Wizard PrC's and free spells

[WoLT]

OK, this is a bit of a weird question, but it's a unique circumstance.

I'm running a mass game that operates strictly on WBL (and has many other similarities to PFS, but is decidedly different for many reasons).

Right now we've got 14 GMs and will be running 50-70 PCs simultaneously (starting out)through PBP (it's a big project). Because of this rules are incredibly important.

Because we operate strictly with WBL, each GP is a limited resource for PCs so now we are getting to the nitty gritty of this:

Prestige Classes and Spellcasters: Does a wizard (or other character that uses a spellbook), receive bonus spells to add to his spellbook when he gains a level in a prestige class that grants an increase to spellcasting?

No. The increase to his spellcasting level does not grant any other benefits, except for spells per day, spells known (for spontaneous casters), and an increase to his overall caster level. He must spend time and gold to add new spells to his spellbook.

—Jason Bulmahn, 11/24/10

source:
http://paizo.com/store/downloads/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq #v5748eaic9nib

Now we understand that this is basically a 50k hit or 5.7% of WBL lost to taking a PrC as a wizard, magus, witch, etc. come level 20.

At the end of the day it's clear that the rule is RAI and RAW.

What I need to know is the proverbial RAI "why" of this issue.

I have speculated extensively, but I'm trying to figure out why this rules exists the way it does.

The scenario:
I have several GMs for this game that are jeering for shooting down this rule because their argument is:
No one uses this rule, we don't like it, it's not a big deal.

My reasons against changing it:
Close the Power Chasm rather than make it bigger in the interest of balancing the game (wizards are Class T1, why buff them?)
If it's not broke, don't fix it
The rule is declared exactly as RAW and RAI
The current ruling makes perfect sense IC (specialization effects of a PrC in trade for resources, in IRL we must give up some general things to specialize)
Complaining about this at all is unjustified as the EM hit is so small it's barely noticeable (5.7% WBL at level 20)
Changing this rule back will cause huge blowback if it needs to be changed back (wizards are a large part of the community population)
Changing this rule at all can lead to huge blowback and potential game breaking problems due to it's reasons for implementation. (ZOMG, you buffed the wizard!?!?! cue nerd fight, etc)

So far they still aren't budging and we need a ruling.

It's not that I'm against the rule, or don't like it or hate wizards (I prefer casters actually) it just seems like a really really bad idea and the amount of reasons not to change it significantly outweigh the reasons for changing it IMO.

I'm hoping if I can present to them solid evidence as to why this decision was made I can end the dispute entirely, or, decide that the developer staff's reasons was terrible (unlikely but you never know).

I would like greatly to be able to say something other than "Because Paizo said so"

Insight on this matter is greatly appreciated.

[HaraldKlak]

I cannot grant you deep insights or a special insights into why prestige classes don't give spells for the preparing arcane caster.

They fact is: They don't. Prestige classes always looses some class features of the parenting class, and in these cases loosing 'free' spells is one of them.

Is it unreasonable to make the change, and allow it? No, definately not. But like yourself, I wouldn't fix it when it ain't broken.

I my opinion it makes sense that PrCs don't get the spells, because they are focusing on something else, or several things, compared to the pure wizard who has his undivided attention on the arcane arts.

Passing over your arguments on not making the change, I have to say that I disagree with the balance-argument. While the change benefits PrC-wizards, it also promotes taking a PrC instead of going pure caster. Ultimately this might lead to slightly less powerful casters.

BTW, which rules do you guys use for learning new spells? Scrolls? Following the rules and prices for copying spells from other wizards, I cannot quite understand how the monetary differences becomes that great.

[Mort the Cleverly Named]

At the end of the day, it is this way because this is how Paizo decided to go with it. Wizards decided differently (you can check their opinion in the 3.0 Main FAQ here). I personally preferred it the other way, as it made certain that a Wizard would never get a new level of spells without actually having any spells of that level to cast. Could there be a bigger disappointment? I don't think balance really needs to be a concern, both because it is a fairly small difference and because the Pathfinder prestige classes aren't buffing Wizards to the point they need anything taken away from them. But hey, it is how it is. Maybe someone will have compelling arguments I'm just not thinking of.

[Midnight_Angel]

I must admit, I side with Mort, thinking that this Paizo's decision was the wrong one.

It's not for the (noticeable but minor) impact on APL, it's for the effects on immediate play. Having played adventures where the characters are in a dungeon / in the wilderness / at high sea for several levels straight, where the +2 automatic spells per level are pretty much the only spells the wizard gets (at least until the group can go shopping again, after quite some time), I do not think the 'no free spells' rule would sit well with any player who took a wizard PrC.

[Dekalinder]

The reason behind the change was to cater to all the PrC hate that has generated from the 3.5 by making PrC close to usless. And they did a pretty damn good job at that, the only 2 PrC worth mentining are the EK (you got the shaft with the magus release) and the Arcane Archer (hastly remedied with the mirmydarch archetype). All other PrC are just traps that makes you pay fluffs with mechanics.

[Midnight_Angel]

Dekalinder wrote:

The reason behind the change was to cater to all the PrC hate that has generated from the 3.5 by making PrC close to usless. And they did a pretty damn good job at that, the only 2 PrC worth mentining are the EK (you got the shaft with the magus release) and the Arcane Archer (hastly remedied with the mirmydarch archetype). All other PrC are just traps that makes you pay fluffs with mechanics.

Hmm... I still think the Bard going Dragon Disciple might still be a viable choice.

But I think we are quickly de-railing the thread...

[WoLT]

BTW, which rules do you guys use for learning new spells? Scrolls? Following the rules and prices for copying spells from other wizards, I cannot quite understand how the monetary differences becomes that great.

This is actually a really important factor... essentially all spells cost full price. This causes another tiny hit to the casters that had to be done for game balance, otherwise everyone would copy every spell from everyone and everyone would have a full spell book at all times. (because all spells are always available for purchase before and after all adventures which are 1 shots designed to last 1 level, so the notion of not having spell access is not an issue)

The problem with that though, is that you can say "well they already took a hit from WBL for spells" except that PFS does the same lack of scribe scroll and it seems to work fine there (I also ganked all their class changes and added a few more due to 3pp and Basic, like no artificers because crafting is banned, but I digress). The issue here arises that you're either buffing the PrC or you're Buffing the straight wizard, and of the two, both are T1, but the PrC's are usually going to end up with the more focussed power due to specializing, so if one is going to take a hit, I believe it should be the PrC, but that's besides the point of changing established RAI and RAW because of how someone feels...

Doing that only once opens Pandora's box to all kinds of other rules changes folks might not like until we have so many house rules the thing because an unmanageable mess of erratum, and we already have extensive house rules but those were only the things we absolutely had to change or there would be no game balance at all (such as removing crafting).

The best thing I've seen here is: "Prestige classes always looses some class features of the parenting class, and in these cases loosing 'free' spells is one of them." Which was something I had said at one point, but it still doesn't say much about why, just that "something had to go" and it was free spells.

What's important to mention here is that paying full price for spells doesn't kill the wizard, it just restricts their utility a little and brings them more towards the middle, which is good for game balance.

The Loss of free spells doesn't change utility, but instead forces the wizard to prioritize gear and spells better.

Neither are much of an effect on the class at all.

Also there has been 1 proposed and strikingly simple compromise posed that I don't entirely hate which is: PrCs get 1 spell free, but this still changing RAI and RAW without proper justification (because it is needed).

[Mighty Squash]

Prepared arcane casters lose out seriously with Prestige classes working this way, Sorcerers suffer so much less on the spell casting front (though I guess they do have cooler class features to lose).

[Krak de Chevalier]

There is a point when the pursuit of the mechanical fails in front of the story.

To wit - A wizard 10/Loremaster 6 gains a level and choses Loremaster. Thus becoming Wizard 10/ Loremaster 7 - able to cast 9th levels spells.

But under Jason's FAQ the PC has NO spells to cast.

What, does he just whip down to the Magi-mart and pick up 9th level spells and a bottle of milk!

I smell bad storyline fudging....

Surely a "Prestige" class should be a extension that is really no different that just making a late stage archtype choice.

my 2cp worth.

[ryric]

I think the logic behind the ruling is that prestige classes continue the "Spells" class feature, but do not continue the "Spellbook" class feature, which is where the extra 2 spells per level come from.

I think the ruling is fine, but I've played since 1e, where after about 4th or 5th level magic-users got no free spells at all. And there were no magic shops. Any spells you wanted at that point had to be found as scrolls, captured from enemy wizards (The DMG was quite explicit that friendly sharing does not happen), or researched. Plus you had to cast spells uphill both ways in chest high snow. /curmudgeon

2e at least gave you one free spell every time you gained a new spell level.

A lot of the boost in wizard power in d20 comes from the easy access to a personally customized spell book, along with easily acquired scrolls and wands. Maybe one of the reasons I've never felt sorcerer spells known was very restrictive is that a PF sorc knows more spells than most 1e magic-users I ran.

[WoLT]

What, does he just whip down to the Magi-mart and pick up 9th level spells and a bottle of milk!

In this case yes. The setting is Eternity's End, there is a mart there with anything one would want on a sliding scale percentage dice roll based on GP value and a library with all spells. To not have these things in such an environment, and for game balance, is folly.

If anyone needs more data the setting or rules it's here: http://www.dndonlinegames.com/showthread.php?t=119654

Specifically though, I'm not seeing much logic into the choice besides "something had to go, and that fit the bill" which is fine, but not solid enough evidence to make the argument I would like... Still better than what I had though.

Additional insight appreciated.