Are multiclass spellcasters really a non-viable choice?

[Gnimish88]

It's called choice.

Just like you have the choice to play other game systems if you want a lower powered magic system without drastically changing the system.

True enough and I fully support freedom of choice, but the question becomes, why not try another game system? Certainly, no one would argue that if I wanted to play a high tech game with magic and monsters, I couldn't modify D&D to do so, but why WOULDN'T I try Shadow Run, for example? It comes down to this, I have read and listened to alot of people complain about this and that aspect of D&D, without bothering to try another system before they launch into how much better D&D would be if X changes were made. Note, I am not making that last accusation against anyone on this board, so don't get on my case about how I don't know your particular game experience.

 

[Thanee]

- 1 spellcaster major class, 1 non-spellcaster minor class

I have played a few such characters, most noteably rogue/wizard/arcane trickster and currently rogue/cleric, the two I have played from level 1-2 to pretty high levels 13-15.

I found both characters to be fairly powerful, actually (this is under 3.0 rules, however, I'm not sure how the overall changes to 3.5 would affect them).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darklone]

Clr1/WizX proved to be lots more useful IMC than a sorcerer... At least till level8 now.

 

[Sigma]

I'm a firm believer in not diluting spellcaster levels. There's a guy in our group who can never resist the temptation to take a level or two in some other class. His most recent fiasco began with a lawful good necromancer that decided to take a level of ranger. Not only did his spellcasting get diluted, he kept trying to be a tank. He'd waste bull's strengths on himself (back when they lasted hour/level) instead of putting them on the other pure melee combatants. I suppose that's more an example of bad playing than diluting spellcasting.

I have played a wiz3/drd3/mystic theurge3, and have to say I won't do it again. The spell diversity just doesn't make up for the fact that your spells don't last as long, do as much damage, or have as long of a range. Throw in the fact that you're a spell level or two behind the pure casters and you can't punch through SR to save your butt, and things really suck. Plus, to top it off, you don't get the bonus spells or higher saves you would reap if you could focus on one spellcasting attribute. On the other hand, the character was a utility toolkit, so long as the reduced duration wasn't a problem.

To make a good multi-class spellcaster, I think you'd need to do something like the mindmage that was in Dragon a couple issues ago. I haven't had a chance to playtest it, but the class allowed you to mix arcane and psion abilties so that you could increase your ability to penetrate SR, cast more high levels spells by swaping out power points for spell levels (and vice versa), and otherwise combine the two abilities to make up for their deficiencies.

The other thing that might make a multi-class spellcaster good is if there were a spell like the old haste that let you cast multiple low level spells in a round. That way you could increase your effectiveness by combining effects as a single class caster never could and yet not have those effects be individually as powerful as a single class caster.

 

[MerakSpielman]

True enough and I fully support freedom of choice, but the question becomes, why not try another game system?

It's taken the members of our group years, and many still don't really understand the 3rd edition rules. They just play for fun, and are very slow at grasping nuances. None of them want to put out the effort to try to learn another system.

----

As far as multiclassed spell casters, I just created a Cleric 5/Wizard 5/True Necromancer 10. Pretty buff, I can tell you. Maybe not as powerful as a 20th level cleric or 20th level wizard, but he does have the spells per day of a 15th level cleric, as well as the True Necromancer abilities. Or are we not allowed to use PrCs?

 

[thorimar]

trade-off

Multi-classing spellcasters has a few simple limitations as mentioned above. The most important one is knowing and accepting your role in the party. I keep seeing multi-class Wiz and Sor builds in these threads that just plain suck for casting ability. And they managed to dilute their combat ability in the process. Think about what the party needs and what you want to play. Wizards suck at traditional combat, they can excel at tac-nuke type spell casting. For a Wiz or Sor to really pack the punch you expect, they need to stay pretty pure, no more than 4 or 4 non-caster lvls over the life of the character.

Another point. I like flavor as much as the next player. My current character is a Dwarven Ftr 1/ Clrc 5/ Art 2. Artificer from the Green Ronin line is a crafter. Basic cleric stats (BAB and saves), +1 caster lvl, bonus feats from the Craft series of feats. Nice, but not a combat machine. Or a casting machine. Am I as good as a Clr 8? I'm 1 lvl behind in casting, +1 BAB, +1 feat, full martial weapon access, tower shield prof. I think I balanced the lost caster lvl pretty well. Clerics rock for multiclassing. The only class that really losses anything is the arcane casters, but with the right domains it can actually work out better. I had originally intended this character to be more spell-focused, but the group lost someone and I became the tank in the party. Am I as good a tank as the Bbn 2/ Fgtr 6 I had hoped to have in front of me? No, but I fill the role pretty well.

One last point. In a party of single class characters, the multi-class always slips behind. But if you are filling a role that is needed, like a few levels of rogue to get some skill diversity for traps, it is usually worth the trade-off, even for a spellcasting class.

Thorimar

- Oh yeah, and the next person that tells me they don't have a cleric in the party, I'd like to know why not. They are one of the most versitile classes in the game (single and multiclass) and the staple of healing. How do you stay alive more than one or two encounters? Maybe I'll start a thread...

 

[Silveras]

It depends

It really depends on a couple of factors in the campaign.

As mentioned before, if the DM is running published adventures (which presume a standard 4-single-class-characters party), the mixed-class spellcaster will be in some degree of distress (depends on how mix the levels are).

Also, if the campaign style is mostly combat-oriented, the lack of spell "firepower" will become readily apparent.

There are three main issues:
1) access to higher level spells
2) effectiveness of the spells you do have
3) ability to penetrate opponents SR

Multi-classing a spellcaster weakens all three of these factors. Unlike BAB and Saves, the spellcasting ability does not get even a minor benefit from the other class(es) taken.

Arguably, a Fighter's "core competencies" are BAB and Feats, while that of a Wizard is spellcasting. The Fighter's "core competencies" are shared, to some degree, by all classes -- but the Fighter excels in those areas. On the other hand, ONLY a Wizard gets prepared arcane spellcasting (leaving aside PrCs for the moment), and even multiclassing in other arcane spellcaster classes leaves the character with 2 or 3 weaker spell lists. A Fighter who takes some levels of Wizard still gets some BAB, hit points, and Save bonuses, and even some feats. A Wizard who takes some levels of Fighter gets BAB, hp, Saves, and Feats -- but nothing added to his/her "core competency", arcane spellcasting.

The impact of this depends on the campaign. In a "standard" dungeon-oriented campaign, the impact is brutal. The wizard who took 1 or 2 levels of Fighter is one spell level "behind" where s/he should be -- having 3rd level spells when 4th level spells would be best for the challenges faced. And those spells are under-powered, doing 6d6 instead of 8d6, so requiring an extra round or two, or a second casting, to put down some foes. Likewise, as foes with SR begin to appear, the multi-classed caster is at another disadvantage -- s/he is less able to make his/her spells penetrate the SR of the enemy.

Now, in a campaign where the emphasis is less on "dungeon crawls", the multi-classed spellcaster is not as badly off. Also, if the multi-classed character is there to back up a single-classed spellcaster, it is not so bad.

I played a Rogue/Wizard who was originally intended to be mostly Rogue, and who used magic to augment his Rogue abilities. That is a concept which works well; he was a little "behind" on the sneak attack damage and skills, but the spells made up for that. Then the party's "primary spellcaster" died in battle and was not able to be brought back (the player had left the group). Suddenly, my Rogue/Wizard was taking all Wizard levels, trying to get his casting ability "up to snuff". Every fireball was a little too weak, and so on, for the challenges we faced; and I didn't have the spell we needed for many encounters, as it was "1 level higher" than I could use. That campaign was a combat-focused set of dungeon-crawls using mostly published modules. I still had a lot of fun with the character, but I also felt the lack of ability in encounter after encounter.

 

[Antoine]

Within the last three years, I tried several combinations of fighter types with some level of spell caster.

From my experience, fighting cleric types are probably best with very low level barbarian class (1 or 2). Fighter or ranger doesn't help that much.

I had a very good surprise at multiclassing an elven fighter with 4 bard levels (few hit points loss, only -1 BAB, far better saves worth the 2 feats loss, ability to use any cure spell wand…), with a very good classical combination on improved critical, spring attack, specialization and expeditious retreat + no arcane spell failure while wearing elven chain. Many abilities useful in non combat situations.

The most sucessful combination I have so far is a distant relative to 1E and 2E elven fighter/wizards : a Ftr4/Wiz7 elf. Always introduced as a pure fighter, probably never cast a spell at another group member or any offensive spell at enemies. Using all that daily magic allotment to improve archery skill (no save or SR problems). Found out that most of the most useful combat enhancement wizard spell are 4th level at most. Picked up Craft, wondrous items and arm and armor. Can duplicate almost all of her equipement by herself.
From there, I'll probably pick up a couple of arcane archer levels (for skills, reflex save and all-you-can-shoot magical arrows), and finish up to 20th level with 6 more wizard level.
Perfect second fighter type for any party. BAB is OK with all archery bonuses (like greater bracers), specialization and energized bow for damage, will end up with 4 arrows per round, not including haste. If your campaign is not undead heavy (ours is), trade those arcane archer levels for rogue.
In the end, higher wizard level will allow more potent enchantments, and quickened spells of course.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

If some of you has tried them, please post your experience on the following cases:

...1 spellcaster major class, 1 non-spellcaster minor class...

I played a Pal2/ClrX in RttToEE and it was a mixed bag. I was one of the two primary tanks in the party. The paladin levels worked well with the cleric levels for this. Having the paladin's boost to saves was invaluable in more situations than I can remember. Those two classes work very well together.

Unfortunately, in the module we ran into several situations where I really missed having those higher level spells. It seemed I was constantly 1 or more spell levels behind the bad guys. Not only did this mean I couldn't heal some of the conditions the party was exposed to, but in combat I often lacked the perfect spell to get out of a battle quickly (which means the battle lasted longer, meaning more party deaths, rinse and repeat). It wasn't until I reached 13th level, Pal2/Clr8/Contemplative3, (right at the end of the module) that the character seemed to be a "real" cleric.

Short answer to multi-classing spellcasters: Don't.
Long answer: Depends on the campaign (or module), the party make-up, and frankly, what kind of character you'll have fun playing.

 

[Thanee]

Yep, the higher level spells are one thing you are always longing for, when you play a multiclassed spellcaster. But I didn't find that problematic with my characters.

Bye
Thanee