Mutliclass In Pathfinder

[Bartmanhomer]

Is there any multiclass in Pathfinder or no?

[TheFamilarRaven]

Yes there is. Personally I usually don't advise it because many class abilities scale with your total class levels, rather than character level. But for some characters taking 1 or 2 levels in another class can be very effective.

[EndlessKng]

Yes there is. Personally I usually don't advise it because many class abilities scale with your total class levels, rather than character level. But for some characters taking 1 or 2 levels in another class can be very effective.

This. PF made a solid effort to encourage less "dipping" compared to 3.0/3.5 where even many low-power classes would be popular dips because of front-loaded features. Further, prestige classes aren't emphasized in PF as they were in 3.5 as a design option; the application of archetypes allows you to specialize a given class to something without having to divert into a PrC for the same specialization. This also restricts the need for multiclassing by default, as don't need to take multiple classes to meet requirements for a prestige class that is designed to combine two classes together. Then, the hybrid classes pretty much let you get the same or similar effects as certain MC combos with a smoother progression.

But, it does exist, and can still work to define a character or obtain hard-to-emulate abilities.

[Elysiume]

In addition to multiclassing (which is weak) and hybrid classes there is variant multiclassing (or VMC) where you trade half of your feats for limited progression in another class. It's an optional system from Unchained and it's not particularly powerful.

[Silvercrys]

Basically what they said for Pathfinder 1e.

In Pathfinder 2e multiclassing is all but dead. You can take feat chains to get some abilities from another class, like variant multiclassing in 1e, but that's basically all.

[Rynjin]

To expand a bit on what people are saying, multiclassing is definitely in the game, and there are some very good reasons to do so, but a lot of classes (particularly ones released later in the game's lifespan) suffer a lot from it.

Most multiclassing is to "dip", taking 1-4 levels of a front loaded class for some benefits, like taking 2 levels of Monk for a plethora of benefits (2 Bonus Feats, Wisdom to AC, Improved Unarmed Strike/1d6 damage fists, Evasion, etc.).

Fighter, Ranger, Monk, Cavalier, Brawler, and Paladin in particular have a ton of discrete (non-scaling or minimal scaling that don't have optional upgrades to be obtained later) abilities gained at early levels which make it non-detrimental to drop in and then drop out again between those classes.

Meanwhile, classes like ANY full caster (due to caster level and particularly Spells Known/Max spell level issues), and those with scaling benefits like Inquisitor, Alchemist, Magus, etc. that your character is meant to be focused around are poor choices to both dip into or out of. Taking 2 levels of Inquisitor gets you basically jack diddly except a 1/day use of Judgment and a +1 to Sense Motive and some Knowledge skills (and an admittedly hefty Initiative boost) because everything in that class is designed to scale over time, which is why they get so many seemingly weak class abilities in the first 3 levels; they start off weak, but by about level 6 they're really strong.

This is compounded by those same classes typically having class locked features (ex a Magus can only Spell Combat with Magus Spells, not other class' spells, so dipping for Spell Combat is meaningless), only getting key features at level 5 or above (like the Inquisitor's Bane ability, which is far stronger than Judgment), or just getting SO MANY good abilities that if your character is considering dipping into it, they may as well just have ALL their levels in it (like an Alchemist and their Discoveries).

So in short, multiclassing exists, but you need to do a very thorough cost/benefit analysis to see if it's actually worth it for most classes. As a general rule of thumb, you NEVER multiclass with a full caster like Wizard, or especially as a spontaneous caster like Sorcerer or Oracle, you SOMETIMES multiclass half-casters (with 6 levels of spells like Bard, Warpriest, etc.), and you may OFTEN be tempted to multiclass with non- or low-casters (like Paladin, Fighter, or Monk).

[Particle_Man]

Also, unlike 3.5 you don't ever take xp penalties for multiclassing (yay!).

[Cue legions of posters about to say "but no one plays with that xp penalty rule from 3.5, it is lame and stupid and . . . "]

Anyhow, you lose the +1hp/skill point/whatever favoured class bonus if you takes levels in something that is not your favoured class (exception: A half-elf can have two favoured classes!). And as usual "There's a feat for that!" so there are ways around this.

As said above, multi-classing is legal but often unrewarding unless you have a particular niche build. Personally, I kinda like Barbarian going into Shadowdancer to get a "beefy" shadow. And I could see a fighter 4/unchained rogue 3/duelist build.

[Kurald Galain]

This is compounded by those same classes typically having class locked features (ex a Magus can only Spell Combat with Magus Spells, not other class' spells, so dipping for Spell Combat is meaningless),

Dipping for spell combat is great on any non-caster, since you can use it with cantrips or with pearls of power

Anyway, I find that about half my characters have a one- or two-level dip in something else. So yes, multiclassing is definitely a thing in PF. The feat-based "variant multiclassing" is all over the place; some of those VMCs are pretty powerful, most are not. But maybe the OP can clarify what he actually wants...

[Particle_Man]

One idea is to go brawler with the snakebit striker archetype and VMC monk to get full bab and almost full sneak attacks with monk damage level unarmed strikes. But I guess that doesn’t use refusal multiclassing.

[Rynjin]

Dipping for spell combat is great on any non-caster, since you can use it with cantrips or with pearls of power

In what scenarios is that better than just taking Two-Weapon Fighting?

I could see maybe a very niche circumstance with a heavily strength based Bastard Sword user, but that's about it.

[Kurald Galain]

In what scenarios is that better than just taking Two-Weapon Fighting?

Good question. Well, if your character is strength-based instead of dex-based (which I really don't think is a niche); or alternatively, if you want to save money by buying one magic weapon instead of two; or alternatively, if you occasionally want to cast e.g. Shield or Vanish or Long Arm instead of the second attack (plus the ability to use utility scrolls).

[Rynjin]

Good question. Well, if your character is strength-based instead of dex-based (which I really don't think is a niche); or alternatively, if you want to save money by buying one magic weapon instead of two; or alternatively, if you occasionally want to cast e.g. Shield or Vanish or Long Arm instead of the second attack (plus the ability to use utility scrolls).

I specifically mentioned a Bastard Sword because in general, I would think a Str based character would want to two-hand their weapon given how weak the Dueling combat style is. Spell Combat will lower a Str based character's DPR significantly (you're effectively taking a -3 to attack rolls since you also lost a point of BaB, plus the loss of about half your static damage).

The casting of the free spells definitely seems a better reason, but seems a weird thing to dip for. If you're planning to cast Shield, you may as well just wield an actual shield (and take Two-Weapon Fighting). You only need 15 Dex for that starting out. Long Arm seems like it's less good than just taking Lunge, etc.

It's a little more versatile than any one of those options but you could then just play a single classed Magus to get all of that and more, which was kind of my point.

[Kurald Galain]

Spell Combat will lower a Str based character's DPR significantly (you're effectively taking a -3 to attack rolls since you also lost a point of BaB, plus the loss of about half your static damage).

But you get an extra attack, which is a massive DPR boost

If you're planning to cast Shield, you may as well just wield an actual shield

Shield spell gives a much bigger bonus than an actual shield. And Long Arm spell is available several levels earlier than Lunge. Point is, to a non-caster (or even some divine casters), getting a few Magus spells per day plus using their scrolls is worth considering as a dip.

[Rynjin]

But you get an extra attack, which is a massive DPR boost

I'm assuming this is sarcasm? You know better. =p

Shield spell gives a much bigger bonus than an actual shield. And Long Arm spell is available several levels earlier than Lunge. Point is, to a non-caster (or even some divine casters), getting a few Magus spells per day plus using their scrolls is worth considering as a dip.

At 1st level, sure, but if you wanna be shield man you need Shield Focus anyway, which boosts it to +3 compared to +4, and then you're only 1000 gp away from matching it.

I dunno. It doesn't sound like the worst, but it seems like everything you can do can be replaced by skills (Use Magic Device) and cheap and easily available magic items.

But maybe that's just my natural aversion to multiclassing talking. Every time I think about doing it I hit a mental wall of sorts.

[Kurald Galain]

I'm assuming this is sarcasm?

No. TWF or rapid shot or spell combat (i.e. an extra attack for -2 to hit) will commonly improve DPR for characters.

For instance, L5 character vs L7 enemy,
+11 to hit (5 BAB, 5 str, 1 magic weapon) for 1d12+8 damage (7 str, 1 weapon) = 9.4 DPR
vs
+9 to hit (4 BAB, 5 str, -2 spell combat, 1 weapon, 1 arcane pool), 1d8+7 damage (5 str, 1 weapon, 1 pool), two attacks = 12.65 DPR, or about a 34% increase.

Clearly this isn't true for all characters, but equally clearly it's not an obscure corner case that a Magus dip for spell combat will improve your DPR. This is why my druid and ninja characters both have a monk dip (for flurry; same principle applies).

Getting back to the OP's question, given how front-loaded many PF classes are, a one-level dip in something is a pretty good deal for more characters than you'd think.

[Rynjin]

Factoring in Arcane Pool but not the damage boosters martials get (like Weapon Training, Studied Target, etc.) seems odd, and I WAS specifically talking about Power Attack as well.

VS AC 20 (CR 7) using your same stats, Power Attack is +9 to hit (5 BaB, 5 Str, 1 magic weapon, 1 Weapon Training -2 PA) for 1d12+15 (7 Str, 6 PA, 1 weapon, 1 Weapon Training and I'm assuming it's a Greataxe for x3 crit?) .6(21.5)+.05*2*.6*21.5 = 14.19 DPR unless I flubbed the math somewhere.

Not a huge deal in the grand scheme (like I said, I just have my own hangups re: multiclassing), but that 12.65 IS a DPR drop as opposed to a pure classed martial.

Monk is a bit different, as you don't get the same drop to attack OR damage (you get a +1 BaB increase when Flurrying, canceling out the loss, you get 1.5x Power attack for wielding in 2 hands, AND you get your full Str to damage in the off hand, which magus does not). The deal is even better for Unchained Monk, which even gets to keep the 1.5x Str to damage. I don't feel like running the math, but I would imagine the Unchained Monk dip significantly increases your DPR in that scenario.

[Kurald Galain]

I flubbed the math somewhere.

Yeah, you're giving a damage-boosting feat and bigger crit bonuses to one side but not the other

Besides, I explicitly said TWF/Spell combat won't increase damage for every character (in case that wasn't, you know, obvious). So that you can think of a build where it doesn't help, well, that's really not a counterargument. Besides, getting a few Magus spells per day plus using their scrolls is worth considering as a dip.

Getting back to the OP's question, given how front-loaded many PF classes are, a one-level dip in something is a pretty good deal for more characters than you'd think.

[Rynjin]

Yeah, you're giving a damage-boosting feat and bigger crit bonuses to one side but not the other

I had figured you factored the longsword's 19-20 crit ratio into your own math, because it's a relatively large determiner for the DPR calculations. "c" is crit ratio in that formula, while "h" is multiplier.

Besides, I explicitly said TWF/Spell combat won't increase damage for every character (in case that wasn't, you know, obvious). So that you can think of a build where it doesn't help, well, that's really not a counterargument. Besides, getting a few Magus spells per day plus using their scrolls is worth considering as a dip.

I don't really think factoring in Power Attack (probably the most commonly taken Feat in the game, so much so that over half the tables I've ever played at give it to players for free) is really out of order given you are factoring in the equivalent of a different Feat (Two-Weapon Fighting), and it illustrates the largest opportunity cost of the build (Power Attack would likely lower the DPR of the Spell Combat/TWFer, as it usually doe sat low levels).

Getting back to the OP's question, given how front-loaded many PF classes are, a one-level dip in something is a pretty good deal for more characters than you'd think.

But back from the weeds, I think this is only true if you really know what you're doing. As the conversation preceding this likely illustrated, the seemingly minor choice of taking a single level involves a surprisingly large number of factors that can affect your analysis.

[Psyren]

PF Prestige Classes definitely need more love, which I am in the process of giving them. Blackfire Adept for example letting you use summons in dimensionally locked, antimagic and even dead magic planes is pretty unique, as is the ability for their summons to break the rules and use their own summoning abilities. Sure it loses a few caster levels, but Prestigious Spellcaster fixes it right up.

One idea is to go brawler with the snakebit striker archetype and VMC monk to get full bab and almost full sneak attacks with monk damage level unarmed strikes. But I guess that doesn’t use refusal multiclassing.

Unchained Monk of the Mantis would be my alternate (possibly superior) recommendation for this one.

[Aotrs Commander]

This. PF made a solid effort to encourage less "dipping" compared to 3.0/3.5 where even many low-power classes would be popular dips because of front-loaded features.

I've been outright yoinking a lot of the PF base classes over to my 3.5 hybird (3.Aotrs), but I haven'y particularly noticed this, at least on the core classes... Unless it's in the sense that the old 3.5 core classes mostly have some class features at mid-to-high levels now (that don't horribly suck)...

Mind you, I never had a problem with dipping in the first place, though I definitely think PF's approach to better base classes > PrC was the right one, myself.

(Can't understand why they seem to be more dropping this approach to more class-locked in Starfinder and reputedly PF2, myself. 3.0's multiclassing idea (less the stupid penalties and unnecessary favoured classes) was by far the single best idea that D&d's ever had mechanically in my opinion.)

[Bartmanhomer]

What's dipping?

[Aotrs Commander]

What's dipping?

Taking the first few of levels in one class and then doing something else.



E.g, my character who is not at all an expy of Naruto who is mechanically (in 3.5) cleric with, I think, two levels of monk (we ignore all of 3.5's multiclassing restrictions) for Unarmed Strike, Monk AC bonus and Decisive Strike mostly. Or the time I toyed with a Buffy-the-Vampire-slayer concept as a Paladin/Monk (again in 3.5).

Or the barbarian in my current Rise of the Runelords party, who grabbed a couple of levels of fighter so as to get to Shock Trooper (and headless charge) a little bit faster.

[Calthropstu]

In what scenarios is that better than just taking Two-Weapon Fighting?

I could see maybe a very niche circumstance with a heavily strength based Bastard Sword user, but that's about it.

Caster level boosters + shocking grasp + crit fish build can be quite effective.