There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
As to the restriction: It's for balance purposes. The hybrid classes tend to be potent in their own right, and have abilities that by RAW would stack with the abilities from their origin classes to be too potent. There's also certain abilities, feats, and items that count the hybrid class as the origin class for determining final level - for example, the Monk's Robe adds 5 to your effective Monk level, and a Brawler counts as both a Monk and a Fighter for such an item; therefore, a Brawler\Monk cross-class would effectively get a double-dip from the item and be treated as his Monk +5 and his Brawler +5.
first of all, you just compared a level 40 character to a level 20 character.....
secondly, you cant take a parent class in addition to its child/hybrid class because the idea behind that hybrids is to move away from cross classing. Pathfinder as a game was build behind the idea that cross-classing was bad and thus introduced class capstones. the Hybrids are a way of cross-classing without giving up capstones because it is understood that some people WANT to do more than just what a single class can offer.
third - barring class archetypes there should be no reason to take a parent class in addition to a hybrid. you would effectively be double tapping on half of your class skills. so taking levels in arcanist AND wizard would do nothing for you except decrease your overall ability to cast spells since neither one has the same class spells as the other so for your example your highest spell usable would be a lvl6 spell at lvl20. this is a gimp instead of a boon. you would end up with more spell slots, sure, but would have a much lower caster level for each class than the encounters you could be facing would require you to need in order to deal with them. so you'd only have a CL of 11 and CL of 9 for any given spell you had ready, and then would by trying to cast against something with SR 25+ which makes getting over it pretty hard. also, almost nothing would ever fail a save against you.
the only hybrid classes that benefit from taking levels in their parent classes are those that have rogue or fighter as a parent because sneak attack stacks through all classes that grant it and fighters extra feats are never a bad thing for anyone. other then those two, its never a positive to cross-class into a parent.
all of this is assuming that you dont want something from an archetype, but those SHOULD be melded into the final draft of the UCG when it is published. If not, then the community is going to be in an uproar about not being able to get their favorite archetypes with their hybrids.
There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
The Core Rulebook disagrees with you:
To gain a level beyond 20th, a character must double the experience points needed to achieve the previous level. Thus, assuming the medium XP progression, a 20th-level character needs 2,100,000 XP to become 21st level, since he needed 1,050,000 XP to reach 20th level from 19th. He'd then need 4,200,000 XP to reach 22nd level, 8,400,000 XP to reach 23rd, and so on.Anyways, this isn't really a rules question...
Yay, I achieved 21st level because I was able to add on enough XP to do so! Wait - what abilities do I get? Shouldn't I get another level of spells now? Where are they?
:P The epic handbooks in 3.x existed for a reason.
As to this not being a rules question - don't know that I agree. There's a rule in the ACG that states those ACG classes can't be cross-classed with their origin classes. I think it's fair to ask, "Why?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder why they didn't just patch their awful multiclassing ...
I wonder why they didn't just patch their awful multiclassing ...
Because as i stated before they design behind pathfinder was to get away from cross classing as was done in 3.x. they don't want you to cross class in this game. To make people happy who WANT to, they made hybrid classes so you don't HAVE to cross class...
|
I just spotted the rule that if you take a hybrid class you can never take any levels in either of its alternates. I'm just wondering what the reasoning behind that
The idea of Alternate Classes predates the Advanced Class Guide and was first described in Ultimate Combat:
Alternate classes are standalone classes whose basic ideas are very close to established base classes, yet whose required alterations would be too expansive for an archetype. An alternate class operates exactly as a base class, save that a character who takes a level in an alternate class can never take a level in its associated class—a samurai cannot also be a cavalier, and vice versa.
The first three Alternate Classes were (and technically still are) Ninja, Samurai, and Antipaladin.
The Advanced Class Guide is simply offering more of them.
The Advanced classes aren't Alternate classes though.
They (mistakenly, IMO) have some of the same design philosophy, but they are not Alternate classes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder why they didn't just patch their awful multiclassing ...Because as i stated before they design behind pathfinder was to get away from cross classing as was done in 3.x. they don't want you to cross class in this game. To make people happy who WANT to, they made hybrid classes so you don't HAVE to cross class...
And making a new hybrid class for every combo is an improvement? Sorry, not seeing it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People who hate multiclassing could always play a game that largely eliminated multiclassing, like 4e.
Or, they could simply choose not to multiclass, while letting those who like multiclassing do it.
There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
The Core Rulebook disagrees with you:
To gain a level beyond 20th, a character must double the experience points needed to achieve the previous level. Thus, assuming the medium XP progression, a 20th-level character needs 2,100,000 XP to become 21st level, since he needed 1,050,000 XP to reach 20th level from 19th. He'd then need 4,200,000 XP to reach 22nd level, 8,400,000 XP to reach 23rd, and so on.Anyways, this isn't really a rules question...
That is general advice. The point being made is that improving each class specifically has no rules.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
The Core Rulebook disagrees with you:
To gain a level beyond 20th, a character must double the experience points needed to achieve the previous level. Thus, assuming the medium XP progression, a 20th-level character needs 2,100,000 XP to become 21st level, since he needed 1,050,000 XP to reach 20th level from 19th. He'd then need 4,200,000 XP to reach 22nd level, 8,400,000 XP to reach 23rd, and so on.Anyways, this isn't really a rules question...Yay, I achieved 21st level because I was able to add on enough XP to do so! Wait - what abilities do I get? Shouldn't I get another level of spells now? Where are they?
Gee, maybe it would be helpful to continue reading down the exact same page:
Scaling Powers
..
Maybe it would be better to read what is printed ahead of parts you cited:
Beyond 20th Level
Although Classes doesn't describe what happens after 20th level, this isn't to say that there are no resources available to you should you wish to continue your campaign on to 21st level and beyond. Rules for epic-level play like this exist in numerous products that are compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, although in many cases these alternative rules can provide unanticipated problems. For example, if your campaign world is populated by creatures and villains who, at the upper limit of power, can challenge a 20th-level character, where will epic-level PCs go for challenges? You might be looking at creating an entirely new campaign setting, one set on different planes, planets, or dimensions from the one where your players spent their first 20 levels, and that's a lot of work.
Paizo Publishing may eventually publish rules to take your game into these epic realms, but if you can't wait and would rather not use existing open content rules for epic-level play, you can use the following brief guidelines to continue beyond 20th level. Note that these guidelines aren't robust enough to keep the game vibrant and interesting on their own for much longer past 20th level, but they should do in a pinch for a campaign that needs, say, 22 or 23 experience levels to wrap up. Likewise, you can use these rules to create super-powerful NPCs for 20th-level characters to face.
So you are taking some stop gap guidelines as as "the rules to play a 40th level character".
well lets say that they dont incorporate every current archetype into the archetypes the add into the ACG, then people would start to do the following: Brawler 6/Master of Many Styles 3/Blood Rager 4/Barbarian 7....see where this can become far too OP? the Brawler shouldn't be able to take levels in anything that has monk or fighter levels in order to gain something he was intentionally meant NOT to have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
well lets say that they dont incorporate every current archetype into the archetypes the add into the ACG, then people would start to do the following: Brawler 6/Master of Many Styles 3/Blood Rager 4/Barbarian 7....see where this can become far too OP? the Brawler shouldn't be able to take levels in anything that has monk or fighter levels in order to gain something he was intentionally meant NOT to have.
Errr...how is that OP again?
He gets: Some neat styles, a little bit of Rage and Blood Rage...and that's it.
He loses progression on ALL of those class abilities (besides MoMS) that makes those powerful in the first place.
Blood Ragers only become good at 7th at the earliest (when the second Bloodline power comes in, since the first is rarely worthwhile), so you've become a gimped Barbarian at that point.
The Barbarian levels are good...but that's because BARBARIANS are good. And nothing is stopping the Brawler from taking levels in Barbarian in the first place.
And said Brawler/MoMS/Barbarian won't be nearly as powerful as an equivalent Brawler (Fighter archetype)/MoMS/Barbarian, which is ALREADY A PERFECTLY LEGAL COMBO, and it's not all that powerful anyway.
Liam I don't think it is a problem for every class, but I think they are putting a preemptive measure in place to stop possible abuses so they don't have to look at each class individually and issue errata later on.
That however is just a guess. :)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem they were thinking of is more along the lines of classes that give the same ability (or some similar enough to count) at 1st level, taking two single dips for a disproportionate buff. I.e.; Bloodrager 1, Barbarian 1 for significantly more Rage rounds than either a Bloodrager 2 or Barbarian 2. Or classes that give a few bonus feats at the start to stack a large number of extra feats, it tends to be the Advanced classes and their bases which can stack like this, and thus the prohibition.
|
|
There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
The Core Rulebook disagrees with you:
To gain a level beyond 20th, a character must double the experience points needed to achieve the previous level. Thus, assuming the medium XP progression, a 20th-level character needs 2,100,000 XP to become 21st level, since he needed 1,050,000 XP to reach 20th level from 19th. He'd then need 4,200,000 XP to reach 22nd level, 8,400,000 XP to reach 23rd, and so on.Anyways, this isn't really a rules question...Yay, I achieved 21st level because I was able to add on enough XP to do so! Wait - what abilities do I get? Shouldn't I get another level of spells now? Where are they?
Gee, maybe it would be helpful to continue reading down the exact same page:
...Scaling Powers
Hit dice, base attack bonuses, and saving throws continue to increase at the same rate beyond 20th level, as appropriate for the class in question. Note that no character can have more than 4 attacks based on its base attack bonus. Note also that, before long, the difference between good saving throws and poor saving throws becomes awkwardly large—the further you get from 20th level, the more noticeable this difference grows, and for high-level characters, bolstering their poor saving throws should become increasingly important. Class abilities that have a set, increasing rate, such as a barbarian's damage reduction, a fighter's bonus feats and weapon training, a paladin's smite evil, or a rogue's sneak attack continue to progress at the appropriate rate.
SpellsA spellcaster's caster level continues to increase by one for each level beyond 20th level. Every odd-numbered level, a spellcaster gains access to a new level of spell one above his previous
And this is relevant to this thread how?
I actually have to change my opinion on something: 137ben is correct hat this isn't really a rules question at this point. The rule here is clear: You can't cross-class one of the ACG classes with either of its parent classes, and there's no question about that.
The "why" behind it really isn't a rules question. I'm certain that there are reasons for it, and a few of them have been provided in the thread - stacking class abilities shared between the two classes for greater effect, gaining "double dips" on items that increase your effective level for class abilities, etc. - but that really falls more under general discussion than a rules question.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem they were thinking of is more along the lines of classes that give the same ability (or some similar enough to count) at 1st level, taking two single dips for a disproportionate buff. I.e.; Bloodrager 1, Barbarian 1 for significantly more Rage rounds than either a Bloodrager 2 or Barbarian 2.
At which point you've made a Barbarian with reduced/aborted rage Power progression and a Bloodrager with reduced/aborted Bloodline progression.
What's the problem again?
Or classes that give a few bonus feats at the start to stack a large number of extra feats, it tends to be the Advanced classes and their bases which can stack like this, and thus the prohibition.
So lessee what we can accomplish just with Core classes.
2 levels of Fighter. 2 levels of Monk. 2 levels of Ranger. Human.
6th level.
Standard Feats at 1/3/5, check. Bonus Feat from Human, check. Bonus Feats from level 1 and 2 of Fighter, check. Bonus Feats from level 1 and 2 of Monk, check. Bonus Feat from level 2 of Ranger, check.
Level 6, with 9 Feats. All possible via core options.
If a person wants a lot of Feats, they can get them regardless. The Advanced classes are not going to change this.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish they had a Hybrid class with the Paladin as part of the combo.
I really don't even care what they mixed it with.
If it somehow allowed anything beyond LG(or CE), I would likely be ecstatic.
I really like many of the Paladin mechanics, but extremely limited in player concept options.
|
|
I wish they had a Hybrid class with the Paladin as part of the combo.
I really don't even care what they mixed it with.
If it somehow allowed anything beyond LG(or CE), I would likely be ecstatic.
I really like many of the Paladin mechanics, but extremely limited in player concept options.
Absolutely this.
The Warpriest is sorta, kinda a halfhearted version ish... but a proper Paladin/Hybrid style class without alignment restrictions (and balanced around that if you believe the code is part of the class balance) would be amazing.
I wonder why they didn't just patch their awful multiclassing ...Because as i stated before they design behind pathfinder was to get away from cross classing as was done in 3.x. they don't want you to cross class in this game. To make people happy who WANT to, they made hybrid classes so you don't HAVE to cross class...
Yet in the same book they introduced a class that will be played as a 1 level splash as often as it is played. . .I really thought we learned that three-ish feats in one level was bad with 3.0 ranger, but I will gladly write Warpriest 1 down all day long with no intention of ever going to warpriest 2.
|
|
And this is relevant to this thread how?There are no explicit rules in Pathfinder for exceeding 20th level. So you could be a 10th Wizard\10th Sorcerer, but until\unless the epic book comes out being a 20th Wizard\Xth Anything is a house rule.
The Core Rulebook disagrees with you:
To gain a level beyond 20th, a character must double the experience points needed to achieve the previous level. Thus, assuming the medium XP progression, a 20th-level character needs 2,100,000 XP to become 21st level, since he needed 1,050,000 XP to reach 20th level from 19th. He'd then need 4,200,000 XP to reach 22nd level, 8,400,000 XP to reach 23rd, and so on.Anyways, this isn't really a rules question...Yay, I achieved 21st level because I was able to add on enough XP to do so! Wait - what abilities do I get? Shouldn't I get another level of spells now? Where are they?
Gee, maybe it would be helpful to continue reading down the exact same page:
Scaling Powers
Hit dice, base attack bonuses, and saving throws continue to increase at the same rate beyond 20th level, as appropriate for the class in question. Note that no character can have more than 4 attacks based on its base attack bonus. Note also that, before long, the difference between good saving throws and poor saving throws becomes awkwardly large—the further you get from 20th level, the more noticeable this difference grows, and for high-level characters, bolstering their poor saving throws should become increasingly important. Class abilities that have a set, increasing rate, such as a barbarian's damage reduction, a fighter's bonus feats and weapon training, a paladin's smite evil, or a rogue's sneak attack continue to progress at the appropriate rate.
SpellsA spellcaster's caster level continues to increase by one for each level beyond 20th level. Every odd-numbered level, a spellcaster gains access to a new level of spell
It is relevant to 137ben posts saying that there are rules for character above 20th level.
Well, they said that they may change it in the final release (though don't take that as definitive). I remember SKR saying that they did it so that they would not have to worry about how the same class abilities would interact with the parent classes' abilities.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think there is a very simple reason: stacking almost equal things.
Doing that require rules on how every combination of stacking work. Start to add archetypes that modify a bit the special abilities and you will have combinations where if you add x levels of one class to z level of another and, when checking how an ability work, read the result as x+z level in the first class you get a result, when reading it as z+x levels in the second class you get a different result.
Describing in the rules how each combination work and adding a chapter on how it work with each of the parent class would require a lot of work, would be cumbersome and probably will miss some combo and be made obsolete as soon as a new archetype is printed.
Not allowing to multiclass in the parent class reduce greatly the number of those combinations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When a major decision for a significant release is based on "Because it's easy" you're sliding down a very slippery slope as a developer.
Rynjin: dont agree at all. Making rules simple should be a very important part of any good game development.
That was part of the reason why they left 3.x crossclass skills. And very good.
by not allowing the stacking it avoids future rules conflicts or managing to double dip. an example is say a lvl20 wizard taking eldritch heritage to get a familiar then arguing for a lvl 38? familiar which the game has no rules for.
this then avoids unplanned stacking issues that create situatikns lije that that cannot be forseen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rynjin: dont agree at all. Making rules simple should be a very important part of any good game development.
That was part of the reason why they left 3.x crossclass skills. And very good.
Simple/intuitive and easy are not the same thing.
In this case, what they are doing is making interactions overly complex, and then slapping a band-aid on it (the easy solution) instead of simplifying or streamlining the mechanics to work better together.
Imagine if they'd done this with Core, banned multiclassing because it'd be too hard to close loopholes about ability synergy.
The game would have been much worse off, and it would have reflected poorly on their skills as designers that they did not make an attempt to allow their mechanics to work together properly.
Making things simple and still good is a very difficult thing.
by not allowing the stacking it avoids future rules conflicts or managing to double dip. an example is say a lvl20 wizard taking eldritch heritage to get a familiar then arguing for a lvl 38? familiar which the game has no rules for.
this then avoids unplanned stacking issues that create situatikns lije that that cannot be forseen.
level 38 Familiar?
i would count the Eldritch Heritage Separate from levels. a special Exception, the Wizard would have 1 level 20 familiar and 1 level 18 familiar, with one feat, both could be improved.
i would do the same with any feats that provide a character level based resource outside of traditional character level, such as cohorts, or animal companions gained by the sylvan bloodline, or an eidolon gained by a feat.
while real wizard and sorcerer levels would stack if they have a feature that applies. level based variables granted by feats would be tracked seperately.
the rule isn't clear, but that is how i would interpret it
the wizard or magus would have 2 familiars, one at level 18 by feat, and 1 at level 20 through class
however, a Ranger/Druid would stack their levels for animal companions normally, while a Rogue/Ninja would stack sneak attack dice normally. applying all appropriate variables
but then, that does nothing to stop Aasimaar Lunar Oracles with level 40 Celestial Pets. but then, they did, give up the equivalent to what could have been 20 extra spells known via an alternate racial trait and alternate favored class bonus granted by the trait, to gain a pet that is twice as deadly. it's a nastier tiger, with next to no skill points and it's only abilities are, it can pounce, and Now, it can soak hits and maybe, grapple.
by not allowing the stacking it avoids future rules conflicts or managing to double dip. an example is say a lvl20 wizard taking eldritch heritage to get a familiar then arguing for a lvl 38? familiar which the game has no rules for.
this then avoids unplanned stacking issues that create situatikns lije that that cannot be forseen.
Or they could avoid stacking the classes with three+ features at first level and making dipping the best thing to do with them?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A big part of the reason is because this was just the playtest, and they wanted people to test these classes for balance and design, and not overcomplicate things by adding in a lot of multiclassing, concerns about how abilities worked/didn't work in synch with one another, how archetypes worked, etc.
When the actual book comes out later this year, presumably they will more explicitly address this issue.
I have a feeling that we may see feats and other class abilities that make this important. I also think that we may see more of these hybrids "count as" their parent class which could have unforeseen issues pop up.
I wish they had a Hybrid class with the Paladin as part of the combo.
I really don't even care what they mixed it with.
If it somehow allowed anything beyond LG(or CE), I would likely be ecstatic.
I really like many of the Paladin mechanics, but extremely limited in player concept options.
Absolutely this.
The Warpriest is sorta, kinda a halfhearted version ish... but a proper Paladin/Hybrid style class without alignment restrictions (and balanced around that if you believe the code is part of the class balance) would be amazing.
I think the paladin already is a hybrid of the fighter and cleric base classes. Just poorly done. Actually, I just wish they had gotten rid of the paladin when they went to PF from 3.x edition. Why do only LG or CE gods have a dedicated warrior followers? I think the inquisitor fulfills the function that the paladin was always intended to fulfill.
Some of the mechanics are pretty powerful and some people really like them. But the restrictions and code cause nothing but table arguments. I have very nearly had to ban it at my table because nearly every session ground to a screeching halt while they argued over whether a paladin can/should/would do whatever without falling and losing his abilities. I have gotten to really hate having a paladin at the table.
"Are you really sure you want to play a paladin? You can't make the concept you want with out some combination of fighter/cleric/inquisitor? Ok, then you have to figure out what your god requires and how what you do fits those requirements. I won't overrule you unless you are completely out of line and I will give you a warning first. The rest of you just shut the hell up about it. It's his character and he decides what he will do with his character."
I had to get pretty nasty about it. It took over 6 hours of gaming time just to get past the intro scene where they learn what they are going to be doing on a particular mission. I had expected it to take about 30-45 minutes total. I was nearly at the point of "ROCKS FALL EVERYONE DIES!" when the group finally realized they had been 'playing' the campaign for a month and accomplished absolutely nothing except get their mission. It seems to happen almost every time someone plays a paladin.
I won't even go into the fiasco when 2 guys tried to bring in paladins of different gods for the same campaign. {shudder}
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the paladin already is a hybrid of the fighter and cleric base classes. Just poorly done. Actually, I just wish they had gotten rid of the paladin when they went to PF from 3.x edition. Why do only LG or CE gods have a dedicated warrior followers? I think the inquisitor fulfills the function that the paladin was always intended to fulfill.
Umm, pretty darn sure that while a Paladin has to be LG, they only need to be within one alignment step of their god... so you could be a Lawful Good Paladin of Sarenrae, for instance. I have a Paladin of Sarenrae in my current campaign, and I must say, Paladin of the Goddess of Redemption plays a lot differently.
The problem isn't Paladins, it's players and GMs seeing them as nothing more than walking LG murderbots. In the hands of a good player, they bring a lot to the table.
That said, if this was my d20 heartbreaker rather than Pathfinder, I'd make Paladins or their equivalent a PRC.
Umm, pretty darn sure that while a Paladin has to be LG, they only need to be within one alignment step of their god... so you could be a Lawful Good Paladin of Sarenrae, for instance. I have a Paladin of Sarenrae in my current campaign, and I must say, Paladin of the Goddess of Redemption plays a lot differentlyI think the paladin already is a hybrid of the fighter and cleric base classes. Just poorly done. Actually, I just wish they had gotten rid of the paladin when they went to PF from 3.x edition. Why do only LG or CE gods have a dedicated warrior followers? I think the inquisitor fulfills the function that the paladin was always intended to fulfill.
Technically, they don't even need to be in one step of the alignment of their god, at least by RAW. While this is a reasonable restriction, they lack the restriction that Clerics or Inquisitors, or other deity-powered divine classes do. So technically, you could be running an LG Paladin of any god, just you'd get a lot of funny looks from your DM and other players, when you say you're playing an LG Paladin of Rovagug.