Question:Garys intention on multiclass-HD

[GT]

I don't know... if you can't properly articulate a spell or execute a theft, you're no better than the average peasant....

[amalric]

On the subject of question 2:-

If the dwarf reaches 7th level with his 17 strength, and then loses a point, he should stay at 7th level ~ why would you lose a level of experience? Do you suddenly forget all you've learned? I don't think so. His 17 strength might give him the edge to get to 7th level, as opposed to 6th, but the only manner in which he should lose a level would be via an energy drain/undead attack.

If he starts with a 17 STR, giving him a possible max. of 7th level, but loses a point before he reaches that level, then his max. level would be 6, unless he somehow found a way to increase his STR permanently.

[Scott]

That's not the way AD&D logic works though. You could ask the same question when you get hit by a level draining undead. It's just a game mechanic that creates a desired result.

[geneweigel]

I found an answer from DRAGON #53 (SEPTEMBER 1981) Sage Advice on Monks:

My monk with a dexterity of 15 was hit in the leg by an arrow.
The DM said there would be a temporary loss of 3 dexterity
points, and later he said that one of those points would be lost
permanently. He took away half of my experience points (the
character was first level) and said I’d have to change classes
because the character no longer met the minimum require-
ments for being a monk.. Is this proper? If I change, would I keep
any of the abilities of the former class?

It sounds like you’ve willingly accepted the “fact” that you
have permanently lost a point of dexterity from a relatively minor
wound — yet that’s really the heart of your problem. It seems as
though your DM was determined to find a way to keep you from
playing that character as a monk. This sage doesn’t have ESP, of
course, and it’s impossible to know the details of this incident,
but any DM who decides to have such a tragedy befall a first-
level character had better have a very good reason for acting
that way.
There is nothing in the AD&D rules to suggest that a character
has to abandon his or her chosen class because of a drop in an
ability score anyway. Ability scores are not infrequently raised
or lowered by various magical means, and by certain types of
psionic attacks. The life of a character or a long-running cam-
paign would be thrown into disorder if characters were forced to
change classes every time an ability score fell below the min-
imum number originally needed to qualify for membership in
that class.
If it were mandatory for a character to change class whenever
an important ability score was lowered during the course of an
adventure, what would be the fate of, for instance, a character
rendered feebleminded by a psionic blast attack? Such a char-
acter, with (by definition) a combined intelligence and wisdom
score of 0-5 for the duration of the feeblemind effect, technically
doesn’t qualify for any class of adventurer.
There are certain types of magical attacks which cause the
loss of a point of strength or some other attribute. Losses of this
kind are sometimes only temporary (the strength drain of a
shadow, for instance), and even so-called “permanent” changes
can be counteracted by different magical means at a later time.
There may be occasions when a character has lost so much of
his original attribute score that it is not practical or healthy to
continue in the same class: A human fighter who has his
strength reduced to, say, 6 points is risking ruin if he sets out on
an adventure in that condition, and the character might stand a
better chance of survival in the long run if he decided to take up
magic-using (assuming a sufficiently high intelligence to do
that). But the choice should belong to the character and player,
not to the DM.
In the descriptions of the fighter, paladin and thief player
character classes in the Players Handbook, the rules state that
certain minimum ability scores are needed to “become” a
member of that class. The same reasoning should be applied to
those classes where the same wording is not used. In other
words, minimum requirements have to be met when a characterbegins a career in a class, but not necessarily at all times thereafter while that profession is being pursued.

[GT]

Well, I believe that Jean Wells answered that, and I would leave open the option for a character to "return" to a Class, but if they don't have the minimum stats to perform, then they are not by definition, that Class until something changes...

[GT]

To use the above example; if a M-U is feeble-minded, then until that alters he is no longer a M-U--he cannot cast spells! Maybe it's the semantics that are getting in the way on this question. To wit: A Fighter reduced to a 4 STR can no longer effectively fight. Nonetheless, he retains his potential, should his STR be raised again.

[Merkholz]

So if a 10th-lvl fighter in melee with shadows gets temporarily drained to str 8 he uddenly fights like a 0-lvl normal man?

If it's not enough with a temporary effect let's say that the same fighter meets a ghost and due to 50 years of aging goes down to str 8, will he become a 0-lvl normal man?

I think this is a very drastic effect for a not so uncommon situation. For the sub-classes with high ability requirements it is a very harsh ruling. I know that in my campaign ability loss is quite frequent (though not from arrows in the leg).

M

[dcas]

For a fighter I would say that he is subject to the penalties for low Str but retains his fighting skill. A magic-user wouldn't be able to cast spells, so he would be pretty useless (all of his other abilities, like scribing scrolls and brewing potions, assume the ability to cast spells IMHO). Maybe he could read a spell off a scroll but with a penalty like a thief. A cleric would not be able to cast spells but would be able to Turn Undead. A thief would be subject to dexterity penalties for his thief abilities. Some he probably would not be able to do at all.

But in no case would someone magically become classless.

[geneweigel]

May 6, 2008 8:24:49 GMT -5 dcas said:

But in no case would someone magically become classless.

I was thinking about that and while I couldn't think of anything, I crosschecked and I still couldn't find anything. Anyway the reason for the deliberation, I was thinking that in one specific and powerful instance this might be "true" but why bother? It'll just wrinkle brows and ruffle feathers for no reason, right?

[GT]

Again, you're not "magically clasless", but you are no longer adequate to your profession until you are "restored" or what have you. It's just a game mechanic like Scott stated earlier...

[dcas]

Again, you're not "magically clasless", but you are no longer adequate to your profession until you are "restored" or what have you. It's just a game mechanic like Scott stated earlier...

But this doesn't make sense. Say you're a fighter and you lose a point of strength (go from 9 to 8). If you're no longer a fighter, then you now have fighting skills even worse than those of a 6th-level M-U with 8 strength. That's just silly.

[GT]

Why? Suddenly, you've been weakened to a point that you are unaccustmed to... the M-U has at least been inured to his level of STR for a good part of his life (presumably). If you get a severe case of the flu. or develop a bout of epilepsy, or are sedated; do you necessarily "forget" your skills? Nope. Nonetheless, the exercising of said skills is to say the least, "challenging".

[GT]

You could still fight as a "0 level" Fighter... although a M-U below INT minimum or Cleric below WIS minimum could not cast spells, from where I'm sittin'... How's that? And as soon as you are restored--Voila! Competence returns!