Split OCCs

[Veknironth]

Well, the inconsistent rules strike again. In the Adventures on the High Seas, 2nd Edition p10, the rules for switching OCCs is laid out. If you stay in the same field (I.e. Man at arms, clergy, magic user, etc.) then there is no penalty. If you switch to another field of expertiese, then you need DOUBLE the EXP to level up. But if you go from regular Priest of Light to Warrior Monk or Blade Priest, you could essentially do so after reaching level 2. Boom, you're now a fighter with healing touch. Why wouldn't everyone do that?

In the FAQ, [url]under non combat rules #26[/url], it's a little different. You must reach second or third level, in the new OCC, and then you have ended your apprenticeship. So, it takes some time to change OCCs. That's more restrictive and makes it less enticing to just pick an OCC at the beginning and then change immediately. There is some time needed. You also need a teacher. But that sounds a lot like the 1st edition rules, which are on the main book p16.

So, I don't know when that FAQ was written, but it seems it was written BEFORE the 2nd edition came out, so the rules should be superceded. But the 2nd edition rules seem really forgiving, especially with some subclasses.

-Vek
"Start with Scholar monk, then switch, so you have that automatic dodge."

[kiralon]

The game isn't really designed to have multiclassed characters. That's why I have some magic perks for fighters and some fighting perks for magic users.

[Kraynic]

It wouldn't surprise me if the rules for changing/multiple OCCs are one of the more houseruled bits of the rule set. I have certainly made some changes to them myself.

If you simply look at OCCs from a "gamist" point of view, there is no reason to not have multiples. You may not be very developed in everything, but at least you have access to some various tricks. I can definitely see appeal to that sort of character, and have made npcs along these lines to fill in knowledge gaps of a party.

If you approach them as "ways of life", then it is may or may not be harder to pick up some of them depending on how the world is built that the game happens in. People playing this way may want to wait for a pivotal moment in their characters life to make an OCC change, or will only change based on some pressure for change that has built up through play.

I haven't really had anyone "abuse" OCC changes in any of my games so far, so I haven't even used the xp multiplier so far. I do use the training time xp, and some OCCs may require a quest to break into. For example, gaining the patronage of a deity when it hasn't been your character's focus in life so far will likely require you to render a service or aid current clergy in some task. On the whole, OCC changing is probably one of those things that comes down to the group. If you have one or 2 in the group that will use the OCC changes to make the rest of the characters mostly irrelevant, then that is a problem you will need to deal with if/when it causes trouble at the table. If everyone is doing that sort of thing and you don't mind running games with multiples of that sort of character, then go wild.

[The Dark Elf]

I GM'd for a group of 4 players for years and years. 3 had 3 OCC's, one had 4 OCC's. This was first edition and it wasnt unbalancing in Palladiums rules. It's one the reasons we like PFRPG.
My "The Dark Elf" character is a 6th lvl wizard, 6th diabolist, 8th lvl Summoner and again it's not that unbalanced. Balancing is about character comparison within the group dynamics.

Point is I love multiple OCC's. I think all of Palladium lines should have them.

We do 100% play narratively-If you dont have a tutor or time then you cant just suddenly learn it. When "TDE" learned diabolism we were on a wandering campaign. IIRC I summoned an arch fiend and made a deal to lean it off them in exchange for something. Every time I powered a ward the skies would go dark and red and the temperature would raise (only to me) and I didnt get all of the abilities (as arch fiends didnt know runes or something akin to that trail of thought).

To answer OP. I think youre right, I think the FAQ sounds like it relates all the way back to 1st edition.

[Kraynic]

Yeah, I may not have been clear enough with the "may or may not". I wasn't intending to imply that groups playing that way wouldn't ever pick up another (or multiple) OCCs. My first character was a paladin 9, priest 8 by the time I was done playing him. I'm not sure I would have picked up any more if I had kept playing him, since that was 26 years of in-game time and he was human (16-42 years old). If he had been of a longer lived race, I could certainly see him dabbling in other things over time.

[The Dark Elf]

My first character was a paladin 9, priest 8 by the time I was done playing him.

Great combo!

[ShadowLogan]

This really doesn't surprise me that the class changing rules seem to change between sources. I would say pick one set and go with it, either for each setting or treat it as megaversal.

[Soldier of Od]

Yeah, as you say, the rules for changing O.C.C. on the website are from 1st edition Palladium Fantasy. They have since been superseded by 2nd edition. I guess if you are still playing first edition, use those rules. Or, maybe a house-ruled combination of both...

There were a couple of changes in the 2nd edition version I didn't like. For instance, not having to pay any experience points to begin your second O.C.C. In the last (2nd edition) campaign I GM'd, I made the player go through the first edition rule of having to spend experience points to reach third level before they could "start" their new O.C.C. - I felt that some cost was necessary to "earn" all the new powers and skills. Personal opinion.

But some changes I prefer, such as not having to wait until you reach an experience level ("transitional point") before you can change - in practice, that rule has meant for us in the past that a character who wants to change O.C.C.s, has access to a teacher, and the time to practice, can't do it. Later in the adventure, when they finally reach their next level, the character may be far from any potential teachers and unable to spend any time training, so the opportunity has passed. I guess you could have the character train with the teacher when they could, and then change later on, just handwaving it by saying they have been "practicing ever since", but it seems unnecessary and unfair that another character with the same opportunities who just happened to be nearer a transitional point would not have to wait.
I think that freezing all of your in-between level experience points is enough of a penalty to allow you to change when you want/can - if you never return to the original O.C.C. those points are basically lost.

I am in favour of paying double the experience points if you chose a second O.C.C. from a different category from your first. I guess it makes sense, assuming your "background" training from O.C.C. 1 relates closely enough to O.C.C. 2. However, I'm tempted to house-rule double experience points for any second O.C.C., just to give this pretty powerful mechanic more of a penalty. Some O.C.C.s in the same category are quite dissimilar (Druid/Monk? Diabolist/Warlock?). Or maybe house-rule double experience points for magic O.C.C.s (even if your current O.C.C. is already in the magic category)? Because magic users get so many more abilities than men-at-arms.

I had one of my own characters change from thief to conjurer and I really felt that double experience point penalty! But it was worth it!

[Soldier of Od]

My first character was a paladin 9, priest 8 by the time I was done playing him.

What religion?

[Kraynic]

He had been a follower of Rurga. However, as time progressed, he had a family and that called into question the wisdom of trying to follow the code of chivalry as closely as possible. I was also gravitating away from Principled as an alignment/philosophy by that time. There was a fairly long intense time spent around several priests of light. Shortly after that, there was a continent spanning travel quest to unearth a secret for Thoth and become a priest of his. So I ended up picking up things like paralysis bolt for disabling targets, magic pigeon for long range communication, mystic portal for travel and bypassing walls, and Armor of Ithan and Strength of Utgard Loki for combat buffs and npc protection (with the armor anyway). I don't remember what other spells I gained over time, but I still remember I had and used those. It was almost 30 years ago that I played that character.

The intent at the time was that he would be living a less dangerous life (at least a little). But, of course, it left my character as one of the most (in the physical sense) battle hardened priests and so when any of them ran into trouble somewhere, he got sent to deal with it, extract them, or whatever. I don't think the danger got reduced at all, but that is to be expected in a table top game. Silly GMs don't let things like that work out!

[Soldier of Od]

Yeah, player characters can't retire "in game" and just spend their lives knitting and making tea! They have to right wrongs and protect the innocent!

[drewkitty ~..~]

Well, the inconsistent rules strike again. In the Adventures on the High Seas, 2nd Edition p10, the rules for switching OCCs is laid out. If you stay in the same field (I.e. Man at arms, clergy, magic user, etc.) then there is no penalty. If you switch to another field of expertise, then you need DOUBLE the EXP to level up. But if you go from regular Priest of Light to Warrior Monk or Blade Priest, you could essentially do so after reaching level 2. Boom, you're now a fighter with healing touch. Why wouldn't everyone do that?

In the FAQ,....snip

Because the character concept would have the character follow a different course of action.

The FAQ were written by staffers and are not considered to be Canon in any way. This is besides the fact that they are inconsistent and at times contradict what the canon text says. And as you implicated sooo old that they are no longer relevant.
Really they need someone who is OCD (or even CDO) to redo the opinions in the FAQ posted on the website so they reflect the canon text of the games they are about.

The only official Split OCC is the Half Wizard in the MoM1 book.