Does "favored class" change over time?

[Thanos92]

Hi all!
I'm currently DMing a 3.5 campaign.
One of my players is playing a human thief 3/swordsage 1/swashbuckler 1. His intention for the future is to go for thief 3/swordsage 2/swashbuckler 15.
My question is: will he have, during levelling up, a XP penalty?
His answer is no, because:

- Level 4 [first multiclassing]: (human) thief 3/swordsage 1: as a human his higher class is counted as his favored class, so, actually, for the XP penalty, we should consider just swordsage, and a single class doesn't produce XP penalty.
[In my opinion, that's right]

- Level 5 [second multiclassing]: (human) thief 3/swordsage 1/swashbuckler 1: same as above, two classes but low/no difference in their levels: no penalty
[In my opinion, that's right]

- Level 9: (human) thief 3/swordsage 2/ swashbuckler 4. Here's the problem. He says that now his favored class should change and it becomes swashbuckler. So from now on he can add as many swashbuckler levels as he wants because for the XP penalty they only count thief and swordsage levels that will be always very near.

In my opinion there is no roleplaying explanation for this: his background is that of a common good-for-nothing scoundrel who has passed his first twenty years in a city, robbing and running away from city guards. During game it will pass no more than a month o two, I suppose, from level 5 and level 9, is that enough to change your favored class? I think that his favored class should stay thief or change after much more time or else (need your help).
I know human always use their higher class as a favored one but levelling up from level 1 to level 20 the thing couldn't be the same as if starting playing a character from level 15 or more. There could be absurd situations as that one of a (human) warrior 1/cleric 1/ mage 18 who can fight, use 1st level divine spells and also be a very good mage. Players' past, background and personality before adventure is so useless?

I'm looking for a good explanation and answer. I also accept other ways to treat XP penalty or the general problem.

Thank you so much.

[Nifft]

1/ The "favored class" mechanic is one of the least favored mechanics in D&D. Many groups just throw it away because it's dull and inhibits a large number of interesting character concepts.

2/ In this case, looking at the rule, the player would be correct:


Favored Class: Any. When determining whether a multiclass human takes an experience point penalty, his or her highest-level class does not count.

If the PC puts more level in Swashbuckler and Swashbuckler becomes the PC's highest-level class, then Swashbuckler is the PC's favored class. Period.

[Thanos92]

1/ The "favored class" mechanic is one of the least favored mechanics in D&D. Many groups just throw it away because it's dull and inhibits a large number of interesting character concepts.

I know this and I agree, but I think there should be a limit, a deterrent to multiclassing in non-sense ways. How do people solve the whole thing? A character can just add classes, even very dfferent in their respective levels, without any problem?



2/ In this case, looking at the rule, the player would be correct.

If the PC puts more level in Swashbuckler and Swashbuckler becomes the PC's highest-level class, then Swashbuckler is the PC's favored class. Period.

But the rule is intended for "normal" or two-class based characters, I guess. So, standing at the manual, if a dwarf must have a warrior in his build to avoid XP penalty, a human must not. It doesn't say that the favored class shifts over time.

[Nifft]

I know this and I agree, but I think there should be a limit, a deterrent to multiclassing in non-sense ways. How do people solve the whole thing? A character can just add classes, even very dfferent in their respective levels, without any problem? The main problem is that the player will have a terribly ineffective character.


But the rule is intended for "normal" or two-class based characters, I guess. So, standing at the manual, if a dwarf must have a warrior in his build to avoid XP penalty, a human must not. It doesn't say that the favored class shifts over time. A Dwarf may ignore Fighter levels.

All other class levels must be within 1 of each other.

If a Dwarf Wizard has 10 levels of Wizard, and no Fighter levels, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.

How many classes does a Dwarf Wizard have? One. What level is that class? 10. Are there any other classes? Nope. Do we have to check if two classes are within 1 level of each other? No, there aren't two classes.


If a Dwarf Rogue / Monk has 5 levels of Rogue, and 5 levels of Monk, and zero levels of Fighter, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.


If a Dwarf Rogue / Fighter has 8 levels of Rogue and 2 levels of Fighter, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.

[Thanos92]

The main problem is that the player will have a terribly ineffective character.

Well in my case that's not true. A rogue/swashbuckler/swordsage could not be the greatest fighter ever (undead, contructs, ecc), but, however, it does quite well his job.

So, I'm asking, if I don't consider XP penalty, what penalty could I choose in order to make that character more "realistic" (all the other players have normal bi-classes characters or monoclass characters)?


A Dwarf may ignore Fighter levels.

All other class levels must be within 1 of each other.

If a Dwarf Wizard has 10 levels of Wizard, and no Fighter levels, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.

How many classes does a Dwarf Wizard have? One. What level is that class? 10. Are there any other classes? Nope. Do we have to check if two classes are within 1 level of each other? No, there aren't two classes.


If a Dwarf Rogue / Monk has 5 levels of Rogue, and 5 levels of Monk, and zero levels of Fighter, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.


If a Dwarf Rogue / Fighter has 8 levels of Rogue and 2 levels of Fighter, that Dwarf takes no XP penalty.

Yeah, I know this stuff. What I was trying to say is that the "advatage" of "Favored class: any" over "Favore class: this one in particular" is that you haven't so many problems, you can just add two classes, even different in their levels, without problems, while a dwarf or an elf should be more cautios as you explained. But the "advantage" can't be that your class always change over time, just because it says "any". I think that when you multiclass you determine which is your favored class (the higher one) and it should stay the same forever, with very little exeptions o with good explanations.

[ksbsnowowl]

I think that when you multiclass you determine which is your favored class (the higher one) and it should stay the same forever, with very little exeptions o with good explanations.
And you would be wrong, according to RAW.

[Thanos92]

And you would be wrong, according to RAW.

Okay, but there's no roleplaying explanation, do we agree on this thing?

If so, what do people use to make characters more realistic? With "realistic" I mean to avoid absurd situations as that one in which a character who has done the same job for his whole life then, one beautiful morning, he wakes up and his "favored class" has changed.

I'm talking of roleplaying here, not of rules.

[Eldariel]

I know this and I agree, but I think there should be a limit, a deterrent to multiclassing in non-sense ways. How do people solve the whole thing? A character can just add classes, even very dfferent in their respective levels, without any problem?

But the rule is intended for "normal" or two-class based characters, I guess. So, standing at the manual, if a dwarf must have a warrior in his build to avoid XP penalty, a human must not. It doesn't say that the favored class shifts over time.

Multiclassing is its own deterrent - single-classed characters with PRCs (Wizards, Clerics, Druids, etc.) are already the strongest of the bunch so by multiclassing you're inevitably weakening your character. Besides, it's only a problem if you make classes in-game constructs rather than metagame constructs, something the system doesn't really support very well; there's no reason Rogue 3/Swashbuckler 15/Swordsage 2 would be any different from Swordsage 20 or Rogue 20 in terms of description other than in terms of ability; slightly more precise aim, lower variety of tricks and with a shallower pool of various aptitudes. You could describe all of them as "thieves", "assassins", "swashbucklers", "dirty fighters" or whatever - that has nothing to do with the classes but rather the abilities.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I'm talking of roleplaying here, not of rules.
No, you're not. You are making a common mistake: you ascribe in-world existence to purely mechanical constructs (that of "favoured class", and "class" in general). You are, in essence, 'roll-playing' (to use that term), not 'role-playing'.


Firstly, your rogue/swordsage/swashbuckler does not have a "favoured class" in-world, because "class" does not exist in-world. They are only a character, a personality, with an affinity for accomplishing certain things (I'm guessing stealth, precision damage, trapfinding?). When they take that level in swordsage, they are still only a character, who so happens to extend that same affinity. Add swashbuckler, and you slightly shift the accent from stealth to combat, but you are still a character with an affinity for certain things, which progress naturally in whatever way you find pleasing in-world--there are many ways you can explain such a shift. Even a shift to wizard levels can be explained quite easily, although it might take some retconning (which you should be willing to do).


Secondly, XP penalties are really screwed up.
A monk 10/soulknife 10 does not incur an XP penalty. A monk 9/soulknife 11 does. Why?
A monk 5/soulknife 5/samurai 5/truenamer 5 does not incur an XP penalty. A monk 4/soulknife 5/samurai 5/truenamer 6 does. Why?!
A monk 1/soulknife 1/samurai 1/truenamer 1/.../divine mind 1 (ECL 20, with twenty different classes) does not incur an XP penalty. What the hell?!!


In short: Multiclassing is not only not bad for the game, there is no roleplaying reason to discourage multiclassing. Even if there were, the XP penalties as presented in the Core rules are incredibly ineffective at curtailing any kind of supposedly harmful multiclassing.

[Eldariel]

If you want some favoured class stuff in the game, check out Pathfinder. Instead of penalties, favoured classes grant minor bonuses there (+1 HP or skill point or race-specific boon per level in favoured class), which is a much better system. And every character gets to pick a single favoured class (extras with feats) and gets benefits from that class regardless of race (but again, particular races have extra options for particular classes).

Though some of the racial favoured class bonuses are way too good making any other race comparatively worthless (Sorcerer-like classes getting extra spells known 1 below max level is particularly egregious; if your race can't utilise that, it's just comparatively horrid as a sorc), that's a separate issue that does not undermine the fundamental soundness of the system.

[Thanos92]

No, you're not. You are making a common mistake: you ascribe in-world existence to purely mechanical constructs (that of "favoured class", and "class" in general). You are, in essence, 'roll-playing' (to use that term), not 'role-playing'.

Firstly, your rogue/swordsage/swashbuckler does not have a "favoured class" in-world, because "class" does not exist in-world. They are only a character, a personality, with an affinity for accomplishing certain things (I'm guessing stealth, precision damage, trapfinding?). When they take that level in swordsage, they are still only a character, who so happens to extend that same affinity. Add swashbuckler, and you slightly shift the accent from stealth to combat, but you are still a character with an affinity for certain things, which progress naturally in whatever way you find pleasing in-world--there are many ways you can explain such a shift. Even a shift to wizard levels can be explained quite easily, although it might take some retconning (which you should be willing to do).

In short: Multiclassing is not only not bad for the game, there is no roleplaying reason to discourage multiclassing. Even if there were, the XP penalties as presented in the Core rules are incredibly ineffective at curtailing any kind of supposedly harmful multiclassing.

I'm not saying multiclassing is bad, I just think there should be a good in-game explanation for certain multiclass action. For example, as you said, rogue/wizard would require a good story to be justified, but it is absolutely possible. In my example rogue/swashbuckler is an excellet multiclass operation, because they are very similar. It's the swordsage who ruins everything, because it unlocks pseudo-magical abilities, uses concentration and wisdom which are not so similar to the concept of the thief.
So, I think there should be a problem, a roleplaying problem, for a character who lives like a thief, slightly shifts the accent from stealth to combat, as you say, but suddenly acquire some strange manuveres and stances.

The concept of "favored class" is that it is the thing in which you are more proficient, able, the thing you've been educated to do (that's why I think it is useless with other races: an elf warrior 20, which should be a veteran of wars and battles, still have mage as his favored class? WTF?). When you add classes the favored isn't counted because you're so confident with youself that you can start doing other things, not forgetting what you are able to do. That's why I think it should not change from time to time (in particulare at level 8 you've got one, at level 9 another).

[Thanos92]

If you want some favoured class stuff in the game, check out Pathfinder. Instead of penalties, favoured classes grant minor bonuses there (+1 HP or skill point or race-specific boon per level in favoured class), which is a much better system. And every character gets to pick a single favoured class (extras with feats) and gets benefits from that class regardless of race (but again, particular races have extra options for particular classes).

Though some of the racial favoured class bonuses are way too good making any other race comparatively worthless (Sorcerer-like classes getting extra spells known 1 below max level is particularly egregious; if your race can't utilise that, it's just comparatively horrid as a sorc), that's a separate issue that does not undermine the fundamental soundness of the system.

I like that, thank you. This way other players, which use a simplier build, would receive a bonus but that one player, even though without a XP penalty, would receive a minor malus.

[Knaight]

Yeah, I know this stuff. What I was trying to say is that the "advatage" of "Favored class: any" over "Favore class: this one in particular" is that you haven't so many problems, you can just add two classes, even different in their levels, without problems, while a dwarf or an elf should be more cautios as you explained. But the "advantage" can't be that your class always change over time, just because it says "any". I think that when you multiclass you determine which is your favored class (the higher one) and it should stay the same forever, with very little exeptions o with good explanations.

That's not always true - specific favored classes let you multiclass with a cluster of classes at a specific level, and your specific favored classes at a level much lower. Favored Class: Any will give you a penalty in the same condition.

As for the roleplaying aspect, if you're insisting that classes map to in game things (which is a standard that D&D has been really inconsistent about using, with some prestige classes clearly meant for that and other classes that don't work well under that paradigm) then what you have is a straightforward case of someone discovering that they have a knack for something after already picking up a different skill set. That's not a particularly exceptional event, as any retired person who suddenly found a hobby that they had a real talent for can tell you.

[Thanos92]

That's not always true - specific favored classes let you multiclass with a cluster of classes at a specific level, and your specific favored classes at a level much lower. Favored Class: Any will give you a penalty in the same condition.

Yes, that's true. I was generalizing, but you're right.



As for the roleplaying aspect, if you're insisting that classes map to in game things (which is a standard that D&D has been really inconsistent about using, with some prestige classes clearly meant for that and other classes that don't work well under that paradigm) then what you have is a straightforward case of someone discovering that they have a knack for something after already picking up a different skill set. That's not a particularly exceptional event, as any retired person who suddenly found a hobby that they had a real talent for can tell you.

This is smart. But what I ask you is: should I, in my mind, give the explanation, the justificaition? Should I, as a DM, produce a specific character-centred quest to give him a narrative way to explain the change? Or shoud he, as a player, find a way to justify his new abilities?

[DeTess]

I'm not saying multiclassing is bad, I just think there should be a good in-game explanation for certain multiclass action. For example, as you said, rogue/wizard would require a good story to be justified, but it is absolutely possible. In my example rogue/swashbuckler is an excellet multiclass operation, because they are very similar. It's the swordsage who ruins everything, because it unlocks pseudo-magical abilities, uses concentration and wisdom which are not so similar to the concept of the thief.
So, I think there should be a problem, a roleplaying problem, for a character who lives like a thief, slightly shifts the accent from stealth to combat, as you say, but suddenly acquire some strange manuveres and stances.


Depending on which Swordsage maneuvers he picks, they could just be explained as specific tricks he learned and perfected during combat (though that won't got for the teleportation maneuvers, one of which he probably wants to take). If he wants to go Swordsage, and you absolutely need some explanation apart from: "I learn by doing", how about you ensure he gets access to a teacher when he wants to take the Swordsage levels? He can built the character he wants, and you get the explanation for him getting those abilities into the game.

[DEMON]

But what I ask you is: should I, in my mind, give the explanation, the justificaition? Should I, as a DM, produce a specific character-centred quest to give him a narrative way to explain the change? Or shoud he, as a player, find a way to justify his new abilities?

A Dragon Shaman, from level 4, can breathe fire and 2 levels later, he can heal wounds with a touch. Before that, he acquired the ability to breathe underwater, or slow his fall, none of which is in any way connected to projecting auras. And that's a set of abilities provided by a single class over 6 or so levels.

Meanwhile, a Wizard goes from Prestidigitation to Sleep to Fireball or whatnot. Of course, that's perfectly fine, because magic.

A Swordsage, added on top of Rogue and Swashbuckler just allows the character to "rouge" a bit better. If anything, this combo provides a more consistent set of abilities, despite it being created by multi-classing several classes.

It really boils down to how much you want to tie your players to the "class" concept, when they can all be seen more like a set of abilities. After all, not every Rogue is a pickpocket living on the street and might as well be a spy or a prince., yet they all get the same set of abilities.

[Ashtagon]

RAW: Favoured class for humans is whichever class happens to be the one with the most class levels. It does indeed change over time.

Common Houserule: Many tables ignore favoured class rules in 3.0/3.5. Note that PF favoured class rules grant bennies rather than slaps, so groups playing PF often still use favoured class.

My house rule: At 1st level, humans get to pick any one non-full-caster class as a favoured class, and keep that as their favoured class for their career (short of character rebuild shenanigans). otoh, I also favour PF-style bennies rather than 3.x style slaps.

[Dimers]

Okay, but there's no roleplaying explanation, do we agree on this thing?

If so, what do people use to make characters more realistic? With "realistic" I mean to avoid absurd situations as that one in which a character who has done the same job for his whole life then, one beautiful morning, he wakes up and his "favored class" has changed.

I'm talking of roleplaying here, not of rules.

We do not agree on this thing, no. People really can just up and change. I spent three years of my life learning computer programming, and not a lick of it before or after those three years. I sincerely doubt I'm facing an XP penalty for being a multiclass librarian/philosopher/computer science major/gamer/loverboy, judging from the rate at which I learn new things, and I've certainly never been accused of roleplaying myself poorly.

Heck, I learn faster now than I used to. I'm accustomed to the process of adding new skills, and I can integrate useful tidbits from other contexts. I might be getting an XP bonus for being so multiclassed.

[Thanos92]

A Dragon Shaman, from level 4, can breathe fire and 2 levels later, he can heal wounds with a touch. Before that, he acquired the ability to breathe underwater, or slow his fall, none of which is in any way connected to projecting auras. And that's a set of abilities provided by a single class over 6 or so levels.

Meanwhile, a Wizard goes from Prestidigitation to Sleep to Fireball or whatnot. Of course, that's perfectly fine, because magic.

A Swordsage, added on top of Rogue and Swashbuckler just allows the character to "rouge" a bit better. If anything, this combo provides a more consistent set of abilities, despite it being created by multi-classing several classes.

It really boils down to how much you want to tie your players to the "class" concept, when they can all be seen more like a set of abilities. After all, not every Rogue is a pickpocket living on the street and might as well be a spy or a prince., yet they all get the same set of abilities.

Technically speaking yes, swordsage "just" allows to have new abilities but roleplaying speaking it involves other, significant changes: Swordsage: "A master of martial maneuvers, the sword sage is a physical adept — a blade wizard whose knowledge of the Sublime Way lets him unlock potent abilities, many of which are overtly supernatural or magical in nature. Depending on which disciplines he chooses to study, a swordsage might be capable of walking through walls, leaping dozens of feet into the air, shattering boulders with a single touch, or even mastering the elements of fire or shadow". I think that is pretty different from a thief.

However the theme of the thread was another: should I just leave the player use three different classes without problems or should I give him a little malus considering his reckless multiclass?
NOT justified by himself, whose background is that one of a common burglar.

[rrwoods]

I'll echo the sentiment many others have provided, and add my own take on it.

In general, I prefer to let players Do The Thing.

What is the Thing he wants to Do, from a narrative perspective? What is the character concept he's trying to execute on? If it's a mechanical synergy, you may want to work with him to help find the best combination of classes that compliment that synergy, after which you figure out what the backstory of that character is. If it's a narrative or roleplaying element, perhaps make some tweaks to his classes and feats to help bring out that narrative element mechanically. Either way, I find it best to work *with* the player to help him execute whatever concept he's trying to make happen, which has the additional benefit of making sure it fits in your conception of the world and the power level of characters you prefer to design challenges for.

Regarding multiclassing specifically, it's important to remember that classes are a *mechanical* construct. A sneaky-type character might be built as rogue, swordsage, ninja, fighter, ranger, or any combination of the above, depending on what makes the most sense for the character. But in-world s/he is a sneak, nothing more! A heavy-hitter might be built as a barbarian, fighter, cleric, warblade, or any combination of the above! It's true that the classes often have lengthy descriptions regarding narrative, but personally I prefer to take those as inspiration, picking and choosing which bits fit with my world and the player's concept -- or ignore it entirely, if it makes the most sense.

EDIT: I want to address a couple of specific things in your last post that I forgot about: (1) There's no such thing as "reckless" multiclassing. Or, rather, there is, and it's the kind that hurts the character plenty on its own (as others have already pointed out). If that's the case you certainly don't need to be slapping him with some extra penalty. (2) If the player's stated background doesn't justify the written fluff of the class, then work with the player to change one or the other -- again, with the added benefit of giving yourself the opportunity to weave his backstory into the world, if you want to.

Find out what your player wants to do, and then give him the opportunity to do it.

(Oh yeah, and houserule away that silly multiclassing penalty. It's terrible.)

[Thanos92]

I'll echo the sentiment many others have provided, and add my own take on it.

In general, I prefer to let players Do The Thing.

What is the Thing he wants to Do, from a narrative perspective? What is the character concept he's trying to execute on? If it's a mechanical synergy, you may want to work with him to help find the best combination of classes that compliment that synergy, after which you figure out what the backstory of that character is. If it's a narrative or roleplaying element, perhaps make some tweaks to his classes and feats to help bring out that narrative element mechanically. Either way, I find it best to work *with* the player to help him execute whatever concept he's trying to make happen, which has the additional benefit of making sure it fits in your conception of the world and the power level of characters you prefer to design challenges for.

Regarding multiclassing specifically, it's important to remember that classes are a *mechanical* construct. A sneaky-type character might be built as rogue, swordsage, ninja, fighter, ranger, or any combination of the above, depending on what makes the most sense for the character. But in-world s/he is a sneak, nothing more! A heavy-hitter might be built as a barbarian, fighter, cleric, warblade, or any combination of the above! It's true that the classes often have lengthy descriptions regarding narrative, but personally I prefer to take those as inspiration, picking and choosing which bits fit with my world and the player's concept -- or ignore it entirely, if it makes the most sense.

EDIT: I want to address a couple of specific things in your last post that I forgot about: (1) There's no such thing as "reckless" multiclassing. Or, rather, there is, and it's the kind that hurts the character plenty on its own (as others have already pointed out). If that's the case you certainly don't need to be slapping him with some extra penalty. (2) If the player's stated background doesn't justify the written fluff of the class, then work with the player to change one or the other -- again, with the added benefit of giving yourself the opportunity to weave his backstory into the world, if you want to.

Find out what your player wants to do, and then give him the opportunity to do it.

(Oh yeah, and houserule away that silly multiclassing penalty. It's terrible.)

You convinced me.
Which is the best way to houserule the munticlassing penalty? Other than PF way of treating it, just to have more options avaible.

[ATHATH]

You convinced me.
Which is the best way to houserule the munticlassing penalty? Other than PF way of treating it, just to have more options avaible.
Flat-out removing it, since it benefits spellcasters and penalizes martial characters.

[DEMON]

Which is the best way to houserule the munticlassing penalty? Other than PF way of treating it, just to have more options avaible.


Flat-out removing it, since it benefits spellcasters and penalizes martial characters.

Other than that, you could consider grouping several classes into a single category - if you have a Rogue as your favored class, add a Beguiler, a Scout, a Ninja etc. into that group. Same for the Fighter / Knight / Swashbuckler / Warblade... combination. If you take the Swift Hunter or Daring Outlaw etc. feat, make both classes the feat combines, your favored class...

[Ashtagon]

Another variant would be to say that once you have 10 levels (or pick another number) in any given class, that class automatically becomes an additional favoured class for your character. This allows high-level characters to branch out without too much difficulty.

[Jay R]

But the rule is intended for "normal" or two-class based characters, I guess. So, standing at the manual, if a dwarf must have a warrior in his build to avoid XP penalty, a human must not. It doesn't say that the favored class shifts over time.

The rule is "Favored Class: Any. When determining whether a multiclass human takes an experience point penalty, his or her highest-level class does not count."

You are trying to act as if the rules state, "... the class that was his or her highest-level class at a previous time does not count."

That's not what the rules say or mean. If it was, the the actual phrasing would be, "... his or her first-level class does not count." [The first-level class was obviously his original "highest-level class".]

The purpose of the rule is to allow more flexible multi-classing for humans. You might as well let it allow this player with a human character to have more flexible multi-classing.

[Thanos92]

The rule is "Favored Class: Any. When determining whether a multiclass human takes an experience point penalty, his or her highest-level class does not count."

You are trying to act as if the rules state, "... the class that was his or her highest-level class at a previous time does not count."

That's not what the rules say or mean. If it was, the the actual phrasing would be, "... his or her first-level class does not count." [The first-level class was obviously his original "highest-level class".]

The purpose of the rule is to allow more flexible multi-classing for humans. You might as well let it allow this player with a human character to have more flexible multi-classing.

That's not true, actually. The rule says "When determining...". Your first level class doesn't necessarily have to be your highest class. If a character goes:
1st ClassX1
2nd ClassX1/ClassY1
3rd ClassX1/ClassY2
4th ClassX1/ClassY3 <- Here comes the problem. Before this point you don't have to determine anything. The question is: Will the character have a penalty? No, because as a human his highest class (ClassY) doesn't count.
The PH doesn't say anything about what happens when your "favorite class" is determined and you grew up expanding a third class much more than the first two. In addition, I think it's pretty obvious that the PH rule is intendend to be appliable to every level character, not talking about his growth.

However I decided that it's good to remove XP penalty (eventually introducing it in clear cases of powerplay, when, for example, a player decides to take a specific combo of classes just for a bunch of abilities without considering it in his roleplaying).

[Thanos92]

We do not agree on this thing, no. People really can just up and change. I spent three years of my life learning computer programming, and not a lick of it before or after those three years. I sincerely doubt I'm facing an XP penalty for being a multiclass librarian/philosopher/computer science major/gamer/loverboy, judging from the rate at which I learn new things, and I've certainly never been accused of roleplaying myself poorly.

Heck, I learn faster now than I used to. I'm accustomed to the process of adding new skills, and I can integrate useful tidbits from other contexts. I might be getting an XP bonus for being so multiclassed.

Here is the problem: you spent three years. Before that you were not a "computer programmer". A character learns much more faster, like you learn druidic during night (if you go druid) or to use magic powers in a single day (if you go mage). I think the modern interpretation doesn't suit very well.

If, during game, the player waits to access his new powers, those coming from his new class, like he is learning to do something new, everything would have sense, but this doesn't happen. You've spent your whole life being a thief, than you kill a bear, level up and become a mage while your collegue mage has spent lots of year to learn this. Com'on!

[Nifft]

That's not true, actually. The rule says "When determining...". Your first level class doesn't necessarily have to be your highest class.

The character existed at level 1.

At level 1, that character's first class is her highest class.

Did the character face an XP penalty at level 1? I sure hope that poor character did not.

[Thanos92]

The character existed at level 1.

At level 1, that character's first class is her highest class.

Did the character face an XP penalty at level 1? I sure hope that poor character did not.

That is not considered multiclass. Clear and simply.

[Captn_Flounder]

Okay, but there's no roleplaying explanation, do we agree on this thing?

If so, what do people use to make characters more realistic? With "realistic" I mean to avoid absurd situations as that one in which a character who has done the same job for his whole life then, one beautiful morning, he wakes up and his "favored class" has changed.

I'm talking of roleplaying here, not of rules.

You role play a character, not a class.

My character is Dan.

His class is Paladin (of Freedom)

His career is Paranormal Investigator.

He is never address, in or out of character, as a Paladin, because classes are a game play feature, not an in-character profession he signed up for.

Pally Dan's Paladin class abilities come from his devotion to righteousness, not from being in a Paladin order.

Dan decides his character should have Pounce, to represent the relentless ferocity in which he hunts the things that go bump in the night.

Dan takes a level Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian.

Dan doesn't need to go live in a Savannah and forget how to belong in polite society.

Dan doesn't forget how to read and write and start worshipping pagan animal spirits.

Because class is not an in character decision.

I can have the Profession of "Paladin" without a single level in the class.

I can be a Sorcerer from a nomadic village. I am now roleplaying a Barbarian Sorcerer with no levels or class features in Barbarian.

Just like how my character doesn't one day go "huh, I've been adventuring a lot, I can increase my skills by up to 6 levels now!" Because anything on your character sheet is an OOC decision.

[Thanos92]

You role play a character, not a class.

My character is Dan.

His class is Paladin (of Freedom)

His career is Paranormal Investigator.

He is never address, in or out of character, as a Paladin, because classes are a game play feature, not an in-character profession he signed up for.

Pally Dan's Paladin class abilities come from his devotion to righteousness, not from being in a Paladin order.

Dan decides his character should have Pounce, to represent the relentless ferocity in which he hunts the things that go bump in the night.

Dan takes a level Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian.

Dan doesn't need to go live in a Savannah and forget how to belong in polite society.

Dan doesn't forget how to read and write and start worshipping pagan animal spirits.

Because class is not an in character decision.

I can have the Profession of "Paladin" without a single level in the class.

Your example works.
But other times it is not that easy, I think.
If Dan wants Pounce I can understand it, but I cannot understan how a character who hasn't received anything in game in that direction can simply change class from something like a Mage to something like Paladin. Or else.
It is possible, yes. It can be justified, yes. But if it is not, if there are no real reasons, a character simply can't shift directly.
I repeat myself, with a logic roleplaying explanation I think that is good, without it, SOMETIMES, it is not.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I repeat myself, with a logic roleplaying explanation I think that is good, without it, SOMETIMES, it is not.
Right, a good explanation is purely a roleplaying thing, I agree. That's also why XP penalties are ineffective (but you've already come around to that, so let's not waste more time on that).

Basically, what I think you want is a (non-ridiculous non-trivial) explanation for multiclassing. That is, you don't want people to go X 2/Y 4/Z 6 without any attempt at explaining the why and how. There's basically two things you can do here:
1) Simply require people to write a very short (200 words) backstory of "what happened when I learned new skill X". You're making it a requirement for multiclassing. If you want, you can do the same for major in-class milestones, like the paladin receiving their mount, or the druid wild shaping for the first time. That way, it's clear you're not aiming for out-of-character multiclassing, but for in-world milestones.
2) Give people a reward for coming up with backstory. The carrot to the stick (1), you can hand out things like floating rerolls, action points, and get-out-of-jail-free cards for well-crafted backstory and solid roleplaying.

[rrwoods]

So if the multiclassing is happening at character creation (necessarily meaning you're starting above first level), then it's a matter of shaping the backstory. This can be easy or hard, depending on the classes involved, but remember that *classes are mechanical elements*. What you want to get at when crafting a backstory is explaining why the character does what they do and who they are. Mechanically, a character might be a swashbuckler who dipped swordsage for some Shadow Hand teleportation maneuvers and Assassin's Stance. What does that mean for the narrative of the character? Is he someone who valued being able to get the drop on his targets, and therefore wanted to research new, innovative, and possibly extreme ways of doing so?

When it happens mid-game, it's a little hairier. However, generally players who multiclass during the progression of a campaign have some idea that they want to do so before it happens. Stay in communication with your players, and if you know that one of them wants to multiclass, consider the kinds of things their new class will get them. If they're already in line with what the character does, then there's really nothing you need to do. For example, if a melee-focused cleric dipped totemist for two levels, it's a pretty easy handwave to say "oh look, more magic". But in our swashbuckler example, if he's going to pick up those swordsage levels and learn some supernatural stuff, it can be satisfying to provide the narrative framework that "justifies" the new, unique abilities. Maybe the character comes across an ancient tome detailing the how-to, or encounters an old practitioner of the Sublime Way (if you keep the book's fluff), or some other thing you can come up with.

Note, by the way, that this is useful for single-classed characters too! The example I typically give is druid. If you start a druid before 4th level, you're a spellcasting nature-loving guy with a pet. Then suddenly at 4th level, you can turn into an animal! How cool is that? But wait, where's the justification? Sure, maybe you have some sort of spiritual connection to your animal companion, or to nature in general. But you gotta admit: Suddenly I'm An Animal is a little jarring without some extra narrative "oomph" to push it along, no?

[Captn_Flounder]

Right, a good explanation is purely a roleplaying thing, I agree. That's also why XP penalties are ineffective (but you've already come around to that, so let's not waste more time on that).

Basically, what I think you want is a (non-ridiculous non-trivial) explanation for multiclassing. That is, you don't want people to go X 2/Y 4/Z 6 without any attempt at explaining the why and how. There's basically two things you can do here:
1) Simply require people to write a very short (200 words) backstory of "what happened when I learned new skill X". You're making it a requirement for multiclassing. If you want, you can do the same for major in-class milestones, like the paladin receiving their mount, or the druid wild shaping for the first time. That way, it's clear you're not aiming for out-of-character multiclassing, but for in-world milestones.
2) Give people a reward for coming up with backstory. The carrot to the stick (1), you can hand out things like floating rerolls, action points, and get-out-of-jail-free cards for well-crafted backstory and solid roleplaying.

You need just as much explanation to multiclass Wizard as Barbarian. Or how/when do a level one wizard's powers manifest?

"After pushing my self to the physical limits, my body began to adapt and overcome its physical weakness."

Everyone has some latent magic ability as an Adventurer, because magic permeates everything. Most just don't have enough to actually manifest their powers.

Or like how Harry Potter became a level one Wizard all of a sudden around puberty. The powers manifest, THEN you learn to control them. "(PC) just woke up one day and could do the most basic of magics (like a few level 0 spells, and one level 1 spells a day perhaps?) and now must learn to control his powers (level up the class)." You learn the basics from seeing spells cast on the field. I know the nasics of building a computer because I saw out done a couple times.

Would be a problem if he, say, was suddenly a level 5 wizard who could do more than stack coins or shoot a single magic missile a day. But level one is clearly an unpracticed/unproven member of the class. Hence being level one.

[Dimers]

Here is the problem: you spent three years. Before that you were not a "computer programmer". A character learns much more faster, like you learn druidic during night (if you go druid) or to use magic powers in a single day (if you go mage).

Ah, I see what you're saying. The interpretation most of the Playground uses is that the character was practicing it all along, and just now finished learning. E.g. I practiced computer programming for a year and a half before I actually multiclassed into Computer Programmer. I had plentiful roleplaying background to justify it at that point.

Honestly, you run into very serious problems in D&D if you take that reasoning too far. Wizards can go from 1st-level spells to 9th level in a matter of months ... doesn't really fit the roleplaying flavor, even within a single class. A barbarian who takes the Bear Warrior prestige class suddenly starts being able to shapeshift without a hint that was coming before -- again, just one base class. A paladin hits fourth level and can call a warhorse and cast spells, but didn't start out with either ability.

In any such case or the case in your OP, you have to be willing to fudge it a bit and say "yes, your practice up til now was leading to this", or stuff starts looking kinda bent all over.

[ayvango]

You convinced me.
Which is the best way to houserule the munticlassing penalty? Other than PF way of treating it, just to have more options avaible.
I could suggest following scheme.

The races are separated to human and non-human. Human could ignore any one class for determining if he is multiclassing, contrary to ignoring the highest one as normal. So Rogue 3, Swashbuckler 3, Bard 1 is ok. Non-human could designate any one favoured class during character creation. That made classes outside PHB working too.

Every 10 hit dices (ignoring racial) non-human character are eligible to designate new favoured class. Humans could ignore one more class.

[Knaight]

Honestly, you run into very serious problems in D&D if you take that reasoning too far. Wizards can go from 1st-level spells to 9th level in a matter of months ... doesn't really fit the roleplaying flavor, even within a single class. A barbarian who takes the Bear Warrior prestige class suddenly starts being able to shapeshift without a hint that was coming before -- again, just one base class. A paladin hits fourth level and can call a warhorse and cast spells, but didn't start out with either ability.

D&D's advancement system is completely ridiculous, so your options are either to largely ignore it, or to roll with it and embrace the absurd. Multiclassing is just a tiny part of this absurdity, and generally less ridiculous than the sheer speed at which a single class is picked up.

[JBPuffin]

The concept of "favored class" is that it is the thing in which you are more proficient, able, the thing you've been educated to do (that's why I think it is useless with other races: an elf warrior 20, which should be a veteran of wars and battles, still have mage as his favored class? WTF?). When you add classes the favored isn't counted because you're so confident with youself that you can start doing other things, not forgetting what you are able to do. That's why I think it should not change from time to time (in particulare at level 8 you've got one, at level 9 another).

That's where you end up with problems - it's a race thing, not a character thing. Being human in DnD means you can basically do whatever you want; sure, you might not have the most support, but you can easily boost the thing you want to do with the extra feat and skill points. Hence FC: Any. That elf warrior doesn't have FC: Wizard b/c he personally is inclined to magic, it's because WotC decided "Hey, elves should be wizards more often than not" and gave them FC: Wizard. If you want favored classes to work different, do it yourself, but if you ask for RAW, you'll get it...well, raw.

[Nifft]

Eh, just ignore the whole Favored Class concept.

3.5e is a toolbox game. It's fun to come up with interesting builds, and some character concepts are best accomplished using several different classes.

Humans are still very strong, because getting a bonus Feat is very strong, and the extra skill points are not bad either -- humans do not need the perk of special Favored Class in order to remain one of the best races in the game for any class.

[Thanos92]

Basically, what I think you want is a (non-ridiculous non-trivial) explanation for multiclassing. That is, you don't want people to go X 2/Y 4/Z 6 without any attempt at explaining the why and how. There's basically two things you can do here:
1) Simply require people to write a very short (200 words) backstory of "what happened when I learned new skill X". You're making it a requirement for multiclassing. If you want, you can do the same for major in-class milestones, like the paladin receiving their mount, or the druid wild shaping for the first time. That way, it's clear you're not aiming for out-of-character multiclassing, but for in-world milestones.
2) Give people a reward for coming up with backstory. The carrot to the stick (1), you can hand out things like floating rerolls, action points, and get-out-of-jail-free cards for well-crafted backstory and solid roleplaying.

Yes, this is exactly what I think. Solutions you provided are very interesting.


I could suggest following scheme.

The races are separated to human and non-human. Human could ignore any one class for determining if he is multiclassing, contrary to ignoring the highest one as normal. So Rogue 3, Swashbuckler 3, Bard 1 is ok. Non-human could designate any one favoured class during character creation. That made classes outside PHB working too.

Every 10 hit dices (ignoring racial) non-human character are eligible to designate new favoured class. Humans could ignore one more class.

Cool! That is great.


Eh, just ignore the whole Favored Class concept.

Yes, I definitely decided that the concept of "Favored class" is awful.

I think I'll go with the PF solution.

Thank you all.

[XionUnborn01]

However I decided that it's good to remove XP penalty (eventually introducing it in clear cases of powerplay, when, for example, a player decides to take a specific combo of classes just for a bunch of abilities without considering it in his roleplaying).

Do not introduce penalties like this. You should never single out a player for making a character. Not all classes line up with a character concept so they have to branch out to achieve what they want. Honestly, let them have 5 classes, it'll hurt them in the long run because they're not as good as a single classes character. Seriously. Just don't do it.

[rrwoods]

Do not introduce penalties like this. You should never single out a player for making a character. Not all classes line up with a character concept so they have to branch out to achieve what they want. Honestly, let them have 5 classes, it'll hurt them in the long run because they're not as good as a single classes character. Seriously. Just don't do it.
I agree with this, but it’s important to understand what you do instead. I might sound like a broken record here, but the answer is work with the player, helping them craft a backstory that does fit. If someone has decided on what looks like a hodgepodge of unrelated classes, but the Thing She Does is cool and interesting, then what I do is talk to them about what their combination of mechanical abilities represents narratively, and how they came to acquire their unique set of talents. They may not have ideas about that right away, if they came at the character-creation task from a mechanics perspective, but I can talk with them about it! And again, it’s an opportunity for me to weave in their backstory, if I want to.

[Thanos92]

I agree with this, but it’s important to understand what you do instead. I might sound like a broken record here, but the answer is work with the player, helping them craft a backstory that does fit. If someone has decided on what looks like a hodgepodge of unrelated classes, but the Thing She Does is cool and interesting, then what I do is talk to them about what their combination of mechanical abilities represents narratively, and how they came to acquire their unique set of talents. They may not have ideas about that right away, if they came at the character-creation task from a mechanics perspective, but I can talk with them about it! And again, it’s an opportunity for me to weave in their backstory, if I want to.

Yes, this is the point.

I think a penalty can be applied in extreme cases, obviously I'll tend to accept lots of combination, even with five classes, if they have a logic. I don't think it's so stupid to find narrative way of interprete characters. Players will role better, the master will be more "narratively" excited.

[Hecuba]

You convinced me.
Which is the best way to houserule the munticlassing penalty? Other than PF way of treating it, just to have more options avaible.

Outside of some very specific cases, which generally require a setting designed with list of approved classes, you should ignore it all-together.

It doesn't do well what it was intended to do, and what it was intended to do gradually became a less desirable element over the lifetime of 3.0 and 3.5.

The easiest element to highlight is that it explicitly does not apply to PRCs, which means that it fails to address one of the most common methods and goals of multi-classing. It also doesn't address the most egregious multi-classing from the perspective of a highly class-based aesthetic: to wit, you can have 20 different base classes without penalty, as long as they are all level 1.

If you are playing in a (likely homebrewed) highly class-based setting, you will want a more finely-tuned tool than the default rule. For example:

If your goal is to enforce a dominant primary class you could apply a penalty if the the highest level class does not make up at least 4/5 of the levels.
If your goal is to represent that its hard to move back and forth between different professions without having expertise lag, you'd probably be better having a penalty for 1 level whenever you take a non-favored class that is different than he previous level.
And if your goal is to force even level advancement a la 2nd edition and earlier in order to represent a particular kind of quasi-profession not represented by the classes, you're better off just working with the player to home brew a class by smoothing level advancment.

[ayvango]

but the answer is work with the player, helping them craft a backstory that does fit.
In the recent module the party went full frontal override smashing door after door and quickly gain 2 lvl ups. How could I craft backstory with that?

[Thanos92]

In the recent module the party went full frontal override smashing door after door and quickly gain 2 lvl ups. How could I craft backstory with that?

Maybe using their fury against them.
During game you could have used traps, magical effects, stubborn monters. In other words: making those doors unsmashable.
After game, you could decide to introduce a quest in which if they go furiously on they come up with lots of problems. So they learn to control theirself.

[RedMage125]

OP, you've gotten the rules answer, which is that your player is correct.
This:


But the rule is intended for "normal" or two-class based characters, I guess.
Is about what you THINK the rules as INTENDED were. There's no evidence to support it, however.


In my opinion there is no roleplaying explanation for this: his background is that of a common good-for-nothing scoundrel who has passed his first twenty years in a city, robbing and running away from city guards. During game it will pass no more than a month o two, I suppose, from level 5 and level 9, is that enough to change your favored class? I think that his favored class should stay thief or change after much more time or else (need your help).

I'm looking for a good explanation and answer. I also accept other ways to treat XP penalty or the general problem.




Okay, but there's no roleplaying explanation, do we agree on this thing?

If so, what do people use to make characters more realistic? With "realistic" I mean to avoid absurd situations as that one in which a character who has done the same job for his whole life then, one beautiful morning, he wakes up and his "favored class" has changed.

I'm talking of roleplaying here, not of rules.

Here's what I think is a good roleplaying reason: Even though the guy's background was that he was a good for nothing scoundrel, he still was a level 1 Rogue when he started adventuring, right? (Even if that took place before gameplay actually began). But once his Swashbuckler levels exceed his Rogue levels, he has clearly invested more of his energy, more of his whole being into being a swashbuckler. Kind of like the tropes of heroes who start out as thieves and street urchins, but become mighty warriors, later in their careers, they're more of a warrior than an urchin, are they not?

That not only fulfills a roleplaying reason for the favored class change, but does so in a manner that is consistent with tropes of heroes who rose from shady/unfortunate circumstances. The favored class changing is actually a GREAT way to demonstrate that with game mechanics.

And on a personal note, I agree with the people who have mentioned that most groups just throw "favored class" and multiclassing penalties away. Those mechanics add nothing to the players' experience (in which context, I mean the fun the player is having), they make MORE work for the DM (who has to re-calculate XP separately for those players with penalties), and don't have ANY mechanical benefits.

[Zombimode]

I know this and I agree, but I think there should be a limit, a deterrent to multiclassing in non-sense ways.

Why?
Senselessly advancing in various classes doens't result in a functional character (like Wizard2/Sorcerer2/Bard1/Incarnate1/Soulborn1/Paladin/Spirit Shaman1/Druid1). incidentally this character would not even receive multiclass penalties.
Advancing in various classes to fulfill a concept results in a functional character - that fulfills a concept (like Knight4/Fighter2/Warblade1/Cavalry Charger x for Knighty MacKnight). incidentally this build will ALWAYS result in multiclass penalties (in this case because there is no printed race with Knight as favoured class).

What is the problem you are trying to fix with enforcing multiclass penalties?


When it happens mid-game, it's a little hairier.

It's not any hairier then wizards getting new spells as they Level up (without the Need of learning them through other means).

And this is not actually difficult to rationalize. Real-world analogy:

By the time I finished my degree in Computer Siences I had accumulated a lot of theoretical knowledge about Software Engineering: Design Patterns, V-Model, best practices, etc.
But when I started working and sat down to actually write Code, I did not implement most of those things. It's not that I had forgotten the lessons from University. I simply lacked the experience to implement those concepts effectively. Now, a year later things look different.

Likewise, a wizard that Levels up does not gain instant Knowledge of spells they have never heard about. Instead some of their theoretical Knowledge has transformed into useable abilities through their experience.

[Thanos92]

Here's what I think is a good roleplaying reason: Even though the guy's background was that he was a good for nothing scoundrel, he still was a level 1 Rogue when he started adventuring, right? (Even if that took place before gameplay actually began). But once his Swashbuckler levels exceed his Rogue levels, he has clearly invested more of his energy, more of his whole being into being a swashbuckler. Kind of like the tropes of heroes who start out as thieves and street urchins, but become mighty warriors, later in their careers, they're more of a warrior than an urchin, are they not?

That not only fulfills a roleplaying reason for the favored class change, but does so in a manner that is consistent with tropes of heroes who rose from shady/unfortunate circumstances. The favored class changing is actually a GREAT way to demonstrate that with game mechanics.

Actually, that is the immediate explanation I gave myself for the whole thing. But it's time that doesn't fit well: whole life vs a few months.

[RedMage125]

Actually, that is the immediate explanation I gave myself for the whole thing. But it's time that doesn't fit well: whole life vs a few months.
But experience points are the metagame measure of just that in-game concept-EXPERIENCE.

What I'm saying is yeah, he may have spent more years picking pockets, but he plateaued doing that. He's learned more, come farther, and grown more in a few months of adventuring than he ever did cutting purses.



It's not any hairier then wizards getting new spells as they Level up (without the Need of learning them through other means).

And this is not actually difficult to rationalize. Real-world analogy:

By the time I finished my degree in Computer Siences I had accumulated a lot of theoretical knowledge about Software Engineering: Design Patterns, V-Model, best practices, etc.
But when I started working and sat down to actually write Code, I did not implement most of those things. It's not that I had forgotten the lessons from University. I simply lacked the experience to implement those concepts effectively. Now, a year later things look different.

Likewise, a wizard that Levels up does not gain instant Knowledge of spells they have never heard about. Instead some of their theoretical Knowledge has transformed into useable abilities through their experience.
So...one of the older editions had an analogy for the spells wizards just "know" when they level, since they're studying magic ALL THE TIME. They said it was like being in school, and studying the material, getting some of it, but one day you just wake up, and-nice and refreshed from resting-it suddenly occurs to you what a cosine is. Like, it suddenly makes sense.

That's supposed to be the explanation for the new spells added when they level. All the time they spent studying magic, and the formulae for these new ways to use it just "click" for them one morning.

Incidentally, this also explains why every wizard's spellbook for the same spell looks different enough that it's not easy to read a captured spellbook.

[Thanos92]

What is the problem you are trying to fix with enforcing multiclass penalties?

The thing is that I would like players to carry on a concept for their characters. With "concept" I mean an idea, a coherent idea.
For example: a warrior has lived his whole life in a city, receiving military training. He's now looking for new adventures. That's fine.
If he suddenly becomes mage when he levels up (War 1/Mag 1) I become a bit confused. There are however two ways to solve the mistery:
1) During game I've introduced elements or hints that the player intends to apply to his character (I guess, a mentor? I don't know). That's fine, even if I had not thought about that possibility: the players is adapting something of my campaign to his characters. There's an explanation.
2) The player has a precise idea for his character's growth (a movie hero he wants to reply, I don't know). That's fine, even if it is totally nonsense. There's an idea.

I'm fine with these situations.

I'm not fine with another kind of situation: the player wants to do lots of things, he just wants to have access to that precise ability or power. I guess he can be called "powerplayer"? I don't know. However his only aim is to have more possibilities which have not a real application in game. Or he has not an idea of what is going on, so why the hell should I suppose that the character (while the players has not) has a precise intent to get a specific training to magic or else? If it can be explained in-game but the player doesn't actually explain it, why shouldn't I apply a little malus?

As lots of you said in 99% of cases it will result in a weaker character, so I don't have to intervene. But i may have to.

[Nifft]

The thing is that I would like players to carry on a concept for their characters. With "concept" I mean an idea, a coherent idea.
For example: a warrior has lived his whole life in a city, receiving military training. He's now looking for new adventures. That's fine.
If he suddenly becomes mage when he levels up (War 1/Mag 1) I become a bit confused. There are however two ways to solve the mistery:
1) During game I've introduced elements or hints that the player intends to apply to his character (I guess, a mentor? I don't know). That's fine, even if I had not thought about that possibility: the players is adapting something of my campaign to his characters. There's an explanation.
2) The player has a precise idea for his character's growth (a movie hero he wants to reply, I don't know). That's fine, even if it is totally nonsense. There's an idea.

I'm fine with these situations.

I'm not fine with another kind of situation: the player wants to do lots of things, he just wants to have access to that precise ability or power. I guess he can be called "powerplayer"? I don't know. However his only aim is to have more possibilities which have not a real application in game. Or he has not an idea of what is going on, so why the hell should I suppose that the character have a precise intent to get a specific training to magic or else?

As lots of you said in 99% of cases it will result in a weaker character, so I don't have to intervene. But i may have to.

The sad reality is: no matter what the Fighter does after level 1, he's already shot himself in the foot by taking a level of Fighter.

Here are the actual Power Player characters:
- Wizard 5 / PrC +
- Cleric 5 / PrC +
- Druid 20
- Sorcerer 5 / PrC +
- (other full-casters)

No matter what kind of multi-classing this poor, sad Fighter tries to do, he will never catch up to a full-caster at level 7 or above.

Seems a bit unfair to punish the Fighter for trying to improve. That player probably didn't know any better at the time.

I guess the only way to correct a mistake in your games is to have the PC die and then build a new PC?