jerichothebard
First Post
This came up on another board, and I thought I would get the opinions of the community here.
I initially intended to use the favored class/multiclassing rules as written, and enforce the XP penalty for unbalanced multiclassing. I also thought that I would never actually have to deal with it...
Of the five characters in my game, there are two humans, a half-elf, and two elves. Both humans and the half-elf have multiclassed, but only with two classes each. Which wouldn't be an issue with or without it. One elf is a ranger, which is elf's favored class in my game. (I outlawed arcane magic, so wizards are not allowable PC classes. Right now, at least. Elf favored class is ranger, gnome is cleric.) So it looked to be a non-issue, since everyone is really looking towards prestige classes anyway, which are exempt from the multiclassing penalty.
Well, it turns out, I wasn't quite right about that. The fifth, who I thought was a pretty dedicated long-haul monk, just threw a monkey wrench into the works and is making me actually think about it.
Here's the expanded situation:
No wizards allowed, sorcerers very frowned upon (cultural/legal limitiations).
Lots of undead baddies running around.
5th level elven Monk character has had several bad experiences with undead - in fact, usually the same one, a 'lich spawn' sorcerer that keeps coming back to plague the party. (lich spawn is a monster that I sorta created a while ago - like vampire spawn is to vampire, it is essentially a low-powered lich. The PC's are wandering around with its phylactery in their saddlebags right now, and I am not sure whether they know it or remember it. They will soon, though )
Thusly, it came up in casual conversation this weekend that he is interested in taking Hunter of the Dead as a prestige class, which has as a requirement the ability to turn undead.
Paladins and Monks do not get along (another cultural thing - Same god, radically different philosophies) and the player has taken this to heart and run with it, making up back story on his own and convincing the party currently to run from the paladin authorities and seek sanctuary in a monk monastary out of town. (They got in trouble, but that is another story...)
Thus, he would need to take a level of cleric. (no problem qualifying, he has that monk WIS)
Which will, of course, invoke the penalty, as neither cleric nor monk is his favored class. And, it would most likely be invoked indefinitely, as I do not forsee him taking four levels of cleric to balance his classes before taking Hunter of the Dead.
Generally, I think sticking to my guns about the rules is a good thing, and I did tell them the multi-classing penalty would be enforced, right at the beginning of the campaign.
There are a few things that make me hesitate, however.
1) We only play about once every few months. I am a grad student and really busy trying to finish my thesis project. So I want them to have a good time when we can make it happen. Hopefully in the future we can make more time for it, but within our group, there are several players (and the DM) who may be daddies in the next year or two (or, in the case of two of our players, mommy AND daddy), so who knows.
2) All my players are pretty much newbies. A couple played a little in High School, but not a lot and long ago (first ed, I believe). So, they didn't know the rules that well when we started, and I imagine that the concept of "10% XP penalty for unbalanced multi-class non-favored character levels" probably went right over their heads.
3) I didn't really inform them up front that the campaign would be undead-heavy, or at least not to the extent that it has been. (I did suggest quietly to one of the rangers that undead might be a good starting favored enemy, but that is all, I think.) The monk character in particular has grown to be worried about the proliferation of undead - as a player, he is really taking it seriously and his character is growing in interesting and extra XP-generating ways. So penalizing him for taking a level of cleric would be, essentially, penalizing his growth as a character - which is the exact opposite of what I want to do.
4) I have removed player access to the primary source of firepower in the game, and not slacked off really at all in terms of the challenges they face - including evil arcane spellcasters. (Say what you like about clerics and druids, most of them still don't get meteor swarm - even spells like identify are harder to come by).
5) Given the nature of the society, I have already ruled that both Paladins and Monks may take levels of cleric without being exiled from their orders (a limitied negation of "can't leave and return policy") - the clerics act as peacemakers between to other two rival factions.
It is really the last three points which have made me consider changing the rules.
There are two ways I see of doing it:
Option 1) Make clerics an "open-door" exception to the rule.
Since I have already decided that there is extra access to the cleric class, it seems a logical extension of that ruling to allow cleric levels to bypass the XP penalty - essentially making cleric everybody's favored class.
(As a side note, they really could use someone else who can turn undead, as the cleric 3/bard 2 character has thus far only managed to do it successfully once. You'd think with a CHA of 17, and Sun as a domain, that he could manage, but it is a never ending streak of 3's and 4's on the d20.. *sigh*)
If I go this route, what do I do with gnomes? When I gave wizard the ol' axe, I ruled that cleric was the gnome favored class (elf got ranger). If I do rule that everyone gets cleric as a 'favored class' then I have screwed gnomes twice!
Option 2) Just dump the whole favored class notion entirely - with two humans and a 1/2 elf, and an elf in her favored class already, and everyone starting to look towards PrC's, the multi-classing penalty will basically ONLY ever penalize this one character. (A corallary to this notes that if I go with option 1, and someone else multiclasses in a way to invoke the penalty, then THEY are the only ones being penalized - a big point in favor of option 2).
Thoughts?
I initially intended to use the favored class/multiclassing rules as written, and enforce the XP penalty for unbalanced multiclassing. I also thought that I would never actually have to deal with it...
Of the five characters in my game, there are two humans, a half-elf, and two elves. Both humans and the half-elf have multiclassed, but only with two classes each. Which wouldn't be an issue with or without it. One elf is a ranger, which is elf's favored class in my game. (I outlawed arcane magic, so wizards are not allowable PC classes. Right now, at least. Elf favored class is ranger, gnome is cleric.) So it looked to be a non-issue, since everyone is really looking towards prestige classes anyway, which are exempt from the multiclassing penalty.
Well, it turns out, I wasn't quite right about that. The fifth, who I thought was a pretty dedicated long-haul monk, just threw a monkey wrench into the works and is making me actually think about it.
Here's the expanded situation:
No wizards allowed, sorcerers very frowned upon (cultural/legal limitiations).
Lots of undead baddies running around.
5th level elven Monk character has had several bad experiences with undead - in fact, usually the same one, a 'lich spawn' sorcerer that keeps coming back to plague the party. (lich spawn is a monster that I sorta created a while ago - like vampire spawn is to vampire, it is essentially a low-powered lich. The PC's are wandering around with its phylactery in their saddlebags right now, and I am not sure whether they know it or remember it. They will soon, though )
Thusly, it came up in casual conversation this weekend that he is interested in taking Hunter of the Dead as a prestige class, which has as a requirement the ability to turn undead.
Paladins and Monks do not get along (another cultural thing - Same god, radically different philosophies) and the player has taken this to heart and run with it, making up back story on his own and convincing the party currently to run from the paladin authorities and seek sanctuary in a monk monastary out of town. (They got in trouble, but that is another story...)
Thus, he would need to take a level of cleric. (no problem qualifying, he has that monk WIS)
Which will, of course, invoke the penalty, as neither cleric nor monk is his favored class. And, it would most likely be invoked indefinitely, as I do not forsee him taking four levels of cleric to balance his classes before taking Hunter of the Dead.
Generally, I think sticking to my guns about the rules is a good thing, and I did tell them the multi-classing penalty would be enforced, right at the beginning of the campaign.
There are a few things that make me hesitate, however.
1) We only play about once every few months. I am a grad student and really busy trying to finish my thesis project. So I want them to have a good time when we can make it happen. Hopefully in the future we can make more time for it, but within our group, there are several players (and the DM) who may be daddies in the next year or two (or, in the case of two of our players, mommy AND daddy), so who knows.
2) All my players are pretty much newbies. A couple played a little in High School, but not a lot and long ago (first ed, I believe). So, they didn't know the rules that well when we started, and I imagine that the concept of "10% XP penalty for unbalanced multi-class non-favored character levels" probably went right over their heads.
3) I didn't really inform them up front that the campaign would be undead-heavy, or at least not to the extent that it has been. (I did suggest quietly to one of the rangers that undead might be a good starting favored enemy, but that is all, I think.) The monk character in particular has grown to be worried about the proliferation of undead - as a player, he is really taking it seriously and his character is growing in interesting and extra XP-generating ways. So penalizing him for taking a level of cleric would be, essentially, penalizing his growth as a character - which is the exact opposite of what I want to do.
4) I have removed player access to the primary source of firepower in the game, and not slacked off really at all in terms of the challenges they face - including evil arcane spellcasters. (Say what you like about clerics and druids, most of them still don't get meteor swarm - even spells like identify are harder to come by).
5) Given the nature of the society, I have already ruled that both Paladins and Monks may take levels of cleric without being exiled from their orders (a limitied negation of "can't leave and return policy") - the clerics act as peacemakers between to other two rival factions.
It is really the last three points which have made me consider changing the rules.
There are two ways I see of doing it:
Option 1) Make clerics an "open-door" exception to the rule.
Since I have already decided that there is extra access to the cleric class, it seems a logical extension of that ruling to allow cleric levels to bypass the XP penalty - essentially making cleric everybody's favored class.
(As a side note, they really could use someone else who can turn undead, as the cleric 3/bard 2 character has thus far only managed to do it successfully once. You'd think with a CHA of 17, and Sun as a domain, that he could manage, but it is a never ending streak of 3's and 4's on the d20.. *sigh*)
If I go this route, what do I do with gnomes? When I gave wizard the ol' axe, I ruled that cleric was the gnome favored class (elf got ranger). If I do rule that everyone gets cleric as a 'favored class' then I have screwed gnomes twice!
Option 2) Just dump the whole favored class notion entirely - with two humans and a 1/2 elf, and an elf in her favored class already, and everyone starting to look towards PrC's, the multi-classing penalty will basically ONLY ever penalize this one character. (A corallary to this notes that if I go with option 1, and someone else multiclasses in a way to invoke the penalty, then THEY are the only ones being penalized - a big point in favor of option 2).
Thoughts?
