Multi-classing in DCC RPG?

[joela]

Will there be rules in the book? Or wait until the first supp?

[goodmangames]

Maybe. I actually had a set of multi-class rules written, but I trashed them. With consistent XP tables by class, multi-classing is conceptually easy. Then I decided I preferred different XP tables by class. That makes multi-classing more complex. I need to revisit those rules one of these days. Multi-class rules really require long-term campaign play to get "just right" so I'll need to evaluate them over the coming months with actual play.

[fireinthedust]

Different XP is a nightmare for the GM, or can be. I get the balance issues, just saying.


Would Elric be multiclass, or are you going to allow Wizards to use swords (like Elric and Gandalf)?

[JRR]

I really hope there's a multiclass mechanic. I love multiclassing in 1e and detest it in 3e. a 1e fighter mage kicks ass. A 3e one, eh, not so much. A high level eldritch knight is okay, but it sucks to level one.

[Machpants]

I hope there is multiclassing, or at least enough class flexibility to not really require it. And I disgree with you JRR, I loathe Fighter/Magic Users in 1E and 3E, in 1E it is far too OP in 3E the opposite. What you need is some semblance of balance.

[Hamel™]

I hope there is multiclassing, or at least enough class flexibility to not really require it. And I disgree with you JRR, I loathe Fighter/Magic Users in 1E and 3E, in 1E it is far too OP in 3E the opposite. What you need is some semblance of balance.

In addition, IMHO there's should be a some difference between being a fighter with magic and a wizard with sword.

1E usually tends to build a too plain character (neither meat nor fish), while in 3E the only purpose for multiclassing is mainly to achieve some requisites for a Prestige Class.

[Ravenheart87]

Different XP is a nightmare for the GM, or can be. I get the balance issues, just saying.


Would Elric be multiclass, or are you going to allow Wizards to use swords (like Elric and Gandalf)?

Elric would be a member of the Elf class.

[fireinthedust]

Different XP is a nightmare for the GM, or can be. I get the balance issues, just saying.


Would Elric be multiclass, or are you going to allow Wizards to use swords (like Elric and Gandalf)?

Elric would be a member of the Elf class.

(sounds of gurgling, quivering limbs, and fumes heating up to the red) Noooooo!

Come on, he's clearly human. It's D&D artists who add the pointy ears. He's an "older form" of humans, and strange due to their supposedly natural talent for the dark arts (or something), but he's still human... or, at least, not an elf.


I like 3e multiclassing, compared to 2e. The dual-class/multi-class options were frustrating. Power gamers always took two: dwarven fighter-clerics, and mage-anythings. 3e was a logical breath of fresh air: not only could any race take any class, but they needed to do it one level at a time.

The attempt at compromise is 4e, with the Feats (which is a dirty word on this project, for some reason; I like them, conceptually), and also with the PH2 multiclass option.

The reason I think we'd need some level of 3e-style multiclassing is so my Elf can pick up levels of some other class; or my dwarf can tinker with, say, the dark arts (not that he would; only if he wanted to...). It's also really handy for character development, and for strange concepts.

I'm DMing an E6 eldritch knight attempt. It's going fairly well so far. We're RL not PBP, so it's only taken a session or two to get the foundational class abilities; when she gets to level 6+feats, we'll be tweeking her BAB up, etc. Long story short, I don't mind it.
My pbp Eldritch Knight, however, is still level one; but we're on the second room of the campaign, so no surprise there.

[Ravenheart87]

Well, check out the OD&D and BD&D elf, and tell me, which one comes to your mind when you read about it's abilities: Legolas or Elric? The elf class is a good archetype to represent "ancient people" of sword & sorcery literature - melnibonéans, eldarin, vadhagh, high elves, stygians or even aliens. It's not the pointy ears, what make you elf, especially if we're talking about the classic elf class.

[Hamel™]

Come on, he's clearly human. It's D&D artists who add the pointy ears. He's an "older form" of humans, and strange due to their supposedly natural talent for the dark arts (or something), but he's still human... or, at least, not an elf.

Both Elves and Elric like Prada.. so Elric is an Elf.

BTW, I think Ravenheart87 wants to say that you can see Elf Class not as a Race Class but more like a Template Class: a bunch of things you're able to do.

From that point of view, Elric can do the same things an Elf can do: use magic (IMHO more divine than arcane) and sword at the same time.

[fireinthedust]

Stygians? Not so much (they're straight human wizards).

Prada: well, the devil wears prada... bought from the Bright Empire outlet!

[Harley Stroh]

Would Elric be multiclass, or are you going to allow Wizards to use swords (like Elric and Gandalf)?

Wizards can definitely use swords, but they aren't as effective as warriors. A warrior's might comes from what he can do with a weapon, as opposed to simply being the one class that gets to pick up the 1d8 weapon.

//H

[GnomeBoy]

Would Elric be multiclass, or are you going to allow Wizards to use swords (like Elric and Gandalf)?

Wizards can definitely use swords, but they aren't as effective as warriors. A warrior's might comes from what he can do with a weapon, as opposed to simply being the one class that gets to pick up the 1d8 weapon.

//H

And given that, plus the fact that your wizard could have a Strength higher than his Intelligence, he might be nearly as effective in melee as the warriors in the group (minus the feats of daring and strength)...

[finarvyn]

Stygians? Not so much (they're straight human wizards).

What? No gay wizards in DCC?

[JRR]

I hope there is multiclassing, or at least enough class flexibility to not really require it. And I disgree with you JRR, I loathe Fighter/Magic Users in 1E and 3E, in 1E it is far too OP in 3E the opposite. What you need is some semblance of balance.

1e needed some tweaking, I agree - elves in plate comes to mind - but it's far from overpowered, at least by the rules. It's incredibly hard to get off a spell of anything other than the very lowest levels. And they hit the level cap pretty fast.

[Hamakto]

I hope there is multiclassing, or at least enough class flexibility to not really require it. And I disgree with you JRR, I loathe Fighter/Magic Users in 1E and 3E, in 1E it is far too OP in 3E the opposite. What you need is some semblance of balance.

I do see where you are coming from. I always liked multi-classing in 1e. And due to the XP tables, you were only a level behind on overage. Different XP tables would change that dynamic.

But talking about the old does not help us along right now, so how about this for an idea.

Each character class in the rule book has two statistical blocks.

1. Primary class stat block - If you take this as a primary class, you get the full range of class abilities.
2. If it is taken as a secondary class - You get this sub-set of class abilities. This could be a short paragraph(s) at the end of the class that determines which class abilities are acquired. About 1/3 to 1/2 the class abilities would transfer over.

To multi-class, you pick a primary class... and then a secondary. Your take a 30% XP hist on all experience gained when you multi-class. This covers the additional experience necessary to acquire the secondary class.

The big point is that you do not acquire the full class abilities of the secondary class, but only a subset of the benefits and restrictions. This keeps things easy.

Example: One of our group members dream character... Stealth Fighter

Warrior is primary class for combat
Thief is secondary (to get hide, move silent, etc) But he would not have open locks, disarm traps, etc...

[geordie racer]

Interesting, but I'll stick with my opinion over on the Races as Classes thread, why not use backgrounds instead of builds. Otherwise it's just layering on more crunch.

[Hamel™]

Warrior is primary class for combat
Thief is secondary (to get hide, move silent, etc) But he would not have open locks, disarm traps, etc...

Kinda what happened in Guild Wars MMORPG, where you could stack 2 professions (retaining the Primary Attribute only for the primary profession, but not for the secondary).

[fireinthedust]

To multi-class, you pick a primary class... and then a secondary. Your take a 30% XP hist on all experience gained when you multi-class. This covers the additional experience necessary to acquire the secondary class.

If I did this, I'd want a separate XP rate for multiclass characters. Not everyone is good at math. Discalcula, for example, means that some players or potential players wouldn't want to worry about -30% every single time: they couldn't do it. As a GM I just want to say "you get 200xp" and leave it at that; or say "everyone is now level 4 after that boss fight", or so.

There's the basic package and a secondary, multiclass benefit. I like this, initially, in terms of how to stat a character "right now". If I were to do Elric it would be fine, as a warrior + mage benefits. Or Conan: warrior + thief benefits. This doesn't have a build-up-to-it option, though, so what you're saying is basically IF you're going to multi-class THEN you have to do it right at the start.

What if my Thief sees the light and wants to become a Paladin or Cleric? Or through the story my warrior befriends the elven queen and wants to take up some sorcery? Or my Barbarian falls in with some thieves and wants to pick up a Rogue skill or two?
This sort of thing is why skill ranks exist, and the 3e multiclassing rules.

I suppose a sort of compromise is to have "levels" of mage/thief, so my thief can be a thief 6, but for 7th level he takes Mage/Thief, so he gains the 1st level minor benefits of mage, and only some of the benefits of Thief go up (ie: he can pick 4 of the 6 thief traits, instead of boosting all 6). There could be a rule "you can only take multiclass levels based on your initial class (so mage/thief, fighter/thief, cleric/thief, but not fighter/mage)". This is still fairly restrictive, but it could be done.


Another option I've been thinking about: classic fantasy game trope of having one of the stats be "magic" and another be "fighting". Remember those old "choose your own" books, where you rolled dice alone, died a lot, and the game trusted you not to cheat? Yeah. Like that. Then, if you want to cast spells, you use your magic stat.
Likely won't work for this game (really it's a M&M concept, having no class whatsoever), but it is an option. Elric doesn't exactly fit standard D&D class models, nor does Grey Mouser (who, I vaguely recall, knew something about magic; need to check that). In theory everyone can swing a sword, everyone can attempt, say, rituals, but only masters of magic can fling spells or something.

[Hamakto]

To multi-class, you pick a primary class... and then a secondary. Your take a 30% XP hist on all experience gained when you multi-class. This covers the additional experience necessary to acquire the secondary class.

If I did this, I'd want a separate XP rate for multiclass characters. Not everyone is good at math. Discalcula, for example, means that some players or potential players wouldn't want to worry about -30% every single time: they couldn't do it. As a GM I just want to say "you get 200xp" and leave it at that; or say "everyone is now level 4 after that boss fight", or so.

That will be an issue anyway if each class has separate XP tables.

There's the basic package and a secondary, multiclass benefit. I like this, initially, in terms of how to stat a character "right now". If I were to do Elric it would be fine, as a warrior + mage benefits. Or Conan: warrior + thief benefits. This doesn't have a build-up-to-it option, though, so what you're saying is basically IF you're going to multi-class THEN you have to do it right at the start.

What if my Thief sees the light and wants to become a Paladin or Cleric? Or through the story my warrior befriends the elven queen and wants to take up some sorcery? Or my Barbarian falls in with some thieves and wants to pick up a Rogue skill or two?
This sort of thing is why skill ranks exist, and the 3e multiclassing rules.

Since there are no skill ranks in the game, this was my best idea at Multi-Classing (to keep it simple). One of my buddies did point out that C&C has something similar to this... they call it a Class and a Half (If I remember right).

I will have to admit that the 3e multi-class mechanic at first class sucked... but because of prestige classes, it did work and sorta balanced out (if the prestige class was balanced -- i.e. Eldridge Knight was very broken). Since from what I see (so far), there will not be Prestige classes in DCC RPG. I do not see how a 3e style Multi-Class system would work.

How about something like this? You can MC at any level, but you start at level 1 in that MC.

Example:

Thief gets to level 4 before deciding that he really needs to get better at fighting...

So when going to level five he MC's to Fighter. So he is a level Thief 5/Warrior 1

He consults the 'MC table' for the fighter class and determines that he gains X for being a warrior 1.

Now as he levels up with (the XP penalty), he levels up evenly in both classes. Thief 6/Warrior 2 --- at each level up he could gain a class ability from the Warrior MC table or he may not.

HP are still all based off the primary class.

If you want to add a 3rd class... go ahead. Take another 30% of your XP gained.

30% is just a base line number. It would all depend on how much of a class ability is gained from the MC table. If it is not too many class abilities, the penalty can be reduced to 15% or 20%.

I did think about just increasing the XP required for each level by 50% for each class. Numerically it works out the same as a 30% penalty (or very close --- 42% vs 50%). Plus at that point you can do one primary class and 5 secondary if you want... and it takes 2 1/2 times as much XP to make a level.

Not sure on how this will work out long term, I need to actually see the XP tables. (are they similar to 3e (more linear) or more like 1e where to exponentially grow faster)

Not to make this post any longer... but I will throw this out there as a bone.

Each class in the DCC RPG would have two types class abilities. Primary and Secondary. Primary abilities are those that define the class and make it totally unique. Secondary abilities would be those that the class has, but are not 100% unique to the class OR are of lesser abilities.

With this concept, a player could Multi-Class and drop a Primary class ability from his primary class to pick up a secondary class ability from another class. There would be no additional tracking of XP, multiple classes, etc...

Example:

Thief: Primary: Middle Combat Progression, Open Locks, Find Traps, Disarm Traps, Sneak Attack Secondary: Hide, Move Silently, Climb [there are others that I did not include]
Wizard: Primary: Low Combat Progression, High Level Casting, Magic Item Creation Secondary: Low Magic (cast spells of level 1-3?), Sage Knowledge
Warrior: Primary: High Combat Progression, MDA, HP bonus Secondary: All Armor Wearing, All weapon using, Increased Damage Dice w/ weapon, Climb

In this hypothetical example a Warrior wanted to multi class with Wizard. He decided he would give up the MDA to acquire the secondary Wizard ability of Low Magic.

This is a very rough idea, but it would allow you to dip outside of your class for a specific ability or set of abilities at the cost of a primary class ability. You lose your edge in your primary class to become more well rounded.

[geordie racer]

Except for the influence of backgrounds, alignment and more importantly -the way the player plays the character - I would prefer to stick to the archetypes. Rather than have a totally balanced do-it-all character, I think a balanced party is a better ideal to aim for. If you want to play another class - roll a new character up.

[Hamakto]

Except for the influence of backgrounds, alignment and more importantly -the way the player plays the character - I would prefer to stick to the archetypes. Rather than have a totally balanced do-it-all character, I think a balanced party is a better ideal to aim for. If you want to play another class - roll a new character up.

I agree with you about the one character do it all. But Multi-Classing does have a place in small gaming groups that do not want to run multiple characters. Most adventures really need the four base character types to solve all of the challenges. Multi-Classing lets you cover them if necessary... or when we do a new group, we always have backups just in case the main character does not make it (they do not play) or they go negative (i.e. backup medic to get the cleric back on his/her feet).

So Multi-Classes does have its place, but without seeing backgrounds and such it is hard to know how much it is needed.

[Black Dougal]

I like the way that Pathfinder RPG handles this. It still uses the 3.x multiclassing rules, but de-emphasizes them in favor of creating multiple classes with lots of flavor (see the PFRPG Advanced Player's Guide and the upcoming Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat). I think Elric would be the Magus class from the upcoming Ultimate Magic. Basically multiclassing is there only to flesh out interesting character concepts.

The way I do it in my C&C game is simple, and seems to work well for my players. The C&C PHB doesn't have multiclass rules, so I houseruled it. A player who wants to multiclass can pick any two or three classes for their character, but must distribute the XP evenly amongst each of their classes. The player can start at level 1 in each class and character generation. So, if I give a player 300 XP for an encounter and that player had three classes, each class gets 100 for the encounter.

[smathis]

Except for the influence of backgrounds, alignment and more importantly -the way the player plays the character - I would prefer to stick to the archetypes. Rather than have a totally balanced do-it-all character, I think a balanced party is a better ideal to aim for. If you want to play another class - roll a new character up.

Good point. But there are examples of cross-archetype characters in Appendix N. Grey Mouser is a Thief who does some magic once in a while. Conan is a Thief or a Fighter, depending on the story being told. Aragorn is perhaps the quintessential Ranger -- meaning a Skillful sort of Fighter.

So while I agree with the advice to stick to the archetypes, I also feel there should either be archetypes that cross the lines (like the Ranger/Skillful Fighter, the Paladin/Clericky Fighter, the Thief-Mage and the Mage-Fighter) or a simple way to multi-class.

Personally, I prefer the former option. Multiclassing has always been a little off to my tastes. I think I like C&C's Class and a Half rules the best. But they're still not perfect.

And depending on how complex the classes and experience progressions are, it may be a no-brainer to take half a Magic-user and half a Fighter and make a Fighting Magic-User.

[smathis]

I like the way that Pathfinder RPG handles this. It still uses the 3.x multiclassing rules, but de-emphasizes them in favor of creating multiple classes with lots of flavor (see the PFRPG Advanced Player's Guide and the upcoming Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat). I think Elric would be the Magus class from the upcoming Ultimate Magic. Basically multiclassing is there only to flesh out interesting character concepts.

This is more of the approach I'd prefer. Instead of allowing characters to take multiple classes, create classes that touch on different archetypes in more limited ways. I prefer this approach precisely for the "flavor" option that's largely absent, IME, from traditional multi-classing. It seems multi-classing, in my experience, is -- more often than not -- and exercise in character optimization than anything else.