Troll Lord Games

I looked over the multiclass rules in Castle Zagyg and though I like them better than older editions rules, I am wondering if this would work.

HD: Average of the 2 or more classes HD, rounded down to nearest die.

Gain HD til levels = 10, after that get average of the bonus per level after that.

BTH: Best of the classes

Weapons: Least restrictive of the classes

Armor: Most restrictive of the classes

XP: Split evenly

For example a Fighter,Wizard would look like this.

HD: (d10 + d4) / 2 = d7 round down to D6

After levels = 10 gain (4 + 1) / 2 = 2.5 or 2

BTH: as Fighter

Weapons: As Fighter

Armor: As Wizard

XP: Split evenly

If hit points are lower than perhaps should be you can also round up.

Granted a class that gives d10 hit points multiclassed with one that gives d12 hit points would still gain d10 or (if rounded up) d12 hit points.

Thoughts.

I did not like the system of dividing your hp you rolled by how many classes you are mullticlassed in because hp always seemed to low. This was especially true with 3 classes.

Thanks.

This is how I do multi/dual classing:

Multi-classing:

1. any two classes (baring alignment restrictions)

2. must have Prime for both classes

3. all EPP must be divided evenly between classes

4. 1st level, add HPs from both classes, divide by 2, add Con mod; when a level is gained roll appropriate HD, add Con mod, divide by 2 (fractions round up)

5. gain best To Hit bonus of both classes

6. use least restrictive weapons list of both classes

7. use most restrictive armor list of both classes

8. gains abilities of both classes; cannot combine abilities

Dual-classing

1. must start with one class

2. after gaining at least 2 levels in starting class, may switch to any class (baring alignment restrictions) as long as the character has the Prime attribute of that class; character may not return to previous class

3. can gain only a total of 10 HD

4. gain best To Hit bonus of both classes

5. use least restrictive weapons list of both classes

6. use most restrictive armor list of both classes

7. gains abilities of both classes; cannot combine abilities

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Multi classing often depends upon how the CK see the world functioning
ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html

Yep, I agree with Arioch...and C&C makes it easy to use multiple variants side by side. For example:

- For characters to whom two classes are an intimate part of the make-up, simply blend both classes together, add the XP tables up into one, and treat it as one class (e.g. the old Basic D&D elf).

- For characters who have one primary class, and "dabble" in a second, use the old AD&D multiclass rules, but allow variable splitting percentages for XP gained (example would be Grey Mouser, a Rogue/Wizard/Fighter if I ever saw one).

- For characters who had an epiphany of some kind and totally want to change their career without ever looking back, use the old Dual-classing rules from AD&D, maybe with a little more leniency about what abilities are kept from the old class.

The fact that C&C didn't incorporate "one true multiclassing system" makes it much easier to use more than one, depending on what you want to express with the multiclass. And the differing XP tables make it meaningful again to multiclass from e.g. fighter into wizard.

On the subject on Gygax's multi-classing and dual-classing rules from Castle Zagyg - Vol.1 ... on the whole I like them alot... simple enough but I'm wondering about one element of regarding the dual-classing.

With a multi-classed character, the classes have to fit the prime attributes. But not with a Dual-Classed character?

I suppose it opens up the avenue of possiblities for even more customizable characters...

Any thoughts?

Remember, there were some errors in the editor's intrepretation of Gygax' method, leaving some problems in its execution. I believe Peter asked Gary directly about the intent and cleared up some of these areas. Maybe I can harangue the info from him...

Yo, Gideon *harangue, harangue*

serleran wrote:
Remember, there were some errors in the editor's intrepretation of Gygax' method, leaving some problems in its execution. I believe Peter asked Gary directly about the intent and cleared up some of these areas. Maybe I can harangue the info from him...

Yo, Gideon *harangue, harangue*

LOL... thanks. I wasn't aware of the problems involved. I did check if there was some sort of errata but couldn't find any. I definately thought this was a good question to ask though!

Actually, most of the major errors were in the background skills interpretation. Multiclassing was rather minor in comparison. ^_~`
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

So where is the errata! The Trolls said my books are on the way, so I want to have the correct version to learn.

I did some quick analysis on the CZ multiclass rules, and started with a 10th-lvl fighter (502k exp); the same character as a fighter/wizard would be 8th-lvl/8th-lvl (251k/251k exp). If I read the multiclass rules correctly the latter is actually considered a 16th-lvl character. Details are:

10th-lvl fighter: +10 BTH, avg. 55HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, extra attack, any weapon & armor, +10 to saving throws

8th-lvl/8th-lvl fighter/wizard: +8 BTH, avg. 64HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, spells, any weapon, no armor, +16 to saving throws

Have I done this correctly? I have an opinion on how balanced this is, but am curious as to other opinions: my first instinct would be to average everything: BTH, HP and saving throw bonus. The result would be:

8th-lvl/8th-lvl fighter/wizard: +5 BTH, 32HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, spells, any weapon, no armor, +8 to saving throws

Comments?

Oh, and lastly, an introduction: started RPing almost 30 years ago, left D&D for many years, came back with 3.x, left that mess a couple of years ago, and recently and happily discovered C&C, but haven't played yet (soon, using Green Ronin's Thieves' World setting).

Grom

Man, this brings back some 1e memories, but they aren't pleasant ones. Multiclass... dual class... whatever you want to call it is a mess. At the risk of flame and stone, I have to say, this is one place I think 3e got it right. By balancing the classes per level instead of at the experience chart, multiclassing is a breeze and can have any of the effects mentioned.

Grom wrote:
I did some quick analysis on the CZ multiclass rules, and started with a 10th-lvl fighter (502k exp); the same character as a fighter/wizard would be 8th-lvl/8th-lvl (251k/251k exp). If I read the multiclass rules correctly the latter is actually considered a 16th-lvl character. Details are:

10th-lvl fighter: +10 BTH, avg. 55HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, extra attack, any weapon & armor, +10 to saving throws

8th-lvl/8th-lvl fighter/wizard: +8 BTH, avg. 64HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, spells, any weapon, no armor, +16 to saving throws

Have I done this correctly? I have an opinion on how balanced this is, but am curious as to other opinions: my first instinct would be to average everything: BTH, HP and saving throw bonus. The result would be:

8th-lvl/8th-lvl fighter/wizard: +5 BTH, 32HP, weapon spec, combat dominance, spells, any weapon, no armor, +8 to saving throws

Comments?

Grom

Well, that's given me something to think about. I think the current rules as given in the CZ can work and but there is a couple of things that must be taken into account.

Using your example:

A fighter/wizard level 8/8 would have a BTH of +16. You see, like hitpoints which are determined every time you go up a level in a class (in this case 16 levels worth), you would basically take the better BTH between a fighter and a wizard at 16th level... clearly a 16th fighter has a better BTH than a 16th level wizard. Same goes for the level adjustment to the saving throws (+16 as opposed to +8 ). However, the character would not get the the Extra Attack special ability till he advances to 10th in Fighter The reason for that is the fact that these special abilities are tied to the class itself... likewise the wizard portion would be using spell progression chart as if he was 8th level (and not 16!).

How does that sound? I believe that averaging the stat's won't work unless you somehow lessen the experience requirements to level up. Anyone else want to sound off on this?

Moriarty The Red

I would, at most, add the BtH value of the wizard at 8th level to the BtH of the fighter. Personally I just let them have the BtH of the fighter, period. +8 only. There are plenty of other advantages to being of two classes, the drawbacks are what keeps it balanced. Otherwise they will be doing like they do in 3E. Hardly anyone will play a "pure" class.

If the player doesn't like the "disadvantages, GOOD! Play a single class only!

Believe me, as it is, I played plenty of fighter/mages and mage/thiefs in the old days. They are plenty powerful enough to offset the disadvantages. The same holds true with C&C, I am sure.

Treebore wrote:
I would, at most, add the BtH value of the wizard at 8th level to the BtH of the fighter. Personally I just let them have the BtH of the fighter, period. +8 only. There are plenty of other advantages to being of two classes, the drawbacks are what keeps it balanced. Otherwise they will be doing like they do in 3E. Hardly anyone will play a "pure" class.

If the player doesn't like the "disadvantages, GOOD! Play a single class only!

Believe me, as it is, I played plenty of fighter/mages and mage/thiefs in the old days. They are plenty powerful enough to offset the disadvantages. The same holds true with C&C, I am sure.

Thanks Treebore, that is decidely a lot better for the BTH values than giving him the best BTH value of the two classes for the total of character levels. Simple too!

In my old games (both running and playing)... we didn't do much of mulitclassing or dualclassing. There were permitted but problems with them seldom came up.

Moriarty The Red

moriarty777 wrote:
Well, that's given me something to think about. I think the current rules as given in the CZ can work and but there is a couple of things that must be taken into account.

Using your example:

A fighter/wizard level 8/8 would have a BTH of +16. You see, like hitpoints which are determined every time you go up a level in a class (in this case 16 levels worth), you would basically take the better BTH between a fighter and a wizard at 16th level... clearly a 16th fighter has a better BTH than a 16th level wizard. Same goes for the level adjustment to the saving throws (+16 as opposed to +8 ). However, the character would not get the the Extra Attack special ability till he advances to 10th in Fighter The reason for that is the fact that these special abilities are tied to the class itself... likewise the wizard portion would be using spell progression chart as if he was 8th level (and not 16!).

How does that sound? I believe that averaging the stat's won't work unless you somehow lessen the experience requirements to level up. Anyone else want to sound off on this?

Moriarty The Red

No, that's not what CZ says: it clearly states 'best BTH of either class', which in this case is +8. And I realize the F/W doesn't have the extra attack, which is why I left it off that character (see above). But, as for HP & saves, you are correct: you essentially get to add those, and my point is that for effectively the same exp, the 8/8 F/W has better HP and saves than the 10 F: lessening the exp is exactly the opposite of what I'd do...

On that note:

Any chance we're going to see the CK rules as a lone PDF? I like the additonal options, but I don't really have a need for the location stuff.

moriarty777 wrote:
Thanks Treebore, that is decidely a lot better for the BTH values than giving him the best BTH value of the two classes for the total of character levels. Simple too!

In my old games (both running and playing)... we didn't do much of mulitclassing or dualclassing. There were permitted but problems with they seldom came up.

Moriarty The Red

And I guess I assumed everyone knew what CZ's rules were
Treebore's 'personal' choice is CZ's, for BTH. But the odd ones are HP & saves. It just seems that the RAW have unintended consequences of more versatility and more capabilities (in the case of HP & saves only). If you want more versatility at the expense of capabilities, then averaging everything is better than CZ as written.

anglefish wrote:
On that note:

Any chance we're going to see the CK rules as a lone PDF? I like the additonal options, but I don't really have a need for the location stuff.

Sposed too. Trick is trying to get the powers that be to settle on what the final, 'corrected', result is to look like.

Oh yes, fyi on the MC rules for all concerend, all the numbers are 'averaged' per # of classes. Whether thats balanced or not according to individual gaming view I have no idea. Subjective subjects make me crazy.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Grom wrote:
No, that's not what CZ says: it clearly states 'best BTH of either class', which in this case is +8. And I realize the F/W doesn't have the extra attack, which is why I left it off that character (see above). But, as for HP & saves, you are correct: you essentially get to add those, and my point is that for effectively the same exp, the 8/8 F/W has better HP and saves than the 10 F: lessening the exp is exactly the opposite of what I'd do...

Sorry, I didn't have the CZ book immediately handy -- I looked through the multiclassing rules the other day but didn't think anything of it at the time. With your example, basically a 16th level character... the +8 seemed wrong somehow. I remembered the factor of hitpoints and saves well enough, and tried to apply the logic accordingly -- apparently it was quite a leap As to regards to the special abilities (in this case the extra attack), I was simply clarifying things in general and my own train of thought...

So... all in all... no disrespect intended
However... given that the book says to take the best BTH of either class, consider this example: A Fighter/Bard level 5/5. According the the CZ, the BtH of this 10th level character would be +5.

Considering the BTH progression of both classes, this doesn't seem to work out as well as it could. Treebore's idea would give a BTH of +9 given the above example... As for my... er... failed suggestion would have entitled him a +10.

The one question that comes to mind... in part because I remember how 2nd ed AD&D disallowed these, and because I'm fairly certain that the CZ doesn't mention this... What about multiclassing or dualclassing similar classes?

A Paladin/Knight for example (or Ranger/Fighter being another).

Any thoughts?

Moriarty The Red

In my games I might allow a knight to dual class as a paladin, assuming he had been lg the whole time etc, and I might allow a fighter to dual class to a rangers assuming he decided to do so to further his progression. But in neither case would I allow it as a multi class but YMMV

Ken

Quote:
The one question that comes to mind... in part because I remember how 2nd ed AD&D disallowed these, and because I'm fairly certain that the CZ doesn't mention this... What about multiclassing or dualclassing similar classes?

A Paladin/Knight for example (or Ranger/Fighter being another).

Any thoughts?

_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html

My "personal" choice is the way it was done in 2E. Like I said, I played enouh Fighter/Mages and MAge/Thieves in 1E and 2E that I am very confident in that being multiclassed/dual classed, the best way to go is like someone already listed, give the best BtH whichever class gives you, saves don't matter because that is based on Primes/highest class level. Give the most restrictive armor (ie none for mages/illusionists and Monks), and the best weapon selection, and the better HD.

Requiring the PC having a Prime in the "key" stat is also a good rule. In 2e (I think) you had to have a decently high stat to qualify for a second class. I think it was a 16. I would have to look it up again to be sure. Anyways, such a rule was a good one, even if it didn't make a whole lot of sense. Having the key Prime does make better sense, because of the extreme overall impact a Prime has on the character.

The only thing I might do, and only because it would really hurt the PC's chance of survival, is to let them add at least half of the second classes levels rounded down to the saves. If your throwing spellcasters at a 10th level party and the pure classes are getting to add +10 and the 6/6 or 7/7 character is adding 3 fewer, your going to see a noticeable difference in saves failed. Letting them add half, rounded down, of the second classes level would keep them close, maybe even (I haven't looked at the xp tables and did the xp and level comparison) keep them equal in that regard. Which I see as a good thing since the save system for C&C is inherently deadlier than any version of D&D done before. Which is a good thing in my opinion. I never could stand the 3E mentality of wussifying the spellcasters, especially in the 3.5 baloney.

I never could understand why they thought a well armored soldier, or even tank, should stand a fair chance against a precision stealth bomber, which is what a flying mage with improved invisibility is while throwing fireballs, etc... There is no "balance" possible between these two class types. The only ways your going to take down a mage is by surprise, or with the help of another mage or spellcaster. Or a Paladin with a Holy Avenger.

The only way to really weaken the overall threat potential of a mage is to have SR items a bit more common than "rare".

Anyways, enough of my rambling. Hope it gave some useful ideas.

Multi-Classed Characters

A multi-class character improves in two classes simultaneously. His experience is divided equally between each class. The available class combinations vary according to race. The character can use the abilities of both classes at any time, with only a few restrictions. All races may multiclass.

A multiclassed character always uses the most favorable Bonus to Hit (BtH) of his two classes. The characters hit points are the average of all his Hit Dice rolls. When the character is first created, the player averages the maximum hit points for each, totals them up and divides that total by 2 (the number of dice rolled). Fractions are rounded down. Any constitution bonus is then added to the characters hit points. When creating a multiclassing class, use the following guidelines:

1. Class combinations are restricted by race and, possibly, by alignment.

2. The character must have each classs Prime Requisite as one of his Primes.

3. Multiclassed characters use the best to Bonus to Hit (BtH) value of their classes.

4. Multiclassed characters use the least restrictive weapon list for their classes.

5. Multiclassed characters must use the most restrictive armor list of their classes.

6. Multiclassed characters starting gold is determined using the best Starting Gold of their classes.

After the multiclassed character is created, keep the following in mind:

1. All experience points are divided equally amongst the two classes chosen for the character.

2. Once a character acquires enough experience points to progress in one class, they do so.

3. When advancing a level, use the hit die types for the classes advanced in to determine the number of hit points gained and divide the results by two. Fractions are rounded down.

A characters constitution bonus is added to the characters hit points when they gain a level in the class that advances first. If the character advances in both classes simultaneously, which is usually the case, apply the constitution bonus after totaling the averaged hit point rolls for each class.

At 11th level and beyond give half of the bonus hit points that each class provides as the character advances in that class. If this halved bonus winds up being a fractional number, round it down at odd levels and up at even levels.

Example:

A cleric/thief advancing in the cleric class rolls a d8/2 for hit points. When the character advances in thief a d6/2 is used for hit points. Since the character advances in thief first, he gains his bonus hit points from constitution whenever he advances as a thief. At 11th level and beyond this character would receive 2 bonus hit points per level (the average of his cleric and magic-user bonus hit points).

4. If the character does not advance in both class levels at an even rate add the highest level gained to all ability checks other than class abilities. Class ability checks add the characters relevant class level to them.

Rigon wrote:
Multi-classing:

1. any two classes (baring alignment restrictions)

2. must have Prime for both classes

3. all EPP must be divided evenly between classes

4. 1st level, add HPs from both classes, divide by 2, add Con mod; when a level is gained roll appropriate HD, add Con mod, divide by 2 (fractions round up)

5. gain best To Hit bonus of both classes

6. use least restrictive weapons list of both classes

7. use most restrictive armor list of both classes

8. gains abilities of both classes; cannot combine abilities

This is how I've handled multiclassing too, it seems to work well. Haven't had any dual-classers yet, but I imagine I'd handle it much the same way you do.

Why would a 8/8 fighter/mage be consdiered 16th level.

Lets say the xp is broken down to 170,000/170,000 this would give you the 8/8 fighter mage. If it was a single class character the xp total would be 340,000. A fighter would be 9th level, and a wizard would be 9th level.

I woulld do this for attribute checks:

If the skill would fall under what a fighter would be able to do, add the fighter level to the roll.

If the skill would fall under the wizard then add the wizard level to the roll.

I would not ever add the levels together.

The above character would be the following in my campaigns

8/8 Fighter/Mage 170,000/170,000

HD: (8d10)/2 + (8d4)/2 + (8xCon Bonus)/2 Max would be with a Con of 0, 40 + 16 = 56

BTH: +8

Armor: None

Weapons: Any

Ability Checks: Depends on what character is trying to do. See Above

Saving Throws: Highest of the two classes. in this case +8

For Comparison here is the single class characters

9th level Fighter 340,000

HD: 9d10, Max 90 if Con bonus is 0

BTH: +9

Armor: Any

Weapons: Any

Ability Checks: +9

Saving Throws: +9

9th level Wizard 340,000

HD: 9d4, max 36 hit points if Con is 0

BTH: +2

Armor: None

Weapons: Limited

Ability Checks: +9

Saving Throws +9

Now I read, I believe, that the CK version averages everything. In this case it would be

Average everything

8/8 Fighter Mage

8/8 Fighter/Mage 170,000/170,000

HD: (8d10)/2 + (8d4)/2 + (8xCon Bonus)/2 Max would be with a Con of 0, 40 + 16 = 56

BTH: +5

Armor: None

Weapons: Any

Ability Checks: +8

Saving Throws: +8

I will either go with the first one I posted or the last one I posted. I think that a multiclass character should be about the middle in Hit Points and BTH. The reason I might go with the first one is because my players will stomach that one perhaps a bit better.

I believe Peter/Gideon said the BtH is of the highest class, so it would be +8, according to the LA rules.

csperkins1970 wrote:
Multi-Classed Characters 1.

1. All experience points are divided equally amongst the two classes chosen for the character.

I like the multiclass descriptions presented here, and for the most part this is how I would do it as well. The only thing is that the division of XP would not be equal. The way i see it, a higher level character gets into more difficult situations that reward more XP. this means that the lower level class of a multiclass character will shoot up quite quickly as compared to the one class character of the same type. So the only thing I would do differently is divide the XP according to the fraction of one class level over the total level.

ex.

CLERIC 5 / FIGHER 10

The player earns 1500 XP

total levels = 15

CLERIC XP: 5/15 X 1500 = 500

FIGHTER XP: 10/15 X 1500 = 1000

What do you guys think?

This is the way I wrote it in my C&C house rules addendum.

Jynx wrote:
I like the multiclass descriptions presented here, and for the most part this is how I would do it as well. The only thing is that the division of XP would not be equal. The way i see it, a higher level character gets into more difficult situations that reward more XP. this means that the lower level class of a multiclass character will shoot up quite quickly as compared to the one class character of the same type. So the only thing I would do differently is divide the XP according to the fraction of one class level over the total level.

ex.

CLERIC 5 / FIGHER 10

The player earns 1500 XP

total levels = 15

CLERIC XP: 5/15 X 1500 = 500
FIGHTER XP: 10/15 X 1500 = 500

What do you guys think?

This is the way I wrote it in my C&C house rules addendum.

That's an interesting take. But check your math. The Fighter XP should be 1000, not 500. Also, why/how would there be such a difference between the classes?

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

I raised this item of discussion on the old boards and I think there was actually a reply by Gygax.

My take on the MC rules as placed in CZ by the editors is that they are VERY unbalanced. There is almost NO reason NOT to MC with the rules as they are standing in CZ since in almost any instance they will be much more powerful than a single class character.

However, there are some modifications, and ideas that were mentioned (once again I think Gygax also mentioned some items here, but I can't find the original thread, perhaps someone saved it?) that show a better way of it being done?

Anyways, currently if I do allow a MC character it is more in line with the original way (in older editions of D&D/AD&D) than the 3e takeoff.

Of course on the otherhand, the group I'm currently playing we've had our characters for a little under 2 months and finally just hit 2nd level. No one's playing a MC character, and with the rate of advancement I think people might want to stick to single classes for now instead of dual classing...at least not quite yet as it would take awhile with current progressions.

Rigon wrote:
That's an interesting take. But check your math. The Fighter XP should be 1000, not 500.

oops! Typo! I just fixed it - thanks for pointing that out.

Rigon wrote:
Also, why/how would there be such a difference between the classes?

R-

I just feel that it isn't fair that the other player in the group with the Cleric, has had to take much more time to level up as a cleric when the multiclass character is suddenly going to have his cleric move up in level much faster. Granted.. the figher will now move much slower, but that is just my preference.

Well, I'll try and clarify my original point: I know there are lots of house-rules for MC, but I was referring to Castle Zagyg's, and whether or not I understood it correctly (I think I do, and think that they're unbalanced exactly as Grey Lord points out: more versatility and more power, with respect to HP & saves; ability checks are not specifically mentioned, but I'd rule as yipwyg2 did). The CZ rule about the character being the sum of all its levels is only with respect to the overall character level, which has implications for HP & saves, but not BTH (which is clearly described as 'the best of either class').

Given that, as written, they're too generous to MC characters, I'd lean towards averaging everything (though Treebore's warning about saves is noted). But, thanks for all the many good ideas to consider here. 8)