XP Penalty?

[ZhanStrider]

Hi there!

I'm in the process of moving and have a game session this week, so i don't have my usually books, does anyone remember the Experience penalty rules are for multiclass character? or where i can find them quick and easy online?

Thanks!

[Sith_Happens]

20% penalty if you have two classes at least two levels apart from each other. Favored classes and prestige classes don't count.

Also note that at least 95% of people (myself included) will tell you to ignore that rule entirely, it being a relic from older editions in which multilclassing worked completely differently, classes tending to benefit from multiclassing in inverse proportion to how good they are by themselves, and it being perfectly possible to make a hideous hodgepodge of different class levels that doesn't take a penalty (thanks to that "at least two levels apart" bit) while the guy trying to qualify for Mystic Theurge is forced to take his Wizard and Cleric levels alternately rather than in blocks for that same reason.

[Doc_Maynot]

The favored class doesn't count IF it's the highest. Oddly enough this system encourages a build with frequent dips focusing on one major class.

[ArqArturo]

Pathfinder made an elegant solution to the multiclassing problem: You choose a favored class (half-elves choose two), and each level in that class you either get 1 HP, or 1 skillpoint.

Expansions broaden the bonuses you get on your favored class options, but I think the basic solution is easy to be transported into 3.5.

[Sith_Happens]

The favored class doesn't count IF it's the highest. Oddly enough this system encourages a build with frequent dips focusing on one major class.

That's incorrect, if your race has a specific favored class then it remains such regardless of whether it's your highest.

Incidentally, did I mention the part where the 20% XP penalty is per class that's at least two levels from at least one other? It literally took until late last year for anyone on these forums to point that out even though it's written clear as day and even has a supporting example, presumably because they had to forcibly shut off the part of your brain that blocks you from acknowledging the presence of soul-crushing stupidity.

[Doc_Maynot]

That made me go back and check it.

I apologize, I must have mixed up general favored class, and favored class: any.

[Anlashok]

Pathfinder made an elegant solution to the multiclassing problem: You choose a favored class (half-elves choose two), and each level in that class you either get 1 HP, or 1 skillpoint.

Expansions broaden the bonuses you get on your favored class options, but I think the basic solution is easy to be transported into 3.5.

Pathfinder kinda takes it too far though because dipping is largely awful in it

[TuggyNE]

Yeah, the Favored Class rule in 3.5 is completely nonsensical: the only time you care about what favored class your race has is when you are considering taking levels in something that is not that class. And that includes cases where you want to dip the favored class in a build that is mostly a different class entirely just as much as it does the reverse.

It's a rule that not only hurts balance (because classes that work well with multiclassing are those that are generally weaker) but is actively illogical fluff-wise. Absolutely unsupportable.

PF's solution would be interesting, except that it decouples favored class from race almost entirely: all races can pick any class to be favored that they want, and the only difference is that some class/race combinations have slightly better options to pick from each level. It's not terrible, but it doesn't actually do any better at "elves are great wizards, see!" than 3.5 does, except by not encouraging elf wizards to take fighter levels.

[Vedhin]

Incidentally, did I mention the part where the 20% XP penalty is per class that's at least two levels from at least one other? It literally took until late last year for anyone on these forums to point that out even though it's written clear as day and even has a supporting example, presumably because they had to forcibly shut off the part of your brain that blocks you from acknowledging the presence of soul-crushing stupidity.

Oh, I noticed that when I first read the rules. My immediate thought was "what happens if the penalty is 100%?". Then, with something like the PHBII rebuilding rules, there's also the possibility of a 120%+ penalty. At which point I can only assume you lose XP by killing monsters and gain it from negative levels.

[ericgrau]

Hi there!

I'm in the process of moving and have a game session this week, so i don't have my usually books, does anyone remember the Experience penalty rules are for multiclass character? or where i can find them quick and easy online?

Thanks!

20% xp penalty for every class not within 1 level of his highest level class. Ignore favored classes when figuring out the penalty. Those with "Any", including humans and half elves, ignore their highest level class.

Everyone hates them with a passion because getting -20% experience sounds insanely bad, but actually it only amounts to -1 temporary level. You get +25% experience for being a level behind. (100%-20%) * (100%+25%) = 100%. So once you're one level behind you gain experience at the same rate as everyone else. And once you fix the penalty you catch back up to everyone else.

Having matching levels in all but your favored class is a way to avoid it, as are 1-2 level dips with your main class as your favored class. So dabblers and pseudo dual/tri/quad classers are exempt. The overabundance of prestige classes far beyond what was originally intended also bypasses it.

Because of prestige classes or for build freedom you might also decide you don't like it and don't want to use it. But if you do it's not actually the end of the world.

[Vedhin]

20% xp penalty for every class not within 1 level of his highest level class. Ignore favored classes when figuring out the penalty. Those with "Any", including humans and half elves, ignore their highest level class.

Also, PrCs don't count towards the penalty.

[Story]

Pathfinder made an elegant solution to the multiclassing problem: You choose a favored class (half-elves choose two), and each level in that class you either get 1 HP, or 1 skillpoint.

Expansions broaden the bonuses you get on your favored class options, but I think the basic solution is easy to be transported into 3.5.

Without further modification that just encourages Druids even more.



PF's solution would be interesting, except that it decouples favored class from race almost entirely: all races can pick any class to be favored that they want, and the only difference is that some class/race combinations have slightly better options to pick from each level. It's not terrible, but it doesn't actually do any better at "elves are great wizards, see!" than 3.5 does, except by not encouraging elf wizards to take fighter levels.

Ironically, elves actually do make great Wizards in 3.5 thanks to Domain Generalist and the int bonus.


Oh, I noticed that when I first read the rules. My immediate thought was "what happens if the penalty is 100%?". Then, with something like the PHBII rebuilding rules, there's also the possibility of a 120%+ penalty. At which point I can only assume you lose XP by killing monsters and gain it from negative levels.

You don't even need rebuilding. It's entirely possible to go all the way from 0% to 340% in a single level.

P.S. The forum software seems to have randomly broken down halfway through this thread. I was unable to quote your post no matter what I tried and had to paste it in manually.

[eggynack]

Everyone hates them with a passion because getting -20% experience sounds insanely bad, but actually it only amounts to -1 temporary level. You get +25% experience for being a level behind. (100%-20%) * (100%+25%) = 100%. So once you're one level behind you gain experience at the same rate as everyone else. And once you fix the penalty you catch back up to everyone else.

That's a reasonably accurate criticism, but I don't think it's the main reason people hate those rules. I, for one, hate them because they increase the imbalance of the game, punishing the mystic theurges and fighter 5/barbarian 2/rogue 1's , while doing nothing to the wizards with prestige classes, and the fighter 2/barbarian 2/warblade 1/prestige class x/blah de bloo's. It double-punishes characters that were already suboptimal (because now they're suboptimal with a penalty), while doing nothing to the characters that were optimal. That's not really a thing that the game should be doing.

[Story]

Yeah. There's basically two reasons to hate them. A) They do the opposite of what's intended and increase imbalance, and B) they lead to mathematically nonsensical results like negative XP.

[TuggyNE]

Ironically, elves actually do make great Wizards in 3.5 thanks to Domain Generalist and the int bonus.

Yes but a) that's nothing to do with favored class rules; b) that's only one or a few subraces with the Int bonus; c) Domain Generalist is very decidedly non-Core, which is logically where such a very basic outcome of the rules should be expressible.

So the intended mechanism to express stuff like that is entirely disconnected from any mechanisms that actually do anything like that, and if it actually works as intended it's essentially by pure chance.

[ericgrau]

That's a reasonably accurate criticism, but I don't think it's the main reason people hate those rules. I, for one, hate them because they increase the imbalance of the game, punishing the mystic theurges and fighter 5/barbarian 2/rogue 1's , while doing nothing to the wizards with prestige classes, and the fighter 2/barbarian 2/warblade 1/prestige class x/blah de bloo's. It double-punishes characters that were already suboptimal (because now they're suboptimal with a penalty), while doing nothing to the characters that were optimal. That's not really a thing that the game should be doing.

All things being equal, you need to compare the fighter 5/barbarian 2 to a barbarian 7 (or fighter 4 / barbarian 2 after the lost level). I wonder how well a lot of builds would do if they couldn't dip 2 levels of fighter but had to either fighter 8 it, barbarian 8 it, fighter 4/barbarian 4 it, pick a specific race, etc. Saying caster trumps all isn't really relevant because that's another issue entirely that needs to be dealt with as such. Prestige classes are relevant and a big arbitrary hole in the rule. They were originally supposed to be uncommon though. But if you play with a lot of PrCs it is another reason to ignore the rule.

[Urpriest]

Yeah, the Favored Class rule in 3.5 is completely nonsensical: the only time you care about what favored class your race has is when you are considering taking levels in something that is not that class. And that includes cases where you want to dip the favored class in a build that is mostly a different class entirely just as much as it does the reverse.

It's a rule that not only hurts balance (because classes that work well with multiclassing are those that are generally weaker) but is actively illogical fluff-wise. Absolutely unsupportable.

That is what it's supposed to do fluff-wise, though. The idea is that even if an Elf is trained in another field, they have an easy time picking up Wizardry, so they can dip it without penalty, while at the same time Elf Wizards are more common and thus more diverse and more likely to complement their Wizardry with dips of other classes.

[eggynack]

All things being equal, you need to compare the fighter 5/barbarian 2 to a barbarian 7 (or fighter 4 / barbarian 2 after the lost level). I wonder how well a lot of builds would do if they couldn't dip 2 levels of fighter but had to either fighter 8 it, barbarian 8 it, fighter 4/barbarian 4 it, pick a specific race, etc. Saying caster trumps all isn't really relevant because that's another issue entirely that needs to be dealt with as such. Prestige classes are relevant and a big arbitrary hole in the rule. They were originally supposed to be uncommon though. But if you play with a lot of PrCs it is another reason to ignore the rule.
The problem is, all things aren't equal. I don't need to compare a fighter 5/barbarian 2 to a barbarian 7. Why the hell would I? If we're assuming for a moment that all methods of approaching the game are equally valid from a power level standpoint, then the build that needs to be toned down is the dip build I mentioned. If we're not assuming that all approaches are viable(and again, why the hell would we?), then neither build needs to be nerfed at all.

Casters, unfortunately, are not an entirely separate issue, as they create a situation where the most powerful classes are built best by not multi-classing. The classes which would be harmed by reduced access to multi-classing are the classes that should be harmed least (even on a micro scale, warblades are harmed by this significantly less than fighters), so the rule is silly. Overall, it's a rule that does active harm to the balance of the game, stifles build creativity, and is poorly designed, all at the same time. It's really a rule with no redeeming properties. Just let your barbarian 5/fighter 2 live free as a barbarian 5/fighter 2.

[TuggyNE]

That is what it's supposed to do fluff-wise, though. The idea is that even if an Elf is trained in another field, they have an easy time picking up Wizardry, so they can dip it without penalty, while at the same time Elf Wizards are more common and thus more diverse and more likely to complement their Wizardry with dips of other classes.

I could maybe buy the idea that elves are better able to spontaneously wizard, but the idea that the only way in which elves who wish chiefly to wizard demonstrate their superiority over lesser races by … efficiently not wizarding … no. That is, as I said, exactly backwards.