Multiclassing: "Any combo, any level, always works."

[RPG_Tweaker]

Screw realism in the ass, dude...

No thanks, that's not how I roll.

...this is D&D, it's about fun, not "realism", and non-crap multiclassing was a feature of D&D until 3E. Hell, it still is, if you pick similar classes (classes, ironically, it would have been illegal to multiclass under 2E rules).

Why? Because it's fun and it works better! It's not a terribly hard concept is it?

:\ Please save the snarky behavior for the playground. My questions were in earnest, and not intended as a challenge to battle.

Multiclassing in 3E currently is utter crap, because you need to practically make up a base class or a PrC just to multiclass with even basic effectiveness with certain common combos. That's an idiotic situation, frankly, and if 4E can correct it, it should, even at the cost of some "added complexity" which will only come up between games in the first place.

I understand the need to keep a WIZ-3/FTR-3 as equally "effective" as a WIZ-6 or a FTR-6, but just giving multi-classing players what amounts to "free experience" hardly seems fair to the player who focuses in a specific class.

I guess I'm having a problem with people's varying ideals of what constitutes "effective". It seems like people are saying the the multi-class character should be as good in each of their classes as each of the specialists are in their own field.


As for "fun" this seems to me to be the case:

Choosing between fighter, wizard, and fighter/wizard should ideally be a choice based on character concept preference, not mechanical combat power effectiveness considerations.

 

[Campbell]

Yep, several times, not the answer you were expecting? The utter powergamers wouldn't play them, I'm sure, but they are rarely had Thief in their multiclass combo either, and they're not a good measuring stick imo. Honestly, in most of my games, there was single-classed human Thief of some description.

My experience differed. That's all.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I understand the need to keep a WIZ-3/FTR-3 as equally "effective" as a WIZ-6 or a FTR-6, but just giving multi-classing players what amounts to "free experience" hardly seems fair to the player who focuses in a specific class.

I guess I'm having a problem with people's varying ideals of what constitutes "effective". It seems like people are saying the the multi-class character should be as good in each of their classes as each of the specialists are in their own field.

It's not free experience, though, and I find it confusing that people think it is. The player who is multiclassed is worse at either of their given jobs than the single-classed one, probably by a long margin. Even in 1E/2E it was true.

No-one is saying, except for a TYPO in one post earlier, that multiclasses should be as good in both classes as single classes. What they are saying is that multiclasses should be as useful to the party without having to come up with bizarre and wacko ways of playing their character that allow them to "win the game" in the way MMU1 seemed to be suggesting.

I mean, seriously, who is asking for 10/10 FTR/WIZ to be as good as both a 20 WIZ and a 20 FTR? No-one that I see. What I am suggesting is that a 10/10 FTR/WIZ should be more like 75% as effective in both classes, because seriously, the way D&D works, 75% + 75% in class terms is not 150%. If it was, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Currently, a 10/10 FTR/WIZ is close to 75% FTR effectiveness, due to BAB, the main deal for melees, still advancing when you're a Wizard, not being entirely static. Whereas his Wizard portion is nowhere near 75% effectiveness. I think that's not very good, personally. I want to see more abilities based on character level, and some way for having a few levels of a class to actually help out - not to make mechanical monsters, but to avoid horribly gimping people who want to play multiclass characters of certain, entirely random, arbitary and illogical combinations.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

My experience differed. That's all.

Yeah, I think most D&D experiences do, to be honest.

I never saw The Cleric Problem in my campaigns either, as people loved SPs (I was playing in the Realms), but we often (though by no means always) went without a single-class Fighter. Everyone's experience is different. I also rarely saw the "no humans" problem. I think my players were just picking what the liked rather than what was uberest (well, some of them), and I personally, I found for the games I ran, multiclassing as of 2E worked like a treat - particularly as I usually had three players. To achieve something similar in 3E, you need to us the gestalt rules.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

Currently, a 10/10 FTR/WIZ is close to 75% FTR effectiveness, due to BAB, the main deal for melees, still advancing when you're a Wizard, not being entirely static. Whereas his Wizard portion is nowhere near 75% effectiveness. I think that's not very good, personally. I want to see more abilities based on character level, and some way for having a few levels of a class to actually help out - not to make mechanical monsters, but to avoid horribly gimping people who want to play multiclass characters of certain, entirely random, arbitary and illogical combinations.

Ah... that clears it up much more effectively.

 

[Gentlegamer]

I'm a cook, network operator-engineer, and graduate student in psychotherapy. I can also program in C, fight with boffer weapons or rattan, and deliver a very solid axe kick. So in response to your question... I can't really say, but I know plenty of people who in real life have had more than one profession and an interesting spread of skills.

Sounds like you have some ranks in secondary skills to me.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

So, would having Base Arcane Power Bonus and Base Divine Power Bonus columns on the PHB Table 3—1 to add for multi-classing solve this?

...or is that what people are saying in a more roundabout way and I'm just being totally obtuse?

 

[Jhaelen]

The player who is multiclassed is worse at either of their given jobs than the single-classed one, probably by a long margin. Even in 1E/2E it was true.

Yep, however, in 1E/2E multiclassed characters were only one or two levels behind single-class characters because the XP required for gaining a new level typically doubled.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So, would having Base Arcane Power Bonus and Base Divine Power Bonus columns on the PHB Table 3—1 to add for multi-classing solve this?

...or is that what people are saying in a more roundabout way and I'm just being totally obtuse?

That might in fact do it.
(As much as I hate to say it to you: You're not the first to bring this idea up. But great minds and all that... But you might be the first to bring it up here )

The 75% Fighter / 75 % Wizard idea might also fit well into the "quadratic problem" thread - basically, we already know that characters do not advance linearly, which means a Fighter10 is not twice as strong as a Fighter 5, but... well, something differently. Probably more like 8-10 times as strong. (I think one estimation puts a Fighter 20 as ~4,000 times as strong as a Fighter1? Or was it even a magnitude higher)

It becomes a bit more complicated if we don't compare x to y level characters, but x_1+y_1=z level characters to x_2+y_2=z level characters...

 

[Plane Sailing]

Page 3 had a lot of rudeness and snarkiness reported, but it has calmed down on page 4 so we're going to let the thread continue - but any more name calling and the thread gets closed.

Thanks