Multiclassing

[Drowbane]

As far as I am concerned, characters all have the same class, "adventurer", with players free to choose the combination of race, classes, feats and skills which best matches their character concept.

This pretty much sums up my view as well. Bleh, I'm too tired to properly explain further...

 

[FireLance]

I have to say that I find the random willy-nilly picking up of classes anethema to the integrity of the characters as "real" individuals in the setting and instead seems more in keeping with a CRPG than an internally consistant world with a certain level of believability.

The other extreme, that a character never gets the chance to step out of his chosen profession, is equally in keeping with a CRPG that keeps one field open for "class" (which can never be changed) and another for "level".

In fact, between the two extremes, I find the idea of characters picking up class levels in a "random willy-nilly" fashion to be more in line with the idea of characters as organic beings that go through changes in interests, philosophies and goals (or that just do whatever seems to be the most convenient or advantageous to them at the time). In the extreme case where characters could only have a single class, it would be difficult, if not impossible to portray a character who was raised by a thieves' guild and, after successfully pulling off a string of burglaries, manages to acquire enough money to retire from crime and turn his keen intellect to the study of the magic. Or a mercenary captain who has fought and killed all his life, and has become sick of the bloodshed, and thus decides to become an acolyte of the goddess of peace. Or a wandering minstrel whose closest friend was killed by a ghast, and decides to dedicate the rest of her life to destroying the undead.

And if, like me, you just enjoy tinkering with combinations of classes to see what synergizes well with what, or you like coming up with fanciful explanations for how your character happened to become a ninja/druid/warmage, don't let anyone tell you that you're playing the game wrong. If that someone happens to be your DM, you owe it to yourself to find another one.

 

[MonsterMash]

I'm not opposed to multi-classing in theory, but I need a reason why at the minimum, e.g. from having spent so much time in combat and training with the town watch, Oderic the Rogue now takes a level of Fighter.

 

[Pinotage]

I'm generally against having too many classes - players in my games can multiclass with two base classes and a single prestige class, but I never allow more than a single prestige class unless there's real solid motivation. I expect for base classes that there'll be some hint in character as to the change, and that the player should warn me well in advance that the player in intending on multiclassing.

Pinotage

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I keep a firm separation between class (a game mechanic) and character (a roleplaying construct). Your class gives you a set of abilities, nothing more. If you want your character to gain a different set of abilities, thats all well and good to me. You don't need to shavve your head and join a monestary to gain the abilities of an unarmed unarmored fighter (monk), you don't need to join a theives guild to learn to hit people when they are vulnerable and tumble better (rogue). Some abilities will require acertain amount of role playing, but that should be true if they come along in the higher levels of a class you've already taken or a new one.

 

[Sundragon2012]

The other extreme, that a character never gets the chance to step out of his chosen profession, is equally in keeping with a CRPG that keeps one field open for "class" (which can never be changed) and another for "level".

In fact, between the two extremes, I find the idea of characters picking up class levels in a "random willy-nilly" fashion to be more in line with the idea of characters as organic beings that go through changes in interests, philosophies and goals (or that just do whatever seems to be the most convenient or advantageous to them at the time). In the extreme case where characters could only have a single class, it would be difficult, if not impossible to portray a character who was raised by a thieves' guild and, after successfully pulling off a string of burglaries, manages to acquire enough money to retire from crime and turn his keen intellect to the study of the magic. Or a mercenary captain who has fought and killed all his life, and has become sick of the bloodshed, and thus decides to become an acolyte of the goddess of peace. Or a wandering minstrel whose closest friend was killed by a ghast, and decides to dedicate the rest of her life to destroying the undead.

And if, like me, you just enjoy tinkering with combinations of classes to see what synergizes well with what, or you like coming up with fanciful explanations for how your character happened to become a ninja/druid/warmage, don't let anyone tell you that you're playing the game wrong. If that someone happens to be your DM, you owe it to yourself to find another one.

I think I should have clarified better my point.

I am not against someone picking up a class that seems an organic outgrowth of their characters life I am against the cherry-picking of classes that are more than just concepts but instead are distinct professions/life paths that would require extensive training to acquire.

For example I see sorcerers as the natural mages of the game while wizards are tained extensively in the arcane arts prior to becoming wizards. Same thing with monks for example. A monk isn't just a fighter who uses his hands, he is someone who has spent years developing his mastery of ki and his martial arts techniques. A rogue could theoretically become a wizard because he spent a lot of time learning from ancient texts or from a tutor after putting his lockpick away for awhile and focusing on a new path.

Its the same with certain PrCs. Some are natural outgrowths of a character concept. Risen martyr is an example from the BoED where a PC sacrifices himself for a cause and rises again. No training necessary for that. However there is training or some accomplishment required to enter certain other PrCs based upon the setting and the PrC in question.

Its a case by case thing really.


Chris

 

[Khairn]

IMC the players have to work with me on identifying the class and how they are going about the actual training before I'll allow them to multi-class. I am flexible if the players are multi-classing to class that has already been taken by a party member, but if its a brand new class some IC work is definately needed.

 

[howandwhy99]

I try to keep it realistic. If you never saw a tome of magic in your life and next week you are casting 5 or more spells (1st level Wiz) with ranks in spellcraft & K:arcane, there is a disconnect in my mind. The same goes for being declared a priest in under a week.

I picked option 2. You can change, but it takes lots of time training, considerable energy, probably a lot of money, and no place for adventuring in between.

 

[Azul]

I allow it when some reasonable in-game explanation exists, typically some form of training or preparation. I generally want an explanation for where the character learned the basic abilties, skills and proficiencies of their new class. This learning is typically acquired via training with characters who already have levels in the new class or in a class with similar abilities (e.g. a PC who spends their free time practicing martial skills with the party paladin could reasonably justify becoming a fighter).

In my game, I typically see 3 sorts of multiclassing:
1) dual-classed characters who actively progress in both of their main classes - roughly analogous to the old AD&D multi-classes
2) dabblers - characters who are pretty clearly focussed on one class but take a level or two in another class to acquire some particularly desireable ability or to add a little twist on their character's flavour
3) converts - much like the old AD&D dual-class method, these are PCs who suddenly stop advancing in one class (often after only a few levels) and start advancing in another -- these are especially common in games where I start the PCs at higher than 1st level (e.g. I often see PCs with their first few levels as rogue to represent a criminal past, after which the PC will typically focus on a very different class (e.g. cleric, wizard or sorcerer)) -- I have also often seen 10th-12th level fighters and rogues suddenly shift to a new class because the player felt those classes were sub-optimal in higher level games

I have noticed that certain classes tend to attract "dabbling" far more than others. Taking a few levels of fighter (for the feats) or rogue (for the skills and to a lesser degree sneak attack and evasion) are especially popular with my players. The other popular dabbling choices for my players are barbarian (for raging), cleric (for access to healing magic) and sorcerer (for access to arcane magic).

The nature and flavour of bards, druids, monks, paladins and wizards lends itself poorly to dabbling (at least for my group). I can imagine players might want to dabble in the ranger class for various reasons, but it seems to have little appeal to my players as an "on the side" thing.

 

[Darkness]

I voted:

Yes, but it requires at least some in-game explanation and training

I should point out that I will suggest an explanation if the player can't think of one (and I can, naturally, which normally will be the case unless the combination is extremely unreasonable). Not sure I had to so far, but that's what I'd do (if possible and reasonable).