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

[warlockwannabe]

Good question!

How do you choose to treat prestige classes that can 'grow from' nonmagical classes, yet give the character spellcasting or other supernatural stuff, basically all of a sudden. IOW, what is it about prestige classes that makes you think they are any more 'organic', for want of a better term?

Good Question snow! And eloquently put! The reason I like Prestige classes better is that they 1, seem to grow from the base class(es) they were designed for. Though im less happy with prestige classes that require multiclassing, though in somecases it makes sense. and 2, that dont offer the kind of power a full class has. For example, the archmage and assassin are pretty much advanced mages and rouges, Im ok one expands the horizons of one class and tightly focuses the other. Then you have a blackguard, who is a fighter that gains dark power thru the auspices of an outside power, that gives him clerical abilities, but not to the point he really competes with a cleric. When it comes to wanting to mix classes, ive always found variant core classes the way to go. I am a HUGE fan of the Guttermage, from The Book of Rogish Luck, thanks to Monte Cook. One of the most fun characters I ever played, and seemed more realistic than a thief 1/mage 1.
Does that make sense?

 

[Aus_Snow]

Does that make sense?

Definitely.

But the prestige classes that prompted my question - more than any others - were those like Consecrated Harrier and Pious Templar (just skimming over one book: Complete Divine), which grant spellcasting to characters who do not need to start with any background in it whatsoever.

There aren't that many though, I'm pretty sure. Probably more of an oddity than anything meaningful. Just sprang to mind, is all, and made me think 'hm, odd' when reading your previous post. In retrospect, it probably isn't so odd.

While I'm on the topic though, I happen to concur: Classes should not be allowed to just 'plop' one atop another, forming some sort of bizarre, monstrous eyesore with not even a trace of context to its name. That's why I introduced rules for skill/feat/ability/class training.

 

[Phlebas]

If it's not inherently built in, I wonder if making "+1 level of arcane spellcasting class spells" and "+1 level of divine spellcasting class spells" feats might temper the problem. (With a caveat that this feat cannot raise your caster level past your character level - 2.) (Thus, you couldn't be a Wizard 17/Fighter 3 and have an effective Wizard level beyond 18.)

If a Cleric 1/Wizard 19 maxed out their 10-12 feats (Pathfinder), they could essentially be a Wizard 19/Cleric 13 for spellcasting prowess. That seems reasonable.

.........

this i like (i'd probably add a caster level increase in as well)

a - Its simple

b - its doesn't change anything fundamental in 3,5e

c - its net effect seems similar to most of the other proposals made by other posters (so it must be hitting ~ the right spot)

d - it allows multi-classing to be more effective in certain combo's but without boosting all multi-class concepts at the expense of single class concepts

 

[warlockwannabe]

Definitely.

But the prestige classes that prompted my question - more than any others - were those like Consecrated Harrier and Pious Templar (just skimming over one book: Complete Divine), which grant spellcasting to characters who do not need to start with any background in it whatsoever.

There aren't that many though, I'm pretty sure. Probably more of an oddity than anything meaningful. Just sprang to mind, is all, and made me think 'hm, odd' when reading your previous post. In retrospect, it probably isn't so odd.

While I'm on the topic though, I happen to concur: Classes should not be allowed to just 'plop' one atop another, forming some sort of bizarre, monstrous eyesore with not even a trace of context to its name. That's why I introduced rules for skill/feat/ability/class training.

Well, actually, I used the blackguard as a example of granted powers by an outside force, the one you gave are similar. Given some additional power, but not to the point that they really compete with the cleric class. The only difference is the source of the power .

Arcane spellcasting is a bit rougher to me though. As one cannot spontaneously become a sorcerer to my mind. Nor study suddenly enough to be granted spells as wizards cast them. Maybe im just a stick in the mud. lol

Actually I consider those classes,

 

[Gailbraithe]

I don't think that's the issue. I think it is a spellcaster versus martial class divide for whether combos multiclass effectively out of the box.

Multiclass concepts

Spellcasting:

Concept 1: Gandalf/Elric/Dilvish the Damned type. A wizard who is good with a sword. Gandalf is not as good as Aragorn or Legolas or Gimli in combat, but he can hold his own plus do neat wizard things. Wizard/Fighter or Fighter/Wizard

Concept 2: inborn magic who then learns to master his magic. Sorcerer/Wizard.

Concept 3: wizard devoted to the god of magic. Wizard/cleric.

Concept 4: nature priest. Cleric/Druid.

None of these sound like concepts best achieved by multiclassing, and @ & 4 sound like they would be incredibly broken.

 

[CapnZapp]

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.

Agreed.

Pathfinder definitely needs to introduce a general multiclassing mechanism that makes combining a caster class and a combat class as attractive as other forms of multiclassing.

Then they should nerf the front-loaded save bonuses for taking a new class.

I know the reasoning behind that front-loading (that multiclassers need a little extra to compensate for their lack of focus), but that simply turned out to be false. Nobody I know ever multiclassed if that PrC didn't play to your strengths, increasing and not decreasing your focus. Getting incredibly good saves on top of that is just broken; especially as you can cherry-pick several classes and get multiple +2 bonuses to your saves.

These are broken aspects of 3.5E that Pathfinder really must fix. Otherwise, why bother?

 

[DaveMage]

this i like (i'd probably add a caster level increase in as well)

a - Its simple

b - its doesn't change anything fundamental in 3,5e

c - its net effect seems similar to most of the other proposals made by other posters (so it must be hitting ~ the right spot)

d - it allows multi-classing to be more effective in certain combo's but without boosting all multi-class concepts at the expense of single class concepts

Yeah, I'd like a simple solution that adds to the base game (3.5) rather than rewrites it and this seems the easiest way. (And I agree about caster level.)

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I think that the caster level issue and the spellcasting progression issue are separate, in that I think the caster level problem at a minimum needs to be fixed, and should not cost the player any resources like feats.

Stealing blatantly from other folks ideas, and combining them, how about this:

First, there's Base Caster Level (BCL), which works just like BAB. Wizards, sorcerers, clerics, druids, and bards get full BCL (+1 per level); rangers and paladins get average BCL (+3/4 per level); and fighters, barbarians, rogues, and monks get poor BCL (+1/2 per level). To get caster level just add these as you'd add BAB. (Which means using fractional values if you use fractional BAB, but otherwise just totalling the value.) This is the PC's caster level for all spellcasting classes.

Second, there's spellcasting progression (SP). To add 1 to SP for any given class, it costs a feat. See below.

Spellcasting Advancement [Special]

Prerequisite
Multiclassed spellcaster, minimum ECL 4.

Benefit
You are treated as one level higher in one of your spellcasting classes (your choice each time this feat is chosen) for the purpose of spells (or spell slots) per day. If this feat is applied to the sorcerer or bard class, it also counts for spells known. If this feat is applied to the wizard class, you may select two new spells for your spellbook, as if you had gained a level in the wizard class.

This feat does not provide any other benefit, such as to caster level or the benefits gained by a familiar based on its master's level.

This feat may be taken multiple times. However, you may only take this feat once for every full four total character levels you possess. (For this purpose, use ECL.) Your spellcasting level in any given spellcasting class cannot be increased beyond your total character level minus 1. For example, a cleric 1 / wizard 7 cannot have this feat applied to his wizard class.

Thoughts?

 

[Chacal]

I like the BCL but I don't think fixing a mechanical flaw should cost something like a feat.

Chacal

 

[Quartz]

Spellcasting Advancement [Special]

Prerequisite
Multiclassed spellcaster, minimum ECL 4.

Perhaps make Practiced Spellcaster another prerequisite? And ECL 4 should be 'Can cast 2nd level spells' instead.