When do YOU multi-class?
- Thread starter Quickbeam
- Start date
My two coppers on the current topic.
I've been mulitclassing a Druid/Sorceror over the past 8 levels, campaign started at 2nd level. I've kept the levels dead even, currently 4/4. Ninth is quite close, which is the point where I intend to begin taking straight Druid for a few levels.
There have been several issues arising from this choice, some good, some bad.
First up, I was the only one multiclassing for the first six levels. This meant I had effectively half the power of any other character in the party, but with twice the options. I found this very frustrating at times. (House rules eased the Spells Known limit on Sorcerors by a little bit, and allowed a combination Animal Companion/Familiar. These helped, but my power level still sucked a bit.) The party has since begun to branch out and now everyone has at least one level of another class. The Wiz7/Barb1 freaked our DM a bit when it happened
Multiclassing a divine/arcane combo of spellcasters means far greater variety of spells, but far lower caster level. My way round this was to utilise low level spells to the best advantage I could, and leave the flashy damage spells to the single class Wizard. I set em up, she knocks em down is generally how it works. (Entangle is a truly potent spell against groups, and doesn't have Web's anchor point limitations) It's still a sub-optimal choice from a raw power point of view, but if you don't mind a support role in the party, you can do a hell of a lot.
My biggest gripe has been my inability to deal serious damage in combat, mainly due to a strength of 11 (+0) and Druid Weapon restricitions - Then we got hit by an NPC wielding a Keen scimitar, with the Improved Critical feat and I now have a goal... (2d6+4 on a 15. He'd poisoned the blade, too. It was Nasty.) Plus my party has finally had the time to stop running around so the wizard can make me a few offensive wands.
Staggering back towards the point, I think I'd have gone straight Druid to 5th and then multied into Sorceror if it weren't for major campaign plot that meant I wanted to start with both, and then it just seemed easier to keep the levels even.
If you're not worried about the focused power hit inherent in multiclassing, it can be a great way to broaden your options. But in the next campaign, I fancy a straight fighter, or perhaps a 1/2 orc monk. I want a chance to hit things hard...
I've been mulitclassing a Druid/Sorceror over the past 8 levels, campaign started at 2nd level. I've kept the levels dead even, currently 4/4. Ninth is quite close, which is the point where I intend to begin taking straight Druid for a few levels.
There have been several issues arising from this choice, some good, some bad.
First up, I was the only one multiclassing for the first six levels. This meant I had effectively half the power of any other character in the party, but with twice the options. I found this very frustrating at times. (House rules eased the Spells Known limit on Sorcerors by a little bit, and allowed a combination Animal Companion/Familiar. These helped, but my power level still sucked a bit.) The party has since begun to branch out and now everyone has at least one level of another class. The Wiz7/Barb1 freaked our DM a bit when it happened
Multiclassing a divine/arcane combo of spellcasters means far greater variety of spells, but far lower caster level. My way round this was to utilise low level spells to the best advantage I could, and leave the flashy damage spells to the single class Wizard. I set em up, she knocks em down is generally how it works. (Entangle is a truly potent spell against groups, and doesn't have Web's anchor point limitations) It's still a sub-optimal choice from a raw power point of view, but if you don't mind a support role in the party, you can do a hell of a lot.
My biggest gripe has been my inability to deal serious damage in combat, mainly due to a strength of 11 (+0) and Druid Weapon restricitions - Then we got hit by an NPC wielding a Keen scimitar, with the Improved Critical feat and I now have a goal... (2d6+4 on a 15. He'd poisoned the blade, too. It was Nasty.) Plus my party has finally had the time to stop running around so the wizard can make me a few offensive wands.
Staggering back towards the point, I think I'd have gone straight Druid to 5th and then multied into Sorceror if it weren't for major campaign plot that meant I wanted to start with both, and then it just seemed easier to keep the levels even.
If you're not worried about the focused power hit inherent in multiclassing, it can be a great way to broaden your options. But in the next campaign, I fancy a straight fighter, or perhaps a 1/2 orc monk. I want a chance to hit things hard...
Deadguy
First Post
I've been perusing the replies given in this thread, and it seems to me that rather than ask When do you multi-class, ask rather Why are you multi-classing? If you can answer this, then the question of when tends to flow from it.
There are many reasons for multi-classing; I want just to mention two of them. One is the character redesign: you find the character doesn't quite mesh with the game or the way it's running. You might have focussed on interpersonal skills as a Rogue only to find that the DM is now running a long story arc where you are fighting in the Underdark. In that case, you should multi-class when you are able to and when you find a niche that you can exploit. I never have difficulties with PCs doing this: they are behaving as smart people do and learning new 'skills' to deal with their environment. but it needs discussing with the DM to get the right feel and perhaps to set up the appropriate circumstances for the development.
Another good reason for multi-classing is when the character is using the multi-classing rules to represent a character who doesn't quite fit the archetypes of the core classes. I have a Fighter-Rogue (split 2:1 Ftr:Rog). He is actually a warrior who specialises in the urban environment, wearing light armour and working often as a bodyguard. I don't think of him in-game as a Fighter-Rogue, he's a Bodyguard-Enforcer. This is a where multi-classing really comes into its own, and can do away with the need for certain Prestige Classes.
Still, let's face it, for any faults it might have, 3e multiclassing is a fantastic step forward!
There are many reasons for multi-classing; I want just to mention two of them. One is the character redesign: you find the character doesn't quite mesh with the game or the way it's running. You might have focussed on interpersonal skills as a Rogue only to find that the DM is now running a long story arc where you are fighting in the Underdark. In that case, you should multi-class when you are able to and when you find a niche that you can exploit. I never have difficulties with PCs doing this: they are behaving as smart people do and learning new 'skills' to deal with their environment. but it needs discussing with the DM to get the right feel and perhaps to set up the appropriate circumstances for the development.
Another good reason for multi-classing is when the character is using the multi-classing rules to represent a character who doesn't quite fit the archetypes of the core classes. I have a Fighter-Rogue (split 2:1 Ftr:Rog). He is actually a warrior who specialises in the urban environment, wearing light armour and working often as a bodyguard. I don't think of him in-game as a Fighter-Rogue, he's a Bodyguard-Enforcer. This is a where multi-classing really comes into its own, and can do away with the need for certain Prestige Classes.
Still, let's face it, for any faults it might have, 3e multiclassing is a fantastic step forward!
Buttercup
Princess of Florin
Quickbeam said:
It seems to me that this is your answer. If he is devoted to the god of magic, wouldn't he learn wizardry asap? If I were playing this character, I would take a level of mage at second level, then go back to cleric, then mage, then cleric. I might well stop at two levels of mage, but in any case I wouldn't take more than about 4. And I would get them in early, not because of the lower experience point cost, but because it's what the PC would want to do to show his devotion.
BiggusGeekus said:
Proposed Revision: Anyone who relies on casting spells (or psionic powers), and monks, should not multi-class to a core class. If you want a non-spellcasting Ranger or Paladin, flipping to Fighter after 4 or 5 levels isn't a bad idea. And a level or two of Sorcerer can be useful to many characters that don't rely on spellcasting.
Brown Jenkin
First Post
As a player I am glad for the 3e multiclassing rules. It has given me the chance to play characters that I personally find interesting.
In my first 3e campaign I played a dwarven Sorcerer/Fighter. when the campaign ended he was sor 5/ftr 1. As a dwarf I could not see him hanging back in combat, so he would buff himself and run into the front lines. He started as a sorcerer and then after much teasing about not being a real dwarf he took a level of fighter to prove he was a real dwarf. After that it was all sorcerer but with spell selections to help him in combat. This allowed me try a different approach to being a front line fighter.
Currently I am multiclassing for a different reason. I was interested in the Mystic Wanderer PrC from MoF. I have been alternating Bard/Cleric while woshiping Silvanus the god of nature. I know some may say that planning a character out for a PrC is wrong especially to be able to take the Prc as soon as possible, but it was playing the PrC that I was interested in. And at least in this case it is far from powergaming. I have allways been behind in my power levels compared to the rest of my party, and this particular PrC really only provides more of what I already am a support character. What it has forced me to do is even more role playing than normal, which I have enjoyed. I personally don't see anything wrong with this as it has increased my enjoyment of the game without harming anyone elses.
I guess my question is why are so many people against multiclassing. Why not let people play what they want to. Granted some people will use this to try to exploit the rules but then wouldn't they try to do this anyway.
In my first 3e campaign I played a dwarven Sorcerer/Fighter. when the campaign ended he was sor 5/ftr 1. As a dwarf I could not see him hanging back in combat, so he would buff himself and run into the front lines. He started as a sorcerer and then after much teasing about not being a real dwarf he took a level of fighter to prove he was a real dwarf. After that it was all sorcerer but with spell selections to help him in combat. This allowed me try a different approach to being a front line fighter.
Currently I am multiclassing for a different reason. I was interested in the Mystic Wanderer PrC from MoF. I have been alternating Bard/Cleric while woshiping Silvanus the god of nature. I know some may say that planning a character out for a PrC is wrong especially to be able to take the Prc as soon as possible, but it was playing the PrC that I was interested in. And at least in this case it is far from powergaming. I have allways been behind in my power levels compared to the rest of my party, and this particular PrC really only provides more of what I already am a support character. What it has forced me to do is even more role playing than normal, which I have enjoyed. I personally don't see anything wrong with this as it has increased my enjoyment of the game without harming anyone elses.
I guess my question is why are so many people against multiclassing. Why not let people play what they want to. Granted some people will use this to try to exploit the rules but then wouldn't they try to do this anyway.
Henry
Autoexreginated
Brown Jenkin said:
I don't think anyone WOULD say this. As a player, you have a right if the DM allows it in his campaign, to play the character you want to play.
I occasionally have to get this off my chest, and now might as well be one of those times:
There are far too many calls of "munchkinism" in our hobby - it's a word that is so overused that no one has a concept of what it really means anymore, like "gay."
100 years ago, to call someone "gay" had far more to do with their temperament than their sexuality, nor how "manly" they were. Same thing in our hobby with people who complain about other people's characters - they enjoy trying to make others feel bad so much that they have lost sight of the prize.
Quickbeam
Explorer
Wow -- what an amazing array of new commentary!!
Thank you all for the additional remarks and feedback. Let me group several of the posts and respond accordingly.
drothgery, Biggus Geekus, et al:
I have no interest in min/maxing this character, or using conventional powergame logic with respect to multiclassing. In general I agree with your assessments on the subject, which is why I rarely multiclass or use PrC. I understand that taking a second class lowers my caster level for both types of magic, and presents other drawbacks. Nonetheless it's the path I wish to pursue for this character in keeping with my overall concept and his overall devotion to magic.
Brown Jenkin:
Many people are against multiclassing for the above reasons and the one you touch on -- namely, grabbing a second class which doesn't fit the PC solely for the benefits it provides. Bottom line, though, it's a game and some folks are always gonna look to manipulate the rules for maximum advantage. That's their prerogative. As everyone else (the majority of gamers), multiclassing adds flavor and options, thus making the game more entertaining.
Henry:
I agree that we all too frequently label people as munchkins, rules lawyers, etc., to the detriment of gaming in a broad sense. For my part, I'm not trying to attack anyone else's style of play, I'm simply saying that I do not seek to min/max my PCs for the sole purpose of gaining every conceivable edge. I enjoy creating a character concept and following it where the game takes me, regardless of how powerful he or she may be become.
tenelo, Deadguy, Buttercup and others:
Your comments get right to the heart of my dilemma -- what to do, and when to do it. Obviously this will ultimately be my choice, but the extra insight is greatly appreciated. I'm aware of all the benefits and drawbacks involved in multiclassing a spellcaster, and have acepted this as my course. Buttercup suggests grabbing a level of Wizard now, which would make my PC Cleric 2/Wizard 1, since we just gained enough XP to hit 3rd level. As my previous post indicates, I was leaning towards taking a 3rd Cleric level, then going with a level or two of Wizard. To answer Deadguy's question, I am multiclassing because this PC is devoted to magic in all its forms. Thus, he wants to be personally familiar with arcane magic to some degree. Nothing to this point in our campaign has transpired which would make either class more or less attractive for this level up opportunity.
We have encountered a fair number of undead, and had several party members come VERY close to death, and so another level of Cleric would be helpful. On the flip side, there is only one arcane caster in the group right now, the party does a have paladin and druid to assist in healing, and my interest in magic might warrant the Wizard level now. Any more thoughts now?
Thanks in advance!!
Thank you all for the additional remarks and feedback. Let me group several of the posts and respond accordingly.
drothgery, Biggus Geekus, et al:
I have no interest in min/maxing this character, or using conventional powergame logic with respect to multiclassing. In general I agree with your assessments on the subject, which is why I rarely multiclass or use PrC. I understand that taking a second class lowers my caster level for both types of magic, and presents other drawbacks. Nonetheless it's the path I wish to pursue for this character in keeping with my overall concept and his overall devotion to magic.
Brown Jenkin:
Many people are against multiclassing for the above reasons and the one you touch on -- namely, grabbing a second class which doesn't fit the PC solely for the benefits it provides. Bottom line, though, it's a game and some folks are always gonna look to manipulate the rules for maximum advantage. That's their prerogative. As everyone else (the majority of gamers), multiclassing adds flavor and options, thus making the game more entertaining.
Henry:
I agree that we all too frequently label people as munchkins, rules lawyers, etc., to the detriment of gaming in a broad sense. For my part, I'm not trying to attack anyone else's style of play, I'm simply saying that I do not seek to min/max my PCs for the sole purpose of gaining every conceivable edge. I enjoy creating a character concept and following it where the game takes me, regardless of how powerful he or she may be become.
tenelo, Deadguy, Buttercup and others:
Your comments get right to the heart of my dilemma -- what to do, and when to do it. Obviously this will ultimately be my choice, but the extra insight is greatly appreciated. I'm aware of all the benefits and drawbacks involved in multiclassing a spellcaster, and have acepted this as my course. Buttercup suggests grabbing a level of Wizard now, which would make my PC Cleric 2/Wizard 1, since we just gained enough XP to hit 3rd level. As my previous post indicates, I was leaning towards taking a 3rd Cleric level, then going with a level or two of Wizard. To answer Deadguy's question, I am multiclassing because this PC is devoted to magic in all its forms. Thus, he wants to be personally familiar with arcane magic to some degree. Nothing to this point in our campaign has transpired which would make either class more or less attractive for this level up opportunity.
We have encountered a fair number of undead, and had several party members come VERY close to death, and so another level of Cleric would be helpful. On the flip side, there is only one arcane caster in the group right now, the party does a have paladin and druid to assist in healing, and my interest in magic might warrant the Wizard level now. Any more thoughts now?
Thanks in advance!!
Similar Threads
