I'd appreciate you not saying that I'm 'playing word games'. That implies intentional obfuscation, which is not what I'm doing at all.
Sure.
so I don't think anyone should make assumptions in that regard.
I'm not assuming. What I am doing is looking at all the facts that have been revealed, looking at other game systems where many parallel decisions were made and using that knowledge to extrapolate what multiclassing will look like. We'll see soon enough whether I am right (I will point out this was actually an early prediction of mine at which time it was a blatant guess, but has only Ben validated with each new piece of information. I will honestly be shocked if we don't get multiclassing via feats).
In the Know Direction Podcast Mark talked about something which sounded a lot like multi classing.
The example that he gave was that a rouge could get up to 8th level spell slots without giving up core rogue abilities.
So that's a thing.
That's good news. I'm happy to be wrong about whether or not you can get spells through multiclassing.
In the Know Direction Podcast Mark talked about something which sounded a lot like multi classing.
The example that he gave was that a rouge could get up to 8th level spell slots without giving up core rogue abilities.
Emphasis mine. Sure sounds like a character won't stop advancing in Rogue and instead start advancing in Wizard.
Yah that's what it sounded like. It was an answer to a question about half-casters and their place in second edition (basically none so far and in the future probably something like 8th level instead of 6th) so we don't know how that will relate to multiclassing or if it is just one way to multiclass amung others.
Yah that's what it sounded like. It was an answer to a question about half-casters and their place in second edition (basically none so far and in the future probably something like 8th level instead of 6th) so we don't know how that will relate to multiclassing or if it is just one way to multiclass amung others.
Your optimism is boundless.
Yup!
In the Know Direction Podcast Mark talked about something which sounded a lot like multi classing.
The example that he gave was that a rouge could get up to 8th level spell slots without giving up core rogue abilities.
So that's a thing.
Hmm. That sounds like you have to give up a class feat, then. I was hoping they wouldn't go that route. Of course, it's still possible that it is some kind of pseudo slots for cantrips picked up via rogue class feats, but if not I hope they give some way of improving spellcasting so that you don't have dcs too far behind a wizard or sorcerer.
|
Up To 8th level spell slots ?
So no 9th or 10th. IIRC 10th had caster level 20 as a prerequisite, or was the prerequisite the ability to get 9th level spell slots ?
Anyway, it sounds like not being a full caster means you do not get 9th. I guess because that means you took a level in another Class and thus missed a spell advancement step
Sounds like multiclassing and a class-level based one at that. Which I like
I guess core rogue abilities mean class features but I could be wrong on that
Do we know if advancing spell levels hinges on class features or on class feats ?
Up To 8th level spell slots ?
So no 9th or 10th. IIRC 10th had caster level 20 as a prerequisite, or was the prerequisite the ability to get 9th level spell slots ?
Anyway, it sounds like not being a full caster means you do not get 9th. I guess because that means you took a level in another Class and thus missed a spell advancement step
Sounds like multiclassing and a class-level based one at that. Which I like
I guess core rogue abilities mean class features but I could be wrong on that
Do we know if advancing spell levels hinges on class features or on class feats ?
Advancing spell levels is a class feature for casters. For a rogue to get it only to 8th level slots would mean that they are advancing the equivalent of 15 caster levels, so presumablty the earliest they can do this is at 6th level. This is when you get your 4th class feat, so the ruling is probably that you have to get 3 class feats in a class before you can move on to another (much like archetypes).
Alternatively, he is referring to some kind of class feat that enables access to cantrips or spells (Not having seen the original post, I can't tell whether he was saying only Rogues can do this, or rogues (and others) can do this), which can be heightened, requiring spell slots to heighten into.
It does look like they have something in store for the Playtest that is different from what a lot of folks have been theorizing. I look forward to seeing it.
If I can get 8th level spell slots and some spellcasting proficiency (as well as spells), I could work with that.
It seems a little overpowered if it only costs 1 class feat, so I will wait until we know more before I fully endorse this idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The example Mark gave was probably someone going Rogue. But spending all of their class feats at the earliest levels on multiclassing. Which is super surprising to me. I thought that the highest level would be more around 6th level casting. 8th level casting is amazing. Multiclassing sounds REALLY strong. That's awesome.
So we know Daze catches people flat-footed now right? So, depending on action cost a wizard or bard dip might be worth it for a rogue.
So we know Daze catches people flat-footed now right? So, depending on action cost a wizard or bard dip might be worth it for a rogue.
Bard/Rogue does sound quite good. Maybe an arcane trickster build will ACTUALLY be really good for once. I'd probably start as a bard and spend some of my feats to gain sneak attack and other Rogue stuff instead of going into the muses. Rogues seem rather action-light so it should work out fine with my one action performance cantrip. I'm sure there will be lots of sneaky bard tricks to make opponents flat footed.
So we know Daze catches people flat-footed now right? So, depending on action cost a wizard or bard dip might be worth it for a rogue.Bard/Rogue does sound quite good. Maybe an arcane trickster build will ACTUALLY be really good for once. I'd probably start as a bard and spend some of my feats to gain sneak attack and other Rogue stuff instead of going into the muses. Rogues seem rather action-light so it should work out fine with my one action performance cantrip. I'm sure there will be lots of sneaky bard tricks to make opponents flat footed.
Rogues and Rangers can later on get a class feat to reload crossbows while moving. By comboing magic and crossbow sneak attacks you could maybe get something pretty fun.
1 Action to move and reload?Rogues and Rangers can later on get a class feat to reload crossbows while moving. By comboing magic and crossbow sneak attacks you could maybe get something pretty fun.So we know Daze catches people flat-footed now right? So, depending on action cost a wizard or bard dip might be worth it for a rogue.Bard/Rogue does sound quite good. Maybe an arcane trickster build will ACTUALLY be really good for once. I'd probably start as a bard and spend some of my feats to gain sneak attack and other Rogue stuff instead of going into the muses. Rogues seem rather action-light so it should work out fine with my one action performance cantrip. I'm sure there will be lots of sneaky bard tricks to make opponents flat footed.
That's the impression I got.
So there's a post on reddit of a guy who got the playtest in his hands. One of the upvoted posts is question about multiclassing. I'm pretty sure he will reply pretty soon so I thought I'd bump this thread up so we can have a discussion once it's revealed.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"So multi-classing is actually taking a multi-class archetype. You may not have the class, of which you plan to take the archetype (so no fighter archetype, if you are already a fighter). The dedication feats require at least a 16 in one particular ability score and being trained in a certain skill.
The wizard one can then cast 2 cantrips chosen every day. With another feat you get a limited spellcasting progression, capped at level 8 with a level 3 spell slot. Two other feats are necessary to get to level 8 spells at level 20. Another feat expands the number of spell slots, but never the two highest available. Otherwise you can access wizard feats (but at best only level 10 feats at level 20) and get arcane school powers.
So it doesn't seem that your basic class chassis is changed at all, unless an archetype feat does provide access (no better hit points or different saves, but rogue multiclass grants evasiveness = evasion in PF1)."
I called it :P. Anyways sounds great. Everything I was hoping for honestly. The ability score requirement is interesting.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He's revealed it. They're an Archetype.
So, like VMC, you trade Feats for Class abilities from another class. Unlike VMC, you can apparently spend 4 Feats and cast 8th level spells on your Fighter (Wizard Archetype), so they're potentially very powerful archetypes as these things go.
Unlike VMC, you can apparently spend 4 Feats and cast 8th level spells on your Fighter (Wizard Archetype), so they're potentially very powerful archetypes as these things go.
That sounds interesting, and I love the Gish so I hope it works out cool, but just makes me extremely suspicious that it will get smacked hard with the nerfs if it becomes the obvious choice for every non-casting class.
If it doesn't change, it does create an interesting situation of multi-classing a non-casting class with a casting class possibly being the equivalent of the 6th level casters of yore.
I have some disappointment with the seeming passing of old multi-classing, which I deeply enjoyed, but the ability to pursue your normal class while still getting something actually worthwhile from another class is still a perk.
Any details revealed with regards to multiclassing in more than just 2 classes?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That sounds interesting, and I love the Gish so I hope it works out cool, but just makes me extremely suspicious that it will get smacked hard with the nerfs if it becomes the obvious choice for every non-casting class.
Based on what he said, you get only 2 spells per spell level (or thereabouts) and are always a spell level behind full casters (so you have 4th level while they have 5th), but it's pretty cool, yeah.
It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.
If it doesn't change, it does create an interesting situation of multi-classing a non-casting class with a casting class possibly being the equivalent of the 6th level casters of yore.
Yup, pretty much. I'm also very interested in people who multiclass from a caster into a non-caster. Like what a Bard multiclassing into Rogue, Fighter, or Barbarian looks like.
I have some disappointment with the seeming passing of old multi-classing, which I deeply enjoyed, but the ability to pursue your normal class while still getting something actually worthwhile from another class is still a perk.
I've always been neutral on this issue, but yeah, this sounds very interesting.
|
|
Any details revealed with regards to multiclassing in more than just 2 classes?
Since they're an Archetype you need to invest a minimum of 3 Feats into one before you can take another. That being the case, you could theoretically have 3 Multiclass Archetypes, but only at the very highest levels and only by giving up all your Class Feats to do it.
I think most people will stick with one, though I'm sure someone will find a fun build with two of them.
|
This sounds like it might be a really good setup for multiclassing in the new edition. Will be interesting to play with. Especially want to see things like, how a Fighter/Wizard and a Wizard/Fighter compare.
My first reaction was like the above: Why wouldn't *every* martial drop a few feats to get some casting? Curious how the tradeoffs look.
Any details revealed with regards to multiclassing in more than just 2 classes?Since they're an Archetype you need to invest a minimum of 3 Feats into one before you can take another. That being the case, you could theoretically have 3 Multiclass Archetypes, but only at the very highest levels and only by giving up all your Class Feats to do it.
I think most people will stick with one, though I'm sure someone will find a fun build with two of them.
Ahh, thank you.
So multi-classing is actually taking a multi-class archetype. You may not have the class, of which you plan to take the archetype (so no fighter archetype, if you are already a fighter). The dedication feats require at least a 16 in one particular ability score and being trained in a certain skill.
The wizard one can then cast 2 cantrips chosen every day. With another feat you get a limited spellcasting progression, capped at level 8 with a level 3 spell slot. Two other feats are necessary to get to level 8 spells at level 20. Another feat expands the number of spell slots, but never the two highest available. Otherwise you can access wizard feats (but at best only level 10 feats at level 20) and get arcane school powers.
So it doesn't seem that your basic class chassis is changed at all, unless an archetype feat does provide access (no better hit points or different saves, but rogue multiclass grants evasiveness = evasion in PF1).
It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.
I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I guess this confirms there is no more level dipping in 2e. Personally I'm really happy about that. They can now give characters really powerful 1st level class abilities and not worry about everyone dipping into it for every build by just making sure those abilities aren't available in the archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
I can't decide if I like it or not, particularly in the case of multiclassing into a non-caster, where there isn't always a clear "appropriate score". if I am playing a rogue who wants to gain some more martial combat utility as a dexterity-based combatant, do I really need to go start powerlifting in order to multiclass into Fighter? What about the opposite? If I am a Fighter who wants to learn to be more skillful, I am not allowed to multiclass into rogue until I have taken some tumbling and yoga lessons?
This will end up being as ignored as the multiclass/racial level caps was in 2nd edition, if so. (I hope.)
It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
I can't decide if I like it or not, particularly in the case of multiclassing into a non-caster, where there isn't always a clear "appropriate score". if I am playing a rogue who wants to gain some more martial combat utility as a dexterity-based combatant, do I really need to go start powerlifting in order to multiclass into Fighter? What about the opposite? If I am a Fighter who wants to learn to be more skillful, I am not allowed to multiclass into rogue until I have taken some tumbling and yoga lessons?
This will end up being as ignored as the multiclass/racial level caps was in 2nd edition, if so. (I hope.)
I mean the Ranger is kind of the inbetween there. I bet the Ranger can either be Dex or Str based. So either start as a ranger. Or multiclass from one of those into the Ranger.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean the Ranger is kind of the inbetween there. I bet the Ranger can either be...It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
I can't decide if I like it or not, particularly in the case of multiclassing into a non-caster, where there isn't always a clear "appropriate score". if I am playing a rogue who wants to gain some more martial combat utility as a dexterity-based combatant, do I really need to go start powerlifting in order to multiclass into Fighter? What about the opposite? If I am a Fighter who wants to learn to be more skillful, I am not allowed to multiclass into rogue until I have taken some tumbling and yoga lessons?
This will end up being as ignored as the multiclass/racial level caps was in 2nd edition, if so. (I hope.)
No, I never said anything about wanting the character to be a woodsy hilbilly, I said I wanted the character to be either a Dextrous Rogue who wanted some extra Fightery stuff, or a big, buff Fighter who wanted to get some Roguelike utility.
The example was an example, and not the point. Arbitrarily limiting character options to pigeonhole characters into YOUR vision of what characters of a certain class should be needlessly limits options and stifles creativity. (And by YOUR I don't mean you in particular, but the developers or whoever is deciding that all multiclassed Fighters should be this imaginary level of strength.)
All because some people are absolutely terrified of multiclassing.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study
You can do rituals with Int 12 and trained in Arcana but I guess you need to be a little smarter to actually get spell slots and cantrips, unless I guess you got formal training to start as a wizard.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, once a rogue always a rogue? And there it dies all my hype.
So I guess this confirms there is no more level dipping in 2e. Personally I'm really happy about that. They can now give characters really powerful 1st level class abilities and not worry about everyone dipping into it for every build by just making sure those abilities aren't available in the archetype.
Yah I wonder if Dex to damage will be in the Rogue multiclass archetype. It would be almost too good of a feature to not get for a Dex focused build.
It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
I can't decide if I like it or not, particularly in the case of multiclassing into a non-caster, where there isn't always a clear "appropriate score". if I am playing a rogue who wants to gain some more martial combat utility as a dexterity-based combatant, do I really need to go start powerlifting in order to multiclass into Fighter? What about the opposite? If I am a Fighter who wants to learn to be more skillful, I am not allowed to multiclass into rogue until I have taken some tumbling and yoga lessons?
This will end up being as ignored as the multiclass/racial level caps was in 2nd edition, if so. (I hope.)
If the monk is any example, martials will probably get to choose their key ability score (strength or dex for the monk IIRC) both for purposes of the +2 from the class step of ABC and most likely for the multiclass dedication. Where as casters will almost certainly have their key stat locked in.
So I guess this confirms there is no more level dipping in 2e. Personally I'm really happy about that. They can now give characters really powerful 1st level class abilities and not worry about everyone dipping into it for every build by just making sure those abilities aren't available in the archetype.Yah I wonder if Dex to damage will be in the Rogue multiclass archetype. It would be almost too good of a feature to not get for a Dex focused build.
According to the Reddit person posting it all, Rogue multi-class gets Sneak Attack, not Dex to damage.
If the monk is any example, martials will probably get to choose their key...It also requires a 16 in the appropriate score and a specific Skill trained per Class, apparently.I very much like that little detail. Not for any real balance reason, just feels charming for some reason. Assuming a Wizard multi-class needs 16 Intelligence and Lore, or Arcana, or whatever it is, I enjoy it. You're smart and and you study the thing, so you can learn magic.
Its kind of silly that you can start as a Wizard with lower Intelligence (I assume?), and it does interfere with a concept like an Intelligence 12 guy who just figures out some hedge magic. But for some reason, it tickles my fancy and I like it. Maybe you just have to be smarter about it because you are picking it up faster, without the benefit of years to study in a quiet place with all the books and resources you need.
Maybe a Wizard has to get jacked if they're going to start swinging that sword around without real training first. And run wind-sprints a lot. I wonder if reality just occasionally looks at people with 16 Charisma and thinks "Aw shucks, you really are swell aren't you? Go ahead and manifest some magic you crazy kid." I can imagine many people being annoyed, and I'm not passing judgement one way or the other, but I like that detail.
I can't decide if I like it or not, particularly in the case of multiclassing into a non-caster, where there isn't always a clear "appropriate score". if I am playing a rogue who wants to gain some more martial combat utility as a dexterity-based combatant, do I really need to go start powerlifting in order to multiclass into Fighter? What about the opposite? If I am a Fighter who wants to learn to be more skillful, I am not allowed to multiclass into rogue until I have taken some tumbling and yoga lessons?
This will end up being as ignored as the multiclass/racial level caps was in 2nd edition, if so. (I hope.)
I could easily accept this.
So, once a rogue always a rogue? And there it dies all my hype.
Your primary class is locked with regard to core class features, but you can trade at least half of your class feats to obtain some abilities from another class. Depending on which are excluded and which you want, you might prefer to pickup rogue as your multiclass archetype rather than primary class.
According to the Reddit person posting it all, Rogue multi-class gets Sneak Attack, not Dex to damage.So I guess this confirms there is no more level dipping in 2e. Personally I'm really happy about that. They can now give characters really powerful 1st level class abilities and not worry about everyone dipping into it for every build by just making sure those abilities aren't available in the archetype.Yah I wonder if Dex to damage will be in the Rogue multiclass archetype. It would be almost too good of a feature to not get for a Dex focused build.
That's probably good I wouldn't want every monk to feel like they need to be a rouge multiclass. I am very wary of Dex to damage as a concept, but there is a whole other thread on that topic so I won't speak on it any more here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Errm... I'm neither surprised or happy about the replacement of multi-classing with Archetypes (feat chains). I suppose we'll have to use retraining then if we wished to forsake our original class.
Though I'll be waiting to read it for myself to make my final judgement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, once a rogue always a rogue? And there it dies all my hype.
So I actually don't have any problem with the description for multiclassing we got, and think it will probably make for a fine system. Also seems like it will enable a lot of our gish-y 6th level caster concepts.
HOWEVER. I wish to reiterate that the barriers to a more traditional multiclassing system being implemented seem far overblown. I suspect this might be one of those "extreme changes we may wind up walking back" things the Paizo peeps have mentioned. I don't mind if it isn't, personally, but I certainly wouldn't write the possibility off.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not too jazzed on the Ability Score requirements, much for the same reason I wasn't in 5e, but I'm cautiously optimistic, given how easy it is to raise ability scores this time around. Also, while I'm a bit disappointed by the VMC style (having not used that system, my main experience with feat based multiclassing was in 4e which was pretty bad, and I can even stick up for a good amount of the design decisions in that system, if not the system as a whole), but I'm cautiously optimistic, if the feats actually feel like being a Fighter/Rogue or Rogue/Wizard, or whatever, then it sounds like it could fix some of the dipping problems of 1e.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
He's revealed it. They're an Archetype.
I saw this coming, but it's still extremely disappointing. This is a poor substitute for actual multiclassing rules. I've already given my 2 cents on it and will wait until the playtest proper to speak more on the subject, but rest assured I hope we'll get more robust multiclass rules that don't make certain combinations of class features illegal by the fiat of what is and isn't allowed by the multiclassing archetypes.