PDA

View Full Version : E10 System



Easy_Lee
2015-05-31, 12:34 AM
The idea for this system came from two other threads: the level 0 post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?418168-Level-0-characters-blog-post-iteresting-read) and the E6 thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?417061-5e-e6). The gist of the first is to create a 0th level where people just have backgrounds and racial traits to work with, easing them into full characters where they gain their class. The second discusses whether an E6 system would make sense for 5e, since casters gain world-shattering powers at later levels while martials do not.

I read the first and thought to myself that it would be really good for new players, who are often overwhelmed with their huge number of features. Then I read the second and thought that most casting is fine, but it's spell level 6+ that really gets out of hand. Then a well-known poster, whose opinions I very much respect, presented the idea to condense everything to 10 levels. Person_man, you gave me this idea.

E10: The Epic Ten System
The idea of this system is to condense the game down to just ten levels, adding a level 0 for the game's start. This reduces the gap between a maximum level and minimum level character, doing a better job at keeping low-level threats threatening than bounded accuracy accomplishes. Every level is interesting, and new players are eased into the game at a more consistent rate.

The other goal is to fix numerous issues with spell casting. Spell casters do not multiclass as well as martials, often losing far more than they should. Spell casters also gain world-shattering effects at higher spell levels, which can seriously mess with both class balance and the game world itself. Since these spells are generally of incredible power, these things should not be thrown around willy nilly on a daily basis. They should be the result of incredible feats of casting or divine intervention.

In short, tenth level is an epic character, and every level is very interesting for everyone. However, since level 1 represents a huge number of features gained (which can already overwhelm new players), players do not start at level 1.

The System
Level 0
You do not start at level 1; you start at level 0. Choose a background, personality traits, race, etc. You also choose your class, but do not gain class features until you achieve level 1. Level 1 happens at 100XP.

Players learn the system, learn their stats and skills, and learn to RP their characters before they are introduced to a full set of abilities. Players with particularly learned classes, such as monks or wizards, could be said to have never quite got it until that one moment. When they hit 100XP, they have an epiphany, everything finally falling into place. This represents a turning point in that character's life, the moment where the character realizes that he or she wields power beyond the norm. This often happens in the midst of a life-or-death situation.

Caster classes start the game able to cast cantrips as a level 1 caster, but may not cast first level spells until they hit level 1. All classes start with their weapon and armor proficiencies.

Proficiency
At level 0, your proficiency is +1. This increases to +2 as soon as you achieve level 1. From then on, your proficiency increases by 1 at every odd level. Thus, proficiency is +3 at level 3, +4 at level 5, +5 at level 7, and +6 at level 9.

In addition, players and creatures add their proficiency bonus to their AC. Since martials will be swinging harder and more often much earlier, and rogues will gain SA much faster, this is necessary. Combat will be fast and scary at all levels, especially if PvP occurs.

Finally, players and creatures add half their proficiency bonus (rounded down) to non-proficient saves, to reflect accumulated experience.

Feats/ASIs
The current system discourages multiclassing. Multiclassing is already a larger investment than usual with this system, since everything is condensed. To compensate for that, feats/ASIs are no longer tied to class levels. They represent your own character training in a thing, gaining experience. You gain one ASI or feat at every even level. Variant humans still start the game with a bonus feat.

Edit: Classes which receive extra ASIs, such as rogues at level 10, still receive them. They are treated as class features.

Class Features
When you achieve level 1, you gain all class features for levels 1 and 2 of your class. At level 2, you gain the features for levels 3 and 4. And so on, all the way up to level 10 when you gain your 19th and 20th level features.

Archetypes
Archetypes are treated as class features. If you would normally gain an archetype at class level 3, you gain it at class level 2 instead. If your archetype would grant a feature at level 7, you gain this feature at level 4.

Spellcasting
This is the largest change for this system. This system was modeled after wizard casting, the most consistent of the lot, and allows for a wider array of spells and better multiclassing between caster classes (to compensate for the loss of 6th through 9th spells).

Spell levels and spell slots remain unchanged, so you may still cast the same number of spells each day and cast spells up to the same level as normal for your level.
Cantrips scale up at levels 3, 6, and 8 instead of levels 5, 11, and 17.
When you gain a level in a casting class, choose four spells from that class' spell list. You learn these spells, and may treat them as spells known.

To learn a spell from a class, your relevant spellcasting ability mod must be equal to or higher than the spell's level.
To learn a spell, you must have a spell slot of a high enough level to cast that spell.

You may prepare a number of spells up to double your caster level plus your proficiency. This is close to twice as many spells as a wizard can normally prepare, and may be more spells than you currently know in some cases.
For all spell casters, spells are known internally. For some, this takes the form of a mental vault, from which knowledge may be retrieved in a trance. For others, it is a prayer to their god or a request to their patron. Many find that carrying a spellbook helps with with both fully understanding the spells one uses and research. For this reason, most wizards carry a spellbook at all times, though it may not hold every spell they know.
If you encounter spell scrolls or similar (praying to your God, etc.) during your adventures, and these spells are on your spell list(s) and are of a level for which you have spell slots, then you may learn them.
When you gain an additional level in a caster class you currently have levels in, you may forget two spells that you know from that class' spell list and learn two others in their place.

The language used does mean that a wizard / druid / cleric multiclass could potentially learn nearly every spell up to 5th level. However, as it would be up to his DM to give him these spells, as spells of a given level are (or should be) equally useful, as he would need maximum intellect and wisdom to do so, and as this player would miss out on higher level class features, this should not be a problem.

Half and One-third Casters

You only learn two spells, instead of four, when gaining a level in one of these classes.
Your spell slot progression is treated as having full caster levels equal to one-half or one-third of your levels in the relevant classes, rounded down, to a minimum of 1. Examples:

A 4 Wizard / 2 Fighter (EK) has spell slots as a level 5 caster.
A 2 Cleric / 4 Ranger has spell slots as a level 3 caster.
A 3 Fighter (EK) / 3 Rogue (AT) has spell slots as a level 2 caster.



Research
You may be able to research new spells which not even in the PHB. Speak to your DM about the spell you are trying to create, and he may tell you the steps you need to perform in order to research this spell. This may include finding and studying ancient texts, acquiring the correct materials, or even seeking out a supernatural creature. Your DM will adjudicate what the new spell does and its level. Usually, creating a new spell through research will require the use of a spellbook and special inks, the same inks which one might use to inscribe a spell scroll.

Some DMs may feel that the current spell list is adequate, so this feature is optional.

Warlocks
Warlocks are now considered a full-casting class, following all of the above rules. However, when you gain levels in the warlock class, you create a pact with your patron. Your current spell slots (if you have any) instead become warlock short-rest spell slots at your total caster level. So long as you have warlock levels, all spell slots will be of this nature. You cast your spells out of these slots using the usual spell-casting statistic for the caster from whose list the spell came.

Mystic Arcanum: these now function as long-rest spell slots. In addition to his short-rest spell slots, the warlock may utilize each Mystic Arcanum once per long-rest. Mystic Arcanum spell slots are the same level as the character's highest level spell slot. This way, warlocks are able to hoard some spell slots at later levels in the same way that normal casters do. In addition, features such as Arcane Recovery which normally replenish spell slots can be used to replenish Mystic Arcanums instead (for example, arcane recovery would let you regain 1 mystic arcanum after a short rest).

Warlock casters gain short-rest spell slots and Mystic Arcanums according to the following table:

Caster LevelSpell SlotsArcanums
110
210
320
420
521
621
731
831
932
1032


A caster who loses his warlock levels, such as by being banished by his patron, reverts to a standard caster spell slot progression.

System Summary
Every level is interesting, and features come at a consistent and easy to understand rate. Martials don't have to worry about casters becoming gods at later levels and leaving them behind. Rather than attacks and DCs scaling while defenses do not, defenses now scale at a consistent rate with attacks. This means that HP, AC, and hindering effects are equally useful at all levels, rather than HP and hindering effects becoming much more useful than AC at later levels. It also means that targeting a non-proficient save is not a guaranteed win button at later levels.

Casters, while they cannot gain the high level spells, can cast a much wider variety of spells per level than they currently are able. This is more reflective of a studious and varied person. More importantly, casters are able to multiclass effectively now without giving up their higher level spells, a huge improvement over the current system. Since many D&D books feature multiclassed casters, I consider this to be a great improvement. A wizard / cleric is now feasible, so long as his Intellect and Wisdom are both exceptional. And a pure wizard, while he cannot learn 6th through 9th level spells, gains his features much faster.

Where did the higher level spells go?
The higher level spells still exist in the world, but the players won't usually be casting them. A beyond epic big-bad caster might have achieved 6th level spells. The most magical of creatures, such as an ancient dragon, Lich, or similar might research and cast 7th level spells. A Demi-God might cast 8th level spells. A True God may wield the power of 9th level spells.

At the DM's discretion, players may even reach these levels of power, past tenth level. Though who can say what lies beyond that pinnacle? Most mortals cannot even imagine such power.

In addition, the players may encounter powerful magical artifacts on their adventures. Some of these might produce a high-level spell effect, but they are generally very limited in how often they can do so.

Scaling Things Down
Most player spells and abilities can be scaled down quite simply: just halve the damage. For abilities such as the Warlock's Hurl Through Hell, simply reduce its damage to 5d10 to represent acquiring it at a reduced level. For spells that need their level reduced, such as smites and Lightning Arrow, reduce their damage die as you feel appropriate (one simple method would be to divide by the spell's level then multiply by the new spell level). Most effects are equally useful at all levels, so it should not be necessary to change the effects of spells such as Tree Stride.

For creatures, do as you feel appropriate, though I suggest the following:

Halve the CR, rounded down, minimum 1/8. A CR halfway between two levels, such as a CR of 3.5, is possible. Some say that a CR of 3.5 is actually the most overpowered CR of all, but those may be rumors.
Recalculate its attack bonus. AC, and saves according to its new level and the new system (round partial CRs down).
Reduce its damage to half of the previous amount, since it will be attacking players who have fewer hit points.
If the creature is able to cast spells, let it keep these spells even if they are stronger than what a player of this level can cast. Reduce their damage where appropriate.
Keep the normal hit point total. Players will be hitting hard much earlier, so this is necessary.

As players gain levels, they will fight more durable opponents. Their tactics and teamwork will need to improve as their characters grow and develop.

Final Thoughts
Whew, that ended up being a lot longer than I thought it would be. The overall system eases players in, keeps every level interesting, and reduces the overall power level of casters while increasing their versatility and ability to multiclass. This system benefits multiclassing overall, compared to the standard 5e system where it is heavily discouraged. There will never be a dead level, for even a classless player would gain a feat at every even level and increase his proficiency at every odd level.

I may update this as needed. Please let me know if you notice any major problems with this system which should be addressed. This is, of course, an experimental thing.

darkscizor
2015-05-31, 12:59 AM
One thing- you said that the casting classes learn spells per level. While. I like this idea, could it be raised to 6/level instead of 4 for clerics and druids, to give them more spells as in the normal rules but still keep the spells known in a limited amount?

Easy_Lee
2015-05-31, 01:20 AM
One thing- you said that the casting classes learn spells per level. While. I like this idea, could it be raised to 6/level instead of 4 for clerics and druids, to give them more spells as in the normal rules but still keep the spells known in a limited amount?

No doubt that it could. I used double the wizard amount as a basis, but increased variety may favor the system.

TurboGhast
2015-05-31, 09:18 AM
I like this system. It even sorta covers the one big flaw I think exists in it: If a player really wants Disintegrate, or any other high level but non gamebreaking damage effect spell, but can't get it since it's 6th level, the research options lets them make a Lesser Disintegrate. One small issue is that slight balance changes exist due to different classes getting different numbers of ASIs in the base game, but this isn't a huge issue that tears down the system. The lack of deadish levels for Fighter and Rouge make up for the ASIs they would otherwise lose, and nobody else loses ASIs. Monoclass ranger gains an ASI, but one ASI isn't going to break the game.

Easy_Lee
2015-05-31, 11:39 AM
I like this system. It even sorta covers the one big flaw I think exists in it: If a player really wants Disintegrate, or any other high level but non gamebreaking damage effect spell, but can't get it since it's 6th level, the research options lets them make a Lesser Disintegrate. One small issue is that slight balance changes exist due to different classes getting different numbers of ASIs in the base game, but this isn't a huge issue that tears down the system. The lack of deadish levels for Fighter and Rouge make up for the ASIs they would otherwise lose, and nobody else loses ASIs. Monoclass ranger gains an ASI, but one ASI isn't going to break the game.

Ah, I forgot to specify that. I had intended rogues and fighters to keep their bonus ASIs. Let me update that.

Do you guys think the spell preparation rules are too strict?

JAL_1138
2015-05-31, 06:13 PM
One extraordinarily minor and pedantic quibble: isn't the plural of arcanum "arcana" rather than "arcanums"...?

Speaking of warlocks, the current phrasing of warlock spells and MCing could be read (at least on a very quick skim) to mean "every slot becomes a warlock slot" making it a required multiclass; suddenly every spell recharges on a short rest.

mephnick
2015-05-31, 06:49 PM
I'm still not sure level 0 is necessary. My group hated level 1 because of how basic it was and we even started with a free flavour feat. I think the system is good, but level 0 really has no purpose being tacked on here. It doesn't seem to have an effect on the rest of the system.

Easy_Lee
2015-05-31, 06:54 PM
I'm still not sure level 0 is necessary. My group hated level 1 because of how basic it was and we even started with a free flavour feat. I think the system is good, but level 0 really has no purpose being tacked on here. It doesn't seem to have an effect on the rest of the system.

It depends on one's group. Some experienced groups can jump right into things at late levels, while new players will struggle with the current options (seen it happen). I can imagine the headache that would come with a new player trying to use a full set of race features, background, skills, and two levels worth of class features from the word go.

JAL_1138
2015-05-31, 09:12 PM
It depends on one's group. Some experienced groups can jump right into things at late levels, while new players will struggle with the current options (seen it happen). I can imagine the headache that would come with a new player trying to use a full set of race features, background, skills, and two levels worth of class features from the word go.

Thus far in the league play I've been in, several complete newbies who had never rolled a d20 before have done fine with level 1s of various classes in the standard game. Most of the issues they've had are remembering which die is which (not which one to use, just which one is which shape) rather than forgetting class features. It's the grognards who have older-edition rules burned into our brains that have had more trouble when just starting.

Person_Man
2015-06-01, 11:22 AM
Person_man, you gave me this idea.

Glad I could be of some help. I think this is all very promising, and I hope you continue to run with it.

Specific Feedback:

Level 0: In old school D&D games, classes had very, very few features at low levels. Instead of resolving challenges with class features (or spells or magic items or whatever), it was expected that you would just resolve most challenges like a normal humanoid. For example, you disarmed traps by describing how you personally would disarm the trap. The Thief class feature was a special benefit that occasionally worked, not the default method of resolving every trap. So if you're going to run a game that starts without class features, I think its important to resolve most challenges in the old school method. Rely on narrative solutions, not class ability or Skill Proficiency dependent Eigen Plots (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotTailoredToTheParty?from=Main.EigenPlot). Don't even roll for things unless its truly necessary, and if you do so, make sure the DC math is manageable.

Multi-classing: If this is your biggest priority, then we might as well start working on 5E Legend or 5E Tome of Battle. If not, then I think you could achieve much greater balance and clarity by just assuming that players can't multiclass. It's always been the biggest kink in the D&D class design. I don't see any obvious flaws with your current proposed system, but if they do exist, I'm willing to bet that they arise from multi-classing.

ASI: I have an alternative proposal to consider. Everyone gets an automatic stat increase every 2 (or 3, or whatever) levels, which you may trade for a DM approved Feat. Eliminate stat increases as part of the class chart, replacing them with real/unique class (or subclass) abilities.

Class Features: Perhaps it would be better to specify specific class charts for each class, rather then using the formula you propose. That way it'd be a lot easier to see fix specific level by level imbalances. It would also be an opportunity to get rid of duplicative or garbage class abilities. This might include just giving some classes (like the Rogue or Fighters) extra subclass abilities to fill in the blanks. You may even wish to consolidate some of the classes, and make their class features into subclass options.

Research: I think this is a great idea that warrants a lot more discussion. Not sure about the best way to write out the mechanics, but I think lots of people would love the idea of coming up with custom spells, with DM approval.


Anywho, these are just my initial thoughts. I'm hoping your system continues to get fleshed out, play tested, etc.

Easy_Lee
2015-06-01, 12:03 PM
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'd like to continue developing this as I'm able. I'm most concerned about how I've handled spells, specifically the method for and how many are gained each level, so that section is the most likely to change.

KorvinStarmast
2015-06-01, 12:09 PM
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'd like to continue developing this as I'm able. I'm most concerned about how I've handled spells, specifically the method for and how many are gained each level, so that section is the most likely to change. The Cavalier Class in 1st Edition AD&D (the unearthed aracna supplemental rules) was an effort to do something like this.

Are you familiar with it?

Books not handy, but you started as "less than a cavalier" and you had smaller HD than a full up Cav's HD, until you had earned some XP. Same supplement made the Paladin a sub class of Cavalier.

You may find some useful stuff if you get your hands on, or have, that archaic volume of lore.

Easy_Lee
2015-06-01, 12:31 PM
The Cavalier Class in 1st Edition AD&D (the unearthed aracna supplemental rules) was an effort to do something like this.

Are you familiar with it?

Books not handy, but you started as "less than a cavalier" and you had smaller HD than a full up Cav's HD, until you had earned some XP. Same supplement made the Paladin a sub class of Cavalier.

You may find some useful stuff if you get your hands on, or have, that archaic volume of lore.

I have not heard of that, but I will see if I can find it. Thank you.

silveralen
2015-06-01, 01:01 PM
To actually clarify, you created a system that weakens ranger relative to fighter, barbarian, and rogue, then claim this system improves balance?

I just want to make sure that's what I'm actually reading. Maybe I missed something but that seems to actually be the case.

Let's also examine how utterly useless archetypes like EK are compared to battlemaster with this modified scaling.

I mean, that's without getting into the problems with the baseline assumptions of non casters being roughly half as powerful.

You even managed to make paladin boring. That's inpressive. Now he is just there to generate auras. Can't even match a battlemaster fighter if he burns all his smites as fast as he can. Wow. I didn't even know you could screw balance up that bad. At least he still isn't ranger though, talk about insult to injury.

Easy_Lee
2015-06-01, 01:08 PM
To actually clarify, you created a system that weakens ranger relative to fighter, barbarian, and rogue, then claim this system improves balance?

I just want to make sure that's what I'm actually reading. Maybe I missed something but that seems to actually be the case.

Let's also examine how utterly useless archetypes like EK are compared to battlemaster with this modified scaling.

I mean, that's without getting into the problems with the baseline assumptions of non casters being roughly half as powerful.

You even managed to make paladin boring. That's inpressive. Now he is just there to generate auras. Can't even match a battlemaster fighter if he burns all his smites as fast as he can. Wow. I didn't even know you could screw balance up that bad. At least he still isn't ranger though, talk about insult to injury.

Aside from the language used, the strength of half casters is a valid concern with this system. Rangers already have trouble as is, while Paladins are mostly fine but may be weak under this system. I'll have to run some tests. I'll see if there's a way to address that without making them too strong relative to casters, perhaps giving them the same number of slots but limiting slot level.

silveralen
2015-06-01, 02:34 PM
Aside from the language used, the strength of half casters is a valid concern with this system. Rangers already have trouble as is, while Paladins are mostly fine but may be weak under this system. I'll have to run some tests. I'll see if there's a way to address that without making them too strong relative to casters, perhaps giving them the same number of slots but limiting slot level.

Have you considered making that change for all casters? The issue people bring up is rarely casting lower level spells in higher slots or casters having too many spell slots overall, but instead the higher level spells themselves.

It seems, to me, hard to justify a wizard casting 10 spells per day then falling back on cantrips at levels where fighters are action surging every short rest with three base attacks and can have 5 maneuvers per short rest. I mean, those level 1 spells likely are worse than what the fighter does at will. I mean, at lvl 6 fighters would have three 2d6+5 attacks, with the GWF bonus to boost damage a bit. A wizard casts burning hands for 3d6+5 if we assume an evocation spell. It's a 15 ft cone so three people seems reasonable for targeting. Yes, by that point literally 1/3rd of the wizards spells aren't particularly better than what his party members do at will. Not really much point in being there, you'd struggle to be at all relevant or useful.

It doesn't seem at all balanced to think lvl 6 caster is equal to or balanced with level 12 fighter, even a lvl 9 caster vs a lvl 12 fighter if you split the difference between lvl 6 slots and lvl 12 features. Considering how well the game actually holds up in balance until you hit level 12, going by everything people have said at least, it seems downright disingenuous to claim this creates balance. Have people reported major balance problems at lvl 8? 10? I haven't seen any, which means that the scaling needs to stay far closer to the PHB scaling up till that point.

Easy_Lee
2015-06-01, 02:51 PM
Have you considered making that change for all casters? The issue people bring up is rarely casting lower level spells in higher slots or casters having too many spell slots overall, but instead the higher level spells themselves.

It seems, to me, hard to justify a wizard casting 10 spells per day then falling back on cantrips at levels where fighters are action surging every short rest with three base attacks and can have 5 maneuvers per short rest. I mean, those level 1 spells likely are worse than what the fighter does at will. I mean, at lvl 6 fighters would have three 2d6+5 attacks, with the GWF bonus to boost damage a bit. A wizard casts burning hands for 3d6+5 if we assume an evocation spell. It's a 15 ft cone so three people seems reasonable for targeting. Yes, by that point literally 1/3rd of the wizards spells aren't particularly better than what his party members do at will. Not really much point in being there, you'd struggle to be at all relevant or useful.

It doesn't seem at all balanced to think lvl 6 caster is equal to or balanced with level 12 fighter, even a lvl 9 caster vs a lvl 12 fighter if you split the difference between lvl 6 slots and lvl 12 features. Considering how well the game actually holds up in balance until you hit level 12, going by everything people have said at least, it seems downright disingenuous to claim this creates balance. Have people reported major balance problems at lvl 8? 10? I haven't seen any, which means that the scaling needs to stay far closer to the PHB scaling up till that point.

I was thinking the exact same thing. A level 5 wizard under this system should have the same number of spells per day as a level 10 wizard under the current system, if not slightly more to compensate for the lower levels. I might also need to increase the single target damage potential of some spells, such as scorching ray. He should probably also know a wider variety of spells to compensate for the lower overall level. I definitely like the idea of casters having more variety but less godlike power than the current system, since it seems to me to fit the lore much better.

Finally, regarding one of Person_man's comments about multiclassing, I'm wondering if a sort of gestalt system would work better with this system. I'll have to see if it would make sense to choose two or more classes and have the option to basically exchange features, with rules about what kinds of features you can gain from the secondary class and give up from the main (no stealing capstones, no trading non combat abilities for more combat prowess, DM approval, etc.).

Edit: for damaging spells like scorching ray, it might actually make the most sense to just reduce the spell level but keep the initial damage the same. That way they can be cast out of higher slots and stay competitive for damage. I'll have to test an evoker wizard vs fighter under this system compared to the current.

silveralen
2015-06-01, 02:58 PM
I was thinking the exact same thing. A level 5 wizard under this system should have the same number of spells per day as a level 10 wizard under the current system, if not slightly more to compensate for the lower levels. I might also need to increase the single target damage potential of some spells, such as scorching ray. He should probably also know a wider variety of spells to compensate for the lower overall level. I definitely like the idea of casters having more variety but less godlike power than the current system, since it seems to me to fit the lore much better.

Finally, regarding one of Person_man's comments about multiclassing, I'm wondering if a sort of gestalt system would work better with this system. I'll have to see if it would make sense to choose two or more classes and have the option to basically exchange features, with rules about what kinds of features you can gain from the secondary class and give up from the main (no stealing capstones, no trading non combat abilities for more combat prowess, DM approval, etc.).

I think that's a solid solution to balance this particular modification and certainly delivers what you are looking for. That's also my preference as well, both for lore and because I don't particularly enjoy having those single use high level spells as a player, I always preferred the 2/3rds casters in earlier editions, wouldn't have minded that being the "normal" casters this edition, with the higher level stuff being the realm of epic casting.

Can't comment on multiclassing, seems easiest to just have people MC in increments of two the same as they level, but some version of gestalt could work. Being able to take even from one class and odd from another would be amusing to say the least, but I imagine the sheer number of combinations would open up some troublesome areas.

Easy_Lee
2015-06-01, 03:01 PM
Can't comment on multiclassing, seems easiest to just have people MC in increments of two the same as they level, but some version of gestalt could work. Being able to take even from one class and odd from another would be amusing to say the least, but I imagine the sheer number of combinations would open up some troublesome areas.

Yeah, definitely. I'm picturing a system more like main and subclasses, so you get most of your features from one class but can exchange some things with the other, with DM approval to limit busted options. For example, a fighter might trade his archetype to pick up the hunter or beast master archetype from ranger. That could open up some totally new options.