Knights & Knaves Alehouse

There's no reason you couldn't dual-class as a magic-user, then at a later level switch to paladin, assuming alignment and all other stats were acceptable right?

I mean there's obviously some spells that'd be no-nos, but I think otherwise you could do that.

You’d have to have amazing scores for it to work, but, it’s allowable, yes.

As long as you've got sufficient stats and there are no alignment restrictions and are willing to abide by the restrictions of each class while operating as that class, you can dual-class from any class to any other class (exception: IIRC the UA errata in Dragon magazine clarified that you cannot dual-class into Barbarian).

T. Foster wrote:As long as you've got sufficient stats and there are no alignment restrictions and are willing to abide by the restrictions of each class while operating as that class, you can dual-class from any class to any other class (exception: IIRC the UA errata in Dragon magazine clarified that you cannot dual-class into Barbarian).

Yeah, I don't get that restriction. It precludes the possibility that a character could "go native."

I think that it is presumed that a lot of the barbarian's benefits, such as the d12 hit die, extra con HP boost, detecting someone behind them, sensing illusions, magic sensing, the running/jumping, and so on are not consciously learned or developed as an adult, but are learned and/or created by the rigor of the lifestyle while growing up.

It is the physical activity and so on while your body develops and grows that result in the awesome physique and physical capabilities of a Barbarian.


In other words, "Barbarians are born, not made!".



They only way someone not born as a Barbarian can take the class is if they entered the tribe as a child, and grew up there.

T. Foster wrote:As long as you've got sufficient stats and there are no alignment restrictions and are willing to abide by the restrictions of each class while operating as that class, you can dual-class from any class to any other class (exception: IIRC the UA errata in Dragon magazine clarified that you cannot dual-class into Barbarian).

The only dual-class PCs that couldn't function properly would be those with alignment conflictions (so assassin-paladin, ranger, druid etc.) the first two could do it, but they would become fighters (though I'd allow an assassin-anti-paladin). I'm not sure how I'd handle a ranger that became an assassin. I might let him keep his tracking abilities, just for the coolness factor (but he'd loose his +1 giant class and surprise related ability).

Ditto druid-assassin, since a druid must be nuetral and an assassin must be an evil (btb, no spells). I'd be tempted to allow it though (say an assassin who reached 5th and then switches to druid) how bad ass would that be. I wouldn't make a habit of it though, probably better as an NPC.

Kinda reminds me of Brother Cadfael... a nice, mild-mannered Benedictine monk who keeps the abbey's herb garden and acts as their healer.

Except when the crap starts flying... then you remember that he came to the robe as a middle-aged man, having served with enthusiasm for over 20 years as a front-line soldier in the Crusades and as a sailor, and is a rather proficient horseman and fighter.


As a fighter he had basically a lawful neutral alignment... he followed orders, and did what he was told... even killing women and children if ordered.


Then he had a change of view (alignment), and since taking vows has been staunchly neutral-good... always seeking what is best for those under his care, without regard to what the secular or religious authorities want.

He does try to teach them that obeying laws and religious edicts is usually better then following their own will (and he is thus not chaotic), but agrees that sometimes the authorities are wrong and must be ignored, bypassed, or even fooled (and he is thus not lawful).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadfael

Given that it seems do-able by the book, what would the requirements be? The PHB says a 15 in the primary class' prime requisite stat, and a 17 in the class being switched to - since a Paladin by default has to have a CHA 17, that's covered. So paladin stats + 15 INT minimum?

(*I think it's 15; don't have the book in front of me)

I don't think the 17 charisma would satisfy the requirement. Principal attribute(s), IMO, would be the attributes that would grant the 10% experience point bonus. So for the paladin that would be 17s in strength and wisdom on top of the 17 charisma requirement.

ScottyG wrote:I don't think the 17 charisma would satisfy the requirement. Principal attribute(s), IMO, would be the attributes that would grant the 10% experience point bonus. So for the paladin that would be 17s in strength and wisdom on top of the 17 charisma requirement.

Wow, so...
STR: 17
INT: 17
WIS: 17
DEX: (minimum for paladin)
CON: (minimum for paladin)
CHA: 17

...not quite impossible...but damn close!

Inteligence would have a min. of 15.

A couple thoughts:

1. The inability to dual-class into barbarian and the seeming concept that barbarians are born, not made - as BlackBat put it - makes me think that the "barbarian-type" may have been best served as an "uncivilized human" race that could advance in a few different classes (druid, fighter, maybe thief and assassin).

2. The language with regard to requirements for dual classing is so imprecise that there are a number of different possible interpretations. If you're taking "principal attributes" to mean those needed to get an xp bonus, what do you do with classes that have no attributes that give xp bonuses? (Assassin, Illusionist, Monk.) Personally, since it's so seldom used in my experience, I go for the most permissive reading of the rule that I can justify given the individual circumstances. For example, I'd pretty much never deny a player who wanted to dual class from a more specialized sub-class to one of the "big-four" classes, such as from monk to thief. If everyone started using it and I felt it was being abused, maybe I'd change my mind.

rogatny wrote:I go for the most permissive reading of the rule that I can justify given the individual circumstances.

Even beyond just dual classing, anytime there's any ambiguity, I usually gravitate toward the player advantage... but once the dice are rolled, we live with the results, for better or worse. As you say, if it's turns out later that the ruling lends itself to an obvious and repeatable exploit, then we fix it. No biggie.

I have never like how duel classing works in AD&D. I house rule it myself and just ignore the book(s).

Clangador wrote:I have never like how duel classing works in AD&D. I house rule it myself and just ignore the book(s).

Cool, post what ya got over on home brew. I'm okay with the raw, but I look forward to reading an alternative.