Multiclassing

[MoogleEmpMog]

Classes are theoretically balanced ability packages.

Characters are neither a single class nor the sum of their classes.

Every character comes to his class features in his own unique way, and some characters come to a mix.

Wizard 3/Fighter 1/Bard 4/Ranger 1/Rogue 1/Loremaster 3 seems closer to Gandalf's "class abilities" than Wizard 13 (or any other single-class or dual-class combination). Why should I artificially restrict PCs' ability packages, when they have no bearing whatsoever on the PC's actual in-game role or career aside from what they allow him to do?

 

[Sundragon2012]

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.

Fortunately, my players haven't even thought along these lines in many years. Perhaps in high-school this was something they would have requested, but now they expect me to require something of them in-game to make sense of things and they themselves want their characters to be believable and would require it of themselves even if I didn't.

The above point is only in regards to classes that would require training such as a monk, cavalier, rogue, cleric, wizard, etc. and not classes that represent a natural transformation such as someone becoming a sorcerer. In game a character doesn't choose to become a sorcerer but discovers his nature as one who naturally wields magic.



Chris

 

[MerakSpielman]

I allow multiclassing into whatever classes or PrCs fit the original character concept. I'm also willing to ignore alignment and RP restrictions in order to have the player have the kind of character they originally envisioned.

In theory, classes and PrCs are balanced mechanically, so there shouldn't be any balance issues. In practice, of course, you have to look over everything just in case. Sometimes certain things from different books were simply never intended to meet in the same character.

To me, it's all about letting the playes get the package of abilities they feel is correct for their character as he advances. If a PrC from some suppliment offers the exact right abilities at 1st and 2nd level, but requires the character to be evil and worship the god of oozes, I'll let them take the 2 levels of the class to get the abilities, and waive the flavor text. The character still considers himself to belong to a single profession.

 

[Baron Opal]

I've never had a character take more than two classes in games that I have run, save once. Usually, character's carrier's follow one of three paths:

• Single Classed
• Even Multiclassed
• Major/minor classed where the minor was 2-4 levels

So, the ranger gains a couple levels of fighter, or the thief four levels of wizard. Usually, however, the players in my games have either gone single classed or had an even multiclass. The multiclass has been a fight/wizard or similar theme.

The one time I've had what people consider egregious "cherry-picking" is when I told people to make 12th level characters for a 3.0 version of GDQ. That had a 2/4/6 Paladin / Sorceror / Monk or something like that. And, It performed as well as anyone else. The 12th level sorceror rocked the house, however. Hasted sorceror throwing a Chain Lightning, Cone of Cold and a quickened Fireball was just vile. He had a Ring of Wizardry too. Gahh. No amount of multiclassing could out-blast him.

 

[Dog Moon]

I have no problems with characters multiclassing in base classes if they want to. Sometimes Fighter 4/Rogue 3 [For a Thug, let's say] makes more sense for a player's idea for his character than anything else. Trying to make a Fighter 7, but removing some abilities and adding more to making it more Thuggish is just annoying because comparisons would have to be made and I dislike spending my time on things like that.

As for PrCs, I like the idea that to become something, you need to learn about it. If someone wants to become an assassin, they need to mention a few levels earlier that they are training for it. However, since there is always downtime, I assume that they're training during that time, so people don't have to wait for 2 weeks ingame for the character to train. If they want to become a Purple Dragon Knight, they'll need to find the Purple Dragon Knights and then work on joining them. I do want to spend some time on it, but I don't want it to become the focus of the campaign.

For the other DMs in the group, however, we can pretty much take anything we want as long as we meet the prereqs for it. The DM pretty much says no only if the class is unbalanced or something. Heck, we don't even need to be part of a group to have a PrC. My character advanced most of the Red Wizard of Thay without having any connection to that group whatsoever.

 

[the Jester]

Depends on the game.

In my low-magic setting- no way.

In my 'standard' setting- yes, fairly easily.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

All multi- and prestige classing is done under my keen eye. A character needs to display the desire to learn things outside of their known fields and actively try to pursue it before being able to gain a level in a new class.

 

[wingsandsword]

I am a proponent of characters having an explanation for their multiclassing, but I don't make a big deal out of how they get trained.

If it fits with how they've been playing their character or their background I don't mind. If they suddenly want to take a new class out of nowhere, they need to have some explanation of how they are getting that class like training or practice as appropriate, and better have roleplayed that somewhat. When DMing, I do require characters to spend some general downtime, time spent not adventuring in some way appropriate to their characters. For characters gaining a new class, generally some explanation of how they were trained for it or learned the neccesary skills, be it while they were adventuring or in downtime.

Most core classes are fairly easy to acquire (with notable exceptions of Monk and Wizard, I do require some real justification of how you were taught those classes), although for prestige classes which really are just an extension of an existing class (Archmage or Frenzied Berserker) training doesn't seem neccesary to me, as it's just a slightly different take on what you already do.

I may require training for very unusual feats, but if it's from the PHB or probably 95% of other feats PC's can just take them if they meet the requirements. I also generally presume that PCs can get skills they need.

In d20 Star Wars campaigns I've restricted access to Knowledge (Jedi Lore) in Rebellion era games since that knowledge is nigh-impossible to get, and Knowledge (Sith Lore) in most eras since it's very little known (and guarded by anybody know knows it). In those cases you can only teach another up to the ranks you know, and can learn up to a certain amount of ranks from a Holocron or textbook.

 

[amethal]

I have never understood this apparent obsession some people have with the "integrity" of classes. (Maybe I shouldn't be playing D&D at all )

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 approach is fully supported by the rules.

The game is supposed to be fun, after all.

Its not about "realism"; since I am perfectly happy that in D&D a group of experienced fighters can slay huge monsters (don't try this in real life folks!), I don't see any reason to object if some of them are also able to cast a few spells, pick a few locks or whatever else the player wants his character to be able to do.

 

[Agback]

All multi- and prestige classing is done under my keen eye. A character needs to display the desire to learn things outside of their known fields and actively try to pursue it before being able to gain a level in a new class.

Because it seems more realistic, I guess.

Tell me: do you insist that characters display a desire to learn something outside their known fields and actively try to learn before acquiring a completely new ability through a choice of feat? Before learning a new skill withthe skill points their class gives them? Before acquiring a completely new ability as a class feature in an existing class?

If not, why not?