|
This could fall under the "Open Comments" portion, but I felt obligated to mention this now to give Jason time to digest.
A good deal of exploits of 3.5 comes from multiclassing combinations that provide serious advantages over single classes (slightly reduced BAB for huge saves and tons of class features? Sold!).
I was thinking today about how my original D&D group misinterpreted multiclassing when 3rd Edition came out, when it was a new D&D system.
Okay, so here is how our group originally misinterpreted, in a good way, multiclassing when 3rd Edition came out:
We never had problems with multiclassing until we started using the rules "the right way".
Example: Gorg the 4th Level will be built two ways in each system. First, under the 3.5 rules as a single-class barbarian, second as a 3.5 barbarian/ranger/druid. Then, under my groups "incorrect" rules as a single-class barbarian, and again as a barbarian/ranger/druid.
3.5 Mechanics
Gorg, Barbarian 4:
BAB +4; Fort +3, Ref +1, Will +1; fast movement, illiteracy, uncanny dodge, trap sense +1, rage 2/day.
Gorg, Barbarian 2/Ranger 1/Druid 1:
BAB +3; Fort +6, Ref +2, Will +2; fast movement, illiteracy, uncanny dodge, rage 1/day, favored enemy, track, animal companion, wild empathy, nature sense, druid spells.
Gorg trades +1 BAB for net +5 saves and a whack of class features, it gets more out of whack with more classes and higher levels.
Proposed Pathfinder Mechanics
Gorg, Barbarian 4: Unchanged from above.
Gorg, Barbarian 2/Ranger 1/Druid 1:
BAB +2; Fort +3, Ref +0, Will +0; same class features but Pathfinder.
Gorg trades +2 BAB for net -2 saves and a whack of class features, adding more classes does not improve his BAB or Saves any faster.
I'd love to hear from Jason on the potential for this. Obviously it requires some work recalculating BAB and saves, but it is all based off the highest level class so there is really only one calculation (reduce numbers by the difference between one version and the new version). And given the advances with CMB and Turning subsystems, I do believe that the lingering abuse of Multiclassing could use an overhaul.
First, I feel as if Jason did a great job with the base classes, providing a number of incentives to stick with one class. A lot of the multiclassing abuse I've seen comes from prestige classes, not base ones; multiclassed base-class characters seem more or less equal to their single-class peers (for fighting characters), or are actually quite a bit weaker (for multiclassing anything with full spellcasting progression).
|
Most of the abuse comes from the multiple front loading on strong saves. Getting Great Fortitude/Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes for free once might be acceptable, but when you get the bonus to what already your strong save, it quickly ramps things up to stupid levels.
My solution is slightly more complex than Jal's, but goes as follows. If you multiclass, you add your levels in all classes with a good save together and take that bonus, + the bonus from all your classes with a poor save.
Thus, Gorg in Jal Dorak's example ends ups with saves of:
Fort: +4 (Four levels of good saves) Ref: +3 (1 level Good save [+2], 3 levels poor save [+1]) Will: +3 (1 level good save[+2], 3 levels poor saves[+1])
This compares to:
Single-class Barbarian: Fort: +4 Ref: +1 Will: +1
Standard Multi-Class: Fort: +7 Ref: +2 Will +2
It basically works as the old fractional save option, but prevents the stacking of good on good on good which is what produces the biggest problem with wild saves. All IMHO, of course.
|
|
What concerns me is that multiclass spellcasters are still crippled, which is fine, but multiclass warriors (Ftr1/Brb1/Rgr1/Pal1) end up being better than their counterparts, especially at early and late levels. In the example I just gave, that character would have BAB +4, Fort +8, Ref +0, Will +0, detect/smite evil, rage, fast movement, track, wild empathy, favored enemy, and way more skill points (instead of Ftr 4: BAB +4, Fort +4, Ref +1, Will +1, and 2 more feats and armor training +1). It should not be a better basic mechanical choice to have 4 different classes than to have 4 levels in one class.
For completeness, the "proposed" version of above would have BAB +1, Fort +2, Ref +0, Will +0, plus all the class features.
I agree Jason has improved the core classes in comparison to splatbooks and PrC options. But I still feel that multiclassing provides too great of an appeal mechanically.
|
|
Most of the abuse comes from the multiple front loading on strong saves. Getting Great Fortitude/Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes for free once might be acceptable, but when you get the bonus to what already your strong save, it quickly ramps things up to stupid levels.
My solution is slightly more complex than Jal's, but goes as follows. If you multiclass, you add your levels in all classes with a good save together and take that bonus, + the bonus from all your classes with a poor save.
Thus, Gorg in Jal Dorak's example ends ups with saves of:
Fort: +4 (Four levels of good saves) Ref: +3 (1 level Good save [+2], 3 levels poor save [+1]) Will: +3 (1 level good save[+2], 3 levels poor saves[+1])This compares to:
Single-class Barbarian: Fort: +4 Ref: +1 Will: +1Standard Multi-Class: Fort: +7 Ref: +2 Will +2
It basically works as the old fractional save option, but prevents the stacking of good on good on good which is what produces the biggest problem with wild saves. All IMHO, of course.
That was the original option my group came up with when we didn't understand multiclassing, but it seemed too complex. I didn't mention it in my OP because I wanted to present the end solution rather than 2 seperate ones. But thanks for posting yours, Paul!
Jal, I have to admit that I'd prefer a more "gestalt"-like approach to multiclassing, where a fighter 10/wizard 10 would be like a 15th level character, for example, instead of 20th. But I assumed that was my 1e grognard side showing, so I figured I'd suck it up and jump on the 3e bandwagon.
Multiclassing in 3.X certainly has its drawbacks, but I'm not sure Paizo is ready to scrap it and go playtest a different system. Maybe if they do an "Unearthed Pathfinder Arcana"-type deal (yes, PLEASE!), a variant multiclass system could be included.
In the example I just gave, that character would have BAB +4, Fort +8, Ref +0, Will +0, detect/smite evil, rage, fast movement, track, wild empathy, favored enemy, and way more skill points (instead of Ftr 4: BAB +4, Fort 4, Ref +1, Will +1, and 2 more feats and armor training +1). It should not be a better basic mechanical choice to have 4 different classes than to have 4 levels in one class.
The multiclassed character would have in addition to the BAB, saves (Fort +8 Ref +2 Will +0), detect evil, fast movemenet, 4 + Constitution modifier rage points, smite evil 1/day, one favored enemy, track (adds 1/2 level to Survival checks to identify tracks. +0 bonus to that then for the 1st level ranger? Maybe +1 if you make that the minimum?), wild empathy (1d20 + 1 + Charisma modifier. Still a 1st level ranger),
As opposed to the 4th level barbarian who gets BAB +4, Fort +4, Ref +1, Will +1, two more skill points, has 3 times (2 + Constitution modifier) more rage points, uncanny dodge, two rage powers, and trap sense +1. I mean I'm not seeing the better mechanical choice aside from the saves. I'm pretty sure the 4th level barbarian gets the better choice of class abilities than the poor multiclasser.
A 4th level paladin would again get BAB +4, Fort +4, Ref +1, Will +1. She would have 6 less skill points, smite evil 2/day instead of just 1, lay on hands for 4 healing 2 + Charisma modifier times per day, divine grace, aura of courage, divine health, channel positive energy (1d6 positive energy 1 + Charisma modifier times per day), and possibly 1st level spells if she has a high enough Charisma. Again, I think the 4th level paladin gets better choice of class abilities than the poor multiclasser.
A 4th level ranger would get BAB +4, Fort +4, Will +1, and now Ref +4. He would have 10 more skill points, his track would now have a bonus of +2, +3 more to wild empathy, one combat style feat, endurance, one favored terrain, hunter's bond, and possibly 1st level spells if she has a high enough Wisdom. I don't think the multiclasser is superior to the 4th level ranger.
If this would continue forward the multiclassed character might have more class abilities, but saying that is superior, to me, is like saying that having ten dimes is superior to having a five dollar bill just because you have nine more things if you had dimes.
|
|
Jal, I have to admit that I'd prefer a more "gestalt"-like approach to multiclassing, where a fighter 10/wizard 10 would be like a 15th level character, for example, instead of 20th. But I assumed that was my 1e grognard side showing, so I figured I'd suck it up and jump on the 3e bandwagon.
Multiclassing in 3.X certainly has its drawbacks, but I'm not sure Paizo is ready to scrap it and go playtest a different system. Maybe if they do an "Unearthed Pathfinder Arcana"-type deal (yes, PLEASE!), a variant multiclass system could be included.
I was actually toying around with that idea. I can't wrap my head around it to actually make it work properly tho.
|
|
Jal, I have to admit that I'd prefer a more "gestalt"-like approach to multiclassing, where a fighter 10/wizard 10 would be like a 15th level character, for example, instead of 20th. But I assumed that was my 1e grognard side showing, so I figured I'd suck it up and jump on the 3e bandwagon.
Multiclassing in 3.X certainly has its drawbacks, but I'm not sure Paizo is ready to scrap it and go playtest a different system. Maybe if they do an "Unearthed Pathfinder Arcana"-type deal (yes, PLEASE!), a variant multiclass system could be included.
In an ideal world, yes. Really, the whole thing is a nostalgic thought exercise, except that I actually did play (an entire campaign to epic levels) with this system.
Along the lines of a Gestalt system, we can probably swing something, yes? Here goes:
Step 1: Use the gestalt rules from Unearth Arcana.
Step 2: Start off using something like the apprentice class rules from 3.0 DMG. At first level you get 1/2 HD for best class, +0 BAB, +1 to good saves, Int skill points, 1 class feature (including weapons or armor) from each, only 0th level spells.
Step 3: Increase XP requirements to gain levels to 200% normal.
Quick math:
Normal Progression:
Level 2: 1300 (2600) = Level 1
Level 3: 3300 (6600) = Level 2, single class now 2 higher
Level 4: 6000 (12000) = Level 3
Level 5: 10000 (20000) = Level 4
Level 6: 15000 (30000) = Level 5
Level 7: 23000 (46000) = Level 6
Level 8: 34000 (68000) = Level 7
Level 9: 50000 (100000) = Level 8
Level 10: 71000 (142000) = Level 9
Level 11: 105000 (210000) = Level 10, single class now 3 higher
Level 12: 145000 (290000) = Level 11
Level 13: 210000 (420000) = Level 12
Level 14: 295000 (590000) = Level 13
Level 15: 425000 (850000) = Level 14
Level 16: 600000 (120000) = Level 15
Level 17: 850000 (170000) = Level 16
Level 18: 1200000 = N/A (technically can reach this level...)
Level 19: 1700000
Level 20: 2400000
If we rule they cannot reach Level 17 (even 1 XP difference would cap them at 16), then they are effectively 4 levels behind if a game reaches 20th level. That's 4 HD of ability, spellcasting is capped at 8th level spells for all progressions, no capstone abilities, etc.
Is this enough? Kirth was suggesting around 15th level for a 20th level character. This does approximate that.
Incidentally, if you use the 3.5 XP totals it caps characters at 13th level, which is in some ways more reasonable and in others a bigger loss (HD for example). In 3.5 I would negate the 0th level penalty, which moves the cap up to 14th level, giving sorcerers their 7th level spells too.
|
While I like the simplicity of and the idea behind these ideas (my grognard side showing), I think the biggest problem here is one of backwards compatibility. If the multiclassing rules are changed so drastically, you lose backwards compatibility, because every single multiclass character from 3.x will have to be rebuilt and recalculated. That would increase conversion work by a significant degree.
I'm not trying to stop the discussion or anything, I just don't know if the rules can be changed and still fit with PF's design philosophy.
My solution is slightly more complex than Jal's, but goes as follows. If you multiclass, you add your levels in all classes with a good save together and take that bonus, + the bonus from all your classes with a poor save.
I propossed this same solution a few months back. Each class level gives you a level in Good/Average/Poor BAB, and Good/Bad saves, the same way prestige classes stack spellcasting progressions.
|
|
I do agree with Rob about the compatability issue - my last point about Gestalt and XP was more for my own benefit and for Kirth. I'm strongly considering using the system from now on. I may even allow multiple gestalts by multiplying the base XP required by the number of classes you gestalt...not quite sure how one ends up in terms of progression yet, it might be a little too low.
I was actually toying around with that idea. I can't wrap my head around it to actually make it work properly tho.
In my campaign that is starting the first weekend of October I will be ignoring experience points altogether and just telling players that they will level after every two sessions, ie, between sessions 2 & 3 then between4 & 5 etc.
Then, I say, if you want to gestalt multi-class it requires the Multiclass Feat for each class beyond one that you take and you level after every three sessions (if you are dual class) or after every four sessions (if you are triple class).
Here is the level progression:
# of Classes
Session 1 2 3
1 1 1 1
2 1 1 1
3 2 1 1
4 2 2 1
5 3 2 2
6 3 2 2
7 4 3 2
8 4 3 2
9 5 3 3
10 5 4 3
11 6 4 3
12 6 4 3
13 7 5 4
14 7 5 4
15 8 5 4
16 8 6 4
17 9 6 5
18 9 6 5
19 10 7 5
20 10 7 5
21 11 7 6
22 11 8 6
23 12 8 6
24 12 8 6
So, after 12 sessions:
- a single class character will be 6th level
- a dual class character will be 4th level
- a triple class character will be 3rd level
So, after 24 sessions:
- a single class character will be 12th level
- a dual class character will be 8th level
- a triple class character will be 6th level
I'm going to try it out and see how it goes.