Is Multiclassing Balanced?

[Felix]

As was mentioned, spellwise, a W16/F4 is identical to a W16.

True. Unless you allow Practiced Spellcaster, in which case the divide is somewhat bridged. And except for spells which require an attack roll.

The bonuses from the fighter at this point are not terribly significant. Most, if not all, could be replicated by magic items and certainly can be replicated by spells. Want more AC, higher BAB and do more damage? Shapechange will do that for you. And, you get to still cast spells in many cases.

Yes, they can be replicated by spells and magic items, but those are spells and magic items that arn't enhancing something else.

Also, unless those fighter levels were taken at character level 17-20, that Wiz/Ftr has had an edge of +2 to +4 on his Fort saves for many levels. Which is worth something I think, even if it isn't noticable at the near-epic levels.

And Shapechange shouldn't really be the yardstick of balance either.

Never mind that many DM's actively dislike level dipping. Many people frown on it for being powergaming.

I never have really agreed with that outlook. If taking one calculus class (Math department) makes it easier for a student to pass his Economics exams I'm not going to begrudge him that. Neither will I begrudge a Fighter who wants to be more at home in the wilderness for taking a few levels of Ranger.

There is a point beyond which it becomes silly, however. That I do agree. Just not that 4 levels of Fighter is.

----

By the way, I just noticed you put two spaces after a full stop. I recently read Eats, Shoots and Leaves so I think that's cool. Good on'ya.

 

[The_Gneech]

I recently retired a 10th level Ftr/Wiz/Eldritch Knight because among other things, well, he sucked. He was a mediocre wizard and a terrible fighter. Not only did he not have access to higher-level spells (which I think is perfectly fair), his lower-level spells weren't anywhere near effective enough to be worth casting them.

Magic missile is one in particular I remember grinding my teeth over. It's the default "Blast 'em!" spell for any wizard, but there was no point in my guy casting it -- his caster level was so low that it was a drop in the bucket of party damage on any given round.

Nor did he have any hit points ... making him something of a one-hit wonder when he tried to fight. Certainly, I didn't expect him to be the sheer terror that the party barbarian was, but I did expect him to be able to hold his own -- no such luck. If I'd built him as an archer instead of a melee guy, it might have been a little better, but that wasn't the concept I wanted. I was aiming for something vaguely Jedi-like ... mostly a swordsman who'd occasionally let loose a little Foom! or have a neat little utility spell.

Truth be told, a single-classed cleric is a more effective ftr/wiz than my guy was. -.- Leaving out for a moment the RP requirements around deities, they can fight pretty well and they have an array of useful spells. Had I known at the beginning of the campaign what I know now, I would have either gone with a cleric, a psychic warrior, or just a different concept all together.

By comparison, I've made several ranger/barbarian, fighter/barbarian, and even fighter/rogue combos that worked beautifully. So yes, I'd say that multiclassing hoses spellcasters more than other characters.

I think the single easiest "quick fix" to this problem would be to replace the term "class level" with the term "character level" wherever it shows up, because of the way the game scales. In a world with a saner power-level spread, sure it doesn't make sense for a ftr 9/wiz 1 wizard to cast as powerful a magic missile as a wiz 10 -- but in D&D, if you're fighting CR 10 monsters, a first level mm isn't going to hurt them!

-The Gneech

 

[FireLance]

True, but at least a 10th level wizard taking a level in fighter isn't jumping from +0 to +6 BAB, but from +5 to +6 bab.

And that wizard may have a bit more practice with his ray spells than a recruit fighter.

And if there was a Magic Rating statistic, a 10th-level fighter taking a level of wizard would go from (say) MR 5 to MR 6.

And while it could be argued that a wizard's BAB increases due to practice with ranged touch spells (or mundane weapons), his BAB goes up even if he never casts a spell or uses a weapon that requires an attack roll in the course of his career. If the argument is that the BAB training is taking place "off camera", the same argument could be made of "magical training" (whatever that is). Or perhaps all characters unconsciously tap a negligible amount of magical energy to power even Extraordinary abilities. That would explain how the Knight's challenge works, how a Rogue can evade damage from a fireball that explodes in an enclosed room, and how a fighter with a longspear can dispatch one opponent facing him and Cleave into a second on the other side.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

In a world with a saner power-level spread, sure it doesn't make sense for a ftr 9/wiz 1 wizard to cast as powerful a magic missile as a wiz 10 -- but in D&D, if you're fighting CR 10 monsters, a first level mm isn't going to hurt them!

Don't take this as an attack, please. Because earlier I felt like I got nailed for posting in this thread when really all I was trying to do is compromise.

Anyway, as an honest question I might ask: What business does the fighter 9/wizard 1 have casting magic missle? I mean, I agree that your character concet with the EK about a mostly melee guy who occasionally casts a spell is a neat one. but if a fighter 9 level dips for one level, it shouldn't be for the damaging spells! At least, not in my mind.

I understand your point. At ECL 1, 1st level MM is a legitimate spell. At ECL 10, 1st level MM is more like a nonlethal damage spell than a legitimate attack! I gert it, and I certainly agree with it.

But to me that goes back to a flaw in the character design and not a flaw in the system. If a character wants to have powerful spells, then they should be taking feats like Practised Spellcaster. [Although in the fighter 9/wizard 1 I think even Practised Spellcaster would be a waste!]

I like the fact that the game rules inherently make it a bad deal to try and be a good fighter and a good caster at the same time. If you want that, play Gestalt! The rules the way they are force spellcasters to be spellcasters, skill jockeys to be skill jockeys, and warriors to be warriors. And personally, I think that's the right way to go. I can see no reason that a character must be good at two divergent paths - except that it'd be "cool." But if coolness is what you want, play a gestalt campaign. Anyone can get what they want in a Gestalt campaign.

On a side note, why is nobody talking about how the skill jockey gets hosed by multiclassing with fighter or spellcaster? I mean, say a human rogue has INT 16. In fact, lets make it even better and make her be exalted with Nymph's Kiss at first level. So that rogue is getting 8+3+1+1 skill points per level. 13 skill points! But say the character wants to multiclass evenly with spellcaster. so for half the levels they are getting 2+3+1+1 = 7 skill points. So every level 6 of their skills lose out. [Assuming one rank in each skill, of course.] Sure, spellcasting might be able to give temp bonuses on abilities. So there's a +2 or +4 for the duration of the spell. But they can't always depend on magic to boost their skills. It works some of the time, but as the cahracter increases in levels magic just can't make up for the lost skill points! So why aren't people complaining that the skill jockeys get hosed?

My point in the side note is that I personally think people should pick their avenue and multiclass within it well. If you want to be a melee guy, be a melee guy. If you want to level dip a bit with spells, then pick spells wisely. If you are a skill jockey, level dip in classes in which the spells/class abilities will help make up for the skill points you lost. Etc, etc, etc.

In the end, though, I do not believe all character ideas are created equal. Some are feasible, some aren't. And i don't see that as a nescessarily bad thing.

 

[kanithardm]

I voted for the nonexistent choice "Other" because while its not broke, Ive seen some pretty nice powergamer creations that came from multiclassing. Like my favorite, +35 to diplomacy at 3rd level.

 

[Hussar]

+35 diplomacy at 3rd? I really gotta know. How? (Not an attack or a question of veracity - just very very curious and a wish to bask in the glow of such superior number crunching)

I never have really agreed with that outlook. If taking one calculus class (Math department) makes it easier for a student to pass his Economics exams I'm not going to begrudge him that. Neither will I begrudge a Fighter who wants to be more at home in the wilderness for taking a few levels of Ranger.

Agree. Completely agree. I have no problems with dipping and even when I may not like the player's reason for it, I don't have a beef with it. It's their character, not mine. So long as it's not broken, I'm groovy.

((BTW, two spaces after a full stop comes from writing and grading FAR too many English papers.))

I like the fact that the game rules inherently make it a bad deal to try and be a good fighter and a good caster at the same time. If you want that, play Gestalt! The rules the way they are force spellcasters to be spellcasters, skill jockeys to be skill jockeys, and warriors to be warriors. And personally, I think that's the right way to go. I can see no reason that a character must be good at two divergent paths - except that it'd be "cool." But if coolness is what you want, play a gestalt campaign. Anyone can get what they want in a Gestalt campaign.

Again, I agree with this. I have no problems with a multiclass character being less good at any one thing. Fine. It's not a question of being a little less good though and a question of being utterly pants.

Perhaps the example of Magic Missile is a poor one, so how about mage armor? For this character, it's going to last all of one hour. The rest of the party is still good to go, but, our F/Wiz has blown his spells already after the first encounter. He's given up his armor because he's a F/Wiz, meaning that he's now much less effective as a fighter.

Again, it's not a question of being somewhat less effective. The non-caster classes are perfectly fine. Even combining fighter with rogue, where the fighter is going to have less BAB, works perfectly fine because his BAB, while lower, doesn't freeze at his fighter level. It's at least somewhat better. So, now he's a 70% fighter instead of 100%. His damage output and new skills makes up for that.

But, for the mage, he's automatically frozen at whatever level his mage is. Unless you take non-core feats (the existence of which makes for pretty good evidence that there are some issues with multiclassing), there's nothing you can do about it.

No matter how you slice it, multiclassing casters is a much weaker option than multiclassing non-casters. In a game which prides itself on Any Class/Any Race being balanced, this is something that needs to be fixed.

 

[satori01]

I do not think it is a fair arguement to say a Fighter 9/ Wizard 1 is signifigantly weaker than a 10th level Fighter. A Fighter 9/ Wizard 1 would be much better served by going with Shield as his spell and not Mage Armor. Risk ASF and use self buffing spells and lots of wands. True Strike, Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, Wraith Strike, Expeditous Retreat Swift, See Invisibility etc are all had by a 3 level dip as a Wizard.

Dipping as a spell caster, or into a spell casting class for 3 levels, if done for a focused reason, generally works well. After that point, is where it gets wonky.
Eldritch Knight would probably be better served it instead of requiring 3rd level spells, it instead required 2nd level spells and a BAB of +2.

How do people feel about the Arcane Trickster? I very rarely hear people complain about that PrC. Needing to take Practiced Spell Caster to keep the Caster level up to character level, and less over all spells in exchange for being able to do 9d6 Sneak Attack damage with the 0 level spell Ray of Frost, seems to quiet most people who claim that multi classing spell casters is a losing proposition. The key is a PrC based Multi-Classing fix has to recgonize that the Eldritch Knight route needs other advantages, hopefully specializing advantages, to make up for the poor mix that Fighter Wizard makes.

 

[green slime]

Felix is missing the point that, some people feel (justifiably, IMO), in order to call multiclassing in 3.x "balanced", then even evenly-multiclassed characters of any base class should be viable in any game, especially the default 3.33 "combative" engagements per 4 hour session.

 

[airwalkrr]

I am not sure I understand why HD has anything to do with multiclassing. Do you mean that you give out class features without granting additional hit dice? I.e. if I have a fighter 4 who picks up a level of wizard, he gets to cast 1st level spells, gains a familiar, and gets Scribe Scroll, but doesn't get +2 on Will saves or +1d4 hp? Or, similarly, a 4th level wizard who takes a level of fighter gets a bonus feat, but nothing else? How is this worth +1 LA?

An easier comparison is a Ftr6 and a Wiz6.

A Ftr6 who picks up one level of wizard gains:
-scribe scroll
-summon familiar
-three 0-level spells and one 1st level spell per day
-all 0-level spells and 3 + Int 1st level spells known
-2 + Int wizard skill points
-1d4 hp (if the roll is higher than his roll at 1st level; only works if you roll hp at 1st level, otherwise it works at all levels after 1st)

A Wiz6 who picks up one level of fighter gains:
-proficiency with all armor, shields, and tower shields
-proficiency with all simple and martial weapons
-1d10 hp (if the roll is higher than his roll at 1st level)
-bonus fighter feat
-2 + Int fighter skill points

Now I wouldn't knock the armor and weapon proficiencies as being of little or no value. If anything a wizard can have a much more superior weapon for when AoOs are provoked. I should also point out I play a half-orc wizard who has proficiency with the greataxe. Simply the fact that he is a half-orc with a greataxe and no visible armor makes people mistake him for a barbarian all the time and level Will saves at him instead of Fort saves. There is much to be said for looking like a fighter sometimes. An elf with a longsword and a longbow who wears a chain shirt might be a ranger as much as a fighter/wizard. Plus, it gives the wizard a way to help out in combats when casting spells really isn't very effective (like high SR creatures or targets with lots of energy resistances.

 

[Hussar]

Something to not forget in this though is that all classes, to some degree, are front end loaded. Taking one level in any class nets you far more than taking two levels. Taking 2 levels in any class doesn't generally get you a whole lot of anything for the loss of two caster levels.

Yeah, I think Green Slime has it. Multiclassing should work in all cases, not just in very narrow ones in order to call it balanced. If taking more than three levels in another class results in significantly weaker characters, then, no, it's not balanced.