Multiclassing in 3.X works well for non-caster and for multiclassed casters who take a 1 or 2-level dip into another class (usually in order to qualify for a PrC like the Arcane Trickster or Mystic Theurge).
Here is an alternate system that would grant you limited class features from a second class as you progress in your chosen character class. To make up for the Gestaltian features of the combined classes, you'd progress in levels more slowly (as if you were 1 level higher than your actual level):
SPLIT-CLASSING
Any character, at the beginning of their adventuring career, may choose to dabble in a second character class as they advance in their chosen, primary, class. Such character are called split-classed characters.
A player who split-classes must decide which class is his primary class and which is his secondary class at the start of play. Throughout the character's split-class career, the class features for his primary class are modified by that character's secondary class, though the character NEVER loses any features of his primary class.
Split-classed characters advance in level as if they were one character level higher than their actual character level (+1 LA) and may never change their secondary class (their secondary class modifications are ALWAYS applied to the character's primary class, even if their primary class changes). The character's primary class levels determine his character level in all instances... the secondary class only serves to modify the primary class's features.
So far I'm only including rules for taking one of the 4 "core" classes (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue and Wizard) as a secondary class.
Cleric:
The character gains simple weapon proficiency, as well as proficiency with light armor, medium armor proficiency and shields if they lack these.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d10 or greater die type. The character gains clerical spellcasting ability as a cleric of 2/3 (rounding fractions down) of their character level. They may turn as a cleric of 2/3 of their character level. Concentration and knowledge (religion) are added to their primary class's class list.
Fighter:
The character gains all weapon and armor proficiencies. All arcane spell failure percentages are reduced by 10%.
Characters with fighter as a secondary class gain 1 bonus feat at level 3 and every 3 levels thereafter. Their hit die type increases by one category (to a maximum of a d10). Their BAB improves by one category (to a maximum of +1 BAB/level).
Rogue:
The character gains proficiency with light armor and all rogue weapons. They also gain the trapfinding ability and the sneak attack ability. Sneak Attack starts at +1d6 at level 2 and increases by +1d6 every 3 levels thereafter.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d10 or greater die type. The character gains 4 additional skill points per level (to a maximum of 8/level) and may add up to 6 rogue skills to their class skill list.
Wizard:
The character gains wizard spellcasting ability as a wizard of 2/3 of their character level. The character gain Scribe Scroll at level 2 and gain a bonus wizard feat at levels 2, 8, 14 and 20.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d8 or greater die type. All Knowledge skills, as well as concentration and spellcraft are added to their primary class's class list.
EXAMPLES
Fighter (Wizard)
A split-classed Fighter (Wizard) 6 would have all of the Fighter class features of a 6th level Fighter but, due to dabbling in Wizard would adjust his character in the following ways:
He'd cast as a 4th level Wizard.
His HD type would drop to a d8.
He'd gain all Knowledge skills as class skills and would gain concentration and spellcraft as class skills.
He would have 6 character levels BUT would be considered 7th level for the purposes of advancing in level.
Wizard (Fighter)
A split-classed Wizard (Fighter) 6 would have all of the Wizard class features of a 6th level Wizard but, due to dabbling in Fighter would adjust his character in the following ways:
His BAB would be +4 (it would increase by +3 every 4 levels).
His HD type would increase to a d8.
He'd have all weapon and armor proficiencies.
His arcane spell failure percentages would be reduced by 10%.
He'd have 2 bonus Fighter feats.
He would have 6 character levels BUT would be considered 7th level for the purposes of advancing in level.
Multiclassing in 3.X works well for non-caster and for multiclassed casters who take a 1 or 2-level dip into another class (usually in order to qualify for a PrC like the Arcane Trickster or Mystic Theurge).
Here is an alternate system that would grant you limited class features from a second class as you progress in your chosen character class. To make up for the Gestaltian features of the combined classes, you'd progress in levels more slowly (as if you were 1 level higher than your actual level):
SPLIT-CLASSING
Any character, at the beginning of their adventuring career, may choose to dabble in a second character class as they advance in their chosen, primary, class. Such character are called split-classed characters.A player who split-classes must decide which class is his primary class and which is his secondary class at the start of play. Throughout the character's split-class career, the class features for his primary class are modified by that character's secondary class, though the character NEVER loses any features of his primary class.
Split-classed characters advance in level as if they were one character level higher than their actual character level (+1 LA) and may never change their secondary class (their secondary class modifications are ALWAYS applied to the character's primary class, even if their primary class changes). The character's primary class levels determine his character level in all instances... the secondary class only serves to modify the primary class's features.
So far I'm only including rules for taking one of the 4 "core" classes (Cleric, Fighter, Rogue and Wizard) as a secondary class.
Cleric:
The character gains simple weapon proficiency, as well as proficiency with light armor, medium armor proficiency and shields if they lack these.
Decrease the primary class's hit die type by 1 category if the primary class has a d10 or greater die type. The character gains clerical spellcasting ability as a cleric of 2/3 (rounding fractions down) of...
bump...
no takers for offering constructive criticism?
I would like to think about this for a moment or two before I comment. At first glance it seems like the Gestalt Character creation guidelines in Unearthed Arcana. I say more later.
|
This is a repeat from the 'one rule to rule them all' thread. I think that it was addressed there. Personally, I don't like this option very much. It is more complicated and it doesn't allow the same flexibility as 3.5.
I want flexible multi-classing rules. I'm okay with seeing a 'power increase' in 'effective level' so a lvl 5/lvl 5 character is closer in true power to a lvl 10 character, but I think that can be achieved by allowing some features to 'stack'. This is essentially the effect of many of the 'Complete Feats' that allow you to add your bard and monk levels, for instance, to gain monk abilities based on your total character level.
I think that granting 'full advancement' in more than one class is a problem. My personal opinion is that the best system suggested (and it wasn't originally mine, but rather collaborate) is a system where you treat your level in a class as your level +1/3 of your levels in all other classes. No class can more than double, and this applies to all 'special features'.
For example, a Fighter 6/Rogue 6 would be treated as a Fighter 8/Rogue 8 in terms of special abilities (but would have the BAB and saves, etc of a Fighter 6/Rogue 6). Essentially they would gain an extra feat compared to 3.5, better sneak attack, etc.
Math:
When determing what 'effective fighter level' we look at the levels in all other classes. The only other class is rogue, and we have 6 levels. Multiplying by 1/3 we get 2. Adding +2 to the 6 levels of fighter gives us an effective fighter level of 8. Likewise, to determine the effective rogue level we look at our levels of fighter. The math is the same.
Additional Examples:
Fighter 2/Rogue 2/Wiz 2
When looking at the Fighter, we look at all non-fighter levels. We have 2 levels of rogue and 2 of wizard (4 character levels). 1/3 of 4 is 1. We add +1 effective level to fighter. Again, the math is the same for all classes, so we are effecitvely Fighter 3/Rogue 3/Wiz 3. This means we get +1d6 sneak attack over 3.5 and 2nd level spells.
Cleric 5/Wizard 8/Fighter 7
To determine the effective cleric level we take 1/3 of 8+7 = +5. To determine the wizard level we take 1/3 of 5+7 = +4. To determine the fighter level we take 1/3 of 8+5 = +4.
We would effectively have a Cleric 10/Wizard 12/Fighter 11.
Fighter 1/Cleric 10/Wizard 5
1/3 of 15 +5 to Fighter (max x2, so +1)
1/3 of 6 +2 to Cleric
1/3 of 11 +3 to Wizard
Fighter 2/Cleric 12/Wizard 8
Again, this means higher level spells and more spells, but not as much as a 'straight level caster'.
The general feeling is that Prestige Classes should not be counted, only base classes.
I think this makes multiclass character a little better, and they probably do need a bump (especially casters). A fighter 5/wizard 5 isn't as strong as a Fighter 10 or a Wizard 10. Their 'additional flexibility' doesn't synergize well, and they're not a real threat to any CR 10 encounter (or an effective member of a 10th level team).
A fighter 5/wizard 5 isn't as strong as a Fighter 10 or a Wizard 10.
Does a Fighter 5/Wizard 5 have to be as strong as a Wizard 10 or a Fighter 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 3?
What about a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 -- how strong should that combination of classes be?
Personally, I have no problem with having some combinations of classes weaker than others.
|
|
A fighter 5/wizard 5 isn't as strong as a Fighter 10 or a Wizard 10.Does a Fighter 5/Wizard 5 have to be as strong as a Wizard 10 or a Fighter 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 3?
What about a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 -- how strong should that combination of classes be?
Personally, I have no problem with having some combinations of classes weaker than others.
The CR system assumes that each level of a character class (any class) increases the amount of challenge you should face on a +1 basis. Thus, a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 will face the same challenges that any other 10th level character will face. So, ideally, they would be on the same level of power. Now, having multiple different classes grants flexibility, and that is a form of power.
Under a system like mine they would have +2 or +3 to their effective level (8/3=+2 9/3=+3) but we limit it to effectively doubling their level in each class. This means that the example you provided would have spells and other class abilites as a:
Bard 4/Sorcerer 4/Wizard 2/Cleric 2/Druid 2/Monk 2/Rogue 2/Barbarian 2.
I don't think that makes them much more of a challenge than they were, and still not as tough as any single class combination totalling 10 levels. A system like this reduces the sting of multiclassing, it doesn't prevent a player from making a bad choice that doesn't synergize well.
Going to example you provide (using 3.5 base classes, not Beta) this character cain cast 2nd level Bard Spells (instead of 1st, assuming a sufficiently high charisma to have bonus spells), 2nd level wiz/sor spells, Evasion, Woodland Stride, and Uncanny Dodge.
They still have no 'high level abilities', but gaining the extra level of spells certainly helps them 'remain on the power curve'. Certain 2nd level spells (like invisibility) may synergize well with the combination of classes to allow them to actually participate in a fight in which the Wizard has 5th level spells.
At least, that's the hope: to increase the relative power of a multiclass character to conform to the expected powerlevel assumed in the CR system.
I don't think that makes them much more of a challenge than they were, and still not as tough as any single class combination totalling 10 levels. A system like this reduces the sting of multiclassing, it doesn't prevent a player from making a bad choice that doesn't synergize well.What about a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 -- how strong should that combination of classes be?
Personally, I have no problem with having some combinations of classes weaker than others.
I guess that's my point. A Fighter 5/Wizard 5 is a bad choice that doesn't synergize well; you can just as easily make an Eldritch Knight under the core rules, but for some reason you're choosing not to (which is your choice, just like making a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 could be your choice).
|
|
I guess that's my point. A Fighter 5/Wizard 5 is a bad choice that doesn't synergize well; you can just as easily make an Eldritch Knight under the core rules, but for some reason you're choosing not to (which is your choice, just like making a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 could be your choice).I don't think that makes them much more of a challenge than they were, and still not as tough as any single class combination totalling 10 levels. A system like this reduces the sting of multiclassing, it doesn't prevent a player from making a bad choice that doesn't synergize well.What about a Bard 2/Sorcerer 2/Wizard 1/Cleric 1/Druid 1/Monk 1/Rogue 1/Barbarian 1 -- how strong should that combination of classes be?
Personally, I have no problem with having some combinations of classes weaker than others.
The rules are designed to give high level abilities to high level characers. That design assumes that when a character is high level, they are a high level in one class. Thus, a 17th level Barbarian gets Mighty Rage (a high level ability), but a Sorc 9/Barbarian 8 gets very little (since the rules mistakenly assume that this is a low level character). This is to say that the progression of power between levels is to is not even. If you were to graph it out, you would find that between 1st and 2nd there is a significant jump, then a fairly gradual increase in power that increases a bit each level. What begins as a gradual slope becomes much steeper.
Now, a fighter/wizard may not be an optimal choice, but it is certainly a 'classic cliche', and it seems very appropriate from a role-playing perspective (particularly for elves, since their prediliction for magic and sword play seems to be a core fascination). The Eldritch Knight may certainly work for some people, but the flavor may not seem right for others. Others don't allow Prestige Classes into the game (they are an optional rule, afterall).
While we could certainly argue that someone who doesn't allow prestige classes 'isn't playing right', we needn't bother. The point of the rules is to provide a system that is flexible but consistent and helps us achieve our design aims.
If a design aim is to have multiclass characters have better access to 'high level abilities' when they are 'high level characters', something should be done so those multi-class combinations don't count as heavily against them. There are several options... For example, they could be treated as a lower level character (subtract 1 from the total of all character levels) but that's awkward considering how the rules work with CR=HD for characters...
I think that this proposed rule would be advantageous as it allows multiclassing to be somewhat more effective, but not too much.
I should note, I'm well known as a fairly conservative DM. I don't allow Orb Spells, for instance, in my games. When I originally looked at this rule, I thought it would be 'broken' (at +1/2 level). I was surprised that it was not (but it was noticeably more powerful than a standard character). At the +1/3, it seems to be a 'sweet spot', and may be a little underpowered as well. A friend of mine has suggested that the magic number may be 2/5, but that involves more 'math' (though still fairly simple).
Of course, a proposal is all it is. I don't ask that it be accepted carte blanche, but instead be challenged. Examples can be used in play, etc.