When is talking all 20 levels in a single class better than multiclassing?

[John Longarrow]

I've been playing for a while and keep running into the same question over and over when levelling. What do I get for the new level? I find dipping in classes or grabbing levels in a prestigue class make more mechanical sense than just going "Straight up".

I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?

[DeAnno]

Druid, for the most part? Outside of specialized builds or Planar Shepard at least.

[eggynack]

Druid, unless you take planar shepherd. Were planar shepherd to not exist, which easily could have happened, the answer would be druid with absolutely no issues. You also probably shouldn't take planar shepherd because it's utterly broken, so that's reason enough for me to not become one. There're some PrC's that get you to about the same level of power as a straight druid, but none that really push you higher. Also, classes with a cool capstone. For example, warblades get to use two stances at once, and that's cool, so you might want to stick to warblade. I also don't think that leaving truenamer is all that good of an idea, because there's so little support for the class.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Generally speaking, if you don't plan on actually hitting level 20 it's rarely optimal to single class. That said, let's assume you plan on playing a level 20 character for a one shot, so you get to enjoy potential capstones for the entire game...

Warblade 20 is a fine build, competitive with other initiator builds, because of its dual stance capstone.

For most of a Beguiler's career you'd rather dip Mindbender for Mindsight and delayed Advanced Learning, but the "ignore SR" capstone is tempting enough to stay in the class all 20 levels.

A minion-focused Dread Necromancer is going to savor every single DN level, for each gives CHA more hit dice of undead at his command. And of course, becoming a Lich is an awesome capstone.

[Jack_Simth]

I've been playing for a while and keep running into the same question over and over when levelling. What do I get for the new level? I find dipping in classes or grabbing levels in a prestigue class make more mechanical sense than just going "Straight up".

I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?
As many have said, Druid is pretty much the go-to answer (other than things that are Druid+, like Planar Shepherd).

Note, however, that if your DM pays particular attention to the Prestiege Class Header in the DMG, PrC's might not be as available as people normally assume, and dipping in them may not be practical. In which case, pretty much any full caster would fit the criteria.

[Zombulian]

The only way to really play a Truenamer is to stick it out all the way.
Also I think it is the case with most Meldshaping classes that they don't get the Soul Chakra until level twenty, though I may be misremembering that.

[ArcturusV]

Paladin is another I consider going straight up, no deviation. Not because Paladin is a perfect, powerful class like the Druid... but for the reason that almost every single Paladin Ability factors in your levels of Paladin for how useful it is. Smites, Mount, Lay on Hands, etc, etc. I know there are some PrCs for Paladin that people love like Grey Guard, though I admit I haven't really looked over that one, or Bone Knight. But most of them don't really progress Paladin abilities. So you're left with this static, anemic set of abilities while you PrC out. Or just bite the bullet, keep taking Paladin Levels, and build on what you have.

[Valluman]

Knight's capstone is amazing. If you start knight, going straight knight can make it rather powerful.

[123456789blaaa]

Psychic Warrior twenty is pretty great. Ususally I see people either going that route or dipping two levels.

[Rubik]

Artificer. There are only two PrCs that continue adding to your crafting pool (legacy champion and uncanny trickster), but they add to everything. Plus, most levels give you something (at least until much later on), and by that point your crafting pool is so high that there's no reason not to keep going.

[Gavinfoxx]

I've been playing for a while and keep running into the same question over and over when levelling. What do I get for the new level? I find dipping in classes or grabbing levels in a prestigue class make more mechanical sense than just going "Straight up".

I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?

Do you mean multiclassing as taking other base classes, or prestige classing, or what?

[John Longarrow]

Gavinfoxx

Yes, taking either more base classes, Taking prestige classes, or both.

All,
For druids, dipping two levels in Master of Many Forms is really tempting as it lets you change into giants then. That opens a lot of melee power when you do so. Pushing back a top level ability by a level or two (when you are now epic) may not be a bad trade for the survivability at lower levels.

[Frosty]

When is talking all 20 levels in a single class better than multiclassing?When you play Pathfinder :smallwink: I have never multiclassed in PF.

[eggynack]

For druids, dipping two levels in Master of Many Forms is really tempting as it lets you change into giants then. That opens a lot of melee power when you do so. Pushing back a top level ability by a level or two (when you are now epic) may not be a bad trade for the survivability at lower levels.
It might be tempting for folks who want their overall power level to be lower. I mean, sure, it's a nice prestige class, but it's certainly not winning the, "better than straight druid" award. Apart from planar shepherd, which is obviously ridiculously powerful, it's mostly just moonspeaker and lion of talisid on the list of classes that give you something like parity with a druid who's just druiding along.

[Gigas Breaker]

I think Dragonfire Adept wants you to stay single classed.

[Taveena]

The Incarnum classes multiclass poorly, and the capstones are amazing...

[Zombulian]

The Incarnum classes multiclass poorly, and the capstones are amazing...

Is that a joke?

[Karnith]

Is that a joke?
Have you seen what Soulborns get at high levels!? You'd be crazy to want to leave!

[danzibr]

Is that a joke?

The Incarnum classes multiclass poorly, and the capstones are amazing...
I think so?

Totemist 20 is solid. Someone already mentioned Warblade 20: I agree. Dread Necromancer 20. While Cleric 20 is obviously good it has some PrC's with which you essentially lose nothing.

And let's not forget Monk 20.

[Rubik]

And let's not forget Monk 20.I fixed that for you. Because you don't become an outsider. You're just counted as one, which means you're no longer a proper target for Enlarge Person, which monks generally need in order to function properly.

IE, it's a debuff that screws you over royally.

Not to mention that every single level that you take beyond level 6 makes you actively worse than you could be by taking almost any other class in existence.

[Runestar]

For me, if I can't be bothered to fill out the prereqs.

For example, archmage may be a nice prc, but that involves me taking 3 subpar feats early on (2xspell focus, skill focus). Those feats could just as readily have been much more useful alternatives (like reserve feats).

I find that when planning out a character, it is very easy to say "I will take X and do Y by level Z". However, in actual gameplay, given the choice between a filler feat that does nothing now, vs a more useful feat that actually gives me more options now, I often find myself tending towards the latter.

Not a very huge proponent of delayed gratification. :smalltongue:

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

For me, if I can't be bothered to fill out the prereqs.

For example, archmage may be a nice prc, but that involves me taking 3 subpar feats early on (2xspell focus, skill focus). Those feats could just as readily have been much more useful alternatives (like reserve feats).

I find that when planning out a character, it is very easy to say "I will take X and do Y by level Z". However, in actual gameplay, given the choice between a filler feat that does nothing now, vs a more useful feat that actually gives me more options now, I often find myself tending towards the latter.

Not a very huge proponent of delayed gratification. :smalltongue:You could still take low-cost PrCs like Fatespinner (which basically costs a couple of useless skill ranks one level before you enter), or Master Specialist (which requires one okay feat and starts at 4th), no?

[Karnith]

You could still take low-cost PrCs like Fatespinner (which basically costs a couple of useless skill ranks one level before you enter), or Master Specialist (which requires one okay feat and starts at 4th), no?
Or Ruathar, whose only serious requirement is a fluff thing. It's the ultimate space-filler.

[Jeff the Green]

Someone's already mentioned warblade, which I second. Swordsage's capstone (two boosts at once) isn't as good, but still worth considering over a prestige class.

Dread Necromancer's solid, if you rule that he gets the lich template for free, though I still prefer being a necropolitan or having Tomb-tainted Soul and delaying an advanced learning by at least one level. Likewise Beguiler 20 is good, as their capstone allows you to overcome SR automatically if your enemy is flatfooted.

The one nobody's mentioned and I'm sad about is Spirit Shaman. Contingent heal, incorporeality, free raise dead, all worth it.

[Calimehter]

Paladin is another I consider going straight up, no deviation. Not because Paladin is a perfect, powerful class like the Druid... but for the reason that almost every single Paladin Ability factors in your levels of Paladin for how useful it is. Smites, Mount, Lay on Hands, etc, etc. I know there are some PrCs for Paladin that people love like Grey Guard, though I admit I haven't really looked over that one, or Bone Knight. But most of them don't really progress Paladin abilities.

Yeah, having played a high-level paladin in a campaign, I'll vouch for that one too. Maybe I also haven't examined all the options, but it seems like most of the ones I looked at caused problems when it came to stopping your paladin progression when it came to special abilities and class features. Mind you, you would have to be playing in a campaign where such features were still relevant with respect to what your teammates were bringing to the field . . . but if you were, then staying Paladin has its rewards.

I would also add the special case of the Holy Avenger, since its sort of like a capstone feature for Paladins. Greater Dispel at will (tied to your Paladin level, not your caster level) with no charges/spell slots to expend is fairly handy even with spellcasters around.

[Red Fel]

Sorry for summarizing, but this is just my observation. It sounds like there are three constants among reasons not to multiclass.

1: The capstone is awesome (e.g. Warblade's Dual Stance)
2: The class depends on you single-classing (e.g. Paladin, Truefailurenamer)
3: The class itself is overpowered that good (Druid, Druid... Druid)

Can anyone else think of a reason to stay monoclass? (Player laziness/the complexities of multiclassing/XP penalties notwithstanding.)

It occurs to me, however, that really only 1 and 3 are good reasons. 2 just sounds like mechanics punishing you for taking the class in the first place. (Ha ha! You chose Truenamer, you fool! Now you must be one FOREVER just to be ADEQUATE at what you attempted!)

... And I'm done hating on Truenamer.
... For now.

[danzibr]

Sorry for summarizing, but this is just my observation. It sounds like there are three constants among reasons not to multiclass.

1: The capstone is awesome (e.g. Warblade's Dual Stance)
2: The class depends on you single-classing (e.g. Paladin, Truefailurenamer)
3: The class itself is overpowered that good (Druid, Druid... Druid)

Can anyone else think of a reason to stay monoclass? (Player laziness/the complexities of multiclassing/XP penalties notwithstanding.)

It occurs to me, however, that really only 1 and 3 are good reasons. 2 just sounds like mechanics punishing you for taking the class in the first place. (Ha ha! You chose Truenamer, you fool! Now you must be one FOREVER just to be ADEQUATE at what you attempted!)

... And I'm done hating on Truenamer.
... For now.
I absolutely agree with player laziness, which... is related to complexities, I suppose. Or to nerf yourself if you know you'll be in a low op group.

Speaking of which, if you're playing with inexperienced people, it might be best to tell them to pick a class and stick with it until they feel comfortable making a trickier build. In which case, probably let them start from scratch.

[Captnq]

Almost never.

The only time I've seen anyone play the whole 20 levels was when someone was playing a concept. From a Min/Max point of view, multiclassing into PrC or other Base Class is almost always a good idea. You see, usually you have a goal of some sort. Something to shoot for.

I'm a druid. I'm a shapechanger focus. There's some sick PrC for shapechanging. Spells your focus? I can think of a few PrC for a druid/

Monk? Maybe 13th max before you as SO much better off in another class.

Wizard? MC ASAP. There is never a reason to go past 5th level as a wizard. EVER.

Add in ACF and Substitution levels and there's is little reason to play a vanilla anything.

Now, that said, nothing WRONG with straight 20 levels of something. Seen it done once. Usually because the player didn't want to Min/Max every detail. But somewhere along the way just about everyone dips.

And before anyone counters me, I've taken three campaigns to level 20+, I've only seen one person stick to one class 20 levels. I've never heard of anyone playing it to 20th in any other campaign.

I bet someone else out there is about to chime in, "I played a straight 20 levels", but I'm talking started at 1st, played to 20th. If you started at 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or anything other then 1st, it don't count. This isn't theoretical experience, this is RL observation here. Out of the past 14 characters I've run for in the past 8 years, only one made it to 20th in one class, and that was because he was pig headed.

"I'm a Dwarven cleric of Moradin, and a Dwarven cleric of Moradin doesn't multiclass."

That's was his excuse. Go fig.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

2: The class depends on you single-classing (e.g. Paladin, Truefailurenamer)I don't think this reason is necessarily bad, if done in a positive way instead of a negative way.

I'm ambivalent about PF, but I do like the fact that it rewards single classing via favored class bonus and actual class features instead of, say, multiclass XP penalties. "Not getting level-dependent benefits, class features and bonuses" is effectively a penalty to multiclassing, but it's much more palatable IMO because you're trading off various interesting benefits.

Take PF Sorcerer compared to 3.5 Truenamer. If you multiclass out of PF Sorcerer, you're getting some (probably PrC's) benefit instead of ++ spells known and some unique features. That's a choice between two sets of positive features; an optimized build will probably stick with Sorcerer 20, but that's an intended feature, and you're not gimped if you PrC out.

3.5 Truenamer, instead of giving you fun options, subtracts from your ability to affect things every level (upping average CR, and of course upping the party's CR) and forces you to take more Truenamer levels to compete. Also no support.

[Calimehter]

It occurs to me, however, that really only 1 and 3 are good reasons. 2 just sounds like mechanics punishing you for taking the class in the first place. (Ha ha! You chose Truenamer, you fool! Now you must be one FOREVER just to be ADEQUATE at what you attempted!)[/SIZE]

Reason #2 doesn't *have* to be bad. Its only bad if you are feeling trapped or underpowered. If you are enjoying the class you have, are getting new features (or level-based improvements on the ones you got earlier) that you like that keep you interested in your character, and are still contributing to the campaign and story . . . then what's not to like?

I would think that a class that mechanically keeps you interested in staying with it would be considered a very well-designed class.

Edit: Ninja'd!!

[eggynack]

I'm a druid. I'm a shapechanger focus. There's some sick PrC for shapechanging. Spells your focus? I can think of a few PrC for a druid.

There isn't really a way to get a shapechanging focus on a druid that doesn't either lose caster levels, or break the game utterly as a planar shepherd. As I mention, often, there are basically three druid prestige classes that can claim either parity with a druid's power level, or an increase in power. The first, planar shepherd, perfectly advances all three druid components, and gives incredibly powerful stuff on top of that. The second, lion of talisid, is basically just a druid that loses two wild shape levels for some reasonably powerful abilities. The third, moonspeaker, actually ditches both the animal companion, and four levels of wild shape advancement, but it gets a pile of abilities that might be worth it. That's basically it. Everything else is worse, because straight druid abilities are amazing.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Almost never. *snip*I haven't seen it, mostly because I've only seen a campaign go from 1 to 20(+) once.

That said, we can still point out when it would be a good idea, even if we haven't seen it in play. A minion-focused Dread Necromancer with Versatile Spellcaster would prefer to stick with Dread Necromancer for his entire career. A Druid who self-bans Planar Shepherd, even one who specializes in Wild Shape or Animal Companions, would optimally take Druid to 20 to avoid losses in spellcasting and/or other prominent class features. An Artificer would also optimally maintain as large of a crafting pool as possible by single classing the entire game.

[Taveena]

Is that a joke?

... I'd say I was thinking of something else, but no, I was just wrong. Sorry!

[danzibr]

I bet someone else out there is about to chime in, "I played a straight 20 levels", but I'm talking started at 1st, played to 20th. If you started at 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or anything other then 1st, it don't count. This isn't theoretical experience, this is RL observation here. Out of the past 14 characters I've run for in the past 8 years, only one made it to 20th in one class, and that was because he was pig headed.

"I'm a Dwarven cleric of Moradin, and a Dwarven cleric of Moradin doesn't multiclass."

That's was his excuse. Go fig.
Sounds like a cool dude.

[RolkFlameraven]

A Psion is a good one to just go striate up 20 with as most of his PrC's suck in that they take manifester levels away, as does muti-classing.

The Wilder too I guess but I've never played one.

[eggynack]

Add in ACF and Substitution levels and there's is little reason to play a vanilla anything.
This seems to be a different thing. Druids certainly have ACF's and substitution levels that make them better than a straight druid.



And before anyone counters me, I've taken three campaigns to level 20+, I've only seen one person stick to one class 20 levels. I've never heard of anyone playing it to 20th in any other campaign.

I bet someone else out there is about to chime in, "I played a straight 20 levels", but I'm talking started at 1st, played to 20th. If you started at 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or anything other then 1st, it don't count. This isn't theoretical experience, this is RL observation here. Out of the past 14 characters I've run for in the past 8 years, only one made it to 20th in one class, and that was because he was pig headed.
This seems to also be a different issue than the issue we're talking about. If you're playing a druid, and hit level 10, and you know that your next 10 levels are absolutely going to be more druid, that's an example of a character that's all one class. If you're a level 8 druid, and you know your next 12 levels are going to be moonspeaker, that's not really a full class druid for these purposes. People work out their builds in advance. Most druids have their set of classes on paper the minute they write down, "druid."

[Rubik]

A Psion is a good one to just go striate up 20 with as most of his PrC's suck in that they take manifester levels away, as does muti-classing.

The Wilder too I guess but I've never played one.You never want very many levels in wilder because you get penalized worse through enervation the more levels in wilder you have.

[John Longarrow]

OK, so far there seem to be a few classes people would want to stick to all their career.

Of course there are probably as many players who'd still mix in other classes for those same base classes, so I'm gathering none of the existing 3.5 base classes really screams "Stay in it for your entire career". Oddly this follow real life a LOT.

Now as a DM I tend to encourage players to work out who their character is and what abilities they want first, then start matching a class or classes to their design. From the comments, it sounds like there are very few reasons NOT to multiclass.

[demigodus]

For those who keep mentioning Truenamer, as someone who has played a mid-level truenamer, I must strongly disagree.

If, for whatever reason you find yourself as a level 1 Truenamer, you shouldn't take another level of Truenamer at level up. Or ever. Instead, it is far more optimal to take Wizard at level 2, and just keep taking wizard levels/PrC's from that point on.

Truenamer 1 / Wizard x > Truenamer X+1

Possibly even look into whether your DM allows for retraining...

[eggynack]

For those who keep mentioning Truenamer, as someone who has played a mid-level truenamer, I must strongly disagree.

If, for whatever reason you find yourself as a level 1 Truenamer, you shouldn't take another level of Truenamer at level up. Or ever. Instead, it is far more optimal to take Wizard at level 2, and just keep taking wizard levels/PrC's from that point on.

Truenamer 1 / Wizard x > Truenamer X+1

Possibly even look into whether your DM allows for retraining...
Well, what if you're a level 2 truenamer? At some point, I've gotta figure that the sunk cost fallacy starts becoming the sunk cost thing you should do.

[RolkFlameraven]

You never want very many levels in wilder because you get penalized worse through enervation the more levels in wilder you have.

And this is why I've never played one. But you ML will still get gempy if you Muti-class or PrC out of Wilder so...

I just wouldn't touch the class myself, much like Soulknives before Soulbow was made, and even then its not really a good idea.

[Red Fel]

Well, what if you're a level 2 truenamer? At some point, I've gotta figure that the sunk cost fallacy starts becoming the sunk cost thing you should do.

It's not just sunk cost fallacy. Truenamer's Utterances are keyed to Truenamer level. At first level, you get one first-level Utterance from the Lexicon of the Weaksauce Buff Evolving Mind, and you know your own Truename. That's all you get from the class at level 1, apart from +2 to Will saves.

If you want to be able to do anything the Truenamer does remotely well (and this is remotely well for a Truenamer, you basically have to take the class all the way up. (And, admittedly, the capstone is neat, if not overpowered.)

Can you class out? Yes. The same way you can class out of Paladin, or other classes whose abilities are keyed to their levels in that specific class. But it means sacrificing the very ability for which you took the class in the first place.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

To be honest, I mostly see Paladin as 2-4 level dips. That class is really front-loaded. If you're going for mount and spells, you stay in the class, but otherwise it's perfectly viable to go Paladin 2/other melee X.

[TuggyNE]

Psychic Warrior twenty is pretty great. Ususally I see people either going that route or dipping two levels.

I must be missing something here. What does PsyWar 20 give you specifically?

[Rubik]

I must be missing something here. What does PsyWar 20 give you specifically?Plenty of feats for a feat-starved system?

[RolkFlameraven]

The best "out of the box" gish in the game?

The PsyWar is a good class, it could use a bit more PP but besides that its better then a Paladin, Ranger or Hexblade by far. I'd rather it over a Duskblade myself but your mileage may very.

But really by lvl 20 you've got 8 bonus feats, 20 "spells" and 127+ PP to use those spells. The Cleric hit die and BAB hurts some but that is why they get up to level 6 powers

[eggynack]

The best "out of the box" gish in the game?

The PsyWar is a good class, it could use a bit more PP but besides that its better then a Paladin, Ranger or Hexblade by far. I'd rather it over a Duskblade myself but your mileage may very.

But really by lvl 20 you've got 8 bonus feats, 20 "spells" and 127+ PP to use those spells. The Cleric hit die and BAB hurts some but that is why they get up to level 6 powers
So, a paladin and a psychic warrior both qualify as "gishes"? In that case, clerics logically qualify as gishes, and are thus likely the best "out of the box" gish in the game.

[MesiDoomstalker]

I must be missing something here. What does PsyWar 20 give you specifically?

Better than any PrC or Multi-Class combo will. The only thing that would Multi-class well with Psychic Warrior is Psion, because the Psion's better PP growth will stack with your Psychic Warrior's cruddy PP. But since both scale up exponentially, it takes a lot of Psion to get an appreciable boost in PP, and your sacrificing Fort saves, HP, Feats and BAB for more PP, which isn't really worth it in anything but the short run. In short, Psionic's has poor support, and even worse support for its natural Gish class. If you say, adapt some Arcane gishy PrC's to work with Psionic's, I can see PsyWar 15/Psionic Abjurant Knight 5 being awesome.

[Divide by Zero]

Better than any PrC or Multi-Class combo will. The only thing that would Multi-class well with Psychic Warrior is Psion, because the Psion's better PP growth will stack with your Psychic Warrior's cruddy PP. But since both scale up exponentially, it takes a lot of Psion to get an appreciable boost in PP, and your sacrificing Fort saves, HP, Feats and BAB for more PP, which isn't really worth it in anything but the short run. In short, Psionic's has poor support, and even worse support for its natural Gish class. If you say, adapt some Arcane gishy PrC's to work with Psionic's, I can see PsyWar 15/Psionic Abjurant Knight 5 being awesome.

Don't forget the monk dip!

In general, a class is worth taking to 20 if it has an important ability tied to level that isn't progressed at all by PrCs (e.g. Truenamer, DN's extra minion HD) or has multiple such abilities that aren't progressed by a single PrC (e.g. druid if you ignore PS, martial adepts since the PrCs don't give them as many maneuvers). I don't think capstones are a particularly convincing argument, because unless you're doing a one-shot at level 20 they're only relevant for a tiny portion of your character's career (unless you go into epic, in which case they stop mattering because Epic Spellcasting).

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

If the game does go to level 20, the capstone ends up mattering in what is likely the most important, most memorable set of encounters in the entire campaign.

Because of the weird stance progression, initiators can benefit highly from dipping/multiclassing. I do agree that Crusader 20, Warblade 20, and Swordsage 20 are all fine builds, though.

[Divide by Zero]

If the game does go to level 20, the capstone ends up mattering in what is likely the most important, most memorable set of encounters in the entire campaign.

Hmm, true. I guess I'd say that they do matter, but aren't quite enough of a justification on their own because you don't want to have an inadequate character for the previous 14 levels just to get a cool capstone.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Don't forget the monk dip!

In general, a class is worth taking to 20 if it has an important ability tied to level that isn't progressed at all by PrCs (e.g. Truenamer, DN's extra minion HD) or has multiple such abilities that aren't progressed by a single PrC (e.g. druid if you ignore PS, martial adepts since the PrCs don't give them as many maneuvers). I don't think capstones are a particularly convincing argument, because unless you're doing a one-shot at level 20 they're only relevant for a tiny portion of your character's career (unless you go into epic, in which case they stop mattering because Epic Spellcasting).

Right right, Tashlorta.

[demigodus]

So, a paladin and a psychic warrior both qualify as "gishes"? In that case, clerics logically qualify as gishes, and are thus likely the best "out of the box" gish in the game.

Druids would like to have a word with you.

[123456789blaaa]

I must be missing something here. What does PsyWar 20 give you specifically?

I didn't mean the 20th level in particular. I meant taking all 20 levels.

[RolkFlameraven]

So, a paladin and a psychic warrior both qualify as "gishes"? In that case, clerics logically qualify as gishes, and are thus likely the best "out of the box" gish in the game.

This would be the Druid if you really want to go there, but it is not what I was intending.

Of the two, Paladin or Psychic Warrior witch do think isn't a Gish?

Besides, both the Cleric and Druid are 'full casters' not Gishes, you can use them as such if you like, though this might not be the best idea for your party.

You can make things that are nuts, BAB 17+ with 9th level spells and such that would put a PsyWar to shame, but of the "Fighter who also has spells" idea that is the Duskblade/Paladin/Ranger/Hexblade/PsyWar base classes PsyWar is the best in my opinion.

Bards can be put here too and, if built right, out shine the PsyWar as he can buff himself AND the party but this is not the role they are most noted for. Paladins and Rangers got some major love with spells towards the end of 3.5 while Psionics only has two books, and a power here and there in a few others but what makes the PsyWar better at that point is CL 20 not 10, as well as 5th and 6th level spells.

Now this is all my opinion and that doesn't mean much but there you have it.

[TuggyNE]

I didn't mean the 20th level in particular. I meant taking all 20 levels.

The 20th level is what I meant, yes, chiefly because it's the actual subject of the thread; taking most of your levels in PsyWar I can understand, but dips are reasonable too.

[eggynack]

This would be the Druid if you really want to go there, but it is not what I was intending.
You could do it the other way, but I tend to think that ideal druid fighting tactics involve buffing your dinosaur friend and staying the hell out of the way. Clerics are more self buffish, in my opinion, particularly because they don't have a friendly dinosaur friend to put their cleric buffs on.



Of the two, Paladin or Psychic Warrior witch do think isn't a Gish?
Well, a paladin isn't much of a gish, because they use divine rather than arcane spells, which is in opposition to the traditional definition of "gish". By putting a paladin on your list of gishes, you opened the door to a cleric's divine casting. Similarly, a psychic warrior opens the door to characters who don't get a fourth iterative, which is slightly contentious. When you put it all together, you get a gishy cleric. Huzzah.



Besides, both the Cleric and Druid are 'full casters' not Gishes, you can use them as such if you like, though this might not be the best idea for your party.

You can make things that are nuts, BAB 17+ with 9th level spells and such that would put a PsyWar to shame, but of the "Fighter who also has spells" idea that is the Duskblade/Paladin/Ranger/Hexblade/PsyWar base classes PsyWar is the best in my opinion.
These two things are kinda opposed to one another. Gishes can easily be full casters, and in fact traditionally pick up 9th's and a BAB of 16+. Getting full casting and full iteratives is the mark of a successfully built gish. Clerics and druids can buff themselves up and engage in melee combat, and in this sense they are as much of a gish as a paladin or psychic warrior is.

[123456789blaaa]

The 20th level is what I meant, yes, chiefly because it's the actual subject of the thread

I don't understand what you mean. I'm saying that while the class doesn't have an awesome, unique 20th level capstone, taking all 20 levels in it is still an optimal option equal to multiclassing or going into PRC's. Other classes like this have been listed as well like paladin, druid, artificer, and dragonfire adept. Why is this not on-topic?


; taking most of your levels in PsyWar I can understand, but dips are reasonable too.

Didn't I say that? :smallconfused: Yeah the title of the thread says "When is talking all 20 levels in a single class better than multiclassing?" but the OP also says "I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?". I'd say dipping Psywar and taking all 20 levels are roughly equal depending on the build.

Furthermore, there are plenty of classes listed already where doing something other than monoclassing are reasonable as well. Druid has 2 PRC's (Lion of Talised and Moonspeaker) that a druid can take without a drop in power level. For a Dread Necromancer, going into PRC's is roughly equal to taking 20 levels. I could go on but I actually think it would be much easier to list the classes in this thread that don't have equally reasonable options besides monoclassing.

[RolkFlameraven]

The only thing with taking Dips out of PsyWar is you lose PP and ML as well as one power per level you don't take a level in PsyWar. While dips are fine they do have a bit of cost that might make you think twice about it.

I can see your point, and I agree as one of my favorite PC's is a Human Sor from the Dale Lands who took the Militia feat before going into Eldritch Knight and then Abjurant Champion. He is kooky and stupid and a hell of a lot of fun to play, and was really REALLY fun when he was level 1 and stabbing things with his sword with his 4+ con mod HP and 10+ dex mod AC. How he lived I really don't know.

But I put him together using three four different books before even touching his spells. Of the classes that are "out of the box" who fit the gish type (and yes they all kinda suck as gishes but meh) PsyWar does it best, and that is with the worst BAB and HD of all of the other classes that are this idea.

[Divide by Zero]

The 20th level is what I meant, yes, chiefly because it's the actual subject of the thread; taking most of your levels in PsyWar I can understand, but dips are reasonable too.

I didn't really get that impression from the thread, and in fact the first post even talks about "when levelling." In other words, is PsyWar X comparable to or better than PsyWar Y/other classes X-Y for any value of X?

[Draz74]

I think Dragonfire Adept wants you to stay single classed.

This is the best answer in the thread.

Yes, Druid generally is better to stay single-classed, but that's because Druids are ridiculous.

Yes, lots of other classes (Warblade, Totemist, Psion, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer) are pretty decent if you single-class them ... but it's still not hard to make them even better, in most cases, with multiclassing or PrCs. (Beguiler and Warblade less than the others. Beguilers will often want to stay pure except for a single level dip, and the Warblade capstone really is tempting. But still not as good as you can get by dipping, say, a level in Fighter and a level in Lion Spirit Totem Barbarian. Other Tome of Battle dips and/or Master of Nine can be tempting too.)

But Dragonfire Adept ... it's a nice, middle-powered class (high Tier 4) that ... is actually really hard to find a way to improve (or even equal) with multiclassing or PrCs.

Like Druid, the key thing that makes it this way is that there's no PrCs that progress all of its important features. (Breath Effects, particularly. Although you get all of those by Level 15, and it's still hard to find good multiclass options, because the PrCs that progress other DFA features are actually pretty hard for the DFA to get into. :smalltongue:)

That's true of Paladin as well. It's very hard to find PrCs that progress all of a Paladin's important features. But unlike Paladin, DFA keeps going strong with new features right up until the end (er, or at least until Level 18). So you don't get stuck in the Paladin's loop of "I have to keep taking levels in this so that my old class features don't start sucking, but I don't want to because these new levels are a barren wasteland."

[Runestar]

I must be missing something here. What does PsyWar 20 give you specifically?

It's more of what other prcs don't give you. Expanded Psi handbook was very strict in that none of their psionic prcs grant full level manifesting progression, and apart from slayer, I can't think of a single fighter-oriented prc which advances psi-manifesting as well.

Full psy-warrior progression gives you bonus feats and continued power advancement. Not a bad deal in the overall scheme of things.

[Doorhandle]

I've been playing for a while and keep running into the same question over and over when levelling. What do I get for the new level? I find dipping in classes or grabbing levels in a prestigue class make more mechanical sense than just going "Straight up".

I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?

In Pathfinder.
While multi-classing can still work very well, the combination of various -improve -as-you-level features (like bloodlines, weapon training, rage power/rouge tricks, ect) and favoured class things (some of the alternates are quite good, but even 1+hp/skill rank a leverl is nice) menas there is less impetus in comparisons to 3.5. In particular, the magus almost never benefits from a multiclass.

Not to mention all the various archetypes.

[TuggyNE]

I don't understand what you mean. I'm saying that while the class doesn't have an awesome, unique 20th level capstone, taking all 20 levels in it is still an optimal option equal to multiclassing or going into PRC's. Other classes like this have been listed as well like paladin, druid, artificer, and dragonfire adept. Why is this not on-topic?

Yep, that's what I mean. Sorry for slight over-sharpness there; that wasn't really intended.


Didn't I say that? :smallconfused: Yeah the title of the thread says "When is talking all 20 levels in a single class better than multiclassing?" but the OP also says "I'd like to know if there is anyone who's found a class that always offers something as good or better than other classes when leveling?". I'd say dipping Psywar and taking all 20 levels are roughly equal depending on the build.

The thing I was confused about is that it didn't seem to me that PsyWar's 20th level was all that awesome or worthwhile in particular: it's nice, but is it better than almost all (non-niche) dips you could put in that slot? Apparently some would say yes! But that's the part I don't get. For example, Monk 1 or 2 seems like it could very easily add a good bit to the build, at a rather smallish cost.


I didn't really get that impression from the thread, and in fact the first post even talks about "when levelling." In other words, is PsyWar X comparable to or better than PsyWar Y/other classes X-Y for any value of X?

Well, yes. I'm just puzzled why PsyWar 20 is usually, or even often, better than (as above) Monk 1/PsyWar 19, never mind any of several other possibilities.

[Eldariel]

I'm a druid. I'm a shapechanger focus. There's some sick PrC for shapechanging. Spells your focus? I can think of a few PrC for a druid/

Straight Druid has more power than any of those PRCs. Master of Many Forms/Warshaper/etc. don't advance spellcasting and Druid's spellcasting gives you more power to Wildshaping than those PRCs do (Greater Magic Fang, Enhance Wild Shape, Venomfang, Bite of the WereX, eventually Shapechange).

Likewise, spellcasting PRCs waste the power of Druid's Wildshape (Dire Tortoise, various combat forms, etc.) and of course, leaves the AC and such behind without really providing much to Druid itself. Sacred Exorcist dip is cute but straight Druid is probably better, especially since Druid buffs are usually long duration, so the benefits of DMM are reduced.

Yeah, you can try to focus but without Planar Shepherd, you aren't beating the Druid. Which is how it should be; the base class should be the best generalist for the role while the PRCs are specialists. PF performed better in this regard since the base classes actually get scaling stuff, but 3.5 only really has Druid, Rogue and Monk that scale relevantly by level (and Monk baseline is so low that this doesn't even save the class). Pally, Barbie, etc. stop gaining additional class features at reasonable pace and Fighter/Cleric/Sorc don't even get anything later on.


Monk? Maybe 13th max before you as SO much better off in another class.

Monk 13 is wasted if you multiclass. 11 is the absolute last breakpoint, but you should usually be looking at Monk 2 or Monk 6.


And before anyone counters me, I've taken three campaigns to level 20+, I've only seen one person stick to one class 20 levels. I've never heard of anyone playing it to 20th in any other campaign.

This does not really mean the players make the optimal choices (they usually don't, simply due to lack of knowledge), nor that this knowledge is generalizable. 3 campaigns out of how many 20th level campaigns have been played or level 20 characters planned? Drop in the bucket.

[123456789blaaa]

Yep, that's what I mean. Sorry for slight over-sharpness there; that wasn't really intended.



The thing I was confused about is that it didn't seem to me that PsyWar's 20th level was all that awesome or worthwhile in particular: it's nice, but is it better than almost all (non-niche) dips you could put in that slot? Apparently some would say yes! But that's the part I don't get. For example, Monk 1 or 2 seems like it could very easily add a good bit to the build, at a rather smallish cost.



Well, yes. I'm just puzzled why PsyWar 20 is usually, or even often, better than (as above) Monk 1/PsyWar 19, never mind any of several other possibilities.

No problem.

What I'm saying is that it may not be better than other options (like dipping Monk) but it's not worse either (see my previous post for an expansion on this point). I've seen builds where it was pretty much most optimal to take Psywar 20. This one (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3541096)for example. Why didn't that build dip monk?

[Shining Wrath]

If your DM uses the XP penalty for multi-classing staying in a good class until level 20 starts to make sense. It makes even better sense for a good class with a level 20 "capstone" worth having, e.g., Warblade's "Two stances at once".

[Dusk Eclipse]

If your DM uses the XP penalty for multi-classing staying in a good class until level 20 starts to make sense. It makes even better sense for a good class with a level 20 "capstone" worth having, e.g., Warblade's "Two stances at once".

XP penalties affect people who don't multiclass that much, a build that has 1 level in 20 different classes isn't affected at all while a fighter 2/Barbarian 5 is affected.

[Shining Wrath]

XP penalties affect people who don't multiclass that much, a build that has 1 level in 20 different classes isn't affected at all while a fighter 2/Barbarian 5 is affected.

How many multiclass builds actually keep all their classes within one of each other? So many are something like "Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 4/ PRC 6 / Other PRC 10".

[Dusk Eclipse]

It was an example on how terrible 3e multiclass xp penalties rules are, besides most games ignore that rule and if they don't there is always human.

Also prestige class levels don't count for multiclass penalties,

[John Longarrow]

How many multiclass builds actually keep all their classes within one of each other? So many are something like "Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 4/ PRC 6 / Other PRC 10".

Prestige classes don't trigger XP issues. Paladin (2) Sorcerer (4) on a race with any favored class or either of those as a favored won't have a problem. Same build on a Dwarf would though.

[eggynack]

How many multiclass builds actually keep all their classes within one of each other? So many are something like "Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 4/ PRC 6 / Other PRC 10".
You'd mostly be using melee builds for that kind of thing, as those are generally made up of a series of one and two level dips, followed by a prestige class. Diplomancers (it's like a pun of some kind) also have piles of quick paced dips if they want to push things to the limit.

[137beth]

In Pathfinder.
While multi-classing can still work very well, the combination of various -improve -as-you-level features (like bloodlines, weapon training, rage power/rouge tricks, ect) and favoured class things (some of the alternates are quite good, but even 1+hp/skill rank a leverl is nice) menas there is less impetus in comparisons to 3.5. In particular, the magus almost never benefits from a multiclass.

Not to mention all the various archetypes.

Multi-classing and prestige classes in PF are still good. Especially dips.

The main difference is that in 3.5, pure single class was almost always horrible compared to dips/PrC, while in PF single-class characters get extra buffs to make it slightly more balanced.

Dipping in PF is more desirable now in a lot of ways, though:
--class skills now depend only on having at least one level in a class,
--there is no multi-class xp penalty,
--FCBs are per-level, so a dip doesn't cause you to lose too much (unless you have a really really really powerful FCB like a human sorcerer).

Also, prestige classes in 3.5 were flat out better than base classes most of the time. Now they are closer to being equal (though the lack of variety of PrCs is sorta annoying).

Overall I'd say PF actually made dipping a lot better, but it didn't do much to help non-dip multi-classing.