Multiclassed (2 classes) characters

[Balgus]

Thanks for the responses.
Huh? What exactly do you know about "this game"? All I've said is 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

Calm down guy... no one is saying you are a bad DM... But i will say that i would be less than happy playing in this game. Takes away from the creativity of creating your own PC.. if your DM tells you you HAVE to level as this class or that. DMs should not mess with a PC - everything you have power to play with, but a PC is the only choices and freedom a player has -a nd if you take away that... they will not be happy..

Have you tried lookng into Midnight CS? There is rift between heaven and earth and the only deity in the game is the evil one that caused teh sundering. Meaning no cleric classes at all - so every other class has a dipping into healing.. and made much stronger defensively (to make up for the lack of clerics and heal/resurrection spells)

IMO- I think a room full of clerics would be incredibly boring to play ... no skills... no feats.. just pound spell and heal. As long as you have a couple stand watch - there is never a reason to fear anything.. and without fear, there is no suspense ....

 

[rgard]

Thanks for the further replies.

If I go through with this campaign idea, the levels would be split evenly -- 1/1, 3/3, 6/6, 10/10, 15/15, such.

My main wonder is what challenge level such split classed characters would be equal to -- is a 6/6 equal to a 12, or is only a 10? Is a 10/10 equal to only a 15, or an 18?

Is a wizard/cleric less effective than a fighter/cleric or a rogue/cleric of same levels?

Quasqueton

Hi, the split classed characters are not equal to a single classed character...I say this just from personal experience. The exceptions being the fighter/barbarians and barbarian/rogues Nifft meantioned.

I did something similar in one campaign. All the PCs started out as rogues and were able to multi-class at third level. It was part of the campaign theme of the PCs all being born poor, orphaned and growing up on the streets.

Once they hit 3rd level all the usual classes were picked up at some point. Of 6 PCs, we only had one stay with rogue levels.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Quasqueton]

Calm down guy... no one is saying you are a bad DM...

Calm down from what? It seems that no matter how light and silly I feel when I type a post, folks read it as some kind of angry rant.

I just thought it rather ridiculous to say mentioning a bare campaign idea "repersent you in a bad light as a DM." That's sort of like saying that misspelling one word represents him in a bad light as a forum poster.

Quasqueton

 

[Quasqueton]

My initial thinking on the even-level multiclass was sort of -- The PCs start off as mere mortals working their way to godhood. When they reached 20/20 (40th level), they could get a Divine Rank. I came up with this idea while reading Deities & Demigods -- most of the gods have 20 levels in two classes. It was just an initial idea that I had not yet put any real follow-through thought in beyond, "How would such multiclassing affect the challenge level of the PCs?"

No Players were harmed, aggravated, frustrated, or annoyed in the making of this idea. <- look, a smiley! That means I'm funnin' around; not angry.

Quasqueton

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Maybe I missed it, but did you illuminate why you don't want to use the Gestalt rules from UA? Just too "munchkiny" for you? Or maybe there's another reason? I think it could definitely emulate what you're looking for. Then you'll get to turn "hey, you guys have to take every other level as cleric" into "and you all get free levels of cleric!"

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

My initial thinking on the even-level multiclass was sort of -- The PCs start off as mere mortals working their way to godhood. When they reached 20/20 (40th level), they could get a Divine Rank. I came up with this idea while reading Deities & Demigods -- most of the gods have 20 levels in two classes. It was just an initial idea that I had not yet put any real follow-through thought in beyond, "How would such multiclassing affect the challenge level of the PCs?"

No Players were harmed, aggravated, frustrated, or annoyed in the making of this idea. <- look, a smiley! That means I'm funnin' around; not angry.

Quasqueton

For the sake of argument, we'll assume that the epic rules actually work.

I think they'd me smeared. I wouldnt bet on a level 20 caster trying to overcome the spell resistance of a CR 40 threat. Not to mention the loss of epic spell progression.

As to the PC's effectiveness, its really hard to rate it. The mage/cleric is pretty wimpy if hes not allowed to progress into mystic theurge (and even then its been reasonably demonstrated he's underpowered). The fighter/cleric... maybe consider the cleric levels nonassociated or something? I dunno how to accurately guage it.

Perhaps you could let people play the class they want, but devise several divine class substitution features? Replace fighters with crusaders from Bo9S?

 

[Arkham]

Personally, I think it would be a rather entertaining idea, depending on the play. But then again, any game either rocks or sucks based on how it stands up in play. I can see how one might get bored if everyone is 1/2 cleric in a dungeon crawl where your classes and feats really do define your character. But if your characters have an actual "Personality", then any two characters, even with the exact same build, can make for interesting and fun interactions.

Now on to the actual topic, a Ftr 10/Clr 10 would indeed be a much better fighter than a Ftr 20, but vastly worse in overall power than a Clr 20. In general, in my opinion, cleric levels added to any non-spellcaster can make that class better. But if the primary purpose of the other class is spellcasting, i.e. wizard or sorcerer, then the cleric levels will do far more harm than good without a Mystic Theurge type class smoothing over the edges.

 

[Nifft]

In D&D, specialization is either rewarded or required. For high-level play, I lean towards required.

Deities & Demigods was written before the Epic Level Handbook, right? And long before 3.5e with its better grasp on how multi-classing affects spellcasters.

<- look, a smiley! That means I'm funnin' around; not angry.

Also, I wasn't going to say anything, but your smilies are a clear indicator of near-psychotic kitten-slaughtering rage. Please, don't do it! Don't kill the kittens! We need them for the avatars!

Thanks, -- N

 

[Quartz]

In D&D, specialization is either rewarded or required. For high-level play, I lean towards required.

I disagree: it's not that specialisation is rewarded or required; specialisation is assumed.

 

[Balgus]

Calm down from what? It seems that no matter how light and silly I feel when I type a post, folks read it as some kind of angry rant.
Quasqueton

My mistake... I guess you read what you want to read into it...

As for the idea of MC - i like the idea of having them start somewhere and letting them take it where they want to. Like a group of clerics (lvl 6) is let loose from the monstary to find their own path. One takes to arcan mastery, another stays devout and finishes his cleric training, one takes to trickery and thievery, and one to barbarism in the woods..

Unless you give them a free level - like everytime you level p, go ahead and give yourself a cleric level too. Otherwise, it will take way too long to see your character progres the way you would like. I played in a game for 3+ years before he hit lvl 18... just think if after 3+ years, I were only lvl9 and had pidly lvl 5 spells... too long for me to invest another 2 years to see HARM and HEAL, and another 4 years to see horrid wilting..

You can ask your players how they feel about it.. and you can always bait them with extra gold and XP for trying this out... but a game that is designed to hit lvl 40... you are thinking long term and losing sight of the short run.. players have to enjoy every level in order to want to keep going to the next.