An easy way to compare would be to look at 9th level Cleric and Wizard Spells. This is the pinnacle of power and should give a good idea on how the spell lists stack up. Limiting to the CRB, just to reduce the work.
** spoiler omitted **
So out of the 10 9th lvl Cleric Spells from CRB there are only 5 the wizard doesn't get, and really 4 and 1/2 since Miracle overlaps with wish. And of those 5, 2 are healing, one is only ok, one is good and one is very good.
** spoiler omitted **...
You have to remember that the cleric has access to all his 9lvl spell list as soon as he hits lvl 17, the wizard gets 2 of them at every level and he has to pay for scrolls or get a good loot (aka if the DM likes you enought to let you have them)
So in a sence cleric has a great advatage since he has access to every spell just by sucking up to his god every morning
|
Some people refuse to realize the cleric is sub par to the wizard in spell list. The fact is the Wizard spell list is far more potent then a a cleric. Just because they both get level 9 spells means nothing. Look at what they get. The first true crowd control spell a wizard gets is Web(2nd level). The first true crowd control spell a cleric gets is mass command(5th level). And even then black tentacle's(4th level) wizard spell is far better then it. I really do like playing divine casters, but that dose not mean there just as good as arcane casters. There spell list is not even close in effectiveness as a arcane caster
Arcane and Divine spells when you look at the spell list as a hole.
Utility (equal),
Damage (Not even close arcane spell are far and away better)
Buffs (Self buffing divine casters are king{Only useful if your making a battle cleric, or oracle of battle}, Group buffs arcane are better, and Single target buffs same)
crowd control (divine spell list has very few and far between, The arcane spell list has so many it's deciding what spell works best.)
SoS/SoD spells (Let me count the ways arcane casters are better. From level 5 spells on they have one at every level and some levels they get multiple.)
Healing/Restoration (Divine casters are the only ones that can do this. With the exception of the Witch)
Well, if you refuse to consider how the spell lists, which have largely remained unchanged in Core, were designed, that's your choice.
And really, who cares about fireballs and red dragons? The first is a situationally useful spell, and the second is a creature with the [Awesome] subtype.
Hardly good examples for your point.
and yet they keep changing. Never mind the witch who does the arcane healing..
The point you've missed is that the wizard is more at danger to things being immune or resistant to his damaging attacks. While the cleric is using negitive/positive damage. There is very little that is resistant to both, and what is resistant to one is often weak against the second.
Now back to the witch. This is an arcane caster who has a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT set of spells. It is an arcane caster who can cast healing spells and has 9 levels of it too.
Also its not just fireball. Your entire point hinges on the idea that wizard spells do more damage and therefor cannot have a higher bab. My point is regardless of what the spell is, if its not a attack roll type, the BAB of the character DOES NOT MATTER. Fireball, Icestorm, lighting bolt, wall of fire or whatever the heck else would be "a good example" illustrating the point.
You keep going on how wizard spells do more damage and cleric spells don't. So I'm using the classic wizard spells to illustrate my point that BAB does not matter with them.
Also don't give me that cause the cleric doesn't have a visible mass crowd control that all divine doesn't. Entangle, first level druid spell I think (or second) is another divine list that does get it.
This isn't just cleric vs wizard, but Arcane vs Divine. Also there is a huge difference between wizard and sorcerer, which is why if they ever made an archetype that would change the BAB of an arcane class it would be sorcerer who would get it.
The reason is versatility. Doesn't matter how many tens of thousands of spells are on the list. Doesn't matter if level 3 spells had 13 different spells that deal 90d6 points of damage (they way you yammer on about how wizard spells are soo much more powerful.) Sorcerers do not have the versatility of a wizard. Especially if the archetype removes a spell known and a spell castable per level.
But as no archetype ever changes bab, so it would be a completely new class. A class you can still use arcane spells for, have a medium bab and go all the way to level 9. Unfortunately with magus now in play, this probably will never happen as any class that has medium bab and full arcane casting would probably outshine this combat caster.
|
Your post completely misses my point. You're railing at things I'm not saying. Judging by the comparative size of our posts, the only one 'yammering on' is you.
Since you don't seem to disagree that what is on a spell list determines power level, we have nothing to argue about. I especially don't care to argue with someone so invested in his argument he has to insult the other side.
The reason for low BAB is simple...a wizard does not fight. If he gets a high BAB, there is no reason for a fighter. There are plenty of spells that can duplicate the attack power of a Melee combatant, and once you hand over the high BAB and multiple attacks, there is NO reason to play pretty much any melee combatant other then a mage. Not only can they have the buffs to be awesome IN combat, they can have the spells to be awesome out of combat.
Think of your fighter if every day you could choose to swap out all your fighter bonus feats for any other feat.
Every day.
That's what a wizard with full BAB can do.
So the arcane casters dont' get the combo of full BAB and full spells, and really don't get 3/4 BAB without making some sacrifices and delaying their ascent to power.
==Aelryinth
|
|
The point you've missed is that the wizard is more at danger to things being immune or resistant to his damaging attacks. While the cleric is using negitive/positive damage. There is very little that is resistant to both, and what is resistant to one is often weak against the second.
Also its not just fireball. Your entire point hinges on the idea that wizard spells do more damage and therefor cannot have a higher bab. My point is regardless of what the spell is, if its not a attack roll type, the BAB of the character DOES NOT MATTER. Fireball, Icestorm, lighting bolt, wall of fire or whatever the heck else would be "a good example" illustrating the point.
who cares what damage your dealing no one thinks dealing damage with spells is a good idea. Unless you really think thats where the arcane spell power comes from?
Also don't give me that cause the cleric doesn't have a visible mass crowd control that all divine doesn't. Entangle, first level druid spell I think (or second) is another divine list that does get it.
Well there are two problems with this. On top of the fact only one of the divine casters gets this spell. And all arcane casters with access to level 9 spells get web.
Entangle1: Area plants in a 40-ft.-radius spread (There must be plant life in the area. Hard to do in most boss fights are in dungeon's and not close to plant life when you really need it.)
2: Entangled creatures can attempt to break free as a move action, making a Strength or Escape Artist check. The DC for this check is equal to the DC of the spell.
VS. Web
1: Effect webs in a 20-ft.-radius spread : These masses must be anchored to two or more solid and diametrically opposed points or else the web collapses upon itself and disappears. (Anchored points are not that hard to come buy. You can even use trees in a forest or buildings in a city. So much more versatile.)
2: If the save fails, the creature gains the grappled condition, but can break free by making a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check as a standard action against the DC of this spell.
The reason is versatility. Doesn't matter how many tens of thousands of spells are on the list. Doesn't matter if level 3 spells had 13 different spells that deal 90d6 points of damage (they way you yammer on about how wizard spells are soo much more powerful.) Sorcerers do not have the versatility of a wizard. Especially if the archetype removes a spell known and a spell castable per level....
You should really look at the arcane list if you think the versatility is in damage spells. It is not it is in there overall utility and other spells. They have a few more damage spells then a divine casters but they have 3 times as many other spells.
The reason for low BAB is simple...a wizard does not fight. If he gets a high BAB, there is no reason for a fighter. There are plenty of spells that can duplicate the attack power of a Melee combatant, and once you hand over the high BAB and multiple attacks, there is NO reason to play pretty much any melee combatant other then a mage. Not only can they have the buffs to be awesome IN combat, they can have the spells to be awesome out of combat.
Think of your fighter if every day you could choose to swap out all your fighter bonus feats for any other feat.
Every day.
That's what a wizard with full BAB can do.
So the arcane casters dont' get the combo of full BAB and full spells, and really don't get 3/4 BAB without making some sacrifices and delaying their ascent to power.
==Aelryinth
.
.Someone sugested medium/full BaB that can only be used for touch spells, not regular fighting.
And if all you attack with is Touch Spells, why do you need full BAB?
And if you do have it, you'll basically never miss.
==Aelryinth
And if all you attack with is Touch Spells, why do you need full BAB?
And if you do have it, you'll basically never miss.
==Aelryinth
I am confused about that as well. At level 1 most wizards get a +2 vs like 10 or 12. By level 5 or 6 you are hitting far more often then most people vs that same foe as his ac might be 25 but his touch is 12.
You do not need better BAB for touch attacks.
Sigh..
1. This thread is titled "Why is there no Arcane Medium BAB classes with 9 levels of casting." Not "Why doesn't wizard have full base attack bonus."
2. BAB does nothing for (Since people seem to be very nitpicky on my just looking at fireball..) ANY spell that doesn't require an attack roll. Charm person, Fireball, Mirror image, Wish, Evatries black tentacles or whatever other hundreds of thousands of spells (Since people will ignore the point and just say "there arn't even a thousand spells", this is an exaggeration) are on the wizard/sorcerer, witch, bard, or magus spell list.
3. Unless under the effects of something like haste, you only get a standard move and swift action. Most spells are standard action, and quicken could make them into swift.
4. Again, BAB does nothing for any spell that doesn't require an attack roll.
5. What increased BAB does increase the characters versatility. They can now start hitting things with weapons a little easier. And THIS is where the bloody problem lies with something like a wizard getting medium bab. Because now he can cast spells and wack stuff. If he has the ability to wear armor as well..
However a sorcerer on the other hand who has limited selection of spells will have less versatility than a wizard, especially if the Battle Sorcerer Archetype would eat a spell known and spells per day. (as it did back in 3.5)
But again, the Magus is already in place as the medium BAB arcanist, as well as the EK being available (as was mentioned previously in this thread)
6. Entangle is only the start. Yes, you can't use it everywhere, but its bigger and still effects people who save. It also doesn't flash fire when you hit with a fire spell (which may or may not be a good thing depending)
Now lets go to second level druid spells - Soften Earth and Stone.
Clerics - Calm emotions, Enthrall.
There is more too, but you seem to only care about mass crowd control rather than selective. And I avoided the ones that wizards/sorcerers got too.
Sigh...
You don't seem to be getting the point. It doesn't matter if YOU never use the higher BAB. It's if the arcane casters all out there start booting the other classes to the side now that you don't need them. Your oober buffs and higher BAB now allow you to sub for any martial class, so why use them?
That's the reason. And that's why talking about giving casters full/more BAB makes our heads hurt.
==Aelryinth
Sigh...
You don't seem to be getting the point. It doesn't matter if YOU never use the higher BAB. It's if the arcane casters all out there start booting the other classes to the side now that you don't need them. Your oober buffs and higher BAB now allow you to sub for any martial class, so why use them?
That's the reason. And that's why talking about giving casters full/more BAB makes our heads hurt.
==Aelryinth
Seriously..
That is what I just said in point 5. The higher bab increases the versatility of the character. The only class that could have done it and been balanced was the sorcerer (only if the archetype would have eaten its spells known a bit more). But we have the Magus and the EK, so that's not going to happen, and neither would a new class that uses arcane spells.
Not really a martial vs caster thing. The slot for a class of this attributes has done been filled.
|
Magus is that to a very lesser degree; I guess I was saying extend out Eldrich Knight, but how different is that from Magus? Magus literally gave a skillset for mixing magic and fighting at the same time; as well as channeling touch attacks through their weapon. That is more perfectly "caster-martial" than what is being described here.
I guess I don't understand what the original OP is asking for; is he looking to trade out 2 levels of caster advancement, say 5th or 10th, for medium BAB and maybe d8 HP? I could see that as well, again very few would do it, but it would make it an option for those looking for a "better, base class" Wizard.
As it stands Wizard is "up there" on all list of power classes already; so giving them extra versitility is not on my "to do" list. I could see base classes that maybe get 9th level spells eventually (19th level instead of 17th, as that class above) and have Medium BAB. Just a matter of making sure it costs something; versitility should NOT be free.
I don't find arcane spells to be more powerful than divine spells. Back in 2E days divines spells were significantly less powerful than arcane spells. 3E seems to balance the spells a bit. Now arcane spells off just a little more than divine in some areas.
Divine casters get spells with strings where as arcane casters don't, that's the real power of arcane casters have over divine.
