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

[thecasualoblivion]

The main problems of high level play are:

1. Rocket Tag, or having characters and monsters who can win in 1-2 turns of combat without breaking a sweat.

2. The DM having a really difficult time putting together adventures that challenge the party without resulting in a TPK. Higher level 3E tends to make this very difficult.

3. Player Characters becoming so complex that running them in or out of combat slows down the game.

These really aren't solvable without really nuking the system. Its a tough choice, but not taking it on makes it tough to justify not just sticking with 3.5E as it is.


As for the nukage, there is a way to multiclass using mechanics that existed for D&D, and that is to combine Psionics with Tome of Battle multiclassing. Have people gain PP and powers as Psionic characters do, while having total caster level be equal to the class level of the spellcasting class plus 1/2 of other class levels. Tome of Battle multiclassing worked, and it could be easily adapted to the mechanics for the Psion class.

 

[Sadrik]

I think that they have done some stuff to fix high level play. They removed or neutered save or die or save or suck. This changes the game significantly. One of the big fixes was power attack characters will no longer be able to do as crazy damage with that feat. Both are good changes for high level play. 1300 damage per round characters won't be possible.

 

[Volaran]

How's that Clr 10/Wiz 10 working out for you? Multiclassed casters NEED to be fixed. It's not up for debate. If Pathfinder doesn't address it, it didn't do it's job as far as I'm concerned.

To be honest, I haven't been following the multiclass debate much, nor have I noticed it being too prominent on the Paizo boards here.

This hasn't really come up in play for my groups ever, but what specifically was wrong with the x/x prestige classes in 3.5 (Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, and Arcane Trickster being the primary ones, I suppose). When I had seen them in action, the seemed to do exactly what we needed: blend the basic abilities of two classes without having as much kick in either area as a single member of the class.

Is it a case where people are hoping for a solution not requiring a prestige class, or a hybrid class like the hexblade or duskblade? Wanting to play an effective Cleric/Wizard type character from level 1, etc.

The main reason I'm asking here is that from what I have read of the Beta, most of my personal concerns have been met already. So if I have a year to help Paizo with playtesting and feedback, I would certainly be happy to focus on other areas I haven't been concerned with.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

One of the big fixes was power attack characters will no longer be able to do as crazy damage with that feat. Both are good changes for high level play. 1300 damage per round characters won't be possible.

That may be the first time I have ever seen anyone complain that high level melee classes were dishing out too much damage.

Different gamers experience different kinds of games, I'm sure, but the divergence is most pronounced at high levels. I have seen folks describe high level games that bear no resemblance to anything I have ever experienced.

 

[GlassJaw]

This hasn't really come up in play for my groups ever, but what specifically was wrong with the x/x prestige classes in 3.5 (Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, and Arcane Trickster being the primary ones, I suppose). When I had seen them in action, the seemed to do exactly what we needed: blend the basic abilities of two classes without having as much kick in either area as a single member of the class.

Is it a case where people are hoping for a solution not requiring a prestige class, or a hybrid class like the hexblade or duskblade? Wanting to play an effective Cleric/Wizard type character from level 1, etc.

If mutliclassing worked, you wouldn't need wonky classes and prestige classes from other sources. A lot of those classes and prestige classes were introduced specifically because multiclassing doesn't work.

And what are you going to do with those hexblades and duskblades with the Pathfinder classes? Just run them as-is alongside?

 

[Volaran]

If mutliclassing worked, you wouldn't need wonky classes and prestige classes from other sources. A lot of those classes and prestige classes were introduced specifically because multiclassing doesn't work.

And what are you going to do with those hexblades and duskblades with the Pathfinder classes? Just run them as-is alongside?

Here's hoping ENWorld doesn't eat this...took 10 minutes for the reply page to load.

Personally, I have never used a Hexblade or Duskblade or had any in campaigns I have run. However, in a short game played during the Alpha phase of Pathfinder, we had a Favoured Soul, 2 psionic classes, and the Savant from the Dragon archive used. Except for some updating of the skills, and hit dice to bring them in line with Pathfinder (as well as the Savant's bardic-knowledge-like ability), they ran perfectly well as is. That seemed to make sense, since that sort of compatibility was one of stated goals of the system.

Granted, both core classes I mentioned in my previous post were from other sources, but I also mentioned the Eldritch Knight, which is core for 3.5 and basically gets the job done.

I don't really consider those theurge-type prestige classes to be a sign of the problem either. Prestige Classes are part of the multiclassing system, allowing abilities and concepts that don't build well with single classes. As such, I really don't see them as a

A cleric/wizard progressing evenly can be a useful character, but it is a long way from being as effective as most single classed characters, I would agree. I don't think I've ever really considered the idea that every possible multi-classing combination should be equally effective.

Then you have the Mystic Theurge. Blends the two concepts together, gives a benefit (greatly increased spell selection), and has a drawback (lags behind a single classed character in caster level, and would not receive higher level domain and specialist powers). With an update to the skill-list and a bump up to a d6 hit die, I'd be willing to let it run in a Pathfinder game.

That said, I mentioned the Prestige Class idea being quite an important part of multi-classing as it was presented in 3.5. According to the Pathfinder Beta, we'll be getting another PDF (soon hopefully) with their take on Prestige Classes. If we have to wait a bit longer, lets hope it addresses some of your multiclassing concerns.

 

[Storm Raven]

This is for pathfinder which will not be presented in that way (there will be more than three classes) so I am not sure how useful this is.

It is useful to me, no matter what comes out with Pathfinder - since I can shave almost any class down to a feat progression without too much trouble. It is also (at least for me) evidence that the basic multiclassing system isn't broken - it is the proliferation of a myriad of base classes that is the problem.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Caster level and class feature progression fix
I personally like the rule that your caster level is equal to the spell casting class level plus 1/2 of all your other levels up to a max of double. This would also cover all of the scalable class features such as animal companions.

Sadrik, I am interested in this.

It is not evident from your text, but do you intend for the caster to gain access to his higher spell levels with this? Or are you only increasing caster level?

In my opinion anything that unduly delays your access to high level spells is crippling.

So taking for example the case of a Wiz10/Clr10, which of these are you proposing?

1. He casts spells as a Wiz15/Clr15 (10 + ½ the other class levels).
2. He casts spells as a Wiz10/Clr10 but spells take effect at caster level 15.

The first case is satisfactory. The second case is not; there's no way a 20th level character can compete with a 5th level spell "cap."

 

[freyar]

Sadrik, I am interested in this.

It is not evident from your text, but do you intend for the caster to gain access to his higher spell levels with this? Or are you only increasing caster level?

In my opinion anything that unduly delays your access to high level spells is crippling.

So taking for example the case of a Wiz10/Clr10, which of these are you proposing?

1. He casts spells as a Wiz15/Clr15 (10 + ½ the other class levels).
2. He casts spells as a Wiz10/Clr10 but spells take effect at caster level 15.

The first case is satisfactory. The second case is not; there's no way a 20th level character can compete with a 5th level spell "cap."

The problem I see with granting the spells like you're doing in the first example is with a build like Wiz1/Ftr19. Then you've practically given this character 9 free levels of Wiz (since increased levels of Wizard mostly just gives you spells). Or are you saying that 5th level spells don't really matter anyway, so who cares about the extra spells?

 

[drothgery]

The problem I see with granting the spells like you're doing in the first example is with a build like Wiz1/Ftr19. Then you've practically given this character 9 free levels of Wiz (since increased levels of Wizard mostly just gives you spells).

I think that's why Sadrik's proposed rule had a 'max of double' cap. A wiz 1 can't go beyond caster level 2 from levels picked up from other classes, so your Wiz 1/Ftr 19 would cast as Wiz 2. A Wiz 5/Ftr 15 would cast as Wiz 10; a Wiz 10/Ftr 10 would cast as Wiz 15, and a Wiz 15/Ftr 5 would cast as Wiz 17; a Wiz 7/Ftr 13 gets the most possible 'free' wizard levels (for a non-epic 3.x-style character) and casts as Wiz 13.