Multiclassed (2 classes) characters

[Nifft]

It's well known that evenly split multi-classing is death for spellcasters. That's very specifically why prestige classes like Eldritch Knight, Mystic Theurge and Arcane Trickster exist -- to make multi-classing spellcasters possible without utterly gimping them.

If your goal is to utterly gimp the PCs (as spellcasters), then this will do it. It's a popular way of enforcing a low-magic setting.

But if your goal is to play normal-magic D&D, you may not be happy with the results.

Note that many non-magical classes multiclass very nicely -- Ftr 10 / Barbarian 10 is decent, and Barbarian 10 / Rogue 10 is excellent.

Cheers, -- N

 

[drothgery]

It's well known that evenly split multi-classing is death for spellcasters. That's very specifically why prestige classes like Eldritch Knight, Mystic Theurge and Arcane Trickster exist -- to make multi-classing spellcasters possible without utterly gimping them.

And there's not really an equivalent of EK for divine casters, because 'cleric' and 'paladin' already cover warrior/divine caster nicely.

 

[DreadArchon]

Have you even found anyone willing to play in a game like this? You might try that before worrying about balancing it. Don't count your eggs before they're hatched, etc.

But assuming you can find PC's for this, I'd say that it should be safe to just assume them one level lower for CR purposes and ramp things up (or down) if it gets too easy (or hard).

(And don't be surprised if everyone decides to take a template with a large LA.)

 

[Slife]

And there's not really an equivalent of EK for divine casters, because 'cleric' and 'cleric' already cover warrior/divine caster nicely.

Fixed your post.

 

[Herobizkit]

Sounds like Q's missing 2ed.

But that said, when you multi-class, you invariably trade raw power for versatility. Evne if your levels are even, you're still not as effective at your "primary" job because, well, you don't HAVE a primary job.

With a group of clerics, any challenges will have to be ramped up just because of the availability of healing magic. They'll be able to fight/travel much longer without rest periods. Food/drink will be irrelevant. Higher-level undead will still be challenging, but the odds will be stacked against them.

Woe to the character who picks the Cleric/Rogue, and woe to you if they all pick Cleric/Druid.

 

[hong]

Sounds like Q's missing 2ed.

But that said, when you multi-class, you invariably trade raw power for versatility. Evne if your levels are even, you're still not as effective at your "primary" job because, well, you don't HAVE a primary job.

You gain more _personal_ flexibility, but the group loses in terms of _overall_ flexibility. Sure, people can now cast lots of minor restorations, but that doesn't really replace, say, raise dead or wind walk.

Where you REALLY gain is endurance. If the adventure is structured so that resting to regain spells is hard, then having lots of spells becomes an advantage.

 

[Quartz]

I'm toying with the idea of running a campaign where all PCs multiclass with cleric. Are multiclassed characters equal to single-classed characters when considering challenges?

No. A party of focused (i.e. single-classed) characters can handle a smaller number of higher EL encounters, whereas one of balanced characters can handle a larger number of lower EL encounters. You will find that balanced characters are better defensively - higher saves, more varied abilities, greater resilience and the like - and worse offensively - fewer combat feats, spells of lower level, etc. You're less likely to get a TPK. While MAD is a real issue, there are certain combinations that work really well - like fighter / monk, and paladin / fighter / knight.

With canned adventures, you need to realise that they're designed for the archetypical 4, so an adventure listed as 'for 9th level characters' often actually means 'for parties that can cast 5th level spells'.

I find balanced characters more fun. YMMV.

 

[Maldor]

so what if you pick cleric as your many do you not muiltclass

P.S. this game does not sound fun and repersent you in a bad light as a DM

 

[Quasqueton]

Thanks for the responses.

And as I previously asked, is your opposition to gestalt coming from power balance issues, or something different?

You didn't previously ask anything. There's no question mark in your previous post. As for gestalt -- it just didn't fit the concept that I was thinking about. Hardly "opposition".

this game does not sound fun and repersent you in a bad light as a DM

Huh? What exactly do you know about "this game"? All I've said is

I'm toying with the idea of running a campaign where all PCs multiclass [evenly] with cleric.

If you are going to judge me as a DM based on one idea I'm just thinking about, I won't bother telling you about campaigns I've worked on or actually run. You'd realize I do actually suck as a DM.

Quasqueton

 

[Stormborn]

In general I would think that EL wise you do not have much to worry about with the exception of magic based challanges. Obviously spell progression is going to be slower and thus the party is going to be 50% behind on the spell casting front from an equivalent level party. OTOH, if you allow ready access to magic items and at leat standard wealth by level rules then wands, and to a lesser extent scrolls, are going to bridge the magic gap. Overcoming SR is likely going to be problem over all, but if they focus on spells that dont allwo for that then they will be OK. I would expect a party in which everyone has 1/2 levels in cleric to be able to stay on its feet longer with all those healing spells available.

Every-other-level-caster progression is a fairly common 'low-magic' fix and if, in general, all casters in the setting were limited to 5th level spells and effects then I would see no real problems for the party.

And while I know this is just an idea that you are tossing out, I would like to respond to those who are complaining about a lack of 'freedom' or DM style or anything else. Simply put, if I were told up front what the conditions of the campaign were going to be then I would have no problem playing in it because I always have the option of not playing. Saying everyone has to take 1 level of cleric for every level of another class they take is no different than many other setting based limitations that come up in games all the time. I have played and ran games where I said everyone had to be a pirate, or a stealthy character, or from a particular small isolated community. Its no big deal.

I think the idea is interesting and would like to here more about what you have in mind. How would you handle PrC that gave divine spell progression? Would they count as levels of 'cleric'? What framing idea are you using for the campaign? Would all the PCs have to worship gods of a particular pantheon?