Multi-classing Variant

[Jeremehovah]

I have been talking a bit with a friend about a variation on how to handle multi-classing.  While it is for playing Spycraft 2.0, it could probably be applied to the other 3.x variations.
 
The basic idea is a bit retro, as it is how multi-classing was done in AD&D 1 and 2, in that you would spend xp towards each different class.  In Spycraft 2.0, level 1 costs 1000 XP in a class.  Basically just bump the XP cost down a level.  If you want to start a character at level 1, just give him 1000 xp and choose a base class and assign a level to it.  The Expert (Prestige) classes should probably cost more, but I could be wrong here (what do you guys think?).  I am thinking that the PrCs (or whatever they are called in the system that you are playing) should be doubled, so a 5-level class would spend 40,000 xp to get that 5th level.
 
The reason for this variation is that it can be quite lame if you have to wait a gajillion XP just to get another level, and each level is very precious if it is finite.  A single-classed character would be higher level as all XP is spent towards one class, but a multi-classed character would have lower levels, but more versatility overall.
 
Now, the question comes up about BAB, saves, Hit Points (Vitality Points) and whatever else is derived by making levels.  According to the 3.x model, they all stack.  Well, that is fine and dandy when your levels are more finite, but what I propose borrows a bit from the multiclass roots again.  Take the single highest value from levels, and then add half of the others.  Perhaps the PrC could do that as well, so that the highest value given from a PrC has its full value and the highest base class has its full value, and all others are halved (and rounded, probably up, but maybe down?).
 
The next question comes regarding Feats every 3 levels and an attribute bonus every 4 levels.  One way to do it is that you get a Feat for every 3 total levels, but that could really get munchkin as you get a lot of low levels in a lot of classes and stack up the feats.  Feats seem to be a dime a dozen anyway, so maybe that isn't so bad.  Another, more balanced way, is to take the total XP of the character and base it on the "Character Level" using the normal XP table.  That is probably the best way to handle the attributes as well.
 
Any comments on this?  It looks good to me, but I am sure that you guys can see things that I don't (i.e. you probably have more experience with mucking around with the 3.x rules than I do).
 
Thanks,
Jeremehovah

[Medwyn]

It is an interesting concept and I know my players would jump at it which is why I just get an icky feeling from it.

In Spycraft there is a lot of balancing going on between different classes and feats, so a 5th level single class character is equal to the character with 5 different level 1 classes.

The reason for this variation is that it can be quite lame if you have to wait a gajillion XP just to get another level, and each level is very precious if it is finite.  A single-classed character would be higher level as all XP is spent towards one class, but a multi-classed character would have lower levels, but more versatility overall.

For your primary reason have you looked at the Campaign Qualities?
Have Fast Growth ((require 1/2 XP to gain levels).
You could also add a custom made campaign quality to allow character to go above level 20 if you so wish, as the classes could be extended above level 20 by using the class creation formula to push the level out to say 30.

So to sum up, I would be very hesistant to allow such a rule as it is going to be so much better to take a whole of different classes at low levels than to stick to one class.
In fact in most of the games I have run I might have 1 player out of the 5 or 6 players who only sticks to a single base class.

[Desertpuma]

I'm with Medwyn on this. There are even Campaign Qualities for increasing the number of times you can get feats or make all skills available to everyone with Omni-Competent. You can even play with all the Fast feats for tremendous growth and advantage for your players.

Just consider the balance... I must say I'm not fond of all of these being turned on but it is your home game to run

[Psion]

It is an interesting concept and I know my players would jump at it which is why I just get an icky feeling from it.

Very icky.

I just don't see what you get out of it. You trade a fairly even balance (mods and abilities scale with level) for a fairly unpredictable one (you can sacrifice mods for abilities). You throw the existing balance out the window, and replace it with an ill understood one. Some players will game it, figure out the best way to pull in extra abilities without suffering too badly with the mods.

And for what? Because you don't like dealing with big numbers? Considering that XP cost increase between levels only grows slightly faster than gains, I don't consider this a big deal.

Wait a minute... here's a silly question... you do realize that XP rewards for missions are multiplied by mission thread level, right? Wouldn't want you to suffer from an ill-balanced house rule because of a simple misunderstanding of the rules.

If you do do this (and I still don't think it's a great idea), at least consider going the "gestalt rules" route as presented in 3.5 Unearthed Arcana (available online here). You get two and exactly two classes at a time. It's still "gamable", but you won't have the balance mayhem that you will have in the system you are proposing here.

[Jeremehovah]

I haven't played d20 in a few years, I just bought a bunch of Spycraft 2.0 pdfs (a couple of days before the sale, DOH... oh well).  So I didn't know that.  A friend had presented the idea and it seemed to be a good one.  But I know that I lack the recent experience that other gamers have with this particular system, which is why I brought it up.

I recall how multiclassing seemed last I played D&D 3.0, which as I said was a few years ago.  The DM used his own XP method, which remained the same throughout the whole campaign (some 3000-5000 xp per session).  I hated how picky you had to be with each level and feat selection.  "I will take this class at this level, take a level in this class at this level, increase this stat at this level, increase that stat at this level, take this feat at this level" just to get to some silly prestige class at a different level.  Basically you had to map out your entire character progression, even skill picks at different levels (spend x points on this skill).

I thought that perhaps by using his proposed method I could get around that hassle of character progression planning.  How does taking the best available sound?  So, no matter how many classes you have, you just use the best BAB, saves, etc.?  I guess the real issue would be that you would be opening up a lot of class abilities.  I plan to have my spreadsheet character sheet do all of the work for me, so it isn't that hard.  But perhaps it would have additional classes cost additional XP?  So that perhaps each additional class beyond the first would cost perhaps a multiple more of XP?  As I said the spreadsheet will do it for me, so the math isn't an issue.

Of course you all think it's a BAD idea, it sure seems that way based on the responses.

[NezMaster]

It seems to me the problem is your basing 'fixing spycraft' based on your expereicne playing DND. Which would be fine excpet they aren't the same, and if you play the game before you try fixing it, I think you'll find it's not broken. Certainly not in the same ways.

Expert classes are much freindlier and easier to access than prestige classes. Classes are far more streamlined than DND. Experience rewards are far more balanced.

Essentially, the crafty guys fixed alot of the broken things from old d20 moderns, and you seem to be going in assuming they are still broken. Play first, modify later.

The system you propose might be fine for dnd 3.0. It doesn't work for spycraft, as they are not hte same system at all.

[Desertpuma]

Spycraft 2.0 is just that much crunchier without adding Nutrisweet to it. ... You think you are adding something that will enhance the flavor but in reality it doesn't, the additive can have a nasty aftertaste, and if you eat to much of the additive it will hurt in other medical ways.

In other words, it is best to try the crunch before altering it.

However, you do seem to have your heart set on altering a system that is far superior to any other D20 game out there and it is the one that many other D20 games are stealing ideas from under the OGL. Things like Action Dice (Eberron called them Action Points) and a shorter more comprehensive skill list... I have yet to see how many of our feats are ending up in the books of other games. ... I keep saying "our" because these forums are like a brotherhood or a family to many of us and the Crafty Crew will probably tell you how much they love having us camp out on their "property".

Given that last statement, who's working the grill tonight anyway?

[Psion]

I recall how multiclassing seemed last I played D&D 3.0, which as I said was a few years ago.  The DM used his own XP method, which remained the same throughout the whole campaign (some 3000-5000 xp per session).

Yeah, as I alluded above, as mission threat levels go up, so will XP. Higher levels don't hurt you that bad.

I hated how picky you had to be with each level and feat selection.  "I will take this class at this level, take a level in this class at this level, increase this stat at this level, increase that stat at this level, take this feat at this level" just to get to some silly prestige class at a different level.  Basically you had to map out your entire character progression, even skill picks at different levels (spend x points on this skill).

You really don't have to do that in spycraft, with few exceptions.

Expert classes are designed to have simpler entry requirements than prestige classes, and all should be enterable by level 4, and as such, have similar balancing points. The "core ability" mechanic of spycraft keeps level dipping from being prevalent.

If you are going to be playing for long, one thing you need to consider is capstone abilities, which have the coolest "gamebreaking" effects. Base classes get them at level 14 and expert classes get them at level 10 (which, since you can enter them at level 4, is also character level 14). If you pick up 3 classes, or don't ride out your expert class once you take it, you will delay getting the capstone ability.

So a normal "solid" build is single class up to level 14, or base class 4/ expert class till 10. There are other things you can do that are fun, but you don't have to get complicated to have a good character.

Further still, you rarely have to pick up a second class to get a certain skill. There are a variety of origins that will give you a class skills, and certain feats (like talented) will also give you class skills and a skill point boost. This helps enter expert classes if you aren't the perfect class, but can also give you a little flavor of another class without dipping into that class if that's what you are after.

Honestly, you are used to D&D where much of the "play" in character builds is in the class stacking. In Spycraft, it's honestly much more in the feats. But then, they went to extra lengths to make feats an evenly appealing as possible, so it's not like you are going to gimp your character by not picking the optimum feat path, unless there is something particularly inappropriate for the character or the game. There are no toughness and skill focus type feats in Spycraft.

I thought that perhaps by using his proposed method I could get around that hassle of character progression planning.  How does taking the best available sound?  So, no matter how many classes you have, you just use the best BAB, saves, etc.?

I think your method would make progression planning harder. Because instead of simply picking the right feats and skills (and the class or origins that will give them to you), you have to ask yourself "is this ability worth giving up a progression in my bonuses from my class". And once you make that choice 2 or 3 times, you are guaranteed to be behind, so it sounds like you get locked into it, and the character is doomed to be a "low mod ability monkey".


Whatever you do, I'd really try the system as-is first.

[Krensky]

I agree with everything said so far, and I'll add this:

Your plan will make you life as a GC much harder because it destroys the assumptions that everything in Chapter 7 is based on. TL will be inconsistent if not meaningless so you'll have a hard time presenting a fair challenge and in calculating XP rewards.

To expand on the scaling of XP...

Taking a old LSpy mission off the downloads page at random, say, Double Tap.

Counting up all the scripted XP the max possible (if I counted right) is 2210 points. If a party of five 1st level agents run through this, they'll each get 2210 xp not counting bonus action dice and subplots. This will raise them to level 2.

If the same mission is run by a party of five 5th level agents, they'll get 11050 xp each. In the unlikely event that they have exactly the 20000 xp they need for 5th, the mission will give them 31050 xp, just short of 6th. More realistically, this mission would likely push most of the party to sixth. My experience is that it's generally one mission per level if you're not tossing a lot of mission/campaign qualities in the mix.

[Jeremehovah]

Thanks, guys, for your input.  It looks like I have done right by deciding to go SC 2.  The things that bugged me about D&D have been fixed.   I'll go by the rules, and point my friend to this thread.