NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheWriterFantastic™" data-source="post: 6679093" data-attributes="member: 88534">I think most are missing the most obvious point: Firstly, in AD&D (1e), multiclassed casters capped around 11th, or lower, in their caster class. Single classed demi-humans could surpass the limit by 2 levels. Secondly, they advanced at double, or triple, the rate of single classed characters. These rules were set specifically to balance them against single classed PCs. In comparison, 5e multiclass characters, if advancing each class alternately with level, would advance half as quickly in each class as a single class PC, capping out at 10th level in each class, but depending on the paired class/subclass, the caster level might be higher -- 5e PCs are typically more powerful in comparison by this measure, if comparing core rules between editions. 3.5 was the first to attempt an "even split" to afford close to full caster progression with every level in addition to the alternating classes functions, but was bending the rules through prestige classing (and people still complained then). The only time in 1e where you ended up with characters hitting 12+ in multiple classes was typically through human dual-classing, and this isn't a true representation of what you seem to be arguing for -- in order for the human to continue to progress in the new class, it cannot utilize any of the previous classes features, short of Hp, and possibly saves/attack bonuses (but I'm shaky on that, it's been a few years since I even looked at those rules). 5e seems to at least be a balanced step in improving upon what's come before, to an extent.</blockquote>

Verification