Feats That Make Sense and Will help with Weak Multiclassing


Advanced Player's Guide Playtest General Discussion


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I feel like multiclassing, especially with caster classes is usually extremely detrimental to te power of a character, but this is fine, and many times, there is a prestige class like mystic theurge or eldritch knight to minimize this.

However, some classes cast in the exact same ways and in the world, it would make sense for a character to switch between them. For example, a ranger that decides to focus more on the natural world and less upon hunting will start as a ranger and then take the druid class later.

I have not really created coherent feats or anything. I just wanted to see waht people thought about this idea but so far this is what I have:

All feats enhance the effective spellcasting level of the fastest spell progressing class. The spells known and spells per day are for this class and do not include special spells of the slower progressing class.

Ranger+Druid
Prerequisites: one level of Ranger and Druid
add (1/4) of the ranger's level (rounded down) for the purpose of determining the druid's effective level to cast spells. Spells are no longer obtained from the ranger class itself

Paladin+Cleric (though now paladins use charisma so maybe oracle)
Prerequisites: one level of Paladin and Cleric (Oracle?)
add (1/4) of the paladin's level (rounded down) for the purpose of determining the cleric's effective level to cast spells. Spells are no longer obtained from the paladin class itself

Bard+Sorcerer (Song Mage as a name perhaps)
Prerequisites: one level of Bard and Sorcerer
add (1/2) of the bard's level (rounded up) for the purpose of determining the sorcerer's effective level to cast spells. Spells are no longer obtained from the bard class itself

So what does everybody think?

I was thinking that some form of this idea should be included in the APG as either an alternative rule or as feats. i am not exactly sure how much each class should give as spell progression.


That's an interesting idea. Paladin/Cleric and Ranger/Druid I could see, but Bard/Sorcerer would be painful.


Ok, so these feats are for effective caster level, as in the level you use to access spells? I can see this as being a decent, if not quickly broken option. What can I say? I'm a powergamer.

For instance, the bard/sorcerer one intrigues me most, yet isn't the most powerful one there. A Bard 19 / Sorcerer 1 would cast spells as an 11th sorcerer. At first glance that's pretty "meh" since you'll only have 5th level spells and a lower caster level (11- yikes!). Yet, ignoring bonus spells based on charisma, you're only casting 2 fewer spells per day and you're casting them from a much stronger spell list. Not bad, I say, and about a fair trade.

Now change that whole thing to a druid/ranger build. Druid 1 / Ranger 19 has an awesome BAB, great combat ability, casts as a 11th level druid, which despite the crappy caster level is LOADS better than ranger casting. For the cost of 1 ranger level and 1 feat the ranger has gained 2 additional spell levels from a stronger list, and her spells per day (assuming a domain, because why wouldn't you?) are 10 more at minimum, AND she gets the ever-lovely orisons.

I would probably include some sort of restriction (ability to cast 3rd level druid/cleric/sorcerer spells) and add like +4 to your caster level. It's still a hit in the long run, requiring at least 5/6 level dip into your caster class, but it becomes a true theurge rather than a dip for power. Even at the most optimized you'd have something like Ranger 15 / Druid 5 with druid casting of 13th level and a caster level of 17.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Actually you are looking at it a bit wrong, or at least for what i have written but maybe what i wrote is not balanced.

A ranger 19 druid 1 has worst spellcasting than a ranger 20 because it would be (1/4)*19 which is 4 +1 from druid is effectively level 5 which means the ranger has third level spells. The point is not to allow random dips like that, but if for example, you have a druid 16 ranger 4, you will have 9th level spells.

For the bard, the same concept applies. Bard 19 Sorcerer 1 is okay but the best uses of the feats requires some investment in both classes. A sorcerer 13 and bard 7 would get level 9 spells at level 20 and a bard 11 and sorcerer 9 would get 8th level spells. But remember, espcially for bards, you lose your crazy low level enchantment spells like the dance spell.

And yeah, i meant for the purpose of getting spells and caster level; I probably should have made that more clear, but I didn't really know how I should say it.


Temeryn wrote:

Actually you are looking at it a bit wrong, or at least for what i have written but maybe what i wrote is not balanced.

A ranger 19 druid 1 has worst spellcasting than a ranger 20 because it would be (1/4)*19 which is 4 +1 from druid is effectively level 5 which means the ranger has third level spells. The point is not to allow random dips like that, but if for example, you have a druid 16 ranger 4, you will have 9th level spells.

For the bard, the same concept applies. Bard 19 Sorcerer 1 is okay but the best uses of the feats requires some investment in both classes. A sorcerer 13 and bard 7 would get level 9 spells at level 20 and a bard 11 and sorcerer 9 would get 8th level spells. But remember, espcially for bards, you lose your crazy low level enchantment spells like the dance spell.

And yeah, i meant for the purpose of getting spells and caster level; I probably should have made that more clear, but I didn't really know how I should say it.

No, you're absolutely right. For some reason I read it that you get 1/2 your levels as caster levels, not 1/4.

Still, if you balanced it properly, 1/2 would work really well.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

i was thinking of saying half for rangers and paladins because that is basically there progression but then i thought that 4th level spells are exponentially worse than 9th and are practically useless for in combat and are more of utility. i was thinking that I should be a little harder on them because if the ranger provided the 9th level spells or 8th level spells it would be way better than anything normally obtained from his/her casting

But the bard is sort of mainish caster and has nice spells that are obtained at lower than usual level. Also, the bard songs don't work that well if they are weakened by multiclassing, so i thought that removing the more powerful spells from the bard and giving them a slightly worse progression than they actually have would be balanced in this case.

Also, i was thinking that taking only one should still probably be better and I just thought it made sense for the spells to be carried over.

Maybe your right, do you think it should be 1/3 or something for paladins and rangers?


Well, conventional math at the table (and both WotC materials and the more common PF materials I use) works easier with 1/2. 1/2 of 10? 5. 1/3 of 10? I can fire off 3.33~ easy, but it can be a (short) mental stumbling block. 1/4 of 10? 2.5. You also have better odds of pulling odd fractional results, rounding up or down at odd intervals. With 1/2, its at least only on odd numbers that get fractional, and a blanket round up or down statement in the appropriate text solves that.
So, if you can get 1/2 to work, I'd say go with that.


I'd go as far as having their casterlevels stack together, having the same casterlevel is easier in gameplay and works fine in certain themes. (a bit like practiced spellcaster in 3.5)

example:

Nature's Guardian

prerequiste Ranger 4 Druid 1

Levels in ranger and druid stack for the purpose of casterlevel.
You can use Ranger spells as Druid spells and Druid spells as ranger spells. Also you can use light or medium armor and / or shields made of metal without losing your druid abilities.


Song Mage

Prerequiste: bard level 4 and sorcerer level 1

Bard and sorcerer levels stack for purposes of casterlevel, you can learn spells on the bard spell list as though they were on the sorcerer's spell list. None of your spells can be cast without verbal component.

Bard and sorcerer levels also stack for purposes of how powerful the bardic music abilities you use are, though you do not gain more uses or new abilities by virtue of this feat.


Defender of the Faith

Prerequiste: Paladin 4 Cleric 1

Paladin and Cleric levels stack for casterlevel purposes, you can use paladin spells as if they were cleric spells and cleric spells as if they were paladin spells. Also you can choose to use either Charisma or Wisdom as your Spellcasting Ability.


Nature's Avenger

Prerequiste: Barbarian 1 Druid 4

Barbarian levels stack with druid levels to determine casterlevel and wildshape ability, it however does not increase the number of times you can wildshape per day.


I am aware above feats are more powerful generally than other feats, main purpose is to make some multi-class options more viable.

The Song Mage seems very nice, it continues to give bard spells at the earliest possible and adds a good mix of magic and skills.

Sovereign Court

Remco Sommeling wrote:

I am aware above feats are more powerful generally than other feats, main purpose is to make some multi-class options more viable.

The Song Mage seems very nice, it continues to give bard spells at the earliest possible and adds a good mix of magic and skills.

The danger is that those feats make multi-classing more powerful than sticking with a single class.

I always thought multi-classing should be for unique, interesting characters rather than being standard practice.


ofcourse care has to be taken, but they are just suggestions I whipped out now, they are more meant as feats to equalize them with a single class. they still do not keep up with the highest level spells from other classes, but they have some nice abilities that function well as long as they stick to those two classes.


Your barbarian level augmenting your wild shape I could possibly see, but definitely not also affecting your caster level.


Arakhor wrote:
Your barbarian level augmenting your wild shape I could possibly see, but definitely not also affecting your caster level.

Agreed. I see these feats working best where a second spell-casting class of similar focus (Bard/Sorc, Cleric/Pal, Druid/Ranger) is involved, but not where disparate classes are involved. That said, doing what Arakhor suggests and having Barbarian levels add to Wild Shape for level determination could be kind of cool. Its a different kind of class synergy.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wait so would your feats just effect caster level or also the ability to gain new spells.

My thought was that if you are a level 4 ranger and then take 2 levels in druid, you should get 2nd level spells because you already knew how to cast druidic spells before hand and it doesn't make sense to start back at level 1.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest / General Discussion / Feats That Make Sense and Will help with Weak Multiclassing All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion