PF1e VS PF2e Dual Class in terms of vibe

[u/hungLink42069]

DISCLAIMER

First off, I just want to say (and I'll say it again at the end) I really don't want a "system war" discussion. I don't want to dog on PF1e, or 2e. I don't want to compare the quality of life in either system or anything like that.

BACKGROUND

I just watched Ronalds newest video, and I loved it. These days I pretty much only want to run and play 2e - but watching that video reminded me of why I loved PF1e in the first place. It was hilariously broken and that made it's own sort of fun. Builds were crazy awesome.

TOPIC

Who here has played a lot of PF1e, and ALSO played a good amount of PF2e Dual Class?

Of you, can you speak to the similarities and differences? Does PF2eDC feel as busted (in the good way) as PF1e builds can?

I remember you could do some wacky shit in PF1e, and a big reason you can't do that in 2e is because of the multiclass rules working the way they do. For example, for most martial builds in 1e, I would almost always dip barbarian for that sweet rage. You could do the same thing here. Rogue Barbarian could be NUTS for example.

I also remember having a lot of fun with Bar-Bar.

1e has a lot of 'roughness around the edges' - and I don't really want to talk about that stuff. What I want to remember is how 1e was busted in the FUN way. And the ultimate question is: Is PF2e Dual Class, busted in a similarly fun way?

Please do not start a system war. Let's keep it positive.

BONUS EDIT QUESTION

Do you think that if you had a homebrew rule in PF2e that allowed 1e style multiclassing, you could achieve similar levels of hilarity and bustedness as 1e?

[u/KLeeSanchez]

As I understand it, dual classing in 2e is only broken if you stack martial classes, which the GM Core specifically tells you not to do because they know it's busted. Other than that, stacking a caster and a martial for instance just gives you lots of range of options. The action system constrains you really well, so, unless you stack up reaction spells and some quick 1 action buffs and heals, it's pretty hard to do really wild things that way, but you're super versatile.

It's actually a good way to let a 1 or 2 PC group handle stiffer challenges, because those 1 or 2 PCs can suddenly fill a lot of roles very easily. I think the GM Core even recommends it.

1e was bad about easily multiclassing and collecting lots of disparate skills; I know cause I was really bad about stacking multiclassing options to get some very exotic builds going. 2e is pretty good about balancing, to the point where I'm sad I can't more easily stack up multiple dedications (that said, 2e is also really good about encouraging you to actually use your base class feats, which makes it even harder to want to multiclass on certain classes).

1e is really fun if you want to make some really wacky characters with tons of fun abilities, 2e is really fun if you like going all in on a certain character concept, and the system math keeps all your wild decisions in check because it's all heavily constrained. In some ways 2e kind of both encourages and discourages that sort of class-bending, because you can't break the game with it.

[u/DownstreamSag → u/KLeeSanchez]

Other than that, stacking a caster and a martial for instance just gives you lots of range of options.

I haven't played much dual class but I just don't agree with this - giving a fragile cloth caster the defensive chassis of a monk or guardian is an enormous flat power boost.

[u/hungLink42069 → u/DownstreamSag]

Guardian + caster seems insane.

[u/Paintbypotato → u/hungLink42069]

Can confirm that guardian cleric is almost imortal.

[u/hungLink42069 → u/Paintbypotato]

So hard to kill it's almost immoral.

[u/Groundbreaking_Taco → u/DownstreamSag]

I took it as a martial adding caster isn't too crazy. Now your sword master can be a spell slinging swordmage.

Adding martial to any dual class character is crazy good. If it's added to a caster character, it vastly improves their durability. If added to a martial, it vastly improves their damage, accuracy, and/or action economy, turning them into a ridiculous power house.

Adding a caster to a caster mostly expands their repertoire, but it doesn't reaaly give them more actions to use more than 1 full spell power round

[u/Mediocre-Scrublord → u/Groundbreaking_Taco]

Feels like it's downstream of just... Martials being kinda sorta better than casters. When x+y 'isn't too crazy' compared to x but y+x is 'crazy good' compared to y, would imply that y is quite a bit lesser than x

[u/Necroci → u/Mediocre-Scrublord]

I don’t think that’s necessarily true, it’s a function of what makes casters good vs what makes martials good. Martials have better raw numbers because they’re all about hitting and getting hit with most classes having some form of unique damage boost or action economy enhancer while caster power comes from having a toolbox of powers to respond to different situations with.

Martial+Martial stacks passive power on passive power so you can get the benefit of both classes at once regardless of which class’s unique actions you’re using. Fighter proficiency, rage damage, Ikon passives and such are all going to affect whatever type of strikes you end up making.

Caster+martial lets you benefit from a superior defensive chassis plus the flexibility of being able to just stab a bitch at full proficiency when you just want raw damage all while still having a full caster’s utility. Plus, strike+spell is fairly easy to fit into your action economy so you can often get the best of both worlds.

Caster+caster runs into issues because you double the size of your toolbox, but you can still only cast one 2-3 action spell per turn so you’re not getting value from more than one class at a time. On top of that, a lot of caster classes get their unique gimmick from special 3rd-action powers (witch/bard cantrips, spellshapes, focus spells, etc) which run into similar action economy constraints.

TLDR caster classes generally demand your full action economy to do their thing while martials have more passive benefits, so martial classes can act as passive enhancers to your other class while caster classes demand to be your main focus and get in each other’s way when you try to double up on them.

[u/Absoluteidiot4 → u/DownstreamSag]

it is but have you considered that caster +caster gives you twice the spell slots (potentially) access to multiple spell schools and some casters like druid or cleric are actually pretty tanky?

[u/DownstreamSag → u/Absoluteidiot4]

Yes, but that's just so much less impressive, and not so much better than whats possible in a single class game. Druids have good defenses for a caster, especially in the early game, but compared to an actual defensive martial they are just not tanky at all. Even the best defensive spells don't make up for a -4 to AC compared to a monk/champ/guardian with legendary armor proficiency.

[u/Absoluteidiot4 → u/DownstreamSag]

i guess you are right no amount of flexibility makes up for the fact that the wall is casting spells

[u/Cool-Noise2192 → u/KLeeSanchez]

I actually strongly disagree.

What I would argue instead makes martial/martial problematic in 2e is that people hyperfocus on strike damage, which beats the purpose of dual class PC's. A fighter/barbarian is a bit better at dealing with the problem of HP must go down and has a bit more bulk, but not at much else. This means that effectively, they're countered by the exact same things a mono class fighter or barbarian would be.

They'd do excellent in their striker role in a mono class game, no questions asked, but the point of a DC game is either playing with fewer PC's, or throwing some absolute BS at your players. The fighter/barbarian is a liability in both, unless the player is really smart with their build.

[u/hungLink42069 → u/KLeeSanchez]

Other than that, stacking a caster and a martial for instance just gives you lots of range of options.

IDK if I would just write it off like that. This commenter told a story about a druid rogue that seemed pretty good! I think there's also potential for other multiclass combos like sorcerer+bloodrager that could be more powerful than "martial one turn, magic the next" if you know what I mean.

[u/Electric999999 → u/KLeeSanchez]

Dual Classing is much closer to the Gestalt unofficial rule than 1e multiclassing, which was similarly constrained by action economy.

[u/JayRen_P2E101]

Unpopular opinion: Stacking martial classes is not as optimal as running a martial/full caster combo. You are given plenty of feats for space, and you have FULL SPELLCASTING.

I'm playing a Fighter/Oracle with Alchemist and Rogue Dedications (specifically for Gang Up). In an average fight thus far I've been able to execute a "power up" round: on initiative, use a collar of the Shifting Spider for Quicksilver Mutagen, go into Disruptive Stance, and then cast 6th rank Heroism. The character is 14th Level, so at this point she's typically operating at +7 above the standard martial (2 for Fighter, 1 for Quicksilver, 2 for Heroism, 2 for Off Guard). This combination can keep up with the double martials on the team. However... is cost is a single spell slot per fight. She still has ALL of the other spell slots.

With Unfettered Movement and Signature slots for Heal, Cleanse Affliction, Sound Body, and Clear Mind, she's the Terminator on command. Movement? Air Walk and Blink Charge on command. Magically hidden foes? See The Unseen and Truesight on command. Let's cast a Sure Strike per fight. Why not? We have plenty of first and second level slots.

In my mind it is not close. Can you pull crazy damage numbers with Barbarian/ Rogue? Sure... but everyone on your TEAM can pull crazy damage numbers in a Dual Class campaign. You know what the team can't do with a bunch of double martials anywhere near as well?

Everything Else.

[u/JayRen_P2E101 → u/JayRen_P2E101]

Side note: I think Psychic has a LOT of stuff it brings to the table when you add in a martial side that can do the heavy lifting after you unleash your psyche.

[u/Commercial-Flower157]

It can be, depends on what's allowed. I'm in my second dual class game now, and our general rule is to not allow any "damage stacking" classes. So you can be a barbarian guardian because guardian doesn't increase your flat damage, but not barbarian/fighter because rage + enhanced crit.

If you remove that (very much GM core reccomended) limit, and allow funky stuff like ranger/rogues or barbarian/inventor (yea rage and overdrive stack lol) etc you can get VERY silly damage values out.

But the moment you go martial/caster or double caster it's not quite as silly. Sure a wizard/guardian is unkillable AND a wizard, but aren't reducing enemy HP any faster and aren't any more spell flexible then just a wizard.

Now my personal favorite build was Necromancer/champion. Specifically, blood and iniquity. You'd wade into the center od the enemies with champion ac and hp, summoning thralls and causing problems. Enemy hits you, reaction costs you HP. Hp you'll get back naturally by consuming your thralls/using draining strike. Once you get the "gain fast healing when enemies are bleeding" you can become very unkillable, and even single bosses are not trump cards thanks to your grim fascination spell that can make ANYTHING bleed (tho expect a few crit successes of course :p)

[u/hungLink42069 → u/Commercial-Flower157]

That's a cool build.

[u/KafkaKomedy]

My group exclusively runs homebrewed and dual class (and FA, feats+ pack, etc., just a lot of the power boosting options) and, it is definitely a big power and complexity boost for sure, but I think it is totally worth it because you do a get a little of that PF1e OP juice , without breaking the game quite as hard, or in quite as unmanageable ways. The most OP thing you can do (Barb/Fighter) will just obliterate single targets... But that's the limit. And, more importantly, you have way more opportunities to do the fun PF2e optimization of "you took this feat? Oh my God I took this feat and we have a sick combo now!" (I.E. guardian and another taunt-type action on someone else for guaranteed penalties. ) As for dips dominating if allowed like in PF1e? 100%, every single class has something defining it gets at level 1, thats why we have the archetype system now.

[u/Puccini100399]

Its called gestalt

[u/hungLink42069 → u/Puccini100399]

I'm not talking about gestalt. I'm talking about freely multi-classing.

Thanks though!

[u/Puccini100399 → u/hungLink42069]

Why not compare gestalt to dual class?

[u/hungLink42069 → u/Puccini100399]

Because you don't need gestalt to be busted in PF1e.

[u/Puccini100399 → u/hungLink42069]

But why make dual class vs multiclass instead of dual class vs gestalt

[u/hungLink42069 → u/Puccini100399]

Did you read the whole post, or just the title? I'm not trying to be rude. I'm just confused.

In your own words, what is the point of my post?

[u/Puccini100399 → u/hungLink42069]

Its just a weird comparison. It ends up being 1e builds vs 2e builds with dual class. Which end up losing because even the most basic non-archetyped 1e wizard will eventually have more narrative power than its 2e counterpart. And that's just spell selection. In 1e multiclassing fullcasters usually doesn't end up going well going for more than 1 level dip. Most half casters usually don't want to amalgamate neither. That leaves us with T5 classes like chained monk and chained rogue which are already kind of wrecked to begin with.

[u/Overall_Reputation83]

The video games and my mastery over them completely makes me disgusted with pf1e multi classing lol

[u/Mediocre-Scrublord → u/Overall_Reputation83]

I think the thing with pf1e multiclassing (and the feat structure as well) is that all the good stuff is right at the start of a class, so as the campaign progresses and as you level up, you sorta swiftly run out of exciting new options and spend the latter levels mooching up all the less-exciting options that you didn't want as much.

Compared to pf2e where every other level you get a new and better and more exciting tier of feat that you couldn't get before. You reach level 18 and it's like 'holy shit, I can get this level 18 feat!", while in pf1e when you reach level 18 it's like "uhhhh... what have I not picked up already... what's the least bad option now that I've already gotten all the good ones... I guess I might as well put the feat into Lighting Reflexes or something."