character multiclassing [Archive] - Wizards Community

character multiclassing [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
dudewhere'smydie
06-27-04, 01:03 PM this subject grew out of a monk/barbarian speed stack? thread.

i'm interested to know what house rules people have developed to allow/explain character multiclassing. ie : specific amount of in game training, skill prereqs, character lifestyle etc.

also aside from the obvious alignment restrictions, are there any multiclassing combinations you've disallowed/discouraged?

i've heard a lot of arguments that people wouldn't let someone 'go' barbarian for instance, making it more of a sub-race.
CzarGarrett
06-27-04, 01:19 PM I prefer to have people take Barbarian, Sorcerer, and Psi-classes only at 1st level. It just seems like they are all "natural", whereas anyone can learn how to fight or cast spells from a book, or meditate properly.

I also prefer it that rogue class is not taken at level 1. It just seems wrong if at like level 1, you're talking to a local lord or something, and he asks what each person does.
Fighter: I'm a fighter who's good with a sword
Wiz/Sorc: I'm a arcane spell caster with a wicked spell penetration
Cleric/Druid: I am a holy man, able to bring light into the dark
Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks.
It just seems as if the lord might not be too keen on that. At least with 1 other class besides rogue, they can cover well enough.
Limit
06-27-04, 01:42 PM Personally in my campaigns, I like to follow the rules as written.

Monks/paladin who take levels in another class can't take more monk/paladin levels unless it is the PRC that allows it or they take the appropriate feat which allows them to multiclass more freely.

Alignment retrictions are always in place and if a character changes alignment, they lose the abilities of a class as written in the rules.

I don't know, I personally find it more enjoyable to let my players go by the rules, so I don't have to worry about making the wrong decision:

"You can't take a level of barbarian now because you already know how to read."

"But you let Billy take a level of barbarian 4 years and 6 months ago!"
fanpythonmonty
06-27-04, 01:50 PM Originally posted by CzarGarrett

I also prefer it that rogue class is not taken at level 1. It just seems wrong if at like level 1, you're talking to a local lord or something, and he asks what each person does.
Fighter: I'm a fighter who's good with a sword
Wiz/Sorc: I'm a arcane spell caster with a wicked spell penetration
Cleric/Druid: I am a holy man, able to bring light into the dark
Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks.
It just seems as if the lord might not be too keen on that. At least with 1 other class besides rogue, they can cover well enough.

:rofl:
A similar incident happened in my group on our last campaign, I played a Rogue and another member of the group was introducing us all to whoever it was and point out my career. My response was something to the effect of "Gee thanks for pointing out I like to steal stuff to a guy who has a lot of stuff to steal." I think in the future if I want to do another rogue I'll start off with Bard and multiclass with Rogue--that's a really good combo. I like Swashbuckler/Rogue as well.

BTW, my DM is working on a new campaign with limitations on multi-classing--specifically anyone whose first class uses magic, basically can't multi-class with another type of magic user, there are a few exceptions. It's an interesting idea.
dudewhere'smydie
06-27-04, 02:02 PM i'd like to hear more about those house rules as they develop, that's the kind of stuff i'm interested in. let us know how it works out?
Luminous Crayon
06-27-04, 02:07 PM Originally posted by CzarGarrett
Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks.
Rogue does not equal thief. You can be a rogue and not steal things, break laws, or knife people in the alley. Remember that your character's class is not the same as your character's job.

Besides, if this rogue you speak of can't even lie well enough to fool a stupid king, he deserves what's coming to him. ;)
Stuntman
06-27-04, 06:45 PM Originally posted by Luminous Crayon
Rogue does not equal thief.

I am in total agreement here. One of the best changes 3E made to the classes is to remove the "thief" stigma from the original thief class (now the rogue). One of my 3E rogue characters did not have open lock, sleight of hand or disable device.

Anyway, back to the topic, I don't really require much in terms of training and stuff in order for a PC to multiclass. I do not find multiclassing to be so unbalancing such that I need to make it hard to multiclass. I just assume that over the course of the PC's life history, either during down time in between adventures or in the character's background before level 1, that he spent some time training or developed the abilities of his new class. My players are pretty good at developing reasonable back stories regarding why he is multiclassed (if he is multiclassed) that I need not police multiclassing at all.
JoshRodriguez
06-28-04, 11:30 AM In general I follow the rules as written. DnD isn't about realism, it's about unusual characters performing extraordinary acts of heroism or villainy. They don't have to follow the norms and rules like "you don't suddenly go from monk to barbarian" can be suspended in their case.

If you're going to rule that your characters can't multiclass into certain classes because that class SOUNDS more like something that takes a certain amount of preperation, cultural indoctrination, or just plain genetics to get into, then ban multiclassing altogether. It doesn't make any more sense for a guy that's been studying musty old books in a cramped tower for the past three years to suddenly get the ability to use 48 different weapons and ride a horse then it does for a guy who's been living in a monastery for the past three years to suddenly go native and abandon his lawful outlook. The whole level system is an incredibley simplistic abstraction of what REALLY goes into being a fighter, mage, or what have you. It wasn't designed to be realistic, merely consistant. That's all that matters.

That being said, however, I hate munchkinism and generally make my players give me a good RP-related reason for suddenly changing from one class to a radically different one. And, since I'm the one in charge of their alignment shifts, I make them earn it. :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
dudewhere'smydie 06-27-04, 01:03 PM	this subject grew out of a monk/barbarian speed stack? thread. i'm interested to know what house rules people have developed to allow/explain character multiclassing. ie : specific amount of in game training, skill prereqs, character lifestyle etc. also aside from the obvious alignment restrictions, are there any multiclassing combinations you've disallowed/discouraged? i've heard a lot of arguments that people wouldn't let someone 'go' barbarian for instance, making it more of a sub-race.
CzarGarrett 06-27-04, 01:19 PM	I prefer to have people take Barbarian, Sorcerer, and Psi-classes only at 1st level. It just seems like they are all "natural", whereas anyone can learn how to fight or cast spells from a book, or meditate properly. I also prefer it that rogue class is not taken at level 1. It just seems wrong if at like level 1, you're talking to a local lord or something, and he asks what each person does. Fighter: I'm a fighter who's good with a sword Wiz/Sorc: I'm a arcane spell caster with a wicked spell penetration Cleric/Druid: I am a holy man, able to bring light into the dark Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks. It just seems as if the lord might not be too keen on that. At least with 1 other class besides rogue, they can cover well enough.
Limit 06-27-04, 01:42 PM	Personally in my campaigns, I like to follow the rules as written. Monks/paladin who take levels in another class can't take more monk/paladin levels unless it is the PRC that allows it or they take the appropriate feat which allows them to multiclass more freely. Alignment retrictions are always in place and if a character changes alignment, they lose the abilities of a class as written in the rules. I don't know, I personally find it more enjoyable to let my players go by the rules, so I don't have to worry about making the wrong decision: "You can't take a level of barbarian now because you already know how to read." "But you let Billy take a level of barbarian 4 years and 6 months ago!"
fanpythonmonty 06-27-04, 01:50 PM	Originally posted by CzarGarrett I also prefer it that rogue class is not taken at level 1. It just seems wrong if at like level 1, you're talking to a local lord or something, and he asks what each person does. Fighter: I'm a fighter who's good with a sword Wiz/Sorc: I'm a arcane spell caster with a wicked spell penetration Cleric/Druid: I am a holy man, able to bring light into the dark Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks. It just seems as if the lord might not be too keen on that. At least with 1 other class besides rogue, they can cover well enough. :rofl: A similar incident happened in my group on our last campaign, I played a Rogue and another member of the group was introducing us all to whoever it was and point out my career. My response was something to the effect of "Gee thanks for pointing out I like to steal stuff to a guy who has a lot of stuff to steal." I think in the future if I want to do another rogue I'll start off with Bard and multiclass with Rogue--that's a really good combo. I like Swashbuckler/Rogue as well. BTW, my DM is working on a new campaign with limitations on multi-classing--specifically anyone whose first class uses magic, basically can't multi-class with another type of magic user, there are a few exceptions. It's an interesting idea.
dudewhere'smydie 06-27-04, 02:02 PM	i'd like to hear more about those house rules as they develop, that's the kind of stuff i'm interested in. let us know how it works out?
Luminous Crayon 06-27-04, 02:07 PM	Originally posted by CzarGarrett Rogue: I'm a thief who hides in shadows and opens locks. Rogue does not equal thief. You can be a rogue and not steal things, break laws, or knife people in the alley. Remember that your character's class is not the same as your character's job. Besides, if this rogue you speak of can't even lie well enough to fool a stupid king, he deserves what's coming to him. ;)
Stuntman 06-27-04, 06:45 PM	Originally posted by Luminous Crayon Rogue does not equal thief. I am in total agreement here. One of the best changes 3E made to the classes is to remove the "thief" stigma from the original thief class (now the rogue). One of my 3E rogue characters did not have open lock, sleight of hand or disable device. Anyway, back to the topic, I don't really require much in terms of training and stuff in order for a PC to multiclass. I do not find multiclassing to be so unbalancing such that I need to make it hard to multiclass. I just assume that over the course of the PC's life history, either during down time in between adventures or in the character's background before level 1, that he spent some time training or developed the abilities of his new class. My players are pretty good at developing reasonable back stories regarding why he is multiclassed (if he is multiclassed) that I need not police multiclassing at all.
JoshRodriguez 06-28-04, 11:30 AM	In general I follow the rules as written. DnD isn't about realism, it's about unusual characters performing extraordinary acts of heroism or villainy. They don't have to follow the norms and rules like "you don't suddenly go from monk to barbarian" can be suspended in their case. If you're going to rule that your characters can't multiclass into certain classes because that class SOUNDS more like something that takes a certain amount of preperation, cultural indoctrination, or just plain genetics to get into, then ban multiclassing altogether. It doesn't make any more sense for a guy that's been studying musty old books in a cramped tower for the past three years to suddenly get the ability to use 48 different weapons and ride a horse then it does for a guy who's been living in a monastery for the past three years to suddenly go native and abandon his lawful outlook. The whole level system is an incredibley simplistic abstraction of what REALLY goes into being a fighter, mage, or what have you. It wasn't designed to be realistic, merely consistant. That's all that matters. That being said, however, I hate munchkinism and generally make my players give me a good RP-related reason for suddenly changing from one class to a radically different one. And, since I'm the one in charge of their alignment shifts, I make them earn it. :)