The innate problems of unlimited multiclassing.

[FranOhmsford]

Yesterday I ran EEs with a player playing a 9 Sorc / 7 Wizard / 4 FvS.

He was AWESOME!

And I've got nothing against a really good player coming up with a really good build.

BUT:

Sorc/Soul?

Really?

These two classes by Lore are both innate - You're born with the basic abilities and advancement is not through choice - Usually a PnP DM will allow you to choose your next spell yes but that spell is being granted to you rather than you spending the time and effort to learn it.

DDO works on a Dual-Class system as opposed to Multi-Class {3rd Ed.+D&D threw out the Multi-Classing system and renamed & redid the Dual-Classing system of previous editions} so we can't even say that "Well he was given both abilities at Lvl 1" because he wasn't!
How does someone who starts life as a Sorceror become a FvS? How does someone who starts life as a FvS become a Sorceror? How does someone who starts life as a Wizard become either?

The answer is that you can't! You can't "learn" to be a FvS! You can't "train" to become a Sorceror! These classes are innate!


Now of course DDO has to make some trade-offs but do we really need to allow quite so much?


The Devs kept alignment restrictions in play for Barbarians, Bards, Monks, Paladins and yes Druids {though they messed up that last one badly - WolfMonks!}.

So clearly the Devs know that unlimited Multi-Classing is bad for balance!

So why did they not see all the other consequences of allowing quite so much Multi-Classing to take place?



Here's some possibilities the Devs could have used:

1) You could take Sorc or Soul at Lvl 1 then multiclass into any of the other classes at a later point.
You can't multiclass into a Sorc or Soul ever.
This would mean both classes would be bad choices to splash Rogue onto for obvious reasons - But they already are comparatively bad for that.

2) Druid should have been True Neutral required - No way to play a WolfMonk!

3) Ranger & Paladin = Mutually Exclusive - Like Sorc/Soul this is for Lore reasons - Rangers are Nature Loving Wilderness Warriors who are rarely Lawful and even if they were Lawful would not be able to put in the years of training to become a Paladin.
In a way Ranger {devoted to a nature deity} is a Paladin by another name {with abilities based on his focus} already!
Paladins on the other hand are Holy Warriors who've spent their formative years in training - They have no affinity for the wild whatsoever!

Easy way to do this would have been to make Rangers unable to be Lawful {would have stopped Ranger-Monks too.}.

4) Certain Prestiges could have been made available to Multiple Classes{With slight differences for each - maybe multi-selectors}:
Stalwart Defender - Fighter, Barbarian.
Sacred Defender - Paladin, Cleric, FvS.
Kensai - Fighter, Monk
Tempest - Ranger, Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Rogue, Bard.
Deepwood Sniper - Ranger, Rogue
Mechanic - Rogue, Artificer
Acrobat - Rogue, Monk
Assassin/Ninja Spy - Rogue, Monk, Bard
Swashbuckler - Bard, Fighter, Rogue

5) Racial Prestige Trees could have been built {actually still could} to emphasise that a race is particularly good at one type of multi-class:
Elf - Enhancements to boost Arcane Power so as to make an actual Fighter/Mage {Or Sorc} that has Lvl 9 Spells available and much higher DCs even if one goes 10/10!
Dwarf - Fighter/Cleric {Or FvS} - Only this time Divine Power.
These should probably still be less than a Pure Mage or Cleric could get but not so much as to make these builds unviable.
Halfling - Bard/Rogue
Warforged - FvS/Paladin {Lord of Blades}
H-Orc - Barbarian/Ranger or possibly Barbarian/Druid
H-Elf - Arcane/Divine - One Innate, One Trained - FvS/Wizard or Sorc/Cleric
Gnome - Bard/Illusionist
Human - Fighter/Monk

Drow would be the only one that really doesn't stand out as multi-class capable as the options are slim and Drow are the most likely in PnP to be single-classed {Specifically they're either Clerics, Wizards or Fighters. In Eberron it's even worse where they're more Barbarians than anything else.}.
The Drizz't {Ranger/Fighter} wouldn't be necessary if Tempest was available to Fighters anyway as it should be.
Their bonuses to Int and Dex suggest maybe Ranger/Rogue {Bard/Rogue being already taken by Halflings.}.

[Axeyu]

Can't innate powers simply "activate" late in life?

[Grailhawk]

That's not D&D 3.5 not by the rules as written at least.

I get where you are coming from but that's not this game or the game its based on these game isn't that strict about its lore when it comes to multiclassing.

[FranOhmsford]

That's not D&D 3.5 not by the rules as written at least.

I get where you are coming from but that's not this game or the game its based on these game isn't that strict about its lore when it comes to multiclassing.

Lore NOT Law!

These are two different things!

I'm not talking about game rules...I'm talking about game Lore!

And yes that's exactly what I'm saying is the basic problem with DDO when it comes to balancing Multiclassing!

The Devs weren't strict enough when they first created the game and when they added in extra classes!

Druid especially - I know 3.5 allows Druids to be alignments other than True Neutral BUT DDO should not have! The Lore reasons for allowing those other half-neutral alignments is outweighed by the Balance AND Lore issues of allowing Druid/Monk Multiclasses to exist!


Just because a Multiclass is allowed by the letter of the 3.5 Rules also in no way means that a DM would allow it without strict role-play requirements and penalties!
DDO doesn't have the ability to force role-play requirements or penalties so should be stricter with the basic allowances!

[Uska]

Lore NOT Law!

These are two different things!

I'm not talking about game rules...I'm talking about game Lore!

And yes that's exactly what I'm saying is the basic problem with DDO when it comes to balancing Multiclassing!

The Devs weren't strict enough when they first created the game and when they added in extra classes!

Druid especially - I know 3.5 allows Druids to be alignments other than True Neutral BUT DDO should not have! The Lore reasons for allowing those other half-neutral alignments is outweighed by the Balance AND Lore issues of allowing Druid/Monk Multiclasses to exist!


Just because a Multiclass is allowed by the letter of the 3.5 Rules also in no way means that a DM would allow it without strict role-play requirements and penalties!
DDO doesn't have the ability to force role-play requirements or penalties so should be stricter with the basic allowances!

WHY should ddo have broken the 3.x rules on druids? I am glad they followed the rules.

[Ykt]

Law!

things!

Lore!

Multiclassing!

classes!

exist!

allowances!

Chill dude.

The game was called DDO: Unlimited, so I don't see why unlimited multiclassing is against the game.
Second, you can't be a paladin/barbarian, so there you go, it's not unlimited.
Third, Paladin/Rogue, how is that for lore?

Here's some possibilities the Devs could have used:

You have too much free time. How about you stick to suggestions instead of hypothesizing a different version of DDO?

[Uska]

Chill dude.

The game was called DDO: Unlimited, so I don't see why unlimited multiclassing is against the game.
Second, you can't be a paladin/barbarian, so there you go, it's not unlimited.
Third, Paladin/Rogue, how is that for lore?


You have too much free time. How about you stick to suggestions instead of hypothesizing a different version of DDO?

His version would had to be done under ad&d which might have been cool but had zero chance of happening

[FranOhmsford]

Can't innate powers simply "activate" late in life?

Yes they could but are you saying that a deity {or force of nature} would give the powers of a FavSoul to a person who already had the powers of a Sorc? {Or Warlock for that matter!}.

Are you saying that a person could be chosen to represent a deity/force of nature when they already have these other innate powers in them that have come from who knows where?

Are you saying that a Person who makes a pact with a demon could also be given the powers of a FavSoul or wouldn't have those powers taken away the very instant they made that pact?
Don't even get me started on Paladin Warlocks!


Sorc isn't really the problem here - It's the FavSoul side that's the issue {and Warlock even more so!}.


Oh and yes a Deity could choose someone with innate powers to be given yet more innate powers but then you're going into the territory of a bad DM for allowing that to a Player when it clearly should be kept for a really powerful NPC antagonist!



Finally - I could just about accept it IF the old Dual-Classing had been kept where you couldn't use any abilities of your previous class till you're a higher level in your new class and can never again level in your previous class after starting a new one BUT DDO doesn't work like that!
DDO allows you to go back and forth levelling both at the best possible times to take each level.

Imagine a Lvl 11 Sorc having to relevel to Lvl 9 FavSoul and never again being able to use any of his previous Sorc abilities because his FavSoul level is always lower?
Imagine a Lvl 9 FavSoul being serverely underpowered until he got to 10 Sorc/9 FvS at Lvl 19 and even then still being behind a Pure Sorc or Pure Soul?

[Uska]

Yes they could but are you saying that a deity {or force of nature} would give the powers of a FavSoul to a person who already had the powers of a Sorc? {Or Warlock for that matter!}.

Are you saying that a person could be chosen to represent a deity/force of nature when they already have these other innate powers in them that have come from who knows where?

Are you saying that a Person who makes a pact with a demon could also be given the powers of a FavSoul or wouldn't have those powers taken away the very instant they made that pact?
Don't even get me started on Paladin Warlocks!


Sorc isn't really the problem here - It's the FavSoul side that's the issue {and Warlock even more so!}.


Oh and yes a Deity could choose someone with innate powers to be given yet more innate powers but then you're going into the territory of a bad DM for allowing that to a Player when it clearly should be kept for a really powerful NPC antagonist!



Finally - I could just about accept it IF the old Dual-Classing had been kept where you couldn't use any abilities of your previous class till you're a higher level in your new class and can never again level in your previous class after starting a new one BUT DDO doesn't work like that!
DDO allows you to go back and forth levelling both at the best possible times to take each level.

Imagine a Lvl 11 Sorc having to relevel to Lvl 9 FavSoul and never again being able to use any of his previous Sorc abilities because his FavSoul level is always lower?
Imagine a Lvl 9 FavSoul being serverely underpowered until he got to 10 Sorc/9 FvS at Lvl 19 and even then still being behind a Pure Sorc or Pure Soul?

again you want to use ad&d rules not 3.X

[Saekee]

Fran I do not know the lore but do value insights about it

[blerkington]

Hi,

Your point is lost when you exaggerate. DDO doesn't have unlimited multiclassing or even anything near it.

We're limited to a maximum of three classes sharing 20 heroic levels. Even within that, some permutations are not possible because of alignment clashes. If you want to build a really strong character, your choices are actually much fewer because many combinations don't work that well due to game mechanics.

This just seems like another one of your personal preferences which you are trying to justify by citing the rules of other games, such as the various editions of PnP. But then in the same post, you go on to invent your own house rules which conflict with 3.5E. You can't really pick and choose like that if you want to use PnP rules and lore to justify your arguments.

A much better question to ask might be, how do the changes you're proposing make the game better for everyone? Would the game be improved with you as the DM? In this case, I don't think it would be; adding a lot of arbitrary restrictions and wasting development time to reduce the diversity of interesting builds seems like a big fail to me.

Thanks.

[Uska]

Can't innate powers simply "activate" late in life?

He keeps going back to 2nd edition really the combos he complains about can be done within the rules as written for 3.X d&d

[Uska]

Yesterday I ran EEs with a player playing a 9 Sorc / 7 Wizard / 4 FvS.

He was AWESOME!

And I've got nothing against a really good player coming up with a really good build.

BUT:

Sorc/Soul?

Really?

These two classes by Lore are both innate - You're born with the basic abilities and advancement is not through choice - Usually a PnP DM will allow you to choose your next spell yes but that spell is being granted to you rather than you spending the time and effort to learn it.

DDO works on a Dual-Class system as opposed to Multi-Class {3rd Ed.+D&D threw out the Multi-Classing system and renamed & redid the Dual-Classing system of previous editions} so we can't even say that "Well he was given both abilities at Lvl 1" because he wasn't!
How does someone who starts life as a Sorceror become a FvS? How does someone who starts life as a FvS become a Sorceror? How does someone who starts life as a Wizard become either?

The answer is that you can't! You can't "learn" to be a FvS! You can't "train" to become a Sorceror! These classes are innate!


Now of course DDO has to make some trade-offs but do we really need to allow quite so much?


The Devs kept alignment restrictions in play for Barbarians, Bards, Monks, Paladins and yes Druids {though they messed up that last one badly - WolfMonks!}.

So clearly the Devs know that unlimited Multi-Classing is bad for balance!

So why did they not see all the other consequences of allowing quite so much Multi-Classing to take place?



Here's some possibilities the Devs could have used:

1) You could take Sorc or Soul at Lvl 1 then multiclass into any of the other classes at a later point.
You can't multiclass into a Sorc or Soul ever.
This would mean both classes would be bad choices to splash Rogue onto for obvious reasons - But they already are comparatively bad for that.

2) Druid should have been True Neutral required - No way to play a WolfMonk!

3) Ranger & Paladin = Mutually Exclusive - Like Sorc/Soul this is for Lore reasons - Rangers are Nature Loving Wilderness Warriors who are rarely Lawful and even if they were Lawful would not be able to put in the years of training to become a Paladin.
In a way Ranger {devoted to a nature deity} is a Paladin by another name {with abilities based on his focus} already!
Paladins on the other hand are Holy Warriors who've spent their formative years in training - They have no affinity for the wild whatsoever!

Easy way to do this would have been to make Rangers unable to be Lawful {would have stopped Ranger-Monks too.}.

4) Certain Prestiges could have been made available to Multiple Classes{With slight differences for each - maybe multi-selectors}:
Stalwart Defender - Fighter, Barbarian.
Sacred Defender - Paladin, Cleric, FvS.
Kensai - Fighter, Monk
Tempest - Ranger, Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Rogue, Bard.
Deepwood Sniper - Ranger, Rogue
Mechanic - Rogue, Artificer
Acrobat - Rogue, Monk
Assassin/Ninja Spy - Rogue, Monk, Bard
Swashbuckler - Bard, Fighter, Rogue

5) Racial Prestige Trees could have been built {actually still could} to emphasise that a race is particularly good at one type of multi-class:
Elf - Enhancements to boost Arcane Power so as to make an actual Fighter/Mage {Or Sorc} that has Lvl 9 Spells available and much higher DCs even if one goes 10/10!
Dwarf - Fighter/Cleric {Or FvS} - Only this time Divine Power.
These should probably still be less than a Pure Mage or Cleric could get but not so much as to make these builds unviable.
Halfling - Bard/Rogue
Warforged - FvS/Paladin {Lord of Blades}
H-Orc - Barbarian/Ranger or possibly Barbarian/Druid
H-Elf - Arcane/Divine - One Innate, One Trained - FvS/Wizard or Sorc/Cleric
Gnome - Bard/Illusionist
Human - Fighter/Monk

Drow would be the only one that really doesn't stand out as multi-class capable as the options are slim and Drow are the most likely in PnP to be single-classed {Specifically they're either Clerics, Wizards or Fighters. In Eberron it's even worse where they're more Barbarians than anything else.}.
The Drizz't {Ranger/Fighter} wouldn't be necessary if Tempest was available to Fighters anyway as it should be.
Their bonuses to Int and Dex suggest maybe Ranger/Rogue {Bard/Rogue being already taken by Halflings.}.

They didn't mess up with monk/druids in 3.X druids can be LN

there are some special rules regarding monk/paladin multi-classing but even in pnp a monk/druid or monk/paladin is perfectly legal and possible Multi-classing not dual classing is at the very heart of 3.X d&d

[RD2play]

Yesterday I ran EEs with a player playing a 9 Sorc / 7 Wizard / 4 FvS.

He was AWESOME!

And I've got nothing against a really good player coming up with a really good build.

BUT:

Sorc/Soul?

Really?

These two classes by Lore are both innate - You're born with the basic abilities and advancement is not through choice - Usually a PnP DM will allow you to choose your next spell yes but that spell is being granted to you rather than you spending the time and effort to learn it.

My Father was a Sorcerer, My Mother was a Favoured-Soul. Then I went to school to learn the arts of wizardry.

[silinteresting]

My Father was a Sorcerer, My Mother was a Favoured-Soul. Then I went to school to learn the arts of wizardry.

and they called you harry

your friend sil

[Gizeh]

[...]

Sorc/Soul?

Really?

These two classes by Lore are both innate - You're born with the basic abilities and advancement is not through choice - Usually a PnP DM will allow you to choose your next spell yes but that spell is being granted to you rather than you spending the time and effort to learn it.

[...]

"Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice" (Player's Handbook p.51, emphasis mine)

"Others suggest that divine {i]training of the proper type awakens the ability[/i], or that favored souls are simply imbued with their gifts by their gods when they begin the cleric's path." (Complete Divine p.6, emphasis mine)

The abilities of both classes may be innate but that does not mean they have to be taken at first level! The class descriptions, Favored Soul, imply that they can awaken at any time!

In the descriptions, one talent is "honed by practice", and the other requires "training of the proper type" - in other words, advancement is very much through choice, and by spending time and effort to learn the abilities!

Restricting sorcerer and favored soul multiclassing would actually contradict the pnp rules! Unlike monks and paladins (see PHB p.42: ex-monks, and PHB pp.44-45: ex-paladins, respectively) these two classes have no rules that limit the way they can advance!

There's certainly no problem with using house rules that put limitations on the way sorcerers and favored souls are played in your pnp campaigns, but there is no reason to try and impose those arbitrary limitations onto DDO!