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

[lutecius]

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.

Personally, I *don't* see multiclassing as a problem to be fixed, except where the results are really suboptimal.

Thirded. I can't think of a multiclass combination that is more powerful than a "pure" spellcaster.

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.
[...]
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.

Requiring in-game development and justification is a good thing. Occasional quests are fine too, though they could get repetitive if they're needed every time a character multiclasses. But I don't think there should be automatical mechanical restrictions.

I'm not sure what broken combinations you are speaking of but I think they should be addressed individually.

Also, prestige classes are the proof that prerequisites are no guarantee of balance.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

What is this fixing? (And speaking of thread necromancy and and threads moving - shouldn't this be in House Rules? )

I see that it makes multiclassing harder, but how does it address multiclassing spellcasters with spellcasters or non-spellcasters?

 

[CleverNickName]

What is this fixing?
...
I see that it makes multiclassing harder, but how does it address multiclassing spellcasters with spellcasters or non-spellcasters?

It reduces the amount of cherry-picking that goes on in 3.5E, and forces characters to be more linear and distinct. If those things aren't a problem in your game, then you probably don't need to houserule it. If they are, this is a pretty simple way to handle it.

We wanted multiclassing to be a rather rare occurance, instead of the default assumption in character creation. (How many books have you read, where the hero is a neurologist/astronaut/drug dealer?)

I wish the trackback to the original thread worked, so that people could see the context in which this thread was forked from. If I remember correctly, people were discussing all sorts of ways to "fix" multiclassing, from minor tweaks to outright banning it. I presented this houserule as a simple, low-maintenance way of curbing the proliferation of multiclassing in the game. I wasn't trying to save the world here.

The problems with multiclassing and spellcasting are many and delicate, and probably cannot be resolved with a single houserule...at least not a simple one.

 

[kenmarable]

The problems with multiclassing and spellcasting are many and delicate, and probably cannot be resolved with a single houserule...at least not a simple one.

The best I've seen and have been using for a while now in my campaigns is:
When multiclassing, you count 1/2 of all other non-prestige class levels towards your spellcasting ability, up to double that class's level.

So if you are a fighter 6/wizard 1, you take half the fighter levels (3) and add it to your wizard level (to get 4), but due to the cap, you cast as a wizard 2 (since that's double 1). Fighter 10/wizard 10 would cast as a 15th level wizard which is still useful but not overpowered for a 20th level PC.

It even maps very well in power to the Mystic Theurge style band-aid PrCls, which I take as a good sign of balance, and even makes those otherwise bland PrClasses officially redundant.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It reduces the amount of cherry-picking that goes on in 3.5E, and forces characters to be more linear and distinct. If those things aren't a problem in your game, then you probably don't need to houserule it. If they are, this is a pretty simple way to handle it.

I see, that makes sense, and I think it will achieve its goal mostly.

An interesting mechanismn - and I don't know if one could integrate this with your idea, but it might be worth a try - is one I noticed in 4E. You can't cherry pick your Paragon Path or Epic Destiny (and that's the closest to PrCs 4E comes, and PrCs are a subtype of multiclassing). So maybe you shouldn't just make it hard to get into a class, but also to get out again.

The problems with multiclassing and spellcasting are many and delicate, and probably cannot be resolved with a single houserule...at least not a simple one.

It seems so.

 

[Spatula]

The problems with multiclassing and spellcasting are many and delicate, and probably cannot be resolved with a single houserule...at least not a simple one.

Well, it takes two houserules, but they are very simple.

1: Ditch the idea of wizard caster levels, cleric caster levels, etc. Everyone has one caster level, just as they have one base attack bonus.

2: Give every class a Base Casting Bonus, analogous to BAB.

Done.

 

[Mon]

The best I've seen and have been using for a while now in my campaigns is:
When multiclassing, you count 1/2 of all other non-prestige class levels towards your spellcasting ability, up to double that class's level.

So if you are a fighter 6/wizard 1, you take half the fighter levels (3) and add it to your wizard level (to get 4), but due to the cap, you cast as a wizard 2 (since that's double 1). Fighter 10/wizard 10 would cast as a 15th level wizard which is still useful but not overpowered for a 20th level PC.

It even maps very well in power to the Mystic Theurge style band-aid PrCls, which I take as a good sign of balance, and even makes those otherwise bland PrClasses officially redundant.

We have used almost the same system. The differences being:

(1) Use 1/3 of other levels instead of 1/2 (max of twice acutal level, as with you)
(2) Applies for all class features not just spells
(3) No prestige classes are used in the campaign at all, so no clause excluding them is needed

Works well IME. PRCs would mess it up good though, I reckon (without ever having tried it with PRCs, that is).

 

[Mon]

To the OP...

CNN, I've seen stuff similar to that before.

I think it was just a feat corresponding to each class though - you got the feat from your first class as a bonus, and had to take the feat of any additional classes as prerequisites to gaining levels in those classes.

Still, I think it is a neat idea despite what some others have said...

 

[Aus_Snow]

A bit of extra context, for my previous post here. . .

In the same (big) bunch of house rules, I also gave out more feats, and more skill points. Also, the prereqs were a bit less demanding, in some ways (I just looked them up). However, there were special feats I made up, for each type of spellcasting/power use/psychic stuff, which were free for character level 1, when starting with an appropriate class, but had to be bought like any other feat, for any character level other than 1st. These, some skill ranks (very few), and sometimes other things like specific armour and/or weapon proficiencies (again, things that must be bought for any character level other than 1st; i.e., classes do not grant weapon and armour proficiencies, beyond character level 1).

All of which was not a 'fix' for much, game-wise, I suppose - such fixes lie elsewhere in my comprehensive rewrite of 3e. No, this is far more to do with 'realism' (yeah, yeah, whatever) and 'flavour'; y'know, that stuff.

 

[kenmarable]

We have used almost the same system. The differences being:

(1) Use 1/3 of other levels instead of 1/2 (max of twice acutal level, as with you)
(2) Applies for all class features not just spells
(3) No prestige classes are used in the campaign at all, so no clause excluding them is needed

Works well IME. PRCs would mess it up good though, I reckon (without ever having tried it with PRCs, that is).

How's #2 working? I thought about that as well, but it was enough to get my group to accept just caster levels since it is such a clear underpower issue. I'm hoping of moving them to accepting all class abilities working that way, but one step at a time.