Multiclassed good saves: why do you get the bonus each time?

[TuggyNE]

So, can anyone explain the design philosophy or fluff behind the decision to make all first-level good save bonuses (+2) stack when multiclassing? And then the even more bizarre way the fractional save variant keeps that?

[Frosty]

Pathfinder's prestige classes don't have that problem, although their base classes still do.

[StreamOfTheSky]

It's the equal and opposite design philosophy that a guy with 2 medium BAB classes and a medium BAB prestige class fails forever at hitting things?

(Note PF did NOTHING to "fix" that with its prestige classes)

EDIT: Fractional saves *don't* keep that. You only get the +2 once...

[Frosty]

PF prestige classes don't magically give you a +2 iirc.

[kulosle]

I am most curious about this too, I always thought it was weird that multi-classing makes you're saves amazing.

[Just to Browse]

Probably because Math is Hard. I've tried explaining fractional saves to my players several times and it just doesn't make sense to them.

[TuggyNE]

PF doesn't seem to make any exception for PrCs, so I assume they're treated the same way as base classes, just like 3.5.


EDIT: Fractional saves *don't* keep that. You only get the +2 once...

Hmm. I've definitely heard that fractional specifically does include that, but I don't have access to the source right now. :smallfrown: Anyone verify one way or another?

[Failed Phantasm]

Hmm. I've definitely heard that fractional specifically does include that, but I don't have access to the source right now. :smallfrown: Anyone verify one way or another?



For example, in a standard game, a 5th-level cleric/2nd-level fighter would have base save bonuses of Fort +7, Ref +1, Will +4. In this variant, the same character would have Fort +7 (rounded down from +7-1/2), Ref +2 (rounded down from +2-1/3), and Will +5 (rounded down from +5-1/6)


A single-classed 7th level Cleric would have a base Fort save of +5 (rounded down from +5 1/2 using the variant as above), so it appears that good save bonuses are not restricted to "once only" with the fractional BAB/Saves house rule, at least as it is written in UA.

[TuggyNE]

A single-classed 7th level Cleric would have a base Fort save of +5 (rounded down from +5 1/2 using the variant as above), so it appears that good save bonuses are not restricted to "once only" with the fractional BAB/Saves house rule, at least as it is written in UA.

Thanks, that's what I thought. (Since I just recently gave detailed advice on this basis, I'd hate to be proven wrong. :smalleek:)

Pity that part of UA doesn't seem to be OGL, though.

[Jeraa]

Thanks, that's what I thought. (Since I just recently gave detailed advice on this basis, I'd hate to be proven wrong. :smalleek:)

Pity that part of UA doesn't seem to be OGL, though.

Actually, the entire book is Open Content. Even the fractional saves and level-independent XP awards. They were just left out of the SRD for some reason.

The title page of Unearthed Arcana very specifically states the entire book (aside from a few of the bloodlines, and the standard termnology stuff) is Open Content.


Product Identity: The following items are hereby identified as Product Identity, as defined in the Open Gaming License version 1.0a, Section 1(e), and are not Open Content: All trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters, deities, artifacts, places, etc.), artwork, trade dress, and the names and game statistics for the following monsters: beholder, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti.

Open Content: Except for material designated as Product Identity (see above) and the githyanki/githzerai, slaad, and yuan-ti bloodlines in Chapter 1, the contents of this WIZARDS OF THE COAST® game product are Open Game Content, as defi ned in the Open Gaming License version 1.0a Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission. To learn more about the Open Gaming License and the d20 System License, please visit www.wizards.com/d20.

[Keneth]

My group uses fractions for everything. Pathfinder kinda messes with the saves for prestige classes to compensate for lack of fractions though, effectively giving you +2/2 to good saves at 1st level, and +2/3 to bad saves, as if you were starting at 2nd level. I generally allow players to get the +2 bonus the first time a save becomes good, whereas fractions instead accumulate normally, regardless of multiclassing. Not that many people multiclass in Pathfinder in the first place, they did a good job providing incentive to go full 20 in most cases.

[Drelua]

Probably because Math is Hard. I've tried explaining fractional saves to my players several times and it just doesn't make sense to them.

Okay, try explaining it like this; just count the number of levels you have of a good and a bad progression for each save. Then, add 1/2 the number of good progression levels and 1/3 the number of bad progression. You can even just take these numbers off of any class' chart if you add on any extra +2s after. Finally, add up your first level bonuses. For example, a Fighter 3/Rogue 3 would have 3 levels of good FORT (+3) and 3 of bad, (+1) same for Reflex and 6 levels of bad Will, and 1 +2 each for FORT and Reflex, for a total of 4/4/2. Hope that helps. :smallsmile:

This is actually how I just assumed saves work the first time I multiclassed, except that I thought the +2 would only count once. I didn't even realize I was using an optional rule, this way just seemed to make more sense. Your player's might just be a bit slow. :smalltongue:

[Frosty]

PF doesn't seem to make any exception for PrCs, so I assume they're treated the same way as base classes, just like 3.5.



Hmm. I've definitely heard that fractional specifically does include that, but I don't have access to the source right now. :smallfrown: Anyone verify one way or another?You are incorrect. Compare the 3.5 Loremaster (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/loremaster.htm) to the PF Loremaster (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestige-classes/core-rulebook/loremaster). Notice the difference in the saving throw table? Look at the 1st level and then also look at the 10th level.

[Keneth]

Indeed, Pathfinder removes the old "good save bonus" in PrCs and instead shifts the whole table by a level to compensate for fractions.

[The Viscount]

So, can anyone explain the design philosophy or fluff behind the decision to make all first-level good save bonuses (+2) stack when multiclassing? And then the even more bizarre way the fractional save variant keeps that?

I had wondered that myself. It sort of balances with the fact that poor saves retard your progression, I guess. As someone mentioned, it's also likely that presenting the save progression as is made design easy on the designers part. Perhaps it was also supposed to balance the multiclass xp penalty because everybody uses that.

[Eldariel]

Thanks, that's what I thought. (Since I just recently gave detailed advice on this basis, I'd hate to be proven wrong. :smalleek:)

Pity that part of UA doesn't seem to be OGL, though.

Fractionals as per WotC site (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060303a) don't repeat 'em while fractionals as per UA do, from which the confusions stems. Of course, it's also more logical that way; +2 at most once per save and you're good to go.

[Sylthia]

It's nice for good saves, but it makes bad saves even worse.

[navar100]

I call it a feature, not a bug, of multiclassing. Multiclassing is self-correcting because of various abilities based on class level as opposed to character level. The boost in saving throws is a perk. This issue does not bother me at all.

[Keneth]

I call it a feature, not a bug, of multiclassing. Multiclassing is self-correcting because of various abilities based on class level as opposed to character level. The boost in saving throws is a perk. This issue does not bother me at all.

Implying people don't multiclass only to get class features independent of level, or the rare few based on character level. Multiclassing is the farthest thing from self-correcting and goes to extremes in 3.5. :smallbiggrin:

[StreamOfTheSky]

Nah, multiclassing works pretty well in 3E, aside from the scourge of full casting PrC's which break the system.

Noncasters bounce around and learn a varied amount of styles and skills to create their own style. Casters stay focused on their caster class to unlock the most power they can.

People always say casters multiclassing is broken, because it's so inferior to staying in the casting class. News flash: casters are overpowered. OF COURSE not advancing your casting class will bite harder than fighter skipping a level! The spectrum remains Wizard >> Fighter. If you have a Wiz 19 / Ftr 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Wiz side. If he is a Ftr 19 / Wiz 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Ftr side. The fact that adding or losing caster levels very quickly causes huge shifts in power is because casters are quadratic and warriors are linear.
So the multiclassing is actually a perfect reflection of the class balance, it's the class balance that is broken.
/rant

[Sylthia]

Nah, multiclassing works pretty well in 3E, aside from the scourge of full casting PrC's which break the system.

Noncasters bounce around and learn a varied amount of styles and skills to create their own style. Casters stay focused on their caster class to unlock the most power they can.

People always say casters multiclassing is broken, because it's so inferior to staying in the casting class. News flash: casters are overpowered. OF COURSE not advancing your casting class will bite harder than fighter skipping a level! The spectrum remains Wizard >> Fighter. If you have a Wiz 19 / Ftr 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Wiz side. If he is a Ftr 19 / Wiz 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Ftr side. The fact that adding or losing caster levels very quickly causes huge shifts in power is because casters are quadratic and warriors are linear.
So the multiclassing is actually a perfect reflection of the class balance, it's the class balance that is broken.
/rant

That's true, but there's also the issue if you try to do Cleric 10/Wizard 10. Even if you go mystic theurge, it's very hard to pull of successfully.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Even though they're both casters, they're still very different fields, so to speak. So it still makes sense. Sorc/Wiz a bit less so since they both cast arcane spells from the same list. But still, book learning explicitly doesn't help sorc with gaining more spells at all, and having spells innately wouldn't necessarily help a wizard study his craft better, other than having a bunch of spells from sorc he can readily scribe into his spellbook.

[Eldariel]

People always say casters multiclassing is broken, because it's so inferior to staying in the casting class. News flash: casters are overpowered. OF COURSE not advancing your casting class will bite harder than fighter skipping a level! The spectrum remains Wizard >> Fighter. If you have a Wiz 19 / Ftr 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Wiz side. If he is a Ftr 19 / Wiz 1, he is between the two classes in power, much closer to the Ftr side. The fact that adding or losing caster levels very quickly causes huge shifts in power is because casters are quadratic and warriors are linear.
So the multiclassing is actually a perfect reflection of the class balance, it's the class balance that is broken.
/rant

But those are separate issues. Casters being broken and caster multiclassing being broken have pretty much nothing to do with each other; even if you fix casters (say, ban all spells except ones that do direct damage; crude, boring, unoriginal, inefficient, incomplete fix but just an example for the sake of an argument), multiclassed casters will remain far inferior to singleclassed casters, as do caster/non-caster multiclass.

As such, the system for multiclassing casters is broken independently from the caster classes themselves. Indeed, it's one of the biggest issues with the shift from AD&D-style multiclassed characters to 3.5; in AD&D, the multiclassed characters only lagged slightly behind single-classed characters in level of both of their classes so they were able to keep up reasonably well and the extra options and versatility from multiclassing actually did something.

Non-casters (outside ToB) have no scaling features that can't be acquired from BAB (a problem with the classes that randomly "fixes" a problem with multiclassing by enabling single-classed characters to suck as much as multiclassed ones), so the issues in the multiclass system don't really hit them; they're gonna suck regardless of the number of classes you take. However, casters that actually gain worthwhile abilities as they get to higher levels in the class feel the full brunt of suckitude the multiclass system imposes.

ToB-like "class features half-advance in off levels with few things fully advancing" (BAB, in this case) system is probably how multiclassing should've been realized in the first place but that's not the case so we're in the case where a 10/10 is considered equal to 20/20 in a game with theoretically multiplicative scaling.


This is just one of the million issues in 3.5 that are mostly swept under the rug because of the blatant balance issues (e.g. reach weapons vs. non-reach weapons, TWF & S&B vs. THF, archers, martial vs. exotic weapons, monotony of melee, lack of multi-attribute improvements, full attacks, skill system, lack of sufficient natural feat gains, etc.; those problems are far less often mentioned than Monks, or Mundanes vs. Casters, simply 'cause the bigger problems overshadow them), but it's there and it's fairly obvious if you set out to actually fix the system.

[wayfare]

I don't really see it as broken -- i think it in there on purpose to make people take a few dips. The ability to multiclass was a huge change from 2E. I think the idea is "you lose a few abilities, but you broaden your horizons".

That said, you can get some ridic saves if you just take 20 different classes, but honestly, I dont think blatant exploitation counts as "Broken". You can break almost any system if you try hard enough.

There are may things that are broken in 3.5. I just dont think multiclassing 1 level dips is really one of them.

[Just to Browse]

Someone needs to make Base Saves Man--a class made entirely out of 1-level dips in 3.x classes that gets +2 to base saves every level.

EDIT: My god, the monk might be useful for something.

[Zovc]

I am most curious about this too, I always thought it was weird that multi-classing makes you're saves amazing.

Multi-classing "optimally" makes your saves amazing.*

;)

[TuggyNE]

Woo! Lots of replies. I've been sick the last day, so gonna kinda skim most of them.

The PF Loremaster does seem to be different, which is weird, because I'd thought I'd checked for that sort of thing. :smallconfused: Ah well. I swear I did try to verify it! :smalltongue:

[Arael666]

Cleric 1 / Monk 1 / Rogue 1

He will have +4 to all saves and 0 BAB. And that is just comparing saves and BAB, there is a lot more that a character loses when multiclassing, like the XP penalty for instance.

Jokes aside, I really don't think its overpowered. Sure, the guy might have a +12 base sabe at lvl 8, but he wont have a good BAB (probably), his class features will be a fruit salad (a low powered fruid salad BTW), and he still will be able to use one at a time, since overcoming action economy is as hard as it gets. Let the man have his +12 base save.

[Namfuak]

Honestly, I don't even think it's that broken - for the most part, similar classes get similar good and bad saves, so a fighter/barbarian for example will have good fort and bad reflex/will, while a caster/casterPRC will have good will and bad reflex/fort. If you take levels in opposing classes, such as a gish caster, you might have relatively equal saves, but none that are especially good. So the question is, is it really that exploitative that a melee powerhouse will rarely fail fortitude saves but falls flat on his face or gets mind controlled often, or that a caster is strong of mind but weak of body?

[Coidzor]

I call it a feature, not a bug, of multiclassing. Multiclassing is self-correcting because of various abilities based on class level as opposed to character level. The boost in saving throws is a perk. This issue does not bother me at all.

Self-correcting only applies if you think multiclassing is, in and of itself, a problem.

[Eldariel]

Jokes aside, I really don't think its overpowered. Sure, the guy might have a +12 base sabe at lvl 8, but he wont have a good BAB (probably), his class features will be a fruit salad (a low powered fruid salad BTW), and he still will be able to use one at a time, since overcoming action economy is as hard as it gets. Let the man have his +12 base save.

It's not overpowered, but it's pointless, random, contrary to player expectations, bad game design, largely useless (outside hitting some PRC prerequisites early) & without any big upsides.

If someone wants his +12 saves, there are classes (e.g. anything with Divine Grace), feats (some weaker, some stronger) & so on for it. That shouldn't be the reason to multiclass; multiclassing is supposed to give you class abilities from multiple classes in exchange for slower progress, not screw over your character in exchange for having high saving throws.

[eggynack]

Jokes aside, I really don't think its overpowered. Sure, the guy might have a +12 base sabe at lvl 8, but he wont have a good BAB (probably), his class features will be a fruit salad (a low powered fruid salad BTW), and he still will be able to use one at a time, since overcoming action economy is as hard as it gets. Let the man have his +12 base save.
Well, he won't be good at that stuff if you multiclass badly. If you multiclass well, then a series of dips is the most optimal progression, without even considering saves. Start off with barbarian 2, with whirling frenzy, wolf totem, and spirit lion totem. You've gained just about everything that the barbarian has to offer, and you've done it in two levels. If you take extra rage, then you make up for just about the only weakness. Then you have fighter, which is also good for two levels if you don't use ACF's. With them, it makes sense to progress significantly higher, but taking level 3 in fighter without those incentives, is just unreasonable.

The pattern basically continues like that. You just keep taking short dips in classes until you hit a good prestige class of some kind, and then you take that until it's not viable anymore. In this case, it's pretty easy to go for runescarred barbarian. Therefore you basically just need three other full BAB levels, and that cost is a trivial one. Most melee classes operate like that. Tome of Battle incentivizes taking a single level dip late in a build, if you're not just going full classed Tome of Battle. Melee classes are generally intrinsically frontloaded, which means that the results which this thread takes issue with are actually rather common. Casters have basically the opposite result, but no one cares about the save boosting issues that full casters face. It just has such a low impact on their power level.

[Aegis013]

Someone needs to make Base Saves Man--a class made entirely out of 1-level dips in 3.x classes that gets +2 to base saves every level.

EDIT: My god, the monk might be useful for something.

I present 50BaseSaves Man (a gestalt that I actually made yesterday, how convenient!)

Breaking this down level by level
Race Jungle Kobold (Venerable) - takes two flaws.
Base attributes: str 8, dex 14, con 16, int 13, wis 13, charisma 14
level 1 attributes: str 4, dex 16, con 16, int 14, wis 16, cha 17
1. Hexblade//Ranger - 1. Dragonwrought, F1. Endurance, F2. Combat Reflexes, R. Track
2. Hexblade//Monk - M. Improved Unarmed Strike, M. Stunning Fist
3. Hexblade//Favored Soul - 3. Combat Casting
4. Dragon Shaman//Psionic Rogue
5. Duskblade//Ninja
6. Cloistered Cleric//Scout - 6. Skill Focus (Bluff)
7. Druid//Factotum
8. Wizard//Totemist - Alertness from familiar
9. Paladin of Freedom//Swordsage - 9. Practiced Manifester [character becomes chaotic, can no longer take levels as monk]
10. Paladin of Freedom//Shadow Sun Ninja
11. Archivist//Rogue
12. Lurk//Lion Totem Barbarian - 12. Practiced Manifester
13. Soulknife//Fighter - F. Skill Focus (Handle Animal)
14. The Sacred Fist//Ardent (get your 4th level psionic power here, you can probably manifest it once with all the PP from Rogue, Lurk, Soulknife and Ardent)
15. Bard//Crusader - 15. ???
16. Dragonfire Adept//Beastmaster
17. Incarnate//Bloodhound
18. Spirit Shaman//The Shadowbane Stalker - 18. ???
19. Divine Mind//Spy Master
20. Healer//Vigilante

That gives you, by fractional, +50 to all base saves by level 20.
In addition, you get at least +3 from ability mods, and +3 again from Divine Grace.
You end up with 17 BAB (fractional), d10 HD most levels, a few Swordsage maneuvers to play with, a bunch of level 1 spells and best of all, if you pass a Will or Fort save, Mettle from Hexblade protects you from any side effects.

As far as Evasion, just grab the Ring of Evasion as early as you can.

The classes aren't taken with any regard for their class feature offerings, so the build will be pretty bad, but it does get about a million skill points.

[TuggyNE]

It's not overpowered, but it's pointless, random, contrary to player expectations, bad game design, largely useless (outside hitting some PRC prerequisites early) & without any big upsides.

No no, tell us how you really feel! :smalltongue:

Seriously though, that's basically my general inclination; it just seems like a bizarre flaw without any obvious reason to exist.

[chronomatophobe]

Fractional BAB/Saves and a little bit of common sense leave you exactly where you're supposed to be.

I will never understand why people don't utilize them.

[eggynack]

Fractional BAB/Saves and a little bit of common sense leave you exactly where you're supposed to be.

I will never understand why people don't utilize them.

I might be missing something about fractional saves and attack bonus in saying this, but don't those variant rules provide necessarily beneficial results? Good saves are still front loaded under that system, except the poor saves slowly accrue a few points even if they're always poor. I don't see how these rule mitigate the crazy high saves gained by multiclassing at all.

[TuggyNE]

Fractional BAB/Saves and a little bit of common sense leave you exactly where you're supposed to be.

I will never understand why people don't utilize them.


I might be missing something about fractional saves and attack bonus in saying this, but don't those variant rules provide necessarily beneficial results? Good saves are still front loaded under that system, except the poor saves slowly accrue a few points even if they're always poor. I don't see how these rule mitigate the crazy high saves gained by multiclassing at all.

This was already covered earlier in the thread; the UA fractional saves specifically don't fix this problem. (The web enhancement seems to, though.) So it depends on which variant you're using, I guess. :smalltongue:

[eggynack]

Still, even though you can create an optimal character who has sky high saves, I don't see the problem. All it ends up meaning is that melee types have higher saves than caster types. Any character who would gain significant benefit from multiclassing on saves, deserves the benefit from multiclassing on saves. there are some obvious exceptions to this, mostly classes which need your full attention and give nothing in return, but if there's any archetype which I'd want to give super saving powers to, it's melee guys. For once it's casters getting shafted, and I can't help but think it's a good thing.