Multi-Classing?

[Ross Byers]

I'd recommend these changes for multiclassing:

Make fractional BaB canonical (A Wiz1/Rog1 should not have a worse BaB than a Wiz2, and a Clr1/Drd1/Rog1/Wiz1/Sor1/Mnk1/Brb1, while certainly suboptimal, should not have BaB +0).

Fix stacking 'good saves'. One of the reasons fighters frequently take a one level dip into barbarian for rage is that it basically comes with a free Great Fortitude feat. I suggest creating a rule that say to add up your total levels of good saves, and the total level of bad saves, then add the two progressions together. For instance, a Ftr3/Clr2 would have a +4 Fort save (5 total levels of good fort.), a +4 will save (3 Levels of bad save (+1) and 2 levels of good save (+3), and a +1 reflex save (5 levels of bad save).

EDIT: Huh. The OP deleted his post. Oh well. I guess I'm the OP now.

[JoelF847]

I think that if you go this route, you also have to include some sort of fix for multi-class spellcasters. There's been a variety of threads on that topic, but I think some version of non casting classes add 1/2 to spellcasting progression would be the way to go (to 1 spellcasting class progression only maybe, so a Ftr 16/wiz 2/clr 2 doesn't get both of their spellcasting classes increasde by 8 levels.)

[Ross Byers]

I'm not sure that the spellcasting progression needs fixing, any more than a multiclassing fighter should get still get his bonus feats. I'm more concerned about the mathematical anomolies that pop up.

[JoelF847]

No a multi-class fighter doesn't keep getting bonus feats, but he does keep increasing his BAB. A spellcaster doesn't get ANY increase in spellcasting ability. It would even be okay if only caster level increased, without an increase in new spells known/spells per day.

[Ross Byers]

Hrmm. I should add that the Alpha version of favored class may need tweaking. It depends upon intent.

Under the old (3.0/3.5) rules, favored class said 'If a Dwarf Multi-classes, he's probably multi-classing a fighter.' That might not be what the name sounds like it does, but that's what the rule said.

Under the Alpha rules, the free HP says 'Dwarves should be fighters (or clerics)'. Any other choice seems slightly suboptimal. That matches the name 'favored class' better, but it doesn't match the incentives of the old rule, I thought it worth mentioning.

[Dread]

Id like to see a simpler method of limiting Multi Classing.

1) Number of extra classes...including PRC's limited to Int Bonus. ie +1 = 1 additional class/+2 = +2 additional classes...et al

reasoning: Its hard to become good at too many things

2) Prime Requistes must have at least a +2 Modifier in the stat.

ie
Barbarian/Ranger= Con
Bard/Sorcerer = Cha
Cleric/Druid = Wis
Fighter/Paladin = Str
Rogue/Monk = Dex
Wizard = Int

as an example...So to be able to multiclass you'd have to have at least a 14 in a stat slot for that ability...not too harsh, but limiting

[Demandred69]

Multi-classing adds to the customization of your characters. I like it, but think you shouldn't multiclass more than once or twice. And conflicting classes like Paladin and Rogue probablly shouldn't be allowed.

[Ubermench]

Demandred69 wrote:

Multi-classing adds to the customization of your characters. I like it, but think you shouldn't multiclass more than once or twice. And conflicting classes like Paladin and Rogue probablly shouldn't be allowed.

Limit the number of times a character can multi-class equal to their wisdom bonus and the maximum level in the multi-class equal to the level of their first class.

A 3rd level fighter with a 14 Wis can multi-class twice to a max level of 3rd in the other two classes.

[Desert Yeti]

Why do we need to limit multi-classing any more than in 3.x? Granted, there are power gamers who will find a way to abuse any system, but 3.x multi-classing was beautiful because it was super simple. It's an elegant solution to an age-old problem of class-based rule systems and it allows virtually infinite customization of your character.

Having a wide selection of character options and the ability to create a unique character are what 3.x is all about. If I wanted to limit or homogenize this system, I'd be playing WotC's new game.

I think that the BAB of a rogue 1/wizard 1/sorcerer 1/bard 1 SHOULD indeed be zero. That's what keeps you from doing that. The system already limits the ridiculous combinations to a certain extent by this. Granted, it's a heavy-handed limiting device, but it maintains the elegant simplicity of the "just add everything up!" rule.

And I think that that elegant simplicity should be preserved.

[Demandred69]

Too much muticlassing just adds to players uberizing their characters for benefits and not role-playing. While options shouldn't be as hindered or limited as 4e, their should be some kind of limit. Maybe twice. Though it could just be another dm ruling. If a player doesn't spend time training for an aditional class, they shouldn't just suddenly have it. And, again, classes like Paladin shouldn't be multiclassing with Rogue. It counters the Paladin's beliefs.

[ehb1022]

I'd like to see multi-classing limited as it was in 1st & 2nd edition: no ranger/fighters, paladin/rangers, wizard/scorcerers, barbarian/paladins, cleric/druids, bard/rogues, monk/clerics, monk/druids, etc. I never liked the concept of multi-classing anything with paladins, monks, or barbarians.

[Locke1520]

Demandred69 wrote:

Multi-classing adds to the customization of your characters. I like it, but think you shouldn't multiclass more than once or twice. And conflicting classes like Paladin and Rogue probablly shouldn't be allowed.

Paladin and Rogue don't have to be conflicting classes. Years ago (pre 3e) I played a thief who was a sort of thief catcher. I could see a similar concept being employed in combination with a Paladin.

[walter mcwilliams]

Desert Yeti wrote:

Why do we need to limit multi-classing any more than in 3.x? Granted, there are power gamers who will find a way to abuse any system, but 3.x multi-classing was beautiful because it was super simple. It's an elegant solution to an age-old problem of class-based rule systems and it allows virtually infinite customization of your character.

Having a wide selection of character options and the ability to create a unique character are what 3.x is all about. If I wanted to limit or homogenize this system, I'd be playing WotC's new game.

I think that the BAB of a rogue 1/wizard 1/sorcerer 1/bard 1 SHOULD indeed be zero. That's what keeps you from doing that. The system already limits the ridiculous combinations to a certain extent by this. Granted, it's a heavy-handed limiting device, but it maintains the elegant simplicity of the "just add everything up!" rule.

And I think that that elegant simplicity should be preserved.

Elegantly put and right on the money as well, though I firmly believe a rule of only 1 PrC should be incorporated.

[Candarie]

walter mcwilliams wrote:

Elegantly put and right on the money as well, though I firmly believe a rule of only 1 PrC should be incorporated.

2 Kinks:

"1 PrC" firm would severely hurt the 3 and 5 level PrCs from being viable.
In a non epic game I would think only the 10+ level classes would merit this kind of restriction.

Looking forward, Epic Characters would probably need to be allowed a second class; as 20/10/10 is a common split with too many legitimate non powergaming options.

[Arakhor]

Any change of this sort is too restrictive and probably slaughters backwards-compatibility. This sort of thing should always be left up to the individual DMs and their players.

[james maissen]

If I had my druthers multi-classing would be 'create your own class' as much as was possible.

All BABs should fall somewhere between Bad (Wizard) and Good (Fighter). Adding fractional BABs then rounding afterwards achieves this.

All Saves should fall between Good (Monk) and Poor (Wizard FORT/REF, Fighter WILL). Again adding fractional saves & not gaining multiple +2s at 1st levels would do this. Simply total all levels of 'Good' saves for a given save then add the Poor saves with a shift if you had an odd level in the 'Good' save in question. Heck make a table if that's really needed.

For multi-classed casters simply have the number of spells known/per day be based off of class level while the level the spells can be cast at are based off of character level. It's still not good but at least is serviceable.

Perhaps a system to advance casting proper by 1/2 character level with a max of twice class level (with PrCs that advance casting counting towards that). So a Cleric4/Fighter10 would memorize spells as a Cleric8 (4, +1/2 of 10 with a max of +4, yields 8) and cast those spells at 14th level. If they leveled to Cleric5/Fighter10 then they would increase to Cleric10 for memorizing spells and cast them at 15th level (while a Cleric4/Fighter6 would memorize as a Cleric7 and cast at 10th). Likewise a Cleric6/Wizard6 would memorize at 9th level while casting at 12th.

-James