My dissatisfaction with multiclassing and how to fix it

[Vanday]

As you can gather from the title, I am not totally satisfied with how multiclassing works in PF (or DnD 3.X in general). Don't get me wrong - I think that the basic idea of mixing and matching classes as you see fit is utterly awesome. However, it seems to me that this option is clearly suboptimal for a specific segment of the classes in PF - namely the spellcasters. I would like to discuss how to tweak the rules so that multiclassing may achieve its full potential, as it were.

First off, my assumptions: I think (and it has been pointed out to me) that multiclassing is basically fine for warrior/non-casting classes. The reason for this is that combat abilities already stack in a way that spellcasting doesn't, namely in the form of BAB. Imagine for a moment that every class had its own "fighting progression" - BAB, iterative attacks, etc. - that didn't stack across classes. Suddenly, multiclassing becomes a much less viable option even for martial characters.

This, I think, is the root of the problem with multiclassed spellcasters. Spell progressions from different classes do not stack and are incompatible with one another. Also, spellcasting classes will advance your combat abilities, however slowly, while martial classes do not advance spellcasting at all. My suggested fix* is to simply make each class contribute half its level to the spellcasting progressions of each of your classes, if any. I realise that this is not worded very well, so let me give an example. A Ftr10/Wiz10 would cast spells just like a Wiz15, due to 10 wizard levels and five spellcasting levels from being a fighter. The wizard would not contribute anything to the fighter beyond what it does anyway, since the fighter does not have a spellcasting progression. Similarly, a Wiz10/Clr10 would cast like both a Clr15 and Wiz15. This obviously makes the Mystic Theurge and similar classes obsolete. In my opinion, this is a good thing, since I don't think that it should be necessary to take a PrC to achieve this sort of effect.

Note that this idea is a drastic downgrade of another suggestion I had to improve multiclassing. I will restate it here for your evaluation:

Vanday wrote:

I also have a sort of idée fixe concerning multiclassing. A multiclassed character would get something I call “bonus class levels” for want of a better name. It works like this: For each class C, you add together the levels in all your other classes and divide by two, yielding a number n. You then count as n levels higher in class C for the purpose of class features, i.e. everything that is listed in the rightmost column of the class's progression table. Good lord, that sounds complicated :)

To give an example: Rasha is a Ftr6/Wiz6. He gets half his wizard levels as a bonus to his fighter levels for the purpose of class features, and vice versa for wizard. Thus, he would have the saves, skills, BAB, hp and regular feats of a Ftr6/Wiz6, but the bonus feats, weapon and armour training etc. of a Ftr9 as well as the spellcasting ability of a Wiz9.
I think this would give multiclassing a nice bump (I am a fan of MC), but it might be overpowered. I honestly can't say where this character would stand compared to a straight Ftr12 or Wiz12.

I am actually still rather enamored with that idea, but it has been pointed out to me on another forum that a Brb6/Ftr6/Rgr6 would be ludicrously overpowered compared to a Brb18 or Rgr18 under this system. I am at a loss how to prevent this sort of hyper-stacking of class abilities especially among the martial classes, which is why I developed the toned-down system above. I would very much appreciate any input you have for me.

* I am aware that the word "fix" implies that something is broken and that everyone might not agree that this is the case. This is purely from my perspective.

[Set]

While it's less advantageous than your proposal, Unearthed Arcana introduced an optional rule called Magic Rating, that works similarly. It's in the SRD, so you can check it out online.

Magic Rating

Combined with Practiced Spellcaster (or a similar feat), it can go a long way towards making the classic Elven Fighter / Magic-User a bit more effective, and it's pure gravy for a Cleric / Wizard / Mystic Theurge, as each level in a full casting class advances both sides!

While I don't see it at the SRD in a quick glance, they also introduced the idea of Fractional BAB and Saves, so that if one were to play a Monk 1 / Rogue 1, instead of having a BAB +0, you'd have an effective BAB of +0.5 and +0.5, giving your Monk 1 / Rogue 1 a BAB of +1. On the other side of the equation, with Fractional Saves, instead of having a Base +4 Dex save, he'd only get a +3. It was intented to benefit those classes (like the Monk and Rogue) who need BAB to get things done, but end up losing effectiveness anytime they multiclass or PrC into something that doesn't have full BAB.

[Vanday]

This rule from UA is indeed part of the inspiration for my proposal. I don't know if I'm satisfied with magic rating only replacing caster level, but doing nothing for spells known and spells per day.

And fractional BAB/saves are a no-brainer for me. I don't think I would ever have played differently.

[xAverusx]

I think this is a great idea. I'm not sure how that magic rating works, but you could easily adjust your suggestion.

Fighters, rogues (pure martial): +1 spellcasting per 4 lvls
Rangers, Paladins, (minor casters): +1 spellcasting per 3 lvls
Bards, Druids, (full casters): +1 spellcasting per 2 lvls

[Fatespinner]

The biggest problem with this "fix" is this:

A Ftr 19/Wiz 1 would have all the martial power of a 19th level Fighter AND be able to cast spells as a 10th level wizard (11th if you round up). By dipping a single level in a spellcasting class, you suddenly gain extreme proficiency with magic. This becomes exponentially absurd when you realize that the one level of wizard could've been the fighter's most recent level, meaning that by attending "basic wizard school," he suddenly manifests the proficiency of a veteran mage.

[Vanday]

That's a valid criticism, and I completely forgot about this problem. When you turn the situation around, a Wiz19/Ftr1 would have the BAB of a Ftr10, but of course that would not nearly be as good an actual level 10 fighter. I think this shows that a fighter advancing spellcasting at the same rate as a wizard advances BAB is hugely imbalanced, because spellcasting ability is that much better than BAB. It might be more sensible to use the progression chart from UA, or possibly full, half, third (but with also advancing spells known and per day).

In my other proposal, the one I quoted, i would have addressed this problem by stating that your bonus levels in a class cannot exceed your actual levels in that class. Thus, the guy you posted would only count as a second level wizard. I really wish there were a way to salvage that idea, but I don't know what to do about the martial classes.

[hogarth]

During the Pathfinder Alpha playtest, I saw one or two similar proposals. The most reasonable-looking one (to me) was to allow half of your levels in other classes to stack with your class features in another class (up to a maximum of half your levels in the other class).

So, for example, a fighter 2/druid 4/wizard 10 would have the class features (including spellcasting) of a 3rd level fighter plus a 6th level druid plus a 13th level wizard.

[Vanday]

This is pretty much exactly the sort of thing I am looking for. Who proposed it back then? I was not around for the alpha playtest. Also, how imbalancing is this when you consider a combination like Ftr/Brb/Rgr?

[Freesword]

I'm a bit on the conservative side with this subject, and am hesitant to give multiclassing casters additional spells per day.

As far as my own house rules, I go with something similar to fractional BAB and Saves referred to as like stacking (adding up the number of levels that get 3/4 BAB and using the BAB for a single class of that level with 3/4 progression, etc. to avoid rounding) and a modified version of magic rating shifting the full casters down to 3/4 progression (that is a wiz 8/clr 4 would have a caster level of 11/10 -- 8+3/4+6) that only affects caster level, not spells per day.

For adding spells per day, I'm thinking that should be a feat with the logic of splitting your focus allows you to increase general spellcasting (caster level) but not specific advancement (spells per day). The feat would let you stack half of your level in another class to a spellcasting class to determine spells per day (max of your level in the spellcasting class). Using wiz 8/clr 2, he could have the spells per day of a 9th level wizard 8+1 or a 4th level cleric 2+2. (I use "could" and "or" as I am thinking of having it be pick one class that stacks with one class and can be taken multiple times. I still don't have the specifics locked down yet, but I want it on par with the feats from the WotC Complete books that let you stack levels in specific classes for certain class abilities.)

I really don't like the idea of giving away class features in one class for advancing in another (and spells per day is the only class feature gained at some levels in most primary spellcasting classes). It makes it undesirable to stay in one class if you can get the benefits of leveling in 2 classes at once instead. Feats that allow stacking for specific abilities between classes I have less of a problem with as some classes have natural synergy and such feats create synergy where none previously existed.

[hogarth]

Vanday wrote:

This is pretty much exactly the sort of thing I am looking for. Who proposed it back then? I was not around for the alpha playtest. Also, how imbalancing is this when you consider a combination like Ftr/Brb/Rgr?

Here's a few threads I found on the issue:

Spellcaster Multiclassing
Multiclassing Casters
Multiclass Spellcasters
Attempt At New Multiclassing Rules

[Can'tFindthePath]

Vanday wrote:

That's a valid criticism, and I completely forgot about this problem. When you turn the situation around, a Wiz19/Ftr1 would have the BAB of a Ftr10, but of course that would not nearly be as good an actual level 10 fighter. I think this shows that a fighter advancing spellcasting at the same rate as a wizard advances BAB is hugely imbalanced, because spellcasting ability is that much better than BAB. It might be more sensible to use the progression chart from UA, or possibly full, half, third (but with also advancing spells known and per day).

In my other proposal, the one I quoted, i would have addressed this problem by stating that your bonus levels in a class cannot exceed your actual levels in that class. Thus, the guy you posted would only count as a second level wizard. I really wish there were a way to salvage that idea, but I don't know what to do about the martial classes.

What I am thinking is that you use the rule you propose in the OP (the one from this thread not the one you quoted from before). BUT, you only allow spellcasting progression (spells per day/spells known) up to twice the level of the spellcasting class, and the remainder still counts for caster level. So, the aforementioned Ftr19/Sor1 would indeed only have the spell progression of a 2nd level Sor, but his caster level would be 10th. Caster level goes a long way toward keeping things relevant for multiclassers, but you need some spell progression too.

As far as your other idea, I am actually kinda excited to try it out. I am simply erring on the side of "conservatism".

[Can'tFindthePath]

Vanday wrote:

Similarly, a Wiz10/Clr10 would cast like both a Clr15 and Wiz15. This obviously makes the Mystic Theurge and similar classes obsolete. In my opinion, this is a good thing, since I don't think that it should be necessary to take a PrC to achieve this sort of effect.

Note...

I don't think it makes it obsolete, the Mystic Theurge now has some pretty cool benefits, especially for a multicaster. Indeed, this rule simply makes it more viable to play a MT. At 20 you could have 17th level casting in both classes, granting 9th level spells. And, as was recently pointed out to me, the real pain in MT is the low levels like 7th when you have 2nd level spells in both classes while your companions can have 4th. With this rule, at Clr3/Wiz3/MT1 you would have 5th level casting in both and I think that is viable.

[Laithoron]

Freesword wrote:

As far as my own house rules, I go with something similar to fractional BAB and Saves referred to as like stacking...

Huzzah! Glad to see I'm not the only one who does this. My only noteworthy disappointment with the final PfRPG rules was that Paizo didn't make this official and kept the same [IMO broken] multiclassing rules as before with only minor adjustments to the saves of the prestige classes.

FWIW, here's the like-stacking rules that I use with my group:
http://wiki.worldsunknown.com/wiki/Multiclassing

As far as the Fighter 19/Wizard 1 scenario, why not just place a limit on the number of levels that another class can provide based on how many levels you have in the primary casting class?

If you did this, then a Fighter 18/Wizard 2 would cast as a Wizard 3 instead of a Wizard 11. That would prevent some of the "cheese" that folks seem to be [understandably] concerned about.

[JBSchroeds]

Oooh. I like where this is going. How about:

Proposed Rules wrote:

Whenever a character gains a level in a class they may also gain a pseudo-level in a separate class. A pseudo-level is like having a normal level in that class except it does not grant increase in BAB or Save progressions. A character may never have more pseudo-levels in a class than one-half their actual levels in that class. Gaining a level in a prestige class never grants a pseudo-level.

I think this could work well and the wording is simple.

[Dont Die]

Laithoron wrote:

As far as the Fighter 19/Wizard 1 scenario, why not just place a limit on the number of levels that another class can provide based on how many levels you have in the primary casting class?

If you did this, then a Fighter 18/Wizard 2 would cast as a Wizard 3 instead of a Wizard 11. That would prevent some of the "cheese" that folks seem to be [understandably] concerned about.

We've implemented a similar rule in our games without any problems. Now, we have ruled out Practiced Spellcaster and the Mystic Theurge.

[TheOrangeOne]

I feel that with any of your suggestions on how to fix spellcaster multi-classing that it would make being a one class character obsolete. a level 20 wizard verse a level 10 fighter 10 wizard (equal to a 15 fighter and 15 wizard). It is no contest. I think the rules are okay as they are. I don't think Magic classes should stack. The only reason to do so is to make a Gish. Once you are that high of a level taking a prestige class would remove the need for the multi-class all class stacking stuff.

[hogarth]

TheOrangeOne wrote:

I feel that with any of your suggestions on how to fix spellcaster multi-classing that it would make being a one class character obsolete. a level 20 wizard verse a level 10 fighter 10 wizard (equal to a 15 fighter and 15 wizard). It is no contest.

I agree that it's no contest -- the level 20 wizard is definitely better. :-)

Would you have a similar concern about a fighter 4/wizard 6/eldritch knight 10?

[LoreKeeper]

Maybe I'm coming across as unnecessarily aggro, but this just rubs me up the wrong way:

I think people should get off that crazy bandwagon. If a character plays a wizard/cleric/druid he's already playing the most powerful set of classes in the game - now you want to get sweet candy from some other classes but not give up the hotness that is your basic casting class.

There are suitable prestige classes for pretty much every combination you'd want to do.

• Wizard with Sneak Attack? Arcane Trickster
  
• Cleric *And* Wizard? Mystic Theurge
  
• Wizard and Fighter? Eldritch Knight
  
• (etc)
  

I don't think there is anything to be gained except more room for effortless min-maxing (which is a bad thing, as opposed to effortfull min-maxing, which is a good thing).

Sure, it's nice to get a bit of rage and uncanndy dodge, while dipping in rogue for a sneak attack progression and some evasion. Maybe sniff into the fighter to get that neat "bonus feat" thing every few levels; and then still be able to cast 9th level spells. Is all gravy.

Saying that BAB stacks and that makes non-caster classes easily multi-classable is all good and well; but a rogue's sneak attack doesn't progress in other classes, a monk's abilities don't get progression (and a monk is all about progression of his abilities), a fighter doesn't keep getting bonus feats, a ranger doesn't keep stacking bonus favored enemies, etc

So, here's a look at the rogue10/fighter10 combination that would work out to be an effective rogue15/fighter15:

• 8d6 sneak (+3d6), nice
  
• 3 advanced rogue talents (2 more than normal), we do like the crippling strikes, dispelling attacks and opportunist - it's so passe to actually make a hard choice on the matter
  
• 8 combat feats (2 more than otherwise), including access to up to 15th level fighter feats; and plenty to spare for those nice crit-feats
  
• 4th level armor training, 2 more than usual (because we know that a rogue's true calling is to run around at full-speed in a mithral fullplate and still get +7 dex bonus to AC)
  
• 3rd level weapon training, 1 more than usual - because there cannot be enough of a good thing. Really
  

The resulting character is much better than a "raw" rogue or fighter. Not because of clever optimization, or cunning use of feats. No, purely by virtue of a multi-classing rule that makes multi-classing so attractive that anything else just pales in comparison.

Casters do not need a special progression when multi-classing.

[Jason Beardsley]

If I wanted to propose anything that stacks, I'd say that your caster level for arcane classes stack with other arcane classes, as well as divine on divine. So that a Sorcerer 10/Wizard 10 would have spells/day and spells known as 10th level, but have a caster level of 20. Same for a Cleric/Druid, Sorcerer/Bard, Wizard/Bard, Cleric/Ranger, and Druid/Ranger. I agree that class abilities (like spells/day or known) shouldn't advance beyond actual class levels, but since melee ability does stack (BAB), why not casting ability (CL)?

[TheOrangeOne]

The game would be soo much better if everyone can do everything, where everything stacks. No NPC or Creature can stand in you're way your just awesome! Don't need to roll dice anymore you just tell the DM you desired random D20 score. That would make the game so much more interesting and fun! I am going to run a campaign where this happens!

[Vanday]

I think the game would be much more fun if everyone were male and made out of straw.

[LoreKeeper]

Jason Beardsley wrote:

If I wanted to propose anything that stacks, I'd say that your caster level for arcane classes stack with other arcane classes, as well as divine on divine. So that a Sorcerer 10/Wizard 10 would have spells/day and spells known as 10th level, but have a caster level of 20. Same for a Cleric/Druid, Sorcerer/Bard, Wizard/Bard, Cleric/Ranger, and Druid/Ranger. I agree that class abilities (like spells/day or known) shouldn't advance beyond actual class levels, but since melee ability does stack (BAB), why not casting ability (CL)?

+1 hear hear. I'd go as far as to make this available as a feat for casters.

[Can'tFindthePath]

LoreKeeper wrote:

Maybe I'm coming across as unnecessarily aggro, but this just rubs me up the wrong way:

I think people should get off that crazy bandwagon. If a character plays a wizard/cleric/druid he's already playing the most powerful set of classes in the game - now you want to get sweet candy from some other classes but not give up the hotness that is your basic casting class.

There are suitable prestige classes for pretty much every combination you'd want to do.

• Wizard with Sneak Attack? Arcane Trickster
  
• Cleric *And* Wizard? Mystic Theurge
  
• Wizard and Fighter? Eldritch Knight
  
• (etc)
  

I don't think there is anything to be gained except more room for effortless min-maxing (which is a bad thing, as opposed to effortfull min-maxing, which is a good thing).

Sure, it's nice to get a bit of rage and uncanndy dodge, while dipping in rogue for a sneak attack progression and some evasion. Maybe sniff into the fighter to get that neat "bonus feat" thing every few levels; and then still be able to cast 9th level spells. Is all gravy.

Saying that BAB stacks and that makes non-caster classes easily multi-classable is all good and well; but a rogue's sneak attack doesn't progress in other classes, a monk's abilities don't get progression (and a monk is all about progression of his abilities), a fighter doesn't keep getting bonus feats, a ranger doesn't keep stacking bonus favored enemies, etc

So, here's a look at the rogue10/fighter10 combination that would work out to be an effective rogue15/fighter15:

• 8d6 sneak (+3d6), nice
  
• 3 advanced rogue talents (2 more than normal), we do like the crippling strikes, dispelling attacks and opportunist - it's so passe to actually make a hard choice on the matter
  
• 8 combat feats (2 more than otherwise), including access to up to 15th level fighter feats; and plenty to spare for those nice crit-feats
  
• 4th level armor training, 2 more than usual (because we know that a rogue's true calling is to run around at full-speed in a mithral

...

Ultimately you are right, in regards to 'Universal-half-class-stacking'. But to help illustrate the OP, I point to your Ftr10/Rog10. The main difference with melee multi vs caster multi is that the BAB gets the goodies delivered. In other words, if you can still hit with your most important attacks, it doesn't matter as much that you have less sneak attack, and less weapon training, as they both contribute what they do have to the attacks. With casters, the non-caster levels contribute (mostly) nothing to their most important attacks.

It is a matter of taste trading sneak attack for stronger base weapon attacks and hitting more often with your sneak attacks. But, with multiclass casters it is too much a choice of whether or not to cut off one of your hands.

[xAverusx]

LoreKeeper wrote:

So, here's a look at the rogue10/fighter10 combination that would work out to be an effective rogue15/fighter15:...

The whole point of the OP's argument is that martial classes mix well with other martial classes while spellcasting classes don't. The fix the OP suggests is for SPELL CASTING.

A Rogue/Fighter is a combo that synergizes well while a Fighter/Wizard does not.

LoreKeeper wrote:

I think people should get off that crazy bandwagon. If a character plays a wizard/cleric/druid he's already playing the most powerful set of classes in the game - now you want to get sweet candy from some other classes but not give up the hotness that is your basic casting class.

Let's say some crazy player tries this combo: wizard6/cleric6/druid6. Now, let's apply the suggested house rule: 18th level character casting at effective level 12 in three classes. Powerful? Depends on your definition. It's definitely versatile, but is missing out on 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells. Even with metamagic (quicken specifically) he still only gets 2 spells per round. And those spells are not nearly as powerful as a dedicated caster. Also, the guy only gets class abilities for the 6 levels in each class.

LoreKeeper wrote:

There are suitable prestige classes for pretty much every combination you'd want to do.

This is true. However, this house rule DOES NOT make these classes obsolete. It just makes them more desirable.

Ex: Wizard10/Cleric10 vs Wizard5/Cleric5/MysticTheruge10 both using this house rule. Caster level 15/15 vs 17/17. Mystic Theruge barely sneaks in 9th level spells. Now, that makes the class more desirable to play.

In summary, this house rule may need some tweeking, but I think it's a great idea. It provides a modest boost to help multiclass casters remain appealing. It does not make prestige classes obsolete.

[Laurefindel]

I created a set of houserules primarily based on the assumptions that characters would multiclassed. It shares similarity with what the OP stated. I probably went too far for most people here, but if any of those concept can help, go ahead and dig it...

First, I divorced the class from the spellcasting tradition. Keeping to the core classes, you would get the Wizardric spellcasting tradition which are traditionally practiced by the Mage, the clerical spellcasting tradition usally praticed by the Priest, the druidic spellcasting tradition used by the Animist and Lyrical magic performed by the Bard.

Obviously, the Mage confer a better progression in the Wizardric spellcasting tradition than the Fighter, but the Fighter can contribute to it to a certain degree (similarly as to how a Wizard can contribute to a Fighter/Wizard's BAB.

The advantage would be to have a Mage/Bard character where the Bard selects the Wizardric spellcasting tradition and simply adds to the Mage's level in that spellcasting tradition.

arrg, kind of rushed now. It's poorly stated, but that's the main concept.

'findel

[Skull]

Simply put NO

Look, IMO a 20th level caster is stronger than a 20th level martial class because he/she can bend the rules of the universe. I like the idea that casters of a similar type of magic stacks for CL, like a wiz5/soc5 would have spells known and spells per day as normal, but cast those spells with CL10.

Obviously to limiting degrees as well, as a druid5/ranger5 will not be CL10, but CL7 or CL6 (not sure if ranger counts for half or -4) as a ranger dabbles less in actual magic!

Id fall for a rule where if the Character's favored class is sorcerer, then he might get a "passive" CL bonus similar to suggested rules, but not spells known or spells per day.

But a fighter has nothing magical about the class, so it should have no contribution to casting. In fact if you think a fighter can or should do this. Go play 4th Edition, or World of Warcraft (roll hunter, warlock or death knight)

[Mon]

For my money, Hogarth is right on the money in terms of juggling game balance and simplicity as well as managing nasty edge cases.

At least, with regard to casters.

In any event, it is far more elegant than using flavourless "patch-up" PRCS (IMO). Say what you like...thats the only reason EK, MT etc exist at all.

YMMV.

[Charender]

I have always been one for fixing this via feats.

Practised caster was a good feat.

Make another feat that like:
Knowledgeble caster - Your known spells for a single caster class are as if you were one level higher. this feat can be taken multiple times, but each time you take it, it applies to a different class.

This helps you overcome minor dips into other classes at the cost of feats, but it prevents any of the 19 fighter/wizard 1 casting like a level 10 wizard wierdness.

I would also like to see a line of feats that lets you gain levels in your class abilities as well, so barbarians, rangers, bards, rogues, etc can compensate for minor dips into other classes as well.

[hogarth]

Mon wrote:

For my money, Hogarth is right on the money in terms of juggling game balance and simplicity as well as managing nasty edge cases.

At least, with regard to casters.

In any event, it is far more elegant than using flavourless "patch-up" PRCS (IMO). Say what you like...thats the only reason EK, MT etc exist at all.

YMMV.

It's not my idea, but I agree that it seems like a reasonable alternative to the torrent of "half-'n'-half" prestige classes that popped up in 3.5 like the Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, Divine Prankster (cleric/bard), Daggerspell Shaper (druid/rogue), Arcane Hierophant (wizard/druid), Shadowbane Inquisitor (paladin/rogue), etc., etc., ad nauseam.

[0gre]

I agree that spellcasting plus multiclassing is full of problems. The idea that you can dip one level of a casting class to pick up 50% spellcasting forever doesn't fly with me though. I also disagree that non-casting classes stack really well. For example a rogue 5/ ranger 5 isn't going to be as powerful as a ranger 10. This gets worse as you get higher in levels as the higher level characters get better and better abilities while the multi class characters fall behind. Now even fighters have class benefits into the higher levels which they fall behind in.

The problem as I see it is that the various class combinations have varying levels of synergies and so it's extremely hard to make a single simple ruleset to cover all situations. For example a simple rule to bump JUST casting is going to benefit people who multiclass as wizard most because wizards get the biggest portion of their power from their spells. Bards, druids, and clerics rely quite a bit on their non-casting powers. Why would casting scale but not Bardic Song and Wild Shape?

Not trying to tell you this is a horrible idea, just pointing out that a simple solution is going to 'fix' the problem to varying degrees for each class. You are going to get weird effects like more Wizard/ Rangers than Druid/ Rangers.

[0gre]

hogarth wrote:

Mon wrote:

For my money, Hogarth is right on the money in terms of juggling game balance and simplicity as well as managing nasty edge cases.

At least, with regard to casters.

In any event, it is far more elegant than using flavourless "patch-up" PRCS (IMO). Say what you like...thats the only reason EK, MT etc exist at all.

YMMV.

It's not my idea, but I agree that it seems like a reasonable alternative to the torrent of "half-'n'-half" prestige classes that popped up in 3.5 like the Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight, Divine Prankster (cleric/bard), Daggerspell Shaper (druid/rogue), Arcane Hierophant (wizard/druid), Shadowbane Inquisitor (paladin/rogue), etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Maybe a simple rule would be that if you had 3 levels in 2 separate classes you could Gestalt those classes for the rest of your progression. Hmm... I'm sure there are issues there.

[Rezdave]

As mentioned above, feats like Practiced Caster are great for multi-classed characters.

Another option I presented a couple months ago is something I called Split-Classing. It has several advantages over traditional multi-classing in that it maintains the ability of the character to take Class-based Feats on-schedule and does not eliminate the ability to gain PF's Capstone Abilities (with some DM-judgement required on stuff that its progressive, of course).

I think this option of Split-Classing will serve your needs very well.

Whereas a traditional Ftr/Wiz multi-class trades Caster-Level and Spell Level but maintains Spell Quantity, a split-class trades quantity-of-spells but maintains CL and SL. Considering that they'd be fighting rather than casting at least half the time, it's a good trade.

FWIW,

Rez

[hogarth]

0gre wrote:

I agree that spellcasting plus multiclassing is full of problems. The idea that you can dip one level of a casting class to pick up 50% spellcasting forever doesn't fly with me though.

Right; that's why I think adding a proviso of "up to a maximum of 1.5x your actual class levels" is a good idea (e.g. a druid 4/fighter 10 is a level 6 caster, not a level 9 caster).

[0gre]

hogarth wrote:

0gre wrote:

I agree that spellcasting plus multiclassing is full of problems. The idea that you can dip one level of a casting class to pick up 50% spellcasting forever doesn't fly with me though.

Right; that's why I think adding a proviso of "up to a maximum of 1.5x your actual class levels" is a good idea (e.g. a druid 4/fighter 10 is a level 6 caster, not a level 9 caster).

I still think that gives people who multiclass into wizard a disproportionate benefit from the other casting classes. Just a quick example:

A Bard 10/ Wizard 10 using the rule is almost exactly equal at wizard things to a 15th level wizard but he's nowhere near as powerful as a 15th level bard at being a bard. Similarly the druid mutliclass suffers a lot more than the sorcerer. The new APG classes summoner/ inquisitor, are all hybrids and get a lot of non-casting benefits that would suffer.

Basically the closer to being a "pure" casting class the bigger the benefit you get from this rule.

So I would suggest it's a decent start to a generic house rule but should probably be tweaked on a case by case basis.

Edit: Maybe that's ok because all these classes are already hybridized casting classes already with martial and casting features built in.

[hogarth]

0gre wrote:

hogarth wrote:

0gre wrote:

I agree that spellcasting plus multiclassing is full of problems. The idea that you can dip one level of a casting class to pick up 50% spellcasting forever doesn't fly with me though.

Right; that's why I think adding a proviso of "up to a maximum of 1.5x your actual class levels" is a good idea (e.g. a druid 4/fighter 10 is a level 6 caster, not a level 9 caster).

I still think that gives people who multiclass into wizard a disproportionate benefit from the other casting classes. Just a quick example:

A Bard 10/ Wizard 10 using the rule is almost exactly equal at wizard things to a 15th level wizard but he's nowhere near as powerful as a 15th level bard at being a bard.

How so? I was proposing that you get (almost?) all class features of both classes, so you would, in fact, be effectively a bard 15/wizard 15. (Of course, other folks are suggesting different things.)

[xAverusx]

Ogre wrote:

Edit: Maybe that's ok because all these classes are already hybridized casting classes already with martial and casting features built in.

That's exactly it. The further you get away from spellcasting, the better the classes synergize. A fighter10/rogue10 many not be as "good" as a rogue20 or fighter 20, but its got more options than either alone. And it works out way better than fighter10/wizard10.

Ogre wrote:

So I would suggest it's a decent start to a generic house rule but should probably be tweaked on a case by case basis.

Also very true. Clerics are "full" casters that mix pretty well with other classes. Fighter/Cleric, Cleric/Rogue, etc. It's about how these classes' abilities work (or don't work) together. Arcane casters and armor-using class = sadness. Sure there are feats to help, but it sucks to spend a ton of feats just to function as a character (and not nearly as well as other multiclass character can).

When I discussed this house rule with my group, we came up with this (for spellcasting ONLY):
Full BaB classes only contribute +1 spellcasting per 4 HD up to 1.5x the spellcasting class's level.
Mid BaB classes contribute +1 spellcasting per 3 HD up to 1.5x the spellcasting class's level.
Low BaB classes contribute +1 spellcasting per 2 HD up to 1.5x the spellcasting class's level.

Examples:
Ranger4/Druid6 casts as Ranger6/Druid7
Rogue6/Cleric3 casts as Cleric4
Fighter19/Wizard1 casts as Wizard1
Fighter14/Wizard6 casts as Wizard9
Druid6/Wizard6/Cleric6 casts as Druid12/Wizard12/Cleric12
Fighter12/Cleric8 casts as Cleric11
Wizard2/Cleric2 casts as Wizard2/Cleric3
Wizard2/Cleric3 casts as Wizard3/Cleric4
... etc ...

[0gre]

hogarth wrote:

How so? I was proposing that you get (almost?) all class features of both classes, so you would, in fact, be effectively a bard 15/wizard 15. (Of course, other folks are suggesting different things.)

I guess I missed that and thought it was caster only.

[DM_Blake]

Try this.

Make the Favored Class count for something, and build in a trade off while we're at it.

For every two levels in any non-favored primary classes (not PrCs), you gain the bab, saves, and class abilities of 1 "bonus" level of your favored class. You do not gain HP or skills; you only gain the abilities shown on the class's level chart (including Spells Known for spontaneous casters that use a second chart for this).

You may never have more "bonus" levels than 1/2 the level of your favored class, and if your "bonus" levels are at this upper limit, and you qualify for another "bonus" level, this new "bonus level is lost forever (this last rule prevents strange corner cases, like taking 1 level of your favored class, then 10 levels of something else, then coming back for 9 levels of your favored class during which time you gain 14 levels of benefit).

This is not a two-way street. Taking levels in your favored class never helps your other classes, and taking levels in one non-favored class never helps other non-favored classes.

If you are a half-elf with two favored classes (or any other non-core race with more than one favored class), then you must choose just one of your favored classes to be eligible for "bonus" levels, and this must also be your first class (the class you choose at 1st level). Your levels in all other primary classes, including your other favored class, count toward your "bonus" levels.

This works best for someone who, for example, choses Wizard as his favored class, then starts with two levels of wizard, then dips two levels of other stuff (gaining a "bonus" wizard level), then takes two more wizard levels, then dips two more levels of other stuff (gaining a second "bonus" wizard level), etc. It also works well for someone who takes 10 levels of their favored class then multi-classes for the next 10 levels, gaining 5 "bonus" levels in their favored class.

Summary:
* 2 levels of non-PrC classes = +1 "bonus" level in Favored Class (or first Favored Class if you have more than one).
* Cannot exceed 1/2 your current level of that Favored Class. If it would, then this "bonus" level is lost.
* Does not work in reverse; only your first Favored Class benefits from this rule.
* "Bonus" level only applies to BAB, Saves, and class features on the level chart. Not to HP or Skills.

Finally, it's also worth noting that even this watered down version makes it look to me, at first glance, that this could invalidate pretty much every PrC. For example, someone who goes Wiz10/Loremaster10 might be very far behind someone else who is Wiz10(15)/Ftr10. Even worse might be Ftr5/Rog5/Duelist10 compared to Ftr10(15)/Rog10. Could be problematic for many PrCs out there.

[Morgan Champion]

Here is a feat that might be of use:
Improved Spell-casting:
You are a multiclass spell-caster who has continued to practice (and progress) in his spell-casting abilities.
Prerequisites: Must have two or more classes,one of which has spell-casting ability.
Benefit: As per the Magical Knack trait,this feat adds +2 to the spell-caster's caster level. However this also applies to the spell level as well,and this feat can be taken multiple times (up to the classes maximum spell level).
Example:A gish decides to take this feat.He only has two wizard levels,and taking this feat gives him the spell-casting capability of a 4th -level wizard (or 3rd-level if he only has three character levels).
Note that this feat cannot raise the caster level above the total character level or (if the character has multiple spell-casting classes) the highest caster level of the character's classes.

[Felgoroth]

I don't know if anyone mentioned this but isn't the way you suggested spell-casting work the way martial adept classes (Crusader, Swordsage, Warblade) in 3.5 worked?

[Dark_Mistress]

What we do is this.

You get half or third or what ever of the class added to it. That is just spells, caster level, bonus feats o the likes. Basically the stuff other than bab, saves etc. We have never had any problems with doing this for melee or caster classes. We did say you was limited to no more than double your levels for free.

So in the two examples you gave above.
Fighter 19th - works like a 19th level fighter.
Wizard 1st - works like a 2nd level wizard.

The three class one would divided it by 3rds. So 3 classes at 6th level each would function like 10th level version. Since BaB and saves don't go up we have not found such characters over powered.

[Vanday]

@Dark_Mistress
Dividing bonus levels by the total number of classes you have has occured to me as well, but the problem is that when you so this, you can lose bonus levels upon taking a new class. Say you're a Wiz6/Ftr6 - effectively Wiz9/Ftr9 - and take a level of rogue. Suddenly you're only a Wiz8/Ftr8/Rog2. I think losing levels in this way is counterintuitive and bad for mental health.

Aside from that - multiclassed warriors are not overpowered?

@All
Also, I just thought of another possible solution:
For each class, you add up your levels in the other classes and divide by a number that depends on the class you are calculating your bonus levels for. This number would be lower for casters, higher for martial characters and possibly dependent on other factors. Your total levels (actual + bonus levels) are still capped by your actual levels times 1.5 or 2.0.

Examples:
Let's say that the multiplier is 1/2 for full casters and 1/3 for everyone else (numbers are pretty much arbitrary).

A Ftr6/Wiz6 would yield a Ftr8/Wiz9. A Ftr6/Rgr6/Brb6 would become a Ftr10/Brb10/Rgr10.

I think that it might be possible to achieve something resembling balance by tweaking the numbers.

Let me know what you think!

[Dark_Mistress]

True, on the dual then go triple class. We tend to apply what we call common sense. So in that case, they would become a wiz9/ftr9/Rog2 until the levels catch up. It is not a perfect system by any means, it is just so far the best we have found, that works for us.

As far as warrior classes, no. Or at least not enough of a difference to matter. I mean most classes get better stuff after 10th. Likely they are better but so far the difference seems small enough to not really have a effect.

As for your other suggestion, we tried more complicated approaches but in the end found the extra work wasn't worth it and stayed with our more simple, yet not perfect system. But the key is just finding what works for you and your group.

[KenderKin]

Maybe a couple of feats might work

Let mainly fighters for example have take the following feat

Fighters arcanum

requirements
must have levels in fighter and an arcane class
Must take this feat when gaining a new fighter level

Benefits
The newly leveled fighter gains new spells/day and spells known, as well as an increase in caster level to his previous spellcasting class.

Special
Maybe taken as a fighter bonus feat.

[ClemulusRex]

I would have to support Set's suggestion near the beginning of the thread to use something like the AU Magic Rating. It sounds a lot like what the d20 Conan game did by giving ALL classes a "Magic Attack Bonus" in addition to a BAB, even though there were only one and a half spellcasting classes.

I like the idea that if a Sorcerer or Wizard gives half it's level in BAB, that a Fighter should give half his level in MAB/effective CL. The complaint was made that the Fighter is not a spellcasting class and that it shouldn't contribute to the effective CL at all, but I say just chalk it up the character's inherent "heroicness" for being someone of X level. In the aforementioned example of the Fighter 19/Wizard 1, the character in question may not know a lot of arcane theory (spellcraft, arcana, access to spell levels), but he's probably been healed, zapped, charmed, incinerated, bolstered, and beguiled by magic more times than he cares to remember and therefore could very reasonably have developed an intuitive feel for it.

On the flip side, I don't see a multiclass character's Fighter levels contributing to actual spells known, however. The Wizard levels aren't contributing to the number of Fighter bonus feats, are they? However, Fighter bonus feats (and Rogue talents, and Barbarian rage powers...) progress at the same rate that an A-level caster gets spell levels--once every two character levels. How about then just implementing a feat that bumps your "spells per day" up two notches on the chart for one class each time you take it (limited, of course, but your total effective caster level)?

This would, in effect, create more of a piecemeal, "pay-as-you-go" alternative to the MT,AT, or EK, but would by no means obsolete them, I think.

[Morgan Champion]

Actually KenderKin, have you looked at my Improved Spell-Casting feat?

[KenderKin]

Morgan Champion wrote:

Actually KenderKin, have you looked at my Improved Spell-Casting feat?

I have learned not to look at other peoples things unless they ask me to...

Where is it? Can I touch it?

[ClemulusRex]

Morgan Champion wrote:

Actually KenderKin, have you looked at my Improved Spell-Casting feat?

Oh, whoops. I guess I just repeated you in a different way, myself.

[unopened]

I Like where this is going, actually i tried to houserule multiclassing as well but never reached any solid ground, So, i was thinking, instead of giving full class benefit (At a max of x1.5 lvl), I would limit the benefits to the essence of those classes i.e:

Barb: Rage/rounds / uncanny d.
Bard: Bardic music/rounds/spellcasting
Clr: Spellcasting
Rngr: Fav. enemy (??)/spellcasting
Ftr: weap. training/ Armor training
Mnk: AC/Flurry prog/move.
Pal: Smite evil (? or Maybe LOH)/spellcasting
Rog: Sneak attk/uncanny d.
Sorc: spellcasting
Wiz: Spellcasting

What do you think?
Full Spellcasting classes, gets the caster lvl, Partial spellcasting enhaces some of their abilities and a bit of spellcaster lvl. And martial classes enhaces their abilities.-

[xAverusx]

unopened wrote:

I Like where this is going, actually i tried to houserule multiclassing as well but never reached any solid ground, So, i was thinking, instead of giving full class benefit (At a max of x1.5 lvl), I would limit the benefits to the essence of those classes

You may run into trouble defining what is "the essence" of a class.

Barbarian: rage, right? Well, what about rage powers? How about improvements to rage. Why uncanny dodge? Why not DR? See what I mean?