Since I tend to have very small groups, the players pretty much have to multiclass if they want a well-rounded party (though I do tend to gear the adventure towards their set of abilities) ... But lately I started to realize that as the characters go up in level, those that multiclass to spellcasting classes are kindof left behind ... the 2 levels of sorcerer really add very little usefulness to the 2 levels of barbarian whereas the ranger/rogue is great synergic combo ... Is it just me or does multiclassing with spellcaster classes (even among themselves) just plain suck?
I'm tempted to add 1/2 the other class levels to the spellcaster class so that the magical progression of such PCs is not totally left in the unrelavant zone ...
Do I fail to see something?
I dont think you have missed anything. Mult classing isnt everything it is cracked up to be, espec with some of the kits available thru books like the Fighters Handbook, etc. A lot of people see it as the best of both worlds (or three worlds, whatever); however, it really is half of both worlds. A friend of mine was the king of multi class until he bought a few of those handbooks, and now he is happy playing a fighter from one of the kits. Like you said, you may get "spells and swords" by multi classing, but at higher levels you are left behind, sort of like the adage, "Jack of all trades, master of none." I found the same thing you did; I found that the multi class may help a small, lower level party. Multi classing can be cool, but its not always what it may appear at first. My answer was to add some NPCs on a temporary basis, which made for some cool role playing. I dont think you missed anything, tho.
|
I rather agree with you... in 25 years of gaming, I've run 3 (I belive) multiclass characters. I don't care for them, I don't have the knack for them, I don't really like them in my games, but I don't completely dissallow them. I'm not saying that multi's don't have their place, but for the most part, I don't like using/running them. And, yes, mostly that place in in smaller, lower-level parties where advancement hasn't outstripped them.
Since I tend to have very small groups, the players pretty much have to multiclass if they want a well-rounded party (though I do tend to gear the adventure towards their set of abilities) ... But lately I started to realize that as the characters go up in level, those that multiclass to spellcasting classes are kindof left behind ... the 2 levels of sorcerer really add very little usefulness to the 2 levels of barbarian whereas the ranger/rogue is great synergic combo ... Is it just me or does multiclassing with spellcaster classes (even among themselves) just plain suck?
I'm tempted to add 1/2 the other class levels to the spellcaster class so that the magical progression of such PCs is not totally left in the unrelavant zone ...Do I fail to see something?
I think - as nearly every answer here on the boards seems to eventually conclude - "it depends."
When I had a two-player party and they wanted to cover all its bases, they went with:
Cleric/Fighter
and
Rogue/Wizard (Diviner)
In both cases, the non spell-casting classes were the ones they quickly abandoned. The Cleric fighting ability is actually quite decent if you choose the right path (he chose the domains of War and Protection, I believe), and he alternated between Cleric and Fighter (beginning with Fighter) until he hit Cleric 4/Fighter 4 and thereafter went with just Cleric. Those four levels of fighter gained him weapon specialization and a few other combat-centred feats, and although they cost him 9th level spells, he was okay.
The Rogue didn't even hit 4th level, stopping at 3rd to get Evasion, trap sense +1, and trapfinding, and the player took "Able Learner" as one of his two human first level feats in order to be able to keep the Rogue-important skills maxed out (Search, Disable Device, Open Lock). Once he qualified, he went into "Arcane Trickster" and worked out just fine - and in his case, he would end up with 9th level spells - eventually.
In both cases, yes, at the start, losing some of the 2nd level spells when hitting 3rd level adventures was tough ("Lessor Restoration," was one that was really felt as a lack), but between scrolls and wands, they got by.
In a three-party group I GM'd for, it went only slightly differently, with:
A Ranger (who eventually took "Order of the Bow Initiate")
A Rogue/Cleric (Olidamarra)
and
A Fighter/Sorcerer (who eventually took "Spellsword")
Again, the only places they hurt a little was at lower levels with the lack of 2nd level spells as early as usual, but they survived. The Sorcerer's lack of flexibility paled against his barrage of "magic missiles" and when he hit Spellsword levels, he became quite the combattant. It was interesting that they all started as a group with no spells, and added the spellcasting levels at 2nd level for the Rogue/Cleric and the Fighter/Sorcerer, but not overly challenging for them, since 1st level seems to zoom by so fast.
Is it true that taking a 4th level by multiclass would prevent your spellcasting class from gaining access to 9th lvl spells? I've looked and looked, and I must be overlooking some rule. But it's mentioned above...
Say you have an 12th lvl wizard, and you've bolstered him with 3 lvls of fighter... if you take a 4th lvl of fighter, would you no longer have access to 9th lvl spells (assuming you later go 18th+ lvl in the wizard class)?
<< Is it true that taking a 4th level by multiclass would prevent your spellcasting class from gaining access to 9th lvl spells? I've looked and looked, and I must be overlooking some rule. But it's mentioned above...>>
I believe the conversation was assuming the conventional, non-epic maximum level of 20. 4 levels in another class means a maximume level of 16 for the spell-casting.
I'm also curious from this conversation to know if people use the multi-class experience point penalties for disparity of levels in a non-favored class (PHB 3.5 p.60). The examples of characters leaving off a certain class at level 2,3,4 or whatever didn't mention race, but the 20% penalty is pretty severe. I'm not bound to all the rules. I'm a believer in house rules so that everyone has the most fun. I do happen to use this particular rule and I was just wondering if others do or not.
|
|
I'm also curious from this conversation to know if people use the multi-class experience point penalties for disparity of levels in a non-favored class (PHB 3.5 p.60). The examples of characters leaving off a certain class at level 2,3,4 or whatever didn't mention race, but the 20% penalty is pretty severe. I'm not bound to all the rules. I'm a believer in house rules so that everyone has the most fun. I do happen to use this particular rule and I was just wondering if others do or not.
I don't enforce the multiclass penalties in my game. I'm more interested in a 'balanced' party and interesting character concepts than the fantasy archetype party.
Dan F.
The multiclassing penalty should be used when the players are abusing the multiclassing rules to their own advantage. Power Gamers are very good at doing this, so using the multiclassing penalty keeps the game balanced. Before dropping the multiclassing penalty you should also remember that the humans lack of a favored class with regard to multiclassing is an advantage of that race. Doing away with the penalty weakens humans (and half-elves) as a race.
I find that people usually multiclass to qualify for a prestige class or because there is a hole that needs to be filled in the party. Multiclassing works best when you are aware of what you are losing and gaining by multiclassing. Often players make the mistake of multiclassing at the wrong time or choosing the wrong combination. Its up to DMs (and other players) to make sure that a player doesn't screw themselves over by multiclassing.
I agree that multiclassing is sort of disappointing (though it's not hard to think of useful combinations).
This is how I usually think about it: in a party of 8th level characters, the person who multiclassed is roughly equivalent to two 4th level characters -- an 8th level can take out two 4th levels any day (especially when only one of the low level characters can act in a given round).
That said, I've multiclassed before, and I will again -- it's about cool characters, not optimized (Living Greyhawk-style) combat specialists.
Is it true that taking a 4th level by multiclass would prevent your spellcasting class from gaining access to 9th lvl spells? I've looked and looked, and I must be overlooking some rule. But it's mentioned above...I believe the conversation was assuming the conventional, non-epic maximum level of 20. 4 levels in another class means a maximume level of 16 for the spell-casting.
Thanks Ben, this makes sense now!
I'm also curious from this conversation to know if people use the multi-class experience point penalties for disparity of levels in a non-favored class (PHB 3.5 p.60). The examples of characters leaving off a certain class at level 2,3,4 or whatever didn't mention race, but the 20% penalty is pretty severe. I'm not bound to all the rules. I'm a believer in house rules so that everyone has the most fun. I do happen to use this particular rule and I was just wondering if others do or not.
I've dropped it myself, because a percentage penalty might seem ok at lower overall levels, but it becomes truly harsh as the players reach higher and higher levels. Keeping a 20% penalty for a 14th level character, after they've left behind one or two fighter levels and have never gone back (just because a PC wanted a few extra hp and training with swords and armor), seems too high of a penalty. I'd rather say that once a level is earned, it's earned. Also, there isn't an xp penaly for prestige classes that really change the flavor of characters.
|
I like multi-classing when it creates a unique character with an interesting background. I don't like it, when it's done only to max out the opportunities for the party.
One thing that comes to my mind is taking spell-casting classes after having advanced in a non-spellcasting class.
How can this be explained in terms of background and continuiety?
It's always mentioned that it takes years of studying to become a wizard and by multi-classing you can have this effect just by gaining a level. I never allowed this in my games because we are always playing continueing campaigns and are avoiding long time gaps. Gaining levels in classes like fighter or rogue can be explained a little easier but often includes a bad taste (regarding a "realistic" feel) as well. But often my players are planning the advancement of their characters ahead and if there's somebody that's nearly dying to have a level of wizard i have the chance to include it into the story somehow, but i don't really like it.
Last time we had a situation like this, we explained it so, that the character had years of arcane studies in his background, but this ended abrupt by a misfortune and he had to make his life as a sellsword while he continued to study in times of rest. This explained his seemingly sudden advancement as wizard after four levels of fighter, but it would have been cool to have a game mechanic that makes this work better. It was explained in terms of background, but his ability to cast spells came from one day to the other. It would have been more logic, if he had, for example, some cantrips avaiable before his advancement, but we didn't find a way to include this without unbalancing the game.
I'd like to know if somebody had a similar problem and came up with a better solution.
Sure, he could've taken the wizard-level earlier, but this one was a really sudden idea.
Btw, sorry for my poor english, but i hope you get what i meant...:)
I wanted to respond to the question "to multiclass or not".
We have found it useful in the groups that I have gamed with
as a tool to round out the capabilities of a low level party
with few members. Or to allow the use of certain otherwise
prohibited weapons by party members-example, the use of edged
weapons by the fighter-cleric, or the donning of bulky metal
armor for combat by the fighter-thief. Races other than human
advance in levels dividing XP points between their classes,
allowing for slow growth of the character who trains when his
or her level and circumstance allow. We try to time it so that
most characters train at the same time, and valuable gaming
time is not lost in actually carrying out a blow-by-blow training program. Cost is calculated by the DM, as is success
based on the training taken.
Human characters in our world who multiclass do so at their
peril. Once they leave their primary occupation, they are no
longer allowed to progress in that rank. This was a trap to
ensnare those shadowy players who wished to be human, with
all the benefits that brings, but who wanted to be as powerful
and knowledgable as physically possible without the racial
penalties. And they still have to allot XPs to a class they
no longer ascend in.
Needless to say, people take their choice of class much more seriously, and more of the party are demihuman than human,
which is the reverse of the way it was when I first started
gaming. It makes things more fun, not less. At least, I think
so......
HUZZAH!
|
|
Human characters in our world who multiclass do so at their
peril. Once they leave their primary occupation, they are no
longer allowed to progress in that rank. This was a trap to
ensnare those shadowy players who wished to be human, with
all the benefits that brings, but who wanted to be as powerful
and knowledgable as physically possible without the racial
penalties. And they still have to allot XPs to a class they
no longer ascend in.
This means that the multiclass-restriction for the monk is used for every class in your world?
So when my pc is a fighter 4th and takes a level of rogue he can't advance as a fighter anymore?And this restriction is only for human pc's?
Hmm, i don't really get, why you do this and still use the multiclass XP-penalities...
And how does this even relate to the racial penalities? I mean, these aren't just penalities, there are normally huge benefits as well. The human has no favored class and gets a bonus on skill-points each level, but i don't really get why this deserves an additional penality. I think its balanced quite well as it is explained in the PHB...
But lately I started to realize that as the characters go up in level, those that multiclass to spellcasting classes are kindof left behind...
I agree that there are greater penalties to multi-classing with spellcasters than with some of the other classes. Accessing higher level spells is a very important part of a spellcaster's development and to put that off more than a level is pretty damaging at higher levels. I do think, however, that taking one level of a second class can often fill a party hole without undermining development in the main class too much. For example, if the party was short on frontline fighter-types, you could enhance your cleric's fighting ability by taking just one level of fighter or barbarian. (As others have pointed out, however, you can make your cleric a pretty good warrior without multiclassing by choosing the right domains, spells, etc.) If party needed a rogue-type, I also think taking one level of rogue for a wizard is a good investment. The rogue 1/wizard N will have slightly better weapons, get to add a bunch of skills at first level, gain trapfinding, add +2 to reflex saves, and can add "sneak attack" damage to spells like ray of frost in certain situations. This build can be especially good at spotting by second level (example: +5 ranks, +1 or so ability modifier, +2 from familiar/alertness, +3 from owl or hawk, +2 if elf). I don't think it makes sense, though, to add more than a level of rogue.
Don't forget there is the option to have Gestalt characters from the Unearthed Arcana book. It allows you to be two classes simultaneously. So you'd be a 1st level Fighter-Rogue with all the abilities of both classes and the best attack rating and saves from either of the two classes. And when you hit 2nd level both your Fighter and Rogue abilities would go up.
It's specifically designed for groups that have very few players and who still want flexability. Check it out.
|
|
One of the best characters I ever had was a multiclass Elf Fighter/Mage. He swung a sword most of the time, but could also throw out a magic missile spell a a crucial moment. It all depends on how you play the game. Even now, with all of the prestige classes available, a good, old-fashioned multiclass can be dangerous.
Personally, I like the varied oppertunities that multi-classing offers.
However, as a DM who uses a lot of published adventures, I have to check each one to see if it requires a pure Cleric or mage of X level to be able to cast a perticular level spell to save the day or overcome the lesser globe of invulnerability or the creatures SR. Or, does it requires a disable device check that can only be made by a straight rogue with disable device maxed out.
If those factors are considered, then I say multi class for the creativity.
ASEO out
I'd like to know if somebody had a similar problem and came up with a better solution.
Sure, he could've taken the wizard-level earlier, but this one was a really sudden idea.
Since being a wizard in your world only happens with a lot of study, the player who wants to cast arcane spells after taking levels in another class has a few options that don't seem like they would be too far fetched.
There is a feat in one the the forgotten realms books called practiced magocracy (I think) that allows you (at 1st level) to cast a few cantrips each day. This can be taken by any class (even a wizard) so long as they have a 10 INT.Also, they *could* just be allowed to take the Sorcerer class. There are several novels out that specifically detail the fact that one day a person didn't have a spell, and the next day they could cast spider climb, or summon monster II.
YMMV, but either way should still give you the flavor your require.
Celric
I'm also curious from this conversation to know if people use the multi-class experience point penalties for disparity of levels in a non-favored class (PHB 3.5 p.60). The examples of characters leaving off a certain class at level 2,3,4 or whatever didn't mention race, but the 20% penalty is pretty severe. I'm not bound to all the rules. I'm a believer in house rules so that everyone has the most fun. I do happen to use this particular rule and I was just wondering if others do or not.
I always use the XP penalty rule because I have a few power-gamers in my group that would abuse the rules without it. That being said, I hardly ever have to enforce it because I believe it only applies after the first multiclass. So you could have a 16th wizard/2nd fighter without penalty if you chose a human, elf, dwarf, or halfelf - but not a halfling, halforc, or gnome because they have prefered classes of rogue, barbarian, and bard, respectively. I have ruled that while it might go against the races natural inclination to be a certain class, there is no issues unless they do so with a second (or third!) class.
Prestige classes I find are different, and I don't enforce an XP penalty for them (even if the rules tell me I should, which I am not sure they do), because it is a niche class designed to specialize the class(es) you have already obtained. The penalty is already inherent in qualifying for the class in additional skills and feats - which would certainly have been just as useful if spent elsewhere.
Celric
I'm also curious from this conversation to know if people use the multi-class experience point penalties for disparity of levels in a non-favored class......Prestige classes I find are different, and I don't enforce an XP penalty for them...
Celric
I most certainly do enforce XP penalties on multiclassed characters -- not doing so leaves too much cheese available, methinks.
I don't for prestige classes, though. I think WotC's decision to change that is ill-considered (at best). I suspect that some prestige classes, in the process of collecting all the prerequisites, can't be acquired without incurring a penalty.
Personally, I think the 3.5-revision writers didn't understand (or perhaps deliberately abandoned, though I don't think so) some of the fundamental intent of prestige classes.
Regards all,
Jack
|
|
There is a feat in one the the forgotten realms books called practiced magocracy (I think) that allows you (at 1st level) to cast a few cantrips each day. This can be taken by any class (even a wizard) so long as they have a 10 INT.
YMMV, but either way should still give you the flavor your require.
Thanks, celric, this is exactly what i've been looking for.
I guess my greatest concern is that many spells have their effect proportional to the spellcaster level, not the character level ... so if you're a Fighter 10th / Wizard 5th, what's the relevance of a 5d6 Fireball in a CL 15 encounter? ... might as well just bash & slash ... whereas a 15d6 Fireball is very relevant ...
I never play with XP penalties, the combos that can be abused are far offset by the inability to Max crucial skills, lower caster level ... I really like the idea mentioned earlier of "Multicalssing from the start" and then dividing XPs for slower progression ...
I almost never play with prestige classes, I find them (for the most part) very background-specific or offer no great value on top of the base classes (Weapon Master & Shadow Dancer excepted) ...
I guess my greatest concern is that many spells have their effect proportional to the spellcaster level, not the character level ... so if you're a Fighter 10th / Wizard 5th, what's the relevance of a 5d6 Fireball in a CL 15 encounter? ... might as well just bash & slash ... whereas a 15d6 Fireball is very relevant ...
Try the feat Practiced Spellcaster it adds 4 effective class levels, up to your character level, to such level-dependant things (i.e. you are still a 5th-level-wizard but you cast as if you were 9th - assuming you have at least four levels in something else). 9d6 doesn't sound so bad for a CR 15 encounter. Check out Complete Divine and/or Complete Arcane.
GGG
It's always mentioned that it takes years of studying to become a wizard and by multi-classing you can have this effect just by gaining a level. I never allowed this in my games because we are always playing continueing campaigns and are avoiding long time gaps.
Reminds me of OotS
http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=126
In any case, I'm always for giving an opinion on multiclassing.
Throwing in a level of a fighter class to make your cleric a little hardier? Don't do it.. Don't even think about it... The extra feat and an extra +1 BaB over the course of 4 levels don't come close to teh cost of delaying that higher spell level. As a general rule, if you are a spell caster, be a spell caster, your power is going to come from your spells, not from a d6 of sneak attack, the ability to rage, or anything else any class is going to give you.
Of course there are exceptions to every rule, you can build a decent ray specialist by tying rogue and wizard together, but by the time you hit 9th level and are still tossing scorching rays when your buddy is dropping disintigrate, I doubt you'll think it was worth it.
Multi-classing between different fighter types is generally not as bad as most of the abilities stack well. 4 levels of fighter for weapon specialization are an acceptable trade for an extra rage attempt, dropping 1 BaB and some HP for 2d6 sneak attack and evasion is a decent trade off too.
Finally we have mutts, which can be fun, reasonably effective, but generally not as good as a straight class character. Things to watch out for are Do your abilities stack? I have a Barb/Wizard/Dervish that I thought was pretty cool until I realized that I can't rage or dance and cast spells, nor can I rage and dance at the same time. Pick classes where your abilities don't walk all over each other. Also watch out for classes that don't have the same stat requirements. A rogue/wizard works better than a rogue/sorcerer or a rogue/cleric just because Rogues and Wizards both need high int. Charisma and Wisdom are basically dump stats for the rogue (unless your going for a diplomat, in which case wisdom still isn't that great). A Paladin/Sorcerer or a Paladin/Cleric are better than a Paladin/Wizard for the same reasons.
Mutt's do excel at one thing though, and that is saving throws. Because you get a bigger hit at lvl 1 and 2 for each class, you can stick two just a few levels, be a decent fighter, and have ungodly saves. Monk2/Favored Soul2 already has the same saves as an 8th lvl monk. Favored Souls need a good charisma, throw in a level of Paladin and get your Charisma bonus to all saves. Assuming human, we arn't taking any xp penalties if we now go Favored soul 4th (giving us second level spells, no loss on BAB, and qualifies us for Pious Templar. Assuming a modest 14 charisma (we need stats in other places, I wouldn't go higher than that without magic) we have at 8th lvl
Fort - +12 (+con)
Ref - +8 (+dex)
Will - +10 (+wil)
mettle and evasion, good setup for Sacred Fist or going deeper in pious templar for Weapon Specialization and a useful Divine Sacrifice spell.
Compared to an 8th lvl monk (best save progression)
Fort - +6 (+con)
Ref - +6 (+dex)
Will - +6 (+wil)
evasion
Sorry, I'm rambling now, I'll shut up, but bottom line is I'm all for multi classing as long as your primary role isn't a caster.