Multi-classing - Old vs. New...

[Imrahil]

I saw a couple of posts that really liked the new way of multi-classing over the old, so I thought I'd start a thread to see what the general consensus is.

Do you prefer the old (BGI, BGII, IWDI, i.e. 2nd Edition) way of multi-classing or the new (IWDII, PoR [puke], NWN, i.e. 3rd Edition) way?

Initially, I really didn't like the new way, & I still hate it at low levels. But as you get to higher levels, it seems to be the same, pretty much, as the old way (all that says is that at its best, the new way is on par with the old way).

I do like the fact that you can add a level of practically anything at anytime, but it seems that a straight 50-50 multi-class character is hurt under the new system vs. the old system.

- Imrahil

[White Lancer]

Personally i much prefer the 3rd Ed way. I like being able to have a level 2/8/9 paladin/fighter/cleric if i want to. The draw back is that you gain levels slower in the new method. You gain levels much faster in the new method as well. After 3000exp in 3rd Ed, you could be a level 2/2 fighter/druid. In 2nd Ed, you'd still be a level 1/1 fighter/druid (until you scored another 1000exp). Then again, you get alot more experience for killing things in 2nd Ed (based on BG2:SoA) one kill will often net you upwards of 1000exp. Some of the harder enemies give huge ammounts (Red dragon: 64000exp! Carsomyr+5 and the best set of armor in the game, also come from this enemy) Still, as i said, i like being able to chose if i want my paladin half, or my cleric half to get a level.

My vote: 3rd Ed

[Callum Kerr]

I never multi-classed before, the idea of not being able to use my skills until the multi-class was equal or higher level really put me off. I like 3rd ed btw

[Ar-Cunin]

definately 3. ed.

In 2. ed. you only had a small number of combinations (based on your race), whereas 3. ed. gives you an infinate number of combinations - and (unfortunately(?) more room for power-playing)

[Sr. Paladin Richek]

I never really thought of multiclassing, because most of my guys are sub race, who have a favored class, and none of them have a level in it. But i do like this over IWD's multiclassing, and BG2's multiclassing.

[Madrigal Five]

I've been playing pen n paper AD&D for a long time and I always thought the way they handled multi-classing (amongst other things) left a little to be desired. The 3E rules are waaaaaaaay better than the old way.

Incidentally, the 3E multi-classing system really isn't that new; the Palladium RPG handled multi-classing this way from its inception. (That whole rpg seemed to be designed as a reaction to AD&D's shortcomings anyway).

[Nightowl2]

Umm, 3000 points makes you a third level character, so you'd be 2/1 (or 1/2).

The multiclassing in 3rd ed is much better because they took off almost all the restrictions from previous editions, especially in regard to race/class. And they finally allowed humans to multi, where before they had the idiotic "dual class" rules. Dual class was where your new class had to exceed the old one before you could again use the abilities of the original profession.

I also like the way they do the experience for multiclass. No more "divide xp between the two" and lose out when one class reached its limit.

As far as monster experience, well, actually 3rd ed allows for more, but much depends on the level of the party. For instance, a typical CR 1 (or level 1) critter is worth 300 points. The usual, everyday Orc is a 1/2 CR, or 150 points. That's for a level 1-3 party. After that, the xp drops off.

No xp is given when the party level exceeds monster CR by more than 8.

Nightowl2

[Jack of Speed]

Thats what level squating is for. I once made in regular mode a Deep Gnome Ranger that none of the enemy could even WOUND gave him 20 dex and weapon finesse and had no problem wiping out all the Goblins in targos... If I had known about level squating then I might have kept that party and not leveled anyone up until chapter 1!

[ 11-16-2002, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Jack of Speed ]

[Gimli]

Hmm, I'm agnostic - the old way used to give certain races some "personality" in a way. You knew going in what kinds of combinations they were allowed and could infer they favored certain combos/classes. I never liked the level limits though. And I agree that the human dual-class rules were strange. I like the new rules alot though, like the idea of a favored class and no level limits.

[Gimli]

Actually does anyone remember plain D+D (not advanced)? Where there was no multiclassing - and non-human races were basically classes? Like if you were an Elf, that was it, you were just an Elf, and kind of like a fighter/mage. Very very simple rules [img]smile.gif[/img]