Pathfinder 1E What is Pathfinder doing about multi-classing?

[drothgery]

Non-caster multiclassing was never a problem IME.

Eh. If you don't use fractional BABs and saves, the numbers can get really wonky at times. And there are a fair number of base classes that seem to live (at least in 3.5) as 1-3 level dip classes.

Casters were the major problem with 3.x multiclassing, but non-casters were scarcely perfect.

 

[Aus_Snow]

+1 for fractional BAB and saves. And Base Defence. . . but never mind that.

Caster with caster, and caster with non-caster, however, still beeg problem.

I wonder if some feats a la Complete Adventurer style could work, after all. . . hm.

 

[Gailbraithe]

What level are you playing at?

I am curious about this, from what I read , figthers didn't get that much of a boost.

The party is about fifth level right now.

I should mention that I altered the way Weapon Training works, so now it provides +1/+1d6 instead of +1/+1. So at 20th level, the fighter will add +4d6 to every attack with their favored weapon group.

I found this doesn't unbalance the game at all, but corrects one of my long standing sore points with 3.5 -- that rogues can gain extra damage by placing deadly blows, but fighters who live and die by the sword can never master the art of striking vitals. With my change to Weapon Training, the new assumption is that fighters always strike at vitals and go for the deadliest blows, and unlike the rogue, they don't need an ally to distract the foe, and don't need to catch the opponent flat-footed to strike those killing blows.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Sounds pretty cool, Gailbraithe.

 

[Dalvyn]

That +1/+1d6 idea sounds both interesting and simple enough to apply, Gailbraithe. Perhaps you should post it on the Paizo boards as well for Jason Bulmahn to consider?

 

[Gailbraithe]

That +1/+1d6 idea sounds both interesting and simple enough to apply, Gailbraithe. Perhaps you should post it on the Paizo boards as well for Jason Bulmahn to consider?

I did, I'm pretty active over there, but I think it got lost in all the many good ideas that people have been throwing up all over the place there.

I pity Jason, having to try to organize and absorb all the feedback paizo has been getting. Still, I'm glad they're doing it, because an open playtest is the best idea this industry has had since Ryan Dancey decided to let DMs everywhere publish and profit from the creative effort they put into their games.

 

[Sadrik]

I might be wrong but i suspect the Beta will be 3,5e RAW.

This bodes poorly for me. There have been so many good ideas on how to effectively deal with many of the problems that crop up from the 3e dip method of multi-classing. I would hate to see those ideas go to waste and have this v3.6e come out without a definitive attempt at fixing it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

There have been so many good ideas on how to effectively deal with many of the problems that crop up from the 3e dip method of multi-classing.

Problems?

Dipping is a FEATURE, not a bug.

 

[GlassJaw]

I never understood the idea that a player should be rewarded for staying single-classed. The multiclassing system in 3ed was supposed to allow for an infinite number of combinations so a player could create the character concept they wanted.

Sure, there may be some combinations that are more attractive than others but I've never seen any combo that "breaks" the game. And trust me, I've done my share of trying.

Multiclassed spellcasters do need to be fixed, but any "fix" should be in accord with pro-multiclassing.

 

[Sadrik]

Problems?

Dipping is a FEATURE, not a bug.

So getting +2 to certain saves with every dip is right?
So having certain combination come up with a BAB of +3 at 10th level is right?
Having your caster progression stunted dramatically by taking a non-prc bonus spell casting class?

These are bugs not features.