Which Multiclassing Power Paradigm is Best? ToB? 4E? Else?

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

I kind of see your point Frank. If we can cherry pick other classes lists, then we encourage dumpster diving. It feels very gamist to insist or to limit what a Fighter could subclass with while it feels much more simulationist to allow free multiclassing at any time for any class.

Dumpster diving is a problem if the powers from other lists are significantly better than the powers from your own list. Minor cherry picking doesn't seem to be too bad, but in an unbalanced game it could be very problematic.

However, as long as the powers are looked at carefully and relatively well-balanced amongst each other, then any potential negative effects should be minimal. Secondly, if the classes are well-designed, there should be compelling reasons to stay within the class that would supersede minor power swapping benefits.

[OgreBattle]

FFXI had a nice way of doing it with main jobs and subjobs... though I see it's already been mentioned. That's surprising, most D&D players don't know about it. A good amount's already been said.

It's pretty interesting to see the differences between Samurai/Warrior, Warrior/Samurai, Samurai/Dancer, and Samurai/Thief.
(Square-Enix originally intended for it to be a versatile system (even suggesting warrior/white mage as a valid choice) but the difference between optimal and weak were drastic and they never bothered to 'fix' it... so no redmage/monks punching with lightning fists...)

It's a good amount of variety and easy to grasp... but every Warrior/Monk is going to have the same ability set as another Warrior/Monk. Is that not a problem?

How would you handle caster levels on non casters? in FFXI you simply didn't do that, or certain odd main job features trigger from spells (say a Dragoon's wyvern healing you, very useful for solo play).

[RobbyPants]

Well what if the powers were brought closer to how 3e organized them. ie instead of having a completely separate power list for each class, you have a big central list of spells that most arcane users draw from. A big list of techniques that martial characters draw from. A big list of prayers divine casters draw from. Etc.

Then every Arcane character is going to play really similarly to every other Arcane character or character creation is going to be a nightmare and balance is going to be hard to achieve. The "primal list" or whatever is going to be either short enough to wade through and evaluate quickly, in which case all the primal characters are going to end up very similar; or it's going to be long enough that you can't - in which case chargen is a nightmare and playtesters won't be able to cover more than a small fraction of the play space.-Username17

What if, instead of an arcane power list and a primal power list, you just had fewer classes to begin with? So, you have an arcane class and a primal class, each with it's own list.

The idea is you don't care that all straight arcane guys "play the same" because there's just one arcane class. This lets you keep a smaller list which is easier to evaluate. So, if you had 5 types of classes and you always picked two, you end up with 10 pairings, and this is doubled by figuring out which is primary and which is the sub class.

Would an approach like that be workable?

[Lago PARANOIA]

I advocated a system awhile ago (and still do) on several other threads that works pretty similarly to the Final Fantasy XI multiclass paradigm, but with some twists to it.

Conspiracy Theory Disclaimer Alert: I originally wrote this system up for a WoF system in order for people to be able to put their characters together quickly. But it should work just as well for Vancian or At-Will or Rage Meter or whatever-style resource management systems.

Okay, so. The system has several features.

[*] Mandatory triple-classing. Only the split isn't 33%/33%/33% like in 2E D&D. It's more about 50%/35%/15%, making the order relevant. So if you were a Cleric / Psion / Wizard and knew 12 powers, 6 of them would be cleric spells, 4 of them would be Psion powers, and 2 of them would be Wizard powers.

[*] The triple-classing categories are discrete and non-overlapping except for powers. Meaning that a Fighter / - / -, a - / Fighter / -, and a - / - / Fighter don't just have different amounts of Fighter ability densities but they have a totally different list of features to choose from. That is, Weapon Specialization is something that you can only get from having Fighter as your Third Class. Someone with Fighter for their First and/or Second Class will not get Weapon Specialization at all but will have some other Fighter features.

[*] That's right, I said and/or. You are allowed to select any legal for any combination of your First, Second, and Third class, even the same one. In fact we have specific terms for these combinations. If all of your classes are different you're Triple-Classed; and yes, order does matter. If all of your First, Second, and Third class are the same class then you're Single-Classed. If only your Second and Third class are the same then you're Dual-Classed. If only your First and Third class are the same then your second class is your Sub Job and your First and Third are your Main Job. If only your Third class is different then it is your Minor Job. So here are some possible class combinations.

Triple-Classed Fighter / Thief / Cleric.
Thief / Cleric / Fighter (they play differently).
Dual-Classed Fighter / Wizard.
Wizard / Fighter (the two play differently)
Wizard.
Wizard Major with a Cleric Sub.
Thief Major with a Wizard Minor.

[*] At first level, upon entering the second third of the game, and upon entering the last third of the game you get to select from a Kit, a Prestige Class, and an Epic Destiny that conforms to your Main Class. There's no reason why it can't belong to any of your classes (and in fact is a recommended house rule that will be in effect for more sperg-tastic games like the RPGA), it's just a way to cut down on option paralysis. These give class features and extra powers as appropriate. Kits, Prestige Classes, and Epic Destinies are called Class Expansions, by the way.

That's the base system. Here's some other things that I think it'd be prudent to mention:

[*] You can't replace a higher-level power with a lower-level power (or vice-versa, but that goes without saying). Not all of your powers will be the same level, but if they don't meet a minimum power level for your current level then you have to discard and replace it.

[*] You can change your character around in any otherwise legal way (including but not limited to your class combination) during a level-up or when your DM says so, whichever comes first.

[*] The multiclassing system is closed beyond this. There is no other way to grab a specific class or class expansion feature or power other than the base system.

[*] Class powers are stat transparent. A Fighter minoring Wizard powers uses them at the same generic level of effectiveness as one minoring Barbarian powers.

[ModelCitizen]

[*] At first level, upon entering the second third of the game, and upon entering the last third of the game you get to select from a Kit, a Prestige Class, and an Epic Destiny that conforms to your Main Class. There's no reason why it can't belong to any of your classes (and in fact is a recommended house rule that will be in effect for more sperg-tastic games like the RPGA), it's just a way to cut down on option paralysis. These give class features and extra powers as appropriate. Kits, Prestige Classes, and Epic Destinies are called Class Expansions, by the way.

Did you seriously just say that people should be allowed to pick any class but then make a rule that they can't because you think they're too stupid to do it? The time to make cuts is in playtesting after you fail to manage all the available options.

[Juton]

I think using a modified version of AD&D's multiclassing could work well. Each class gets an experience progression, but one that actually makes sense for that class and doubles every two levels instead of every level. If a player wants to evenly split their classes they'll run two levels behind, otherwise they can take short dips relatively cheaply. This system would require that classes not be as front loaded as 3.X to work.

A system like this could let the character pick up a lot of versatility without sacrificing power long term.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Did you seriously just say that people should be allowed to pick any class but then make a rule that they can't because you think they're too stupid to do it?

I wouldn't say 'stupid', but the general idea is yes. I don't think it'd be impossible to balance on the game developer side, but as FrankTrollman said it'd be too much of a derp moment to have someone, especially someone new at the game, have to pick through 30 possible Kits for their character instead of 10. It's best to just winnow it down at the start.

[Username17]

FFXI had a nice way of doing it with main jobs and subjobs... though I see it's already been mentioned. That's surprising, most D&D players don't know about it. A good amount's already been said.

It's pretty interesting to see the differences between Samurai/Warrior, Warrior/Samurai, Samurai/Dancer, and Samurai/Thief.
(Square-Enix originally intended for it to be a versatile system (even suggesting warrior/white mage as a valid choice) but the difference between optimal and weak were drastic and they never bothered to 'fix' it... so no redmage/monks punching with lightning fists...)

It's a good amount of variety and easy to grasp... but every Warrior/Monk is going to have the same ability set as another Warrior/Monk. Is that not a problem?

How would you handle caster levels on non casters? in FFXI you simply didn't do that, or certain odd main job features trigger from spells (say a Dragoon's wyvern healing you, very useful for solo play).

The issue where all Paladin/Warriors play exactly the same is a big issue. You would not want it to work like that. But the way to add in character differences is to put choices into the main class, not choices into the sub class. Because you're already committing yourself to choosing a subclass off a list of classes that is 10 or more options long. If you have even two or three choices per subclass, that's a huge increase in dumpster diving for what is essentially a minor part of your character.

Let's say you're a Paladin. If you have three choices to pick from for your class, that's 3 choices. And now you pick a subclass. Let's say that we're dealing with the PHB classes and there are "only" 11 classes to choose from. That means you have ten choices for subclass. But if you had three choices per subclass, that would actually be thirty options to dumpster dive through. Variations in subclass ability options are a very much worse rate of return on actual character effect for the amount of options you have to read.

The actual FFXI system fails in several points. The thing where being a Warrior Black Mage isn't good is actually offensive and bad. The thing where they ask you to grind levels separately is overly annoying. The thing where all characters of the same class combo are identical save for variations in equipment is unacceptable. But the place to add variation is on the level of selectable abilities for the main class.

Dumpster diving is a problem if the powers from other lists are significantly better than the powers from your own list. Minor cherry picking doesn't seem to be too bad, but in an unbalanced game it could be very problematic.

However, as long as the powers are looked at carefully and relatively well-balanced amongst each other, then any potential negative effects should be minimal. Secondly, if the classes are well-designed, there should be compelling reasons to stay within the class that would supersede minor power swapping benefits.

You'd think that would be true, and you'd be wrong. The fact is that dumpster diving rapidly becomes an intractable problem whether or not the individual abilities are over powered. Consider a weak sister ability like True Strike. It's honestly not very good. You spend a round having a 0% chance to hit and then you bump up your chance to hit next round to 95%. Since damage now is worth more than damage in the future, it's actually worse than just attacking twice even if you only hit on a 12+. Is it overpowered? Not a chance. Now consider an ability like Guillotine: it has a low chance to hit but drops an opponent in one blow if it lands. While occasionally impressive, it's in the long run worse than a normal attack (although since people remember home runs better than they remember strikeouts, Guillotine will seem much more useful than a standard attack). Again: not overpowered. Not even particularly good.

But now use both those abilities together. It's a 95% of a two turn takedown on any enemy, all by yourself. That is crazy, crazy good. And if you let the Assassin dumpster dive through all of the bullshit abilities that all the other classes can choose from, he will eventually find the Diviner and the awesome synergy he has with the Diviner's frankly fairly shitty True Strike ability. And that's just simple obvious shit. With full dumpster diving on, you're going to get weird bullshit like combining Blade Cascade (extra attack per hit) with Harrying Stance (split each attack into three little attacks) to attack hundreds of times a round. Or to combine Deja Vu (repeat the action you just took with the same roll as a bonus action) with Fortune on Fortune (refresh an ability when you score a critical hit) to inflict infinity damage whenever you roll a natural 20.

It's just not avoidable. Unless you limit the dumpster diving right off. And the most efficient way to do that is to limit the subclass offerings to a single domain's worth of abilities. Because then you only have to check to see if people can abuse what is on that narrow list for each subclass possibility.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Frank:

4E D&D 'solves' this problem to some extent, especially in the later books, by decreeing that certain game effects only interact with the class as intended. For example, Pit Fighter's +Wis to all damage rolls used to apply to any power but after some hasty errata now only applies to fighter powers.

Thoughts on that?

[Username17]

Frank:

4E D&D 'solves' this problem to some extent, especially in the later books, by decreeing that certain game effects only interact with the class as intended. For example, Pit Fighter's +Wis to all damage rolls used to apply to any power but after some hasty errata now only applies to fighter powers.

Thoughts on that?

Dumpster diving through hundreds of pages of abilities that have bizarre kludges that prevent them from being used in multiclassing is exactly like not being able to dumpster dive for abilities to use in multiclassing except that you still have to read hundreds of pages of material.

-Username17

[Swordslinger]

Frank:

4E D&D 'solves' this problem to some extent, especially in the later books, by decreeing that certain game effects only interact with the class as intended. For example, Pit Fighter's +Wis to all damage rolls used to apply to any power but after some hasty errata now only applies to fighter powers.

Thoughts on that?

The modifier abilities are generally the ones you have to look out for in terms of powers.

Honestly as far as standalone powers go, you could probably care less if a fighter took magic missile. While rogues casting invisibility seems powerful, it probably doesn't matter much because those effects aren't protected anyway. A caster could just cast invisibility on a rogue, he could drink an invisibility potion, or he could buy a ring of invisibility. And in either case you get the same setup. Multiclassing abilities may reduce the need for teamwork (which I think is almost inevitable in the concept of someone trying to play two roles), but it doesn't necessarily produce broken combos.

Perhaps the modifier abilities in general should just be removed. Having a "you do more damage with your other powers" ability is boring anyway, why even have it in the game at all? That doesn't belong as a class ability. Damage increases should just come as part of leveling.

Then the only really tricky abilities are the personal buffs, which have to be handled carefully. Mechanics similar to Divine power, where it lets you fight "as if you were a fighter" are much preferred to static bonuses, which a fighter/cleric could use to get crazy attack bonuses.

[ishy]

The more discussion about this topic, the more I get the feeling multi classing just doesn't work, though you could use prestige classes for it like Tussock said.

[Lago PARANOIA]

The more discussion about this topic, the more I get the feeling multi classing just doesn't work, though you could use prestige classes for it like Tussock said.

The alternates to multiclassing (UA style ability points/generic classes, 4E classplosion, prestige classes, etc.) REALLY don't work for one reason or another. So it's a total 'pick your fucking poison motherfucker' kind of deal.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

In the past, designers simply haven't put significant effort into making multiclassing work. 1E/2E straight up didn't try. 3E made BAB so martial classes had some synergy, prestige classes had some synergy, but Spell/Martial combos had no synergy. 4E had multiclassing as an entire afterthought and had a half-baked effort.

So, I don't think it's fair to say the concept doesn't work when all the official attempts at it so far are very lacking.

[OgreBattle]

Some ideal for me would be like making a multicolor deck in M:tG. The thought makes me feel warm and fuzzy, don't know how I'd do that in execution though.


With FFXI main/subjobs, another criticism could be that the effectiveness of a subjob is also dependent on your level, it can change depending on when certain subjob abilities come online. Getting sneak attack at level 10 makes it more useful for damage dealing than warrior until level 30 when you get berserk and double attack, etc.

Though once I just crudely ported FFXI classes into D&D, fitting them into 20 level progression, getting a new ability every level through main/sub integration did seem fun.

Isn't dumpster diving kind of fun in itself though? Your wacky 3.X gamebreaking usually involves a lot of shuffling about. It's also like building a Magic deck with a wide array of sets to pick from.

[Seerow]

Well what if the powers were brought closer to how 3e organized them. ie instead of having a completely separate power list for each class, you have a big central list of spells that most arcane users draw from. A big list of techniques that martial characters draw from. A big list of prayers divine casters draw from. Etc.

Then every Arcane character is going to play really similarly to every other Arcane character or character creation is going to be a nightmare and balance is going to be hard to achieve. The "primal list" or whatever is going to be either short enough to wade through and evaluate quickly, in which case all the primal characters are going to end up very similar; or it's going to be long enough that you can't - in which case chargen is a nightmare and playtesters won't be able to cover more than a small fraction of the play space.

While I can see this argument, I don't think it needs to be axiomatically true. I mean just look at the variety of 3.5 Arcane Casters. A Wizard plays pretty differently than any of the set list casters that draw from the same spell list (Such as Dread Necro or Beguiler), and I could even see a strong argument for the Sorcerer's play style being drastically different (The Sorcerer gets fewer spells known and is a pretty easy and smooth play style. A Wizard requires a lot more micromanagement, and even though both the Wizard and Sorcerer are doing the same tricks, the feel of the two classes is pretty different in play)

[...You Lost Me]

Going to that example of a multi-colored magic deck, I'm thinking that the best way to multiclass is to give each class combo specific abilities. Now that would be FAR more work than is sensible, and leads to dumpster diving (MtG took a long time to get where it is and does encourage searching on and on for better card combos).

So it's probably not the greatest comparison.

[hogarth]

3E made BAB so martial classes had some synergy, prestige classes had some synergy, but Spell/Martial combos had no synergy.

Where is it written that every combination has to be possible, or have synergy?

If every multiclass combination is just as good as a non-multiclass character plus you also get a wider range of abilities, that's a poor idea, IMO.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

The fact that a Wizard 5 / Rogue 5 is not roughly equal to a Wizard 9 / Rogue 1 or a Wizard 10 has been a longterm compliant of 3E. The fact that in 2E you'd be smarter to be a Fighter 10/Wizard 11 rather than Wizard 10/Fighter 11 pissed people off, you'd get a lot of extra HP and get Exceptional strength because you started off as fighter which is something that was impossible to get starting as a wizard. 4E multiclassing doesn't leave you feeling like you're a member of the other class. Hybrid classes don't give you the option to dynamically choose to become another class later.

If you're trying to make a balanced and dynamic simulationist system, you're going to try to create classes in such a way that multiclassing is supported from the get-go and try to make it such that a character could multiclass at any point and not have them suck terribly because of that choice.

[hogarth]

The fact that a Wizard 5 / Rogue 5 is not roughly equal to a Wizard 9 / Rogue 1 or a Wizard 10 has been a longterm compliant of 3E.

Yes, I know. And I'm saying that a game where you can create a character by throwing darts at the rulebook and have it be just as good as a character that you spend some thought on would be boring. (I'm willing to entertain counterexamples, of course.)

It's okay to have some combinations of choices be bad, as long as the rules aren't misleading about it.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

A fun game will not have perfect balance because interesting classes have asymmetric abilities. However they should be reasonably close in overall effectiveness. It's possible to work and create a system such that classes are roughly balanced toward each other. And because that is possible, it's similarly possible to implement a multiclass system where combinations of levels are balanced toward each other. There will always be optimization, but I believe the large disparity between optimized and non-optimized characters as witnessed in previous D&D eras can and should be minimized.

[Username17]

If you're trying to make a balanced and dynamic simulationist system, you're going to try to create classes in such a way that multiclassing is supported from the get-go and try to make it such that a character could multiclass at any point and not have them suck terribly because of that choice.

Uh... why? You're basically implicitly assuming 3e multiclassing as the standard and demanding that the game make it function. That's an achievable goal. It's difficult because you're asking characters to increase in power every level and dilute their main shtick by a variable percentage based on the number of levels they have in the old class ebfore jumping ship. But you could do something like "build a WoF Maneuver deck every level" so that having multiple classes would always give you an equal amount of level appropriate options, but there's no reason to believe it's the only way to make a simulationist game.

Player characters start at the beginning of adulthood as 1st level Wizards and Knights, having just spent the last twelve years as apprentices or squires. So why the fucking hell would it be simulationist to expect some 22 year old Barbarian to pick up spellcraft and use it effectively in the middle of a dragon hunt? It takes a starting character their entire adolescence to get to the level of an entry level position, why wouldn't it take years of training to get a basic proficiency for someone trained in a completely unrelated field? The idea that people have to be allowed to embark upon multiclassing in the middle of their adventures is a frankly kind of weird idea. It's good for certain kinds of character growth, but you could easily decide to do things some other way.

If every multiclass combination is just as good as a non-multiclass character plus you also get a wider range of abilities, that's a poor idea, IMO.

That's another unfounded assumption. Why do you think people have to be allowed to play "non-multiclassed" characters? If player characters are all double classed or hybrid classed or sub classed, what does the game lose? There are after all a great many "classes" that wear robes and cast spells or wear armor and stab people, so if a player wanted a tighter shtick they could always be a Warlord/Paladin or Sorcerer/Warlock rather than a Knight/Shaman. if everyone was required to fill their multiclassing slots with something (as they are in FFXI), then that particular problem simply vanishes.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Hybrid classes don't give you the option to dynamically choose to become another class later.

You know, my personal feeling is that in actual play (both in stories and gameplay) few people want to start just dabbling a tiny bit in a class after already being established at something and grow the pie higher from there.

If I as a 10th level 3E thief want to pick up wizard spells starting at level 11, I don't want to be casting dinky Silent Image and Magic Missile. I won't even be satisfied with Fireball and Lightning Bolt. At the very least I want Dominate Person and Wall of Force. I think 4th Edition's multiclass paradigm of just letting you hotswap a level-appropriate power in was actually a really good idea, it's just that the ability score system and the feat system made it too prohibitive to be worthwhile. That Shadowrun and D&D crap of having to start at ground zero and sucking for awhile when you decide to make a career change sucks. It sucks because it tells people to wait.

If we were using my triple-class system you should just be plain allowed to change your class array whenever the hell you felt like it. If you were going for 'realism' you could even make some stupid and vindictive rule like you were only allowed to change one of your second or third class (not both at the same time) and/or you could only change your first class if it was to what your second or third class was. But that's not necessary.

If every multiclass combination is just as good as a non-multiclass character plus you also get a wider range of abilities, that's a poor idea, IMO.

Hence why I advocated non-overlapping features for a base class's first, second, and third class. A Wizard / Fighter will have flat-out different features from a Fighter / Wizard. But a Fighter or a Wizard will still feel more fightery or wizardy than either of the dual-classes.

[Surgo]

I'm a pretty big fan of how multiclassing works in Guild Wars. Sounds a lot like the ffxi system people are talking about. Everybody can have a second class, and the sum of your mojo can be distributed as you want between the two classes. You just miss one of the attributes of the second, and you get different inherent benefits depending on what you chose as the primary. It works well even though it's a caster's game.

[hogarth]

If every multiclass combination is just as good as a non-multiclass character plus you also get a wider range of abilities, that's a poor idea, IMO.

That's another unfounded assumption.

I agree that it would be an unfounded assumption if I were stating it as a fact. I was specifically pointing out that it's my personal opinion.