• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E A Thought about 5e Multi-classing...

Crazy Jerome

First Post
@Firzair , a way to do something similar that might be a bit more clear is to have a "zero level" entry fee in XP for each class, but from then on scale with whatever the normal progression is. As soon as you start on a new class, divide all XP up equally among the classes. However, the entry fee produces an effect similar to what you have.

For example, let's say that the entry fee for a new class is 5,000 XP. That's what you spend to get to level 1. Then we go with whatever 3E/4E type progression makes sense, perhaps +1000 XP for level 2, +2000 for level 3, etc. This assumes that the basic functions of the class are finally grapsed between the announcement of starting the new class and hitting level 1--i.e. paying the entry fee.

When you start your career, you got 5,000 XP for all that background stuff you did in your youth. Say a character hits 2nd level fighter, at 6,000 XP total. She then decides to mullticlass into rogue. She is now a 2/0 fighter/rogue. All XP is split equally. When she gains 10,000 XP, half of that will have gone into rogue, giving her 1st level in that class. The other half will have gained 3rd and then 4th level in fighter. As she continues her career, the rogue levels will eventually stablize at part of a level back (when the 6,000 XP gap becomes less meaningful).

If a character starts as a multiclass, they have 2,500 in each class, not having 1st level in either. For that reason, you'd like to distinguish some barebones "zero level" abilities from the 1st level one. Alternately, make such characters pick a primary, starting 1/0 as a multiclass.

Naturally, the exact entry fee and the split of XP between the classes is something that should be configurable by campaign. Some groups might prefer that the primary class always get more XP than the secondary or tertiary class, to keep the levels more spread out.

For "sub classes," assuming they exist, charge less of an entry fee. It's easier to pick up, for example, "paladin" from fighter or cleric, than it is from wizard or rogue. That could get complicated, though.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

fuindordm

Adventurer
I think both 1e style and 3e style are fine, and either would be good in 5e with only minor changes.

1e: advance in 2 or 3 simultaneously, avg HP best-of save progression. Certain class options ( specialisation ) are only available to single class characters. This was overpowered in 1e but would not be overpowered with the 3e XP table.

3e: fix by making all classes less front-loaded, use a generic prestige class that allows simultaneous BAB and spell progression.
 

Blackwarder

Adventurer
3e multi classing was the biggest problem of that edition, I remember sitting around a table with guys who had characters with FIVE! different classes roles into their characters... FIVE! I kid you not. And it lead to so much headaches and cookie cutter behavior that it rendered the game unfun to me.

My favorite multi classing system is 2e, I loved playing elven fighter/Mage or Dwarven cleric/rouge it also left my character grounded in itself and I couldn't just grab levels from any class that I want (regardless of how I got that level) just because some of its abilities caught my eye.

Warder
 

I don't get the hate for eclectic characters. I had a fighter/rogue/sorcerer/ranger/psion. That character was fun and had lots of talents. I like having a lot of toys, and being "just" a fighter would bore me.

Sure, it makes sense that some people would be great at one thing and never dabble, but there is definitely an archetype of the character who has a trick for every occasion.
 

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
I don't get the hate for eclectic characters. I had a fighter/rogue/sorcerer/ranger/psion. That character was fun and had lots of talents. I like having a lot of toys, and being "just" a fighter would bore me.

Sure, it makes sense that some people would be great at one thing and never dabble, but there is definitely an archetype of the character who has a trick for every occasion.
Also there WAS a practical limit on how many classes you could have, as soon as you added your 5th unbalanced class you couldn't get any more xp period, part of the problems associated with insane levels and the most ridiculous examples of multiclass was that people was houseruling away -or even outright ignoring- xp penalties from multiclassing. Of course you could just fill up all of your levels with a 1st level in 20 different classes and never face that problem but that is just too extreme. Again I want a system that doesn't try to protect us from ourselves.
 

Andor

First Post
I HATED 3e's introduction of "take a level" in whatever you want at next level. I think it totally destroyed the D&D experience.

Yes, yes, yes. It allowed for allll kinds customization. And all sortsa special/prestige/dare I say "Paragon" type paths. You could be a superhero if you wanted by level 4.

It just stuck in my "flavor/fluff" craw. I don't fully understand how it worked...Did you have to train with someone of a completely different occupation than you started with? How long did that take? Or did you just wake up one day and suddenly have all of the bells and whistles of the new class at level 1?

The optional training requirements for leveling were right there in the DMG if you wanted them. Classes are stuck somewhere between fluff and crunch in D&D since most people (ouside OotS) would say that classes do not exist within the world. Compared to something like Earthdawn where (ironicallly) in spite of the fact that it was a skill based system you has definite classes in the world which were magically empowered by following mythic archetypes and thus much stronger within their own speciality.

And as has been pointed out, dual classing in AD&D and 2e were not that different.

As for your idea, I'd rather see soemthing closer to 3e Multiclassing but with some brakes on it. There was some discussion about reducing the front loading on classes by spreading what would be equivalent to a 3e 1st level in a class over about 3 levels. So no 3e style power dipping because all the 'good stuff' lies deeper in the class.

You can also fix fluff with ... fluff. For example in Monte's Diamond Throne setting it's a very ritualized society, and so level advancement could be tied to a ritual commemorating a new plateau in your development, and so there is no in dungeon leveling.

Heck in the game I just finished the GM let us spend XP between every session, which actually resulted in my character learning powerful talents in the middle of a big multi-session fight! That did feel very odd. OTOH we had just spent 2 years travelling by starship so maybe I had been practicing and it just 'clicked'?
 

steeldragons

Steeliest of the dragons
Epic
I see this alllll of the time...WHAT on the nine earths does "front loading classes" MEAN?!?! How is whatever 3e did to "front load classes" differ from what had existed before??? Or whatever came into play in 4e...or Essentials.

I actually, sincerely, have no idea or concept of what this "front-loading classes" means.

Prease exprain.
--SD
 

YRUSirius

First Post
Front-loaded class: Most if not all important class features at level 1. Might get cheesy in 3E if you dip in 5 different classes at level 5.

The editions before didn't have 'problems' with multiclassing frontloaded classes, because there was a limit on how many classes you can dip into (3 at most I think) and mutliclassing 3 classes got other limits.

-YRUSirius
 

Ellington

First Post
An idea that might work is if multi-classing is to handle it with kits/archetypes. Each class would have a kit where it gained aspects of another suitable class, but lost some in return.

Like, the barbarian could get the following kits: skald (bard multiclass), shaman (druid multiclass) and spellrager (sorcerer multiclass) where it gained some features of those classes but lost some of the barbarian goodies instead. The rogue could get the trickster (wizard multiclass), the paladin could get the hospitaler kit (cleric multiclass), the fighter could get the bounty hunter kit (rogue multiclass) and so on and so on.

There wouldn't be infinite options, but it'd still be cool.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top