Calculating BAB's and save's etc for a multiclass.

[Shockwave]

As title really,

I've read the PHB and thought I understood it, but what I've ended up with has lower Bab than a straight Wizard of the same level.

A level 20 wizard has the following according to the PHB, BAB +10/+5, Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +12

The NPC I'm still kind of stating out and learning 3.5 with has the following according, which I'm guessing is wrong, but how?
The NPC in question is (Deep Breath)
Beguiler 6
Wizard 5
Mind Bender 1
Master Specialist 5
Nightmare Spinner 5
Arch Mage 2

24 total levels, and the Bab and save's I have are as follows
Bab +10/+5 Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +22

at level 20 (Nightmare Spinner 3, No Archmage)
Bab +8/+3 Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +18

So, what (If anything) am I doing wrong?

[Elkad]

If you want accuracy, use Fractional BAB and saves.

https://web.archive.org/web/20060423212317/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060303a

Also in Unearthed Arcana somewhere, but neglects to take away the multiple +2 starting bonuses to saves, which I feel is incorrect.

Pathfinder rules explain it better, same result.
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/unchained-rules/fractional-base-bonuses/

[Troacctid]

The NPC I'm still kind of stating out and learning 3.5 with has the following according, which I'm guessing is wrong, but how?
The NPC in question is (Deep Breath)
Beguiler 6
Wizard 5
Mind Bender 1
Master Specialist 5
Nightmare Spinner 5
Arch Mage 2

24 total levels, and the Bab and save's I have are as follows
Bab +10/+5 Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +22

at level 20 (Nightmare Spinner 3, No Archmage)
Bab +8/+3 Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +18

So, what (If anything) am I doing wrong?
+3 BAB from beguiler. +2 from wizard. +0 from mindbender. +2 from master specialist. +2 from nightmare spinner. +1 from archmage. 3+2+0+2+2+1=10. Your total is correct.

I don't remember the saves for all these classes. But if they all have good Will and poor Fort and Ref, then it would be 5+4+2+5+5+3=24 Will, and 2+1+0+1+1+0=5 Fort/Ref. That's not what you have. Give me a second.

...Okay, mindbender has good Fort, which I believe means the Fort/Ref/Will ought to be 7/5/24.


If you want accuracy, use Fractional BAB and saves.

https://web.archive.org/web/20060423212317/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060303a

Also in Unearthed Arcana somewhere, but neglects to take away the multiple +2 starting bonuses to saves, which I feel is incorrect.
It is not incorrect.

[Shockwave]

+3 BAB from beguiler. +2 from wizard. +0 from mindbender. +2 from master specialist. +2 from nightmare spinner. +1 from archmage. 3+2+0+2+2+1=10. Your total is correct.
Okay, thats makes the character literally the worst at melee, worse than any Wizard, didn't think that was possible


I don't remember the saves for all these classes. But if they all have good Will and poor Fort and Ref, then it would be 5+4+2+5+5+3=24 Will, and 2+1+0+1+1+0=5 Fort/Ref. That's not what you have. Give me a second.

...Okay, mindbender has good Fort, which I believe means the Fort/Ref/Will ought to be 7/5/24.
Okay, found 2 errors, 1 mine, one yours.
I applied a +2 to Ref when I went in to Mindbender, the other error, Master Specialist and Nightmare Spinner are +4 Will at 5 levels, not the +5's you list. So, the final saves are +7/ +5/ +22

[tyckspoon]

Okay, thats makes the character literally the worst at melee, worse than any Wizard, didn't think that was possible


Oh, it's definitely possible. In fact if you can find enough 3/4 and 1/2 progression classes and only take the first level of each you can wind up with BAB +0 at 20th level. It is a result of 'add 1/2 BAB at each level' and 'add 1 BAB every 2nd level' -not- being the same thing - you lose BAB if you never take the even levels. The Fractional advancement rules mentioned up thread basically involve switching to the first and using the actual system math instead of only advancing according to the lookup tables.

[Fizban]

Elkad has done my job for me: best to use fractional BAB and saves (an "official"-ly recognized variant) and also limit the starting +2 for high saves to no more than once per character*. Otherwise you get stuff like this, with dramatically lower BAB and higher saves than are supposed to be possible. If I'd ever read anything that said the devs intended both heavily split multiclassing/dips and that such builds intentionally had much lower BAB and higher saves, that would be one thing, but I never have and am pretty sure no such comment exists.

*Or as I've phrased it:

BAB and saving throws for multiclass characters are fractional (that's +1/2 levels if high or +1/3 if low, for saves), and you only get the base +2 for a high save once per save. Ex: a Clr 1/Wiz 1 has a base Will save of +3, which is +2.5 from Clr 1, and +0.5 from another level in high Will save, and their BAB is +1.25 which rounds down to +1.

So, what (If anything) am I doing wrong?
Expecting the base PHB/DMG rules (and class/PrC table formatting used for everything) to account for a character building style that the designers never particularly expected or intended, particularly when extended into epic levels.

Actually, that's a point- since this is an Epic character, their BAB and save progression changes when they pass 20th, since they have to start following Epic rules. You'll need to specify what order they took the levels in, and refer to Epic Level Basics (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/basics.htm). You seem to be considering this already since you mentioned their totals at 20th, but since epic BAB and saves are just +1/2 levels for everything, it should be whatever numbers you're using at 20th then just +2/+2/+2/+2, if the total level is 24th.

[Elkad]

...but neglects to take away the multiple +2 starting bonuses to saves, which I feel is incorrect.


It is not incorrect.

Thus the "I feel" qualifier. RAW it may be right. But I'm not using it at my table, because RAW leads to things like Drown-healing or stacking turning pools for hundreds of uses instead of just expanding the list of things you can turn.

The original article took it away. Pathfinder takes it away.
UA leaves it in. Take 20 levels of 20 different "good Fort" classes, and you end up with +30 Fort (edit, that should be +50), while a single-class only has +12. Which is both silly and likely an error nobody bothered to fix.

So at my table you get +2 ONCE per save category. Because RAW or not, that's the rational ruling.

[Troacctid]

Thus the "I feel" qualifier. RAW it may be right. But I'm not using it at my table, because RAW leads to things like Drown-healing or stacking turning pools for hundreds of uses instead of just expanding the list of things you can turn.

The original article took it away. Pathfinder takes it away.
UA leaves it in. Take 20 levels of 20 different "good Fort" classes, and you end up with +30 Fort, while a single-class only has +12. Which is both silly and likely an error nobody bothered to fix.

So at my table you get +2 ONCE per save category. Because RAW or not, that's the rational ruling.
Take 2 levels each of 10 different classes with good Fort under the standard system and you end up with +30 Fort. Do it under the fractional system, and you end up with...+30 Fort. The exact same. What's the problem? If you didn't add the +2 each time under the fractional system, then the multiclass character would only have +12, which is a dramatic decrease compared to a normal game, something that is against the explicit intent of the rule. (The text calls out that it is meant to give multiclass characters slightly higher base saves.)

I get if you want to remove the +2 at 1st level for additional classes beyond the first. I mean, I don't agree with it, but I understand why it might feel weird to you. But it doesn't really have anything to do with fractional saves; even if you think the extra +2 is a problem, it's not a problem the fractional system is designed to fix.

[Anthrowhale]

I don't really regard the +2 bonus for good saves at first level as effectively abusable.

The powerful characters in the game are spellcasters who typically damage that power under a many-multiclass build. The weaker characters are fighter-types (not the class necessarily) who can be effective under a many-multiclass build (i.e. a Barbarian/Ranger/Fighter/Battle Dancer/Knight/Hexblade/Paladin/...). The modest benefit of having better saves than a straight class character makes up about 3% of the difference between the power of spellcasters and fighter types.

[lylsyly]

you could always run it the way our table does which is simply all good saves tied to ECL not a specific class. works for us. of course our table bends a lot of rules ;-D

[redking]

Ask your DM is s/he will let you take the Battle Sorcerer variant class (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm), but applied to Beguiler instead of Sorcerer. The tradeoff when applied to Beguiler is equal to that of Sorcerer, so it should not be a problem. That will raise your BAB somewhat.

Someone else mentioned fractional BAB, which is another option that should help marginally.

[lylsyly]

Ask your DM is s/he will let you take the Battle Sorcerer variant class (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm), but applied to Beguiler instead of Sorcerer. The tradeoff when applied to Beguiler is equal to that of Sorcerer, so it should not be a problem. That will raise your BAB somewhat.

Honestly I think this is a bad Idea. Beguilers can already cast in light armor. Beguilers are spontaneous fixed list casters that automatically know every spell on their list. Appliying battle sorcerer to get medium bab? I can't see it. You lose one spell per day of each level? Blah but easy enough. You give up 1 spell known at each level? How do you adjudicate that for a fixed list caster? Especially when Abjurant Champion and Eldritch Knight exsist. Thats 15 levels of full BAB PRC with only one level of casting lost.

[Shockwave]

Honestly I think this is a bad Idea. Beguilers can already cast in light armor. Beguilers are spontaneous fixed list casters that automatically know every spell on their list. Appliying battle sorcerer to get medium bab? I can't see it. You lose one spell per day of each level? Blah but easy enough. You give up 1 spell known at each level? How do you adjudicate that for a fixed list caster? Especially when Abjurant Champion and Eldritch Knight exsist. Thats 15 levels of full BAB PRC with only one level of casting lost.

Well, I am the DM in this case......

But I'm not looking to power game, I'm trying to learn how 3.5 works and catch inconsistencies

[redking]

In that's case, use the fractional everything rules, including BAB and saving throws. The saving throws can be especially painful when multiclassing. It's a shame that the fractional rules weren't implemented as standard in the game.

[holbita]

So at my table you get +2 ONCE per save category. Because RAW or not, that's the rational ruling.

And you are absolutely right, +50 saves aside, even just a +20 being a thing is enough to make most monsters you can throw at the characters trivial, specially when they can buff their saves to +10 by level 4, it just doesn't work. It forces the DM to encounters where creatures don't use save vs abilities, stat everything up which ends up being a lot of work for the DM for literally no gameplay improvement and just straight tells you that single class characters are unplayable in game.

Do not add the +2 more than once, don't break the game.