howandwhy99
Adventurer
Multiclassing is getting some buzz, so I thought I might try and explain how another option might work.
Prior to 3e there wasn't really a mechanic for Character Level. Each character gained a separate XP total by Class and different classes could gain XP in different ways. This repurposed the focus of the game depending upon what class a player was playing. If you wanted to focus on combat, you wanted to play a fighter. If you wanted to sneak around and steal stuff, you wanted to play a thief. The game was more about class performance, than about character portrayal.
This dividing of game play up wasn't to say other players playing other classes couldn't try things outside of their role. (In fact each class was built with some overlap into the others niches.) It was more about having the necessary tools to perform the class best, gaining XP for doing it well, and increasing in challenge difficulty faster due to focusing.
Now adventures could be designed to be more or less challenging for different classes and having a larger group of one class helped those who were playing it. A 4th level combat or fighter-focused adventure would take a cleric longer to progress through and a wizard even more so. Part of this is other classes weren't designed to face combat as well as fighters, but neither are they going to gain XP as fast. They get Class XP for doing things in their own class.
Of course most any adventure is going to include all sorts of swords and sorcery and seances and skullduggery, so every class has opportunities for advancement. But understanding different classes infer different game play means adventure modules can be purposed for many different kinds of adventure within them.
Now advancing in separate classes means beginning each class at starting level, so the player can advance through the difficulty of each class's challenges (further divided up in levels). You may have a single PC who has advanced from 1st to 7th as a Fighter and then 1st to 3rd as a Cleric and so on. Or you might have multiple characters with single classes for when you want to play a different class and a different character. Regardless the player begins at level 1 in every class and plays each class separately at the table. My Ftr7/Clr3 will receive XP as a cleric, if that's the class I say I'm playing for this session. I could still take hold of better weapons and seek out combat, but I would be switching classes during play.
The difference between Multi-Classing & Dual-Classing (as I understand it) is about the differences between demi-humans and humans. Demi-human classes are different than the human classes presented, so their culture may provide them with commensurate training in what humans understand as multiple classes prior to play. Demi-humans could begin as Level 1 in multiple classes, even though each began at 0 XP. (These 2-3 classes are still chosen prior to play however)
Humans were trained in only one class and need to spend time (and often money for a trainer) to train in another class. Your fighter would sit for a few years and learn to read, cast spells, and understand magic before becoming a 0 XP level 1 wizard. If he wanted to become a fighter again, he would need a week or month or an appropriate time to prepare himself again.
Regardless of what classes a character was trained to perform they could always switch back and forth between them throughout their lifetime, but each would still receive XP in separate columns according to their expertise.
All of this may seem extraordinarily odd, but there is some relevance to the real world. A trial lawyer / surgeon loses some ability when staying away from one profession or the other for some time. While there is some overlap of action, each profession is improved in largely separately and results in quite different "adventures" of their own.
I'm not sure if D&Dn will offer such a multiclassing option, or even if the game could be house ruled into a similar design, but I think there do exist interesting design philosophies beyond the current multiclassing idea.
Prior to 3e there wasn't really a mechanic for Character Level. Each character gained a separate XP total by Class and different classes could gain XP in different ways. This repurposed the focus of the game depending upon what class a player was playing. If you wanted to focus on combat, you wanted to play a fighter. If you wanted to sneak around and steal stuff, you wanted to play a thief. The game was more about class performance, than about character portrayal.
This dividing of game play up wasn't to say other players playing other classes couldn't try things outside of their role. (In fact each class was built with some overlap into the others niches.) It was more about having the necessary tools to perform the class best, gaining XP for doing it well, and increasing in challenge difficulty faster due to focusing.
Now adventures could be designed to be more or less challenging for different classes and having a larger group of one class helped those who were playing it. A 4th level combat or fighter-focused adventure would take a cleric longer to progress through and a wizard even more so. Part of this is other classes weren't designed to face combat as well as fighters, but neither are they going to gain XP as fast. They get Class XP for doing things in their own class.
Of course most any adventure is going to include all sorts of swords and sorcery and seances and skullduggery, so every class has opportunities for advancement. But understanding different classes infer different game play means adventure modules can be purposed for many different kinds of adventure within them.
Now advancing in separate classes means beginning each class at starting level, so the player can advance through the difficulty of each class's challenges (further divided up in levels). You may have a single PC who has advanced from 1st to 7th as a Fighter and then 1st to 3rd as a Cleric and so on. Or you might have multiple characters with single classes for when you want to play a different class and a different character. Regardless the player begins at level 1 in every class and plays each class separately at the table. My Ftr7/Clr3 will receive XP as a cleric, if that's the class I say I'm playing for this session. I could still take hold of better weapons and seek out combat, but I would be switching classes during play.
The difference between Multi-Classing & Dual-Classing (as I understand it) is about the differences between demi-humans and humans. Demi-human classes are different than the human classes presented, so their culture may provide them with commensurate training in what humans understand as multiple classes prior to play. Demi-humans could begin as Level 1 in multiple classes, even though each began at 0 XP. (These 2-3 classes are still chosen prior to play however)
Humans were trained in only one class and need to spend time (and often money for a trainer) to train in another class. Your fighter would sit for a few years and learn to read, cast spells, and understand magic before becoming a 0 XP level 1 wizard. If he wanted to become a fighter again, he would need a week or month or an appropriate time to prepare himself again.
Regardless of what classes a character was trained to perform they could always switch back and forth between them throughout their lifetime, but each would still receive XP in separate columns according to their expertise.
All of this may seem extraordinarily odd, but there is some relevance to the real world. A trial lawyer / surgeon loses some ability when staying away from one profession or the other for some time. While there is some overlap of action, each profession is improved in largely separately and results in quite different "adventures" of their own.
I'm not sure if D&Dn will offer such a multiclassing option, or even if the game could be house ruled into a similar design, but I think there do exist interesting design philosophies beyond the current multiclassing idea.
Last edited:
