Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 8854946" data-attributes="member: 59057">Ok. The phone was the problem.So if I understand it right, a level 9/5 class in your example is about a level 13 single classed PC and you penalize the proficiency bonus by 2 and hp by about 1/3 to 1/2. If it is a blow to spellcasting... I don't necessarily think so. The warlock does not really stack with normal slots anyway. So having 5 levels of warlock might be actually nice, as might be one more feat at certain levelsSo yes, it seems to discurage dipping. I don't know if it is better balanced though. I am not really convinced. It seems very strange at low levels, and when you make that jump to the second class. But maybe I am still not fully grasping it. So overall, I guess it is too much hassle for little gain. I bet there are easier ways to do it. But cool that you created something and put some thoughts into it.Edit: probably lowering the multiplyer down to 2 would result in more balanced results and make it easier to calculate.The end result will be a character level 10/13 with about as much xp as a level 20 character and a 2 lower proficiency bonus and about 1/3 less hp. Maybe actually the extra prof bonus reduction is not needed on top of xp increase and just reducing the hit dice by 1/2 instead of all hp would be sufficient to keep those characters in line. Also you could allow for limited stacking of spellcasting. I guess that also gives better results than having two seperate spellcasting tables. I think having twice as many low level spell slots instead of few high ones you can't use to prepare spells is actually a power upgrade instead of a downgrade...So then we are back to: why all the hassle?Instead: just add to multiclass rules, that class abilities based on PB use the PB listed in the class list. We have a precendent for such a rule in the spell preparation multiclass rules.</blockquote>

Verification