Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RangerWickett" data-source="post: 826878" data-attributes="member: 63">So, Merric, would you be opposed at all if they changed the spellcasting rules so that caster levels from different classes integrated smoothly, without needing prestige classes?  I think that's what he meant by 'band-aid':  It'd be better if the spellcasting classes were designed to be compatible, without requiring a prestige class to make the combination feasible.  Don't you agree?  Now, I don't yet have an opinion as to whether the Theurge is over/under/just-right-powered.  However, it doesn't seem elegant.Consider:The Monk class is distinctive.  The Paladin class is distinctive.  They both have very identifiable archetypes.  However, if you want, you can mix the two classes together, creating a monk-paladin, perhaps a very wise do-gooder who focuses on perfecting himself to be a guide to others.  A multiclassing monk-paladin takes a little from each archetype, and mixes them together in a fairly balanced way, without requiring a special prestige class.  A paladin 5/monk 5 fights about as well as a paladin 10, but with a slightly different set of skills.  This multiclassing option is fairly balanced. The druid is distinctive.  The bard is distinctive.  However, if you try to multiclass between the two of them (and heck, it makes sense, since weren't the original druids in England closely related with bardic traditions?), you run into some trouble.  A bard 5/druid 5 should be able to use magic as well as a druid 10 (though with a slightly different selection of magical powers), but instead he uses it as either a bard 5 or a druid 5.  This multiclassing option is a little underpowered, but at least the classes have abilities other than spells that keep them powerful.Now, what about a sorcerer/wizard multiclass?  These classes only really get spells, so really, 5 levels of sorcerer isn't very useful if you already have 5 levels of wizard, since instead of trading one type of good ability for another good ability, he trades a good ability for a much weaker ability, giving up 5th level spells to gain a few more 1st and 2nd level spells.  I'm just saying I would have liked if the rules for the core classes were designed so that multiclassing for spellcasters was as elegant as it is for non-spellcasters.  Fighter and barbarians, or rangers and rogues don't need a prestige class for multiclassing to be fair to them, so I think the designers of 3.5e could've come up with a way for different spellcasting classes to multiclass smoothly.To me, this is not simply a matter of power balance; it's a matter of proper design.  The Theurge could be a completely balanced way to multiclass wizard and cleric, but it requires a few new rules that I don't think were necessary.  And, as people have said, this class doesn't help bard and druids multiclass any more smoothly, since druids lose out on their numerous class abilities, so undoubtedly someone will design a prestige class that works for druid-bards.  Why should we do this, though, when we could have built a more elegant solution directly into the classes themselves?</blockquote>

Verification