Proposed fix for spellcaster multiclassing

[Wulf Ratbane]

We might want to give them something extra to balance that slight decrease (though, looking at bard spells, it would only affect durations, ranges, and the ability to punch through spell resistance, since I don't think any bard spell has a dice-per-level sort of effect).

One thing I considered, but did not develop, was a class feature that allowed bards to select a school/subtype of spell (enchantments, illusions, healing, sonic, etc.) for which their caster level is boosted to their class level.

At 20th level the bard would have conceivably mastered all of the basic types of spells on his list. But a "dipping" bard wouldn't get the same "full educations."

Remember here I'm talking about the usual, old definition of caster level-- the Practiced Spellcaster type. It would affect spell durations, effect, etc. but not spells known, etc.

It felt a little weird to scale them back and power them up, which is why I didn't pursue it, but I still might.

 

[Colonelpuddinhead]

Since the Paizo is trying to make core classes that will steer people fropm multiclassing, I'm curious to see how you guys would handle non-spellcasting multiclassing? Would you leave as it is in 3.5?

 

[RangerWickett]

Since the Paizo is trying to make core classes that will steer people fropm multiclassing, I'm curious to see how you guys would handle non-spellcasting multiclassing? Would you leave as it is in 3.5?

I don't really see that big of a multiclassing problem with non-spellcasters. Was there something in particular you see as a weakness in multiclassing, say, a fighter with a rogue, or a sohei with a swordsage?

 

[Banshee16]

I like a lot of what both Ranger Wickett and Wulf suggest.....I like the idea of a spellcasting BAB....but I don't like Ranger's idea that a multiclass spellcaster only gets one pool of spell points, and all spells have to come from it. A Cleric 10/Wizard10, for instance, would seem to lose a lot.

Wulf's suggestion seems to be very similar to the spellcasting method of the Magister from Arcana Unearthed...which in turn was similar to the Channeler in Spells and Magic, from 2nd Ed.

My concern is that those two suggestions are greater departures from the standard, and might break the backwards compatibility limitations that have been set for Pathfinder.

Personally, I was thinking more of something inspired by what FFG did with the spellcasting in Midnight.

Basically, have the level at which a spell is cast, and spell power be determined by character level, rather than caster level.

Thus, a Fighter 10/Wizard10 would cast spells as a lvl 20 Wizard.

However, his choice of spells.....spells per day, maximum spell level etc. will be determined by his caster level.

Maybe this could be combined with some kind of spellcasting BAB implementation that allows a multiclasser to cast spells of a higher lvl than determined by his caster level. Maybe it could be ability dependent....

Like, say, a Fighter10/Wizard10 with INT of 15 gets the spells per day of a Wizard 12, while a Fighter10/Wizard10 with INT of 18 gets the spells per day of a Wizard 14. This part I'm not as sold on.....you don't necessarioly want a Fighter10/Wizard10 to be as good a spellcaster as a Wizard20.....while at the same time, the spells available to a Fighter10/Wizard10, if he's limited to lvl 5, are of very limited use to a character facing lvl 20 encounters.

Banshee

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Since the Paizo is trying to make core classes that will steer people fropm multiclassing, I'm curious to see how you guys would handle non-spellcasting multiclassing? Would you leave as it is in 3.5?

Yes, I would.

I'd also like to reiterate that I think, "Discourage people from multiclassing" is a spurious design goal.

The correct approach is to make them equally appealing-- and no, the solution to that is not to just stick a huge "prize" at 20th level.

 

[Kerrick]

Not even counting Miracle as an analog of Wish, I count 5 spells on the 9th level Cleric list that aren't on the Wizard list. Which ones are defining features of the Cleric class-- just the healing and resurrecting?

I'm not exactly sure why you're asking that question, but why not reverse it? Wizards get quite a few spells that aren't on the cleric list (17, to be exact). Clerics are arguably powerful enough, and giving them access to wizard spells as well would be a bit much, IMO.

I find it interesting how the arrival of 4E and the announcement of Pathfinder motivates people to _really_ look into the problematic issues and not just post stuff intended as a mere house-rule, but actually consider ways to publish them. You guys should have been active 4-6 years ago (perhaps before 3.5 was in the works!)

As has been pointed out, some of us have been around since before 3.5 came out. The fact that WotC's stopped support of 3.5 is what has really allowed us to mess with larger rules issues (like the skill system) than modular bits and pieces like crafting, turning, and base classes. I can't speak for anyone else here, but only the (very likely) probability of a future Wizards release invalidating any work I've done prevented me from doing large-scale revisions before.

Since the Paizo is trying to make core classes that will steer people fropm multiclassing...

It's not to discourage multiclassing so much as to encourage staying in a single class longer. Rampant multiclassing is usually the result of base classes having no features (or none worth taking), so the player chooses levels in another class for the desired features or because it fits the concept. With base classes having more features and being more clearly defined, it makes it more likely that players will be able to develop their PC within the scope of that class alone instead of a mix of umpteen different classes.

Getting on to the discussion at hand... if I'm understanding this right, all spell slots will just go into a big pool and you choose what spells you want from a given class list (assuming you're high enough level)? I think it could work (especially with the restrictions), but unfortunately for me, it invalidates the changes I made to the sorcerer - I gave sorcerers the ability to learn and cast any spell from any list, though they keep their spells known/per day. It greatly enhances what kind of sorcerer you want to play without seriously increasing their power, and makes them completely unique from wizards.

 

[Nikosandros]

Multiclass spellcasters use only their highest applicable ability score to determine [...] the DC of their spells, regardless of which spell list they use to ready and cast spells.

I would instead use the appropriate stat for each spell list.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I would instead use the appropriate stat for each spell list.

Since some spells cross lists, that's not as clean/easy.

 

[Nikosandros]

Since some spells cross lists, that's not as clean/easy.

I see what you mean... perhaps one could use the best applicable stat. It's an extra step, but it's a piece of information that can be written down along with the other info for each spell (duration, range, etc...). Of course, if the players normally just use the spells out of the PHB without writing down the basic stats, it doesn't work as well.

 

[Colonelpuddinhead]

I don't really see that big of a multiclassing problem with non-spellcasters. Was there something in particular you see as a weakness in multiclassing, say, a fighter with a rogue, or a sohei with a swordsage?

No... to be honest I've only recently picked up the Beta version of the PFRPG and found very little in there about multiclassing. And since my friends and I are going to be playtesting soon... I was seeking opinions.

thanks, CP