Dual Class: How much more powerful? Any difficulty DMing?

[Deriven Firelion]

I'm thinking of letting my players try dual classing. How much extra power is it? Does it make DMing much more difficult?

[Guntermench]

How much more powerful depends on the combination. I'm in a dual class game that's sort of West Marches so I've seen a number of combinations. The book is pretty on point, Martial plus Martial is strong. Casters don't get much from doubling up, and can feel punished when paired with double Martial characters if you bump the difficulty, but bumping the APL is basically necessary to provide a challenge to double martials.

I haven't GM'd it yet, but from playing it feels like I get hit harder than normal. Playing a Monk + Barbarian and I fairly regularly get absolutely chunked. At low levels it can be pretty rough, we're level 8 now so it's not quite as bad but when the GM decides to go APL+4 it's actually APL+5 and hits like a f~*+ing truck so you need to be careful about that. Definitely leans towards adding more creatures after you hit (boosted)APL+2, especially at +3.

All of that said...as a player Dual Class is really fun. You can get some cool character concepts going.

[Taja the Barbarian]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I'm thinking of letting my players try dual classing. How much extra power is it? Does it make DMing much more difficult?

No actual experience with it, but:

a) Any non-fighter martial can take dual with Fighter for the weapon proficiency bonus (Fighter + Rogue makes the Rogue better on the offense (broader and better weapon proficiencies) and defense (better HP and Fort save)).
b) 'Dual casters' will have twice as many spells per day, possibly leading to longer adventuring days or more aggressive spell usage in a 'normal' length adventuring day.
c) The party is much more likely to have a bard or similar buff source.
d) A lot of characters may be 'tougher' than normal as they can shore-up weak saves and HP with their second class (though this may vary greatly from build to build, depending on whether they have an 'accentuate the positive' or 'eliminate the negative' focus, the fighter/rogue mentioned above works both ways).
e) While action economy will limit player options, stacking 'passive' bonuses is probably an issue (like the Rogue's Sneak Attack, the Swashbuckler's Precise Strike, and the Investigator's Strategic Strike)

Beyond that, a lot will depend on the specific character builds: Combining two classes that don't actually synergize well likely won't change the power level too much...

[Guntermench]

One important note is RAW doubling up on the same KAS means you lose an ability boost. The class step is still subject to the rule that you can only take an ability score once, and there's no language that lets you pick something else if you already have it.

[Gortle]

Consider a barbarian with +2 to hit and fighter armour but still with barbarian resistance and hitpoints

Likewise for rogue/fighter and several others

Full casters who can handle themselves in melee and have good saves. I like the idea of a champion/sorcerer myself.

Or a Magus or a Summoner with full spell slots behind them.

Its definitely a power upgrade for some, for others it is flexibility, toughness or endurance...

Does it make GMing more difficult? No. It is just more player options, and you will need to beef up encounters a little. Just be careful of inter player balance, as some will optimise a lot more than others.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think the safest way to do this is to let everybody pick their first class from whatever, but their second class is one from a list the GM curates in order to avoid the combinations that are much more powerful than the other combinations.

You can make this thematic with "you're all also sorcerers" or "you're all also summoners" or "you're all also psychics". I think most of the really problematic combinations are "two kinds of martials that double up on being good at one thing."

[Deriven Firelion]

The everyone playing a fighter and something else is holding me back from doing this. A whole group of double martial fighters seems like a recipe for painful DMing.

I might leave it at free archetype.

[HumbleGamer]

Leaving apart the fact it would be unbalanced, if what concerns you the most is everybody getting the fighter class, why not trying dual class entirely banning the fighter class?

After all, there are plenty of possibilities even without getting the fighter.

[Temperans]

Dual classing has always been a matter of heavily increasing power level, so just treat it like any other gestalt game and make it a meme game. People think Fighter X another class is busted now, but boy was that combination even more busted before (of course people won't acknowledge it).

If you think that is too much, you can always just have classes get the stats of the primary class, twice as many feats, access to all relevant feats, and combine all the spell slots (so dual casters can get twice as many spells). That should put you in a place that is just a straight increase in versatility without the martial's inflated stats ruining the balance.

[Gortle]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

The everyone playing a fighter and something else is holding me back from doing this. A whole group of double martial fighters seems like a recipe for painful DMing.

I might leave it at free archetype.

Just say no dual classing for Fighters, because they are too much.

Don't let that hold you back. If you want to try it, then try it.

It is a little extra power. I have to rebalance encounters constantly so I don't find it any extra work.

[Lucerious]

Dual classing can be a good way to balance a party of 2, but does risk a lot of the lack of anything to throw them for which they don’t have an answer with a party of 4. Fortunately, outside of some very clever feat combinations and spells, everyone is still held to three actions with only so much that can fit in that limitation. Also, the numbers can never exceed what is already allowable for any given level even if the characters have the best versions.

It’s worth a go if it strikes a fancy, but I do think for a standard group FA is the better choice.

[Falco271]

I've played a fighter/cloistered cleric. Smite becomes really strong, if you add a cleric with true strike it's really strong.

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.

Not do fighter in a dual class will do much to help. Also martial/martial (flurry ranger/rogue...) should not be allowed. Otherwise, playing the DC characters was fun.

[Taja the Barbarian]

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

[Captain Morgan]

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

It is, but you'd be better off with one player taking rogue and another taking bard, and both getting the durability of a champion too or whatever.

[Deriven Firelion]

Falco271 wrote:

I've played a fighter/cloistered cleric. Smite becomes really strong, if you add a cleric with true strike it's really strong.

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.

Not do fighter in a dual class will do much to help. Also martial/martial (flurry ranger/rogue...) should not be allowed. Otherwise, playing the DC characters was fun.

Flurry ranger and rogue sounds brutal.

[Falco271]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

It is, but you'd be better off with one player taking rogue and another taking bard, and both getting the durability of a champion too or whatever.

Exactly. It's not difficult for a bard to use 3 actions, 4 even. That doesn't leave much room for rogue actions. Yet another useful 3rd action, I'd almost say. Certainly not bad to have a strike with sneak as that 3rd action, but that sure won't be something you'll use every turn.

[Gortle]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

It is, but you'd be better off with one player taking rogue and another taking bard, and both getting the durability of a champion too or whatever.

Which is a combination which happens often in regular play as Bard is insanely popular and Dirge of Doom is ridiculously strong by itself anyway, and Rogues aren't bad either.

So it is not a problem with Dual Class. My groups get there often.

[Captain Morgan]

Gortle wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

It is, but you'd be better off with one player taking rogue and another taking bard, and both getting the durability of a champion too or whatever.

Which is a combination which happens often in regular play as Bard is insanely popular and Dirge of Doom is ridiculously strong by itself anyway, and Rogues aren't bad either.

So it is not a problem with Dual Class. My groups get there often.

I think dread/dirge might be considered the strongest basic combo.

[Gortle]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Gortle wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Falco271 wrote:

...

A bard/rogue is a very useful combination and is very strong in social event, but not much more in combat. You can choose to buff or fight in combat, but both as a bard or as arogue you need your actions.
...

Dread Striker + Dirge of Doom by level 6 seems pretty damn nasty...

It is, but you'd be better off with one player taking rogue and another taking bard, and both getting the durability of a champion too or whatever.

Which is a combination which happens often in regular play as Bard is insanely popular and Dirge of Doom is ridiculously strong by itself anyway, and Rogues aren't bad either.

So it is not a problem with Dual Class. My groups get there often.

I think dread/dirge might be considered the strongest basic combo.

This combo is nice because Dirge is a huge area, automatic no save, party friendly. Immunity is the only thing that helps.

Dirge affects their defenses and attacks. Compare it to Inspire Courage, or laughably Bless/Heroism. This power embarrasses one of the strongest powers in the game. It is as broken as anything gets in PF2.

Then there is the fact that it is a reliable way for a rogue to gain flatfooted for ranged attacks. Dirge makes sense by itself. There are plently of other ways to get flat footed, just none anywhere as good as this combo.

My NPCs are going to have to start taking silence spells to defend themselves from Bards.

[SuperBidi]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I'm thinking of letting my players try dual classing. How much extra power is it? Does it make DMing much more difficult?

You were supposed to go back to PF1, if I remind correctly. How did it go?

[Falco271]

Gortle wrote:

Dirge affects their defenses and attacks. Compare it to Inspire Courage, or laughably Bless/Heroism. This power embarrasses one of the strongest powers in the game. It is as broken as anything gets in PF2.

Lingering Dirge, Circle of protection pre-cast on a martial and bless on the bard, who has actions to extend it sometimes. That's the combo I try to go for. As a bard I like to stay close to the martials anyway. That really shifts the odds.

[Deriven Firelion]

SuperBidi wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I'm thinking of letting my players try dual classing. How much extra power is it? Does it make DMing much more difficult?

You were supposed to go back to PF1, if I remind correctly. How did it go?

Levels 1 to 4 or 5, completely fine. I ran that first module and it all seemed great.

Then I hit module 2 and all the bad memories of buff stacking came back. The stat blocks of enemies with tons of buff potions they needed to drink to be viable enemies. The caster preparation times with stacked buffs, protection spells, and the like. The stacked magic items with everyone needing rings of protection, cloaks of resistance, armor, magic weapon, and ability boosting items.

I did not want to go back to that level of detail running an older group of players who don't have the same amount of time or interest to invest in all the little details. It's not fun for me to have to put that much effort into DMing for players who just want to imagine being fantasy heroes for a few hours without putting much work into it.

I liked that stuff when I was younger. My players didn't mind putting the work in. But now it's not all that interesting. Gaming is more of a weekly social interaction with some exercising of the imagination tossed in. But no one has the time or energy to really invest like we used to. So back to 2E as I don't want to put the work into 1E like you have to do to make the system challenging and interesting.