Alt multiclassing proposal

[Voadam]

I think Ranger Wicket and Wulf's universal spell slot systems can work for creating fairly balanced multicaster casters, but they require reshaping classes a bunch including single classed characters.

Here is my proposal for increasing the power of multiclassed casters without going overboard or creating significant structural changes to the existing class structures.

1 caster level equals character level. (This affects SR and specific spell effects but not number of spell slots or spells known).

2 spell slots and spells known are based on specific class levels and they stack (a character has all one big pool of spell slots, multiclass full casters generally have lots of low level slots and fewer high level ones, similar to a mystic theurge).

3 spontaneous and preparation spell casting still applies to each individual class (multiclassing to the two types works like clerics with spontaneous inflict/cure spells; prepare the prepared spells but they can be swapped out spontaneously).

4 a feat can be taken to increase the spell slots in a single caster class by one class level. This can be taken multiple times but class level for spell slot purposes cannot exceed character level.

These are based on the premise that because spellcasting high level spells is the core source of a spellcaster's power at every level 3.5 multiclassing spellcasters are weak on the balance scale compared against straight classed spellcasters, straight classed martial characters, or multiclassed martial characters.

Implications of my proposal:

This means a multiclassed caster can use his magic against creatures with level appropriate SR.

Characters of the same level casting the same spell have the same game effect.

Easy to handle mixing of spellcasting classes (bard, assassin, ranger, etc.)

An even split full caster can spend significant character resources (feats) to get the top level of spell slots (a fighter 10 wizard 10 who spends 7 feats on spell slots has 9th level spell slots (17th level wizard spell slots) though only 5th level spells known). They are not as good a spell caster as a straight classed one (fewer feats, fewer spells known, fewer high level spells known) but can handle a good amount of level appropriate challenges with their magic. A 10 cleric/10 wizard will have 5th level spells known in both but with spell slot and metamagic feats can use any of them in higher level slots.

A character who dips into a spellcasting class can still do effective things with his magic, but he won't be casting high level spells that can by themselves generally handle level appropriate challenges. Conceptually this character has supplemented themselves with magic and has not focused on it.

This system works pretty well for dipping, even split caster/noncaster, even split full casters and multiclassing with spellcasters that do not use slots (warlocks).

It is mechanically easy to overlay on the existing 3.5 system including OGL and non OGL expansion classes.

It breaks down a bit though with an even split triple classed full caster whose full class power concepts are all based on spellcasting as they won't have top level slots unless one class is given at least half the levels like a full split two classed full spellcaster.

 

[Colonelpuddinhead]

Alright... what do you think about multiclassing for the other non-spellcasting classes? Do it just as in 3.5?

 

[Voadam]

Balance Uber Alles!

Alright... what do you think about multiclassing for the other non-spellcasting classes? Do it just as in 3.5?

I think multiclassing for most martial classes is fairly balanced. A Fighter X/Rogue Y is about equal in character power to a Fighter of X+Y level or a Rogue of X+Y level.

There are a few areas of standard 3.5 multiclassing that should be tweaked IMO though. There are odd math issues with the current set up.

Saves and BAB should be fractional advances based on levels of standard progression rates and not starting anew in the classes each time.

A Fighter X/Barbarian Y should be as tough (fortitude save) and have as much mental resistance (willpower save) as a straight classed fighter or barbarian of level X+Y, not more fortitude and less willpower. The multiclassed character should blend the characteristeristics of the two classes, not go more extreme in either strength or weakness than either of the component parts. A barbarian 20 should have the strongest base fortitude and weakest base will power of any 20th level character. Multiclassed characters should always maneuver between the extremes of the straight classed characters, not outside them.

Similarly a monk 1/rogue 1 should have the same BAB as a straight classed rogue or monk 2.

I also think that xp penalties for multiclassing should be removed entirely (as they are for favored classes, prestige classes and multiclassing within 2 levels difference). XP penalties make some characters lower level than others, disrupting power balance. Humans get enough benefits from the extra feat and skill points while the racial dabbling multiclass archetypes do not need to be mechanically coerced IMO.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Regarding the OP, I personally think that caster level = class level is too powerful. Especially for multiclassed characters who are also gaining class abilities, bonus feats, or whatever. I simply think that it is too powerful.

However, I also don't like the fractional values proposed in the other thread (or the varying rate, either). That adds complexity that I just don't like. People hate fractions enough as it is. Whole numbers and consistancyis the way to go for me. So, here's what I propose:

Caster level = character level - 1 per every three non-spellcaster class levels (round up).

So ... a rogue 1 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 1. A rogue 2 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 2. A rogue 3 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 3. A rogue 4 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 3. Etc.

The upside is that a theurge style now looks more playable without being over-the-top. A wizard 7 / cleric 3 / mystic theurge 10 has a wizard caster level of 19 and a cleric caster level of 17. Thus, not 20 /20 ... but 19 /17. I think that's a bit better, personally.

Additionally, I would argue that the response to non-caster multiclassing is a bit off. While I think a rogue 1 / fighter 5 is about the same amount of power as a fighter 6 or a rogue 6, I don't think that a rogue 3 / fighter 3 is as powerful as the full classed character. Ingeneral, I've found that the more balanced the levels are in multiclassing the worse the build is in terms of power. Just food for thought .... and only my opinion.

Now, for a bit of off-OP questioning ...

If one has a problem with multiclassing, why continue to use a classed system? Why not use a classless game? The one that got me hooked on classless design is Buy the Numbers. It is a quality product, but it didn't build characters using the progressions that I would have chosen. I've got a new product coming out through Dreamscarred Press that is also a classless design system. Here is a link for the discussion thread. The product is in layout currently - due out soon.

Let me give you an example of what a classless system can do. Specifically, the classless system that I am publishing through DSP:

A "true" magus that has 20th level casting in both sorcerer (or wizard) and cleric. In one of those classes the caster has access to 8th level slots of this magnitude: 3/3/3/3/3/3/3/2/2. In the other class the character hass access to 9th level slots of this magnitude: 3/3/3/3/3/3/3/3/3/3. The character has 20d4, +10 BAB, typical saves for a 20th level caster, 7 total feats (IE, no bonus feats), and the cleric's ability to spontaneously cure. In essence, the character gains near full casting in both classes for a reduced amount of spell slots, the loss of turning, and what bonus feats the character might have gained.

I realize that what you're talking about isn't necessarily a true magus. You're talking about a caster class merging with something like rogue or fighter. But in a classless system you can do that and still have a caster level of 20. The diference between this and what you propose above is that you wouldn't automatically be able to gain all the class abilities, or HD, or BAB or whatever that you would get in standard multiclassing. There has to be a trade-off somewhere in order for a character to have caster ability = character level.

 

[Voadam]

Regarding the OP, I personally think that caster level = class level is too powerful. Especially for multiclassed characters who are also gaining class abilities, bonus feats, or whatever. I simply think that it is too powerful.

However, I also don't like the fractional values proposed in the other thread (or the varying rate, either). That adds complexity that I just don't like. People hate fractions enough as it is. Whole numbers and consistancyis the way to go for me. So, here's what I propose:

Caster level = character level - 1 per every three non-spellcaster class levels (round up).

So ... a rogue 1 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 1. A rogue 2 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 2. A rogue 3 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 3. A rogue 4 / sorcerer 1 has a caster level of 3. Etc.

The upside is that a theurge style now looks more playable without being over-the-top. A wizard 7 / cleric 3 / mystic theurge 10 has a wizard caster level of 19 and a cleric caster level of 17. Thus, not 20 /20 ... but 19 /17. I think that's a bit better, personally.

Nonlethal, I'm talking about caster level equalling character level, not spellcasting slots or spells known which are based on class level. Perhaps I was not clear enough in my initial post, I'll edit that to be explicit.

A monk 19 sorcerer 1 would have the same number of 1st level spells known and spell slots as a sorcerer 1. They would just be penetrating spell resistance designed for 20th level encounters, resisting a dispel magic counterspell like a 20th level caster, and having the range and damage of a 20th level caster with their 4 or so magic missiles. A 20th level character doing 4 5d4+1 magic missile spells a day does not seem overpowered to me. This seems the most extreme example.

As I stated above I believe the true power of the dedicated spellcaster is in the top spell slots and highest level spells (whether metamagicked or straight). This is why IMO losing even one or two full spellcasting levels is a significant power hit for full spellcasters.

Letting caster level slow down means SR becomes even tougher for the multiclassed character designed around spell use, and their already lower level spells will have even less effect against encounters designed for a straight classed spellcaster. This will lead to theurge types either having lots of spells that fail or have only minor effects or forcing them to specialize in spells that are not significantly impacted by caster level.

 

[Voadam]

Additionally, I would argue that the response to non-caster multiclassing is a bit off. While I think a rogue 1 / fighter 5 is about the same amount of power as a fighter 6 or a rogue 6, I don't think that a rogue 3 / fighter 3 is as powerful as the full classed character. Ingeneral, I've found that the more balanced the levels are in multiclassing the worse the build is in terms of power. Just food for thought .... and only my opinion.

Why do you think the rogue 3/fighter 3 is less powerful than a rogue 1/fighter 5?

They have the same BAB. One has traded a bonus fighter feat and some hp for evasion and an extra d6 of sneak attack and extra skill points?

They give up the option of weapon specialization at this level and have a slightly different save array but it does not seem that different.

Rogues and fighters are pretty exemplary for me in multiclassing working at most any mix of levels as you get regular defined benefits (sneak attack or bonus combat feats) in each class at regular level intervals for you to mix and match to taste.

I think the equal split leading to power drain is true for spellcasting classes, but I feel most martial classes blend well. A barbarian 10/fighter 10 for instance has a +20 BAB and tons of hp and is a decent mix of feat chain mastery and rage. I'd feel fine having one be the melee combatant in a 20th level party instead of barbarian 20 or a fighter 20.

 

[Voadam]

If one has a problem with multiclassing, why continue to use a classed system? Why not use a classless game? The one that got me hooked on classless design is Buy the Numbers. It is a quality product, but it didn't build characters using the progressions that I would have chosen. I've got a new product coming out through Dreamscarred Press that is also a classless design system. Here is a link for the discussion thread. The product is in layout currently - due out soon.

For me I like the core 3.5 class and multiclassing rules but feel the multiclassing rules have a few specific problems (spellcasting power loss, wierd save and bab progressions, xp penalites).

Buy the Numbers Style classless design is definitely one option, as would the three generic classes from Unearthed Arcana (warrior, spellcaster, expert) with class abilities becoming feats or d20 modern style talent trees.

The point for me is to keep classes and tweak multiclassing, not to overhaul the whole class system.

Good luck with your new book, it sounds like Buy the Numbers based off of levels instead of pure xp costs for powers the way I understood Buy the Numbers to be. If so it sounds interesting.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

<snipped for space reasons> Good luck with your new book, it sounds like Buy the Numbers based off of levels instead of pure xp costs for powers the way I understood Buy the Numbers to be. If so it sounds interesting.

Thanks. I appreciate it!

<snipped for space reasons> I think the equal split leading to power drain is true for spellcasting classes, but I feel most martial classes blend well. A barbarian 10/fighter 10 for instance has a +20 BAB and tons of hp and is a decent mix of feat chain mastery and rage. I'd feel fine having one be the melee combatant in a 20th level party instead of barbarian 20 or a fighter 20.

Okay, well, I definately agree with you that the difference is significantly more pronounced in spellcasting classes. That is absolutely true and I wouldn't argue that.

As for the others, perhaps rogue and fighter are bad choices because few of their abilities (if any) rely on class level. Perhaps your reflection has caused me to refine my point more accurately. The more class abilities a class has that is based on their class level, the more poorly multiclassing works. If you count caster level as a class ability, this sentence even includes spellcasting.

Take a Ranger 10 / Paladin 10. Yes, they immediately have decreased casting ... but we both agree that's a problem so I don't think more needs to be said. The combo character has depleted abilities in almost everthing they get. Favored enemy is weaker. Ability to hide is weaker. Animal Companion is weaker. Aura of good is weaker, Smite is weaker, Lay on hands is weaker, Turn Undead is weaker, Special Mount is weaker, Remove Disease is weaker.

One might argue that the blended character has the same BAB, roughly the same HP, reasonably close saves, etc to the straight character. One might argue that their versatility makes up for their general weaker abilities, but I lift up the Theurge spellcasting as a reasonable illustration that if it isn't true for spellcasting it probably isn't true for class-level based class abilities. The fact that almost all the class abilities gained (except for Divine Grace and all the ranger abilities that emulate feats) are significantly weaker really hampers the character. And this isn't even going into the lack of spellcasting lost/gained.

I think perhaps a better proposal might beto take my original suggestion and change it to:

Class Ability Level = Character Level - 1 per three levels not in the class.

So, a Paladin 10 / Ranger 10 would have an ability level of 16 for all the abilities that are based on class level - including caster level. In the specific case of casting spells that wouldn't gain them extra slots or spells known ... it would just raise their caster level to 16.

Nonlethal, I'm talking about caster level equalling character level, not spellcasting slots or spells known which are based on class level. Perhaps I was not clear enough in my initial post, I'll edit that to be explicit.

<snipped for space reasons>

Letting caster level slow down means SR becomes even tougher for the multiclassed character designed around spell use, and their already lower level spells will have even less effect against encounters designed for a straight classed spellcaster. This will lead to theurge types either having lots of spells that fail or have only minor effects or forcing them to specialize in spells that are not significantly impacted by caster level.

I know that you weren't talking about spells known and spell slots. I wasn't either! I thnk there is something inherently wrong with someone being able to say that they are gaining caster level strength equal to a character who is actually taking a level in a said class. There has to be a consequence for taking levels in a different class, and I don't think that reduced spells known and reduced spell slots is adequate. That's just my opinion. I think that a reduced caster level should also be part of the trade-off. The fact is that the character is not pursuing the casting class in any way shape or form.

Now, I also agree that the multiclassing system penalizes multiclassed characters too much. But I like the above level I suggested. A rogue 3 / sorcerer 12 would cast their spells at a caster level of 14, not 15. A rogue 6 / sorcer 9 would cast their spells at acaster level of 13, not 15. For me, that is a more than adequate penalty for multiclassing. It more adequately says that the character has not allocated their full attention to their casting pursuits without completely neutering the caster's ability.

I do firmly believe that a penalty to caster level should be imposed. Just not one as harsh as the core rules indicates.

 

[scruffygrognard]

Please bear with me and read this through (even though it's a bit long). This alternative to multiclassing emulates AD&D multiclassing (with a little stolen from 4th edition):

SPLIT-CLASSING
Any character, at the beginning of their adventuring career, may choose to dabble in a second character class as they advance in their chosen, primary, class. Such character are called split-classed characters.

A player who split-classes must decide which class is his primary class and which is his secondary class at the start of play. Throughout the character's split-class career, the class features for his primary class are modified by that character's secondary class, though the character NEVER loses any features of his primary class.

Split-classed characters advance in level as if they were one character level higher than their actual character level (+1 LA) and may never change their secondary class (their secondary class modifications are ALWAYS applied to the character's primary class, even if their primary class changes). The character's primary class levels determine his character level in all instances... the secondary class only serves to modify the primary class's features.

So far I'm only including rules for taking one of the 4 "core" classes (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue and Wizard) as a secondary class.

Cleric:
The character gains simple weapon proficiency, as well as proficiency with light armor, medium armor proficiency and shields if they lack these.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d10 or greater die type. The character gains clerical spellcasting ability as a cleric of 2/3 (rounding fractions down) of their character level. They may turn as a cleric of 2/3 of their character level. Concentration and knowledge (religion) are added to their primary class's class list.

Fighter:
The character gains all weapon and armor proficiencies. All arcane spell failure percentages are reduced by 10%.
Characters with fighter as a secondary class gain 1 bonus feat at level 3 and every 3 levels thereafter. Their hit die type increases by one category (to a maximum of a d10). Their BAB improves by one category (to a maximum of +1 BAB/level).

Rogue:
The character gains proficiency with light armor and all rogue weapons. They also gain the trapfinding ability and the sneak attack ability. Sneak Attack starts at +1d6 at level 2 and increases by +1d6 every 3 levels thereafter.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d10 or greater die type. The character gains 4 additional skill points per level (to a maximum of 8/level) and may add up to 6 rogue skills to their class skill list.

Wizard:
The character gains wizard spellcasting ability as a wizard of 2/3 of their character level. The character gains Scribe Scroll at level 2 and gains a bonus wizard feat at levels 2, 8, 14 and 20.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d8 or greater die type. All Knowledge skills, as well as concentration and spellcraft are added to their primary class's class list.

EXAMPLES

Fighter (Wizard)
A split-classed Fighter (Wizard) 6 would have all of the Fighter class features of a 6th level Fighter but, due to dabbling in Wizard would adjust his character in the following ways:
He'd cast as a 4th level Wizard.
His HD type would drop to a d8.
He'd gain all Knowledge skills as class skills and would gain concentration and spellcraft as class skills.

He would have 6 character levels BUT would be considered 7th level for the purposes of advancing in level.

Wizard (Fighter)
A split-classed Wizard (Fighter) 6 would have all of the Wizard class features of a 6th level Wizard but, due to dabbling in Fighter would adjust his character in the following ways:
His BAB would be +4 (it would increase by +3 every 4 levels).
His HD type would increase to a d8.
He'd have all weapon and armor proficiencies.
His arcane spell failure percentages would be reduced by 10%.
He'd have 2 bonus Fighter feats.

He would have 6 character levels BUT would be considered 7th level for the purposes of advancing in level.

 

[Voadam]

The more class abilities a class has that is based on their class level, the more poorly multiclassing works. If you count caster level as a class ability, this sentence even includes spellcasting.

I agree, this is a good point for analyzing multiclasses in D&D. However I think it should be further refined because certain class features are static abilities where it does not matter if you take them at 1st level or 20th. Other bonuses get stronger linearly with class level. Others have a steeper power curve increase over levels in the class. A fighter gets 1 bonus feat whether it is 6th level or 20th. A rogue gets +1d6 sneak attack whether it is level 1 or level 19 in the class. A paladin gains +cha bonus in lay on hands whether it is 5th level or 15th. These are equivalent power value. A wizard/cleric/druid gains a new 9th level spell slot at 17th level but only a 3rd level spell slot at 5th class level.

I would say that spell slot advancement is qualitatively different from sneak attack advancement. A d6 of sneak attack cumulatively adds to martial combat at both low and high levels. A low level spell is much more situational.

Take a Ranger 10 / Paladin 10. Yes, they immediately have decreased casting ... but we both agree that's a problem so I don't think more needs to be said. The combo character has depleted abilities in almost everthing they get. Favored enemy is weaker. Ability to hide is weaker. Animal Companion is weaker. Aura of good is weaker, Smite is weaker, Lay on hands is weaker, Turn Undead is weaker, Special Mount is weaker, Remove Disease is weaker.

One might argue that the blended character has the same BAB, roughly the same HP, reasonably close saves, etc to the straight character. One might argue that their versatility makes up for their general weaker abilities, but I lift up the Theurge spellcasting as a reasonable illustration that if it isn't true for spellcasting it probably isn't true for class-level based class abilities. The fact that almost all the class abilities gained (except for Divine Grace and all the ranger abilities that emulate feats) are significantly weaker really hampers the character. And this isn't even going into the lack of spellcasting lost/gained.

The question is are the level 11-20 abilities of either class combined with its 1-10 abilities significantly more powerful than combining those 1-10 abilities with the 1-10 abilities of the other class. If they are roughly equal then it is balanced to multiclass. If not then it is unbalanced favoring either single classed or multiclassed depending on which way the power lies.

I think you are giving too much weight to the class based abilities for these classes.

This 10/10 character does allright IMO. He has half the power in each of his class level based abilities but they work well together to form a decent gestalt. Favored enemy and smite can stack on the same blow. He can ride on his paladin mount and have his companion flank for him. His tracking and save bonuses are not level dependent. His paladin grace save bonus adds to his evasion save. He can use full turning checks to power divine feats. He has the maximum BAB and iterative attacks.

At heart paladins and rangers are warrior types who smack things in combat. Their class abilities help them do so in different ways with either flat bonuses or linearly increasing powers. Their powers are not the attacks themselves but are only boosts to them. Mixing and matching the classes to blend the powers to taste seems viable to me.

The mystic theurge does not seem to be an applicable comparison to me. Spellcasters have so much of their power tied into the top spell slots that the 10/10 full caster is significantly underpowered because he does not have any top slots and all his spells are underpowered for the encounters expected to be faced. He generally cannot signigicantly combine the two class abilities the way a ranger/paladin can when smacking a foe with full BAB, the theurge type can only do one reduced class ability at a time.