Multi-classing is generally a bad idea in Pathfinder, because you lose a lot when you do. (Full casters suffer a lot, you miss the capstone ability and other high end abilities of each class)
So here's my potential solution: For every level you take in two different base classes, (not Prestige Classes) you may take a gestalt level of those classes. Once you take a gestalt level, that level in a base class can't be used as a prerequisite for any other gestalt combination. (i.e. You can't be a Ranger 1/Fighter 1/Rogue 1 and then take a gestalt of Ranger/Fighter 1, Ranger/Rogue 1, and Fighter/Rogue 1. That's just stupid.)
I also make use of fractional Saves and BAB. (For example: a Rogue has 1 1/2 BAB and a 2/3 Will Save at 2nd level; add BAB and Saves together from each class and always round down.)
Here are some examples of my weird multiclassing in action:
Slightly optimal Fighter/Rogue mix
1. Fighter 1
2. Rogue 1
3. Fighter/Rogue 1
4. Fighter 2
5. Rogue 2
6. Fighter/Rogue 2
7. Fighter 3
8. Rogue 3
9. Fighter/Rogue 3
As a 9th level character, you'd be a Fighter 3/Rogue 3/Fighter/Rogue 3. You'd have:
BAB: +8/+3
Fort: +6
Reflex: +6
Will: +3
The class abilities of 6th level fighter and 6th level rogue.
This combination is perhaps most worrisome. Melee classes don't increase in power exponentially like casters. This multiclass option may be very strong for the linear growth of classes like these. However, you will fall behind on some of the nice upper level abilities.
Soracle Mystic Theurge
1. Sorcerer 1
2. Oracle 1
3. Sorcerer/Oracle 1
4. Sorcerer 2
5. Oracle 2
6. Sorcerer/Oracle 2
7. Mystic Theurge 1
8. Mystic Theurge 2
9. Mystic Theurge 3
As a 9th level character, you'd be a Sorcerer 2/Oracle 2/Sorcerer/Oracle 2/Mystic Theurge 3.
You'd have:
BAB: +5
Fort: +3
Reflex: +3
Will: +7
The casting ability of 7th level Sorcerer and a 7th level Oracle; the class abilities of a 4th level Sorcerer, a 4th level Oracle, and a 3rd level Mystic Theurge.
This is one of my favorite ways to use this method of multiclassing. Usually, you have to be a 10th level character to cast 3rd level spells as Sorcerer/Oracle; with this, you can cast 3rd level spells by level 8
Terrain Master
1. Guide Ranger 1
2. Druid 1
3. Guide Ranger 1/Druid 1
4. Guide Ranger 2
5. Druid 2
6. Guide Ranger 2/Druid 2
7. Nature Warden 1
8. Nature Warden 2
9. Horizon Walker 1
As a 9th level character, you'd be a Guide Ranger 2/Druid 2/Guide Ranger/Druid 2/Nature Warden 2/Horizon Walker 1.
You'd have:
BAB: +8/+3
Fort: +7
Reflex: +6
Will: +7
The casting ability of a 4th level Ranger and a 5th level Druid; the class abilities of a 4th level Ranger, a 4th level Druid, a 2nd level Nature Warden, and a 1st level Horizon Walker.
This character isn't HOMG optimal, but more in response to a pet peeve of mine. I was thinking of making a character that was a favored terrain specialist, but I found meeting the prerequisites for the prestige classes the normal way was an obnoxious proposition. The build is kind of cool, I guess.
Issues I see right now:
1. Slightly convoluted and harder to keep track of; getting things like saves and BAB may be trickier.
2. Overpowered? This is supposed to strengthen the option of multi-classing, but maybe this goes too far.
I'd love to hear what you guys think. Is this even original?
Multi-classing is generally a bad idea in Pathfinder, because you lose a lot when you do. (Full casters suffer a lot, you miss the capstone ability and other high end abilities of each class)
So here's my potential solution: For every level you take in two different base classes, (not Prestige Classes) you may take a gestalt level of those classes. Once you take a gestalt level, that level in a base class can't be used as a prerequisite for any other gestalt combination. (i.e. You can't be a Ranger 1/Fighter 1/Rogue 1 and then take a gestalt of Ranger/Fighter 1, Ranger/Rogue 1, and Fighter/Rogue 1. That's just stupid.)
I also make use of fractional Saves and BAB. (For example: a Rogue has 1 1/2 BAB and a 2/3 Will Save at 2nd level; add BAB and Saves together from each class and always round down.)
Here are some examples of my weird multiclassing in action:
Slightly optimal Fighter/Rogue mix
1. Fighter 1
2. Rogue 1
3. Fighter/Rogue 1
4. Fighter 2
5. Rogue 2
6. Fighter/Rogue 2
7. Fighter 3
8. Rogue 3
9. Fighter/Rogue 3As a 9th level character, you'd be a Fighter 3/Rogue 3/Fighter/Rogue 3. You'd have:
BAB: +8/+3
Fort: +6
Reflex: +6
Will: +3
The class abilities of 6th level fighter and 6th level rogue.This combination is perhaps most worrisome. Melee classes don't increase in power exponentially like casters. This multiclass option may be very strong for the linear growth of classes like these. However, you will fall behind on some of the nice upper level abilities.
Soracle Mystic Theurge
1. Sorcerer 1
2. Oracle 1
3. Sorcerer/Oracle 1
4. Sorcerer 2
5. Oracle 2
6. Sorcerer/Oracle 2
7. Mystic Theurge 1
8. Mystic Theurge 2
9. Mystic Theurge 3As a 9th level character, you'd be a Sorcerer 2/Oracle 2/Sorcerer/Oracle 2/Mystic Theurge 3.
You'd have:
BAB: +5
Fort: +3
Reflex: +3
Will: +7
The casting ability of 7th level Sorcerer and a 7th level Oracle; the class abilities of a 4th level Sorcerer, a 4th level Oracle, and a 3rd...
As a huge fan of multiclassing and gestalt... I love it. I might suggest a gestalt variant for the mixed levels where you take the average of the HD, BAB, Save bonuses, and skill ranks (instead of always taking the better of the two). It makes things a bit harder to keep track of, but could help balance it. (Frex, fighter/rogue would get .875 BAB per level compared to rogue's .75 and fighter's 1, and 5 skill ranks per level, right between rogue's 8 and fighter's 2.)
Oh, the other thing about this is that it makes prestige classes even more lackluster than they already are. Because you can't combine them with anything, doing the [Class A/Class B/Class A+B] thing is usually going to be more attractive than [PrC A/PrC A/PrC A].
As a huge fan of multiclassing and gestalt... I love it. I might suggest a gestalt variant for the mixed levels where you take the average of the HD, BAB, Save bonuses, and skill ranks (instead of always taking the better of the two). It makes things a bit harder to keep track of, but could help balance it. (Frex, fighter/rogue would get .875 BAB per level compared to rogue's .75 and fighter's 1, and 5 skill ranks per level, right between rogue's 8 and fighter's 2.)
Oh, the other thing about this is that it makes prestige classes even more lackluster than they already are. Because you can't combine them with anything, doing the [Class A/Class B/Class A+B] thing is usually going to be more attractive than [PrC A/PrC A/PrC A].
I suppose that would be more balanced; however, that would obviously only increase the headache of attempting to calculate everything, as you said.
Well, I could make exceptions on a case by case basis... Just like Gestalt forbids Mystic Theurge, maybe I could only forbid classes like those. Horizon Walker, for example, would be a safe prestige class for 'Chort multi-classing.'
I would just allow people to get the favored class bonus in two classes and call it a day. I don't think multiclassing is THAT far behind other options for many characters, and the capstone thing only comes into play at 20th anyhow.
You might consider taking a page from 4e's book with the Hybrid classes. Basically, you got half the hit points, half the save bonuses and you chose the major class ability from one half or the other. When you take another level of a hybrid class, you can either select the ability from one of the classes for that level, or a previous ability. You would have to be careful about letting your player cherry-pick abilities, but it shouldn't be too difficult to toss in a "with GM approval" line.
For example, rather than taking your gestalt levels, you'd take hybrid levels. Let's say that you've got your Fighter 1/Rogue 1 and he wants to continue on with those, but doesn't want to sacrifice too much from his fighter abilities (weapon training and qualification for feats) to keep up his sneak attack. So he takes hybrid levels of Fighter and Rogue. Basically, you would use fraction saves and BAB to consider halves, you'd get half the total skill points for each class (1 for fighter and 4 for rogue) and add your INT mod to the total, and you'd select one class to choose the class abilities for.
You'd have to take the lower level abilities before you could take the higher level abilities. Abilities that scale, such as favored enemy bonuses or sneak attack, increase only on levels that you choose to take them. Abilities that are discrete but rely on a unified mechanic, like bardic performances or rage abilities, require taking the low levels before taking the higher level abilities (e.g., you must take Inspire Courage as a bard before taking Inspire Competence). Hybrid levels count as half for the purposes of qualifying for feats/abilities that require levels in a certain class. With spellcasting classes, you may choose to gain +1/2 CL in each hybrid class, or +1 CL in only one of the classes (i.e., a hybrid cleric/wizard can either gain +1/2 CL for both cleric and wizard or may take +1 CL in cleric or wizard.) Spells per day and spells known are considered class features, and you may only choose to gain the abilities of one casting class or the other.
This still encourages single classing (as favored class bonuses only apply to a single class and top end abilities are more or less excluded from hybrid characters), but opens up options for multi-classed characters.
I wanna see a prestige class for every hybrid thats how i would fix it. and then maybe even 3 class hybrids. (however that seems trickier still)
Hmm... Instead, how about a campaign trait that allows you to tap into this multi-classing system?
Trait: Chort Multi-classing (Could use some renaming)
Benefit: Select 2 base classes. You may take a gestalt level with these two classes as you would under Chort Multi-classing rules. You can only take a gestalt level twice.
Campaign Trait: Chort Multi-classing (Fighter/Rogue)
Fighter 1
Rogue 1
Fighter 1/Rogue 1
Fighter 2
Rogue 2
Fighter/Rogue 2
Fighter 3
Fighter 4
Fighter 5
At 9th level, you'd be a Fighter 5/Rogue 2/Fighter/Rogue 2
...this takes care of a number of issues. My multi-classing option seems a bit too powerful in the long run (taking as many as 6 gestalt levels) and seems to get more ridiculous were I to introduce Prestige classes into it. This trait (a minor, but noticeable cost) would do a few different things:
1. You can dabble in a 2nd class at a far lower penalty than you normally would, but at the same time, you don't have the amazing advantage of 6 gestalt levels and you'll feel the pain of falling behind where you would have been had you stuck to one class. (No capstones, later entry to class features)
2. This also greatly enables you to take Prestige Classes such as Mystic Theurge, Battle Herald, Rage Prophet; so on and so forth. These types of prestige classes could use the love.
3. It encourages all prestige class use in general. (Well, hard to say whether or not this is a good thing...) Since you're already multi-classed, never going to reach a capstone, and behind on class features, why not branch out into a Duelist or that oddball campaign specific prestige class?
...and being a campaign trait, it seems like the perfect way for a GM to allow at or disallow it at will.
Oh, the other thing about this is that it makes prestige classes even more lackluster than they already are. Because you can't combine them with anything, doing the [Class A/Class B/Class A+B] thing is usually going to be more attractive than [PrC A/PrC A/PrC A].
Mwahaha! I think my trait is the perfect solution! Since you'll be done "Gestalt-ing" by level 6, [Class A/Class B/Class A+B/Class A/Class B/Class A+B] you'll be inclined and able to take pretty much any prestige class by level 7.
Not too sure about that trait. If you take it, you're effectively a trait behind until 3rd level, which I'm not sure I like, even though it's a small thing.
It's also a little confusing. Make it sound like you can take one gestalt level, but you can take that one level twice. It also refers to the rules in the first post, but it seems to replace them. I think I understand what you mean, going by your example, but I'm not sure you actually say it.
And naturally when I make a post whining about confusing wording, I end up typing "Make it" instead of "It makes it." I'll get my coat.
And naturally when I make a post whining about confusing wording, I end up typing "Make it" instead of "It makes it." I'll get my coat.
lol, I get your point; I somewhat intentionally wrote it imperfectly. To properly explain what the trait does, I would need a much, much larger block of text. I just decided to write out an abridged version that communicates what it would accomplish.
It sounds a bit complicated for my taste. A simpler solution that has been bandied about is that if you have N levels in a given class and M levels in other classes, then you get the class abilities of a level N + M/2 character (maximum 1.5*N).
So a fighter 6/rogue 4 would have the abilities of an 8th level fighter and a 6th level rogue.
It sounds a bit complicated for my taste. A simpler solution that has been bandied about is that if you have N levels in a given class and M levels in other classes, then you get the class abilities of a level N + M/2 character (maximum 1.5*N).
So a fighter 6/rogue 4 would have the abilities of an 8th level fighter and a 6th level rogue.
Oooh I like this, it solves the issue of gestalt stats being ridiculous.
What would you think of letting multiclassers take the abilities of another class from higher up the chain?
For example, lets say I'm a 6th level fighter and I want to take my 7th level as a wizard.
Instead of getting first level wizard abilities, I get abilities for my new class level, minus 2.
So lets say, and I don't know off hand, that a 5th level wizard gets 1 3rd level spell, 1 first level spell, a wizard feat, 2 HP, and a +1 will save. That's what the fighter would get. If the fighter takes a 2nd level of wizard, he would get the 6th level abilities.
How would you handle it if you were to take more fighter levels later on?
I think that fighter's BAB would be (7+1.5=8.5=) 8, which is only one higher than an L10 magus (7.5=) 7.
I guess you would either take the next level available, or 2 less than ECL, whichever is higher.
So, this build...
L1. Monk 1
L2. Monk 2
L3. Cleric 1
L4. Fighter 2
L5. Rogue 3
L6. Monk 4
L7. Fighter 5
Would have, at level 7:
HP d8+d8+d8+d10+d8+d8+d10+7(con mod)
BAB 5
[how would saves work?]
Flurry of Blows +4/+4 (using monk level as bab)
Improved Unarmed Strike (1d8 damage)
2 bonus monk feats
2 L1 domain-granted powers
L1 cleric spellcasting
Channel Energy 3+cha mod/day, 1d6
1 bonus fighter feat
Bravery +1
Sneak Attack +1d6
Trap Sense +1
Weapon Training 1
Slow fall 20 ft.
Ki pool (2 points + Wis mod, magic strikes)
Evasion (but not in armor)
Monk AC bonus +2+Wis mod (but not in armor)
Is this broken?
===
How do we calculate effects based on class level - is your class level equal to your highest level in the class, or the number of times you've taken the class? I.E. is the monk's BAB for flurry of blows +4 or +3 in the above example? And similarly for caster level—should the L10 Fighter/Wizard posited above be CL 7... or 3?
I don't know, I don't think so. It is a little cheesy that he has Domain powers, but a 7th level wizard or fighter would beat the tar out of him.I think the more cheesy part would be every 19th level character taking wizard or cleric for their 20th level so they can cast Wish.
Saving throws would be like BAB - it goes up if that class gained a bonus on that level.
I'm sure its abusable, but if the game is balanced, always getting powers from two levels ago probably won't add up to enough to be broken.
As far as the class level thing, I don't know. Maybe characters that have odd levels are ECL -2 for everything like that.
Interesting. Yeah the assortment of abilities I threw up there is cheesy but not really optimal. Take a look at this, though...
L20 rogue; 15 bab; sneak attack 10d6 = 35 damage on average
Sneak attacking with short sword, ignoring stats and enhancement bonuses:
So: +15 to hit, 1d6+35
Compare to:
L1-6 rogue, L5 fighter, L7-9 rogue, L9 fighter, etc, L10-12 rogue, L13 fighter, L13-15 rogue, L17-18 fighter.
17 bab; sneak attack 6d6 = 21 damage on average, weapon training 4, weapon specialization
Sneak attacking with short sword, ignoring stats and enhancement bonuses:
So: +21 to hit, 1d6+27
The second case would still have access to at least 1 advanced rogue sneak attack talent, and would have access to better weapons. Hm. And the bonus to attack would make room for a pretty hefty power attack (-5 ATK +10 DMG, +15 if your fighter decides to 2H his sneak attack.... leaving you with +16 to hit, 1d6+42... more attack and more damage than the pure rogue version). And yeah I know combat isn't everything, and the fighter levels lose skill ranks and two rogue talents, as well as 5 levels of improved uncanny dodge, but...
Multi-classing gives you class abilities and spells equal to half your lowest level class. This helps avoid level dipping for max benefits.
samples:
A fighter 6 Wizard 6 would get fighter feats and abilities as a 9th lvl fighter and spells and abilities as a 9th level wizard.
A fighter 4 rogue 4 wizard 4 would get level 6 abilities in each class and at first glance seems a fairly capable character.
a fighter 10 wizard 2, would cast as a 3rd level wizard and function as an 11th level fighter, which seems fairly reasonable.
fighter 4 cleric 8, casts like and channels like a 10th level cleric, has feats and abilities of a 6th level fighter.
-
this shouldnt be combined with prc ofcourse, but seems to work fine otherwise, but maybe I am missing something huge.... opinions ?
It sounds a bit complicated for my taste. A simpler solution that has been bandied about is that if you have N levels in a given class and M levels in other classes, then you get the class abilities of a level N + M/2 character (maximum 1.5*N).
So a fighter 6/rogue 4 would have the abilities of an 8th level fighter and a 6th level rogue.
Eh, I kind of like the simplicity of your system, but it has some issues:
1. Scaling. As a 3rd level character, you could be a wizard 2, cleric 1. As soon as you hit 4th level and take a 2nd level of cleric, you'll be effectively a wizard 3 cleric 3. The power jump seems a bit much and your character will have erratic bursts of effectiveness.
When you're an 11th level Fighter/Wizard, character you're could be a fighter 8/wizard 7 in terms of class abilities. When you take the next level of wizard, you'll be a fighter 9/wizard 9.
2. Overpowered? By level 20, you'll be gaining an additional 10 levels of class abilities as compared to my system (if fully implemented; not using the trait) which gives 6 levels. To break it down, my system grants you a bonus class level at every 3rd level. This system grants you 2 bonus class levels at every 4th level.
As shown under my first example, Cleric 2/Wizard 2 is effectively Cleric 3/Wizard 3. With that, you can enter the Mystic Theurge class at 5th level. Also, by level 20, you could be a 17th level wizard and a 17th level cleric. (9th level spells on both sides.)
Anywho, this system could work too, and granted, it would be much simpler, I just have a few qualms with it. ...as apparently many have qualms with mine. Meh, can't win 'em all. *le sigh*
Anywho, this system could work too, and granted, it would be much simpler, I just have a few qualms with it. ...as apparently many have qualms with mine. Meh, can't win 'em all. *le sigh*
Well, it's a tricky issue...
I think we all want to find something that 'just' works. Don't give up!
I guess my most preferred the idea of class abilities being directly modular: you can always give up something you get for something someone else got two levels ago.
I think for something like this, we really need to divide up all abilities by progression, and within that, by power (so that we can equate something like a monk's flurry of blows to "3 bonus combat feats [at levels 1, 8, 15] and 1 strong ability at first level"), and then figure out what's worth what in terms of power, with an eye for unexpected synergies.
And then come up with a guide that describes under what circumstances you can trade out one ability for another, and if the abilities aren't static, how much of one ability is worth how much of the other.
... kind of like what the http://www.d20openrpg.com/ folks are doing? I dunno.
Until then, we will have players like one of mine who wrote up a class that was basically a rogue with fighter BAB, Fighter Bonus Feats, Rogue SA, and 6 skill points per level (;
Victoly! No, seriously, doing stuff like that is great -- it would just be waaaay easier if there were an agreed-upon system everyone could look to within the PFRPG rules.
I think it is overpowered and mostly not needed. Sure casters look really good on paper, but in actual game play it does not normally pan out that way.
Are you having real game issues at the table? If so I would bring those up. There is normally an easier solution than creating a new sub-system.
If you are not having issues at the table then I say let the game continue as it is.
So:
Your player wants to write up a Lawful Good Rogue that can channel like a cleric. His concept is a devout servant of the church with true faith and a desire to help people and slay evil. He's "the underhand" of the church.
How do you handle it? Say no? Trade an ability? Tell him to play a paladin or take levels of cleric?
Is that for me?
As shown under my first example, Cleric 2/Wizard 2 is effectively Cleric 3/Wizard 3. With that, you can enter the Mystic Theurge class at 5th level. Also, by level 20, you could be a 17th level wizard and a 17th level cleric. (9th level spells on both sides.)
Well, I didn't come up with the system so I can't speak to the original author's intent, but I imagine it's meant to replace double progression classes like Mystic Theurge.
So:
Your player wants to write up a Lawful Good Rogue that can channel like a cleric. His concept is a devout servant of the church with true faith and a desire to help people and slay evil. He's "the underhand" of the church.
How do you handle it? Say no? Trade an ability? Tell him to play a paladin or take levels of cleric?
Inquisitor?
Anyone.Is that for me?So:
Your player wants to write up a Lawful Good Rogue that can channel like a cleric. His concept is a devout servant of the church with true faith and a desire to help people and slay evil. He's "the underhand" of the church.
How do you handle it? Say no? Trade an ability? Tell him to play a paladin or take levels of cleric?
There is a 3.5 PrC that lets you combine cleric and rogue levels. I could update that. Inquisitors can't channel so that would be out.
I might also help make a homebrew class that has some of the abilities of both classes. I am more than willing to work with players on concepts if the game does not have the option.