Best Design for Multiclassing

I don't want to start an edition war but I'd like to find out what people think is the best system for multiclassing.

Someone else might be able to explain the systems better than I but I'll give it a try. I'll admit I've played 4th edition the least and there might be different methods of multiclassing in each of the systems that I don't mention.

1st/2nd edition - a fighter/magic-user/thief was a composite of the best in each class. Each class leveled up by receiving 1/3 of the xp gained. to become a 3/3/3 level multiclass, it required as much xp as the total of all 3 3rd level classes.
3rd edition - each level, players pick a la carte from all possible classes that they are eligible for.  A fighter/wizard/rogue must level up each class individually. To become a 3/3/3 it required as much xp as a 9th level character.
4th edition - multiclass through feats. To become a fighter/wizard/rogue a player must choose the appropriate feats to gain the abilities desired. 
5th edition - it is rumored that each class will have a separate table for multiclassing. If you want to multiclass, you follow the separate progression table

Some people really hate using xp as a method for multiclassing. I liked it personally.

My preference for multiclassing would be a system which allowed a character to gain strength in all classes at the same time so players leveled in all three classes at the same time.

iIt would be great if a player could decide what percentage to allocate to each class. Ex. I want to be a fighter/wizard/rogue. I want 50% dedicated to fighter, 30% towards wizard, and 20% to thief. Hopefully, this system would create a 10th level character that might be roughly equivalent to an 8th level fighter, 7th level wizard, and 6th level thief.

in 3rd edition, you might have a 5th level fighter, 3rd level wizard, and 2nd level rogue and you would be entirely unplayable in a party of 10th level characters. 

In 4th edition you would be trading various abilities for those of other classes through multiclass feats.
I get your fustration regarding this topic.  I always hated the established rules for multiclassing.  You are generally super weak compared to a character who just leveled up in one class.  Although you did have utility outside of combat.


One of the big reasons I like this game is there really aren't any rules, just guidelines.  I've always done my own thing (consulting with the DM of course to ensure I wasn't becoming overpowered).  Basically, I like a system based on xp, but when you hit your required xp for whatever your main class is, you "level" as the chosen class instead.  For example, If you hit level 5 as a fighter and decide you want to level as a warlock instead, you would level as a level 5 warlock.  Obviously at some point the scale has to shift for power/realism reasons.  Maybe when you hit level 10 if you choose a non-main class then you scale the level down a bit, maybe you level as a level 8 warlock instead.


I imagine this is siimilar to what they are trying to accomplish in 5th.    
Break the Card: A great contest run by Dilleux_Lepaire in the Cards and Combo's forums! Support the Card: An homage to Break the Card I run on the You Make the Card forums! Support the Card winners:
Show
Week 1: Savor the Moment - Winner: ConfusedAsUsual!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29788879/CONTEST_Card_Support:_Savor_the_Moment?pg=1
Week 2: Grinning Ignus - Winners: Lobster667 and VRdragoon!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29797229/CONTEST_Support_the_Card:_Grinning_Ignus?pg=1
Week 3: Transcendence - Winner: Dilleux_Lepaire!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29806577/CONTEST__Support_the_Card:_Transcendence?pg=1
Week 4a: Rofellos's Gift - Winner: SuperSpawnWrithe!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29816423/CONTEST_Support_the_Card:_Rofelloss_Gift
Week 4b: Mortus Strider - Winner: Libe!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29820463/CONTEST_Support_the_Card:_Mortus_Strider
Week 5: High Priest of Penance - Winners: Dilleux_Lepaire and Dudibus!
Show
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29921687/CONTEST_Support_the_Card:_High_Priest_of_Penance?pg=1
I have a completely different view of what multiclassing should be like, I think. Nothing to do with EXP and its allocation. I like where D&D Next is going with it (making it a module, and giving it a seperate chart). But I think that it sounds a bit overboard compared to what's likely necessary.

My Multiclassing Solution
The problem that Mearls mentioned in the article discussing multiclassing was the "frontloading" of features for classes, so that they start fun. In multiclassing where you literally take the levels of the class, this means someone gets a lot of class features for multiclassing compared to someone sticking to a single class.

But consider that 1st level doesn't mean "you just started." A 1st level wizard has been working at the craft for quite some time, and this is true of all the others -- very seldom does a player decide "my character was a regular guy; five minutes ago he found some gear and decided to leave his home. The abilities he taught himself in those five minutes are in no way a reflection of his array of abilities." So 1st level, when you look at it, is a contraction of years of effort, possibly more time and effort than your character makes to get from level 1 to 20 (depending on the backstory).

So my thinking is that the multiclassing module should instead say that you ignore whatever it says for the 1st level of a class when multiclassing into  it. Instead, the module gives you a three-level chart that seperates the benefits of that first, front-loaded level to a more sensible pace for balances sake (while also thematically preventing the "I went to bard school for two weeks, but I can become a first level wizard full of spells just because I want to, while the party wizard spent a decade mastering his first cantrip"). The classes are otherwise completely unchanged after this three-level 1st level.

As a final note, the amount of mini-levels before 2nd level is probably not accurate. Maybe different classes would even have different numbers of mini-levels (if being a 1st-level x in addition to another class is more potent than being a 1st-level y in addition to another class).


Anyway, your solution would be fine too, I think. Not exactly my cup of tea, but whatevs. Given the goal of multclassing as a module, perhaps we'll even see different multiclassing modules that evoke different editions.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
I would use something similar to 3e except classes would not be inherently front loaded. Certain class bonuses would only be available if you selected the class as your initial class.
example: Fighter gains 1 maneuver, Rogue gains 1 trick, Cleric gains 1 divinity use, Wizard gains extra spells in book.
If a Wizard gained a level and chose to be a Fighter level 1 they would select one maneuver instead of 2 that they would have received had they chose Fighter first. 

Disclaimer: Wizards of the Coast is not responsible for the consequences of any failed saving throw, including but not limited to petrification, poison, death magic, dragon breath, spells, or vorpal sword-related decapitations.

I would actually like to see two methods of multiclassing avaliable, both a 'soft' and a 'hard' method.

The 'hard' method would be the equivalent of 3e. Grab levels in classes starting at 1 and heading towards 20. This would mean that you could end up with a 10 Fighter/10 Wizard and it should end up reasonably balanced. 

Of course, the biggest problem with this would be matching the levels up. How much do you gimp the Level 10 multiclass fighter compared to the Level 20? If it gets half the MDD, is it going to be useful in combat, even with the level 4-5 Wizard Spells in tow. The second question is do you restrict the Wizard half to Lvl 4-5 spells or allow them to take higher? Will the level 4-5 spells make an impact on higher level monsters?

I, myself, would be more likely to use the 'soft' method - more akin to 4e Multiclassing.

Allow a whole lot of feats which allow characters to pick up aspects of other classes - whether this is MDD as an Encounter resource, or allowing a fighter class to cast 1 Level 1 spell, once per day. These would allow you to dip into another class, without really forcing you to put anything other than a feat into doing so.

Anyway, that is my opinion on the matter - and the latter is almost  supported in the current packet. You can learn Wizard Spells, but it doesnt have the freedom that I would like...

Each system has its flaws. My preference is for a union of 3e, 4e and 5e specialties. If done correctly you get everything that was right about 2e as a by product. 

A 4e hybrid is 2e multiclassing for one level. Since its one level you can mix it with 3e multiclassing. A character could be a 5th level ftr/mage with an Eldritch Knight specialty and a  level Rogue/mage with an arcane trickster specialty, or just a plain 3rd lvl Rogue so they are either an Eldritch Rogue Knight or a Trick-Knight.

I think they will spread out level 1 abilities.  The question is will they give you any choice like 4e hybrids so you can pick the one ability you really want?
If they stick to modules and different complexity of rule sets, i.e. basic, standard and advanced, then I see no reason not to include all versions of mulitclassing. So with the basic set, you would have mulitclassing presented as the simple combination of two or more classes that track experience seperately. As you go into standard rules, you can bring in hybrid rules and feats, and then migrate to 3E multiclassing, and then finally gesalt where you can combine one of more classes where the character retians the abilities of each class that don't overlap.

The progression would be weak multiclassing to being overpowered.
I would use something similar to 3e except classes would not be inherently front loaded. Certain class bonuses would only be available if you selected the class as your initial class.
example: Fighter gains 1 maneuver, Rogue gains 1 trick, Cleric gains 1 divinity use, Wizard gains extra spells in book.
If a Wizard gained a level and chose to be a Fighter level 1 they would select one maneuver instead of 2 that they would have received had they chose Fighter first. 



maybe then put the other class features in a specialty.
with dual class you get the bare bones class and can take the specialty if you want to gain more of the class features.
 
I would like something like 1E/2E Multiclassing, or 4E Hybrid Classing, where you combine two classes for a character concept, more or less evenly.

If we must have "this level I am a different class" multiclassing, I am hopeful about the separate advancement for multiclass characters, which avoids nerfing/backloading every class at low levels just to make the system viable.
I would use something similar to 3e except classes would not be inherently front loaded. Certain class bonuses would only be available if you selected the class as your initial class.
example: Fighter gains 1 maneuver, Rogue gains 1 trick, Cleric gains 1 divinity use, Wizard gains extra spells in book.
If a Wizard gained a level and chose to be a Fighter level 1 they would select one maneuver instead of 2 that they would have received had they chose Fighter first. 



maybe then put the other class features in a specialty.
with dual class you get the bare bones class and can take the specialty if you want to gain more of the class features.
 



this would also alouw for alternatives to make the multi class more intresting.
so instread of taking the specialty that gives the normal wizard class features you can chose a specialty that gives alternative features for your multi class.
so you might chose a specialty that would alouw you to use your expertise dice on spells that have a atack roll.
 
Classless ability-buy.
I am increasingly convinced the devs should give us something as good as 4E or just go home. Once the introduced hybred, system was great.

Handled a pure class no-probs (if you can't get that part right, might be time to quit)
Handled dabling in another class with the multiclass rules (and worked pretty well if thats what you wanted)
Handled the even ballance between 2 classes (good old fighter 10/wizard 10) except in a way that meant they were actually on par in certain aspects with a pure class of same level.
Hell, even alowed you to hybred in two classes and dabble in a third. Admitedly that was the max, so in one sense less "freedom" than 3x, but I will take functional but with (pretty decent really) boundries over boundless and crap any day.

I know there were plenty of things folks didn't like about 4e, but that particular system worked, really really well. Increasingly thinking that it is simply unaceptable to go backwards on this particular front.
I don't want to start an edition war but I'd like to find out what people think is the best system for multiclassing.

Someone else might be able to explain the systems better than I but I'll give it a try. I'll admit I've played 4th edition the least and there might be different methods of multiclassing in each of the systems that I don't mention.

1st/2nd edition - a fighter/magic-user/thief was a composite of the best in each class. Each class leveled up by receiving 1/3 of the xp gained. to become a 3/3/3 level multiclass, it required as much xp as the total of all 3 3rd level classes.
3rd edition - each level, players pick a la carte from all possible classes that they are eligible for.  A fighter/wizard/rogue must level up each class individually. To become a 3/3/3 it required as much xp as a 9th level character.
4th edition - multiclass through feats. To become a fighter/wizard/rogue a player must choose the appropriate feats to gain the abilities desired. 
5th edition - it is rumored that each class will have a separate table for multiclassing. If you want to multiclass, you follow the separate progression table



You forgot about 4e's Hybrid classing, which I've often heard being praised for its effectiveness as a MC system. I never personally used it, having used a houseruled version of the 4e PHB1 MC feats (taking a single MC feat gave you all three of the power swap feats pertaining to that class; my notion being that you spend feats to get something extra, not to be able to choose between two equal choices).

Some people really hate using xp as a method for multiclassing.


I think a more accurate assessment is that some people just don't like to use xp, preferring to level up after so many sessions or when it seems right in the story. If you favor one of these alternate methods of advancement, then xp based MC'ing becomes a burden to your playstyle.

My preference for multiclassing would be a system which allowed a character to gain strength in all classes at the same time so players leveled in all three classes at the same time.


It sounds like you want power tied to character level, while the means of expressing power are tied to class levels.  It sounds like a good foundation, actually building the MC house on it might be trickier than it first seems though.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I am increasingly convinced the devs should give us something as good as 4E or just go home. Once the introduced hybred, system was great.

Handled a pure class no-probs (if you can't get that part right, might be time to quit)
Handled dabling in another class with the multiclass rules (and worked pretty well if thats what you wanted)
Handled the even ballance between 2 classes (good old fighter 10/wizard 10) except in a way that meant they were actually on par in certain aspects with a pure class of same level.
Hell, even alowed you to hybred in two classes and dabble in a third. Admitedly that was the max, so in one sense less "freedom" than 3x, but I will take functional but with (pretty decent really) boundries over boundless and crap any day.

I know there were plenty of things folks didn't like about 4e, but that particular system worked, really really well. Increasingly thinking that it is simply unaceptable to go backwards on this particular front.


I had heard about the hybrid system but every group that I played with gave up on 4E within a matter of weeks and went back to 3E.  Everyone said that the 4E classes were too scripted and vanilla with very little variability.  I actually wanted to try it longer but had no one to play it with (at least in the 3 groups I had belonged to).

I would like something like 1E/2E Multiclassing, or 4E Hybrid Classing, where you combine two classes for a character concept, more or less evenly.

If we must have "this level I am a different class" multiclassing, I am hopeful about the separate advancement for multiclass characters, which avoids nerfing/backloading every class at low levels just to make the system viable.



Arent the classes already backloaded nature? If you take one level in ftr you get every weapon, one level in wizard and you get magic items rituals and a Ray of Frost gun, one level in rogue and a bunch of skills same with Monk even more.
I would like something like 1E/2E Multiclassing, or 4E Hybrid Classing, where you combine two classes for a character concept, more or less evenly.

If we must have "this level I am a different class" multiclassing, I am hopeful about the separate advancement for multiclass characters, which avoids nerfing/backloading every class at low levels just to make the system viable.



Arent the classes already backloaded nature? If you take one level in ftr you get every weapon, one level in wizard and you get magic items rituals and a Ray of Frost gun, one level in rogue and a bunch of skills same with Monk even more.



I was using backloaded to mean a class gets a lot of it's features later, as opposed to being frontlaoded (getting a lot a 1st level, as some say is the case with the current classes in Next).

A good MC system should have synergy with story and role-playing.
2ed and 4ed had interesting, fun systems, but they were terrible from a story-roleplaying point of view.

A good system lets a player say: "I've been a fighter for 7 levels but... know what? I'm going to learn a little arcane magic because **insert story/roleplaying reason here**"
And then maybe a couple of levels later he says: "Well, I've been in the wilds all this time because of **story reasons**. I think I'll just not invest in fighter or wizard anymore and from now on invest only in ranger levels."

2ed and 4ed's systems were nice to play with from a rules' perspective, but they were too rigid. You either had to be half-half something from the start and never change it, or go for that strange dual-class for humans which didn't give you much freedom either. Or, in 4ed, you could "borrow" some abilities from other classes, but you could never really start on the path of another class. You had to be your starting class till the end.

3ed was the only version of MC that really reflected free story-driven choices for characters.
Whether it was worth for some class combinations or not, that's another point.
Such things can be adjusted.

But most important is to make MC a part of a character's story and not just a system to create hybrid classes.

A good MC system should have synergy with story and role-playing.
2ed and 4ed had interesting, fun systems, but they were terrible from a story-roleplaying point of view.



That's where you are completly wrong, MC system should have synergy within mechanical point of view...story and role-playing should remain completly independent of it...let the players and DM give context to it... 
A good MC system should have synergy with story and role-playing.
2ed and 4ed had interesting, fun systems, but they were terrible from a story-roleplaying point of view.

I am going to agree.  A good MC system should have synergy with story and role-playing.  It's doesn't have to, though, but must never dictate nor deny story and roleplaying.

You forgot about 4e's Hybrid classing, which I've often heard being praised for its effectiveness as a MC system. I never personally used it, having used a houseruled version of the 4e PHB1 MC feats (taking a single MC feat gave you all three of the power swap feats pertaining to that class; my notion being that you spend feats to get something extra, not to be able to choose between two equal choices).



The problem with adapting the 4e Hybrid system is that it relies heavily upon 4e's unified class-features mechanic, which it appears 5e won't share.

Personally, I loved the multiclass-friendliness of Star Wars Saga Edition, but again it relies upon mechanics that 5e won't have - not only unified class mechanics, but an almost complete lack of level-dependent class features.

I think that if you want to go with the equivalent of multiclass "dipping", then either feats or specialities are the way to go.

If you want to do more than that, the alternative should be a straight-down-the-middle multiclass option, and it shouldn't consist of alternating levels in each of two classes. Instead, at each level you will gain minor progression in both roles. You're not a "Fighter 2 / Wizard 2", you're a 4th-level Fighter/Wizard.

Each class would then have a second, more limited, level progression chart for use when taking it as part of a multiclass pair, one that grants a stripped-down version of its class features. When you gain a level in Fighter/Wizard, you gain the class features from the Fighter Multiclass progression table and the Wizard Multiclass progression table.

Admittedly, that sort of progression is going to be very difficult to work out for some classes (you can't gain half a spell, or half a feat), and there will still be potential imbalances with all the potential combinations, but it may be doable.
True20 by Green Ronin has a great multiclass system. No class gets stances, tricks, or powers. Those are bought as class specific feats. You gain 1 feat per level. What class you choose at 1st level gets 4 feat choices.
So if I made a Fighter at first level then switch to Rogue at second then Wizard at third, I would have 4 fighter maneuvers, 1Rogue trick, and 1Wizard power.
Examples of class specific feats:
Fighter- Shield Use, Cleave, Heavy Armor Use, Deadly Strike
Rogue- Evasion, Sneak Attack, Feint
Wizard- Spells, Maximize Spell, Expand Spell
    
 

Disclaimer: Wizards of the Coast is not responsible for the consequences of any failed saving throw, including but not limited to petrification, poison, death magic, dragon breath, spells, or vorpal sword-related decapitations.

I want the true multi-classing of AD&D.

That said, I want it as one possible module; I would also like to see a hybrid style multi-classing module.

I really dont care for level-dipping (3E style) multi-classing, or Prestige Classes; although, I think that modules for them should be available for those that want that style of multi-classing. 
I want the true multi-classing of AD&D.

That said, I want it as one possible module; I would also like to see a hybrid style multi-classing module.

I really dont care for level-dipping (3E style) multi-classing, or Prestige Classes; although, I think that modules for them should be available for those that want that style of multi-classing. 



AD&D multiclassing is tricky.  It generally just led to the PC being 1 level lower that the rest of the group but with twice the abilities.  Hit points were rounded down but that wasn't too bad.  You just took the highest attack roll or save for your class AND there were limited combinations based on race as a balancing/flavour  factor.  I don't really see how that could be implemented in the same way in DDN.  Limiting multiclass combinations would not be popular.  Methinks perhaps you might want all the bebefits of that system but nonew of the drawbacks?
I prefer the 3e system for it's granularity. You can pick how much of a split you want going 50/50 between classes or 25/25/50 or a one level dip.
It was also the most fun from a narrative sense. The rogue spends time in a monastery and finds god taking a level of cleric. Or the fighter learns a few magical tricks after sending so much time with wizards.

Bounded accuracy helps. As saves are fixed, a level 1 spell might still be useful. And the fighter's hit probability isn't going to tank because of a few dips into other classes. 
Dumping caster level and having that just be class level might help. A level 8 character that is 5 wizard and 3 rogue might still cast spells that deal as much damage as a level 8 wizard.  

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

For me, hybrid is the best. Since getting it to work in a non-4th setting would be problematic, I propose a point-based multiclass system.

You get x number of points to buy the features from the classes as you wish. You get y more at each level to buy class advancements.

Simple, effective. Easy to outline in a couple of paragraphs.
Color me flattered.

LIFE CYCLE OF A RULES THREAD

Show
Thank_Dog wrote:

2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I think that if you have to argue to convince others about the clarity of something, it's probably not as objectively clear as you think.

No, what it means is that some people just like to be obtuse.

For me, hybrid is the best. Since getting it to work in a non-4th setting would be problematic, I propose a point-based multiclass system. You get x number of points to buy the features from the classes as you wish. You get y more at each level to buy class advancements. Simple, effective. Easy to outline in a couple of paragraphs.



Maybe I am reading this wrong... And I apologize if I am. But doesn't this kinda work under the assumption that everyone is going to multiclass all of the time, and if you dont your gimping yourself for not spending the points?
No. You only get multiclass points if you opt to multiclass. And going a single class would always work out to be stronger in one area. The strength of multiclassing should be versatility over focus.
Color me flattered.

LIFE CYCLE OF A RULES THREAD

Show
Thank_Dog wrote:

2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I think that if you have to argue to convince others about the clarity of something, it's probably not as objectively clear as you think.

No, what it means is that some people just like to be obtuse.

I would want the basic progression of AD&D Dual-Classing, with the freedom of 3E Multi-Classing. As previously mentioned, Dual-Classing gives you only the best of a feature from across your classes, so a fighter 5/ wizard 5 /cleric 5 would have the MDD and HP of a level 5 fighter and the spell attack bonus of the level 5 wizard.

Imagine that gaining levels 2/3/4/5 takes a running total of 1000/2500/5000/9000 XP for every class. Buying the first level of a new class would take a feat, and give you all of the (mostly trivial) level 1 class features.

Then, if you were a fighter 3/ wizard 1, instead of spending your next 2500 XP to gain a fourth level of fighter, you could spend 1,000 XP to increase your wizard level from 1 to 2. Yes, it's extra book-keeping to keep separate XP totals for each class, but you did opt into the system by spending the feat in the first place, and the benefit is that "just dabbling" in a class doesn't significantly affect your XP progression for your main class - you pay a small XP cost to gain weaker abilities, and a two-class even-progression character only ends up a few levels behind a single-class character. You're still weaker, but not by nearly as much.

The metagame is not the game.

No. You only get multiclass points if you opt to multiclass. And going a single class would always work out to be stronger in one area. The strength of multiclassing should be versatility over focus.



Ah I see thanks for the clarification. So to make sure I am getting this right.


Step one: Start a charicter. Race class etc etc....

Step Two: at level (Level you wish to start multiclassing in) Declare that you are doing so. You now get a set amount of points that you can spend on features from both classes from your level or before. (Restrictions on what can and cant be obtained in the secondary class at DM's whim I assume)

Step three: Control your PC that may not be the strongest but can do a wider veriety of things.


Step 4: Wizards gets praised for making a decent multiclass system... And does not credit the forums >.> The sneaky [The multiclass self help tape ends here... The reel seems to have been cut with sissors]
Pretty much, yeh.
Color me flattered.

LIFE CYCLE OF A RULES THREAD

Show
Thank_Dog wrote:

2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I think that if you have to argue to convince others about the clarity of something, it's probably not as objectively clear as you think.

No, what it means is that some people just like to be obtuse.


A good MC system should have synergy with story and role-playing.
2ed and 4ed had interesting, fun systems, but they were terrible from a story-roleplaying point of view.



That's where you are completly wrong, MC system should have synergy within mechanical point of view...story and role-playing should remain completly independent of it...let the players and DM give context to it... 




Actually, I am very much right.
Every rule in the game should exist to support story and roleplaying. There is no dichotomy.
If my fighter now wants to trail the path of a wizard and there's no possible way to do that, then this is poor rules design, because the rules are forcing the player to remain a fighter, which means the rules are dictating story, character concept and roleplaying.
When it should be the opposite. Rules should be there to give players the mechanics with which to develop their characters' stories.
I want the true multi-classing of AD&D.

That said, I want it as one possible module; I would also like to see a hybrid style multi-classing module.

I really dont care for level-dipping (3E style) multi-classing, or Prestige Classes; although, I think that modules for them should be available for those that want that style of multi-classing. 



AD&D multiclassing is tricky.  It generally just led to the PC being 1 level lower that the rest of the group but with twice the abilities.  Hit points were rounded down but that wasn't too bad.  You just took the highest attack roll or save for your class AND there were limited combinations based on race as a balancing/flavour  factor.  I don't really see how that could be implemented in the same way in DDN.  Limiting multiclass combinations would not be popular.  Methinks perhaps you might want all the bebefits of that system but nonew of the drawbacks?

With 5E XP tables, this type of multi-classing would result in a larger level gap {EDIT: starting after 6th level}; thus providing a drawback to compensate for the lack of racial level limits.

Hit Points were not only rounded down, they were also averaged (divided by the number of classes), resulting in worse HP than you suggest; also a drawback you minimalized.

I don't want a system that provides benefits only, like 3E type multi-classing (which had negligible drawbacks); I want a system that makes sense.

For example, if I choose to train in multiple classes at once, I should have to split the resources used for those classes, as long as I continue to use the features of each class. In other words, if I buy a level in a class, then I don't spend any additional resources (XP) for that class, then I should lose the features of that class (because I am no longer putting any focus into developing or maintaining those class features). 3E style multi-classing allows you to do this without having to continue to spend those resources (XP) to maintain training is the class and you never lose those abilities through atrophia.

Splitting the XP among each class evenly is one way of dealing with the problem; you are continuing to spend the resources to maintain, as well as develop, the features of that class. Although, personally, I use a system where class specific actions provide class specific XP (melee combat XP goes towards martial classes, spell casting provides XP towards casting classes, rogue-like actions would provide XP towards those classes, etc.) and general XP gets split amongst the classes.
I prefer the 3e system for it's granularity. You can pick how much of a split you want going 50/50 between classes or 25/25/50 or a one level dip.
It was also the most fun from a narrative sense. The rogue spends time in a monastery and finds god taking a level of cleric. Or the fighter learns a few magical tricks after sending so much time with wizards.

Bounded accuracy helps. As saves are fixed, a level 1 spell might still be useful. And the fighter's hit probability isn't going to tank because of a few dips into other classes. 
Dumping caster level and having that just be class level might help. A level 8 character that is 5 wizard and 3 rogue might still cast spells that deal as much damage as a level 8 wizard.  

How do you choose this ratio in 3E?

That is exactly the problem I have with 3E style multi-classing. Quoted from my reply to pauln6:

"For example, if I choose to train in multiple classes at once, I should have to split the resources used for those classes, as long as I continue to use the features of each class. In other words, if I 
buy a level in a class, then I don't spend any additional resources (XP) for that class, then I should lose the features of that class (because I am no longer putting any focus into developing or maintaining those class features). 3E style multi-classing allows you to do this without having to continue to spend those resources (XP) to maintain training is the class and you never lose those abilities through atrophia."
For example, if I choose to train in multiple classes at once, I should have to split the resources used for those classes, as long as I continue to use the features of each class. In other words, if I buy a level in a class, then I don't spend any additional resources (XP) for that class, then I should lose the features of that class (because I am no longer putting any focus into developing or maintaining those class features). 3E style multi-classing allows you to do this without having to continue to spend those resources (XP) to maintain training is the class and you never lose those abilities through atrophia.

Splitting the XP among each class evenly is one way of dealing with the problem; you are continuing to spend the resources to maintain, as well as develop, the features of that class. Although, personally, I use a system where class specific actions provide class specific XP (melee combat XP goes towards martial classes, spell casting provides XP towards casting classes, rogue-like actions would provide XP towards those classes, etc.) and general XP gets split amongst the classes.


That's great as an option but I would really not prefer that.  What you end up with is a system where people strive to use abilities from each of their classes during all encounters (social, combat, or other) just to gain even advancement.  Naturally, this will be easiest in combat, but in other encounters you end up with players asking "if I do X, will that be fightery enough for me to gain fighter xp for this?"

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

For example, if I choose to train in multiple classes at once, I should have to split the resources used for those classes, as long as I continue to use the features of each class. In other words, if I buy a level in a class, then I don't spend any additional resources (XP) for that class, then I should lose the features of that class (because I am no longer putting any focus into developing or maintaining those class features). 3E style multi-classing allows you to do this without having to continue to spend those resources (XP) to maintain training is the class and you never lose those abilities through atrophia.

Splitting the XP among each class evenly is one way of dealing with the problem; you are continuing to spend the resources to maintain, as well as develop, the features of that class. Although, personally, I use a system where class specific actions provide class specific XP (melee combat XP goes towards martial classes, spell casting provides XP towards casting classes, rogue-like actions would provide XP towards those classes, etc.) and general XP gets split amongst the classes.


That's great as an option but I would really not prefer that.  What you end up with is a system where people strive to use abilities from each of their classes during all encounters (social, combat, or other) just to gain even advancement.  Naturally, this will be easiest in combat, but in other encounters you end up with players asking "if I do X, will that be fightery enough for me to gain fighter xp for this?"

All XP is divided amongst the classes, unless the action earning XP is specifically tied to an individual class.

So:


  • If there's any argument/question (as to which class XP can be attributed to), divide the XP amongst the classes.

  • If the XP gained is the result of using multiple class features (most combat XP), divide the XP amongst the classes.

  • If there is any XP gained specifically by using an individual class's feature(s), apply the XP to that class only.



Thus:


  • Anytime you use a martial weapon to attack you apply the XP to your fighter or cleric class (or divide amongst them),

  • Anytime you cast a spell you apply the XP to the class from which you gained the spell,

  • Anytime you use rogue-like abilities you apply the XP to your rogue-like class (this includes in-combat and out-of-combat abilities).


NOTE: If you count rogues as martial classes, then don't forget to include them in the weapon attack numbers from the first bullet point.

It could get problematic if done 3.5E style(front loading and min maxing) and bleh style 4E, 4E hybrids were good.

Of course there are dead levels also to attend before multiclassing.

and expertise/MDD's: for the sake of this topic we'll call them points and everyone will get them Tongue Out


1st: for dead levels:

a) characters should get feats at levels:
1,2,4,6...etc
b) characters should have Expertise points equal:
1 + 1/2 level(same rate as feats), total 11 at lvl21.
c) characters should get +1 to one ability at levels:
2,4,6,8, etc(this will also give total of +10 points, but will increase primaries faster. If you want to prevent that we can call that you can't raise same ability twice in a row).
d) characters should get bonus skill training at levels 3,5,7,9 etc.

that means that overall characters get their "character bonus" every even level, with slight touch every odd level.

That leaves class abilities to strong at levels 1,3,5,7 etc and minor fluff abilities at even levels(2,4,6 etc)

Sum total: class specific abilities at odd levels, character general abilities at even levels.


Now for topic at hand: Multiclassing

this will be the most difficult work for WotC design crew and us playtesters to chew through.

I would go with "Limited 3E style":

No.1: no multiclassing before level 3, you must atleast have 2 levels in your base class.

No.2: when you do multiclass you MUST take EVEN number of levels before raising another class(your base or new multiclassor prestige class).

that will give nicer power gauge to work with as level 4 you will be X2/Y2 and only one good ability from each class and one fluff ability from each class.
And will avoid X1/Y3 with 3 strong class abilities and only one weak. And let's not forget the dreaded W1/X1/Y1/Z1 Yell combos.
that will translate that you take 2 levels of one class then 2 levels of other then 2 levels of first class again then 4 levels of the 2nd then 10 levels of prestige class and you're EPIC Cool

Prestige classes would also be in 4,6,8,10 level packages with minimum level to take the first 5 or 7(or 13th for lets say, archmageTongue Out)


Now, there is also an option to limit multiclassing to only 2 classes(humans could have 3) and 1 prestige class(humans could have 2)

As for lacking high level power of multiclass, they could implement multiclass feats, I.E. "practiced mage; you gain 4 levels of wizard class abilities. your wizard abilities cannot be higher that your character level".

That way, you can "pay" via feat cost leveling in two classes or more classes(human).

As a human you could be wizard8/fighter8/rogue4 and with 10 feats you can have class abilities of lvl 20 wizard, fighter and rogue.

But with my suggestion it would cost you 10 of your 12 feats you would gain in 20 levels.(humans would again get bonus feat at first level).



The 3e multiclassing system really does deliver proper multiclassing and allow total control over the development of a character.


It's got its share of pitfalls, I'll agree, but I've said elsewhere that the feature brings so much to the game that I'm loathe to get rid of it.


The 3e multiclassing system really does deliver proper multiclassing and allow total control over the development of a character.


It's got its share of pitfalls, I'll agree, but I've said elsewhere that the feature brings so much to the game that I'm loathe to get rid of it.




While you may call it "proper multiclassing" I certainly do not.
 
I like 3.5 style multiclassing and PrCs but prefer the SWSE take on it.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 Fear is the Mind Killer  


The 3e multiclassing system really does deliver proper multiclassing and allow total control over the development of a character.


It's got its share of pitfalls, I'll agree, but I've said elsewhere that the feature brings so much to the game that I'm loathe to get rid of it.


While you may call it "proper multiclassing" I certainly do not.

Well let me clarify. I mean it's the one system in D&D that allows you to pick up the class you want when you want it and change direction at any time. It's the one system that can be dictated entirely by story and roleplaying as the game unfolds. I'm not saying it lived up to that potential - quite the opposite - but no other system in D&D allows for that. Classless systems do it, for sure but character classes make it hard.
The mechanical issues are well known so I'm very interested to see how Mearls & Co go about using it as the basis for DDN's multiclassing.