Fighter, looking a Druid/Barbarian the BAB has not impact on either of the classes main class abilities. BAB does not give the Barbarian aspect more Rage points (for longer lasting Rage). Why should the Druid side be give a free ride on longer duration Bull's Strength or the ability to create additional gallons of water per round (see Create Water)?
|
|
I dislike the idea of increasing caster levels without some additional payment by the character. I would just like to make one thing clear from my point of view. Characters should not gain new spell slots or spells known from this kind of Caster Level increase. It should not stack when calculating class abilities (Domain and School powers). Just wanted to make that clear.
There are some advantages to having a Caster Level stat, much like Base Attack Bonus is a stat. Again referencing the Unearthed Arcana Magic Rating. Primarily it would give Non-Casters a Magic Rating which they could then use to select Item Creation feats. This would open up the Magical Sword Smith archetype without requiring that said smith also be a Wizard. The down side is this automatically makes the Pathfinder setting more magical. Look at a Commoner/Adept multiclass that for what this means to common folk of the setting.
Personally I do not think that this should be a free add-on system that applies to all classes. This would be better handled by a Feat(Tree) or Prestige Class or both. Currently Caster Level does not having a meaning to all classes.
While the default is to look at a Wizard/Fighter, looking a Druid/Barbarian the BAB has not impact on either of the classes main class abilities. BAB does not give the Barbarian aspect more Rage points (for longer lasting Rage). Why should the Druid side be give a free ride on longer duration Bull's Strength or the ability to create additional gallons of water per round (see Create Water)?
Because BAB is the main way the character fights foes.
Imagine this for a minute: What if BAB did not stack? What if you only used the highest BAB of all your classes when attacking normally, meaning that a 5th level Fighter/5th level Rogue would have a BAB of +5, for his 5 fighter levels only? And if you want to use a Rogue ability like sneak attack damage, your BAB drops to what you get from your Rogue levels only?
THAT is the multiclass situation with spellcasters right now, and it sucks. There doesn't need to be a feat or prestige class to handle this, just fix the problem simply and easily, and allow casters to grow in CL through experience and adventuring, same as any other character raises their BAB no matter which class they take. Believe me, this is not some massive, game breaking change. In fact, multi-class casters will still suck compared to single class ones, or Prestige Classes like the Theurge. But at least it takes one small step to help even things out a bit!
Do we really have to make clear, that an increased caster level will FOR SURE:
- NOT increase spells per day
- NOT grants additional spells known
- NOT give additional class abilities or whatsoever?
The ONLY thing the increased caster level WILL DO, is to increase the effectivness of those spells already known and only those, those effects depend on the caster level (like most ranges/areas or spells like fireball, cure spells, etc.)
Because BAB is the main way the character fights foes.
Imagine this for a minute: What if BAB did not stack?
However BAB is how all characters fight foes, not just warrior types. Increases in a character's base attack bonus help just about every aspect of a character, even the spell casting when it involves touch attacks and rays. Advancing caster level has no impact on non-caster class aspects of a character. What additions do you plan to include that allow Caste Level or Magic Rating to be utilized by non-caster classes?
In the most basic form spells are simply a set of 1/day abilities that can be changed every day. Almost no different from the Paladin's Lay on Hands, which utilizes class level (the base for Caster Level) to determine it's power. Same with Smite. Why should classes that are designated as 'spell-casters' be given an effective level boost when calculating the effects of their class abilities when the 'non-casters' won't?
Otherwise you're giving an incentive to multiclass casters but not multiclass non-casters. Sorcerer/Wizard being better then Fighter/Wizard. This is why a feat (given the 3 extra feats in Pathfinder) is good customization point. A Multiclassing or Cross-training feat can include those additional rules that organize and control how different class interact.
I do agree that full casters will be more powerful then a multiclassed caster, as spell casters are top heavy in power.