Thoughts on Multiclassing

[steeldragons]

@steeldragons I think we just look at things very differently (and I may not have made my idea clearly).

I believe so. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

You strongly dislike that a character could suddenly get a third level spell (the non cumulative benefit or 6th level),

Yes, exactly. I mean, if you did that at levels 1-4, would it make much difference? Probably not. At mid, I begin to have problems. Now, extend you concept to the group playing at levels 10, 12, 15...you have no XP in magic use/spells. Take a new level. HERE, PRESTO! Have 5th, 6th...7th[?!] level spells?! Does that seem ok and not broken to you?

4hps and +2 spell casting-bonus; vs 2 1st level spells, d4hps and +1 spell-casting bonus.

To me that's not breaking immersion anymore that a character suddenly being able to cast spells, no matter if that is 1st or 3rd level.

And how is gaining access to a 1st level spell not different, to you, than gaining a 3rd level spell?

Re optimal, fair enough if we have no common ground, i'm not talking powergaming, merely that I'd like to see those features closer in power level to the features you are giving up by choosing not to take the next level in your existing path.

And I find this flawed...and "powergame-y" if not consciously powergaming.

That said, I don't think Next will be anything like this, so you should be safe

Yup. Think we'll both be screwed. lol.

 

[Warbringer]

Yes, exactly. I mean, if you did that at levels 1-4, would it make much difference? Probably not. At mid, I begin to have problems. Now, extend you concept to the group playing at levels 10, 12, 15...you have no XP in magic use/spells. Take a new level. HERE, PRESTO! Have 5th, 6th...7th[?!] level spells?! Does that seem ok and not broken to you?

I think in play it would be fine. The character would have a access to a spell they cast once a day that is in line with all their other daily abilities, then no. If its a sudden jump in power, then the system has a bigger problem.

And how is gaining access to a 1st level spell not different, to you, than gaining a 3rd level spell?

It's not. It's just does it have a reasonable impact in game. A 6th level fighter with magic missile, isn't exactly motivated to use it (and yes, i know they don't have to choose it )

And I find this flawed...and "powergame-y" if not consciously powergaming.

Not my intent, but obvious it could easily become a powergamer tool

Yup. Think we'll both be screwed. lol.

Lol

 

[braro]

One perspective I have is this - a level isn't a level, a level is just a cache of experience.

Lets assume that we are talking about 3e. So our level 6 fighter has 15K Experience, and needs 21K to level; so a delta of 6K.

He achieves that 6K, but instead of learning how to fight, he invests all that energy in to trying to figure out magic. What would 6K give him if he were new and starting out? Why, he'd be a 4th level wizard with that much experience.

However, in 3e, he just gets 1 level of wizard. And while I get that level 1 has a whole lot of special stuff behind it (so maybe it takes more or something, like an Entry Fee in to each class), I don't think that "A Level is a Level" is entirely accurate for how the world works in my head.

 

[steeldragons]

I think in play it would be fine. The character would have a access to a spell they cast once a day that is in line with all their other daily abilities, then no.

Obviously, I think that is mistaken.

If its a sudden jump in power, then the system has a bigger problem.

See previous post regarding "Presto, have a 5-7th level spell." POO! you're a 6th (or higher) level wizard! Yes, that would, from my perspective, be "a sudden jump in power." That is a problem with the system, most certainly. If multiclassing "makes common sense" then no, the system has no problem and does not, as we like to say, "break."

It's not. It's just does it have a reasonable impact in game. A 6th level fighter with magic missile, isn't exactly motivated to use it (and yes, i know they don't have to choose it )

Ok...indulge me a moment...

The party has been fighting the <insert suitable 7th level party challenge/villain here>. It's a tough go. The rogue is making ineffectual attacks (he simply can't pierce the creature's AC). The cleric is almost out of spells. The mage died three rounds ago. Your fighter has given it everything he's got...but is low on HP and the dice just aren't giving his sword blows the "umph" they need...the creature is hurt, for sure, but fights with an unearthly fury! The monster/villain breaks off from the fighter, after a telling blow, turning its attention to attack the obviously hurting cleric before she can invoke her god again...Your fighter, with his 1 level in mage, casts magic missle...it unerringly hits and [who knew!?!?] does enough damage to take the monster/villain down before it kills the cleric...or maybe it doesn't kill them, but puts the villain's attention back on the fighter...You're "fighter" with 1 level of wizard just saved the cleric in either case...at least for one more round...

I would propose it is certainly worth being motivated to use...or charm person, shield, floating disc?! Keep it up your sleeve. Use it as a tool or as a toy. Read the mystic runes over the door when the rogue is looking at them cross-eyed. Recall the tome you read in your limited training [Arcane lore] about the Staff of Arkemideze which now lays on the floor before you, beside the vanquished lich.

These are not trivial abilities...and you don't need to immediately master fireball to do them.

Not my intent, but obvious it could easily become a powergamer tool

Precisely. Which, in and of itself, [again, I assert] is reason enough not to include it. The game system/designers need not cater to such gameplay. Don't "dismiss" it, obviously. People will play that way no matter what is done. It's a viable mode of play. But putting things into the default that are obviously able to be abused?!

No thank you.

Lol

We're all on the "same side" here. We're just all at different angles. This is why the d20 is the perfect symbol of the hobby...we're just all sitting on slightly different angles of the die...approaching it differently with our perception of which way is "up"...but we're all on the same [outer] side.

Those bastards trying to approach it from the inside of the die?! Pff. Let'em burn. ;P

 

[Gomer212]

I always thought I would try sort of a gestalt approach to multi-classing.

In AD&D the math on leveling up was that the XP it took to level up, about doubled every level. Multi-classes with two classes had to split their XP up between the two and were about a level behind everyone else in each class. So A Fighter/Mage running with a group of 7th level characters was generally around a level 6/6 (give or take based on each class' level advancement, I don't have my AD&D stuff in front of me at the moment)

I considered running a game where if you were to multi-class from the start of the game, you would run as a gestalt combo of your classes, then be stuck with a +1 LA for every class taken beyond the first.

So, under this system with, let's say, a group of level 8 characters...
If there was a multi-class character, he might be say, a gestalt Fighter/Mage 7 (ECL 8). This means, he would have a d10 Hit Die, Wizard spells, Fighter Feats, the best saves, Full BaB, etc. He would be a master of two styles, but slightly below everyone else in each (not to mention being multi-ability dependent). This, I believe would be the closest to AD&D's multi-classing.

Of course, the problems with this are numerous. It only takes into consideration characters that multi-class from the start of their careers. It's not very friendly if you want to add non gestalt classes or PrCs later. Adding numerous non gestalt classes would create a complicated class list for the character....etc.

It's not perfect, but for a straight up 2-3 balanced multi-class, It may work out ok.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

@Gomer212

You can emulate AD&D feel a litle closer by handing out averaged hit points (rather than using the best type), having the level adjustment scale (up to about +2 or +3), and creating rules for the types of classes you could take together (no fighter/paladins or sorcerer/bards). I think it's a bit more powerful as you described it. I've used the system I just mentioned, and found that it could be overpowered with some combinations and was generally a powerful (though not necessarily over-powered) choice. It works best with combos that sufer from multiple attribute dependancies. Since hps are also always behind, it has a Con tax (and/or Improved Toughness or other hp feats). It works, as long as you're careful and your players aren't trying to abuse it.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Multiclassing is always tricky because there's a crowd that feels their character should get appropriate powers for the total character level by multiclassing, while another says the character still has to start at the beginning and go through the ropes of gaining experience in those classes.

It seems much better to me to go with the latter, which is what 3.X did (although not always well). Where it failed was the fact that casters almost always trumped non-casters, so often getting levels in a casting class was superior to those in a martial class for both versatility and power. Ideally it should be a sacrifice of less power for more versatility as already noted.

To get multiclassing in a better place would require balancing the classes better at all levels. I haven't been paying much attention to Next, but I hope they've done a better job of balance than 3.X did? And hopefully it's more interesting than 4.0's system?

Turning into some sort of gestalt system might end up working better, if one assumes that as one gains higher levels in a class their power increases more than the last level, which means it'd be a bit quadratic. If it was simply a fully linear gain then the 3.X way of just adding on the first level of another class to the total would work.

 

[Herzog]

3.5 multiclassing suffers from a couple of problems. I will list a few.

1. Class frontloading and the spreading of class abilities over levels.
This means that if you plan to multiclass AND take levels of rogue, you are shooting yourself in the foot if you do not start with the rogue level (because of the x4 skill multiplication at lvl 1)
It means taking a level of fighter gets you all armor and weapon proficiencies. Additional levels 'only' give you figher feats (and maybe fighter only feats like Weapon Specialization etc.)
It means taking a level of Cleric gives you Turn Undead (including all the uses, which power some Domain and Divine feats)
2. Class balance and class progression.
If you take a single level of fighter after several levels of Wizard, you are some BaB behind, but not completely. (even Wiz gets a minor BaB increase). Losing that caster level increase, however, will make you think twice (if not more often) before you take that level of fighter.
If you take a single level of wizard after several levels of fighter, your caster level starts at 1. You can burn a feat to increase your caster level, but only once.
And if you multiclass between barbarian, ranger and fighter, (and other full BaB classes) you are only loosing the higher level perks of the class (like better rage or Weapon Spec.)

IMO, multiclassing is a way to get a character that is able to do what I want my character to be able to do and is not possible with any of the base (or Prestige) classes.
Therefore, even when I have to take 2 or 3 levels of every class in the books, it should be of equal power level as when I single class up to the same character level.
Of course, since the character has more widespread options than a single class character, some trade-in of power for versatility is normal. If I am able to cast 300 1st lvl spells per day, I do not expect each of them to be as powerfull as the 9th lvl spells of the single class wizard. However, I DO expect them to have SOME result in a CR appropriate fight. If my first level spells are no longer affecting my opponents (example: Sleep) than why have these spells in the first place?
mmm. Ok, rant off. Bit of a tangent there. Hope I got my point across though.

 

[Herobizkit]

3.x Gestalt has been and always will be my new favorite way to multi-class. 4e tries it but many options just don't gel that well together. Previously, 2nd edition was the way to go for me. I played a handful of single-classed characters when I jumped the fence from DM to player, but once I got into multi-classing... well, I made a LOT of half-elves, and when the Bard's handbook came out, I never went back. However, I don't know how this system would work with DMs who hand out levels via story fiat instead of XP totals, save that they might just assume they might have [X] XP and figure out their relevant level appropriately. ***final note: my carriage return doesn't seem to work in the text editor anymore and apparently it doesn't recognize HTML tags, either. Glitch, or my PC somehow? tag me if you have an answer ***

 

[Herzog]

[MENTION=36150]Herobizkit[/MENTION] re:carriage return:
Click on the Switch Editor mode icon.