Multiclass Saves Fix!

[Sylrae]

You ever notice people can get goofy bumps in their saves via multiclassing?

That's because D&D 3.5 Calculates saves as (1/3)*level = bad save, (2+1/2)*level = good save. This gives a total of 6 at level 20 for bad, and 12 at level 20 for good. Of course, they ditch the fractions.

I have 2 fixes, one is based on the fraction they use for bad saves, and the other based on the unfractioned totals.

Original:
1/3 for Bad saves: 6.67 at level 20
5/12 for medium saves: 8.33 (plus 1 to make it the mid point) = 9.33 at level 20
1/2 for Good Saves: 10.00 (plus 2 to make it look like double the bad saves) = 12.00 at level 20

Fractions:
1/3 for Bad saves: 6.67 at level 20 (no change)
1/2 for Medium saves: 10.00 at level 20 (new save type, halfway between good and bad)
2/3 for Good saves: 13.33 (1.33 better than before)

If you want the totals to be the same as before (ignoring the fraction left over in the bad saves)
3/10 for Bad: 6.00 at 20 (.66 less)
9/20 for Medium: (halfway point)
6/10 for Good: 12.00 at 20 (No Change)

As you can see, both of the new systems give a similar spread/totals, but allow multiclassing with no flat bonus awarded just for taking a new class.

I personally prefer the one that lets you keep your fractions (1/3, 1/2, 2/3).

Comments?

 

[Merlin's Shadow]

Have you looked at the fractional save option in Unearthed Arcana? It essentially does the same thing.

 

[Ashtagon]

I thought most people just houseruled that the initial +2 for a good save can only be applied one time for each save.

 

[Sylrae]

I didnt realize fractional saves were in UA, just fractional BAB. but I just checked.

In UA all it does is show where the numbers come from in the regular system, including fractions.

It doesn't remove the +2 jumps you can get by continually multiclassing - which is the purpose of my fractions that remove flat bonuses at level 1.

Think of a level 20 fighter. He has a fort of +12.
now a fighter/barbarian: fort + 14
now a fighter/barbarian/monk:fort+16
fighter/barbarian/monk/paladin:fort+18

Yes, I know some of those classes contradict eachother in terms of alignment requirement. but they all have good fort saves. There are all sorts of PrCs people could take, plus non-core classes. if they get a +2 bump to saves every time they do it it makes multiclass characters be better than single-class characters. (I'm not talking about the issues involving spellcasters and multiclassing at the moment.)

This alt. system takes all the goofy +2 bonuses away, but gives comparable results for the single character as he progresses.
The Barbarian/Fighter now has the same Fortitude as the Fighter. or the Barbarian.

I thought most people just houseruled that the initial +2 for a good save can only be applied one time for each save.

Hmm, you could do that, but then you'd have strong motivation to make sure you get the +2 for each save.
I've never seen anyone other than myself houserule that, but I found it wasnt satisfactory, cause then players kept trying to find excuses to take a level in monk, or what have you, to get it for each save. It was getting irritating having to hear about the attempts to get all 3 and I had to keep shutting them down.
I've also tried "you only get it at first level, for your first class", but that wasnt a perfect fix either.
This fraction reworking variant means its not just a restriction, and it doesn't matter what order they take their classes in. (we also use an alt. rule for skills where the x4 at level 1 is unnecessary and removed. "all skill costs are 1-1, max ranks = ecl, class skills give +3 competence bonus.")

 

[Nonlethal Force]

This is borderline off-topic, but have you ever considered a point-buy system? If you go completely class-less, you not only don't have to worry about what to do with the saves (strong or weak from multi-classing) - but you can actually let players strive for the actual save score they want. Rather than let the classes dictate what save score you want, why not let the players actually get the saves their ability scores dictate that they need?

Like I said, I'm sorry if this is borderline off-topic. But my personal opinion is that the best way to fix the multi-classing save issue is to eliminate the need to multiclass by eliminating the need to have classes at all. See my sig for more info if you are interested.

 

[Ashtagon]

Hmm, you could do that, but then you'd have strong motivation to make sure you get the +2 for each save.

Well, yes, there is strong motivation to collect that +2 on each save. But you can only do that one time for each save. That is still miles better than RAW, which allows you to collect that +2 each and every time you take a first level in a class that has a good save.

It's just reducing the amount of front-loading in the classes, really.

 

[Kerrick]

That's what I use for Project Phoenix - fractional BAB/saves, and the +2 applies only once per save. Haven't tried it in play, but it works great on paper.

 

[Sylrae]

Oh I agree, it's much better than RAW. I think taking away the frontloading entirely by just using a larger fraction to reach similar totals takes away the motivation to get all the +2s, as well as the broken frontloading that comes with RAW.

You get the same total over 20 levels, or slightly higher if you use the fractions I'm using.

As for the no classes thing, I like classless, but I haven't seen it done in d20 to my satisfaction, Instead I've been working on my own system for classless Fantasy Tabletop Roleplay. I'll check out yours though. Generally if I want classless then I also want to ditch levels altogether.

Edit: Hey Kerrick.
Yeah, I'm dropping the +2 entirely, and just using larger fractions. I think it cleans up multiclassing a bit. You get a similar spread of points too. A bit lower at level 1 though. Such is the price of making all the levels give the same benefit for purposes of multiclassing.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Just use the UA fractional tables, and you're done. Even if it was just "showing how the save progressions work," it's right there to implement if you want. And if they were just showing how it worked, they could have just said "2+ 1/2 level" and "1/3 level" and be done. The fact they showed a whole table of fractions means to me that they intended it to be a houserule to use those fractions.

Anyway, I would never allow fractional saves without fractional BAB, or vice-versa. Medium BAB multiclassing really gets screwed over with the normal rules. In general, fractional saves is a nerf and fractional BAB a boost, so they balance each other's inclusion. Of course, everyone's talking about the obscene good save stacking from the RAW. No one's mentioning that bad saves get even worse...

A lot of times, you don't even really need special rules. If it's a rogue going into a "rogue prestige class" that's also medium BAB / good reflex saves, for example, you can just keep using the BAB and save progressions of straight Rogue 20. No need to even waste a second thinking.

 

[Sylrae]

Just use the UA fractional tables, and you're done. Even if it was just "showing how the save progressions work," it's right there to implement if you want. And if they were just showing how it worked, they could have just said "2+ 1/2 level" and "1/3 level" and be done. The fact they showed a whole table of fractions means to me that they intended it to be a houserule to use those fractions.

The UA tables still include the +2 boost at the first level of a class, and that is what I was referring to as a problem.

Anyway, I would never allow fractional saves without fractional BAB, or vice-versa. Medium BAB multiclassing really gets screwed over with the normal rules. In general, fractional saves is a nerf and fractional BAB a boost, so they balance each other's inclusion.

Fractional BAB is a bit of a boost, but the UA fractional saves are also a boost. You always have at least what is listed in the rounded phb tables, plus a fraction. Now, my system of dropping the +2 at level 1 and using larger fractions is a nerf at low levels. As you go up though, especially if you go epic, you're gaining at a faster rate than 1/2 for good saves, and the same rate for medium saves. I also use Fractional BAB, but I was satisfied with the UA Fractional BAB rules, it was the fractional saves I had issues with.

Of course, everyone's talking about the obscene good save stacking from the RAW. No one's mentioning that bad saves get even worse...

Bad saves get even worse? They're identical... you end up with an extra 2/3 at level 20 which the RAW just discards. I'm not sure how that could be considered worse. If you mean that stacking bad saves makes them worse, unless you're doing it all in incremental levels of 3, youre right. a Fractional save value corrects that as well.

A lot of times, you don't even really need special rules. If it's a rogue going into a "rogue prestige class" that's also medium BAB / good reflex saves, for example, you can just keep using the BAB and save progressions of straight Rogue 20. No need to even waste a second thinking.

That only works if the PRC they're taking has the same saves and bab. Say the rogue goes into a melee-esque prc, or take some levels in ranger, or monk, the saves arent al lthe same, and you would get to either:
A) stack the saves +2 bonuses
B) at least get the +2 for each save.

this way the class order doesnt matter, and you cant stack level 1 bonuses. UA keeps the +2, so for good saves, their fractional system doesn't address the problem I'm referring to. Just dropping the +2 makes good saves only go up to 10, and that IMO isnt a good solution either.

My fractions I came up with will give a comparable spread of numbers and comparable results, though slightly better good saves unless you use the third one I listed with the 1/3, 7/15, and 6/10.

I'm inclined to make good saves be double bad saves though, hence using 2/3 instead of 6/10.