RW, couldn't you have waited with your post, until I finished mine?
anondragon said:
So why is there an inherent unfair weakness due to multiclassing?
One of the things that EOM tried to fix(and I believe did) was the penalty of multiclassing among spellcasting classes. The argument was that a fighter could multiclass as a ranger and not see a penalty to their BAB. The concept of a caster level to serve as the BAB fixed this.
This is insofar correct, that classes with a full casting progression can be now combined without getting inadvertently "nerfed". Let us stick for the moment to the core rules and how WotC tried to solve the problem.
The problem consisted of spells, which were to weak because of 3 reasons.
- The spell level was too low compared to a singleclassed caster - a Wiz 10/Cle 10 has only access to 5th level spells, while a Wiz 20 or a Cle 20 could even have theoritically access to 10th level spells (after the formula roundup(Caster level/2) = max spell level).
- Due to the lower spell levels the save DC is lower, which means that only weaker foes will be affected - the BBEG will most of the time laugh, also because of the 3rd reason.
- Due to the lower caster level the damage output is lower - compared to a pure caster roughly the half.
The counter argument, that a Wiz/Cle has far more spells available as a pure caster, doesn't hold really water. Firstly, most of the spells won't affect the outcome of a battle much, and secondly, the multiclassed char can still only cast 1 spell per round (Quicken Spell is simply a waste).
So this situation leads to the use of no-save spells (which don't exist in EoMR) and of utility spells. That's simply a waste of a character. Furthermore, all points are valid for multiclassed character with a non-caster classes, except the counter argument.
WotC's first "solution" was the Mystic Theurge prototype. Adding every level two caster levels in exchange for every other class feature. The only thing, Mystic Theurges and their companions can do well, is casting spells - and that after at least the 11th character level in a pure build.
The second "solution" is the Practiced Spellcaster feat - after this feat I modeled the rule. Practiced Spellcaster has the first disadvantage, that at low levels the effect is gigantic. A 1st-level caster can improve his spell effects by a factor five. The second disadvantage, that this feat doesn't stack. The third disadvantage is, that one has to spend a precious feat slot to suck less. It is my deepest believe, that rules shouldn't be designed, that certain combinations have automatically a high penalty, and that the fix is a redesign of the messed up rules, not a faulty workaround.
The transition of Practiced Spellcaster is a little bit difficult, because spells aren't affected by the caster level. To improve the effect the MP limit has to be heightened itself, and setting it equal to the HD seemed 100% logical.
But the perceived unfairness with multiclassing between casting classes and non-casting classes seems a little far fetched. The multiclass caster could not cast spells with very high damage/DCs. That argument is akin to suggesting that someone that takes 5 levels of rouge, then 10 level of fighter should have max ranks in rouge skills.
The fighter/rouge example, has a fewer hitpoints than other fighters, lower BAB, but gains sneak attack, evasion and more skill points than any straight-up fighter would. Comparing their effectiveness solely to one class or the other is a mistake. A straight up rouge will out rouge you, a straight up fighter will dice you up.
That comparison is not entirely fair as someone pointed out there is still an MP pool limit that would severely limit the number of spells that could be cast each day. But encounters are very rare which require more than 3 rounds to finish (they do happen but not often). The ability to cast 3 spells at high level coupled with the abilities that were gained from taking taking levels in the other classes make this rule change unbalancing. Would you allow the rogue to make 3 skill checks a day at HD levels to avoid the "unfairness" that they took 10 levels of fighter?
So your mage 5/ fighter 10 can't fry enemies with a fireball, due to low max damage and low save DCs...so what. The levels of mage can offer many advantages over a straight fighter, but to be effective the character needs to be played as a multiclass character. Focus on buffing spells and environment effecting spells and your character will be seeing the end of the fight more often than the straight up fighter or mage.
As a general rule, the HD limit would ruin much of the existing flavor of the spell casting classes. magekights would be able to stand toe to toe with spell casting against mages (+1 per 5 level does help a little) but with the benefit of higher hit points, better saves(?) and the added bonus of more feats (at lower levels) training with armor and weapons. As a feat/boon that applies to a limited number of spell lists this rule would allow the classes to keep their flavor without punishing single class casters.
As RW pointed out, falling behind in spell levels decreases the efficiency of spellcasting dramatically. A Fighter/Rouge build is a Wiz 10/Cle 10 clearly superior. Also you didn't consider, that a low MP pool will affect a caster strongly, next to the lower amount of spell lists. Even a pure caster build can't afford to cast always the strongest spells. How serious is the situation to someone, whose HD are doubled to his caster level, considering the increment of the MP pool over the course of the career of a pure caster? He can cast in one or two fights, exhausting himself entirely from MP. At least this is more fun than saving those MP for healing after the battle. And for the flavor of the pure casters: They have more perks than you give them credit for.
P.S. did I get rid of the hard breaks? I prewrite everything in emacs to get the spelling right.
Yes, but you can control it yourself, if you use the preview function. In suspicious cases, you can resize your browser.
