Multiclass ability score prerequisites should be lowered, and level advancement should raise all ability scores


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 76 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I am quite optimistic about feat chains being the way multiclassing is being handled in Pathfinder 2e. The wizard multiclass seems quite similar to 5e's Magic Initiate and Ritual Caster, though I see the wizard multiclass's best use as adding noncombat utility to characters such as barbarians and fighters, who might struggle with noncombat utility otherwise.

For one, it allows designers to create class options without worrying about dippability. For two, it allows any abilities gained via multiclassing to actually be level-appropriate and scale properly. For three, it enables main class abilities remain level-appropriate and to remain scaling properly.

This is superior to Pathfinder Unchained's variant multiclassing, because it allows a character to either dabble just a little, or dedicate themselves to their secondary class. This is superior to 4e's multiclassing, because it makes multiclass feats beyond the entry feat actually worthwhile, rather than sideways swaps.

However, I am worried about the ability score prerequisites. Requiring a 16 in an ability score seems like a brutal limitation, and it makes it difficult for, say, barbarians and fighters to pick up a progression in noncombat utility magic to give themselves something to do outside of battle.

I think that the ability score prerequisite for multiclassing should be lowered to merely 14.

A human (or half-elf or half-orc) fighter will probably want Strength 18, Dexterity 16, and Constitution 12 (since Constitution does not do much ala Starfinder). If that fighter wants Intelligence 16 for a wizard multiclass by 2nd level, just to have some noncombat utility spells on hand, they are simply out of luck. An alchemist can freely multiclass into wizard without a problem, and gain all of the benefits of doing so. The alchemist suffers minimal opportunity cost in doing so. I do not see why a fighter, conversely, should have to sabotage their ability scores for the same package.

On another note, I am dissatisfied by the Starfinder-style method of raising only four ability scores at certain levels. I do not see why two ability scores are destined to be left in the dumpster. I would prefer for level advancement to raise all ability scores by +2 (or +1 for ability scores already at 18 or above). It would fit the bounded modifiers 2e is trying to aim for, anyway.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel that if you want to multiclass to Wizard as a Fighter, making it so that they need to make some ability score sacrifices in order to do so isn't a bad idea. Otherwise, it might turn into a situation where there's little point in not multiclassing. The current method should allow multiclassing to be powerful, while still not being appropriate if you want to be really good at what your primary class gives you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Meophist wrote:
I feel that if you want to multiclass to Wizard as a Fighter, making it so that they need to make some ability score sacrifices in order to do so isn't a bad idea. Otherwise, it might turn into a situation where there's little point in not multiclassing. The current method should allow multiclassing to be powerful, while still not being appropriate if you want to be really good at what your primary class gives you.

I am not sure I quite buy this. An alchemist can freely multiclass into wizard without a problem, and gain all of the benefits of doing so. The alchemist suffers minimal opportunity cost in doing so.

I do not see why a fighter, conversely, should have to sabotage their ability scores for the same package.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Nothing says you have to leave two stats in the dumpster. A martial might always boost all physical stats while rotating the fourth boost among all mental stats, for instance. And totally predestined advancement (e.g. every stat goes up when any do) is kinda boring.

Lowering the prereq for multiclassing to 14 I might buy, though that's the kind of thing playtesting is for.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:
Meophist wrote:
I feel that if you want to multiclass to Wizard as a Fighter, making it so that they need to make some ability score sacrifices in order to do so isn't a bad idea. Otherwise, it might turn into a situation where there's little point in not multiclassing. The current method should allow multiclassing to be powerful, while still not being appropriate if you want to be really good at what your primary class gives you.

I am not sure I quite buy this. An alchemist can freely multiclass into wizard without a problem, and gain all of the benefits of doing so. The alchemist suffers minimal opportunity cost in doing so.

I do not see why a fighter, conversely, should have to sabotage their ability scores for the same package.

An Alchemist have a lot more overlap in what their class features do to a Wizard than Fighter does; the cost is lower with them because they don't benefit as much. Likewise, the Fighter has an easier time getting into Rogue or Barbarian since it doesn't really increase the versatility of the Fighter character as much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Meophist wrote:
An Alchemist have a lot more overlap in what their class features do to a Wizard than Fighter does; the cost is lower with them because they don't benefit as much. Likewise, the Fighter has an easier time getting into Rogue or Barbarian since it doesn't really increase the versatility of the Fighter character as much.

I am fairly sure that given the wide variety of spells in the arcane spell list, an alchemist is not going to have much trouble finding something quite synergistic with their alchemist features, or something that patches up a hole in the alchemist's capacities.

Sovereign Court

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Trade offs are more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
Trade offs are more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16.

The tradeoffs are uneven. An alchemist, for example, has to make a minimal investment to become a wizard, whereas a cleric (e.g. a cleric of Nethys) must pony up Intelligence 16, when a cleric's class features are already split between Wisdom and Charisma.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
Trade offs are more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16.
The tradeoffs are uneven. An alchemist, for example, has to make a minimal investment to become a wizard, whereas a cleric (e.g. a cleric of Nethys) must pony up Intelligence 16.

That seems intended, and mirrors PF1 multiclassing pretty well. An Alchemist wizard in PF1 got more class synergy than a wizard/cleric (until they picked up Mystic Theurge, at least).

Edit: mind, they got less in terms of armor and weapon skills, but an alchemist/wizard probably isn't going to find that aspect of gameplay compelling.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:


That seems intended, and mirrors PF1 multiclassing pretty well. An Alchemist wizard in PF1 got more class synergy than a wizard/cleric (until they picked up Mystic Theurge, at least).

Multiclassing should help enable concepts. I do not see why a cleric of Nethys should have to pony up Intelligence 16 when they are already forced to invest in Wisdom and Charisma for their class features. That is going to be unfeasible for a plurality of clerics, which means that the multiclass rules are shutting out that concept.

Sovereign Court

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
Trade offs are more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16.
The tradeoffs are uneven. An alchemist, for example, has to make a minimal investment to become a wizard, whereas a cleric (e.g. a cleric of Nethys) must pony up Intelligence 16, when a cleric's class features are already split between Wisdom and Charisma.

Yeah? A cleric can go Druid a lot easier than the alchemist. A transformation alchemist going for wild shape has to budget Wis. It’s pretty boring if every class has access to every other with minimal effort. At 16, you can choose to budget abilities for Multiclass or wait until 6th depending on your character priorities. At 14, Multiclass seems like almost an auto pick.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

We have experienced everyone become so reliant on high stats, dump stats and crafting whatever you need to maximize potential. I agree that trade-offs make the game better and the play more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16 and make the hard choice. Remember the days when you rolled your stats and lived with the result? And crafting magic items? Unheard of! Time to work for a living adventurers!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want to be able to have low stats at higher levels if I want. One of the most memorable characters in a Pathfinder campaign I've been in was a player's 5 charisma garbage eating possibly-insane cat hoarding swarm monger druid in our Hell's Rebel's game (which featured a bunch of other incredibly high charisma people). If that character was any less off-putting, they would have been less fun.

But I also don't think a 16 modifier is a very big ask. Since your third highest stat is probably a 14, you can grab a 2nd class with retraining at 5th level if you plan ahead even a little. Like 18 Str, 16 Con, 14 Wis, 12 Dex, 10 Int, 8 Cha for a Dwarf Barbarian who has aspirations to being a multiclass Cleric. Some combinations being more natural than others is inevitable, since some classes are literally going to key on the same stats as others.


I'm not sure how I feel about how multiclassing is done, but one thing, even if they *do* go generally this route, that I don't like and think should be changed is allowing more flexibility for a class' primary stat. For example, I *really* hope Fighter ends up being Dexterity or Strength. Otherwise those archer builds are going to be forced into Ranger or Rogue (for that sweet, sweet starting 18).

This would also potentially help out multiclassing a bit in a few cases. I'm not sure if *all* classes should have two (or more) potentially primary stats, but dictating what a class is good at stat-wise takes away from that axis of character development.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

With the generous stat bumps and static stat generation, I dont think this is as much a problem as it appears.

The Exchange

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I dont see a 16 as a limitation in PF2. Either start with a 16 or start with a 14 and multiclass after your ability score boost. I just hope other feats are equally good.


GeneticDrift wrote:
I dont see a 16 as a limitation in PF2. Either start with a 16 or start with a 14 and multiclass after your ability score boost. I just hope other feats are equally good.

Let us have a look at a cleric of Nethys who wants to multiclass into wizard by 2nd level, because a wizard multiclass is a 2nd level class feat.

They can afford Strength 10, Dexterity 12, Constitution 10, Intelligence 16, Wisdom 18, Charisma 12. Their survivability is mediocre given Dexterity 12 and Constitution 10, their daily uses of heal/harm are middling due to Charisma 12, and their Intelligence 16 is not doing much other than qualifying them for the wizard multiclass in the first place.


11 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds like a good trade off to me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:
With the generous stat bumps and static stat generation, I dont think this is as much a problem as it appears.

It's a big limitation for organic character growth, rather than running a pre-planned build from level 1.

With some obvious exceptions like barbarian fighters and cleric druids, where there effectively isn't any cost at all.

It's also very race dependent. I was toying with the idea of a dwarf fighter rogue (or rogue fighter) and despite being a simple concept, it is very difficult to do until 5th level, unless the fighter dedication feat is grabbable with dex 16 rather than str 16, or you make a 16 dex fighter that isn't very good until rogue abilities (especially dex to damage) come online.

Malthraz wrote:
Sounds like a good trade off to me.

How so? The example cleric's abilities are gutted just for the starting point of wand use and cantrips. It will be two more levels before they get a single wizard spell, and all sorts of abilities are wrecked in exchange.

On the other hand, a theoretical druid feat would give a similar set of spells and things (including formerly arcane only spells like fireball), and cost the cleric nothing. They can just build like a normal cleric.

If you can do roughly the same thing at a huge trade off as no trade off, something is clearly wrong.

Though in the playtest it will be more effective to start with druid and compare druid/cleric to druid/wizard. They should get roughly the same power increase, but druid/cleric (of say Erastil or Gozreh) would cost nothing but the feat, whereas the wizard version will have to warp starting stats over backwards.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Voss wrote:
Pan wrote:
With the generous stat bumps and static stat generation, I dont think this is as much a problem as it appears.

It's a big limitation for organic character growth, rather than running a pre-planned build from level 1.

With some obvious exceptions like barbarian fighters and cleric druids, where there effectively isn't any cost at all.

It's also very race dependent. I was toying with the idea of a dwarf fighter rogue (or rogue fighter) and despite being a simple concept, it is very difficult to do until 5th level, unless the fighter dedication feat is grabbable with dex 16 rather than str 16, or you make a 16 dex fighter that isn't very good until rogue abilities (especially dex to damage) come online.

What was hard about it? Seems pretty straightforward if you pick either a Str or Dex background.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think boosting all stats at the same time is a good idea. You might as well not boost stats at all since that removes any character differentiation after first level.

Maybe the prerequisite could be lowered to 14 but I doubt it.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
Trade offs are more interesting. Keep the prereq at 16.
The tradeoffs are uneven. An alchemist, for example, has to make a minimal investment to become a wizard, whereas a cleric (e.g. a cleric of Nethys) must pony up Intelligence 16, when a cleric's class features are already split between Wisdom and Charisma.

Tradeoffs should be uneven. It's easier for a competitive athlete to pick up another sport then mechanical engineering, just like it's easier for mechanical engineer to pick up audio engineering rather than competitive sports.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:
GeneticDrift wrote:
I dont see a 16 as a limitation in PF2. Either start with a 16 or start with a 14 and multiclass after your ability score boost. I just hope other feats are equally good.

Let us have a look at a cleric of Nethys who wants to multiclass into wizard by 2nd level, because a wizard multiclass is a 2nd level class feat.

They can afford Strength 10, Dexterity 12, Constitution 10, Intelligence 16, Wisdom 18, Charisma 12. Their survivability is mediocre given Dexterity 12 and Constitution 10, their daily uses of heal/harm are middling due to Charisma 12, and their Intelligence 16 is not doing much other than qualifying them for the wizard multiclass in the first place.

Pretty much how I feel about the 16 requirement; it's too strong, and it's really only a modifier benefit differential of 1, especially since you can either get 2 sets of 16s, with some 14s, or one 18 and one 16, with maybe one 14 and the rest being 12 or less. Using classes with subpar primary attributes was penalizing enough by having the modifiers determine just how good you were with your features; making it a requirement, especially one as strong as this, really shoehorns character development.

If the complaint is that people will just have all 14s (which I don't think is even possible, by the way,) and dip every class/archetype possible to get every base benefit and be an "ultimate" character, there's still the dedications limit that cuts down on what different options you can stack with by requiring you invest in at least two (or more) feats beyond your dedication feat before selecting another dedication, so the idea that people can just multiclass everything and get everything that way is silly and impossible. (It's also probably inoptimal as hell too.)

The irony here is that, building a Mystic Theurge, would be better done with Wizard as your primary, with Cleric as your Multiclass, with the attribute array of 18 Intelligence and 16 Wisdom with maybe a 14 Charisma (assuming you get Charisma-based benefits with Cleric multiclass), and the rest being 12 or less (bonus points for 8 Strength). Sure, you won't have access to 9th/10th level Divine spells, but you wouldn't have access to 9th/10th level Arcane spells either, making it an uneven trade to begin with (not because Arcane > Divine, but because you're paying effectively more for higher Divine spellcasting than Arcane spellcasting, meaning unless those 9th/10th level spell slots are better, it's not worth the cost).

Sovereign Court

12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

If you are going to multiclass as early as 2nd level, that class's key attribute should be your secondary stat, at the very least. It makes sense that you should have to gain some significant experience adventuring before multiclassing based on your tertiary stats.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps the pre-req should be 14 for half-elves only, since half-elves were good multi-classers in PF1 and they seem slightly under-powered in the preview.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As I understand it, the retraining rules will allow you to retrain stats. So you can start with a stat of 14, retrain it to 16, get the multiclass, retrain it back to 14.

This is useful if you pick a background for fluff reasons (and why wouldn't you?) but it doesn't boost the stat you need for multiclassing. I don't think it would work for races ancestries that get a -2 to that stat, they may have to wait until level-up before being able to multiclass, but then there is a reason they are not famous for certain classes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
If you are going to multiclass as early as 2nd level, that class's key attribute should be your secondary stat, at the very least. It makes sense that you should have to gain some significant experience adventuring before multiclassing based on your tertiary stats.

But that isn't the situation this system gives us. Some race/class/multiclass combination -must- multiclass off tertiary stats, others can just do it with their primary stat, even though they're getting the same thing.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Voss wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
If you are going to multiclass as early as 2nd level, that class's key attribute should be your secondary stat, at the very least. It makes sense that you should have to gain some significant experience adventuring before multiclassing based on your tertiary stats.

But that isn't the situation this system gives us. Some race/class/multiclass combination -must- multiclass off tertiary stats, others can just do it with their primary stat, even though they're getting the same thing.

Having a penalty doesn't make a stat tertiary. It is still a secondary stat if you build it up to a 14. Ancestries with racial penalties can't multiclass as easily into classes that key off their penalized stats. That... makes sense.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One idea that occurred to me back when SF came out is that it might be better (if more complicated) to spread each packet of ability boosts downward, so that, for instance, instead of getting the first 4 at five, you get one at 2, 3, 4, and 5. There could still be a rule that you couldn't use a boost on the same score twice until you reached level six.

I understand that that's a bit involved, but I wish it were true.


I don't know why Pathfinder 2nd Edition has attribute advancement at levels 5, 10, and 15.

In Pathfinder 1st Edition, I usually used the +1 to an attribute at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th levels to first turn odd attribute values into even attribute values, converting the nonfunctional +0.5 to attribute bonus into a functional +1. The increase felt like a method to give more value to odd stats.

After that, I usually just boosted the character's most valuable attribute.

It was nice gaining an occasional high-level bonus spell or another +1 to AC or to damage. But it wasn't important. Qualifying for a feat because my character reached a belated 13 or 15 or 17 was important. But it was rare.

The remaining benefit was that my attack bonus or an entire group of skill bonuses went up. +1 to Dexterity was faster than +1 to Acrobatics, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Fly, Ride, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth. But in Pathfinder 2nd Edition, everyone gains level to attack bonus and skills. Going up by +2 instead of +1 lacks the thrill of an increase where the value would have stayed flat otherwise.

Either the attribute increase or the level to skills and attack bonus is redundant. The level increase would be harder to minmax, so it is the more stable of the two. Its main weakness is that it does not satisfy prerequisites.

It also feels like sabotaging the game to create an Attribute 16 prerequisite when the attributes increase so much. Was the prerequisite an unnecessary obstacle? Or is the high attribute requirement a test to prove commitment and high-level characters don't need commitment?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
whew wrote:
Perhaps the pre-req should be 14 for half-elves only, since half-elves were good multi-classers in PF1 and they seem slightly under-powered in the preview.

I feel it would be better if they need 1 less feat to get a new dedication feat.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

16 is the new 12.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mathmuse wrote:
I don't know why Pathfinder 2nd Edition has attribute advancement at levels 5, 10, and 15.

My guess is the number play, if it was 1,4,8,12,16,20 like in PF1, starting with an 18 in an ability would cap at 23 which feels wasteful and makes starting with a 16 (so that you have a more even spread) feels more optimal.

And since 3 isn't a factor of 20 they'd have to go 1,4,7,10,13,16,19 or 2,5,8,11,14,17,20 to cause an ability to end at 24, which just looks and feels weird (They couldn't do 3,6,9,12,15,18 as that leaves the cap at 23, causing the same issues).

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Mathmuse wrote:
It also feels like sabotaging the game to create an Attribute 16 prerequisite when the attributes increase so much. Was the prerequisite an unnecessary obstacle? Or is the high attribute requirement a test to prove commitment and high-level characters don't need commitment?

Choosing to increase the necessary scores does show some commitment from high-level characters. I don't find it sabotaging to say that everyone can multiclass to anything eventually, but only the very dedicated can do so early in their careers.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I feel it is a rock paper scissors situation and until I get to test it out I am reserving my opinion.

On the surface though I get it. I would love to have a martial multi with a wizard and be on par with an Alch/Wizard

But a Fighter with a Rogue or another class has more benefits than an Alchemist and a Fighter for example.

Some classes will pair better, and others will have to make sacrifices. I think this will shine more in the Archetypes when we get our eyes on those.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I don’t see a problem, myself; you can pretty easily get that required 16 within the first five levels, and take all the multiclassing you want to finish out the dedication long before you reach level 20.

Let’s be honest, though: EVERY edition change features some character builds that become non viable, it’s inevitable. After 2nd Edition AD&D, 1st Edition bards with 7 fighter levels, 9 rogue levels, and 20 bard levels were no longer possible; after 3rd Edition, 2nd Edition half-elven 12th level fighter/14th level magic-user/13th level clerics were no longer possible. We’re going to lose some things, some of which we’ll get back via expansion books... and some others which in hindsight will have been worth losing for the sake of a sound game system. I’m of the mindset, “Instead of building what we’ve built before, why not experiment with something new?”


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't have a problem with the 16 requirement because it is easy to have a 16 your secondary and for most races you can start with 16 in 3 stats. So instead of starting 18 16 14, you can start at 16, 16, 16. Now I can have high Str Dex and Int and still be a fighter.
If memory serves stat generation is:
+2 +2 +2 -2 Race (or human +2 +2)
+2 +2 background
+2 class
+2 +2 +2 +2 level 1
That works out to 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. But you could just as easily have 16, 16, 16, 12, 10, 8. So the Cleric of Nethys has a 16 wis, 16 int, 16 cha, 8 dex, 10 con, 12 str. You could even go with a 16, 16, 14, 14, 10, 8. 16s in Wis and Int, then 14 in cha & str. Who says I HAVE to start with 18 in my main stat?

OR!!! If you really want to go crazy.... put a 14 in your main stat!
Str 12 Dex 10 Con 12 Int 16 Wis 14 Cha 14. This is a very well rounded character. Maybe drop Dex or Con and start with a 14 in Str. that's a starting lineup of 16 14 14 14 12 8 (human ending 10 10). Starting low is not that bad since once your stat hits 18 it only goes up by 1 ever 5 levels instead of 2.
So at level 5, if I start at 18, I will have : 19 18 16 12 10 8.
But with the starting 16s, I'm at : 18 18 18 14 10 8, now you're arguably better off.
At 10 it's 20 19 18 14 10 8 vs 19 19 19 16 10 8.

The 16 triple 14 is at 18 16 16 16 10 8 and 19 18 18 18 10 8 at 5 and 10 respectively.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like one thing that merits mentioning is that retraining rules in PF2 are extremely generous, so if you start with a 14 in something you can make it 16 at level 5 then retrain your 2nd level class feat to be the appropriate dedication.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
Voss wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
If you are going to multiclass as early as 2nd level, that class's key attribute should be your secondary stat, at the very least. It makes sense that you should have to gain some significant experience adventuring before multiclassing based on your tertiary stats.

But that isn't the situation this system gives us. Some race/class/multiclass combination -must- multiclass off tertiary stats, others can just do it with their primary stat, even though they're getting the same thing.

Having a penalty doesn't make a stat tertiary. It is still a secondary stat if you build it up to a 14. Ancestries with racial penalties can't multiclass as easily into classes that key off their penalized stats. That... makes sense.

The typical attribute array for PF2 is 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8, assuming proper ABC selections, under the guise that you would do nothing to shore up that penalty. We're otherwise left with 16, 16, 14, 12, 10, 10, which means you're only skating by for 2 classes, and fumbling around for the others until at least 5th level, for one more class at best.

By outright definition being the third highest or most important attribute, would result in a 14 based on the above usual array of attributes. Not only is it empirically correct to call it "tertiary", as there are two other attributes which took precedent, it's also technically correct based on real world definitions of "tertiary."

Ancestral penalties just mean you don't want to use that race for that particular class as its primary attribute. As one example, Dwarves are crappy sorcerers, but ironically are decent Wizards, Clerics, Fighters/Barbarians, and great Druids. (They're actually best as Druids, simply due to the lack of Charisma dependency.) Whether that means you shouldn't multiclass based on the above array is a whole different ballgame altogether.


KingOfAnything wrote:
Voss wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
If you are going to multiclass as early as 2nd level, that class's key attribute should be your secondary stat, at the very least. It makes sense that you should have to gain some significant experience adventuring before multiclassing based on your tertiary stats.

But that isn't the situation this system gives us. Some race/class/multiclass combination -must- multiclass off tertiary stats, others can just do it with their primary stat, even though they're getting the same thing.

Having a penalty doesn't make a stat tertiary. It is still a secondary stat if you build it up to a 14. Ancestries with racial penalties can't multiclass as easily into classes that key off their penalized stats. That... makes sense.

Didn't say it did. Didn't even mention penalties in fact. Not sure of the relevance, really.

Nope. Its a secondary stat if it benefits the class/build to have it. Dex is still a secondary stat for a wizard regardless of if it is 14 or not. If they're a specifically a ray/touch wizard, Dex is best considered a primary stat, but they can't max it out.

...great? At no point was a I suggesting small race fighters/barbs or dwarf sorcerer/bard. Nothing else has to care, except sorta dwarf clerics, who are arbitrarily worse healers.

It's really simple. Some race/classes have easy multiclass choices and hard multiclass choices. Elves tagging into rogue is easy, regardless of what their real class is, because anyone can be made to value Dex Wizard isn't that hard either, because they're using a fixed bonus, not a free one. Elves adopting cleric or fighter is difficult, especially if they're starting in a class that doesn't value strength or wisdom, which is a lot of them.

Dwarves are the same for anything that isn't cleric (or probably druid). A dwarf rogue looking to multiclass into fighter has a very bizarre and not very useful build ahead of them. Not because they have a penalty, but because strength doesn't mean squat for PF2 rogue, and dwarves either have to go all in on strength or wait 4 or 9 levels. Same is true the other way around. And for wizard, since nothing but alchemist really cares if your Int is 16 (or even 14) or not.

Even humans and their spawn have a hard time if you want to use a tertiary stat. It's just more effective to use a stat you already value to cash in on the greater inherent worth of the dedication feat, regardless if the feat fits or makes sense for the character.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

A character’s secondary or tertiary stats aren’t some predefined thing. They depend on what you invest in. And what you invest in depends on what you value. If you want to multi class fighter right away on your elven wizard, you make strength your secondary stat.


So since the best part of the wizard dedication comes in the 8th level feat, I wonder how feasible it would be to start with a 12 Int (easily doable) then once you hit 10th level retrain 3 feats to get like 6th level casting.


whew wrote:
Perhaps the pre-req should be 14 for half-elves only, since half-elves were good multi-classers in PF1 and they seem slightly under-powered in the preview.

I like this idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I tend to compare the PF2 rules to the adventure paths I've run. I wonder about the Scrapwall Fanatics, a CR 1 foe from the Iron Gods adventure path, Half-orc fighter 1/rogue 1, with Str 17, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8. I suspect the fanatics are mixed class to give the impression that they are untrained thugs who gained their skills through bitter experience. Could such an NPC exist in PF2? We would have to even out the attributes, maybe STR 16, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8. They don't qualify for Rogue Dedication, so I ought to set Rogue to the starting class and add Fighter Dedication.

I am bothered by the weirdness that since their attributes are more aligned with Fighter class than Rogue class, the way to build them with a dedication is to start with the less suitable class to ensure that they qualify for a dedication?

Or they could start as Fighter with a rogue-like Background, and gain some iconic rogue ability via a feat. Except that if a feat gives an iconic rogue-like ability, then it probably won't be a Fighter class feat.

Do I settle on a Fighter wth a rogue-like Background? The list of backgrounds that I have seen is: Acolyte, Acrobat, Animal Whisperer, Barkeep, Blacksmith, Criminal, Entertainer, Farmhand, Gladiator, Hunter, Laborer, Merchant, Noble, Nomad, Sailor, Scholar, Scout, Street Urchin, and Warrior. The ones that would give a roguish feel related to Scrapwall are Criminal, Nomad, Scout, and Street Urchin. Street Urchin was previewed in the Paizo Blog, and it gives two ability boosts, one of them restricted to Dex or Int, Pickpocket skill feat, and training in the Underworld Lore. Pickpocket and Underworld don't fit Scrapwall. Criminal is the Background of the pregenerated Merisiel previewed at ENWorld. It appears to give Experienced Smuggler feat and training in Stealth, and its restricted attribute boost is not in Strength. With that build, the roguish nature of the Scrapwall Fanatics will be that they are stealthy and good at hiding items. Okay, that one fits Scrapwall. Unfortunately, they are not hiding anything when the party encounters them, so no-one will notice their Background.


Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Mathmuse wrote:
I tend to compare the PF2 rules to the adventure paths I've run. I wonder about the Scrapwall Fanatics, a CR 1 foe from the Iron Gods adventure path, Half-orc fighter 1/rogue 1

I would argue that you would probably just go straight Rogue in P2 and grab some combat abilities. From your description, sounds like Rogues with better combat abilities as opposed to sneaky roguish fighters. If you want, you could still do Fighter Dedication with the above stats, which would give the same feel since in P1 the fighter level really just gives +1 BAB and a bonus feat.


Mathmuse wrote:

I tend to compare the PF2 rules to the adventure paths I've run. I wonder about the Scrapwall Fanatics, a CR 1 foe from the Iron Gods adventure path, Half-orc fighter 1/rogue 1, with Str 17, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8. I suspect the fanatics are mixed class to give the impression that they are untrained thugs who gained their skills through bitter experience. Could such an NPC exist in PF2? We would have to even out the attributes, maybe STR 16, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8. They don't qualify for Rogue Dedication, so I ought to set Rogue to the starting class and add Fighter Dedication.

I am bothered by the weirdness that since their attributes are more aligned with Fighter class than Rogue class, the way to build them with a dedication is to start with the less suitable class to ensure that they qualify for a dedication?

Or they could start as Fighter with a rogue-like Background, and gain some iconic rogue ability via a feat. Except that if a feat gives an iconic rogue-like ability, then it probably won't be a Fighter class feat.

Do I settle on a Fighter wth a rogue-like Background? The list of backgrounds that I have seen is: Acolyte, Acrobat, Animal Whisperer, Barkeep, Blacksmith, Criminal, Entertainer, Farmhand, Gladiator, Hunter, Laborer, Merchant, Noble, Nomad, Sailor, Scholar, Scout, Street Urchin, and Warrior. The ones that would give a roguish feel related to Scrapwall are Criminal, Nomad, Scout, and Street Urchin. Street Urchin was previewed in the Paizo Blog, and it gives two ability boosts, one of them restricted to Dex or Int, Pickpocket skill feat, and training in the Underworld Lore. Pickpocket and Underworld don't fit Scrapwall. Criminal is the Background of the pregenerated Merisiel previewed at ENWorld. It appears to give Experienced Smuggler feat and training in Stealth, and...

I do not think monsters are created like PC's anymore. These guys would be made up stats that are appropriate to the encounter level. Like 4th or 5th edition D&D.

You could make them up like PC's if you wish to, but that is a lot of work if this is just some encounter (I am not familiar with the adventure path so I do not know their importance).

My impression is monsters will be rarely made like PCs. We shall see in a few days.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It is a bit strange you can start play as a Wizard with 8 Intelligence but have to have a 16 if you start as something other than a Wizard....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragonborn3 wrote:
It is a bit strange you can start play as a Wizard with 8 Intelligence but have to have a 16 if you start as something other than a Wizard....

Gotta stop the dip!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragonborn3 wrote:
It is a bit strange you can start play as a Wizard with 8 Intelligence but have to have a 16 if you start as something other than a Wizard....

I mean, not to be pedantic but as of current it's impossible to play a wizard with less than 10 int as far as we can tell.


Gavmania wrote:

As I understand it, the retraining rules will allow you to retrain stats. So you can start with a stat of 14, retrain it to 16, get the multiclass, retrain it back to 14.

This is useful if you pick a background for fluff reasons (and why wouldn't you?) but it doesn't boost the stat you need for multiclassing. I don't think it would work for races ancestries that get a -2 to that stat, they may have to wait until level-up before being able to multiclass, but then there is a reason they are not famous for certain classes.

You can retrain stats? I thought retraining was for feats and skills only.

How does that work, pumping iron to boost STR and reduce INT?

1 to 50 of 76 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Multiclass ability score prerequisites should be lowered, and level advancement should raise all ability scores All Messageboards