[3.5] WotC theory on multi-class spellcasters

[TimSmith]

His system makes me wonder why one would want to have more than one "primary spellcasting class" rather than the 4 we have now. It would simplify further if you simply bundled druids, clerics, wizards, and sorcerers into one "spellcaster" class. Take spellcasting out of all other classes. Deal with all spellcasting as multiclassing with this class.

You are spot on-that's basically what they HAVE done in Elements of Magic. The result is much more free form, but (just on the reading- not playtesting) it seems a bit more work. It has great potential for livening up spellcasting but is quite a departure from the iconic character classes that we all associate with D&D.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Compare a Fighter20 and a Barbarian 20 to a Barbarian10/Fighter10. They probably have the same combat ability.

Now compare a Wizard10/Cleric10 to a Wizard20 and a Cleric20.
They probably don`t have the same combat ability. The combocharacter is better in melee than a straight wizard, but still quite weak. Against most opponents, he will have a problem to hit him. If he uses a spell, he only has 10 caster levels to break any spell resistance, and doesn`t deal as much damage.
Sure, he has more options at hand, but none of these options will really help him in typical encounter.
If he goes up against 32 CR10 enemies (approxmiately Encounter Level 20), he might have an equal chance to the single classed characters, since his spellcaster level might probably break any spell resistance, and his attack bonus is high enough to hit their ACs, but probably even then the cleric20 or Wizard20 are better ...

This, at least, is the base idea for the problem.
You are correct when you say a multiclassed caster will have to lose something in exchange for the increased versatility, but he shouldn`t lose to much...

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[bret]

Another way to do it would be to give a magical power skill. Now, rather than automatically advancing in caster level a caster level check is a *skill* check with one of the magic types. There is probably a different magic type for each of the spell lists: Paladin, Ranger, Druid, Cleric, Bard, Wizard/Sorcerer.

When you multiclass, you still have skill points. If you want to continue to improve your caster level, you have to spend points cross-class in the skill.
Spells per Day and Spells Known are still based on class level, so you are still giving up a lot by going multiclass. Spell duration, range, penetration are all based on your magical skill.

Now your Rogue 16 / Sorc 4 can (if they spent the points) use their 2nd level spell to affect things of their own challenge level, but at the cost of some of their other skills. They don't have access to high level spells.

You could also allow a feat that gives +1 spell level to one spellcasting list. This would increase the spells per day and spells known.


I have no idea what ideas the design team tried here, but I think it would be really interesting to find out. Did any of the ideas get as far as the playtesters, and if so would the NDA eventually allow them to talk about it?

 

[WizarDru]

Mustrum sums up a lot of the issue right there. Multiclassing hurts spellcasters disproportinately to non-spellcasting classes. The loss of any level of spells with respect to others can be quite damaging, if spellcasting is your forte. Multiclass with rogue, ranger or heck, even bard, and you'll be more effective than if you mix and match spellcasters. A DRD10/WIZ10, CLR10/WIZ10, SOR10/DRD10 or any other combination is going to be weaker than, say a FTR10/ROG10.

It's not a question of specialist versus generalist. A FTR 20 could be either...he could be an archery master, or he could be a master of all melee weapons he can reach. But the penalties for a spellcaster are that different. A fighter can lose a few points from his maximum BAB and still be fairly effective. The loss of an iterative attack, for example, may be balanced out by the addition of a sneak attack ability. The loss of feats balanced by addition of more skill points. Utility is traded for utility.

But a spellcaster depends on his caster level for many things, such as beating SR and dispel checks. His lack of access to higher magics and his lower DCs for common spells reduces his effectiveness. Simply put, it costs him more to multiclass than a non-spellcaster. Whether or not you see that as a problem or not is another matter entirely.

 

[Petrosian]

Compare a Fighter20 and a Barbarian 20 to a Barbarian10/Fighter10. They probably have the same combat ability.
Now compare a Wizard10/Cleric10 to a Wizard20 and a Cleric20.
They probably don`t have the same combat ability.

While this is true, the fighter-barb also does not gain much of anything in terms of broadening his range of abilities over the barb or the fighter. All of his abilities remain focuses in a relatively narrow band, which is precisely why they also stack together well to produce power.

In other word, the fighter-barb is almost as TALL as the fighter or the barb but also almost as narrow.

The cleric-wiz has, by comparison to either a cleric or a wiz a huge increase in width, gaining lots of new abilities by gaining spells of both major spellcasting types. The addition of domains, the various melee stuff also helps the wiz side a lot.

So while the cleric-wiz is not as tall as the cleric or the wiz by a long shot, he is much much wider than either one.

There is a direct linkage between overlap of the class abilities and gain in power... the more thay overlap, the more power but the less gain in flexibility.

Why does a Wiz10/Clr10 have to be on par in spell casting ability to a Wiz20 or a Clr20?

He doesn't.

What he needs to be able to do is to play on par with other characters of the same total level. With spell level being an element in some many things, including saves and basic spell power, the current reduction in spell power for anything close to the baseline 1-1 multiclass is seeming too steep at the higher level. Throwing a 10d6 attack with a save that is 3-4 DCs down does not compare as anything but a waste of time against a foe who can reasonable handle a 18d6 attack with a much higher dc.

I think, personally, the happy medium would be for a cleric-10/wiz-10 to have spellcasting ability in each class that approximates that of 15th level casters... though i have not spent the time to devise the mehcanics to make this happen. 2 spell levels down seems a good trade off in terms of loss of height for gain in width.

It could be as simple as adding a few feats for MYSTIC SYNERGY which allow a character with multiple spellcasting classes to raise his spell DCs and caster levels.

****************
MYSTIC SYNERGY
PRE: Must have two or more different spellcasting classes
Effect: The caster level and save DC for all spells for ONE of his classes are raised by 1 for every three levels in the other spell casting class (round down.) So for example, a cleric-9/wizard-11 who took this feat for his cleric class would cast any cleric spells at 12th level as opposed to 9th for all caster level purposes and with a bonus to save DCs of +3.
Special: This feat may be taken once for each class, so a cleric-wizard could take it twice, once for wizard and once for cleric.
*******************

 

[TiQuinn]

But a spellcaster depends on his caster level for many things, such as beating SR and dispel checks. His lack of access to higher magics and his lower DCs for common spells reduces his effectiveness. Simply put, it costs him more to multiclass than a non-spellcaster. Whether or not you see that as a problem or not is another matter entirely.

Also fighting ability is measured by BAB, which is the same across the classes. Spellcasters do not have a common stat that they can base their spellcasting ability off of. Part of the problem is the distinction between Arcane spells vs. Divine spells. Remove that barrier, and the problem could probably be easily solved.

 

[Quickbeam]

Great thread topic!!

I played a character several months ago (Cleric3/Wizard3), who was working his way towards becoming a Geomancer. And while he was certainly versatile, and very interesting to roleplay, he wasn't nearly as useful to the party as I would have liked. I spent an inordinately large amount of time trying to find creative methods for employing his spells, feats, and skills, in an effort to contribute to the group's survival and success.

A multiclass Rogue/Ranger or Fighter/Barbarian does not encounter these problems. Hopefully, a meaningful solution will present itself in the future. Until then, RangerWickett offers a great starting point for rectifying this situation. And with various personal/House Rule tweaks, maybe we'll find an answer right here at EN World !

 

[KDLadage]

Well... the reason a Bar10/Ftr10 works is because, in effect, they are both Fighters -- one is just a forced specialist fighter, while the other has some options on being a specialist. In fact, for all intents and purposes, the Fighter, Ranger, Paladin and Barbaraian are all the same class... It is just that the Ranger, Paladin and Barbarian are specialized forms of Fighter that gain a few spells or spell-like abilities along the way.

But as far as the Clr/Wiz combo is concerned -- try a Sor/Wiz combo if you want to see a hosed class combination. Now... as far as dealing with the problems of the primarilly spell-casting classes... how do you fix this elegantly?

Well, off the top of my head, and with the restriction of maintaining the class system, I would say that divorcing much of the classes abilities from the actual class level would be a start.

Base it on the skill system -- Turn the entire spell-casting experience into a system much akin to the one in the Epic Level handbook such that spells are ranked, not by spell levels, but by the DC needed to successfully cast them.

Allow the casters to choose any spells they wish as they advance (perhaps with some restrictions) ... but have the DCs of the spells set such that it will take a lot of {insert skill here} to get those so-called upper level spells handled. Now... let us assume we have two skills here... Spellcraft (Arcane) for arcane spell casting, and Spellcraft (Divine) for divine spell-casting.

The Wizard/Sorcerer classes would have Spellcraft (Arcane) as a class skill, and might have Spellcraft (Divine) as a cross-class skill -- but unless the Wizard had at least a level of Cleric (or Druid, or what-have you) then the ability to cast Divine Spells would never have been granted at all. The Cleric/Druid classes would have Spellcraft (Divine) as a class skill and might have Spellcraft (Arcane) as a cross class skill. Same restrictions as before.

Paladins and Rangers would have Spellcraft (Divine) as a cross class skill as well, but might take some penalty to spell casting to balance them off...

Thus, in this methodology, the Clr10/Wiz10 would have a reduced ability to cast spells of the upper ranks, but not cripplingly so.

 

[Zhure]

The Problem summarized (as I see WOTC expressing it): multi-classed spellcasters are weaker than single-class spellcasters.

Specifically: Lower DC's, insufficient spell penetration, lower dice of effect.

The answer then, to me, is simple, implement a new mechanic that says all spellcasting levels stack for purposes of level-based effects.

Thus, in our Wiz 10/ Cleric 10 archetype:
-Dispel would be 1d20 + 10 (maxes out at 10)
-Greater Dispel would be 1d20+20
-Fireball would be 10d6 (maxes at 10)
-a spell resistance check would be 1d20+20
-a cure moderate wounds would be 3d8+15
-a cure serious wounds would be 4d8+20
-etc

The only thing the multiclassed caster loses out on is higher level spells, but he gains a breadth of lower level spells. Paladin and Ranger levels still count as 1/2.

Other notes:
-A Sorcerer 10/ Wiz 10 is a little hosed in the base rules, until he picks up a ring of wizardry or two.
-For those who insist on bringing back the dreaded Cleric/Magic-User death machine from 2e and before, I currently recommend they play a Cleric of Magic and Spells.

/ramble
Greg

 

[BVB]

Why does a Wiz10/Clr10 have to be on par in spell casting ability to a Wiz20 or a Clr20? ... why should a generallist be on par at anything with a pair (or more) of specialists?

... the multiclass system is broken? No, it means that the character took a sub-optimal career path.

(vigorous nodding of approval) Amen.

And besides that, the very nature of magic makes it massively incompatable with the skills subsystem and the melee subsystem. Magic can do almost *anything* with a wide range of effects. "Balance" is very subjective at the higher levels.