Community

Nov 19, 2012 -- 9:08AM, SatLeBaron wrote:

Hi guys,

One of my players wants to try out multiclass. I suggested using something near the 2nd or 3rd ed but it seems to be overpowered to do so.

He is a cleric and if he goes for the rogue class just for 1 lvl, he gains a LOT of stuff only for 1 lvl.

Any ideas how you would use multiclassing in DnD Next as for now?

Thx 

There are no rules yet, therefore its not part of something they want us testing at this point, I'd advise against it.

EDIT:  I came back to add more to not make this seem so "snippy".

The problem with multiclassing is its not in the system, so you're players (and you) will be spending plenty of time testing something that fails to exist, and not be testing the actual mechanics as released.  In honestly, it's like all these people playing their version of the Warlord or Paladin, or what not.  Fun, yes.  Helpful to the core playtest, my opinion, no.

It seems like there is so much potential for abuse in multi-class mechanics, so much so that it sometimes produces a result far greater than the sum of their parts.  Let me give an example.  Back in 3rd edition, a character starts as a rogue.  He gets a lot of skill points.  He then takes levels of fighter for durability and feats.  Returns to rogue to up skills that he can't on the fighters list as easily.  Returns to the fighter to get class related goodies, such as weapon specialization: Scythe.  Goes back to rogue for skills and more sneak attack damage.  As far as I am concerned, that character can outfight a fighter while being a pretty good rogue. 

My point is that maybe we need a new mechanic for multi-classing and perhaps a subclass/mundane prestige class sort of structure could be the way to go.  It could slide over the existing class and specify what is gained and what you don't end up getting from your base class(if applicable)

For instance, maybe a "shadow priest" or cleric/rogue class could work something like this...

Shadow Priest:

Requirement: at least one level in cleric or rogue
Level 1: Divine or skill mastery(you gain the other component of your multi-class, but don't get everything you'd get for just being that class: May have some options for the sake of customization)
Level 2: +1 divine caster level, +1 level rogue expertise
Level 3: +1 level rogue experise, rogue maneuver
Level 4: +1 divine caster level, +1 level rogue expertise
Level 5: +1 divine caster level, unique divine spell-like ability feature
...and so on...
+1 level rogue experise:  Treated as a rogue of one level higher for purpose of determining expertise dice
+1 divine caster level: Treated as gaining a level in cleric for the purpose of determining spells/day

This above example is imbalanced because it was made up spontaneously.  Only performing as a cleric and rogue of one level lower at level 6 is too much.  I was merely trying to show an alternative set of mechanics.  My issue with multi-classing as it has performed historically is that the practice just begs for you to dabble in classes for the sake of attaining an early class feature.  In my opinion, a first level character has some experiences in his or her vocation to that point that warrants having that bonus.  I don't really want to see the following anymore...

Fighter:  I want to take a level in druid so I get an animal companion.  C'mere tiger...

Tiger: *growls* 

I think the way to go to make multiclassing a choice is to create classes that resemble those from the twilight years of 3e - the archivist, spirit shaman and so on.

They had class abilities that were valuable and easily on par with many of the multiclassing options but if you dipped very much you'd miss out.

Multiclassing becomes a choice at that point.

I certainly hope there won't be a seperate table for each class. The best way to do it is the way they've got it now: a block of exceptions in the class description for taking that class at character level 1 and a universal table to use for the class regardless of application. Universal progression conventions make it easier, to be sure, and probably are necessary but individual multiclass tables for each class would be really irritating.

The hybrid tables in 4e are a total nightmare and require discrete support from the publisher. Expanding the class means expanding the hybrid table as well and it basically doubles the work.

They could do it that way but I really hope they don't. I much prefer the format we have.

In my perfect world WotC would be able to figure out a way to make the multiclassing tables so that

1) Adding a new class gives you extra abilities of the new class but without the front loading issue had with 3.5.
2) A Fighter that learns to cast spells will feel slightly different from a wizard that can swing a sword.
3) If you take 2 or more classes, both from the multiclass section at level 1, you get a hybrid class that is just as powerful as a full class.

Honestly, 1 and 2 can be done pretty easily, it's the third one that will probably be an issue.