Level Up (A5E) 1 level fighter dip too easy?

[niklinna]

they do - and they very explicitly state heralds are an exception and get a regular exertion pool if they take another class level that gets an exertion pool, since heralds normally have to spend spell slots to get exertion.

Hm, it does not say that Heralds who take another class with combat maneuvers lose their ability to convert spell slots to exertion points. Nice perk.

 

[xiphumor]

@xiphumor, I can't remember if you addressed this or are already using this, but you may want to adapt this idea for your hexblade idea instead of straight-out giving them exertion. Or perhaps they gain fewer spell points than regular warlocks because they gain exertion.

I’m not super concerned about exertion because it’s mostly the same for everyone, and it scales with absolute level instead of class level. But thank you for the suggestion!

The bigger issue is a dip into fighter to change the progression of access to high degree maneuvers.

 

[niklinna]

The bigger issue is a dip into fighter to change the progression of access to high degree maneuvers.

That'll depend on what the other martial class is. Rogue and Herald are gonna get access to higher-ranked maneuvers much earlier with a Fighter dip (and eventually access to rank 5, which they otherwise wouldn't get at all). The other classes not so much. Check out the Summary tab in this spreadsheet.

 

[xiphumor]

That'll depend on what the other martial class is. Rogue and Herald are gonna get access to higher-ranked maneuvers much earlier with a Fighter dip (and eventually access to rank 5, which they otherwise wouldn't get at all).

I’m actually trying to make a 1/3 martial archetype, which under normal circumstances gets 6 maneuvers at a maximum of 3rd degree. A fighter dip for this archetype would be a HUGE change!

 

[niklinna]

I’m actually trying to make a 1/3 martial archetype, which under normal circumstances gets 6 maneuvers at a maximum of 3rd degree. A fighter dip for this archetype would be a HUGE change!

Yeah, you'd have to put something in your archetype to deal with that, like say the archetype's maneuver progression does not combine with base class progressions when multiclassing.

 

[xiphumor]

Yeah, you'd have to put something in your archetype to deal with that, like say the archetype's maneuver progression does not combine with base class progressions when multiclassing.

That's actually pretty brilliant. How about this?

"You use your archetype levels in every archetype that grants combat maneuvers to determine the highest degree of combat maneuvers you can learn, determined by the archetype with the greatest access, just as you would with class levels. However, if you have both class and archetype levels that grant combat maneuvers, track each separately.

For example, if you have 10 levels of fighter and you gain a level of Bladesworn Warlock, you may only take combat maneuvers of 1st degree for your new maneuvers known. You must take two more levels of fighter (or another class that grants combat maneuvers, such as rogue or ranger), in order to learn a maneuver of 4th degree."

 

[niklinna]

That's actually pretty brilliant. How about this?

"You use your archetype levels in every archetype that grants combat maneuvers to determine the highest degree of combat maneuvers you can learn, determined by the archetype with the greatest access, just as you would with class levels. However, if you have both class and archetype levels that grant combat maneuvers, track each separately.

For example, if you have 10 levels of fighter and you gain a level of Bladesworn Warlock, you may only take combat maneuvers of 1st degree for your new maneuvers known. You must take two more levels of fighter (or another class that grants combat maneuvers, such as rogue or ranger), in order to learn a maneuver of 4th degree."

Looks like that covers things pretty well. There might be some unintended interactions with other archetypes that grant maneuvers, but then, there are already some pretty powerful unexpected interactions within the base rules! The Narrator can always tweak the rules, of course.

Note that rogue and ranger grant combat maneuvers of 4th degree later than 10th level, however.

 

[xiphumor]

Note that rogue and ranger grant combat maneuvers of 4th degree later than 10th level, however.

But it doesn't matter, because the fighter class is what determines the level at which they access maneuver degrees, which was part of my point.

 

[niklinna]

But it doesn't matter, because the fighter class is what determines the level at which they access maneuver degrees, which was part of my point.

Ah, I see what you were getting at now. I over-scoped the parenthetical, and thought it meant you had 10 levels in rogue or ranger, instead of fighter.

 

[PauloR]

Yeah, you'd have to put something in your archetype to deal with that, like say the archetype's maneuver progression does not combine with base class progressions when multiclassing.

This should be baseline. But I would go one step further...

You should use the worst progression when defining maneuver progression, not the best progression. You multiclass to be more versatile, not to multiply power. That's the whole point of multiclassing IMO. Single class should always be more competent in their niche than multiclassed characters.