Multi-classing

[Legacy_Kail Pendragon]

               

I think the two main factors are the concept and the result.

Concept wise, I think the fact that a 40 fighter will lose to a 39 fighter/1 rogue in a straight up battle with identical gear is flat out idiotic.  Thus, I take steps to correct it.  For any given environment, it's important for the players to have the same general concept (such as class meaning something, like a fighter excelling at fighting), but it really doesn't matter what the concept actually is in an absolute sense.

Here's where we differ. I have no need for the fighter class to mean anything at all but the features it has (full bab, frontloaded feats, bonus combat feats, etc.) and that is true for any class. Hence, it is perfectly reasonable to me that FTR 39/Rogue 1 is superior to a FTR 40 and that seems to be a rather intentional design choice. The game is pretty much geared towards multiclassing and the character concept can be obtained through proper multiclassing choices. That said, a system where features are acquired individually and not bundled together as monolitic "classes" IMO is a much better one.

Which brings me to result, which is what happens due to the concept.  I can easily make a world where the only casters that can survive will be a Sorcerer + Monk/Rogue + Paladin/Blackguard build and where melee builds have to be along the lines of Fighter 12/Weapon Master 28 to deal damage if people desire that, but it's a conscious choice to promote those sorts of builds that eke out every last bit of power.  The environment is then going to be brutal for anything else and you wind up *having* to have certain things.  AB tuned for a PM build and don't have a PM tank?  Don't bother trying.  Saves tuned for a Sorc/Paladin?  Go home or die if you don't have it.  The gap in power becomes vast and limits the number of builds and mandates having certain builds to meet requirements (aka, a Dwarven Defender is unable to tank effectively because it doesn't have enough AC, or the reverse where the PM can't tank because he doesn't have enough damage reduction).

I think that makes an inferior game.  But that's an opinion and some people due genuinely prefer such a world, which is why I said the only thing that matters is that people agree on a concept so there's not a rift in opinion over the result.  People can find the environment that suits them.

All of that said, I do wish to point out that my ideal concept does not eliminate powerbuilding...it just closes the gap.  I want both a PM and DD to be able to tank successfully, and I don't want them to be insanely better than a pure fighter who focused on tanking (but all three can be significantly better than a strength focused weapon master).  I want to promote a variety of builds that give advantages which aren't effectively absolute or gamebreaking.  Having 20 more AC than another build that's reasonable means either one is going to get crushed or the other won't ever be hit due to the d20 system.  I don't want either scenario.

Which can be summed up as NWN is not really well balanced to start with and I think many will agree with this statement.

Thanks for your builder's perspective; now, if I may, what's your take as a player? Does it feel wrong to you to take advantage of certain multiclassing benefits? Does it feel like it's not true to the character, as Grom mentions in his opening post?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WebShaman]

               

Aielund's the prime single player module that comes to mind off-hand on limiting shifted Monk AC as a side note, though I'm sure there are many others.

Ouch, what a spanking!

I agree with MM here - I feel that a 40th level Fighter should be able to go toe-to-toe with a Fighter 39/Rogue 1.

The problem here is made worse in NWN, due to skill point saving.  As one gets Rogue 1 at level 40, one can do massive skill dumps in main skills here, like UMD, Tumble, Hide, etc.  This hugely offsets the minor increase that the Fighter has in Discipline here, IMHO.

What if we stay under Epic levels?  How does it look now?

Fighter 20 vs Fighter 19/Rogue 1?  Yep, still bad, though not as lopsided (especially if scroll use is set as it should be, and not to Bioware default).

Why is UMD "reserved" for Rogues and Bards?  Fighters should at least be able to put cross-class skills into it.

I think this pretty much "breaks" things, IMHO.  Having certain skills that are limited to certain classes (like Perform, for example, and the before-mentioned UMD).

Skills and Feats should not be limited to class IMHO.  Stuff like Magic, Sneak Attacks, etc are fine, as well as BaB, but the rest...bleh.

Pathfinder handles such much better IMHO.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Magical Master]

               

Kail Pendragon wrote...

Which can be summed up as NWN is not really well balanced to start with and I think many will agree with this statement.

It's not spectacularly  balanced in the first place, but I'm not sure it's fair to claim an imbalance due to unorthodox multi-classing in a game based upon DMing.  Look at RDD, for example.  It's a class that requires sorcerer or bard levels and it gives a bonus to melee.  Yet in NWN it's effectively changed from "Give Sorcerers and Bards a melee presence in exchange for less caster levels" into "Take 20+ levels of fighter, a token Sorc/Bard level or three, and then 10 RDD levels."  One isn't imbalanced, the other is more problematic.

Kail Pendragon wrote...

Thanks for your builder's perspective; now, if I may, what's your take as a player? Does it feel wrong to you to take advantage of certain multiclassing benefits? Does it feel like it's not true to the character, as Grom mentions in his opening post?

Does it feel true to the character?  No.

Does it feel wrong?  Only if I care about staying true to the character in a given environment.  I have a level 40 fighter on Greyhawk which was made for the "pure" group.  I also have a level 38 sorcerer/1 monk/1 paladin.

On a player's end, I'm usually looking to gain as much of an advantage as I can over the environment, whether it's spell selection, gear choices, or character builds.  I think it's up to the builder to correct what they see as problematic multi-classing, be it via game changes or saying "this and that are not allowed" or at least "this is tuned for non
'power-classed' builds."  Otherwise I tend to assume they've built and designed according to no resctrictions, meaning *not* doing that sort of multi-classing is making it harder than it was meant to be.  That's
often not true, of course, and "power-classed" characters wind up dominating the content (aka, it was actually tuned for the level 40 fighter), and I think that's a design flaw.

WebShaman wrote...

Ouch, what a spanking!

Let's see...I've played

Aielund
Pyramids of the Ancients Series
Lords of Darkness
A Dance With Rogues
Careena: Krakona Rising

A Dance With Rogues is, believe it or not, not going to care about Druids using Monk AC.  Aielund (more specifically, the EMS hak) does.

So, laying all other issues aside, that's 1 for 4, I guess.  And I think Aielund is by far the most balanced of the 4 (regardless of Druid/Monk stuff).  I guess I could search for mods which reach high enough level for it to be an issue which I've never played if it would brighten your day.

On the flip side, at least half a dozen PWs come to mind that either limit the AC or restrict multi-classing that I've looked at (and I've heard of many more RP oriented PWs that definitely would restrict multi-classing).

WebShaman wrote...

I agree with MM here - I feel that a 40th level Fighter should be able to go toe-to-toe with a Fighter 39/Rogue 1.

The problem here is made worse in NWN, due to skill point saving.  As one gets Rogue 1 at level 40, one can do massive skill dumps in main skills here, like UMD, Tumble, Hide, etc.  This hugely offsets the minor increase that the Fighter has in Discipline here, IMHO.

In this particular scenario it's solely due to Tumble.  4 AC > 26 HP.  The other stuff just "makes it worse," but if you took away the 4 extra Tumble AC then at least you could argue you're giving up raw combat ability for special skills.

WebShaman wrote...

What if we stay under Epic levels?  How does it look now?

Fighter 20 vs Fighter 19/Rogue 1?  Yep, still bad, though not as lopsided (especially if scroll use is set as it should be, and not to Bioware default).

It's closer (but 2 AC > 1 AB and 4 HP).  The problem with Tumble can be understood if compared to Persuade.  If I put 10 points into Tumble, I get 2 AC.  It doesn't matter if I'm level 7 or level 40, I get 2 AC.  If I put 10 points into Persuade...that's going to be completely useless at level 20+.  Stuff like Hide/Open Lock/Discipline/Lore/etc require you to keep investing in them so that they stay at the same level of power.  Tumble just keeps increasing in power as you invest, and unlike damage, AC scales automatically.  Tumble would make more sense if you had to have Character Level + 3 points in Tumble for 2 AC, at least (Character Level + 3)/2 points for 1 AC, and nothing with less than that (AC wise).
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Magical Master, 28 juillet 2011 - 03:30 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Kail Pendragon]

               

Magical Master wrote...

It's not spectacularly  balanced in the first place, but I'm not sure it's fair to claim an imbalance due to unorthodox multi-classing in a game based upon DMing.  Look at RDD, for example.  It's a class that requires sorcerer or bard levels and it gives a bonus to melee.  Yet in NWN it's effectively changed from  into "Take 20+ levels of fighter, a token Sorc/Bard level or three, and then 10 RDD levels."  One isn't imbalanced, the other is more problematic.

The other is a possibility too in PnP. Apart the fact that PnP is generally a lvl 20 environment and that there's a bunch of base classes and PrCs to choose from, eh.

"Give Sorcerers and Bards a melee presence in exchange for less caster levels"

That's not RDD. RDD is give any character build qualifying for it the associated features. Same as any other class.

Dragon Disciple's descriptions in the DMG states:

It is known that certain dragons can take humanoid form and even have humanoid lovers. Sometimes a child is born of this union, and every child of that child unto the thousandth generation claims a bit of dragon  blood, be it ever so small. Usually, little comes of it, though mighty sorcerers occasionally credit their powers to draconic heritage. For some, however, dragon blood beckons irresistibly. These characters become dragon  disciples, who use their magical power as a catalyst to ignite their dragon blood, realizing its fullest potential.
Dragon disciples prefer a life of exploration to a cloistered existence. 
Most are barbarians, fighters, or rangers who have dabbled as sorcerers or bards. Occasionally, a serious  spellcaster explores the path to further a goal of finding out more about his draconic heritage, though at the expense of most of his arcane studies. Clerics and druids rarely choose to become dragon disciples. Already adept at magic, many pursue adventure, especially if it furthers their goal of finding out more about their draconic heritage. All dragon disciples are drawn to areas known to harbor dragons.

which is pretty generic and leaves open all possibilities, as usual, but also clearly states a predominance of a melee approach with superficial interest in arcane lore. Oh look, the same that is so often done in NWN (and not having those minor boni to spellcasting that DD grants in PnP surely doesn't help to change the trend).

But let's not get down the road of what you think was intended by the game designers for certain classes, features etc.  and let's concentrate on what we can make out of the game and whether it results in something we consider good/enjoayable/etc.

So, why you don't consider true to character some multiclassing practices? The character is a concept realized in game through the build for what pertains "mechanical" aspects (being a good combatant, or a spellchucker, etc.); how does taking SD 1 to get HiPS become untrue to character if the character is supposed to be able to meld into shadows? (just an example of course, could have mentioned wis ac and the character's ability to dodge blows because of an intuitive defensive mindset etc.). I understand the perceived balance issues you mention or the fact the game mechanics are not as good as they could be etc. and one can agree or disagree with these arguments, but this is a separate argument, one of a more ideological nature.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Failed.Bard]

                 Half of the "problematic" builds derived from RDD are due solely to Bioware completely butchering the prerequisite check, and sadly, the handling of it is hard-coded.  For RDD, the requisite is the ability to cast first level arcane spells spontaneously, not level 1 in sorc/bard.
  Had that bug not slipped through (and yes, it is a bug, I even saw it admitted as such once but I can't find the quote right now), you wouldn't have 6 charisma half-orc barbarians taking one bard level to qualify for RDD.
  The same could be said for pale master.  The ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells (vampiric touch specifically in 3.5) became level 3 in an arcane class, which is a huge shift in base class requirements to get it.
  Too be honest though, from the players side of it, it really does come down to what the servers rules are for multi-classing.  If they've set up the dungeons so that only tumble dump pal 28/bard 2/ rdd 10 can survive the dungeons there, that's what players are going to make.
  I may not like how Bioware implimented much of the class and skill content, but it comes down to the server.  The servers set their own rules and balance how they see fit, and the players play in the servers that have the things they like in them.

WebShaman wrote...
...

Why is UMD "reserved" for Rogues and Bards? Fighters should at least be able to put cross-class skills into it.

I think this pretty much "breaks" things, IMHO. Having certain skills that are limited to certain classes (like Perform, for example, and the before-mentioned UMD).

Skills and Feats should not be limited to class IMHO. Stuff like Magic, Sneak Attacks, etc are fine, as well as BaB, but the rest...bleh.

Pathfinder handles such much better IMHO.

WotC fixed that in D&D 3.5, all skills are either class, or cross-class, there are no exclusive ones.  I had to rewrite all the skill lists (again) for my server when I implimented that part of the 3.5 rules.

  Actually, if NWN had been made under 3.5 like NWN2 was, there'd have likely been even more class combinations people would dislike.  Assassins, for instance, are considered to be spontaneous casting arcane magic users, meaning they should qualify as both Arcana Archer and RDD requisites, though not pale master as 3.5 requires vampiric touch as a known spell.  With assassins also getting HiPS at 8th in 3.5, they'd be far more problematic to balance for that SD ever was.
  That's a slightly different topic though.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Failed.Bard wrote...

  Half of the "problematic" builds derived from RDD are due solely to Bioware completely butchering the prerequisite check, and sadly, the handling of it is hard-coded.  For RDD, the requisite is the ability to cast first level arcane spells spontaneously, not level 1 in sorc/bard.
  Had that bug not slipped through (and yes, it is a bug, I even saw it admitted as such once but I can't find the quote right now), you wouldn't have 6 charisma half-orc barbarians taking one bard level to qualify for RDD.
  The same could be said for pale master.  The ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells (vampiric touch specifically in 3.5) became level 3 in an arcane class, which is a huge shift in base class requirements to get it.
  Too be honest though, from the players side of it, it really does come down to what the servers rules are for multi-classing.  If they've set up the dungeons so that only tumble dump pal 28/bard 2/ rdd 10 can survive the dungeons there, that's what players are going to make.
  I may not like how Bioware implimented much of the class and skill content, but it comes down to the server.  The servers set their own rules and balance how they see fit, and the players play in the servers that have the things they like in them.

WebShaman wrote...
...

Why is UMD "reserved" for Rogues and Bards? Fighters should at least be able to put cross-class skills into it.

I think this pretty much "breaks" things, IMHO. Having certain skills that are limited to certain classes (like Perform, for example, and the before-mentioned UMD).

Skills and Feats should not be limited to class IMHO. Stuff like Magic, Sneak Attacks, etc are fine, as well as BaB, but the rest...bleh.

Pathfinder handles such much better IMHO.

WotC fixed that in D&D 3.5, all skills are either class, or cross-class, there are no exclusive ones.  I had to rewrite all the skill lists (again) for my server when I implimented that part of the 3.5 rules.

  Actually, if NWN had been made under 3.5 like NWN2 was, there'd have likely been even more class combinations people would dislike.  Assassins, for instance, are considered to be spontaneous casting arcane magic users, meaning they should qualify as both Arcana Archer and RDD requisites, though not pale master as 3.5 requires vampiric touch as a known spell.  With assassins also getting HiPS at 8th in 3.5, they'd be far more problematic to balance for that SD ever was.
  That's a slightly different topic though.

Prerequesities are maybe hardcoded but can be rescripted. My module check for being able to cast spells of X lvl. Neverlethess RDD barbarians are probably weakest of all, and others like paladin/rdd dont lose anything or almost nothing (fighter/rdd).

Pale master per 3.5 indeed needs vampiric touch, thus bards cannot be Pale Masters. But Imo melee PM/Bards are just stupid boxing bags.

As for assassin where have you get he gets acces to RDD? I dont know about this at all. But indeed the assassin/AA is very powerfull combination. But still better than useless class which is assassin in NWN1.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Failed.Bard]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...
...

As for assassin where have you get he gets acces to RDD? I dont know about this at all. But indeed the assassin/AA is very powerfull combination. But still better than useless class which is assassin in NWN1.

I was basing it on this, from the d20 SRD on assassins:

Beginning at 1st level, an assassin gains the ability to cast a number of arcane spells.
... 
An assassin casts spells just as a bard does.
Upon reaching 6th level, at every even-numbered level after that (8th and 10th), an assassin can choose to learn a new spell in place of one he already knows. The new spell’s level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged, and it must be at least two levels lower than the highest-level assassin spell the assassin can cast. An assassin may swap only a single spell at any given level, and must choose whether or not to swap the spell at the same time that he gains new spells known for that level.

  It's not specificly stated that they do, only that they cast arcane spells, learned and cast in the same way that bards do, which should qualify them for those other PrCs.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               hmm interesting, I havent noticed that correct RDD prereq is "Ability to cast arcane spells without preparation." Thus if assassins casts like bards, then they indeed can become RDD. Which is even more powerfull than with bard...

Anyway, there is in some addon book also a 1. lvl feat that makes character viable to take RDD without the spellcasting prereq...
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Kail Pendragon]

               Assassin in PnP meets the prerequisites for RDD.

It is debatable that even a bard/sorc with <10 cha meets the prerequisites, and anyhow in PnP gear ability enhancements for sure let one meet prerequisites so a sorc with 8 natural cha wearing a ring of cha +2 would qualify for RDD (cantrips are spells too).
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Kail Pendragon]

               

Failed.Bard wrote...

  Half of the "problematic" builds derived from RDD are due solely to Bioware completely butchering the prerequisite check, and sadly, the handling of it is hard-coded.  For RDD, the requisite is the ability to cast first level arcane spells spontaneously, not level 1 in sorc/bard.

The prerequisite is the ability to cast arcane spells without preparation, not to be able to cast 1st lvl arcane spells spontaneously. Cantrips are good enough

  Had that bug not slipped through (and yes, it is a bug, I even saw it admitted as such once but I can't find the quote right now), you wouldn't have 6 charisma half-orc barbarians taking one bard level to qualify for RDD.

In PnP DnD gear bringing up cha to 10+ would let said barbarian qualify for RDD.

I'd be interested if you could bring up the quote where it was admitted (by whom?) the current implementation is a bug and not WAD. Is it lost on the legacy forums maybe?

  Too be honest though, from the players side of it, it really does come down to what the servers rules are for multi-classing.  If they've set up the dungeons so that only tumble dump pal 28/bard 2/ rdd 10 can survive the dungeons there, that's what players are going to make.

Well, actually there are some, like Grom above, it doesn't come down to that. Those like him wouldn't adopt specific multiclassing practices because of the feel of "wrogness" that they get from it.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Magical Master]

               

Kail Pendragon:
 
The other is a possibility too in PnP.

I suppose, but the DM can also ramp up creature power if that occurs when he didn’t expect it to in order to compensate.  It’s more flexible than a game where you have to make the same monster for everyone.

Kail Pendragon: 

which is pretty generic and leaves open all possibilities, as usual, but also clearly states a predominance of a melee approach with superficial interest in arcane lore. Oh look, the same that is so often done in NWN (and not having those minor boni to spellcasting that DD grants in PnP surely doesn't help to change the trend).

Fair enough.  Then it becomes a balance issue.

Kail Pendragon:

how does taking SD 1 to get HiPS become untrue to character if the character is supposed to be able to meld into shadows?

If a Fighter 39/Wizard 1 was able to cast Epic Spells due to 1 Wizard level, would you think that was true to the character?

Personally, that doesn’t seem to make any sense to me as an accomplished spellcaster is represented by more than 1 spellcaster level.  Likewise, SD level 1 (or monk/paladin/whatever level 1) doesn’t seem to represent the mastery of melding into shadows.  Aka, it’s true to the character to take SD levels…but taking 1 SD level is like taking 1 level of Wizard to cast Epic Warding. 

Kail Pendragon: 

Well, actually there are some, like Grom above, it doesn't come down to that. Those like him wouldn't adopt specific multiclassing practices because of the feel of "wrogness" that they get from it.

 
Then, no offense to Grom, he’s going to get smashed into the ground without a significant gear advantage or a larger party than intended on a world where the accepted concept is different.

To show just how large the gap is, let’s look at a 40 fighter versus a 12 fighter/3 rogue/25 weapon master under default rules.  Let’s assume they hit for the same amount of damage (good assumption) and crits don’t matter (bad assumption, so this is even further in the weapon master’s favor…or the mob is crit immune.  Whatever).  The 40 fighter should have 400 base HP, another 320 from Constitution with +12 con gear, 40 from Toughness, and 80 HP from Epic Toughness IV.  That’s 840 fighter HP.  Weapon Master has the same but no Epic Toughness IV, so 760 HP.  You know what, let’s make it 720 HP and assume the WM couldn’t get Toughness.  Let’s call the Fighter’s AB 20 and his AC 26.  The absolute value doesn’t matter.  Based upon that, we get the following…

Fighter: 840 HP, 20 AB, 26 AC

WM: 720 HP, 25 AB, 30 AC

Let’s also assume they’re both hasted and the Fighter is going against a mob with 800 HP, 19 AB, and 25 AC (aka, weaker than the Fighter).  Let’s give them all 20 damage per hit and 5 attacks per round hasted.

Our fighter gets a 80%/55%/30%/5%/80% schedule, or 2.5 hits per round, which is 50 damage per round.  Thus, it takes 16 rounds to defeat his enemy.  During this time, the enemy is attacking him with a 70%/45%/20%/5%/70% schedule, or 2.1 hits per round, aka 42 damage per round.  In those 16 rounds, that’s 672 damage dealt to the fighter, so the Fighter winds up at 168 HP.

Our WM gets a 95%/80%/55%/30%/95% schedule, or 3.55 hits per round, which is 71 damage per round. Thus it takes 11.3 rounds to defeat the enemy (rounding to the nearest tenth).  The enemy has a 50%/25%/5%/5%/50% schedule, or 1.35 hits per round.  At 20 damage per hit and 11.3 rounds, that’s 305.1 damage dealt to the WM.

In short, for the WM to take that same 672 HP in damage, you would need to increase the enemy’s HP to 1762 instead of 800.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Magical Master, 28 juillet 2011 - 10:23 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               Why should all characters be same? What you are saying is actually like "delete all classes and keep only fighter". Yes some character is stronger than other, and what? You still can have stronger character only because you get "power-stats", that is charisma, dexterity and wisdom 8 over the anyone who takes "recommended" stats.

There is nothing wrong if you want to give the pure classes some good advantage. But nerfing everyone else to the pure fighter power is absolutely wrong way to go.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par ShaDoOoW, 28 juillet 2011 - 10:58 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Magical Master]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

Why should all characters be same? What you are saying is actually like "delete all classes and keep only fighter"

Where in the world did I say that?  Go on, point it out.  Please.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Guest_Lowlander_*]

               

Magical Master wrote...

A Dance With Rogues is, believe it or not, not going to care about Druids using Monk AC.  Aielund (more specifically, the EMS hak) does.

So, laying all other issues aside, that's 1 for 4, I guess.  And I think Aielund is by far the most balanced of the 4 (regardless of Druid/Monk stuff).  I guess I could search for mods which reach high enough level for it to be an issue which I've never played if it would brighten your day.

I was actually quesitoning why any builder of SP mod would nerf monk Wis bonus for clerics:

Lowlander wrote...

It barely even makes sense to bother on
a PW let alone a SP mod. I mean throwing away armor/shield you are
losing 11 Points of AC right there. 16 if you factor that a Cleric can
echant his own shield to +5.

So how much Wisdom for 16 points of AC? 42 Wisdom to break even on AC. And this was important to nerf in a SP mod?

In addition to that, it isn't like Savant went out of his way to even nerf it for Shifters, he included EMS which is really aimed at PWs and includes hundreds of (poorly documented) changes. Mostly spell changes aimed an someones idea of magic working more like the PHB.

This all started with the point that think that designers really worry about doing specifc nerfs for SP mods(HIPS was specifically mentioned), which I still say they don't, it is largely pointless. That isn't the same thing as including some different magic system that makes hundreds of changes and incidentally includes something like a wis nerf for shifters.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lowlander, 29 juillet 2011 - 12:05 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Magical Master]

               

Lowlander wrote...

I was actually quesitoning why any builder of SP mod would nerf monk Wis bonus for clerics:

How about a really simple case?  38 Cleric/2 Monk

Str: 10
Dex: 16
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 16 -> 36
Cha: 8

Assuming enough gear for +12 to Dex and Wisdom, that's 9 Dex modifier and 19 Wisdom modifier.

A strength cleric would have 1 dex AC, 8 armor AC, 3 shield AC, and then we're assuming +5 armor AC and +5 shield AC?  That's 22 AC from armor and shield if so.

Our Cleric/Monk will have 9 dex AC, 19 Wisdom AC, and +5 armor AC, or 33 AC.  That's a gain of 11 AC without using a shield, meaning they can dual-wield with Divine Favor/Battletide/etc buffs.

Want to see something else that's fun?  Let's make the cleric strength based and have them use a 2H weapon.

Str: 15 -> 30
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wisdom: 15 -> 20
Cha: 8

Assuming they can get +12 strength and +12 wisdom from gear, that's 2 Dex AC, 11 Wisdom AC, and +5 armor AC for 18 total.  Normally using a 2H causes a loss of 8 AC with a +5 shield, now they only lose 4 AC (and gain skill dumps for Tumble, Discipline, and get Evasion).

And the fun part is that if the cleric uses Maximized Bull's, Cat's, and Owl's...they only need a total of 21 stats from gear (versus the 24 we just used above).  With Str, Dex, and Wis all capped the cleric gets 8 Dex, 11 Wisdom, and +5 for 24 AC.  Yeah, our cleric went from using a 1H and shield to using a 2H and *gained* 2 AC.

That said, the main concern is usually the full-fledged casting Cleric listed first with dex that has a huge AC advantage.  I'm also assuming the cleric is multi-classing rogue, bard, or assassin for a tumble dump regardless, if they're not doing that then that's another 4 AC from tumble from the monk multi-class.

Lowlander wrote...

This all started with the point that think that designers really worry about doing specifc nerfs for SP mods(HIPS was specifically mentioned), which I still say they don't, it is largely pointless. That isn't the same thing as including some different magic system that makes hundreds of changes and incidentally includes something like a wis nerf for shifters.

If I was building a SP module (which I still technically might), I would worry about that and other issues.  Of course, I'd be changing a bunch of stuff like EMS does (not changing it to what EMS is, but a sweeping overhaul of a lot of stuff).  Having one casting cleric in full plate and tower shield having 11 AC less than a dual-wielding cleric/monk is sort of an issue.