PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Multiclass Penalties - Do you use them?



Scorpions__
2010-03-26, 11:35 AM
Maybe this should be in the homebrew forums?

Yeah, so my question is, does any DM out there use Multiclass Penalties?
How does this work with NPCs? Does it affect CRs?

I just don't use them cause I think the idea is silly, but, what's the reasoning out there?





DM[F]R

jokey665
2010-03-26, 11:40 AM
Nope. Favored class gives +1 HP and +1 skill point per level instead of messing with XP penalties. Most races have extra favored classes added, and you pick one of them for your character at creation (most of the added favored classes are the non-core ones as nothing has them as favored class).

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 11:41 AM
I've seen games offered where they were stated to be in effect, and occasionally I've seen people argue for them as some sort of balancing factor.

That's preposterous, of course. Multiclassing favors martial characters - about the only thing that does favor martial characters. Penalizing it just makes no sense from a balance perspective.

From a fluff perspective, it depends a lot on the fluff of classes in your setting - that is, do you consider "class" to be an entirely metagame concept with no meaning in the game world (if so, penalties make no sense), or is Fighter a recognized class in-world (if so, they might make sense but are still poor for balance).

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 11:52 AM
Multiclass Penalties - Do you use them?

Absolutely. Makes humans, or any other race with Favored Class: Any, more unique. It also helps balance out the game, in my experience. You won't see very many people playing exotic, and cheesy, races when they get penalized for multiclass penalties.

drengnikrafe
2010-03-26, 11:52 AM
In the words of my old mentor...

"They changed a lot from 2e to 3.x in an effort to make people level up at the same time. Then, they tried to throw it all away with multiclass penalites. That's why I ignore them."

shimmercat
2010-03-26, 12:00 PM
My DM homebrewed a feat called "Extra Favored Class." This still keeps people from going hog-wild, but does allow for quite a bit of flexibility.

Weezer
2010-03-26, 12:09 PM
Nope never played with them, they just seemed like unnecessary complication that was yet another hit against non-casters.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 12:16 PM
Makes humans, or any other race with Favored Class: Any, more unique.
How on earth does it do that? Favored Class: Any is specifically generic.


It also helps balance out the game, in my experience. You won't see very many people playing exotic, and cheesy, races when they get penalized for multiclass penalties.
Exotic != cheesy. Moreover, Favored Class means absolutely zero if you don't multiclass. More importantly, can you name any "cheesy" multiclass combinations? Because I can't. Everything I can think of involves Prestige Classes - which are explicitly exempt from multiclass penalties.

Multiclass penalties do nothing for balance. A multiclass spellcaster is weaker than a single-classed one. A multiclassed martial character may be stronger, but they need it. Why on earth would you take away the one thing martial characters have going for them?

And besides, "cheesy races"? Human is the best race in the game, 95% of the time. And they do have Favored Class: Any. So you're really not helping anything here but forcing yet more people to play Humans. Don't you get bored of all the humans?

If you don't have a ton of humans in your games, it means your players are willing to pick suboptimal choices for whatever reason (fits the character better, just to do something different, whatever whatever - there's tons of reasons to do so, especially with Race) - in which case I think you can afford to trust them. Honestly, that's what it comes down to - do you trust your players? And if not... why are you playing with them?


My DM homebrewed a feat called "Extra Favored Class." This still keeps people from going hog-wild, but does allow for quite a bit of flexibility.
That's not homebrew, it's in Races of Destiny, IIRC. Definitely in one (or more) of the books.

But there's nothing about multiclassing that allows people to go "hog-wild", it's just a stupid feat tax.

Yora
2010-03-26, 12:18 PM
There are no favorite classes in my games. You just add up levels in different classes and get no penalties or bonuses for however you combine them.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 12:22 PM
How on earth does it do that? Favored Class: Any is specifically generic.He meant more powerful, since extra feat and skills aren't enough when trying to force everyone to play humans instead of other races which are cheesy.

More importantly, can you name any "cheesy" multiclass combinations?Dipping Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian for Pounce or Cleric for a bunch of Devotion feats and turning to fuel them might be considered cheesy on otherwise low optimization game. YMMV.

Not that I like the penalties or consider an improvement on balance.

Ernir
2010-03-26, 12:23 PM
No, I don't use them. I have many reasons for not using them, and have never seen so much as one for using them.

Multiclassing favors martial characters - about the only thing that does favor martial characters. Penalizing it just makes no sense from a balance perspective.

Huh? Martial characters are much more likely to multiclass than casters - only because the multiclass XP penalty system doesn't include PrCs. Those get a free pass. :smallsigh:

So a Half-Orc Fighter 2/Warblade 10 gets penalties, but a Wizard 5/Dweomerkeeper 10/Tainted Scholar 2/Incantatrix 3 doesn't, regardless of race. Yay.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 12:24 PM
He meant more powerful, since extra feat and skills aren't enough when trying to force everyone to play humans instead of other races which are cheesy.
Yeah, I edited a bit to address exactly that.


Dipping Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian for Pounce or Cleric for a bunch of Devotion feats and turning to fuel them might be considered cheesy on otherwise low optimization game. YMMV.
That's just getting around the stupidity that is the Full-Attack rules.


Not that I like the penalties or consider an improvement on balance.
Heh, I get ya.


Huh? Martial characters are much more likely to multiclass than casters - only because the multiclass XP penalty system doesn't include PrCs. Those get a free pass. :smallsigh:

So a Half-Orc Fighter 2/Warblade 10 gets penalties, but a Wizard 5/Dweomerkeeper 10/Tainted Scholar 2/Incantatrix 3 doesn't, regardless of race. Yay.
That's... what I was saying?

Ernir
2010-03-26, 12:27 PM
That's... what I was saying?

That is what you were saying, but what I was reading was "multiclass XP penalties favour martial characters". Oops. :smallredface:

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2010-03-26, 12:30 PM
The type of players I dislike the most are the ones who identify with their class, rather than their character. The "I'm a [class]" mentality is the most anti-RP concept I've ever seen. Worse yet, the people who commit this travesty most often consider themselves superior role-players to those who take multiple classes and prestige classes, and especially those who dip classes or don't finish a prestige class. If someone's idea for who their character is and what they're capable of is more complex than what one or two classes provide, they should not be penalized for playing it, and they should certainly not be encouraged to make a simpler character.

Saph
2010-03-26, 12:32 PM
I use them, more or less. Generally I just assume that players won't multiclass in such a way that they'll take an XP penalty.

It's not a particularly logical rule, but it's not important enough to be worth houseruling either.

Tiki Snakes
2010-03-26, 12:33 PM
The type of players I dislike the most are the ones who identify with their class, rather than their character. The "I'm a [class]" mentality is the most anti-RP concept I've ever seen. Worse yet, the people who commit this travesty most often consider themselves superior role-players to those who take multiple classes and prestige classes, and especially those who dip classes or don't finish a prestige class. If someone's idea for who their character is and what they're capable of is more complex than what one or two classes provide, they should not be penalized for playing it, and they should certainly not be encouraged to make a simpler character.

"No, I'm not rolling to sneak past the Troll King with every else, I'm a paladin. I start walking."
Level 1. Ugh.

Emmerask
2010-03-26, 12:38 PM
Maybe this should be in the homebrew forums?

Yeah, so my question is, does any DM out there use Multiclass Penalties?
How does this work with NPCs? Does it affect CRs?

I just don't use them cause I think the idea is silly, but, what's the reasoning out there?

DM[F]R

Well if you donīt use them then humans and I think half elves (or if you use the fav class of a race) you should get some other bonus because itīs one of the bonuses you would have gotten :smallwink:

Maybe +1 to one stat of your choice? or maybe a bonus feat from a very small not overpowered list of feats (perhaps from the can only be taken on first level feat list)

Ernir
2010-03-26, 12:42 PM
Well if you donīt use them then humans and I think half elves (or if you use the fav class of a race) you should get some other bonus because itīs one of the bonuses you would have gotten :smallwink:

Maybe +1 to one stat of your choice? or maybe a bonus feat from a very small not overpowered list of feats (perhaps from the can only be taken on first level feat list)

Hmm. Still, humans are plenty powerful without, and Half-Elves are suboptimal regardless. =/

Kaiyanwang
2010-03-26, 12:44 PM
As long the character concept is respected, I handwave no XP penalties.

Another example if the class is similar to the favored of the race (paladin- knight, ranger - scout).

You always have to ask yoursef why a rule is there. XP penalties are there to discourage abuses IMO. As long no abuse exist, no XP penalties.

HunterOfJello
2010-03-26, 12:48 PM
I've never seen the point in multiclass penalties for use in my games. I do see a reason not to let players take more than 3 base classes though. If someone wanted to take levels in a 4th base class I'd probably let them with a multiclass penalty of 10% or something. Because reallly, a Swordsage 2 /Crusader 3/Warblade 1/Barbarian 2/Cleric 3/ Wizard 1 doesn't make a whole lot of sense character wise even if it could be weirdly effective in combat.


That comment about adding +1hp and +1 skill points for favored class sounds like a good idea. Wish I thought of that.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-03-26, 12:48 PM
It's not a particularly logical rule, but it's not important enough to be worth houseruling either.

Yeah. The only person of my group who would even consider making a build that might take an XP penalty is me, and it's never come up. I'm not even sure everyone knows about the rule.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 12:58 PM
The type of players I dislike the most are the ones who identify with their class, rather than their character. The "I'm a [class]" mentality is the most anti-RP concept I've ever seen. Worse yet, the people who commit this travesty most often consider themselves superior role-players to those who take multiple classes and prestige classes, and especially those who dip classes or don't finish a prestige class. If someone's idea for who their character is and what they're capable of is more complex than what one or two classes provide, they should not be penalized for playing it, and they should certainly not be encouraged to make a simpler character.
I very strongly agree with this, but there are some who run games where classes do have in-game meaning, where it's not an inherently metagame concept, and therefore makes somewhat more sense than in average games.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 01:02 PM
Multiclass penalties do nothing for balance. A multiclass spellcaster is weaker than a single-classed one. A multiclassed martial character may be stronger, but they need it. Why on earth would you take away the one thing martial characters have going for them?

As with all optimizing, its the smallest little thing that opens a whole can of cheese. I prefer to leave as much as the original rules as they are and only houserule things as needed.

Multiclass spellcasters are usually weaker, as if it matters in the end, if they multiclass but you can get insane amounts of power as well. We all know what a 1 level dip of sorcerer can do with a level 4 wizard when you take Practised spellcaster (sorcerer). Early entry into Mystic Therge (while not powerful in its own right), won't be so useful for your wizard 3/cleric 1 if you get a multiclass penalty.


You always have to ask yoursef why a rule is there. XP penalties are there to discourage abuses IMO. As long no abuse exist, no XP penalties.

Quite right.

Greenish
2010-03-26, 01:09 PM
As with all optimizing, its the smallest little thing that opens a whole can of cheese."Things" don't open cans of cheese in real games. Players can open cans of cheese. Or they just might want a character that fits their concept. Multiclass penalties don't remove or even really reduce the ways your players can attempt to cheese should they choose to, but if they do, tell them not to.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 01:14 PM
"Things" don't open cans of cheese in real games. Players can open cans of cheese. Or they just might want a character that fits their concept. Multiclass penalties don't remove or even really reduce the ways your players can attempt to cheese should they choose to, but if they do, tell them not to.

Nitpick the wording all you want. Character concepts are fine but the mechanics behind those characters are important as well. I am more than willing to work with a character to build a custom class that fits their 'concept' and doesn't involve multiclass penalties.

I like multiclass penalties. They are a good deturant system.

Velden
2010-03-26, 01:15 PM
Iīm going to play in a campaign where there are multiclass penalties, the other players, who are already familiar since level 1, donīt seem to have any trouble with it.

Personally I donīt think it matters that much considering you can always custom your class with the DMīs approval (like the example of the fighter who loses armor proficencies but gets more skill points, I think I saw that in the PH).
Itīs not like if you choose a class you canīt customize it according to the characterīs background, forcing you to pick three or four base classes.

Tavar
2010-03-26, 01:38 PM
As with all optimizing, its the smallest little thing that opens a whole can of cheese. I prefer to leave as much as the original rules as they are and only houserule things as needed.

I've only ever seen Multiclass penalties hurt character concepts. Can you give any instance where they actually improved them, or limited cheese?



Multiclass spellcasters are usually weaker, as if it matters in the end, if they multiclass but you can get insane amounts of power as well. We all know what a 1 level dip of sorcerer can do with a level 4 wizard when you take Practised spellcaster (sorcerer).
Umm....no. We don't. Besides giving yourself a few extra 1st level spells per day.


Early entry into Mystic Therge (while not powerful in its own right), won't be so useful for your wizard 3/cleric 1 if you get a multiclass penalty.

So they're Human, already one of the most powerful races, and get a power boost on top of that? And everyone else is penalized? You're right, that does sound like a useful deterrent.

Not to mention the fact that you can still be any race with favored class Cleric or Wizard as well.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2010-03-26, 01:40 PM
Multiclassing in 3.x is a good thing, it allows players to create versatile, interesting, and unique characters. It allows characters to gain abilities which synergize well to gether, and be better at a particular role or task, or be good at multiple roles or tasks without severely penalizing other aspects of the character. Multiclassing in a way which would incur an XP penalty does not result in game-breaking characters. It does not create cheesy combos which would unbalance or otherwise cause a problem in play. 90+% of the cheesy combos in this game can be accomplished by a single-classed character, and most often a spellcaster at that. There has not been a single problem with this game mentioned in this thread which multiclassing has caused, so XP penalties for multiclassing solve nothing.

Multiclassing can cause problems in that a character can end up too weak. I've seen many players who were new to optimizing characters try to dip half a dozen classes to front-load abilities, and ended up with a character who wasn't very good at any particular role or task. In this case, the character only had two or three levels in a given class, so they didn't have any XP penalty anyway, and again XP penalties for multiclassing solve nothing.

Martial characters often benefit from multiclassing, but they often avoid the XP penalty anyway. A build like Barbarian 1/ Fighter 2/ Hexblade 2/ Occult Slayer 5/ Frenzied Berserker 10 would make the "I'm a [class]" crowd cringe, but it's their beloved XP penalties that created it. XP penalties don't make the game better, they don't solve anything, they don't even pose a credible obstacle for any of its problems. The only thing multiclassing penalties do is make the "I'm a [class]" crowd feel better about their shallow RP capabilities. It's something for them to point at and say, "I'm doing it right!" so they'll defend it with every last breath they have, because it's important to them even though it has never contributed to making this game better in the slightest bit.

sofawall
2010-03-26, 01:44 PM
Umm....no. We don't. Besides giving yourself a few extra 1st level spells per day.


Well, it can lead to fun with Ultimate Magus, I guess.

tyckspoon
2010-03-26, 01:48 PM
Umm....no. We don't. Besides giving yourself a few extra 1st level spells per day.


Ultimate Magus entry using CL adjustments to maximize the number of Wizard-advancing levels. Still not as strong as going straight Wizard or taking other Wizard-based PrCs.

2xMachina
2010-03-26, 01:48 PM
Multiclass?

Focused Spec/Master Spec/SCM/Incant

No penalties, and I fry you over NI times.

SilverStar
2010-03-26, 02:04 PM
I don't use them.

However, at least in games that i run, if a player wishes to have a character with five + classes, I expect some logical character-driven story behind why all the eclectic training.

I've pretty much done away with experience points at this point anyway... leveling when my story says so is so much more streamlined and easier to work with.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 02:12 PM
Meh, regardless. I'll keep using Multiclass penalties until they become a problem.

Scorpions__
2010-03-26, 02:15 PM
I think I'll continue on as I have been, thanks for all the feedback!





DM[F]R

Akal Saris
2010-03-26, 02:16 PM
In 3.5: Gods no, I don't use them. They detract from interesting or cool builds without offering any sense of logic.

As another poster pointed out, an Elven Barbarian 5/Fighter 3 has a 20% experience penalty, but an elven warblade 2/swordsage 2/fighter 2/barbarian 1/monk 1 doesn't have an experience penalty (and is ready to enter master of nine!).

I don't really care if my players want to combine hexblade and paladin of tyranny for great saving throws or whatever. It's their character, let them play with whatever multiclass they want. It's still unlikely to ever be as cheesily powerful as a straight human druid 20. If I'm playing in a game where they are used, I'll stick to the code, but inwardly I'll be rolling my eyes at it.

For a RL example of how this hurt a character: I was in a 12th level game where I was playing a Human Scout 3/Ranger 9. The monk PC (one of those "I can't be a samurai without levels in samurai" types) said that I should have an experience penalty for abusing the two classes. I pointed out that as a human I didn't have any penalties, and furthermore scout and ranger are the same flavor anyhow - we're not talking about a wiz/barbarian/incarnate here.

He, in turn, was an elven monk 5/cleric 2/ninja 1/monk PrC 4. Besides being useless to the party, he also had a 40% exp penalty that he was unaware of. Pointing that out shut him up quite quickly, and made the DM house-rule no exp penalties :P

In Pathfinder: PF changed the rules so that now you choose a favored class at 1st level and every level you take in that class you gain either +1 HP or +1 skill point - with no experience penalties from multi-classing except the loss of this bonus. I find this to be a good change, so it's what I use in Pathfinder.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 02:18 PM
I prefer to leave as much as the original rules as they are and only houserule things as needed.
Tell me, what do you think of Core's balance?

SilverStar
2010-03-26, 02:21 PM
Tell me, what do you think of Core's balance?

Isn't that one of the most loaded questions one can ask on these boards?

**runs off giggling madly at the notion of the words "core" (as relevant to 3.5 D&D) and "balance" in the same sentence**

Curmudgeon
2010-03-26, 02:26 PM
Yeah, I use them. It never made sense to me to not use them if you might be playing in RPGA games, where this was strictly enforced.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-03-26, 02:33 PM
We modified the way it works to use 3 ish favored classes. Depending on race.

There is no penalty for multiclassing using any of those classes.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 02:34 PM
Tell me, what do you think of Core's balance?

I'm not even going to answer that question. It is a heavily loaded question and my answer won't make any sense logically. It basically breaks down into, it doesn't have to be balanced, just fun.


Yeah, I use them. It never made sense to me to not use them if you might be playing in RPGA games, where this was strictly enforced.

This is one of the reasons I enforce them too.

Milskidasith
2010-03-26, 02:45 PM
I'm not even going to answer that question. It is a heavily loaded question and my answer won't make any sense logically. It basically breaks down into, it doesn't have to be balanced, just fun.

Then why do you limit player fun for the name of balance by enforcing the utterly pointless multiclassing penalties?


This is one of the reasons I enforce them too.

Because they can't be sanctioned by an association that has no notion of balance and, until this post, I didn't even know existed? That's the reason you limit your players? Because some vague association that isn't relevant to 99% of D&D games says that, in their official games, you can't use it?

Tavar
2010-03-26, 03:06 PM
I'm not even going to answer that question. It is a heavily loaded question and my answer won't make any sense logically. It basically breaks down into, it doesn't have to be balanced, just fun.


So, if fun is the only limiting factor, how do multiclass penalties improve this? Also, if you've already told the players that multiclass penalties are in place, how do you know if it's creating issues? Seems to me that the players would all filter out ideas that would trigger them.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 03:23 PM
Then why do you limit player fun for the name of balance by enforcing the utterly pointless multiclassing penalties?

But I am not limiting their fun. The player's can play whatever they want as long as the play by the rules. I always place a list of houserules in front of my players (if the occassion calls for it) and multiclass penalties is never listed. Multiclass experience penalties are part of the basic rules of 3.5e D&D. They can be houseruled away but I don't find a reason compelling enough to do so.

I have run/am running games as a DM where I have loosened or eliminated the multiclass penalties. These tend to be higher powered campaigns based around players that like that sort of game. My usual group of players play by the RPGA rules and have no problem with them.

Different strokes for different folks. I'll play my way, you play yours.

FishAreWet
2010-03-26, 03:35 PM
There is no reason for them to exist.

They do not balance the game in the slightest.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 03:36 PM
There is no reason for them to exist.

They do not balance the game in the slightest.

Same thing could be said about the fighter or the monk.

FishAreWet
2010-03-26, 03:39 PM
Same thing could be said about the fighter or the monk.And they are largely replaced by Unarmed Swordsage and Warblade. Except for the cases where they do contribute to balance. Feat starved builds, for example.

And Monk/Fighter only allow for more. Multiclassing penalties only take away.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 04:01 PM
Regardless, I'll keep using the multiclass experience penalty. It may be a 'useless rule' but its a rule none-the-less.

*.*.*.*
2010-03-26, 04:06 PM
Regardless, I'll keep using the multiclass experience penalty. It may be a 'useless rule' but its a rule none-the-less.

Candles of Invocation must be delightful in your campaigns

Kylarra
2010-03-26, 04:09 PM
I love how there's no sense of proportion in this sort of thing. Obviously taking one thing as written and not houseruling a perceived issue with it means that every single broken thing in core must be taken strictly as RAW.

Tavar
2010-03-26, 04:12 PM
Regardless, I'll keep using the multiclass experience penalty. It may be a 'useless rule' but its a rule none-the-less.

So, houseruling is okay, except if it contradicts a previous rule? What's the point of houseruling, then?

Also, it's more than useless. It actively hampers players, for no gain. What's the point of such a rule?

Eldariel
2010-03-26, 04:14 PM
Multiclass Penalties make no sense as written and thus I don't use them. Besides, I much prefer "favored classes" and granting minor bonuses to races favoring a given class when taking that class over XP penalties.

"Racial Sub Levels" go a long way towards this, and I definitely feel that's the way it should've been executed from the beginning.


XP penalty is an AD&D Legacy that unfortunately simply does not fall well into 3.5 due to how multiclassing is written and how hard it is to allow "sane combinations" while penalizing "unintended combinations"...and even worse when you get into refluffing and are dealing with a whole different bunch of "sane combinations".

Besides, the game is written for Fighter 1/Wizard 5s, not Fighter 3/Wizard 3s due to how Base Attack Bonus works. Hell, even pretty much all WoTC example characters embody this.

And yet, Fighter 3/Wizard 3 never has XP penalties while Fighter 1/Wizard 5 does. It's one thing to have rules that do nothing and another to have ones that actively detract from the game. Multiclass XP penalties don't work. Don't use them.

jiriku
2010-03-26, 04:22 PM
I use them. After all, they're RAW.

That being said, 70% of my player's characters have been human, and nobody has even expressed an interest in mad multiclassing haxxors. That's what prestige classes are for.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 04:26 PM
Candles of Invocation must be delightful in your campaigns

Oh yes. Though I think you are speaking of getting infinite wishes from an outsider. That would be very difficult. You'd have to find the candle, make sure your alignment matches, have thenecessary knowledge ranks in order to know sufficent information about an outsider with wish as a spell-like ability, actually have the same alignment as that outsider, convince the outsider to perform this service and then pay for the service, if required.

Oh, and if a 'wish' spell does fall into the realm of an immediate service and the outsider can't say no, wishing for infinite wishes sure as hell falls within DM juristiction.

So, Candle of Invocation, not so bad, really.


Multiclass Penalties make no sense as written

Makes perfect sense to me. Its also a rule based more in roleplay than mechanics. The reason a fighter 3/ wizard 3 doesn't get an exp penalty is because that character is 'balancing' the needs of both his classes and focusing equally on them. A fighter 5/ wizard 1 is obviously more focused on being a fighter and can't focus on being as good as a wizard.

But, you'd know that if you read the section on multiclassing and the exp penalty (which I assume everyone reads who owns a PHB).

Deca
2010-03-26, 04:34 PM
My DM never uses them except for when someone is clearly taking a 1-level dip into a class in order to access prime amounts of cheese.

Rixx
2010-03-26, 04:38 PM
I play Pathfinder, which doesn't have multiclass penalties. Instead, you get to pick a "favored class" (or two, if you're a half-elf), and you get to pick either an extra hit point or an extra skill point whenever you level in that class.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 04:39 PM
Makes perfect sense to me. Its also a rule based more in roleplay than mechanics. The reason a fighter 3/ wizard 3 doesn't get an exp penalty is because that character is 'balancing' the needs of both his classes and focusing equally on them. A fighter 5/ wizard 1 is obviously more focused on being a fighter and can't focus on being as good as a wizard.

But, you'd know that if you read the section on multiclassing and the exp penalty (which I assume everyone reads who owns a PHB).
But that doesn't actually make sense. Why is 'balancing' the needs of the two let you grow in power faster? Why does favoring one or the other not?

A Fighter 5/Wizard 1 isn't as good as a wizard - that's why he has 1st level spells and not 3rd. Why would he level up slower? That doesn't make sense.

Not to mention the combination could just as easily be Fighter 3/Barbarian 5, which, hey, how do those cause problems? They're just learning different techniques for hitting things.

Or hell, I'm a Fighter/Wizard because I'm training as a battlemage, so I train both. The fact that it's represented as Fighter X/Wizard Y is an artifact of a metagame concept and has nothing to do with anything in character because really I'm just a battlemage.


My DM never uses them except for when someone is clearly taking a 1-level dip into a class in order to access prime amounts of cheese.
Can anyone come up with a situation where this actually happens?

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 04:48 PM
Can anyone come up with a situation where this actually happens?

Sure can. Taking a level 1 dip in multiple classes to meet the prerequisites for ur-priest a few levels earlier. And just to make note, the level 1 dip doesn't make the cheese, it allows for the cheese to happen sooner. Ever hear of gateway drugs? Similar concept.

Eldariel
2010-03-26, 04:50 PM
Sure can. Taking a level 1 dip in multiple classes to meet the prerequisites for ur-priest a few levels earlier. And just to make note, the level 1 dip doesn't make the cheese, it allows for the cheese to happen sooner. Ever hear of gateway drugs? Similar concept.

You can't take Ur-Priest any earlier with dips; it has skill prerequisites that are the real issue and you can't fill 'em before level 5 without using extra HP granting loops and some skill reallocation, which is a whole other level of BS already. Besides, single-classed casters are the strongest characters in the game, which alone speaks volumes against the "cheesiness" of dips; whatever you get, it's still not worth that lost caster level. Of course, it also speaks volumes for the cheesiness of casters, but meh.

And I'd like to point out that the present rules actually encourage dips. That's how bad they are. 10 1-level dips and a single class progressed to 10 (given it's the FC) is no issue whatsoever, while one class at 7, another at 3 and a third at 1 is.


EDIT: Oh yeah, and drugs? That's not even remotely the same, what with psychic addiction, pressure from the dealers' party and so on.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 04:54 PM
Sure can. Taking a level 1 dip in multiple classes to meet the prerequisites for ur-priest a few levels earlier. And just to make note, the level 1 dip doesn't make the cheese, it allows for the cheese to happen sooner. Ever hear of gateway drugs? Similar concept.OK, really? You're blaming the Ur-Priest on multiclassing? You can get single-classed entry to Ur-Priest at 6th, and it makes a stronger character. And that's entirely besides the point because any problems caused by the Ur-Priest are caused by the Ur-Priest.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 04:54 PM
You can't take Ur-Priest any earlier with dips; it has skill prerequisites that are the real issue and you can't fill 'em before level 5 without using extra HP granting loops and some skill reallocation, which is a whole other level of BS already.

That's a good point, even though it relatively difficult to get into ur-priest that early and still have a decent build for later levels. Its best for casters to get into but the saves are usually a killer.

Ok, so ur-priest isnt a perfect example but its a start.


OK, really? You're blaming the Ur-Priest on multiclassing? Yeah, OK, I think I'm done here

You, sir, You are taking this way out of context. You wanted an example. I gave an example.


EDIT: Oh yeah, and drugs? That's not even remotely the same, what with psychic addiction, pressure from the dealers' party and so on.

Similar and the same are not the same thing.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 04:56 PM
I ninja'd you - no, the Ur-Priest example is a miserable failure if you want to prove that multiclassing causes cheese. You can enter without multiclassing (and will be stronger for it), and that's entirely besides the point because the Ur-Priest is the problem, not the entry.


You, sir, are an idiot. You wanted an example. I gave an example. You are taking this way out of context.
Out of context? What?

Anyway, I'll agree my initial post was out of line; I've edited it but not quickly enough it seems. At any rate, I'll ignore the insult directed at me because really, after that post, it really isn't unjustified.

That said, yes, the example shows absolutely nothing. You still don't have any actual example of multiclassing causing cheese. And you still haven't answered my other questions above.

FishAreWet
2010-03-26, 04:58 PM
I ninja'd you - no, the Ur-Priest example is a miserable failure if you want to prove that multiclassing causes cheese. You can enter without multiclassing (and will be stronger for it), and that's entirely besides the point because the Ur-Priest is the problem, not the entry.

+1.

Look at Sublime Chord. Rather difficult entry but still a spectacular prestige class.

Eldariel
2010-03-26, 05:01 PM
That's a good point, even though it relatively difficult to get into ur-priest that early and still have a decent build for later levels. Its best for casters to get into but the saves are usually a killer.

The issue with Ur-Priest is that it grants you 9th level Divine spells from the full list including Miracle on level 15, without requiring pretty much anything from the first 5 levels. In other words, you get 9th level spells before real casters do, and you can afford to eff around with non-caster levels while doing it. Ur-Priest is broken because it's Ur-Priest.


No, early entry isn't enabled by dips, it's enabled by certain readings of certain feats. And dips aren't penalized by the rules anyways. And frankly, dips are the best way to make functional multiclass characters in combination with appropriate PrCs.

You're still weaker than if you had just progressed your casting all the way, but at least you don't end up in the dreaded 10/10 hole, being an effective level ~12 character by level 20.

When dips start to lead to notably stronger characters than single-classed characters, it may be a problem (outside dysfunctional classes; this includes Tier 0 PrCs like Incantatrix, Dweomerkeeper, Planar Shepherd and things up from there, and classes written poorly like the Fighter, the Monk and to lesser extent, the Ranger and the Barbarian).

Tavar
2010-03-26, 05:02 PM
You, sir, You are taking this way out of context. You wanted an example. I gave an example.

But the example you gave didn't apply for a variety of reasons. First off, the problem in the example you gave is the ur-priest PrC, not the dipping. Secondly, getting into the class isn't possible with dipping, therefore the example wasn't even correct. So, no, you didn't give an example.

Eldonauran
2010-03-26, 05:02 PM
At any rate, I'll ignore the insult directed at me because really, after that post, it really isn't unjustified.

Dually noted and retracted. I edited my post to reflect that.

And I never said multiclassing causes cheese. I believe my stance was level dipping can lead to chesse. CAn lead to cheese, opens the way for cheese, not solely responsible for cheese but cheese none-the-less.


Secondly, getting into the class isn't possible with dipping, therefore the example wasn't even correct

It is entirely possible to get into Ur-priest with dipping. You can take 2 levels of beguiler or bard, 2 levels of duskblade and a level of spellthief and with the right feats/flaws, jump into ur-priest at level 6. I've made the build myself though would have to search for it to get the exact placement of the skill points (ie, duskblades have all knowledge skills).

And, i believe i used a level dip on monk 1 as my example for getting teh saves to get into ur-priest, something that may or may not benefit the build at all.

Tavar
2010-03-26, 05:04 PM
But how does it lead to cheese?

From my own experience, it leads to less cheese, as people tend to multiclass more, yielding weaker characters.

elonin
2010-03-26, 05:35 PM
I've only noticed that they add paperwork. And only the PHB classes are listed as any favored class. They seem to have been put in place to prevent dips. A better mechanism would be the having to role play finding a teacher of the new class and convince them that you are earnest about gaining entry.

I've got a few semi-related questions. First does anyone use the training rules at all? If so past level one in the class? Though the paper work would be harder I'd love to have an aspect where if you have a trainer you can benefit from their experience and not need as much xp each level. I'm also guessing that mid/high levels would have few trainers available and epic would be nigh on impossible.

Also how strict are you folks on class skills for classes you were previously in?
This is more directed at classes that you have more than a few levels in and are trying to keep max ranks. Favorite example is a rogue who multi-classes into some non observant class while wanting to keep spot maxed not some specialized skill like UMD.

Eldariel
2010-03-26, 05:55 PM
I've only noticed that they add paperwork. And only the PHB classes are listed as any favored class. They seem to have been put in place to prevent dips. A better mechanism would be the having to role play finding a teacher of the new class and convince them that you are earnest about gaining entry.

I've got a few semi-related questions. First does anyone use the training rules at all? If so past level one in the class? Though the paper work would be harder I'd love to have an aspect where if you have a trainer you can benefit from their experience and not need as much xp each level. I'm also guessing that mid/high levels would have few trainers available and epic would be nigh on impossible.

The issue is that it really breaks the flow of most campaigns. We used those in our first 3.5 campaign, and it was sorta cool, but took a lot of handwaving (since high-level characters are so rare, tho as that campaign was in FR, that wasn't as big a problem) and more importantly, we needed to arrange downtime within a level of whenever someone wanted to take new class. I recall I was the only one to have more than one class, so I roleplayed it as the PHB suggests (I was a Fighter taking a Wizard-level to enter Arcane Archer - no, I didn't know the rules well back then - so I was constantly inquiring the party Wizard for stupid crap and watching what he's doing).

Since I realized characters are more than a sum of their classes, I found all that unnecessary though. Though when retraining/building or switching development direction, then you can use trainers and "training periods" since those are somewhat rare and a bit more extreme makeovers.


Also how strict are you folks on class skills for classes you were previously in?
This is more directed at classes that you have more than a few levels in and are trying to keep max ranks. Favorite example is a rogue who multi-classes into some non observant class while wanting to keep spot maxed not some specialized skill like UMD.

RAW. 2 points per one upgrade, skill cap as if in class. Though given the number of skill points I'm giving around nowadays (+6/+8 present for every class, about), and the number of class skills each class has (most basics like observationals and most physicals are in-class for everyone), it's less of an issue in our playgroup.

elonin
2010-03-26, 08:05 PM
Guess it depends on the pace. If you were to institute the train every level at the cost of xp inefficiency (self training is harder) then the flow is maintained. Avatar the last air bender is a good example of people questing to train some skill or other. But then again I'm not a dm.


Guess my second question was a train wreck waiting to happen. At the same time I was unaware of that rule. Thanks!

Kylarra
2010-03-26, 08:07 PM
Guess my second question was a train wreck waiting to happen. At the same time I was unaware of that rule. Thanks!
Just to cite it specifically.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/skillsSummary.htm


Regardless of whether a skill is purchased as a class skill or a cross-class skill, if it is a class skill for any of your classes, your maximum rank equals your total character level + 3.

Thurbane
2010-03-26, 08:09 PM
My group always uses multiclass penalties, and also the Paladin and Monk multiclassing rules.

Tavar
2010-03-26, 08:28 PM
Any particular reason why? Just going by the number of feats and PrC's that give exemptions to that rule, I've never quite seen their reasoning.

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 08:41 PM
Oh yes. Though I think you are speaking of getting infinite wishes from an outsider. That would be very difficult. You'd have to find the candle, make sure your alignment matches, have thenecessary knowledge ranks in order to know sufficent information about an outsider with wish as a spell-like ability, actually have the same alignment as that outsider, convince the outsider to perform this service and then pay for the service, if required.
I like the way you think. :smallsmile:

Tavar
2010-03-26, 08:44 PM
Of course, that's a complete houserule. So, I ask again, why are some rules unquestionable, while others are not?

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 08:51 PM
Of course, that's a complete houserule. So, I ask again, why are some rules unquestionable, while others are not?

I know you weren't directing this question at me but I still have to respond; perhaps altering the rules results in a more fluid and/or reasonable game. I have many house rules in the current campaign and will have many more in my next. Personal preference.

Kylarra
2010-03-26, 08:54 PM
Of course, that's a complete houserule. So, I ask again, why are some rules unquestionable, while others are not?Perhaps because he subscribes to an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality?

Now, track with me for a moment, for his group, multiclassing penalties have not been an issue, so there's no reason to houserule it. CoI abuse on the other hand, is pretty obvious and gamebreaking.

It may surprise you that some people do play 3.X with minimal houseruling and their games do run smoothly without degenerating into chain-gate solar/CoI/pun-pun/pazuzu abuse.

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 09:00 PM
It may surprise you that some people do play 3.X with minimal houseruling and their games do run smoothly without degenerating into chain-gate solar/CoI/pun-pun/pazuzu abuse.
All attributable to a good DM no doubt.

Oslecamo
2010-03-26, 09:05 PM
All attributable to a good DM no doubt.

You don't need a good DM to spot and stop chain bidding. It's enough a DM with any kind of sense. I once had a DM who nerfed rogues to the ground while allowing casters to cast multiple quickened spells per round (and sorcerors to freely apply metamagic, resulting in machine-gun sorcerors spamming rains of magic missile every turn), and even him noticed that chain-bidding would break the campaign.

Now on the original topic, I'll have to agree with Saph: multiclass penalties are really easy to evade, and there's a lot more troubles in the rules to worry about. Who was going to play a orc bard 5/fighter1/barbarian 3 anyway?

Eldariel
2010-03-26, 09:08 PM
I can see where everyone is coming from; what follows is why I personally can't stand the FC/XP penalty rules. Personally, I believe that every rule needs to pass the test: "Does this make the game experience more enjoyable in any way?" Whenever a rule fails that test collectively for the whole group (and note, that to e.g. me verisimilitude is a big part of the game experience hence why an awful lot of rules are auto-included), we either get rid of it or alter it until it doesn't.

And that's my principal issue with the multiclass rules: They fail that test. Hard. They don't add anything to the game, limit options in a non-sensical way and fail to address the issues they were designed to address (abusive multiclassing, though such thing doesn't really exist due to caster level design in the first place; also, humans being the best race even without FC: Any doesn't help either). I don't think anyone has ever had trouble remembering the lack of a rule; therefore, I see 0 downsides to removing those.


If one feels multiclassing is problematic, controlling it in a more sensible way on a case-by-case basis, or coming up with a more sensible rule seems preferable to referring back to FC rules.

Tavar
2010-03-26, 09:11 PM
I know you weren't directing this question at me but I still have to respond; perhaps altering the rules results in a more fluid and/or reasonable game. I have many house rules in the current campaign and will have many more in my next. Personal preference.
Oh, I recognize the right to houserule. But the reason that he uses multiclassing rules is that it's a rule. Thus, he's saying that you shouldn't houserule, and that you should, at the same time. Paradox.


Also, I've said it before; one possible reason that it hasn't come up is that, since he's made it clear that this rule is in place, no one is bringing up characters that would invoke the rule.

Also, please don't treat me like I'm 5, Kylarra. My post was in reference to this post;


Regardless, I'll keep using the multiclass experience penalty. It may be a 'useless rule' but its a rule none-the-less.So, houseruling is okay, except if it contradicts a previous rule? What's the point of houseruling, then?

Also, it's more than useless. It actively hampers players, for no gain. What's the point of such a rule?


Also, replying to an earlier, edited post;


It is entirely possible to get into Ur-priest with dipping. You can take 2 levels of beguiler or bard, 2 levels of duskblade and a level of spellthief and with the right feats/flaws, jump into ur-priest at level 6. I've made the build myself though would have to search for it to get the exact placement of the skill points (ie, duskblades have all knowledge skills).

And, i believe i used a level dip on monk 1 as my example for getting teh saves to get into ur-priest, something that may or may not benefit the build at all.
I meant that dipping doesn't get you into the class earlier, something that you stated. Thus, you're example is false.




Similar and the same are not the same thing.
True, but they aren't even all that similar. Again, note the lack of peer pressure, addiction, or similar things. And you still haven't produced any reasons why multiclassing without penalties leads to cheese, except that you can reach cheese with it just like you can with single class characters, and do so at the same time. Not a compelling argument.

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 09:12 PM
You don't need a good DM to spot and stop chain bidding. It's enough a DM with any kind of sense.
LOL. I can't even post one sentence without someone arguing with me. :smalltongue:

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 09:15 PM
Oh, I recognize the right to houserule.

Oops my bad! Misunderstood you. I personally like paradoxes.

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-26, 09:18 PM
LOL. I can't even post one sentence without someone arguing with me. :smalltongue:

Have you considered the reason as to why that is?

Thurbane
2010-03-26, 09:19 PM
Any particular reason why? Just going by the number of feats and PrC's that give exemptions to that rule, I've never quite seen their reasoning.
I guess I'm OK with the MC rules because I come from a 1E background, where MC was very limited and somewhat arbitrary. Same with the Monk and Paladin rules...these were traditionally "elite" classes that were hard to qualify for.

...no real game balance issues, I just like it flavor wise.

Tequila Sunrise
2010-03-26, 09:22 PM
Don't use 'em. I think they were intended to prevent cheese, but mostly what they do is create red tape. There's some multi-cheese that's clearly against RAI (druid X + monk 1) but is clearly legal by RAW, so I prefer the "You abuse it, I nerf it" method of cheese-prevention.


I use them, more or less. Generally I just assume that players won't multiclass in such a way that they'll take an XP penalty.
So if a player happens to mention "Oh yeah, my 17th level character is on the third level of his third base class," do you let it slide or...? Not criticizing, just curious.


It's not a particularly logical rule, but it's not important enough to be worth houseruling either.
Really? Aren't you kinda famous 'round here for home brewing stuff? It's not exactly the same as house ruling, but...anyway, maybe I'm thinking of someone else. [?]

Stubbed Tongue
2010-03-26, 09:22 PM
Have you considered the reason as to why that is?

Yep, my detractors don't know a thing about D&D. :smallamused:

Akal Saris
2010-03-26, 09:29 PM
To be fair, I've only had multiclass penalties come up once in a real game. But I design enough builds for fun that I run into them frequently that way, and it generally irritates me when an otherwise elegant build runs into problems from penalties.

As I said earlier, favored class bonuses like those that PF uses retain the "spirit" of multiclass penalties without punishing PCs arbitrarily.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-26, 10:20 PM
...no real game balance issues, I just like it flavor wise.
I can sort of see the flavor in the Monk and Paladin multiclassing restrictions, but I honestly don't understand the flavor behind multiclassing penalties. They just don't make any sense in my head from an in-game perspective. You've split yourself, so you're not as good at either thing - that's modeled pretty effectively by the fact that your class levels are lower. What is the experience penalty supposed to signify, in game? I understand it's a hold-over from previous editions, but my understanding is that previous editions didn't really use the separate class levels mechanic for multiclassing, so there experience penalties make sense to model the same thing that separate class levels do, but if it's simply a holdover from a different set of rules where it made sense, I dunno, I don't get it. And I really don't see how it makes sense from an in game perspective. I'd appreciate your insight.

EvilBloodGnome
2010-03-26, 11:43 PM
I tend to play Pathfinder, so no penalties for me.

The thing is, flavorwise, they make sense and don't make sense. They make sense in that juggling skills from more than one class's skills and abilities around. Of course, it doesn't make sense because in most settings you don't point at a person and say "well, lookit him, he's Barb1/Sorc7/Spellsword1/Abj.Champ.2!" A character flavor-wise isn't chunks of classes, but rather an amalgamation of several traits. Y'know, like how people are a mix of several things at once. So that's why many of my heavy roleplay DMs nix the penalties out of principle.

Saph
2010-03-27, 04:00 AM
So if a player happens to mention "Oh yeah, my 17th level character is on the third level of his third base class," do you let it slide or...? Not criticizing, just curious.

I'd do the following:

1) Remind the player about the favoured class rules. When they say "huh?" open the book and show it to them. Odds are they'll be able to figure out a way round it themselves.

2) If they can't, suggest a way in which they can. "What if instead of Fighter 3 / Barbarian 1 you went Fighter 2 / Barbarian 2? It kind of works better anyway."

3) If they genuinely can't figure out ANY way around it, and really have their heart set on playing this bizarre combination of classes for whatever reason, then I'll ignore the rule.

I don't expect 3) to ever happen, though. It's a pretty unlikely chain of coincidences.


Really? Aren't you kinda famous 'round here for home brewing stuff? It's not exactly the same as house ruling, but...anyway, maybe I'm thinking of someone else. [?]

Heh, not quite. I homebrew a lot of stuff, but as regards actual rule systems I tend to stick fairly closely to RAW. I've got a mild but definite dislike of houserules, simply because every houserule is one extra bit of work for the players.

Darkfire
2010-03-27, 06:36 AM
3) If they genuinely can't figure out ANY way around it, and really have their heart set on playing this bizarre combination of classes for whatever reason, then I'll ignore the rule.
A good, common sense approach if you're wanting to play by RAW as much as possible.

However, I disagree with you that, in this particular case, having a house rule causes more work. Sure, it's one more thing to remember but "no multiclassing XP penalty" is a damn sight easier to recall than "-20% for each non-prestige class (unless it's your race's favoured class) which is not within 1 level of your highest level non-prestige class. Penalty applies as soon as classes become unbalanced and disappears if balance is restored".

I dislike the rule in general because it's unnecessarily complicated and it doesn't apply to prestige classes despite the fact that the justification for the penalty in the first place is that:

Developing and maintaining skills and abilities in more than one class is a demanding process.
If anything, having the XP penalty apply only to prestige classes would do more to limit cheese than the current rule.

Saph
2010-03-27, 06:59 AM
A good, common sense approach if you're wanting to play by RAW as much as possible.

However, I disagree with you that, in this particular case, having a house rule causes more work. Sure, it's one more thing to remember but "no multiclassing XP penalty" is a damn sight easier to recall than "-20% for each non-prestige class (unless it's your race's favoured class) which is not within 1 level of your highest level non-prestige class. Penalty applies as soon as classes become unbalanced and disappears if balance is restored".

Oh, individually it doesn't cause any work at all. But the thing about houserules like this is that they have a cumulative effect. There are hundreds of little details of the rules in D&D that don't make any sense. For instance, why are the spells Mage Armour, Shield, and Wall of Force in the Conjuration, Abjuration, and Evocation schools when they do almost exactly the same thing?

It's tempting to houserule these things. The problem is, once you start, where do you stop? There are literally thousands of details in the D&D rules that could be done better. If you try to fix all of them you end up with a text file thousands of words long which every player in the game has to learn, which in turn creates a barrier to entry for anyone wanting to join your group. A big reason for the popularity of D&D 3.5 and 4e is that it's more-or-less standardised. The more houserules your group has, the more effort it takes to learn them.

So whenever I look at a houserule, the question I ask is: "Does this rule improve the game significantly enough that it's worth the effort it'll take for everyone in the group to learn and remember it?" And generally, the answer is no. In this particular case, the problem the houserule is designed to correct doesn't come up often enough to be worth it.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-27, 07:23 AM
Heck no. And I've never played in a game with anyone else who used them.

They don't make any sense whatsoever, adding nothing to the game's balance or verisimilitude, and just add one more thing to track.

AslanCross
2010-03-27, 07:55 AM
I don't. XP as it is is a bookkeeping hassle. I don't want to tax my players.

Tequila Sunrise
2010-03-27, 07:56 AM
Oh, individually it doesn't cause any work at all. But the thing about houserules like this is that they have a cumulative effect. There are hundreds of little details of the rules in D&D that don't make any sense. For instance, why are the spells Mage Armour, Shield, and Wall of Force in the Conjuration, Abjuration, and Evocation schools when they do almost exactly the same thing?

It's tempting to houserule these things. The problem is, once you start, where do you stop? There are literally thousands of details in the D&D rules that could be done better. If you try to fix all of them you end up with a text file thousands of words long which every player in the game has to learn, which in turn creates a barrier to entry for anyone wanting to join your group. A big reason for the popularity of D&D 3.5 and 4e is that it's more-or-less standardised. The more houserules your group has, the more effort it takes to learn them.

So whenever I look at a houserule, the question I ask is: "Does this rule improve the game significantly enough that it's worth the effort it'll take for everyone in the group to learn and remember it?" And generally, the answer is no. In this particular case, the problem the houserule is designed to correct doesn't come up often enough to be worth it.
You have a point. There are a ton of things I'd like to house rule, but don't for precisely the reason you describe. I'd like to reduce each race to two or three important racial traits each and reorganize spells into consistent schools, for example. But I don't because most players' eyes would just glaze over when confronted with that much text, so I don't.

But when it comes to things like multiclass restrictions, the house rule actually makes the game simpler. For veteran players new to the group, they only have to know one extra bit of information: "Ignore multiclass penalties." If that's too much info for a new player, he can choose to ignore it; I don't mind him limiting his own choices. For new players, the house rule eliminates a wall of text, thereby lowering the game's 'entrance requirement.'

Although minor, I think the added freedom of ignoring MC penalties is well worth those three house rule words.

Heliomance
2010-03-27, 08:30 AM
Let me give you a Reduction ad Absurdum argument.

An elven Factotum 3/Barbarian 1/Fighter 1/Rogue 1/Ranger 1/Scout 1 (a ridiculous build, I know, but still) has a 100% experience penalty. As such, it can never advance in anything ever again. And people think the multiclass penalties work?

ScionoftheVoid
2010-03-27, 08:37 AM
Let me give you a Reduction ad Absurdum argument.

An elven Factotum 3/Barbarian 1/Fighter 1/Rogue 1/Ranger 1/Scout 1 (a ridiculous build, I know, but still) has a 100% experience penalty. As such, it can never advance in anything ever again. And people think the multiclass penalties work?

And yet putting one Factotum level elsewhere would give no multiclass penalties. Massive dipping is encouraged by the multiclassing penalties until you get to level 6 and ignore them due to prestige classes. I don't use the MC penalty rules. They don't work the way they're supposed to, focusing on separate areas and not being able to do as much in an individual area is already modeled by having lower class levels and it penalises interesting combinations which were already worse than sticking with a single casting class.

Hand_of_Vecna
2010-03-27, 03:20 PM
+1 to the argument that MC penalties only punish melee and characters wanting to blend two things roles, which is usually best done by entering a PrC out of a foundation of two base classes usually in a arangement like 4/2(with the class with more skill ranks taken at level one and again the last level before PrCing) or 5/1.

Most diptastic builds I see actually don't take a hit from MCP anyway. Barbarian 4/Fighter 2 is a popular entry to various PrC's since two feats is better than improved uncanny dodge, trap sense +2, +2 hp and 2 skill points(instead of 4 because now you don't need to buy off illiteracy). Humans, Dwarves and Half-Orcs can all do this without penalty and any body can be a Barbarian 2/Fighter 2/Hexblade 2/Psywarrior 2/Warblade 3. So why punish the player who takes uneven levels. Hell they might even have a roleplaying related reason.

It makes perfect sense for say a Savage Bloodthirsty Gnoll Warrior who represents his abilities with Barbarian levels to sign on with a mercenary company or is conscripted into the forces of the evil warlord that controls his tribe's lands and eventually learn some more disciplined and refined fighting techniques let's say from a hobgoblin seargent and these techniques might be best represented as levels in Fighter or Warblade this will also reflect his growth well since mechanically he won't be able to increase skills like survival or listen as he's constantly surrounded by a dozen soldiers in heavy armor and is handed three square meals today because his employers have better things for him to do than set traps for rabbits. If Multiclass penalties are enforced though after a few years he will suddenly stagnate and have difficulty advancing his overall combat effectivness unless he takes off his shiny suit of fullplate goes AWOL and runs around in the woods for a few months because otherwise his Fighter or Warblade levels will get more than 1 level higher than his Barbarian levels. Seriously, does that make sense to anyone?

Note:Used Gnoll cause it's core and has FC:Ranger but, I could easily picture one in the senario above

If you want to use MC penalties to restrict cheese apply them to PrC's in someway like -10% XP for every level you advance outside a given PrC you haven't completed. Make exceptions for leaving PrC's for good reasons though with the caveat that they are an Ex member of that PrC and can no longer advance and they should loose any benifits that aren't granted by the character's training(heavy houserule/DM fiat territory). That's if you want to restrict some cheese. Personally I am a member of the "classes are a metagame construct and should be taken according to the players whims" school of thought and depend on my players to restrict true cheese themselves, though I help occaisionally.

Oh Multi Class Penalties do one more thing they make the best race even better. If you want to encourage single classed characters for some reason give everyone the PF bonus in their races favored class, give half-elves the bonus in any 1 class and don't give humans any bonus. Any other FC: Any race decide yourself if it's over or under powered and treat it accordingly.

Telonius
2010-03-27, 03:40 PM
I don't use multiclass penalties. As long as the concept makes sense and isn't unbalanced mechanically, and it's what the player wants to do, I don't see a reason to deny it. If it is unbalanced mechanically, either I won't allow the combination at all, or I'll bump down the power until it's balanced.

Oslecamo
2010-03-27, 04:56 PM
I dislike the rule in general because it's unnecessarily complicated and it doesn't apply to prestige classes despite the fact that the justification for the penalty in the first place is that:


Nitpick, but actualy most people out there misuse prc multiclassing for casters in benefit of the casters.

Say you're a wizard. You want to dip mindbender to get telepathy, and then go back to wizard, so you become a wizard 7/mindender1/wizard1

By RAW, the wizard level you take after the mindbender level doesn't see the mindbender advanced casting. It treats you as a 8th level wizard, because that's what the 8th level of wizard does.

However, most caster players out there will merrilly dip prcs and then go back to their base caster classes and pretend all the casting stacks togheter nice and tidy.

Thus, by RAW casters diping Prcs should hurt them like hell unless they only take prcs and never go back to their original class.

Hand_of_Vecna
2010-03-27, 06:22 PM
By RAW, the wizard level you take after the mindbender level doesn't see the mindbender advanced casting. It treats you as a 8th level wizard, because that's what the 8th level of wizard does.

However, most caster players out there will merrilly dip prcs and then go back to their base caster classes and pretend all the casting stacks togheter nice and tidy.

Really?

I'd be interested to see some rules quotes to back this up. Not saying that to be a jerk I'm really interested.

If your right it's really no big deal, anyone going back to wizard after PrC dipping is only doing it for the sake of simplicity or to satisfy a housrule like only 1 PrC or only 2 PrCs and they can't qualify for the class they intend to take through level ten yet. There are plenty of bland full casting PrC's that could be used to fill in any gaps if your interpretation is correct.

Optimator
2010-03-27, 08:49 PM
Our group doesn't use the multiclass penalties. They're silly.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-27, 09:10 PM
Nitpick, but actualy most people out there misuse prc multiclassing for casters in benefit of the casters.

Say you're a wizard. You want to dip mindbender to get telepathy, and then go back to wizard, so you become a wizard 7/mindender1/wizard1

By RAW, the wizard level you take after the mindbender level doesn't see the mindbender advanced casting. It treats you as a 8th level wizard, because that's what the 8th level of wizard does.

However, most caster players out there will merrilly dip prcs and then go back to their base caster classes and pretend all the casting stacks togheter nice and tidy.

Thus, by RAW casters diping Prcs should hurt them like hell unless they only take prcs and never go back to their original class.

If you use that interpretation, then the mindbender level sees "hey, you've got eight levels of wizard there" and merrily adds up to 9 anyway.

sreservoir
2010-03-27, 09:39 PM
by the same logic, the +1 spellcasting-type levels on PrC's should not stack, and therefore incantatrix is 1/10 casting.

DragoonWraith
2010-03-27, 10:28 PM
Nitpick, but actualy most people out there misuse prc multiclassing for casters in benefit of the casters.

Say you're a wizard. You want to dip mindbender to get telepathy, and then go back to wizard, so you become a wizard 7/mindender1/wizard1

By RAW, the wizard level you take after the mindbender level doesn't see the mindbender advanced casting. It treats you as a 8th level wizard, because that's what the 8th level of wizard does.

However, most caster players out there will merrilly dip prcs and then go back to their base caster classes and pretend all the casting stacks togheter nice and tidy.

Thus, by RAW casters diping Prcs should hurt them like hell unless they only take prcs and never go back to their original class.
"This essentially means that she adds the level of {PRESTIGE CLASS} to the level of some other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day, spells known, and caster level accordingly."

Granted, that line does not appear in the Spellcasting section of every PrC that has "+1 to existing level of _____", but unless you're arguing that the Archmage's spellcasting rules are supposed to be different from the Loremaster's, you're wrong.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-03-28, 05:11 AM
By RAW, the wizard level you take after the mindbender level doesn't see the mindbender advanced casting. It treats you as a 8th level wizard, because that's what the 8th level of wizard does.

Yep. So a wizard 7/mindbender 1/wizard +1 only has 8 levels of actual wizard casting from actual wizard levels. Then you add the level of mindbender, as the passage DragoonWraith quoted says, to the 8 levels to get 9 levels. Ta-da, it all works out.

As for my stance on multiclass penalties...well, the kind of "cheesy" and/or powerful characters the penalties seem to be trying to prevent are standard fare in my games, so they're even more pointless than normal.