Reguarding Multi-Class in original AD&D
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Author


Collector

Posts: 7
Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Last Visit: Feb 24, 2006
Location: New York State

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:00 am 
 

Greetings fellow collectors,
   I am curious about multi-class PCs in 1st Edition.  Did a character use the most favorable Saving Throws, best on the Attack Matrices, the highest number of weapon + non-weapon proficiencies, and the lowest penalty for using a weapon not wroficient in during battle?
   I know that in 1st Edition a Fighter/Cleric could use edged weapons, a Fighter/Magic-user could wear armor, but thief multi-class combinations had to obey thief restrictions.  But some of those other details are unclear to me that I mentioned in the above paragraph.  (I know how things worked in 2nd Edition but I still don't know about 1st Edition.)  Thank you for all your help.
~The Left Behind Subject

  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 762
Joined: Feb 05, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 25, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:03 am 
 

Howdy,


Left_Behind_Subject wrote:Greetings fellow collectors,
I am curious about multi-class PCs in 1st Edition. Did a character use the most favorable Saving Throws, best on the Attack Matrices, the highest number of weapon + non-weapon proficiencies, and the lowest penalty for using a weapon not wroficient in during battle?


Yes, you have it correct. Welcome!


Futures Bright,

Paul


The Collector's Trove The online auction house that features the collections of game designers and artists.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5648
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 19, 2021
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:39 pm 
 

I blocked fighter/clerics from using edged or pointed, and I obviously didn't allow mages to cast in armor. Thieves just suffered massive penalties.

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 17, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:47 pm 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:I blocked fighter/clerics from using edged or pointed, and I obviously didn't allow mages to cast in armor. Thieves just suffered massive penalties.


Typical 1st ed restrictions. *choke* *gasp*, need room to move but there is none :P

:)  :)  :)


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:50 pm 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:I blocked fighter/clerics from using edged or pointed, and I obviously didn't allow mages to cast in armor. Thieves just suffered massive penalties.

I didn't realize until I was flipping through the books recently that elven F/MUs were allowed (well, according to the PHB) to cast spells in armor.  8O   That's just wrong, but strangely never became an issue in our games.  No wonder people loved playing elves...

 YIM  


Collector

Posts: 7
Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Last Visit: Feb 24, 2006
Location: New York State

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 2:47 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:I didn't realize until I was flipping through the books recently that elven F/MUs were allowed (well, according to the PHB) to cast spells in armor. 8O  That's just wrong, but strangely never became an issue in our games. No wonder people loved playing elves...


It's true.  I first realized this when I bought the old Dragonlance modules and tool a look at the character of Gilthanas.  The second adventuring party I joined by the way had four elfin Fighter/Mages.  I still don't understand how we survived.  (Actually I do, using my Ring of Fire Resistance I swam thru the magma of a volcano to retreive the Eye and Hand of Vecna, but that's a seperate story.)  It's a tempting combo as you can fight with weapons and blast away with spells.  

But I'm still curious about the saving throws, proficiencies, and Attack Matrices from original AD&D with regards to multi-class characters.  Did you use the worse of the classes or the best?

~The Left Behind Subject

  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 762
Joined: Feb 05, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 25, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:41 pm 
 

Howdy,


Blackmoor wrote:
Deadlord36 wrote:I blocked fighter/clerics from using edged or pointed, and I obviously didn't allow mages to cast in armor. Thieves just suffered massive penalties.


Typical 1st ed restrictions. *choke* *gasp*, need room to move but there is none :P

:) :) :)


Yes, by all means. Don't stick to archetypes that are easy for players to pick-up. They'll have a much better experience playing a half-monkey/gelatinous cube, paladin/armiger/assassin/souffle specialist.
:P


Futures Bright,

Paul


The Collector's Trove The online auction house that features the collections of game designers and artists.

 WWW  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 762
Joined: Feb 05, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 25, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:44 pm 
 

Howdy,


Left_Behind_Subject wrote:But I'm still curious about the saving throws, proficiencies, and Attack Matrices from original AD&D with regards to multi-class characters. Did you use the worse of the classes or the best?


The best.


Futures Bright,

Paul


The Collector's Trove The online auction house that features the collections of game designers and artists.

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:53 pm 
 

Left_Behind_Subject wrote:But I'm still curious about the saving throws, proficiencies, and Attack Matrices from original AD&D with regards to multi-class characters. Did you use the worse of the classes or the best?

Worst restrictions, best attributes is the general rule, I believe.  

Attributes -- saves, attack matrices, proficiencies, are taken from the better class.  Any form of restriction would take the most restrictive version.  

The F/C edged-weapon rule was an exception, and one that I would modify in my "house rules", as it doesn't make much sense.

F/MUs could wear armor and still obtain experience, but not cast spells in it.  Similarly, F/Ts could try to use their skills, but as most require stealth/agility, there were established penalties.

 YIM  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5648
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 19, 2021
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:58 pm 
 

Hey, that's right, I forgot, there ARE no restrictions in 3E! Why shouldn't a thief be able to climb walls in full plate? It's not like it would be difficult. And if he falls, he can use his 'Fall 10,000 and Suffer 0 Damage' feat (I think they get that as a freebie at 1st level). Then again, if he is an Obsidian Dragon/Green Slime/Kobold thief/shaman/paladin, he can just fly. Or he can take the 'Teleport Anywhere in the Known Universe" feat at 3rd level. Or he can roll against his Invincible skill. Or he can land on his feet and let his damage reduction save him. Or he can invoke the Levitation power of his +27 holy vorpal dancing sword of allslaying. Or.....

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Oct 17, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 4:23 pm 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:Hey, that's right, I forgot, there ARE no restrictions in 3E! Why shouldn't a thief be able to climb walls in full plate? It's not like it would be difficult. And if he falls, he can use his 'Fall 10,000 and Suffer 0 Damage' feat (I think they get that as a freebie at 1st level). Then again, if he is an Obsidian Dragon/Green Slime/Kobold thief/shaman/paladin, he can just fly. Or he can take the 'Teleport Anywhere in the Known Universe" feat at 3rd level. Or he can roll against his Invincible skill. Or he can land on his feet and let his damage reduction save him. Or he can invoke the Levitation power of his +27 holy vorpal dancing sword of allslaying. Or.....


At least you are consistant  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  


Collector

Posts: 7
Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Last Visit: Feb 24, 2006
Location: New York State

Post Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:00 pm 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:I blocked fighter/clerics from using edged or pointed, and I obviously didn't allow mages to cast in armor. Thieves just suffered massive penalties.


Interestingly in Second Edition it became less useful to play a fighter/mage.  For one thing a multi-classed fighter cannot have weapon specialization.  (Not the case in First Edition.)  It was also made a formal rule that mages cannot cast spells wearing armor.  And in both editions an elfin Fighter/{Mage/Magic-user} was a lesser combination because as warriors gain a Hit Point bonus for high Constitutions elves inherently loose out on that because of racial modifiers.  (A much better one was an elfin Mage/Thief since Rogues get bonuses for not wearing armor and elves get an improved dexterity.)  The best combination in both Editions I think is the gnome Illusionist/Thief.

~Thomas

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:32 pm 
 

Ironically, in 3.5 the wide-open rules make player characters free to accept all restrictions....armor, weight allowance, whatever....and they discourage fighter/mage characters because you end up sucking at both classes.


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 405
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 28, 2007
Location: Orlando, Fl

Post Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:24 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:Ironically, in 3.5 the wide-open rules make player characters free to accept all restrictions....armor, weight allowance, whatever....and they discourage fighter/mage characters because you end up sucking at both classes.


Very true.

I just read that F/MU could wear armor in 1e, I'm starting to like 1e more (though the racial levels limits still irk me).  Need to get a copy of the DMG out.


There are no bad editions of D&D, just Boring Players and Unimaginative DMs.

  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1