Variant Multiclass Rules Idea

[tingbudong]

Hi,
while I think the 3.XE multiclass rules are a very good system, they sometimes have trouble emulating some archetypes, especially when it involves spellcasters. This almost always leads to the need for a prestige class, which has sort of a compromise between the two base classes, such as the spellsword being a mixture between fighters and wizards, or to the introduction of a whole new base class which fills the niche of the class combination but over time can lead to a huge inflation in classes.
Another approach would be the Gestalt rules, but they are not compatible with regular characters due to the increased power levels, which is not exactly satisfying for everyday gaming either.

So I thought it would be an interesting idea to try an approach somewhere in the middle. The idea was to use a variant of the Gestalt rules where instead of taking the best of both worlds, you take the average. So, for example, when you mix a fighter (d10 HD) with a rogue (d6 HD), you would end up with a d8 HD (which is exactly what effectively happens when you alternate between taking classes in fighter and rogue).

The only rules change I found the need for implementing for so far was the medium save progression.

level - bonus
1 - +1
2 - +2
3 - +2
4 - +3
5 - +3
6 - +3
7 - +4
8 - +4
9 - +5
10 - +5
11 - +5
12 - +6
13 - +6
14 - +7
15 - +7
16 - +7
17 - +8
18 - +8
19 - +9
20 - +9

So I broke down the basic features of the classes and assigned points values to them to compare classes better. So when you combine two classes you find the average for each category and use the corresponding feature, rounding where it makes sense. The sum for all categories can give an indication of the overall power of the combination.

Example: Suppose you want to play a fighter/sorceror. The fighter's d10 HD has a points value of 2 (see below) and the sorceror's d4 HD has a value of -4. The average of that is -1, which is not an element of the table. So depending on whether your focus is more on the fighter or the spellcasting side, you could either settle for a d6 or a d8 HD and note down -2 or 0 points, depending on your choice. This process would be repeated for all features.

Hit Dice
D4 – -4
D6 – -2
D8 – 0
D10 – 2
D12 – 4

BAB
½ - -2
¾ - 0
1/1 – 2

saving throws
good –2
medium – 0
poor – -2

skill points per level
2 - -1
4 – 0
6 – 1
8 – 2

Weapon Proficiencies
Few (e.g. wizard or druid) -1
Simple 0
Simple & martial 1

Armor Proficiency (armor cost doubles for divine spellcasters)
None -2
Light -1
Medium 0
Heavy 1
Shield +1

Misc
Alignment restriction -1
Multiclass restriction -1
Condition on class abilities (alignment, action, etc.) -2
Misc restriction or drawback -1
Full spell progression (9 levels – druid, sorcerer, wizard, cleric) +5
Minor Spell Progression (paladin, ranger, bard) +5
Removed class feature and all following features depending on it -1
Delay spell level gains by 1 level (full progression) or by 2 levels (partial progression) -1
Halve spells per day -2 (full progression) -1 (partial progression)

Example Combination

Fighter/Wizard
D6 HD -2 Pts
¾ BAB 0 Pts
medium fortitude, medium will, poor reflex -2 Pts
2 SP/lv -1 Pt
Medium armor & shields 1 Pt
Full spell progression 5 Pts

Net 1 Pt

Rogue/Sorceror
D6 HD -2 Pts
¾ BAB 0 Pts
medium reflex, medium will, poor fortitude -2 Pts
6 SP/lvl 1 Pt
simple weapons & rogue weapons 0 Pts
Light armor -1 Pt
Full spell progression 5 Pts

Net 1 Pt

Druid/Ranger
D8 HD 0 Pts
¾ BAB 0 Pts
good reflex, medium fortitude, medium will 2 Pts
4 SP/lv 0 Pts
Simple weapon 0 Pts
Light Armor & Shields 0 Pts
Full spell progression 5 Pts
Removed wild empathy -1 Pt
Removed ranger's companion -1 Pt
Removed timeless body -1 Pt
Removed venom immunity -1 Pt
Removed elemental wild shape -1 Pt

Net 2 Pts

Wizard/Cleric
D6 HD -2 Pts
½ BAB -2 Pt
good will, medium fortitude, poor reflex 0 Pts
2 sp/lv -1 Pt
Simple weapons 0 Pts
Light Armor -1 Pt
Two Full spell progressions 10 Pts
Condition on clerical class abilities -2

Net 2 Pt

Based on this rough sketch, the fighter/wizard and rogue/sorceror seems to work out fine. The druid/ranger shows that some builds need to remove several class abilities to keep balance, otherwise they just get a too high amount. The wizard/cleric is not surprisingly the most powerful of the examples, but it should still work out since the total numbers of spells are not increased (two halved progressions). If it turns out to be too much, you could remove the wizard bonus feats or the cleric's turn undead.

I hope this makes sense, I just sort of threw some tables together after I had the idea. Has anybody got some feedback on whether or not this could work?

tbd

 

[Sravoff]

I must admit I didn't read all the way through though it sounded good. From the introduction this seems very "second edition". There, you could start out with two or more classes and your experience was divided between them. Ther were racial restrictions such as. Halfling: only fighter thieves, elves could be most any of the core classes. fighter, mage thief cleric.

Under that system you started off with al class abilites. spellcasting/weapon, armor, ect. HD were divided by the number of classes you had. Were you a fighter/mage/thief, you would get 3 for your fighter, 1 for the mage, and 2 for thief, for a toatal of six. Then all your exp was divied and put into the different classes.

This worked I think because the classes had different xp requirements to get to the next level. thieves needed 1500 I think while mages neede 2500.

So how about this. You may progress as two different classes at once. You are treated as a character equal to all of you class levels combined. All your Xp is divided evenly into the classes. You gain HP as per the above system from 2nd edition. You gain all class abilities from all your classes.

I don't know anything about gasalt so this may be the exact thign you were trying to escape, I don't know.

-Sravoff

 

[tingbudong]

Hi,
yes I am aware of the similarities to the 2nd edition multiclassing rules. However, they are not really the same. With the system in the original post, you are not really changing any rules. It is supposed to be more suitable to the cases where the character concept a player wants to play turns out to be a 50 : 50 combination of two classes (such as fighter/wizard or wizard/cleric). This system is just intended to streamline the effect you would get from that and avoid messy complications with spell progressions etc. Because you are not changing any rules, I can still multiclass into prestige or other base classes if I want to, which would not be possible with the system you proposed as far as I see right now, especially prestige classes would create further complications. In my opinion a rules set should be as unmessy as possible.

tbd

 

[Sravoff]

Thats is true...then you may want to check out the 101 varient class thread, there are many hybrid classes there......Not entirly what u want but there is some......

-Sravoff