I put this up on another forum, but I'm looking for a variety of opinions (and hopefully specific suggestions) and of course a lot of experts should be here...
I had an idea for how to do multiclassing differently than I've seen it before. I think it can get over the issue of underpowered multiclass spellcasters, although it is more a matter of a way to balance creating a new class that matches the player's concept than multiclassing. This new class can be from the beginning or I could see ways that a character could evolve and gain new abilities. (For example, a character joins a monastery for a few months and then has some monk abilities but has forgotten something else.)
I’d love to know if people have seen similar concepts before either online or published (I don’t have the Advanced Player’s Guide or Game Mastery books, for example), or if there are major holes in the idea or if people like it, but can suggest a few tweaks. I also remember something like this in the 2nd edition D&D player’s handbook.
The basic idea is to split the classes apart based on groupings of their special abilities, then give each group of abilities a price in “character points” or whatever you want to call it. Also, give point values for having a d6 of hit points vs. d8, etc; as well as a cost to have 4 skill points/level vs. 6 skill points and so on. For spellcasting, spellcasting as a wizard would have one rather large cost. But to allow more limited spellcasting to be added to another class in exchange for a lesser ability, one could use another classes’ spellcasting or perhaps limit the number of schools of magic in the new class.
The magic in the system is getting the point values to make sense so that the relative value of a Barbarian’s “rage” abilities is appropriate compared to the Fighter’s bonus feats and so on. I remember seeing someone did a spreadsheet along these lines for the 3.5 abilities, but individualized for each individual ability. I think that could fall apart for my purposes, but I think keeping most of the abilities grouped together solves most of that.
Using this method, my hope is that one could give a Fighter trap-related abilities (in case the party won’t have a thief or the player has a good concept around that) by dropping his a fighter ability (or combination of abilities, weapon proficiencies, choice of hit die, etc.)
Also note that if I do go forward with this idea, one would have to sanity check the results. For example, if a new class was stacked with many abilities at 1st level, they should be spread out somehow. Or if you wanted a class that had a particular set of abilities but it would cost just a bit too much, then perhaps some individual abilities could be dropped or moved up to a higher level.
I like this idea :) it wouldnt be for eveyone but I like the idea. The problem I see is coming up with the point costs after all how much more is a spell level over a feat or skill points? The hit points could just be that d6=6points, the BaB could be the final bonus per level so a fighter increase would be 20 points but a clerics would be 15. Skill points could be the same 1 for 1 or you could double it it wouldnt really matter at this point.
Then comes the tricky bit costing 2 base classes and seeing if your points costs come close to each other, if they do (would be surprised at this point if they do) then you have your base class points for each player.
I know its pretty simple stuff I have said but hay always keep it as simple as possible I say.
You have my mind racing now LOL I think I might steal this idea (even if it doesnt get of the ground here) if you dont mind :P I have always liked the idea of the ranger but not the spells so this could help change that, so many possibilities. Will post what ever I find to help.
You have my mind racing now LOL I think I might steal this idea (even if it doesnt get of the ground here) if you dont mind :P I have always liked the idea of the ranger but not the spells so this could help change that, so many possibilities. Will post what ever I find to help.
Thanks!
Well, here's a blog post of mine where I start to detail it a little:
more details
It includes some charts where I throw out some point values for common things (BABs, skill points/level, etc.) as well as a few classes' ability groups. That should give a better idea of where I want to go with this. Also note that those values are more just placeholders/guesstimates by just me. I'd love to get many informed opinions on the values going forward.
|
the reason combat spell casters don't work well. Starts and stops with ability points. If you roll dice you can make it work with a good set of base stats. If your using a point buy you are under powered out of the gate. Rember as well that MAD will kill classes faster then any thing. Removeing MAD ,or most of MAD will result in charters being over powered.
I'v made classes using the 2nd ed. buy system. OMG it was so broken it was not even funny.
Me talking to the GM. Me( Yep im going to take 3 times as long to level. Will you let me do it? ) GM. ( Sure why not it can't hurt any thing.) Me giggling in side becous he just let me have the cooke jar.
Me leveling to 2. GM ( How did you get that meny hp? And how can you sneek attack for that much damage with a lighting bolt. ) Me ( You let me make my owen classes. So I have 1D10 hit dice Full Mage casting and Theaf Sneek Attck Multiplyer. ) GM ( YOU DIE. ) Me ( what?? but but you told me I could. )
LOL yeah that sounds like what were talking about, but is it D20 based?
If it works it might just end up being something for me to use when doing my own classes to check on balance. If it does work then ranger is first on the list LOL.
Sounds like you folks should be considering GURPS. There you just pick the abilities you want and pay for them a la carte.
I never got into GURPS, but I did play my share of Hero, so I get that. But D&D/Pathfinder is the more mainstream game. Also, because I'm not talking about point-buying individual abilities (I'm talking about groups of abilities like the Rogue's maneuverability group and his backstab group and his trapfinding related group) I think this is viable.
Anyway, I think most think multiclassing is broken and I think this is a way to do it. Specifically:
-What if no one wants to play a particular class and the party will be missing an ability. Sure, the group and GM can say "tough, if no one wants to be a rogue then you'll have to bash doors in and open chests planning to minimize any trap effects, etc." But maybe with this the GM could say "Alright, if the cleric player wants to get trapfinding abilities then he needs to drop x and y or x and z."
-What if a player has a concept for a new class? These point values could serve as good guidelines. Yeah, if your group dynamic is adversarial between the GM and players then the GM will have to be really careful, but all the rules subsystems can be abused. The hope is to get a bunch of eyes on this to minimize that, just like other subsystems.
-Also, this can address multiclassing in a way that doesn't suffer the issue of multi-classed spellcasters having underpowered spells. Ideally, the player would craft the new class from the beginning, but if a level 4 monk decided he wanted to cast some wizard spells then he could drop some other abilities. Obviously one would want a story reason for this change to occur and/or some in-game downtime, but you have that issue already with the current multiclassing rules.
|
|
Multiclasseing a spell caster hase very little to do with spells. It hase every thing to do with needing alot of high stats. With the way spell DC are done you can pick casting or melee. Becous the other one will not hit that offten.
For example.
Using the new Magus Classes.
Starting with
Int 18 + 5 levels = 23 + 6 int item = 29 ability mod 9
Spell DC for a Level 1 spell = 20
Spell DC for a level 3 spell = 22
Spell DC for a level 6 spell = 25
Now the Wizard
Starting with
Int 18 + 5 levels = 23 + 6 int item = 29 ability mod 9
Spell DC for a level 1 spell = 20
Spell DC for a level 3 spell = 22
Spell DC for a level 6 spell = 25
Spell DC for a level 9 spell = 28
The problem is the Magus. Is you need Str Dex Con as well as Int.
With the Wizard all you need. Is Int and Con.
Ability scores are what hold casting classes in check. Becous of ability scores you can be good at casting or combat but not both.
Multiclasseing a spell caster hase very little to do with spells. It hase every thing to do with needing alot of high stats. With the way spell DC are done you can pick casting or melee. Becous the other one will not hit that offten.
I'm not familiar with the magus, but of course if you pick class feature sets that rely on different ability scores you'll run into issues unless you get lucky rolling. But this problem would exist for normal multiclassing as well, if I understand you conrrectly.
The pros of what I'm trying to do:
-Multiclassing won't cause a lower power level for the multiclassed character. For example, if one is a Monk5/Wizard5 then your spells will be much weaker that a straight up 10th level Wizard. Of course they should be because you have the monk abilities. But they may be so weak that they aren't useful compared to what other party members are able to do. Likewise, comparing it to a 10th level Monk, he can hit (unarmed) a creature that requires +2 weapons, while the 5/5 character can't.
-This can allow a form of multiclassing (albeit by creating a custom class) at first level.
The cons:
-min-maxers can find another way to min/max.
-If the point values don't get a lot of review it will be unbalanced.
About even:
-Suspension of disbelief: In normal multiclassing, a character will suddenly have many new abilities due to picking a new class unless the GM enforces some story requirement or in-game down-time. Likewise in the new system, suspension of disbelief is ruined without the GM enforcing something similar.
Thanks Jagyr :) I dont know how i missed it but the ranger skirmisher is pretty cool with no spell casting.
I think i will keep going with this some what as i am intrested to see what comes of it and as I said earlier it could help me with balancing new classes I come up with.
PS another tick for paizo spell less ranger to go with the spell less assassin, you guys are good :)
You really should check out the APG. A lot of the new class archetypes are similar to what you're talking about. That is, a rogue gives up trap based abilities and gets X, or a paladin gives up spellcasting and gains Y.
Thanks... I've got it on order now, although I skimmed a friend's copy.
Yeah, that does get really close to what I'm describing although many archetypes don't exist. For example the Fighter has an archer type, crossbowman, weapon master, etc., but I didn't see something that is a Fighter/Rogue blend. And the Cleric section (unless I missed a page) was all about subdomains, so there were not Cleric/other class blends. So building new archetypes is one options. I saw a site that has consolidated some fan-made versions. Or my idea of peeling away a set of related class abilities from a class and switching them for a set of related abilities from another class (and maybe changing HD, skill points, etc to match the concept and for balance) is another idea.
I still like my idea, but I can see how archetypes are useful and close to it.
|
You really should check out the APG. A lot of the new class archetypes are similar to what you're talking about. That is, a rogue gives up trap based abilities and gets X, or a paladin gives up spellcasting and gains Y.Thanks... I've got it on order now, although I skimmed a friend's copy.
Yeah, that does get really close to what I'm describing although many archetypes don't exist. For example the Fighter has an archer type, crossbowman, weapon master, etc., but I didn't see something that is a Fighter/Rogue blend. And the Cleric section (unless I missed a page) was all about subdomains, so there were not Cleric/other class blends. So building new archetypes is one options. I saw a site that has consolidated some fan-made versions. Or my idea of peeling away a set of related class abilities from a class and switching them for a set of related abilities from another class (and maybe changing HD, skill points, etc to match the concept and for balance) is another idea.
I still like my idea, but I can see how archetypes are useful and close to it.
Yeah, the archetypes at least give you a starting point to build from.
Personally I would love to see a GURPS-style ability buying system for Pathfinder. It would solve the multi-classing issues for certain and would allow people to make whatever freakin' kind of character they wanted.
And I think that if D&D is supposed to be a fantasy adventure "simulator" then this is absolutely the way it should be in the first place. Pigeon holing characters into neat little classes is okay from a game-balancing aspect, but it doesn't hold true to the ideal storytelling.
Personally I would love to see a GURPS-style ability buying system for Pathfinder. It would solve the multi-classing issues for certain and would allow people to make whatever freakin' kind of character they wanted.
And I think that if D&D is supposed to be a fantasy adventure "simulator" then this is absolutely the way it should be in the first place. Pigeon holing characters into neat little classes is okay from a game-balancing aspect, but it doesn't hold true to the ideal storytelling.
<Remembers "Spells and Options" from 2nd Ed ADnD>
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Personally I would love to see a GURPS-style ability buying system for Pathfinder. It would solve the multi-classing issues for certain and would allow people to make whatever freakin' kind of character they wanted.
And I think that if D&D is supposed to be a fantasy adventure "simulator" then this is absolutely the way it should be in the first place. Pigeon holing characters into neat little classes is okay from a game-balancing aspect, but it doesn't hold true to the ideal storytelling.
<Remembers "Spells and Options" from 2nd Ed ADnD>
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Never played 1st or 2nd editions, so I'm afraid I don't share your experience ;)
Never played 1st or 2nd editions, so I'm afraid I don't share your experience ;)Personally I would love to see a GURPS-style ability buying system for Pathfinder. It would solve the multi-classing issues for certain and would allow people to make whatever freakin' kind of character they wanted.
And I think that if D&D is supposed to be a fantasy adventure "simulator" then this is absolutely the way it should be in the first place. Pigeon holing characters into neat little classes is okay from a game-balancing aspect, but it doesn't hold true to the ideal storytelling.
<Remembers "Spells and Options" from 2nd Ed ADnD>
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
<eye twitch> That damned book...
Imagine each and every possible class feature having a point value.Imagine magic items having point values.
Imagine each type of magic casting having a point value.
Imagine being able to remove certain abilities to generate more points.
Imagine having x points and being able to mix match. Willy nilly.
Now imagine a fighter that has d12 hp, uses only a greatsword (thats magic now, like +3 or so at 1st level and he had the points) becasue he "gave up" the ability to use 1 handers and shields, with a 6 HD wolf companion like a druid and I think back stab, all at first level.
May not seem like much...but for 2nd ED it was redonkulous.
<eye twitch> That damned book...
Imagine each and every possible class feature having a point value.
Imagine magic items having point values.
Imagine each type of magic casting having a point value.
Imagine being able to remove certain abilities to generate more points.
Imagine having x points and being able to mix match. Willy nilly.Now imagine a fighter that has d12 hp, uses only a greatsword (thats magic now, like +3 or so at 1st level and he had the points) becasue he "gave up" the ability to use 1 handers and shields, with a 6 HD wolf companion like a druid and I think back stab, all at first level.
May not seem like much...but for 2nd ED it was redonkulous.
No, no that does seem pretty broken... but at the same time it seems like more of a balancing issue.
The way I envision a point-buy system is that everyone starts as a commoner (because everyone starts as a commoner IRL right?) and you have poor BAB, poor saves, d6, no magic, etc. Then you buy what you want--you don't "give" anything up, you literally start with nothing.
I agree that the system would be crazy hard to balance, but I think once it WAS balanced then it would be an easy thing to maintain (add new powers, options, features, etc).
I can dream, can't I?
No, no that does seem pretty broken... but at the same time it seems like more of a balancing issue.The way I envision a point-buy system is that everyone starts as a commoner (because everyone starts as a commoner IRL right?) and you have poor BAB, poor saves, d6, no magic, etc. Then you buy what you want--you don't "give" anything up, you literally start with nothing.
I agree that the system would be crazy hard to balance, but I think once it WAS balanced then it would be an easy thing to maintain (add new powers, options, features, etc).
I can dream, can't I?
I think the example cited is greatly exaggerated to make a point... that if you have unbalanced rules, poorly chosen costs, and munchkin players the subsystem will have issues. And I admit that even if you have any one of those you'll have issues, although usually not as extreme.
Anyway, someone elsewhere did point me to two d20/3.5 point buy system books: Complete Control and Buy the Numbers.
But as mentioned above, these things could be abused. And they might not be balanced from the get-go. But I'm going to look at them and press forward with my idea. My blog post up above has been updated with a few more core classes' class ability groups broken up and given initial, stab-in-the-dark costs.
I think any GM using anything like this would have to reserve the right to sanity check it for abuse. For example, one shouldn't be able to pick a number of abilities that all kick in at first level. My idea of peeling out a set of related abilities will hopefully minimize the ability to min/max while still allowing a a character to be a good blend of two classes.
<eye twitch> That damned book...
Imagine each and every possible class feature having a point value.
Imagine magic items having point values.
Imagine each type of magic casting having a point value.
Imagine being able to remove certain abilities to generate more points.
Imagine having x points and being able to mix match. Willy nilly.Now imagine a fighter that has d12 hp, uses only a greatsword (thats magic now, like +3 or so at 1st level and he had the points) becasue he "gave up" the ability to use 1 handers and shields, with a 6 HD wolf companion like a druid and I think back stab, all at first level.
May not seem like much...but for 2nd ED it was redonkulous.
No, no that does seem pretty broken... but at the same time it seems like more of a balancing issue.
The way I envision a point-buy system is that everyone starts as a commoner (because everyone starts as a commoner IRL right?) and you have poor BAB, poor saves, d6, no magic, etc. Then you buy what you want--you don't "give" anything up, you literally start with nothing.
I agree that the system would be crazy hard to balance, but I think once it WAS balanced then it would be an easy thing to maintain (add new powers, options, features, etc).
I can dream, can't I?
Oh no! I'm not saying your idea doesn't have merit, my friend.
It was just that there is a dark side to it to be exploited by those that can. But theres no real way to RAW that out of ANY game system.
No, no that does seem pretty broken... but at the same time it seems like more of a balancing issue.The way I envision a point-buy system is that everyone starts as a commoner (because everyone starts as a commoner IRL right?) and you have poor BAB, poor saves, d6, no magic, etc. Then you buy what you want--you don't "give" anything up, you literally start with nothing.
I agree that the system would be crazy hard to balance, but I think once it WAS balanced then it would be an easy thing to maintain (add new powers, options, features, etc).
I can dream, can't I?
I think the example cited is greatly exaggerated to make a point... that if you have unbalanced rules, poorly chosen costs, and munchkin players the subsystem will have issues. And I admit that even if you have any one of those you'll have issues, although usually not as extreme.
Anyway, someone elsewhere did point me to two d20/3.5 point buy system books: Complete Control and Buy the Numbers.
But as mentioned above, these things could be abused. And they might not be balanced from the get-go. But I'm going to look at them and press forward with my idea. My blog post up above has been updated with a few more core classes' class ability groups broken up and given initial, stab-in-the-dark costs.
I think any GM using anything like this would have to reserve the right to sanity check it for abuse. For example, one shouldn't be able to pick a number of abilities that all kick in at first level. My idea of peeling out a set of related abilities will hopefully minimize the ability to min/max while still allowing a a character to be a good blend of two classes.
That wasn't an exaggeration. That character was made and played under those rules in that book. <shiver>
|
|
You don't need as much Int as the Wizard does which can help the ability budget. The Magus is a hybrid character type he's going to have to spread himself out.The problem is the Magus. Is you need Str Dex Con as well as Int.
With the Wizard all you need. Is Int and Con.
That is the point. You have to spread you self out. That is why you have low spell DC's. There is not realy a good way to make a hybrid character. If you mixing abilitys that blend well to gether you can make the character work. If you are mixing abilitys that don't blend well. It dose not mater how powerfull the class looks on paper. They will be under powered.
That is the point. You have to spread you self out. That is why you have low spell DC's. There is not realy a good way to make a hybrid character. If you mixing abilitys that blend well to gether you can make the character work. If you are mixing abilitys that don't blend well. It dose not mater how powerfull the class looks on paper. They will be under powered.You don't need as much Int as the Wizard does which can help the ability budget. The Magus is a hybrid character type he's going to have to spread himself out.The problem is the Magus. Is you need Str Dex Con as well as Int.
With the Wizard all you need. Is Int and Con.
I had a big long post written but it got eaten by the server and going "back" didn't let me retrieve it. So I think here were the highlights:
-You shouldn't be much above average at anything if you try to have many varying abilities. See the old bard core class.-So this idea is to let you dump a couple of related sets of abilities for a couple of others from another class.
-Doing so allows you to not be spread too thin, but still have the aspects of two or more classes that you want most.
-In this system, a multiclass (maybe I should say blended class) spellcaster will usually be comparable to any other spellcaster because his spell abilities won't be any different if you want to keep them in the blended class. If you want to make a cleric/wizard blend you may have to limit one or the other (probably to a few schools/domains) because there is no way to strip away enough from a wizard to give full cleric spells and vice versa. But if you have two high ability scores you can put one in Int and one in Wis. If you only have one high score, you have to decide what you want to be better at. But that problem exists already when multiclassing and even when single-classed (does your fighter want to be best at melee/damage (Str) ranged/AC (Dex) or hp (Con)?)
-However, the problem this solves when compared to normal multiclassing is that one may create a blended class that matches a player/GM's concept (say a Druid/Ranger) that can still cast spells just as well as a regular Druid (because you can choose to drop things other than the Druid's core spellcasting in favor of a set or two of related abilities from the ranger.) But in normal multiclassing a Ranger5/Druid5 would only be casting 3rd level spells while a full 10th level Druid would be casting 5th level spells. Even if you uncap the damage limits and base caster level on overall level, you don't have the variety of spells and you still lose some power. Further, you may have just made it more powerful overall than non-multiclassed characters.
Actually, back in 3.5 I stumbled across a system like this. The way it worked was that all abilities cost x4 during levels 1-5, x2 for levels 6-10, and x1 for 11-20. That way the creator HAD to spread out all the goodies to higher levels, and most of the more powerful abilities ended up in higher levels (because they were more expensive), or end up spending all of their points very quickly.
I don't remember where I got the document (or if I still have it) but I have a few of the classes I made with it.
Let's see, we have:
Blackhand (Divine Assassin with Smite Evil, Sneak Attack, and Favored Enemy)
Combat Rogue (A Fighter who gets Sneak attack dice every 2 levels instead of bonus feats)
Balance Bringer (divine spontanous caster with limited spell list (abjuration and evocation Sor/Wiz list only) and the ability to Channel both positive and negative energy)
and a Monk variant the name of which I can't remember that gains a 4 level spell progression.
That said, Blackhand was fairly broken, the Monk thing was severely underpowered, and the other two were just about the right balance of neat but not too powerful.
Overall, it was a neat method, but I prefer using alternative class features and/or standard multiclassing. Unless you have something very VERY specific you want to play, it's just easier. (and, to be fair, the Black Hand and Balance Bringer were VERY specific ideas that were all but impossible to create any other way)
Somebody should search rynjin's threads. He made a system for this.
...Yeah, that does get really close to what I'm describing although many archetypes don't exist. For example the Fighter has an archer type, crossbowman, weapon master, etc., but I didn't see something that is a Fighter/Rogue blend. And the Cleric section (unless I missed a page) was all about subdomains, so there were not Cleric/other class blends. So building new archetypes is one options. I saw a site that has consolidated some fan-made versions. Or my idea of peeling away a set of related class abilities from a class and switching them for a set of related abilities from another class (and maybe changing HD, skill points, etc to match the concept and for balance) is another idea.
I still like my idea, but I can see how archetypes are useful and close to it.
We've been blending classes together by "peeling away a set of related class abilities from a class and switching them for a set of related abilities from another class (and maybe changing HD, skill points, etc to match the concept and for balance)" is what we've been doing HERE for the last 3+ years. We call them Multiclass Archetypes. We even have our 5th working thread HERE where one can come and present their concept and we help them create it. Come check it out and see if it's what you're looking for.
Yeah, checking out the MCAs is an idea; or you could check out Super Genius Games "Talented" line of products that takes evey ability of a class and all its archetypes and lets you mix and match them to your heart's content.
Or you may be interested in THIS Character Construction Engine - it's D20, but still might help you...
Somebody should search rynjin's threads. He made a system for this.
I've been trying to get my head around a similar system for years (since D&D V.3.5, actually). The prob lem is that not all classes are equal: at first level. a wizard can't do much, but he perseveres in the hope of getting better spells at higher levels. A fighter, OTOH rocks at 1st level and gradually falls behind other classes as they gain in power.
How do you reflect this with a point buy system? Unless you buy a cluster of abilities (like arcane spells, higher hit points, better BAB, martial weapons) that cross all 20 levels, but that causes problems with welding different clusters together for multiclassing.
The best solution I have seen is the MCA threads as mentioned by Elghinn Lightbringer (and others). This can give you the flavour of multiclassing without the severe penalties of multiclassing (lower spell progression, delayed access to key abilities, etc.). I cannot recommend it highly enough.