|
I was looking at my old 1st ed books and the multi class combinations. The Elven F/Mu/Th was a fun one. The question is whether we could make one in Pathfinder that would also be useful? Would combining eldritch knight and arcane trickster make a viable character?
Fighter 1
Wizard 5
Rogue 3
Then Eldritch knight and Arcane trickster alternating?
Start with Magus and Rogue? Then Arcane trickster and magus alternating?
Is there a better way?
Most of the reasons (to me) to go into arcane trickster is the abilities you get later in the class. I can't see dipping it working well in my opinion.
If I was going to do something like this I would consider bard -- either arcane duelist or sandman, and possibly using arcane archer to qualify for eldritch knight.
If you do sandman bard you can reduce the levels of rogue you need to 1, taking the two levels of arcane archer you need for imbue arrow and then you can go into eldritch knight at your leisure.
Other thoughts would be to use wizard and vivisectionist (since that way you'll be able to use just about any spell trigger item you want to) to get into arcane trickster.
I would NOT do it the way the OP suggested.
Try Magus, Vivesectionist, or Arcane Duellist as the base, and maybe dip a level or two to pick up what you feel you need.
Remember, back in the day, you advanced in all three classes simultaneously. It's not like that anymore, and you don't want to end up at 12th level with a wizard 4/fighter 4/rogue 4. You just won't compete with the rest of the party.
Most of what you want can be done with skill and feat choices.
1-2E multiclassing is closer to gestlt then anything IIRC.
It really depends on what you actually want your character to be able to do. Something that may come close to simulating what you want is a Bard with the Archaeologist archetype (from UC), and the Regional Trait Vagabond Child (choose Disable Device, from APG). It simulates all three while still being a single class (almost always the best choice in Pathfinder).
Edit: However, you won't get Weapon Training (or Specialization), real offensive Wizard spells, nor will you get Sneak Attack.
|
|
1-2E multiclassing is closer to gestlt then anything IIRC.
At first level...yes. Then unless you were a (something)/thief you usually got outclassed very quickly. Sure you could do a lot but you didn't have a lot of hit points and leveling was rare. So it was best in groups were levels stayed low or the racial level caps were enforced.
Fighter 1
Wizard 5
Rogue 3Then Eldritch knight and Arcane trickster alternating?
Weak. The only way to emulate it is gestalt, which still doesn't cut it because you only get 2 classes.
Then again, you're not 3 levels behind the single-classed players, either, with pathetic hit points.
Back in the day you could be semi useful as rogue advanced much faster than the other classes. Usually wizard would be the lowest level in that combination. You would get something like F5/Mu4/Th 6.
Not quite. Look at your books. From 4-9th level the mage actually advances faster then any other class, because his xp requirements/level do NOT double.
F/MU's ended up 4/7, 5/8, and 6/9, 7/10 because of the skewed xp tables.
The rogue level was usually one level behind the wizard level. The fighter level lagged, but his main contribution was the good THACO.
Remember, in 1E Rogues had what we'd call Poor BAB, advancing at 1/2. Advancing at 3/4 and with a d8 is basically a fighter/thief right there.
Just advance Rogue with a focus on being able to hit in combat, MAYBE one level of Fighter, and you should be fine.
==Aelryinth
fighter... magic user... thief...
Yep. Definitely an Archaeologist.
I agree with a number of others to go bard if it suits the concept.
The only downside is the bard's spell list doesn't have as much direct combative magic as the wizard, though I think it's fine for a caster-warrior combo, since it's got a lot of good buffs and debuffs.
Exactly how you'd do it would depend more specifically on your character concept.
If you wanted to really focus on arcane warrior with a good skill set, I'd do single-class arcane duelist. Only maybe a dip into a few levels of fighter (up to 3 for armor training) for a BAB and feat boost, if that seemed important to the build.
If you wanted to add a few rogue-like abilities and interesting casting abilities, but also wanted to boost combat, maybe fighter/bard-sandman or fighter/bard-archaeologist (this last also removes performance if you don't like the performance flavor). (And as I'm ninja'ed by squawk--yeah, straight archeologist would also work.)
Magician is a more wizard-like bard if you wanted some more arcane spells but still wanted to stick to the bard idea.
But if you really wanted to be "pure" and use only the most direct analogues of the AD&D classes, I would pick whether you wanted to be more sneaky/skillmonkey or more fighty. For the former, something like Fighter 1/Rogue 3/Wizard 6/Arcane Trickster 10; this would probably focus on a sneak attack spellcaster, with that fighter level giving you more versatility in weapons you can use and a bab boost and feat to help you land those hits however you like. Plus medium armor proficiency could make you an Arcane Trickster in mithral breastplate (which is treated as light) with arcane armor training to lower chance of spell failure.
For the latter Rogue 1/Fighter 1/Wizard 8/Eldritch Knight 10. Basically an Eldritch Knight with more class skills (and a die of sneak attack, which is always nice, even if it isn't huge).
I would note that these last two builds would take awhile to really feel like they were getting going--at high level, they'd actually both be really fun and interesting to play and be really good at what you wanted them to do. At low level it might feel less so. If you were to play the concept in a campaign that started at 1st level and might be slow to advance, I'd probably go back to bard (with additions of fighter levels as needed) unless you (and your fellow players) feel patient.
While you could also consider magus, I think if you're looking at d8/3/4 BAB classes that cast spells, you're better off going back to bard since the bard has more skills, which is what I'd think you want, in part, out of the concept. And I'm not sure how Rogue/Magus would synergize if at all.
You are missing the point. Back in the day, ONLY rogues could climb walls, etc. Now you can easily have a wizard with ranks in climb. Or perception. Or anything.
So triple classing doesn't help you. It WILL hurt. You'll be a lot of fun at 2nd level, but horribly weak at 8th. I built a wizard/rogue, and that was my experience.
You're not the first person to think of this idea, btw.
fighter 1 for what? the feat, or the proficiencies?
Also, on the Archaeologist front, Extra Performance is a good feat, as it gives you 6 extra rounds of the Archaeologist's Luck ability (which doesn't increase in rounds/day like the normal performance ability).
I think Magus Rogue is really the way to go or 4 levels of fighter, 3 levels of rogue, 3 levels of wizard and 10 levels of arcane trickester. That gives you weapon specialization, the prerequisites for trickster and all 10 levels of the prestiege. The second option assumes you will still be playing the character at level 20.
