Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 324160" data-attributes="member: 5171">There are two things I don't like about the multiclassing system.  One, I have a solution for.  The other, I don't.1) The Monk/Druid/Sor/Wiz/Cleric with saves up the wazoo and a +0 Base Attack bonus.  One of my players made a nice javascript calculator to handle fractional BAB's and to calculate saves by the "x levels of good, y levels of bad" method.  So while this is a house rule, I think it ends up being more true to the game.  I don't think a Fighter/Ranger/Barbarian's Fort save ought to be any higher than a Fighter of the same level -- and I don't see why a Wizard/Rogue should be penalized on attack rolls any more than he already is.2) Multiclassed spellcasters.  A fighter can take levels of monk, rogue, or cleric, and get lots of neat abilities with just a few levels, and his base attack bonus still goes up, just a bit more slowly.  A wizard who takes a few levels of something else gets nothing.  Currently, I'm trying a feat that adds +1 to your effective spellcasting level, with the caveat that it can never raise your spellcasting level past your character level.  A dedicated Wizard10/Fighter10 could take it at 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, and 18th level, and be effectively a 15th level spellcaster (who has no metamagic feats or additional combat abilities).  This seems to match up with a Fighter10/Rogue10, who has all the abilities of a 10th level rogue, and who also has a BAB not far from what a straight Fighter would have had.All that said, I love 3rd Edition multiclassing.  I haven't seen it horribly abused by my players, despite all the jokes about the Pal1/Mnk1/Cleric or Sorcerer x characters.  And I love the customization potential of the system.-Tacky</blockquote>

Verification