Less stuff at level one VS dipping power


Prerelease Discussion


It looks like some classes will have less stuff at level one then in pf 1.

I think the point of it is making dipping worse.

If that's how they are thinking. I hope that they will give you 1-2 extra class feats at level one for the 1st class you select.

What do you think about this idea?


We really have no idea, but I am guessing tha multi-classing is going to look a lot different from PF1. I don't think "dipping" will really be a thing. I think it will more likely that some of the "stuff" you get from 1st level classes will be unlocked through feats, then by choosing to level up in a different class, but I am hoping to be proven wrong.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dipping was never really an issue in PF anyway. One of the main complaints was that it weakened multiclassing. PF2 will handle multiclassing differently, but we don't have enough details.

Personally I don't see it as a problem since you will lose out on the better stuff in your main class. There are a few exception such as the unchained rogue, but even then it takes 3 levels of dipping to get dex to damage and you're limited to 1 weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Im gonna miss dipping. First level feels barren from A to B to C.


I know that dipping are only good for some specific builds.

But it looks like stuff is more spread out over levels. For example alchemist.

So if they are spreading out the ability to discourage dipping. giving 1-2 extra class feats at level one. Would still make good first level characters with a few abilities at level one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I was disappointed at the background preview. I was hoping some of the class power would be given out as a background. Doing so would have allowed for more power at first level in a class while not overpowering it for multiclassing since they wouldn’t have the same resources for the second class.

As others have said, we don’t have enough information yet to tell how multiclassing will work.


From what I have read there seems to be a few options for picking up abilities and powers outside of your class.

I was reading a compilation that someone has put together about party healing, and a lot of it was making reference to other, non-class sources of healing. Maybe it was skills, maybe it was something else.

I wonder if there is a way to pick up powers from the god you worship or something like that. I think that would be pretty cool.

Maybe you can get powers based on the star sign you were born under. Alright, maybe now we are going too far.

Also, dipping was a problem in PFe1 under very specific circumstances (and then a serious problem), but it was pretty rare.


Listening to the designers, it seems that the classes are being rounded out a bit where Multi-classing will be a much less viable option.


My group personally never had much of a problem with someone dipping multiple classes to create a character that would unusually powerful for the level, like dipping alchemist, and barbarian, and something else to get all sorts of bonuses before level 5. Eventually these characters burned out because they didn't have the staying power or growth in their abilities that other classes did. So in a long term campaign it eventually solved itself. However, it could be abused for one shots and at low levels in campaigns.

How severe was the abuse? I would say mildly annoying, but not unmanageable. Like I said, I never had this problem with my gaming groups, but I can understand how the problems arrive. I think rounding the classes to be more linearly distributed in the bonuses they allow will help to alleviate this sort of problem. I just hope it doesn't make the first few levels of classes feel super lame.

Overall, I'm okay with multiclassing more than 2 classes not being viable and I'm also okay with "dipping" not being particularly useful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brother Fen wrote:
Listening to the designers, it seems that the classes are being rounded out a bit where Multi-classing will be a much less viable option.

I was hoping for a different answer. That multiclassing could take the place of some PrC and Hybrid classes.

There have been problems with certain combinations being too powerful, but there are many more examples of multiclassing making a character too weak. I was hoping they would make the gains from multiclassing more smooth and balanced.


Well that's just my guess. It's not an answer at all.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
.. dipping alchemist, and barbarian, and something else to get all sorts of bonuses before level 5.

This is also solved with a simple house rule (or a 3.85e 3PP printing) that the alchemist bonus and the barbarian bonus are both 'adrenaline' bonuses, which don't stack because they are of the same type.


wakedown wrote:
Claxon wrote:
.. dipping alchemist, and barbarian, and something else to get all sorts of bonuses before level 5.

This is also solved with a simple house rule (or a 3.85e 3PP printing) that the alchemist bonus and the barbarian bonus are both 'adrenaline' bonuses, which don't stack because they are of the same type.

There are several ways to work around the few problems. The direction seems to be to design MC out, which is too bad. Since rogue and fighter peak too early, the devs re-designed MC, tossing out the baby with the bathwater.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The sheer railroading when it came to character building was a major letdown with Starfinder and one of the main reasons why my group stopped playing. Dipping and multiclassing are one of PFs deceisive qualities.


It seems like there will be less front-loading in classes, things spread out over more levels, have to wait until certain levels to access/unlock abilities/feats. Have no idea if multiclassing will even be close to its original form; have they mentioned anything at all about multiclassing?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:
It seems like there will be less front-loading in classes, things spread out over more levels, have to wait until certain levels to access/unlock abilities/feats. Have no idea if multiclassing will even be close to its original form; have they mentioned anything at all about multiclassing?

Im sure its an upcoming blog. I'm not especially excited for it...


Planpanther wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
It seems like there will be less front-loading in classes, things spread out over more levels, have to wait until certain levels to access/unlock abilities/feats. Have no idea if multiclassing will even be close to its original form; have they mentioned anything at all about multiclassing?
Im sure its an upcoming blog. I'm not especially excited for it...

I hope the Designers will come up with a good solution acknowledging the role of combining classes, combining archetypes, dipping and prestige classes in "character customisation". While those things certainly don't need to stay, removing them would need equivalent substitute.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:
It seems like there will be less front-loading in classes, things spread out over more levels, have to wait until certain levels to access/unlock abilities/feats. Have no idea if multiclassing will even be close to its original form; have they mentioned anything at all about multiclassing?

My elder daughter accused me of always multiclassing. I said, "Look at my character Val. Fourteen levels of bloodrager and single class."

She asked, "How many archetypes?"

I replied, "Two. One gives her some barbarian rage powers and the other gives her gunslinging."

"That's multiclassing."

Sigh, I guess I multiclass horizontally when I don't multiclass vertically.

Thus, I want PF2 to still let me combine classes. VMC feels like just a feat chain to me, not a true multiclass. I won't mind dipping being weaker, because I usually follow each class for several levels.

In addition, I want to adapt PF1 modules to PF2. And many NPCs in those modules are multiclassed. I have a 1st-level module nearby, so let me check a few NPCs there. Rogue 2, fighter 3, fighter 2, rogue 4, rogue 1, rogue 1, magus 4--those are pure class characters. Rogue 1/wizard 5, fighter 1/rogue 1, cleric 5/ranger 1--those are multiclass. Three out of ten, that's 30% multiclassed, too many to rewrite from scratch.

Zantos' wrote:
If that's how they are thinking. I hope that they will give you 1-2 extra class feats at level one for the 1st class you select.

The preview Paizo Blog: Everyone Has a Past of character backgrounds showed three backgrounds that each received two ability boosts, one feat, and one trained lore skill. Those perks will be part of a 1st-level character but not part of the 1st level of the character's class.

Street Urchin, which sounds like a suitable background for a rogue, gains the Pickpocket skill feat and training in the Underworld Lore skill. I suspect that rogue does not automatically gain the Pickpocket skill feat and training in the Underworld Lore skill. The Rogue Class Preview mentions rogues receiving sneak attack and surprise attack features at 1st level. The preview says that the rogue gains training and proficiency increases in more skills than other classes, but it does not list them. The rogue gains a skill feat at every level that seems to allow selecting one skill out of many. Thus, a rogue could chose the Pickpocket skill feat at 1st level, but a rogue with Street Urchin background will receive that feat from the background, and pick something else, such as Stealth, for the class skill feat.

Liberty's Edge

I'm all for interesting and effective multiclassing being available. What form that takes I don't care so much as long as it is interesting and effective.

Mathmuse wrote:
In addition, I want to adapt PF1 modules to PF2. And many NPCs in those modules are multiclassed. I have a 1st-level module nearby, so let me check a few NPCs there. Rogue 2, fighter 3, fighter 2, rogue 4, rogue 1, rogue 1, magus 4--those are pure class characters. Rogue 1/wizard 5, fighter 1/rogue 1, cleric 5/ranger 1--those are multiclass. Three out of ten, that's 30% multiclassed, too many to rewrite from scratch.

A lot of the multiclasses in PF1 are done for purely mechanical reasons and would probably be better served as single class characters in a new system. The Rogue 1/Wizard 5, for example, unless built to utilize Sneak Attack and a finesse weapon, could and should probably just be built as a Wizard with some more Rogue-like skills in PF2 in all likelihood. Ditto the Cleric/Ranger. The Fighter/Rogue should maybe stay as they are, or maybe just be a Rogue. Hard to say.

I know that a lot of cultists in various adventures with one level of Cleric are probably better served as being single classed but with Ritual Magic as a Skill Feat in PF2.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ideally, a "dip" should be roughly as powerful as taking the next level in your current class, so if Classes are getting 1st level abilities stripped away from them for the purpose of allowing less powerful dips, then that's okay.

My fear is that Paizo wants to shove their custom "variant multiclassing" down our throats, and the stripping of class features is, as someone else put it, "cutting down our trees and selling us firewood" just so they can claim they are offering more at the store. If they are "cutting down our trees" so that we don't have OP class dips, then that's fine.

VMC is almost always worse than just dipping, playing a hybrid class, or using an archetype that does what you want. Some of the VMC options were strictly worse than the feats you could take to emulate their effects (depending on exactly what you want).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'm all for interesting and effective multiclassing being available. What form that takes I don't care so much as long as it is interesting and effective.

Mathmuse wrote:
In addition, I want to adapt PF1 modules to PF2. And many NPCs in those modules are multiclassed. I have a 1st-level module nearby, so let me check a few NPCs there. Rogue 2, fighter 3, fighter 2, rogue 4, rogue 1, rogue 1, magus 4--those are pure class characters. Rogue 1/wizard 5, fighter 1/rogue 1, cleric 5/ranger 1--those are multiclass. Three out of ten, that's 30% multiclassed, too many to rewrite from scratch.

A lot of the multiclasses in PF1 are done for purely mechanical reasons and would probably be better served as single class characters in a new system. The Rogue 1/Wizard 5, for example, unless built to utilize Sneak Attack and a finesse weapon, could and should probably just be built as a Wizard with some more Rogue-like skills in PF2 in all likelihood. Ditto the Cleric/Ranger. The Fighter/Rogue should maybe stay as they are, or maybe just be a Rogue. Hard to say.

I know that a lot of cultists in various adventures with one level of Cleric are probably better served as being single classed but with Ritual Magic as a Skill Feat in PF2.

I like combining the package to make my own hybrid classes. The 4E and VMC is just a single feature swap out and never feels the same. It is no doubt that will suit many, but it wont suit me.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'm all for interesting and effective multiclassing being available. What form that takes I don't care so much as long as it is interesting and effective.

Mathmuse wrote:
In addition, I want to adapt PF1 modules to PF2. And many NPCs in those modules are multiclassed. I have a 1st-level module nearby, so let me check a few NPCs there. Rogue 2, fighter 3, fighter 2, rogue 4, rogue 1, rogue 1, magus 4--those are pure class characters. Rogue 1/wizard 5, fighter 1/rogue 1, cleric 5/ranger 1--those are multiclass. Three out of ten, that's 30% multiclassed, too many to rewrite from scratch.

A lot of the multiclasses in PF1 are done for purely mechanical reasons and would probably be better served as single class characters in a new system. The Rogue 1/Wizard 5, for example, unless built to utilize Sneak Attack and a finesse weapon, could and should probably just be built as a Wizard with some more Rogue-like skills in PF2 in all likelihood. Ditto the Cleric/Ranger. The Fighter/Rogue should maybe stay as they are, or maybe just be a Rogue. Hard to say.

I know that a lot of cultists in various adventures with one level of Cleric are probably better served as being single classed but with Ritual Magic as a Skill Feat in PF2.

The NPCs are far from optimized. They serve as mentors, social encounters, or opponents for the PCs. Their mixed classes are part of their life story rather than an attempt to create an effective adventurer.

Fires of Creation spoiler:
The rogue 1/wizard 5 is Khonnir Baine, a plot hook and potential mentor for the PCs. When he was a young wizard and known as Pauldris Gray, he joined the sinister Technic League to study the alien technology in Numeria. But he could not stand their atrocities. Eventually, he rescued a 2-year-old Kellid girl from experiments, sabotaged the lab to kill the experimenter (he lived), and went into hiding for a few years with the little girl. The level of rogue represent his years in hiding. He later emerged with a new appearance, new name, new life story, and same old fascination with alien technology. He resumed being a wizard and does not benefit from his level of rogue except in his class skills.

The cleric 5/ranger 1 is the villain Meyanda. She survived as a ranger in the Numerian wilderness and shantytown Scrapwall until she encountered the Iron God who called itself Hellion. She became its high priest. The two classes make her a little tougher in combat than a pure cleric. The fighter 1/rogue 1 characters are her minions, called Scrapwall Fanatics. Their multiclass represents that the people of Scrapwall are fighters and rogues--multiclassing did not do them any good. They also fight with improvised weapons because improvising weapons from scrap is common in Scrapwall.


I'm thinking multiclassing will be like the hybrid / "semi-gestalt" multiclassing from later in 4E. Which was a great idea, it just should have been implemented from the start; having been added later in the system, it was kind of a wonky cludge that worked better for some classes than others. But if it was baked into PF2 from the start, especially with the fairly universal feat progression for most classes, it could work out a lot better.


I'm expecting multiclassing to be a feat that gives a minor ability appropriate to the class and allows you to take feats for the new class and that's it.


I hope they don't ruin multiclassing in the new edition. I like being able to combine class features if I want. I have a hunter with 4 levels of rogue and a bard with a level of swashbuckler. I also have an inquisitor with double archetypes. Yes, mechanical benefits matter, but so does just being able to play what you want. I'm making a few fan characters that require multiclassing to be close to accurate - like a Sorcerer/Monk for the Flash, or Alchemist/Barbarian for the Hulk.


I think the best it could possibly be is that one level of a different class when utilized will give you the same power/effectiveness of another level of the class you started in. I think that would be it working as perfectly as possible. I don't know what it will be like but that would be the ideal scenario IMO.


I am betting that you are just gonna have to burn some of your class and generalist feats to instead get class features and class feats from another class.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
I am betting that you are just gonna have to burn some of your class and generalist feats to instead get class features and class feats from another class.

Basically VMC, which is honestly something I hope is done as the main mode of multiclass.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Shiroi wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
I am betting that you are just gonna have to burn some of your class and generalist feats to instead get class features and class feats from another class.
Basically VMC, which is honestly something I hope is done as the main mode of multiclass.

I have disliked this style before, but I can see it appealing to me greatly in PF2E, as PF2E appears to be relying less on class features for variation and much more on class feats.


My problem with hybrid or vmc is that it often doesnt feel like a wizard/fighter but just a wizard with one tiny fighter thing. Its not enough so im pessimistic about where PF2 is going. Guess the playtest will reveal how it really feels.


Just play Gestalt and get the best of both worlds.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Planpanther wrote:
My problem with hybrid or vmc is that it often doesnt feel like a wizard/fighter but just a wizard with one tiny fighter thing. Its not enough so im pessimistic about where PF2 is going. Guess the playtest will reveal how it really feels.

Ideally I would like both to be an option for me. Sometimes I want to go full multiclass. Sometimes I just want a very specific thing, normally for flavour. For example while we won't be able to have Holy Champions of most of the deities in the playtest, I would love to be able to represent that by spending a feat on my Fighter/Barbarian to grab one of the domain powers of my god in order to get that feel. On the flipside sometimes I have a concept like a Spell Thief that warrants being able to do full multiclassing. Both options being allowed would be fantastic.


Classes are less frontloaded at 1, however, they have more stuff at the other levels, don't they? Alchemist and Cleric in PF1 got like 50 class features at 1 and then just power-ups to them for the rest of the game. There's still dead levels for guys like wizard and stuff in PF1.

So am fine with less-forntloading, as long as the content is spread out to other levels rather than just removed outright. Don't want characetrs with net LESS abilities even after a few levels.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Less stuff at level one VS dipping power All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion