Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proposal: Fighter/mage/thief: quick and dirty concurrent multiclassing/gestalt rules
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 7022283" data-attributes="member: 6787650"><p>There's an impact from using different baselines: you're measuring relative to a Cleric 11/Wizard 9, and I'm measuring relative to a Wizard 20 or Cleric 1/Wizard 19. Again, an aesthetic judgment as to which one seems more plausible/common/archetypical and worth supporting. I find Cleric 11/Wizard 9 very uncool and don't care at all if it becomes irrelevant as long as Wizard 20 is still viable; you apparently find it cool enough that you want to keep it in your game even if that makes Wizard 20 relatively stronger than any multiclass split. (And there is nothing you can do to make Cleric 11/Wizard 9 as good a Wizard 20.)</p><p></p><p>Bearing that difference in mind...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's a pretty huge difference between 4/3/3/3/2/1/1/1/0 + 4/3/3/3/2/1/1/1/0 and 8/6/6/6/4/2/2/2/0. Lumping the spell slots from both classes together would let the Cl 15 / Wiz 15 spend his cleric slots on wizard spells like Maze and Feeblemind. Getting to cast Maze x2 probably still isn't as good as getting to cast Shapechange x1 (there's a pretty huge jump in power at 9th level spells), but it's a lot better than only getting to cast Maze x1 is and having to take the Cleric 8 spell from a completely different list (of which Holy Aura and Antimagic Field are probably the best options) with a different set of spells-prepared pressures on it.</p><p></p><p>Lumping the spells together is sort of like allowing spell slots to be shuffled between PCs, which is obviously more powerful for a party than having everyone cast only their own spells.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Precisely. Not only is 94 + 94 less efficient than 188, but it's also 94 from a more limited spell list with no 9th level spells, and fewer synergies. (E.g. if you're an Evoker 15, 94 of those spell points do not benefit in any way from your Empowered Evocations, and the 94 points that DO benefit are the same spell points that are competing with your Walls of Force.) Trust me when I say my powergamer instincts don't jump for joy at the thought of having 94 + 94 spell points but no access to 9th level spells. They <em>do</em> kind of jump for joy at the thought of having an extra feat though, and being 90% of the way there towards having three extra feats, particularly if I were playing a SAD combination like Sorcerer/Warlock.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure. I think we all understand the effects of our various choices, and the reason we went down different roads. Both of us have nerfed the combination that our own respective powergamer instincts tell us is exciting and a bit too powerful; we've left alone the combinations that seem kind of meh.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 7022283, member: 6787650"] There's an impact from using different baselines: you're measuring relative to a Cleric 11/Wizard 9, and I'm measuring relative to a Wizard 20 or Cleric 1/Wizard 19. Again, an aesthetic judgment as to which one seems more plausible/common/archetypical and worth supporting. I find Cleric 11/Wizard 9 very uncool and don't care at all if it becomes irrelevant as long as Wizard 20 is still viable; you apparently find it cool enough that you want to keep it in your game even if that makes Wizard 20 relatively stronger than any multiclass split. (And there is nothing you can do to make Cleric 11/Wizard 9 as good a Wizard 20.) Bearing that difference in mind... There's a pretty huge difference between 4/3/3/3/2/1/1/1/0 + 4/3/3/3/2/1/1/1/0 and 8/6/6/6/4/2/2/2/0. Lumping the spell slots from both classes together would let the Cl 15 / Wiz 15 spend his cleric slots on wizard spells like Maze and Feeblemind. Getting to cast Maze x2 probably still isn't as good as getting to cast Shapechange x1 (there's a pretty huge jump in power at 9th level spells), but it's a lot better than only getting to cast Maze x1 is and having to take the Cleric 8 spell from a completely different list (of which Holy Aura and Antimagic Field are probably the best options) with a different set of spells-prepared pressures on it. Lumping the spells together is sort of like allowing spell slots to be shuffled between PCs, which is obviously more powerful for a party than having everyone cast only their own spells. Precisely. Not only is 94 + 94 less efficient than 188, but it's also 94 from a more limited spell list with no 9th level spells, and fewer synergies. (E.g. if you're an Evoker 15, 94 of those spell points do not benefit in any way from your Empowered Evocations, and the 94 points that DO benefit are the same spell points that are competing with your Walls of Force.) Trust me when I say my powergamer instincts don't jump for joy at the thought of having 94 + 94 spell points but no access to 9th level spells. They [I]do[/I] kind of jump for joy at the thought of having an extra feat though, and being 90% of the way there towards having three extra feats, particularly if I were playing a SAD combination like Sorcerer/Warlock. Sure. I think we all understand the effects of our various choices, and the reason we went down different roads. Both of us have nerfed the combination that our own respective powergamer instincts tell us is exciting and a bit too powerful; we've left alone the combinations that seem kind of meh. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proposal: Fighter/mage/thief: quick and dirty concurrent multiclassing/gestalt rules
Top