Multiclassing a Base Saves

[tedcahill2]

Can someone explain why the +2 bonus to base saves at level 1 are stacked for multiclass characters? Is multiclassing really so weak that the additional saves are a needed balance?

[eggynack]

Dunno that I'd claim any kinda great balance based intentionality behind it, cause the balance of the game is wonky enough to make a claim of said intentionality rather dubious. It might well be a balance positive thing though. If you're multiclassing heavily, you're very likely a melee class, and if you're not multiclassing much at all beyond the occasional prestige class, you're very likely a caster class. Thus, the weaker characters tend to get more benefit out of this than stronger ones.

[OldTrees1]

Can someone explain why the +2 bonus to base saves at level 1 are stacked for multiclass characters? Is multiclassing really so weak that the additional saves are a needed balance?

The +2 bonus to Good saves is there so that 1st level single classed characters still experience the good save/bad save mechanic.

The reason why the +2 bonus to Good saves stack when multiclassing is because the multiclassing rules were meant to be light and intuitive rather than riddled with exceptions.

[Particle_Man]

Your good saves do well, your bad saves not so much and (unless you are using a lot of full BAB classes) your BAB goes badly.

That said, Pathfinder has some variant rules for fractional BAB and save bonuses for multiclassing. Mind you, Pathfinder's non-variant rules makes prestige classes a little less prestigious by reducing their good save bonuses.

[tyckspoon]

Disclaimer: This is speculation.

The designers never expected anybody to multiclass very heavily. 3rd Edition multiclassing was originally meant to enable replicating earlier multi/dual-class characters, who had at most 3 classes.
The designers thought that also doubling down on your bad saves was an adequate trade for doubling up on good ones. A Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger, for example, would have Fort +6, Ref +2, and Will +0. In exchange for having an unusually good Fort, he is pretty much never going to pass a Will save. If he hadn't multiclassed, he'd at least have a Will bonus. (Or if multiclassing across archetypes, say in attempting to do a gish, he would probably select a class that had good Will or Ref but *not* Fort. So his saves would even out.)
The designers let you get an extra bump to your saves as part of the tradeoff you make when you multiclass, because you are not getting whatever higher-level abilities you would normally be getting by advancing a class you already have. (There is circumstantial evidence in the form of example and other pre-made NPCs that majority single-classing is how you are 'supposed' to make characters, so things like multiple 1st-level Good Save bonuses may be part of an attempt to encourage players to use these 'weird' or 'weaker' multi-class rules.)

I think it's mostly that first one, to be honest - characters were 'supposed' to look like Base Class 1/optional splash Base Class 2/optional appropriate Prestige Class 1 (possibly PrC 2 if PrC 1 was only 5 levels.) I don't believe they planned for Base 1/Base 2/Base 3/Prc 1/Prc 2/Prc 3 - if they were expecting that much multiclassing/usage of dips, the favored class and multiclass xp penalty rules would probably look different.

[Afgncaap5]

I like that high bonus. My wizard/cleric/mystic theurge/virtuoso had a crazy high will save.



*Party fighting evil versions of us from a magic mirror, spellcasting ally turns to me*

"So if I was going to cast a save at you that required a will save..."

"Eighteen."

"No, don't roll it! Let the GM handle that. If I cast a spell at you, or your evil clone-"

"Eighteen."

"Let me finish! What's your will save bonus?"

"Eighteen."

*Ally blinks*

"Guess I'll use a different spell then..."

[sleepyphoenixx]

I like that high bonus. My wizard/cleric/mystic theurge/virtuoso had a crazy high will save.


An 18 will save is hardly in the realm of gamebreaking. It's just good. Any build can get there with items pretty comfortably.
And with that build of yours i'm pretty sure it's more than made up for by the ref and fort saves, which you probably spend quite some resources on shoring up (or sometimes wish you did).

So yeah, not really seeing a balance problem with save-stacking.
There are very few classes that get all-good saves (and most of them suck otherwise), so every "free" save bonus from multiclassing comes with 1-2 penalties to your other saves.
Not that you can't multiclass specifically for sky-high saves, but your character won't be good for much else then, so it's still not a problem.

Not to mention that you can get saves in the 30-40s easily enough if you go book diving a little even single-classed. You're probably better off picking your classes for something that isn't quite so easily filled with items.

[Necroticplague]

Can someone explain why the +2 bonus to base saves at level 1 are stacked for multiclass characters? Is multiclassing really so weak that the additional saves are a needed balance?

Because making exceptions to the rules about save progression would add complexity to the rules for no benefit; yes, though they're insufficient.

To just expand on the latter point: If you multiclass, you're getting lower-leveled abilities. If you enter your second class at 11th level (I.E, ClassA10/classB1), you're getting abilities suitable to a first level character, instead of abilities suitable for an 11th level character. Since larger amounts of low-level abilities don't add up to higher level ones (E.X: no amount first level spells will overshadow simply being able to cast a single level nine spell), this is an overall downgrade in power.

[KillianHawkeye]

Can someone explain why the +2 bonus to base saves at level 1 are stacked for multiclass characters?

They stack because you add the two numbers together. 2 + 2 = 4.

[MHCD]

Your good saves do well, your bad saves not so much and (unless you are using a lot of full BAB classes) your BAB goes badly.

That said, Pathfinder has some variant rules for fractional BAB and save bonuses for multiclassing. Mind you, Pathfinder's non-variant rules makes prestige classes a little less prestigious by reducing their good save bonuses.

3.X has these as well. You can find them in Unearthed Arcana or see here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060303a) for a discussion in a "Save My Game" article from Wizards.

Everyone has their preference; every group I have ever played in used fractional rules for BAB and saves, determining that "variant rule" to be the more sensible, obvious, and straightforward one, especially for newer players trying to multi-/prestige class. But again, whatever works for you.

[eggynack]

Everyone has their preference; every group I have ever played in used fractional rules for BAB and saves, determining that "variant rule" to be the more sensible, obvious, and straightforward one, especially for newer players trying to multi-/prestige class. But again, whatever works for you.
Notably, while that rule does solve the issue of the really bad saves somewhat, it does technically exacerbate the issue of the extra good saves, if that's a problem for someone.

[Twurps]

They stack because you add the two numbers together. 2 + 2 = 4.

this would be a good reason, if not for the UA alternative rules on fractional saves. No one can state those were introduces for simplicity. so we can throw that out. Why not just add all good save class levels together (and of course do the same for bad save classes) to calculate a save. The (relatively complex) fractional rules actually make this 'problem' worse.

[tedcahill2]

this would be a good reason, if not for the UA alternative rules on fractional saves. No one can state those were introduces for simplicity. so we can throw that out. Why not just add all good save class levels together (and of course do the same for bad save classes) to calculate a save. The (relatively complex) fractional rules actually make this 'problem' worse.

That's what I already do, and it's not difficult at all. Which is why I question why the designers didn't just do that in the first place.

[OldTrees1]

That's what I already do, and it's not difficult at all. Which is why I question why the designers didn't just do that in the first place.

Because the fractional base saves are as mathematically complex as THAC0 (aka some complexity but not much).

Chalk it up to something that appears to be, and might actually be, a mistake made with the intention of keeping it accessible.

[Zanos]

For what it's worth I don't think anyone has ever really multi-classed for the purpose of upping their base save bonus unless they were trying to meet one of the weird base save prerequisites. So experience tells me that the +2 adding together isn't a big deal.

[flappeercraft]

They stack because you add the two numbers together. 2 + 2 = 4.

I second this answer

[nyjastul69]

I believe it is to simplify the mechanics for sake accessibility. Addition is easier than subtraction. Multiplication is easier than division. Addition is easier than multiplication. Subtraction is easier than division. I think the design philosophy was that simplifying the maths was paramount in order to lower any perceived entry bar. For most people more math=more difficult.

[MHCD]

Notably, while that rule does solve the issue of the really bad saves somewhat, it does technically exacerbate the issue of the extra good saves, if that's a problem for someone.

I'll admit I'm not sure I understand this, unless it is to say that you still have the issue of +2 for multiclassing classes with a good progression for a save. I haven't played that way, though, only adding the +2 for the first time a good save progression is gained (or alternatively, only at level 1).


Because the fractional base saves are as mathematically complex as THAC0 (aka some complexity but not much).

Chalk it up to something that appears to be, and might actually be, a mistake made with the intention of keeping it accessible.

This one is subjective; it may be the minority, but some people find fractional rules more simple, particularly when building characters after first level that have different classes and/or prestige classes. And again, in a matter of opinion, I find the rules to be far more intuitive than 2E THAC0 and saves rules, which were still mathematically simple, just less intuitive than and more "arbitrary feeling" than the current AC system - in fact, "arbitrary feeling" is a primary motivator for some people to switch to the fractional rules that seem to just make more sense, especially the more you involve multiclassing, PrCs, RHD, and so on. But to each their own.

[eggynack]

I'll admit I'm not sure I understand this, unless it is to say that you still have the issue of +2 for multiclassing classes with a good progression for a save. I haven't played that way, though, only adding the +2 for the first time a good save progression is gained (or alternatively, only at level 1).
Not only is the multiple extra bonuses what the rules say happens, explicitly, the bonus is actually larger under fractional rules, because the score is a +2.5. A barbarian 1/fighter 1 would get a +4 to fortitude saves in the normal system. It would get a +5 using fractional rules.

[MHCD]

Not only is the multiple extra bonuses what the rules say happens, explicitly, the bonus is actually larger under fractional rules, because the score is a +2.5. A barbarian 1/fighter 1 would get a +4 to fortitude saves in the normal system. It would get a +5 using fractional rules.

Gotcha. I inderstood the math, but I wasn't sure if that was what you were referring to - thank you for clarifying! :smallsmile:

Whenever I play with fractonal rules, we homebrew it to only ever take the +2 once, so it's only the +0.5 per good level after that. As with reading some other rules entries, I just close my eyes and pretend that part doesn't exist to comprimise How I Think Things Should WorkTM.

[Celestia]

Multiclassing is good to get a variety of abilities, but power tends to suffer, unless you're using the multiclassing to qualify for a really good prestige class. In the end, I think it's fine if the saves benefit. After all, the only times it really matters much, anyways, is in dip heavy builds which are only taken by martials. If you end up with a +23 base Fortitude save, it's not going to be a big deal.

[ben-zayb]

Dunno that I'd claim any kinda great balance based intentionality behind it, cause the balance of the game is wonky enough to make a claim of said intentionality rather dubious. It might well be a balance positive thing though. If you're multiclassing heavily, you're very likely a melee class, and if you're not multiclassing much at all beyond the occasional prestige class, you're very likely a caster class. Thus, the weaker characters tend to get more benefit out of this than stronger ones.

That said, there are plenty of popular caster-based PrCs to dip (or two) into as well, which the casters likely will take given the chance: Mindbender, Sacred Exorcist, Loremaster, Paragnostic Apostle, Unseen Seer, Incantatrix, Escalation Mage, Divine Oracle, Contemplative, Ruathar, Spellsword, Master Specialist, Thrallherd, Wyrm Wizard, and Hathran, to name those I can remember.

[Celestia]

That said, there are plenty of popular caster-based PrCs to dip (or two) into as well, which the casters likely will take given the chance: Mindbender, Sacred Exorcist, Loremaster, Paragnostic Apostle, Unseen Seer, Incantatrix, Escalation Mage, Divine Oracle, Contemplative, Ruathar, Spellsword, Master Specialist, Thrallherd, Wyrm Wizard, and Hathran, to name those I can remember.
So the caster's good Will save will become better. Big whoop. They probably weren't failing those saves, anyways.