Multiclass Spellcasting D&D

[CatharzGodfoot]

I'm interested in coming up with a framework that allows for multi-classed spellcasters in a somewhat elegant fashion. For now, just multiclasses between two spellcasting classes. If you've already done this, please show me and it'll save a lot of work.
There is a caveat: It should work with spells as written, as crappy as that is.

To simplify things, I'm only going to worry about two kinds of casters. On the one side we have sorcerers, on the other wizards. Other classes that prepare or cast spontaneously reduce to one of the two anyway.

A single 'per day' progression is probably the way to go. Assuming that everybody who casts spells has about the same number of spells at the same level simplifies things.

The difficulty arises in determining how spells are prepared into and cast from those slots. If we allowed things as they currently are, there'd be a huge incentive for any wizard to become a sorcerer and vice-versa. That way you can fill all your slots with prepared spells from your spellbook and then spontaneously convert them.

If the sorcerer's spells known is limited by the number of sorcerer levels (not scaling with new spells known), it becomes much better to multiclass with a minimum of wizard levels. If the spells known do scale up as the character gains new levels of spells, the total number of spells could quickly become unmanageable.


I do like the idea of giving sorcerers spells known in the form of Spheres, but that doesn't solve the problem of too many spells. There would have to be actual good class features between where the spheres are handed out, and that might make a caster class too good (see: druid).

I'm also thinking of mucking around to give a wizard 'spells known'. The idea would be to limit the total number of different spells she can prepare. The end result is that a sorcerer/wizard has less variability within the spells that she's prepared and fewer spells to spontaneously convert them to.


How to deal with prime requisites and whatnot can come later.


[Edit] Yeah, this is for the 'one step back, two steps forward' magic user, although for that I may end up going with a hybrid approach. [/Edit]

[virgil]

I've oft wondered what would happen if all spellcasters who multiclassed had their caster level continue to advance at half rate with noncasting classes and full rate with other casting classes.

Example: Wizard 4/Cleric 3/Fighter 6. Spells per day remain at the wizard 4 & cleric 3 levels, but effective caster level is 10 for both classes.

Maybe even have caster level = character level flat-out, depending on your view of things.

[Username17]

An advantage to Tome of Battle style fighter abilities and 4e style ability slots is that you could genuinely and legitimately have open multiclassing. Give out minor abilities in every class at every level, and allow people to fill their ability slots out of the lists from the classes that they have (with maximum numbers of choices based on how many levels you had in each of the classes). That's what 4e should have been, but it wasn't because they got all caught up in the retarded crap about role protection (where roles were defined as "guy who stands in front" and "guy who stands behind that guy" rather than anything about what they actually do).

Or you could go all the way and just have ability lists and have the "classes" be default picks off those lists.

-Username17

[Kaelik]

Honestly, I'd say, if we are basing it off of 3.5 classes, every level advancing the class is as normal, but all other classes grant 1/2 spell progression, rounded down. But CL is always equal to level.

So Wizard 6/Sorcerer 6 casts as a Wizard 9/Sorcerer 9 with a CL of 12 in both classes.

[CatharzGodfoot]

My plan for multiclassing was thus:

• Every character sheet shows the "character level"
• Your saves, BAB, caster level, and maybe hit points and skill bonuses are determined by character level and what classes you have
• If you're single class, that's enough: just write down your single class
• If you decide to multiclass, then you start writing down class levels
• Your first multiclass level might result in the following: Warrior -1/Mage -4
  This means that you haven't advanced your warrior abilities at all for that level, but you have the abilities of a mage four levels lower than your character level.
  At your next level-up, you can either progress to Warrior -2/Mage -2, or stay at Warrior -1/Mage -4. After Warrior -2/Mage -2 you could level to Warrior -3/Mage -2 and then Warrior -4/Mage -1. This is a wart, but I'm trying to keep the characters from ever losing abilities.
• Multiclassing a third time would result in something like Warrior -3/Mage -2/Thief -4. After that it gets ugly and I haven't figured it out.

Although front-loading and dead levels still encourage branching out, 'dipping' is not a possibility. On the other hand, if a 3e ranger/fighter/barbarian had it good, the same character in this system will have it even better. Prestige classes work by assuming at least a 2-level hit, and don't grant lower-level abilities. That makes life easier for players who don't want to write down 5,000,000 things because they've multiclassed.

[Bigode]

I know that sounds like a hackjob (because, well, it is), but I've seriously considered the following:

- level-dependant calculations always use character level;
- when leveling up, choose a class level up to your character level in any class;
- you get whatever the class got at exactly that level;
- if any benefit requires a previous one that you don't have to actually work, default to that one;
- go fractional on base progressions.

So, spells are gotten totally piecemeal, while, say, greater rage defaults back to rage.

I also have a sphere sorcerer experiment in the works.

[Calibron]

Here's a totally unfleshed out idea!

Spells per day and caster level both scale with class level, however, you only get to learn spells and use special casting abilities(such as spontaneous casting) based on your actual Wizard/Sorc level. So a Sorc 4/Fighter4 would know 6 0 level spells, 3 1st level spells, and 1 2nd level spell, but would have 5 3rd level spell slots and 3 4th level spell slots in addition to their 6 0, 1st, and 2nd level spell slots; and would have a caster level of 8. They'd have to rely on metamagic to get the full use out of those higher level slots. Also they'd only be able to cast a total of 3 levels of spells spontaneously; meaning they could choose to either cast their 3rd level spells spontaneously and prepare the rest, or cast their 1st and 2nd level spells spontaneously, and prepare levels 3 and 4. Though that last part is quite possibly unnecessary. Same thing with the Cleric and their spontaneous cures, or the druid's spontaneous SNA; otherwise you could take one level of Druid and spontaneously cast SNA I-IX without penalty. Not to mention the even more abusable situation of the Dread Necro or the Beguiler.

Oh yes, and you'd have to restrict wizards from successfully scribing anything their wizards levels wouldn't allow them to cast of course.

[ckafrica]

I suppose then we could have fighter "spells" that are cool limited use abilities like

Spiral of death
lvl 3 fighter

Duration Instantaneous
range 20ft radius based from caster
Save: Ref for 1/2
SR NO

You rush out in a spiral striking all in your path with a flurry of blows each opponent takes a standard strike + 1d6/2lvls unless the save in which case they take half.

[Psychic Robot]

I lol'd.

[JonSetanta]

I'd rather that all supernatural physics-spanking effects depend on character level.
For all abilities, be they psionic, magic, fartpowered, maneuvers, binding, shadowstuffing, truename, whatever, it comes off of your total levels.

However, and here's the catch, your best abilities and variety thereof depends on the number of levels of your best class.
But somehow there must still be a way to prevent the dilemma of the poor ol' Fighter 10/Wizard 10 with no access to Wish, Gate, or any maneuver past SL5.
But pardon my divergence from a class-focused discussion, once more I hold the ideal that the best solution IMHO is a system combining all classes into one.
No class differences, no separate progressions, no problem.

[NoDot]

I've been looking at a classless system myself. Every level, you take two more "talents"-abilities which scale by level.

Unfortunately, I'm sorta having trouble figuring out how many abilities should be handed out per talent.

[Ice9]

I think it'd be possible to combine a unified system with relatively strong classes - although I'm not saying strong classes are necessary.

You'd have a unified progression, and be able to pick talents from any list, as mentioned above (although some talents could have prerequisites).

To give the classes some identity, you get a starting package, which is a combination of skills, talents, and possibly feats. This is all stuff you could pick up manually if you were so inclined - the starting package just gives you a bunch at once, and you only get one starting package. To give the classes exclusivity, you could state that your highest level talents must come from your starting-package class.


So for example, if you can have, two 5th, two 4th, and two 3rd level talents readied at once, then a Wizard would need to pick arcane talents for the 5th level ones, but could pick from any pool for the rest.

This handles "primary/secondary" multiclassing pretty well, but for "even split" multiclassing, you may want to do something different, like preparing half your highest level talents from one class and half from the other.

[ckafrica]

I'm all in favour of getting rid of classes. Too many times I've sat around scratching my head because I'm not really fitting my idea into any of the classes available.

What I'd really like to see is the game tiered so that you could play a low fantasy, mid fantasy or crazy fantasy all on the same basic engine, but just changing the abilities available

[CatharzGodfoot]

The point was to facilitate multiclassing, not to eliminate it

[Username17]

The point was to facilitate multiclassing, not to eliminate it

Yeah, that was the 4e plan until they crapped out and decided that it was too much work to make work.

Step One: give everyone a static character level driven set of power slots of various types.

Step Two: give each selectable power a set of class/level restrictions so that people of different class combinations play differently.

Step Three: give each class a relatively minor but applicable and flavorful power at each level.

Step Four: let players go nuts and take any class levels they want in any order, confident in the knowledge that no matter what they do they will be allowed to throw some kind of 8th tier effect when they get to 15th level.

---

4e was throwing that around for quite a while as the solution to multiclassing, which in essence it is. Then they determined that it was too much work and they'd rather go back to rails and essentially went to no multiclassing.

---

Of course at this point I genuinely think one is better off ditching the classes altogether from that equation because they no longer serve their original function of speeding up character creation and advancement. You should just let players go nuts with the ability selection chart and provide "classes" which are pre-selected ability lists so that character generation can be done quickly and decently without combing through the whole book every time you want to create or advance a PC or NPC.

-Username17

[JonSetanta]

Hm. Ice9 has a good concept there; readied talents.
One could theoretically switch out class features between battles or even in combat.
Swap between "Fighter maneuvers" and "Wizard spells" modes, for instance.
A quick recitation or battlecry or some weird mystical change of outfit or form and voila, you have yourself multiple casters within one character, but not at the same time.
The ability uses can be shared with the same per-whatever slots but access to abilities is rationed out to "x changes per hour/encounter/day".

And starting packages are a must for classless. Most basic archetypes could be provided.
My girlfriend pointed that out years ago when I began the (partially abandoned) quest for d20 classless.
Taking after a similar yet non-d20 classless game, GURPS, providing templates for premade concepts are a blessing to players both noob and pro.

Catharz: woops! Looks like I've trolled up another classless riot.

But it is a valid, common complaint that there are simply too many classes in D&D, and I don't expect WOTC to get it right in 4e either. They'll start out small at first, sure, but then they keep adding on like a sprawling suburb.
Then the trashy classes move in and fuck the whole place up with their hootin n' hollerin, drug trade, crime, and demonic rock music.

Too many cooks, broth, spoiled, etc.
I've been struggling with alternatives to the multiple-casters problem for years and to this day have yet to see any one overwhelmingly good or effective "facilitation", sorry.

[NoDot]

I think it'd be possible to combine a unified system with relatively strong classes - although I'm not saying strong classes are necessary.

You'd have a unified progression, and be able to pick talents from any list, as mentioned above (although some talents could have prerequisites).

To give the classes some identity, you get a starting package, which is a combination of skills, talents, and possibly feats. This is all stuff you could pick up manually if you were so inclined - the starting package just gives you a bunch at once, and you only get one starting package. To give the classes exclusivity, you could state that your highest level talents must come from your starting-package class.

I don't really agree with the super first level.

A while back, I was going to use "classes," although they were more like the classes from d20 Modern-one class for each stat. You'd take two per level in a quasi-gestalt. Each level in the class, you'd pick a talent off of the list of talents available to that class. Some would have prerequisites, but I was considering not doing so, because they must be on the same power level or either (1) they aren't worth taking, or (2) you're shooting yourself in the foot if you don't take them. I was also going to add PrCs (even more limited selections and a limited number of levels, requiring you to pick no more than X talents from the list out of Y possibilities-unless you took the local equivalent of the RoW Fighter's Problem Solver), but they suffer from the same problems as the talents with prerequisites above.

I was also going to use the "classes" to determine the saves/BAB/skills, but Frank suggested I not do that, hence why I killed the "classes" completely. Your comments made me rethink that decision, but after typing out the problems with prerequisites above, I've decided not to bring them back.

[JonSetanta]

On a similar note, the 4e/SAGA concept of a universal save progression with only a tiny boost from the classes themselves (1/2 level +2 for specific classes) was a welcome change from the mess of 3.x saves.

In retrospect I'm shocked that I put up with 3.x save combinations at all, nor could I think of much better.
In my old d20 classless notes from years ago there was something similar to the 4e shared slots concept and universal saves, but it looks like I had abandoned it in favor of something closer to a numerical character point system like d20 Anime (the BESM d20 adaptation)

It's my theory that the ultimate product of all RPG characters is to reach a similar yet unique destination.
From peasant-like incompetence to warrior, thief, or mage to some form of heroic hybrid that "steps on the toes of other classes" to some form of all-round excellent character to demigod.
Spellcasters, for instance, use spells that grant them the abilities of other classes.
Rogues and rogue-likes use UMD to emulate spellcasting.
Warriors splash exotic supernatural PrCs or spell-like maneuvers to achieve competency.
By the upper levels, all characters resemble each other in terms of the range of ability. Those that refuse such 'meshing of archetypes' are left behind, weak, such as a single classed Fighter.

So for a classless character, IMO the objective should be to (as in 4e) decide which level 'tiers' will determine the range of ability, from very specific in a single archetype (1-10), dual archetype (a toe-stepping 11-20), and finally the Outsider-like "I can do almost anything but this is what I'm best at" tier (21-30)

[Username17]

Ties in to the 4e design concept of the "sweet spot." The concept is that your number variance (and thus the "feel" of the game) can only change or stay the same as levels increase. If it changes then one is tempted to ask why, if the new set of numerical comparisons is good, did the game not simply start with those numbers. If it stays the same, one is tempted to ask why one bothers having advancement at all.

Assuming for the moment that you have a way that you want combat to work, a set of attack bonuses/defenses comparisons that you like, then as characters level up you would want them to get bonuses to their attacks and defenses evenly and equally. Under such a circumstance, all variance would be expected to be achieved at first level. After that, everyone gets the same bonuses and the characters don't become better or worse than each other relatively speaking as levels progress.

Assuming for the moment that you want higher levels of play to "feel different" than lower levels of play, you'll be handing out different bonuses to people. Higher level characters will be essentially gaining and losing abilities as numbers reassign themselves. If your ability to trip opponents does not gain bonuses as fast as enemy defenses rise, then you are essentially losing the ability to trip (just as other characters are essentially gaining trip immunity).

It's not an easy question to answer because it is so predicated on preference. It is easier to design a game with divergent bonuses, but harder to design a good game with them, if you know what I mean.

-Username17

[ckafrica]

I'd like to have a game where there was clearly defined tiers think of them as "rock the neighborhood" "rock the country" and "rock the world" (with a possible "rock the megaverse" if people really want it)with each indicating the relevance of your character's capabilities to a scale of achievement. I'd be happy if these were really the only "levels" we had. You could accrue powers with each tier over time but they would increase your options rather than strictly power.

Each tier should would be completely playable on its own without entering the other ones. You wouldn't even want to really mix them but you would progress to a higher one as a quantum leap experience. For example: you have been working hard to become heros of Smallville and after you have finally crushed the BBEG you get a tap on the shoulder from the local baron to help him out with problems facing the whole region. Boom you've now gone from rocking the neighborhood to the country and now have access to level appropriate abilities as you leave smallville to deal with greater things.

The way I would see it is abilities would all have tier appropriate stats so nothing you had would become useless and you could add new abilities that are only available at certain tiers that would not be appropriate at lower ones.

Thoughts?