Author Topic: New multiclassing  (Read 5836 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2009, 09:15:05 PM »
While I agree that when pitting an effective foo 19/bar 4 and an effective foo 19/bar 11 against each other, the number of effective bar levels is rarely going to make a difference, especially as many classes are front-loaded, I do think that a foo 19/bar 4 is already a very attractive alternative to a foo 20 of almost any single class and I see little reason to give them more free stuff, however insignificant.
You do have a point about getting something for free.  Let's assume a cap on off-class bonuses to ECL equal to the class's level:

[spoiler]X18/Y2 -> ECL 19/4 (this represents about the minimum loss of the "primary" class)

X16/Y4 -> ECL 18/8 (a further loss, but with a greater secondary gain)

X14/Y6 -> ECL 17/12 (the highest loss for 9th level spells on the primary side)

X12/Y8 -> ECL 16/14 (pretty much inferior to the 10/10 split)

X10/Y10 -> ECL 15/15 (same here, no change)[/spoiler]

All in all, I think I am sold on the idea.  I think the cap is a good thing, but I might want to re-include secondary characteristics of various classes, like Turn Undead for Clerics, Shapeshifting, and what not.  With the cap, it keeps it from going crazy.  I suppose I could look at some 3 class splits too.  I have paid relatively little attention to it:

[spoiler]X18/Y1/Z1 -> ECL 19/2/2 (meh)

X16/Y2/Z2 -> ECL 18/4/4 (this is working out similarly as above)

X14/Y3/Z3 -> ECL 17/6/6 (9th level spells, 3rd level in the other two)

X14/Y4/Z2 -> ECL 17/8/4 (9th/4th/2nd)

X10/Y5/Z5 -> ECL 15/10/10 (8th/5th/5th)

X7/Y7/Z6 -> ECL 12/12/12 (eh...)[/spoiler]

So, this does keep things from going too crazy, and it is better than how it works in 3.5.

Quote
Note that with the adapted Versatile Training above, you could also make up to an effective foo 19/bar 6 even with the double class level limit in place, as that feat rewards odd level splits.
I read through it a bit, and I'm still iffy.  Maybe we need to post some examples of this to get a better picture.


Note:
I edited the OP, to primarily remove Versital Training.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 09:18:39 PM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Anym

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2009, 12:16:16 AM »
Basically, it's very similar to ToB in most regards other than the points themselves.
I see. And other than spell points everything (highest level of spells known, number of spells known, number of spells readied, opportunities to swap spells) would be based on caster level, which is to say effective class level, right? And I could swap a first level spell known for a ninth level one at 18th level (like martial adepts swap maneuvers but unlike spontaneous arcane casters swap spells), right?

With those numbers (and if I'm not mistaken), I'd say that a straight wizard 20 would still be attractive when compared to a wizard 18/foo 2 or other multiclass combinations, mainly by virtue of knowing some more 9th level spells. Spell points, the number of spells readied and the actual caster level, familiar progression and the bonus feat seem negligible in that comparison, but still. Of the other classes, crusader 20, swordsage 20 and warblade 20 all seem like fine possible single-classed choices, too.

On the other hand, nobody's ever going to need more than 18 levels (at most) of cleric, druid or rogue, are they? Not sure about the the other classes, partly due to lack of information.

I'm also not at all sure on the balance between wizards and sorcerers or even if the remaining numerical differences warrant having both as separate classes still.

Without his spellbook, a wizard can ready new spells after eight hours.  With his spell book, he can do so in ten minutes.
On a whim and mainly for symmetry, I'd probably lower that to the five minutes martial adepts take for a comparable task.

A quick note on bards: their Bardic Music will still technically scale in that it is keyed off of bard level or ranks in Perform.  So as long as you keep your Perform ranks maxed, you'll actually have a full progression here.
And after re-reading that bit, that actually doesn't seem, to me, to follow from the rules at all.

All in all, I think I am sold on the idea.  I think the cap is a good thing, but I might want to re-include secondary characteristics of various classes, like Turn Undead for Clerics, Shapeshifting, and what not.
I agree. In fact, I didn't even notice there were supposed to be un-included at some point. I'm even beginning to wonder if it would get too crazy if you gained all class features (with the possible exception of spell points), i.e. not just those that "scale" or are listed explicitly above, up to your effective class level...

I read through it a bit, and I'm still iffy.  Maybe we need to post some examples of this to get a better picture.
I think it's fine at high levels, the "optimal" splits just change a little and improve somewhat (albeit at the cost of one feat and possibly some spell points), i.e. foo 17/bar 3 = foo 19/bar 6, foo 13/bar 7 = foo 17/bar 13, foo 11/bar 9 = foo 16/bar 15 (always assuming versatile foo training), but it might be too strong at lower levels, especially with regards to martial adepts.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2009, 09:35:18 AM »
Basically, it's very similar to ToB in most regards other than the points themselves.
I see. And other than spell points everything (highest level of spells known, number of spells known, number of spells readied, opportunities to swap spells) would be based on caster level, which is to say effective class level, right? And I could swap a first level spell known for a ninth level one at 18th level (like martial adepts swap maneuvers but unlike spontaneous arcane casters swap spells), right?
Correct in all regards.  I'm going to post what I have on this in its own thread pretty soon.

Edit: Here is the link.


Quote
With those numbers (and if I'm not mistaken), I'd say that a straight wizard 20 would still be attractive when compared to a wizard 18/foo 2 or other multiclass combinations, mainly by virtue of knowing some more 9th level spells. Spell points, the number of spells readied and the actual caster level, familiar progression and the bonus feat seem negligible in that comparison, but still. Of the other classes, crusader 20, swordsage 20 and warblade 20 all seem like fine possible single-classed choices, too.

On the other hand, nobody's ever going to need more than 18 levels (at most) of cleric, druid or rogue, are they? Not sure about the the other classes, partly due to lack of information.
As for cleric, it looks like you're right.  Unless I drop access to all spells on the list, the only benefit is a few more SP per day.  As for druids, I'd have to look at the shapeshift rules again.  I think you're right in that they don't get anything new past 18th level there either.  I am giving rogues a capstone at 20th level based on skill tricks, but I'm not sure how powerful it really is.


Quote
I'm also not at all sure on the balance between wizards and sorcerers or even if the remaining numerical differences warrant having both as separate classes still.
They would be similar with a few differences.  If the sorcerer picks a heritage, they'll get heritage feats in place of the wizard's bonus feats.  If not, then they get feats the same as a wizard, with Eschew Materials in place of Scribe Scroll.  Other than that, without prep time or advanced knowledge of the threat, a sorcerer might be more attarctive, but planning would still favor the wizard in many regards.


Quote
Without his spellbook, a wizard can ready new spells after eight hours.  With his spell book, he can do so in ten minutes.
On a whim and mainly for symmetry, I'd probably lower that to the five minutes martial adepts take for a comparable task.
This has a negligable effect, so I agree.  The point is you can't do it in combat is all.


Quote
A quick note on bards: their Bardic Music will still technically scale in that it is keyed off of bard level or ranks in Perform.  So as long as you keep your Perform ranks maxed, you'll actually have a full progression here.
And after re-reading that bit, that actually doesn't seem, to me, to follow from the rules at all.
You're right.  I looked back and saw where I misread that.  I should probably add bardic music to this list of things boosted by ECL.


Quote
All in all, I think I am sold on the idea.  I think the cap is a good thing, but I might want to re-include secondary characteristics of various classes, like Turn Undead for Clerics, Shapeshifting, and what not.
I agree. In fact, I didn't even notice there were supposed to be un-included at some point. I'm even beginning to wonder if it would get too crazy if you gained all class features (with the possible exception of spell points), i.e. not just those that "scale" or are listed explicitly above, up to your effective class level...
This could work.  Things like Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, Battle Ador, and Steely Resolve shouldn't break the game at all.  The only thing I would want to specifically exclude from this would be the columns for things like spells/maneuvers known and readied.  I'd like specific investment to pick up new spells and maneuvers.


Quote
I read through it a bit, and I'm still iffy.  Maybe we need to post some examples of this to get a better picture.
I think it's fine at high levels, the "optimal" splits just change a little and improve somewhat (albeit at the cost of one feat and possibly some spell points), i.e. foo 17/bar 3 = foo 19/bar 6, foo 13/bar 7 = foo 17/bar 13, foo 11/bar 9 = foo 16/bar 15 (always assuming versatile foo training), but it might be too strong at lower levels, especially with regards to martial adepts.
I reread the feat you proposed, but without some changes to the system, it wouldn't work.  Boosting your ECL on an "off" class still wouldn't get you any spells known or readied.  We would have to make a provision in there to explicitly grant that.  I did decide to remove Martial Training, but I think the other four feats could work.  Once you multiclass, you still keep the benefit of the feat.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2009, 12:53:19 PM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Anym

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2009, 01:00:00 PM »
First, I'm a bit confused as there seems to be a contradiction with regards to how spells are handled between this:
And other than spell points everything (highest level of spells known, number of spells known, number of spells readied, opportunities to swap spells) would be based on caster level, which is to say effective class level, right? (...)
Correct in all regards.
And this:
Quote
I'm even beginning to wonder if it would get too crazy if you gained all class features (with the possible exception of spell points), i.e. not just those that "scale" or are listed explicitly above, up to your effective class level...
This could work.  (...)  The only thing I would want to specifically exclude from this would be the columns for things like spells/maneuvers known and readied.  I'd like specific investment to pick up new spells and maneuvers.
???

I reread the feat you proposed, but without some changes to the system, it wouldn't work.  Boosting your ECL on an "off" class still wouldn't get you any spells known or readied.  We would have to make a provision in there to explicitly grant that.
I disagree. Not to sound presumptuous, as you wrote them, but I do think it would work under RAW, as I understand them, at least for casters, but then again, see above for some confusing regarding the rules on my part.
1. The feat as written can increase your effective wizard level to a minimum of one, right?
2. Your wizard spells known and readied are based completely on your caster level, which is the same as your effective wizard level, right?
3. A character with a caster level of one has access to first level spells, right?
4. A character with a wizard level of zero would have 0 spell points and a character with a wizard level of one would have 3 spell points, so a character with a wizard level of zero, but an effective wizard level of one would have the average between the two, i.e. 1.5, rounded down, i.e. 1 spell point, right?
5. So, a first level non-wizard with versatile wizard training would known six first wizard level spells, have two of them readied and 1 single spell point per day to cast either one of them, wouldn't she? At which step do you think this wouldn't work?

I did decide to remove Martial Training, but I think the other four feats could work.
See my above comments about Sneak Attack [MULTICLASS]. I don't think a wizard 1/rogue 1 or a swordsage 2/rogue 18 with that feat should be better sneak attackers than a rogue 2 or rogue 20 respectively.

And if you really want to go that route, then there should probably at least also be feats for rage, bardic music, shapeshifter and animal companion progressions, in addition to those four, too.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2009, 01:17:30 PM »
It might be easier for you to read the new thread I posted on the spellcasting system.  I'm hoping it's all cleared up in there.

The one assumption that it looks like you're off on is that the spells readied/known is based on class level, but everything else is based on ECL.  So, with no class level, then there would be no spells known/readied.  Even with SP, the character would be unable to cast.

Now, I'm not sayint that this couldn't be changed for purposes of the feat.  Just make the feat say something to the effect of "you get X spells known and readied", and you'd be good to go.  Although the Magical Training feat already handles this.


See my above comments about Sneak Attack [MULTICLASS]. I don't think a wizard 1/rogue 1 or a swordsage 2/rogue 18 with that feat should be better sneak attackers than a rogue 2 or rogue 20 respectively.
You are right.  Strictly speaking, a multiclass rogue would be better at Sneak Attack, and that's just plain stupid.  So if we get the wording and concept nailed down from your version of Versatile Trainig, it could be used to proived a quicker boost for a non-rogue to get Sneak Attack, but they wouldn't get better at it than a straight rogue once they do multiclass.


And if you really want to go that route, then there should probably at least also be feats for rage, bardic music, shapeshifter and animal companion progressions, in addition to those four, too.
Yeah, I was worried about that.  The problem with most of those things was I figured they were either too good or not good enough for a feat.  Before I put any of this down on paper, I had thought about making feats for each of those. 

Also, when I post the class progressions/modifications, it might clear some things up.  For example, barbarians get rage 1/encounter.  I couldn't think of a good way to handle that with a [MULTICLASS] feat.  I don't want to hand out 1/encounter rage for a feat, and I didn't necessarily want it to be 1/day, because I didn't know how to make it work once they multiclass into barbarian.  I suppose they could end up with 1/encounter and 1/day, but this is the same problem as the Sneak Attack feat: it makes a multiclass barbarian better at rage than a straight barbarian.

That being said, I should remove the Sneak Attack feat.  If we can get Versatile Training working well, then it can replace the Magical Training feat as well as the two Martial feats remaining.


Thanks for all this input, by the way! :D
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Anym

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2009, 03:53:00 PM »
The one assumption that it looks like you're off on is that the spells readied/known is based on class level, but everything else is based on ECL.
Whoa, now that seems overly and unnecessarily harsh and would undo a lot of the benefits of this system IMHO. With this limitation, a wizard 10/cleric 10 would only be able to get 8th level casting in one of its classes (the one it took its last level in), wouldn't it? And the order in which you took your levels in would become important, as a wizard 16/barbarian 4 (taking all the wizard levels first, only knows up to 8th level spells despite being able to cast 9th level ones) would be a good deal weaker than a barbarian 4/wizard 16 (taking all the wizard levels last, gets the same overall number of wizard spells and spell points, but knows up to 9th level spells), wouldn't it? Neither of which seems desirable or necessary to me. I don't think multiclass characters that get spells known and readied up to their effective class level (which is what I assumed so far) would generally be unbalanced (with the exceptions I noted above, e.g. cleric 17-20) and the double class level limit already helps to ensure that you don't get too much without a specific investment. Not sure if this would be more appropriate for martial adepts, but for casters this seems almost as bad as, if not worse than, the status quo.

Thanks for all this input, by the way! :D
You're welcome!

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2009, 04:38:06 PM »
The one assumption that it looks like you're off on is that the spells readied/known is based on class level, but everything else is based on ECL.
Whoa, now that seems overly and unnecessarily harsh and would undo a lot of the benefits of this system IMHO. With this limitation, a wizard 10/cleric 10 would only be able to get 8th level casting in one of its classes (the one it took its last level in), wouldn't it?
Yeah, you're right.

I did it this way both because it's how it works for the martial adepts, and when I thought of it, I had a feat that let you boost your ECL, so I didn't think it was a problem.  Without it though, you're right in that they can't both have 8th level spells.

Hmmm....

So, you're suggesting having the table of spells known/readied be referenced by ECL instead of class level?  Should this be the same for martial adepts?  If so, I think I might want to key SP off of ECL instead of having using an average.

Thoughts?
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Anym

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #27 on: August 19, 2009, 05:57:13 PM »
Yeah, I think basing everything off effective class levels, including spells readied, spells known and maybe even spell points would work out fine for casters and could even be extended to all class features for all non-martial adept classes. It might even work for them, but I lack the experience judge that properly without thinking about it some more. Hopefully somebody else can also weigh in their opinion. The only requirement would be that every class has a capstone that makes taking it straight to level 20 worthwhile. The martial adepts all do and for any arcane caster, the extra highest level spells known should have the same effect. Clerics, druids and rogues would definitely need one, though. Maybe barbarians and rangers, too.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #28 on: August 19, 2009, 11:47:35 PM »
Yeah, I guess I should see what other think.

Would it work gearing all class features, spells/manuevers known and readied off of effective class level?  This would exclude BAB, saves, skill points, and hit dice;  those are geared off of actual class level.

As for capstones, I think they're nice, but not super necessary.  My understanding is few games actually see 20th level play, and far fewer from 1 to 20.  This isn't to say that we shouldn't give them something to aspire to, but I wonder just how much those capstones really matter in true gameplay.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

dman11235

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1544
    • Email
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #29 on: August 20, 2009, 12:21:17 AM »
That would be...bad.  Very much so, actually.  You want to have a reason to remain single-classed, after all.  It should be a choice.  A balanced choice, with neither one being the obvious contender (not because both are bad compared to a caster, but because both are equally good, at whatever balance point you set things to).*

It would, imo, be best if just the power of the abilities advanced as you outlined, but the access to the abilities in question.  So a caster would advance CL (which is the power behind the spells), but not maximum spell known or spells per day (which is the abilities they have access to).  Psionics would do the same with ML, and since that's a better designed system for this, advances partially the spell per day (bonus PP are based off ML, not class level).  That works better imo.  Casters have the issue of having set spells (which you fixed with the spell points).

The biggest problem, I guess, is that while this makes caster multiclassing much more smooth (actually makes it smooth at all, actually) and better, this does very little for mundane classes as presented, barring ToB, of course.

*EDIT: And, of course, class features are probably the best way of doing this.  The power increases with other levels, so that the class features aren't useless and grow even more useless as you level, but you won't gain the better class features.  You trade the better class features (things like the capstone abilities) for more versatility, and class features from other classes that complement yours.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2009, 12:25:31 AM by dman11235 »
My sig's Handy Haversack: Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #30 on: August 20, 2009, 09:23:06 AM »
So you're suggesting boosting class abilities and SP/PP, but not spell/maneuvrs known and readied?  Anym made the good point that a Wizard 10/Cleric 10 would only get 8th level spells on one side this way, because only one class would be picking up new spells known/readied at that level.


Edit:
The biggest problem, I guess, is that while this makes caster multiclassing much more smooth (actually makes it smooth at all, actually) and better, this does very little for mundane classes as presented, barring ToB, of course.
Also (I can post them soon), I have modified some of the classes to make their abilities scale better with level.  Just to give a quick example:

Barbarian - rage is per encounter and gets abilities at higher levels while raging (Mettle, fear immunity, improved damage reduction, Haste, and at very high levels, even Improved Mettle and can't die from HP damage while raging).

Bard - Nothing yet other than SP.  Any suggestions?

Cleric - SP.  Turn undead is modified (deals/heals 1d6 damage per level in a 30 foot radius; does not affect cleric).

Druid - SP.  Pick either animal companion or Shapeshift variant from PHBII.

Fighter - Replaced with Warblade.  Made a variant that can swap maneuvers for feats as well.

Monk - Use unarmed swordsage (which is spelled out better).

Paladin - Use Crusader.  Made a variant that gets auras in place of stance at 2nd level.

Ranger - Made three variants:
   1) Per PHB with full Animal Companion advancement.  Uses SP to cast.
   2) Lose Animal Companion and Combat Style Feats.  Gain Shapeshift from PHBII.  Use SP to cast.
   3) Sublime Way Ranger (from RadicalTaoist), with Raging Storm discipline I created.

Rogue - Gets a free Skill Trick every even level.  Can "recover" per-encounter skill tricks by spending a swift action and making an attack that meets the criteria for a Sneak Attack.  Cannot use a Skill Trick on a round it was recovered.  At 20th level, all Skill Tricks automatically recover (they are at-will).

Sorcerer - Gets bonus feats as wizard, either as heritage feats, or Eschew Materials and bonus Metamagic/Item Creation feats.  Uses SP to cast.

Wizard - Uses SP to cast.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2009, 10:50:35 AM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #31 on: August 20, 2009, 11:56:13 AM »
effective class leveleffective class leveleffective class levelactual class levelactual class level
« Last Edit: August 20, 2009, 12:05:18 PM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Anym

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2009, 04:28:49 PM »
OK, I thought about it some more and I still fail to see the bad imbalance here. Note that "effective class level" doesn't mean "effective character level"! I think there still are plenty of reasons to stay single-classed in most cases. Basically, this system would allow you to trade 1, 2, 3 or 5 levels of class features in your highest class for 4, 8, 12, 15 levels of class features in another class at 20th level. By now, I do think that for most spellcasters and martial adepts, 20th level class features in a single class are comparable to 19th and 4th or 15th and 15th level class features in two classes, with neither one being the obvious contender.

I don't think it completely falls apart at lower levels either: The sweet spot where multiclass characters are closest to overpower single-classed ones is probably at 4th level, where a character can have 3rd level class features (which often are just as good as 4th level ones, i.e. 2nd level spells/powers) from two classes. The single-classed character's fewer class features will be slightly more powerful though, and the single-classed character will always get access to the next level of spells/powers sooner, i.e. a foo 2/bar 2 is probably slightly stronger than either a foo 4 or a bar 4, but on the other hand, a foo 3 or bar 5 is probably slightly stronger than a foo 2/bar 1 or foo 2/bar 3, too.

For the system to work out, power probably needs to increase disproportionally as class level increases, which should be the case for most casters and martial adepts most of the time, so I'm not too worried about any of them anymore, even bards, clerics and druids, especially below level 17. It's still worth keeping this in mind when redesigning the magic system, though.

I am a bit worried about barbarians, beast master rangers, shapeshifter rangers and rogues. For barbarians, the additional abilities while raging might just be enough, but I'm not sure, it depends on how fast they accrue/grow. For the rangers, I'd consider not stopping their spell progression prematurely and maybe giving them a fifth level worth of spells, which could include something along the lines of Cure Critical Wounds, Find the Path, Mass Cat's Grace, Mass Owl's Wisdom, Stoneskin, Summon Nature's Ally V, Transport via Plants. For rogues, I don't think bonus skill tricks are enough. Maybe sneak attack should grow faster then linearly or something. Capstones can help with this at level 20, but there probably should be something fast increasing all the way.

Otherwise, I'm afraid that for these classes there would indeed be little reason to stay single classed: A rogue 18/wizard 2 or rogue 16/barbarian 4 would probably be almost striclty better than a rogue 20 and a rogue 10/ranger 10 would probably be better than either rogue 20 or ranger 20, as the loss of high levels in those classes doesn't offset gaining a disproportionate number of lower levels in another.

On a sidenote, the system should probably include a provision that features granted by multiple classes such as an animal companion increase at a rate of beast master druid class level plus beastmaster ranger class level plus half the sum of all other class levels, rather than something silly like effective beastmaster druid class level plus effective beastmaster ranger class level or having two animal companions at the effective class level of each respective class.

Alternatively, if the slight increase in the overall power level and balance shifts are unacceptable in return for the added flexibility that the system gives you, I'd suggest scrapping most of the effective class levels idea and using a simpler system that just addresses the core problem of spellcaster multiclassing:
  • Non-spellcaster-nor-martial-adept classes multiclass as by PHB, which works reasonably well as all classes improve your BAB, HP, saves and skills.
  • Martial adepts multiclass by ToB, which also works reasonably well as their initiator level is the sum of all levels in their martial adept class plus half the sum of their levels in all other classes.
  • Spellcasters determine their caster level just like martial adepts determine their initiator level, by adding together the level in their spellcaster class plus 1/2 their levels in all other classes, which should make them work reasonably well.
  • A class' initiator/caster level is capped at double your actual class level in that class. (That's a change from ToB.)
  • Initiator/caster level determines the highest level of maneuvers/spells available and the number of maneuvers/spells known. (That's also change from ToB.)
  • Everything else is based on actual class levels, including, but not limited to, the number of maneuvers/spells readied, the number of stances known, the opportunities at which you can swap an old maneuver/spell for a new one and the number of (base and bonus) spell points and any other class features.

Compared to the "full" effective class levels system, this would have less power creep and would make multiclassing in general a bit less attractive, both of which should help balance and single-classed characters, if either of them was considered to be a problem otherwise.

Compared to your "new version" of the effective class levels system, this would take the importance of multiclassing in a specific order (a wizard 16/rogue 4 wouldn't be weaker than a rogue 4/wizard 16) and would help actually getting rid of dual-class advancing PrCs (a wizard 10/wizard 10 wouldn't be weaker than a wizard 5/cleric 5/mystic theurge 10), both of which seem like flaws in that proposal to me. Also, as the special multiclassing rules only apply to martial adepts

Or do use the "full" effective class levels system and have some things (such as spell points) be determined by actual class levels, just other ones than in your "new version". I strongly think that at least initiator/caster level, the highest level of maneuvers/spells available and the number of maneuvers/spells known need to depend on effective class level for the system to work as intended.

Or massage either system a bit more by limiting your maximum effective class level to 3/2 times your actual class level. Or by making off-levels in different classes worth different amounts. For example, levels in other martial adept/spellcaster classes would increase initiator/caster level by 1/2 each, but levels in other classes would only increase it by 1/4.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: New multiclassing
« Reply #33 on: August 22, 2009, 10:29:52 AM »
Crossposting an idea you might want to look at,

Options are the way I like to go, every class has several option trees available, with various prerequisites, whether they are permanent bonus effects(like Evasion) or active abilities(like spells). Ensure each option scales with character level, at least partially but preferably fully. Options with static effects must either have effects that are naturally useful at all levels, e.g evasion and co, or gain automatic improvement with level to greater, or associated effects.

This way, multiclassing remains useful and consistent in power, whichever crazed assemblage you pick up(assuming BAB, Saves and Skills are dealt with in their own ways, BAB). Variance between a straight classed X 20 and a 4/4/4/4/4 is in depth(the difference between stunning, paralysing and petrifying for example) and breadth(difference between spell schools, difference between sneak attack and TWF and animal companion, Variety) of power, not magnitude(DCs, raw damage, combat relevance of effect)
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."