D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5 rumor?] Multiclassing getting "powered up"?

[RigaMortus2]

I heard a rumor that WotC is going to redo how multiclassing works because they feel it is weaker than playing a class straight up. For example, a level 8 Wizard is much more powerful than a Wizard 4 / Fighter 4. I'm not sure exactly what changes were talked about, I don't really have specifics.

Can anyone confirm that they are redoing anything with multiclassing?

 

[LokiDR]

I believe this is an issue to be delt with in prestige classes, ala the Arcane Trickster or Mystic Thurge. I don't think many would call those weak.

 

[niteshade6]

I suspect that they aren't changing multiclassing itself, but they are providing prestige classes that are great for multiclassed characters, like the mystic theurge, arcane trickster and eldritch knight. We don't know what the knight looks like yet but the other two certainly dramaticaly increase the strength of the aproporiate classes.

I doubt they would change multiclassing in general, because it is extremely strong already. It's just not good for spellcasters in most cases, which seem to be the classes benefiting from the prestige classes.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Right, multiclassing is VERY strong for melee types. Take one level of Barbarian, two of Rogue, two of Fighter, one of Ranger, and you're set. You're far more capable than someone who just went Fighter 6.

Besides, to the original post: a Wizard 8 is superior to a Wizard 4/Fighter 4 at spellcasting, but the multiclasser is better in combat (hint: he's a Bard under another name). In general, though, even-split multiclassing isn't that much fun. You'd be better off either going Wizard 7/Fighter 1 or Fighter 7/Wizard 1, IMO.

 

[bret]

I suspect that they aren't changing multiclassing itself, but they are providing prestige classes that are great for multiclassed characters, like the mystic theurge, arcane trickster and eldritch knight. We don't know what the knight looks like yet but the other two certainly dramaticaly increase the strength of the aproporiate classes.

I doubt they would change multiclassing in general, because it is extremely strong already. It's just not good for spellcasters in most cases, which seem to be the classes benefiting from the prestige classes.

Which really doesn't fix the problem. What it causes people to do it take a PrC just because they are running a multiclass character.

Lets take an example from a recent conversation I had with another player. We are part of a Sea campaign. Certain skills (balance, use rope, climb) tend to have more use than normal. Any character without balance is going to have trouble in a storm.

So if you are building a sea mage (an arcane spellcaster that spends most of his time on a boat), you look at taking Arcane Trickster just to add these skills to your class skill list.

Do you really want people taking a PrC just to work around a weakness in the normal rules?

 

[LokiDR]

Which really doesn't fix the problem. What it causes people to do it take a PrC just because they are running a multiclass character.

Lets take an example from a recent conversation I had with another player. We are part of a Sea campaign. Certain skills (balance, use rope, climb) tend to have more use than normal. Any character without balance is going to have trouble in a storm.

So if you are building a sea mage (an arcane spellcaster that spends most of his time on a boat), you look at taking Arcane Trickster just to add these skills to your class skill list.

Do you really want people taking a PrC just to work around a weakness in the normal rules?

I don't think you are really talking about the same thing. You don't really want a rogue, you want a small portion of it: the skills. The solution: recall that your class skills are all the skills from ALL your classes, but when you level you purchase some skills cheaper than others. A Wiz 6 Rog 1 has max ranks of 10 in any rogue or wizard class skill, no matter when they took the rogue level. With the high int and few usefull skills of a wizard, you might lag behind on skills, but no more than you should (focusing more on magic).

Also, D&D doesn't translate into other situations very well, and this might be one. Does every sailor have sneak attack? But rogue fits for skills. Maybe a new class is in order. You a spellcaster? Well maybe there should be a "sea legs" spell to help you out on ship. After a few levels, you could make an hour/level spell last all day between extend and multiple castings. They have skills, you have spells. Also, feats such as the FRCS cosomopolitan and educated can keep you from bothering with the rogue level at all. Spend a few feats, perhaps one you invent, and the skill situation is back to managable.

Multiclassing isn't the only solution for characters slightly out of concept, especially where spell-casters are concerned.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Which really doesn't fix the problem. What it causes people to do it take a PrC just because they are running a multiclass character.

Lets take an example from a recent conversation I had with another player. We are part of a Sea campaign. Certain skills (balance, use rope, climb) tend to have more use than normal. Any character without balance is going to have trouble in a storm.

So if you are building a sea mage (an arcane spellcaster that spends most of his time on a boat), you look at taking Arcane Trickster just to add these skills to your class skill list.

Do you really want people taking a PrC just to work around a weakness in the normal rules?

If the rules aren't the reason you take a PrC, then why are you taking it? Why not just declare your character a gladiator and build him however you feel?

PrC's provide slightly more specialised rules for unusual character concept. Whether that concept is "a warrior who fights in front of a crowd", or "someone who is a fusion of a cleric and a wizard", doesn't change a thing. Each should be able to make an effective character.