D&D 3E/3.5 CleverNickName's 3.5E Multiclassing fix

[CleverNickName]

Forked from: 3.5e -- What REALLY needed fixing?

It seems like one of the most popular complaints about the 3.5 Edition is how multiclassing breaks the game. I agree.

I don't know if this fix will work for everyone, but it seems to work just great for us.

[SBLOCK=Assign Prerequisites to Core Classes]Note that these prerequisites only apply to multiclassing...a character does not need to meet these requirements in order to start as one of these classes...just to multiclass into one.

I tried to keep the requirements as "even" as possible from one class to another. Each core class has the same three elements, in addition to any alignment restrictions the class might have:

- an ability score of 12 or higher,
- 5 ranks in one skill, and
- a skill-enhancing feat

In other words, I treat them like prestige classes.

Barbarian
Con 12
Nonlawful alignment
Survival 5 ranks
Toughness feat

Bard
Cha 12
Nonlawful alignment
Perform 5 ranks
Investigator feat

Cleric
Wis 12
Knowledge (religion) 5 ranks
Negotiator feat

Druid
Wis 12
Neutral alignment
Knowledge (nature) 5 ranks
Animal Affinity feat

Fighter
Str 12
Intimidate 5 ranks
Athletic feat

Monk
Wis 12
Lawful alignment
Tumble 5 ranks
Acrobatic feat

Paladin
Cha 12
Lawful good alignment
Knowledge (religion) 5 ranks
Negotiator feat

Ranger
Dex 12
Survival 5 ranks
Self-Sufficient feat

Rogue
Dex 12
Open Locks 5 ranks
Deft Hands feat

Sorcerer
Cha 12
Knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks
Magical Aptitude feat

Wizard
Int 12
Knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks
Diligent feat[/SBLOCK]

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Forked from: 3.5e -- What REALLY needed fixing?

Not to my taste, to be sure, but certainly functional.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

So, you basically made multiclassing as unpalatable as possible? in that kind of system, I'd never multiclass, cause feats are tough to come by, and those feats required are all the worst of the entire game. Shouldn't the player get at least one "free" multiclass before you start kicking in the requirements?! I'd say let favored class be free, but humans don't need any more help being awesome. Finally, ability requirements should be 13, odd is generally the standard for required scores, if only to give an odd score a reason to exist.

Even with those changes, I agree with Wulf. Not to my taste.

 

[CleverNickName]

So, you basically made multiclassing as unpalatable as possible? in that kind of system, I'd never multiclass, cause feats are tough to come by, and those feats required are all the worst of the entire game. Shouldn't the player get at least one "free" multiclass before you start kicking in the requirements?! I'd say let favored class be free, but humans don't need any more help being awesome. Finally, ability requirements should be 13, odd is generally the standard for required scores, if only to give an odd score a reason to exist.

Oh come now...I could make it far more unpalatable than that.

The ability requirement isn't usually a problem...if a character is wanting to multiclass into Sorcerer, chances are they are going to have at least a 12 in Charisma. It is only a deal-breaker for characters who want to cherry-pick the class.

Same thing for skills...all of the skill requirements are typically skills that the new class will find useful. Wizards will almost always want at least 5 ranks in Knowledge (arcana); making it a "requirement" is rather benign. At any rate, this reflects a bit of in-game study and training for a new class...it's usually not a deal-breaker either, except for cherry-pickers.

I agree that requiring a feat is a bit harsh, and I'll admit that I've waived it on occasion. I included it as a way of indicating a character's natural predisposition to a class...inborn abilities and genetic traits, stuff that is discovered instead of learned. Magical Aptitude, for example, could explain how a fighter suddenly developed inborn magical ability and became a sorcerer. But like you said, feats are hard to come by and these are some of the worst in the game--it could be a deal-breaker for just about anyone, depending on how they structure their characters.

But even with the feat requirement, it's not the worst multiclassing fix that I can think of.

I like your "favored class free" idea. I am totally stealing it.

 

[Taureth]

I invariably run very story driven campaigns, more so than dungeon crawl type scenarios.

So, the way I've always controlled 3.x multi-classing is by insisting it has to fit with the character's back story. Otherwise, forget it.

You want to take a level of wizard? You better establish with me where and from whom you are getting your training, well in advance of taking that first level.

A level of sorceror? You better be building up to it in game, with strange dreams, odd occurrences and the like.

Cleric? Plan on taking more than just one or two levels, because commitment to a deity is no small thing. And for that matter, what are you doing right now for the temple in question that they consider you worth training in the ways of their god?

Even for those who don't run a story oriented game, the PHB states the DM is always free to restrict a player's multi-classing options as they see fit. Personally, I have no compunctions about doing so when its entirely appropriate.

 

[Aus_Snow]

It's been part of my house rules for years now. Not every detail is the same, naturally, but the idea - and maybe even a detail here and there - is. This, plus training and so forth.

So yeah, I'm a fan, you might say.


edit --- The link in your OP doesn't work, CNN. It just takes you to the forums starting page.

 

[Storminator]

Same thing for skills...all of the skill requirements are typically skills that the new class will find useful. Wizards will almost always want at least 5 ranks in Knowledge (arcana); making it a "requirement" is rather benign. At any rate, this reflects a bit of in-game study and training for a new class...it's usually not a deal-breaker either, except for cherry-pickers.

The skill requirement really whammies some combos. If you're a fighter and want to dabble in wizard, you have to wait until 7th level since Knowledge (Arcana) isn't a class skill. That's pretty harsh. You might want to make that 5 skill points instead of ranks.

PS

 

[Dagredhel]

This is really clever. The idea that a character needs "prework" to build up to a level in another class makes a lot of sense from a "simulationist" perspective. If the aim is to dissuade multiclassing, than this is a nifty approach.

As to the feat cost, I was actually surprised that it was as lenient as you made it. The feats required certainly aren't ones that a munchkin would choose, but they'll continue to have some (albeit very minor) value. I was expecting them to be harsher... like a Martial Weapon Proficiency for entry into Fighter, Tracking for Ranger, etc.... Feats that would be wholly subsumed by the abilities of the class that the character is adding.

Personally, I *don't* see multiclassing as a problem to be fixed, except where the results are really suboptimal. My favorite approach to date is the one taken in Star Wars Saga Edition.

 

[Voadam]

You think the mechanical problem with 3.5 core class multiclassing is that there are not enough hoops to jump through or power trade offs to do so?

Heh, I disagree. I'd say the problems are the weak combos, particularly noticeable with spellcasting.

 

[CleverNickName]

Threadromancy is afoot! Wow, I thought this discussion thread died a long time ago...pity too, because it is one of our favorite house rules. (Come to think about it, this thread is probably better-suited to the 3.5E House Rules forum...)

edit --- The link in your OP doesn't work, CNN. It just takes you to the forums starting page.

Hmm...the original thread must have gotten moved to another forum or something. Or imps have infested the database. I'll look for the thread, and fix it if I can.

The skill requirement really whammies some combos. If you're a fighter and want to dabble in wizard, you have to wait until 7th level since Knowledge (Arcana) isn't a class skill. That's pretty harsh. You might want to make that 5 skill points instead of ranks.

But waiting until 7th level isn't really a problem. Magic should be seriously hard to learn. And, you know, good things to those who wait...

Seriously though, this is one of those situations where I would change some of the requirements to benefit the player. If this came up at my table, I would work with the player to come up with a work-around. I once waived the feat requirement for a rogue who had very specific plans for her feats...instead, I required her to complete a special mission to recover a stolen artifact. Her reward was an internship at the local wizard guild.

Personally, I *don't* see multiclassing as a problem to be fixed, except where the results are really suboptimal. My favorite approach to date is the one taken in Star Wars Saga Edition.

It's not really, for most people anyway. But like any other rule in any other game, it can cause problems when exploited. This little house rule makes it harder to exploit multiclassing to an unfair advantage.

Unfair according to me, of course.

What is the Saga method? I've never played it.

You think the mechanical problem with 3.5 core class multiclassing is that there are not enough hoops to jump through or power trade offs to do so?

Sort of, yeah. We prefer a slower, more subtle approach to character building. I try to discourage multiclassing just for the sake of numbers, and encourage it to make the character interesting from the story's standpoint.