Proposed fix for spellcaster multiclassing

[Wulf Ratbane]

I don't think a 10/10 spellcaster can deal with level appropriate challenges as well as a 10/10 martial character can.

Bingo.

You could even say that a 10/10 multiclass spellcaster suffers from the same problems you would expect a melee character to suffer from if he were to spend his money across multiple +1 weapons instead of investing all his money into a single top-of-the-line weapon.

Options do not equal top-tier power.

 

[el-remmen]

I agree. Who said it was unplayable?

Nikosandros.

a Wizard 10/Cleric 10 is, quite simply, unplayable,

 

[el-remmen]

I think I tend to forget that the style of play my friends and I tend to prefer mitigates a lot these issues. Maybe if we ever had anyone ever actually get to be a 10/10 level character we might come to the same conclusion.

Carry on.

 

[freyar]

Kind of random question:

Everyone says that Theurge PrCs are something of a band-aid, rather than a real solution. As far as I understand, the major problem is that it doesn't get the high-level spells. What if, instead of reworking all the multiclassing rules, which either doesn't give the Wiz 10/Clr 10 enough (according to some) or gives them (or Ftr 19/Wiz 1) too much, you just rewrite the spell progression of the MT and similar PrCs? You could strip out some of the lower-level spells per day and put in a few higher level spells. I guess this would take some work, but maybe not any more than what you're already expending on the multiclassing rules.

 

[Bladesong]

We did the following from 3.0 through 3.5. The game never derailed and everyone always had a great time. It worked fine from 1st level through 20th level and I lost count of how many characters made that journey through 20 levels. I have posted this in several threads in the past and there were always those negative Nellies who would say “but that means a 15th level fighter could fall to a charm person spell!" We always thought “why shouldn’t a 15th level fighter be afraid of falling to a charm person spell from a 20th level wizard?”
The DC for spells is 10 + ½ the caster’s level + relevant ability bonus. The DC of a spell from a 20th level wizard with a 20 Int would be 25.
For multiclass casters where all classes are of the spell-casting variety, the DCs worked as if they were single classed…so a 10/10 wizard cleric with a 20 Int and an 18 Wis would have a DC of 25 against his arcane spells and a DC 24 against his divine spells.
Multiclassing with a martial class gave you 1 level for every 2 levels of the martial class (by martial class we included everything but cleric, druid and wizard)…so a 10/10 fighter/wizard with an 18 Int would have a DC 21 for his spells (10 + 2 for fighter +5 for caster + 4 for Int).
The “penalty” if you will in such cases is that the caster never gets a spell higher than 5th level (assuming he stops at 10th level). “DC 21!!!” you might say “the fighter cannot make a reflex save that high at 15 level!!!) Yeah, so?! That 30 or so points (MAYBE) of damage he is going to take is going to make a BIG impression on that 15th level fighter…yeah, right.
We also used the same principal for SR and it worked just as well.

 

[Angrydad]

we did the following from 3.0 through 3.5. The game never derailed and everyone always had a great time. It worked fine from 1st level through 20th level and i lost count of how many characters made that journey through 20 levels. I have posted this in several threads in the past and there were always those negative nellies who would say “but that means a 15th level fighter could fall to a charm person spell!" we always thought “why shouldn’t a 15th level fighter be afraid of falling to a charm person spell from a 20th level wizard?”
the dc for spells is 10 + ½ the caster’s level + relevant ability bonus. The dc of a spell from a 20th level wizard with a 20 int would be 25.
For multiclass casters where all classes are of the spell-casting variety, the dcs worked as if they were single classed…so a 10/10 wizard cleric with a 20 int and an 18 wis would have a dc of 25 against his arcane spells and a dc 24 against his divine spells.
Multiclassing with a martial class gave you 1 level for every 2 levels of the martial class (by martial class we included everything but cleric, druid and wizard)…so a 10/10 fighter/wizard with an 18 int would have a dc 21 for his spells (10 + 2 for fighter +5 for caster + 4 for int).
The “penalty” if you will in such cases is that the caster never gets a spell higher than 5th level (assuming he stops at 10th level). “dc 21!!!” you might say “the fighter cannot make a reflex save that high at 15 level!!!) yeah, so?! That 30 or so points (maybe) of damage he is going to take is going to make a big impression on that 15th level fighter…yeah, right.
We also used the same principal for sr and it worked just as well.

yoink!

 

[Covetous]

...The DC for spells is 10 + ½ the caster’s level + relevant ability bonus. The DC of a spell from a 20th level wizard with a 20 Int would be 25...

While that sounds reasonable, I'm a little leery of having a 1st level spell be just as powerful as a 9th level spell though (or a 9th level spell being weakened, depending on how you look at it). This also removes certain feat(s) from the equation, don't it; specifically Heighten Spell?

 

[Elodan]

We also used the same principal for SR and it worked just as well.

Can you elaborate on this?

Also, yoink!

 

[Bladesong]

While that sounds reasonable, I'm a little leery of having a 1st level spell be just as powerful as a 9th level spell though (or a 9th level spell being weakened, depending on how you look at it). This also removes certain feat(s) from the equation, don't it; specifically Heighten Spell?

All I can tell you, as I stated before, we have never run into a problem with it; no problem at all, zip, nada. Been doing it for years; working great.
It never makes the spell "more powerful" just more challenging to save against, and it NEVER EVER weakens a high level spell, even from saving against (of course also remember, you are never going to get a high level spell if you are multiclassing).
Few examples: 1st level DC for spell normally is 11 whether the caster is first level or 20th, and 15 if you add an ability bonus assuming an 18 Int. With what I mentioned he would still have DC 15 at first level, but at 20th he casts it better and the DC is 25. Wow! He really puts those 1 HD goblins to sleep for sure! The fire giant doesn't seem to care though! A caster would normally get a 9th level spell at 19th level and normally the DC would be 19 or 23 if you add the ability bonus and assuming an 18 Int; with what I proposed, at 19th level the DC would be...23!
Anyone who might want to use this is not going to care if it removes 1 feat from the equation or even 5...just don't use those feats; let's face it there are only about 500 other feats to choose from...I mean really, if you don't like the idea don't use it, but it works just fine. That is the nice thing about all roleplaying games...use what you like, don't what you don't, and make however many house rules you like.

Looking back over this it looks a bit combative. I do not mean to offend so please just take the informative parts with you when you read it.

 

[Bladesong]

Can you elaborate on this?

Also, yoink!

Let's see...SR works by adding your caster level to a d20 roll to try to break it right? So a 16th level wizard rolls a d20 and adds 16 to the roll to try to break through SR.
All we did, and remember COMPLETELY OPTIONAL, is that if all of the classes of a multiclassed character were caster classes, they all totaled for the roll against SR...that is a 10/6 wizard/cleric also added 16 to their d20 roll. Remember, the highest level spell we are talking here is 5th level so it won't be earth shattering.
If the classes were 10/6 wizard/fighter he would add 13 to his roll; martial classes still only add 1 per 2 levels.
If it helps answer the question "why did you do all this?" the answer is: we did it because we wanted the character to be the deciding factor here, not spells. In other words, we thought the power level of the caster should be more important than the power level of the spells and we did this because the power level of the fighter was more important than the power level of his sword.
If you want the toys to be more important than the characters, I strongly recommend that you don't use the method I proposed.