D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5e] A fix for free weapons from multiclassing?

[SevenSir]

I've got a great DM who's been doing this stuff for years and can run a campaign with his eyes closed, and I just love playing in his amazingly well-developed world.

The only trouble with his campaigns is that he has a great deal of taste for the epic (not level 21+. Just, you know, important) and that makes the adventures take a long time. As is common with DMs, he doesn't dispense XP until the end of the campaign. It's not unusual for us to run through several dozen encounters in one of these campaigns, and we surely have enough XP to level. At the end of the one we're just starting, I expect to hear: "OK guys, you all level up." But I'll know that if he'd let us level mid-campaign we'd have leveled twice or three times.

So when I run my own fledgeling campaign in my nascent world, I level my guys as soon as possible when ever their XP hits the threshold. Of course they can't level in the dungeon, but I may tell them as they exit "After having disarmed the poison-gas barrell trap and leaving the underground facility with your lives and a big sack of loot, you feel more confident about your abilities. You've encountered things you've never seen before, and dealt with them effectively. Also, you've all been paralyzed at least twice."

They may well still be in the middle of the epic (again, not level 21+) adventure I'm running, but they can level and use their new abilities to help them continue in their quest.

If a character has to go more than 14 encounters without leveling, he's probably had enough time to examine all of his character's capabilities, and is ready to level up and play with new abilities.

 

[magnas_veritas]

A common house rule is limiting the sneak attack ability to rogue weapons. It might help in this case.

So, under this house rule, I can hit someone in a vital area with a club, but not a kukri? That makes no sense.

Brad

 

[Hypersmurf]

In my game, the ranger died in the round that he landed the critical that forced the dragon to flee.

I knew the dragon was worth enough XP that the cleric would level... so when he used the scroll of Raise Dead on the ranger right after the combat, I told him to count his Caster Level as 5, rather than 4, for the caster level check.

Which was just as well, because otherwise, he would have muffed it by one point.

It doesn't bother me that they aren't doing any formal training. The sorcerer every now and then mentions that before he goes to bed, he tries to cast a fireball. He's been doing that since level 4. So it's not going to seem "sudden" when he hits level 6 and can actually pull it off.

-Hyp.

 

[bret]

In DnD, the only way to improve at skills and abilities is leveling. Not leveling means that the characters aren't learning from their experiences.

I find it hard to believe when a group of characters goes through a lot of encounters which test their abilities yet don't learn anything from it. Suddenly, they drop the McGuffin in the Magical Flag Station and *BOOM*, they level.

If someone gets trapped in a swamp without enough supplies, there is a good chance that they will either die or learn a little bit of Wilderness Lore. If someone who has had weapons training suddenly finds himself having to use it against someone who is trying to kill him, it is quite likely they will either die or find practical applications for all those lessons.

The point is that in many cases, it makes sense for the characters to learn stuff as a result of the adventure they are on. Not allowing them to level causes the characters to be too static and inflexible.

In my opinion, the best method would be slow and continuous growth of abilities as they are used or trained in. Unfortunately, the DnD rules don't lend themselves to this style very well.

 

[Darklone]

This borders houserules area... but most DMs have to "house"rule this anyways.

Wulf Ratbane IIRC or PKitty did it like this: As soon as you get the XPs for the next level, your BAB, hitpoints and saves go up. Considering I see XPs as kinda soul power, that's my logic too.

Skills go up everytime you use a skill successfully. Feats... depends on the feat. New spells: Vision ... or something similar... or a meditative experience for wizards.

As for PCs in a time dependant campaign: I have that too right now. But they have to travel long distances, e.g. the wizard has two weeks on a ship to scribe some new spells or scrolls.

 

[Chacal]

So, under this house rule, I can hit someone in a vital area with a club, but not a kukri? That makes no sense.

Brad

That doesn't make any less sense than fighter not being able to hit vital areas (except on criticals). Game balance and differentiation of classes lead to strange things, I believe.

I don't use kukri, so I don't really know what it's looking like. The rational (which I know comes from 2nd Ed, so sue me ) for this house rule is that a rogue is using its weapon differently than the fighter, and that the fighter training doesn't help him to use his knowledge on new weapons.

We allowed SA with longbows, given that it's not very different from shortbows. If a kukri is quite similar to a rogue weapon, why not. IMC, this hasn't caused issues, and actually lead the Ftr/rogues to adapt their weapon to the circumstances, which we found a good thing.



Chacal

 

[Darklone]

That doesn't make any less sense than fighter not being able to hit vital areas (except on criticals). Game balance and differentiation of classes lead to strange things, I believe.

I think it was Plane Sailings Dirty Fighting house ruled feat that essentially was a fighter bonus feat with Sneak attack +1d6, BAB +4 requirement...

 

[just__al]

It doesn't bother me that they aren't doing any formal training. The sorcerer every now and then mentions that before he goes to bed, he tries to cast a fireball. He's been doing that since level 4. So it's not going to seem "sudden" when he hits level 6 and can actually pull it off.

-Hyp.

It is when he fireballs his companions around a camp fire or burns down the inn...

 

[Saeviomagy]

Chacal - the fighter CAN lean to target his attacks to vital areas, along with learning some other facets of precision combat such as bluff and sense motive.

It's called taking a level of rogue.

It's not like he has to suddenly stop wearing armour, change his weapon, and rob everyone. He just picks up some new skills.

People really don't get that about multiclassing - you're not changing every facet of who you are, you're just learning to do something new, something you've (probably) been thinking of doing for some time.

 

[magnas_veritas]

That doesn't make any less sense than fighter not being able to hit vital areas (except on criticals). Game balance and differentiation of classes lead to strange things, I believe.

As Saev said, they can take the level of rogue for this. Plus, the
fighter can do that if the target's helpless; it's called a coup de grace. Part of learning how to be a rogue is being able to target those vital areas when they're moving.

I don't use kukri, so I don't really know what it's looking like.

It's a funky-shaped dagger with an enhanced crit range. It requires an EWP to use without a penalty.

The rationale (which I know comes from 2nd Ed, so sue me ) for this house rule is that a rogue is using its weapon differently than the fighter, and that the fighter training doesn't help him to use his knowledge on new weapons.

My lawyer will be calling your lawyer. ;-) (Sorry, I always wanted to say that.)

The problem with saying that different classes use their weapons in a different way is that it's just not true. A given weapon is used in a given way by any proficient user; differences in style are either meaningless in game terms, or require a feat or two to pay for. The ability of the character to hit with the weapon varies on how good he is at that sort of thing, measured by base attack, attributes, and feats.

There's no reason that I can't use my class abilities with any weapon I'm proficient with, unless something in the class or weapon description clearly states that I cannot.

We allowed SA with longbows, given that it's not very different from shortbows. If a kukri is quite similar to a rogue weapon, why not. IMC, this hasn't caused issues, and actually lead the Ftr/rogues to adapt their weapon to the circumstances, which we found a good thing.

So, if a longbow is similar to a shortbow, why can't I sneak attack with a greatclub? That's not that different from a club, and I can sneak attack with that.

The fighter/rogues in our campaign (like, say, me) can and do vary their weapons based on circumstances; I switch between a bastard sword, an elven thinblade, and a pair of shortswords based on the situation and what I feel like doing at that time. The other usually runs around with a wand as his primary armament (though he's Str 10, so that makes a world of difference).

Brad