Multiclassing & Saving Throw Proficiencies

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

Synjin

Dec 03, 2014 9:50:46

As it stands with RAW, as far as I can tell, your very first class chosen, is where your proficiency bonus to saving throws lie. For example, a Ranger2/Druid5 would have the saving throw proficiencies of the Ranger class, which is STR and DEX.

 

According to PHB #163-164, the proficiencies for multiclassing don't include adjustments to saving throws anywhere. There's weapon and armor lists. A few Skill lists, and then spells and spell slots.

 

My question is this. Over in this thread (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4166886), I mentioned a build of a Combat Medic. This PC is modeled after a modern military design. In said military, you go through Basic Training along with everyone else (Fighter class in D&D world), and then go on to your AIT and specialty MOS training after you've graduated Basic.

 

With the Fighter class being just the basics in this build and design, and the Cleric class being his speciality, I'm wondering what the concensus is on being allowed to change the saving throw proficiencies from Fighter (STR & CON), to Cleric (WIS & CHA)?

 

Seems like it falls under the "Makes sense" house-rule area of the game. My own ideas on the build and story aside, does it stand to reason that the class you most favor, the one that you have the most levels in, wouldn't that be the saves that you're most proficient in? Not gaining Proficiency from both classes in the Saves, but switching one set of two, for a different set.

 

Thoughts?

#2

mellored

Dec 03, 2014 10:09:48

The saving throw proficencies seem to be based on class flavor rather then any kind of balance factor.

i.e. Barbarians get Con saves because they are supposed to be tough.

 

So I don't see any reason to disallow it a different set.

#3

Stormborn20

Dec 03, 2014 10:17:17

Each class gets one out of CON, DEX, WIS and then one out of STR, INT, CHA.  If  a player had a solid reason for changing proficiencies around but remained within that framework, I'd be open to it.  I'd still be hesistant about giving a spellcaster CON proficiency, but I'd hear them out.

In your case, I don't see a problem.

#4

bonethug0108

Dec 03, 2014 11:09:07 		It won't break anything to change one good save to another good save and one "bad" save to another "bad" save. It's when you try to get two of one type that breaks it(too overpowered or too underpowered). So if your DM is cool with it I see no negative ramifications of your idea, especially since if you went cleric first it would be switched anyway. I'd allow a good to good and/or "bad" to "bad". I'd also allow a good to "bad" while explaining to the player what the implications are.
#5

Illithidbix

Dec 03, 2014 11:17:13

It makes multiclassing slightly better, if you're happy with that, do it.

 

Stormborn20 wrote:
#6

Sorxores

Dec 03, 2014 11:18:45

Synjin wrote:
(Reply to #6)

Coredump00

Sorxores wrote:
#8

guachi

Dec 04, 2014 14:37:41

You advance in levels so fast at first, you could just as easily start such a character at C1/F1 and say he has the saves of a Cleric. You only potentially lose out on heavy armor proficiency by taking Cleric as your first class. But it doesn't matter one bit if you take a Cleric specialty that grants heavy armor.

 

Given your build has the Cleric as a Life Cleric and he gets heavy armor at level 1 anyway, it's not like there is anything remotely like gaming the system with what you propose. If I were DM, I'd not only let you I'd think it was cool you had a concept first and then tried to fit the rules around it.