Couple of questions on dual-class:
1. Is it possible to have a group where some are dual-class and some are not? Would it make the dual-class player feel more OP than those who are not?
2. In the GM guide, it mentions refraining from allowing a dual-class character to double-up on advantages (e.g. fighter/ranger with flurry hunter's edge or barbarian/fighter where high damage plus fighter accuracy). The work-around is not allowing combinations that double down on a narrow ability. Is there any class combination that should simply not be allowed? Our other GM thinks any two Melee or any two spellcasters should not be allowed; I (the other GM) think anything goes with a few exceptions where specific combos give a huge advantage. Wondering your opinions?
3. in the dual-class guide, it mentions that you take the highest of the saving throws between the two classes (in many pairings makes an expert in all three)...how big of an impact is this in reality? We have discussed taking the saving throws from one class proficiency from one class but not the other.
4. When building encounters, should they be built differently or will they pretty much function the same, just a larger variety of actions? I know the book says similar, but I am curious if it plays this way.
I should have mentioned, that we are thinking about dual-classing this campaign because we lost a player and haven't found a replacement (yet). So we are down to 3 players.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) I mean... yeah, it's possible, that's up for the GM to decide I suppose.
1.a) 100% yes, Dual Class PCs are significantly more powerful, flexible, adaptable, and well rounded than non Dual Class PCs. They are statistically going to just flat out be BETTER than single classed (or even free archetyped) PCs as they'll have the best of both worlds for all numbers that matter and those numbers, they REALLY matter when the system math is so tight.
2) Nothing really set in stone other than what was suggested in the book but I can give you my 2c. It is generally best to slice things up by Role whereby you have the Full Martial, Full Spellcaster, & Hybrid Martial/Caster. I haven't actually personally RUN a Dual Class game but I would rule that no player can choose two Classes from the same Role so nobody could play a Fighter/Rogue, Sorcerer/Witch, or Magus/Summoner but they COULD play a Fighter/Sorcerer, a Witch/Magus, or a Rogue/Summoner.
3) It can be pretty big but I wouldn't say it is HUGE. Saving throw prof is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of what defines a Class and if you're not careful with Dual Class you can end up with your entire party having nearly perfectly optimized Save bonuses (with variance caused only by your Ability Score Mod which, as you increase in level matters less and less) which would put them at a pretty big statistical edge versus... most anything. The same thing goes for your AC prof too if you're dealing with a full Blaster-type Sorcerer/Wizard who is running around with the AC of a fully specialized Champion.
4) No idea, this is something I don't have any practical experience with but I would generally advise that Dual Class games are probably not something that I would ever run if I had more than 3 players. If I had a full table of 4+ PCs and we really wanted to run Dual Class... then I would probably end up tacking on one or two extra goon type opponents to every encounter and bump the AC/DCs that opponents have by at least +1 at ALL times in every category. Since it sounds like you're likely in the "down a player" situation you can probably just run any AP/Module or game you have prepared/balanced for a normal party as is without tweaks or in the very least, if they faceroll everything you can do trial and error with the Elite Adjustment and/or adding more goons before gonig so far as to adjust all AC/DCs on the baddies.
Is it possible to have a group where some are dual-class and some are not?
Sure, anything is possible: it's a variant rule.
Is there any class combination that should simply not be allowed?
I think the key is to make sure either everyone doubles down or no one does. It's when you have both ends that you have a hard time balancing things.
in the dual-class guide, it mentions that you take the highest of the saving throws between the two classes (in many pairings makes an expert in all three)...how big of an impact is this in reality? We have discussed taking the saving throws from one class proficiency from one class but not the other.
Not a big deal IMO: it just means you'll have a smaller range of save bonuses so if you aim for the middle with save DC, you're good.
When building encounters, should they be built differently or will they pretty much function the same, just a larger variety of actions? I know the book says similar, but I am curious if it plays this way.
Mostly, it's more options but still limited in actions. You'll just have more synergies like Strategic Strike [investigator] and Precision [ranger] on the same strike or having more spells for longer 'work days'. So expect them to do better than a normal party of that many people. For the 3 person party you mentioned, building like they are a 4 man party should work ok as long as they have their based filled [which they should].
If you are feeling worried about things you can always go free archetype and/or Ancestry Paragon instead of dual class.
One point to notice is that the combinations that Paizo seems to be most wary of in PF2 are the combinations of martial classes. This is notable because I am not aware of any other game where the equivalent of gestalt classes would pose that sort of a problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One point to notice is that the combinations that Paizo seems to be most wary of in PF2 are the combinations of martial classes. This is notable because I am not aware of any other game where the equivalent of gestalt classes would pose that sort of a problem.
I like rogue/investigator for maximum skill monkey. ;)
Couple of questions on dual-class:
Is it possible to have a group where some are dual-class and some are not?
Yep, no reason you couldn't
Would it make the dual-class player feel more OP than those who are not?
Generally speaking, yes.
In the GM guide, it mentions refraining from allowing a dual-class character to double-up on advantages (e.g. fighter/ranger with flurry hunter's edge or barbarian/fighter where high damage plus fighter accuracy). The work-around is not allowing combinations that double down on a narrow ability. Is there any class combination that should simply not be allowed? Our other GM thinks any two Melee or any two spellcasters should not be allowed; I (the other GM) think anything goes with a few exceptions where specific combos give a huge advantage. Wondering your opinions?
It kind of depends on what you're going for here.
- If you truly want your players to be notably more powerful, then let them pick whatever they want, but be clear to them that everyone's getting this opportunity, so if they don't synergize they might fall behind others.- If you want a little bit of synergies but nothing too crazy then there's a couple things I would avoid. Fighter + other martial being a big one imo, and probably some other highly synergistic martials as well, but I'd have to think about that more. Honestly, I wouldn't be too concerned about double caster classes though. It means double the spell slots, sure, but other than that the synergies aren't too insane compared to some of the stuff double martial classes get.
- Finally, if you want to keep things at a relatively similar overall power-level but with more options then going 1 martial and 1 caster class is usually going to be your best bet. But even then there's some considerations that would need to be made about certain combinations. All in all, though, if you're that concerned about balance then I would recommend against dual-class in general and would just make the fights a little easier or something. Some of the variant rules are very well balanced, but it's clear that dual-class isn't really how the game was designed to be played. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it does mean there's going to be a lot more variance in how strong a character is depending on how they're built.
in the dual-class guide, it mentions that you take the highest of the saving throws between the two classes (in many pairings makes an expert in all three)...how big of an impact is this in reality? We have discussed taking the saving throws from one class proficiency from one class but not the other.
It makes them more well-rounded when it comes to defense in the same way they'll be more well-rounded with what they can do on their turn. It's up to you if you want that. Ultimately it doesn't change a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but you'll definitely notice a boost in defensive power especially as things like juggernaut and evasion start kicking in.
When building encounters, should they be built differently or will they pretty much function the same, just a larger variety of actions? I know the book says similar, but I am curious if it plays this way.
They can be built similarly for sure, just keep in mind your players will be at least somewhat stronger than the general encounter building rules expect for the same number of equally leveled regular characters. Some groups will want to compensate for that, others just want to feel strong.
Addendum: in the case of stats, remember that you effectively get only one more Boost at 1st level for your possible second key ability, which is never enough to start with two 18's and all 14+'s on the save stats.
Plus, you still can only benefit from only 1 Apex item stat booster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as combos go, it's mostly martials that stand out as a stackability problem, because their combat mechanics can combine with each other.
A wizard/witch or a rogue/sorcerer are clearly stronger than a single classed character, but in terms of the strength of your individual actions, they mostly fall within expected parameters.
Martial/martial combos let you apply something like rage and a fighter's weapon proficiency bump simultaneously to a single strike, which ends up being uniquely problematic in a way other combos probably aren't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Addendum: in the case of stats, remember that you effectively get only one more Boost at 1st level for your possible second key ability, which is never enough to start with two 18's and all 14+'s on the save stats.
Why can't you have 2 18's? +2,+2 for key stats. +2, +2 for background. +2, +2 for ancestry. +2, +2 from your 4 boosts... Looks like 2 18's to me.
As far as combos go, it's mostly martials that stand out as a stackability problem, because their combat mechanics can combine with each other.
A wizard/witch or a rogue/sorcerer are clearly stronger than a single classed character, but in terms of the strength of your individual actions, they mostly fall within expected parameters.
Martial/martial combos let you apply something like rage and a fighter's weapon proficiency bump simultaneously to a single strike, which ends up being uniquely problematic in a way other combos probably aren't.
I agree.
There are only a few combos for casters that I can find:- Cleric + Life Oracle for d12 healing + Font.
- Cleric + Undead Sorcerer for Harming Font + Harming Hands + Dangerous Sorcery + Undead Bloodline Blood Magic.
- Ancestor Oracle + a non-spellcasting class: In my opinion, Dual Class really makes the Ancestor Oracle strong.
- Battle Oracle + a martial class.
- Wild Shape Druid + Monk (even if this one can be considered doubling down on a martial).
- Summoner + martial class to get the most out of Tandem Strike (so preferably a martial with a strong first attack like Barbarian).
Summoner + any full caster is not bad either. I think it combines pretty well with a Cleric or a Bard.
Summoner + any full caster is not bad either. I think it combines pretty well with a Cleric or a Bard.
You're right. I'd double down on the same tradition and certainly on Charisma to have an effective full caster with a bunch of extra top level spells and the Eidolon. Seems like a good concept, too.
Thank you everyone for the input. After analyzing this and input from my group, I am thinking just not allowing dual-class of a champion, fighter, or barbarian class solves most concerns.
if we dual-class with two of these three seems problematic and dual-class a fighter-sorcerer (as an example), then we have a spell caster with full-plate (our other DMs primary example of excess advantage).
I am learning a ton about PF2e and RPGs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you everyone for the input. After analyzing this and input from my group, I am thinking just not allowing dual-class of a champion, fighter, or barbarian class solves most concerns.
if we dual-class with two of these three seems problematic and dual-class a fighter-sorcerer (as an example), then we have a spell caster with full-plate (our other DMs primary example of excess advantage).
I am learning a ton about PF2e and RPGs.
Full plate caster isn't hard to achieve. For example that sorc can pretty easily grab a champion dedication at level 2 for full plate or run a versatile heritage human to grab double armor proficiency at level 1 and sentinel dedication at 2. The double class feats afforded by dual classing make this sort of thing pretty trivial.
And that's largely trivial as far as "excess advantage" goes. A whole party of x/thief with one bard/thief is going to doing some truly funny stuff with dread striker while covering every possible skill with redundancy for example.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd also be wary of allowing monk to dual class with ranger, or at least with flurry ranger. Monk/rogue could get a bit extreme as well; monk traditionally has lower damage to compensate for having more attacks. But rogue has sneak attack on every hit.
Caster dual classing I don't think is such a big deal. Yes, you'll have mire high level spell slots. But those spells all cost actions to cast, and that's the real limiting element. Meanwhile, martial classes often modify their attacks in some way, so you could have an attack get boosted by two classes at once.