Power level of At-will power from second class?

[Jack99]

The multi-class rules are one of the things in 4e, that I am not too happy about. It is not that I do not like the way multi-classing is done, I just think it is lacking something.

Therefore, I was considering to institute a change in the rules. I was considering adding the following feat:

NMore Power
[Multiclass At-Will]
Prerequisite: Any class-specific multi-class feat
Benefit: You gain the use of an at-will power from your second class

Now, the goal of this isn't to make multi-classing a must. The goal is to create multi-class characters that feel as such before 11th level.

Basically, you could say that adding this feat would solve one of the bigger issues that we (my group and I) have with multi-classing in 4e. However, will this make multi-class characters more powerful than single-class ones? Versatility is great, but how powerful is it really?

Thanks in advance for any feedback

[catsclaw227]

Interesting idea.

Basically, you could say that adding this feat would solve one of the bigger issues that we (my group and I) have with multi-classing in 4e. However, will this make multi-class characters more powerful than single-class ones? Versatility is great, but how powerful is it really?

What are the issues with multiclassing that you are trying to solve?

Is the value of a feat equal to the value of an additional at-will? At-Wills in the heroic tier are all 1st level, but some are significantly more powerful than a basic attack. Like Twin Strike, for example.

[underfoot007]

Basically, you could say that adding this feat would solve one of the bigger issues that we (my group and I) have with multi-classing in 4e. However, will this make multi-class characters more powerful than single-class ones? Versatility is great, but how powerful is it really?
-----------------------------------
Yes, it will make multi-class chars much more powerful than single class chars. 4E brings multiclassing down to a reasonable level, imho. I think it is best to keep 4E multi-classing as written.
Good Luck.

[Kaelkatar]

At the very least you need to make it replace an old at will power. Secondly Twin Strike, and to maybe a lesser extent Righteous Brand and quite a deal more powerful than other at wills, and may easily unbalance a class.

[Mengu]

I wouldn't want to run into a Paladin who could Eyebite at will, or a Brawny Rogue with Wolfpack Tactics or Twin Strike at will.

I would say no to that fix. I actually don't mind the new approach. You want a fighter/wizard who feels like they can do both? Play a Swordmage. My ideal solution is a new class for each flavor of character you want to create. I like the simplicity of the current system, and the "dabbler" feel to all multiclassing.

Also from a design standpoint, rather than trying to balance multiclassing, it's much easier to create a new balanced class that "feels" multiclassed. All the old multiclass Prestige classes such as Arcane Archer, Arcane Trickster, etc, can now be turned into full blow classes, and have that unique feel from first level and up.

[Starbuck_II]

Originally Posted by catsclaw227

Interesting idea.


What are the issues with multiclassing that you are trying to solve?

Is the value of a feat equal to the value of an additional at-will? At-Wills in the heroic tier are all 1st level, but some are significantly more powerful than a basic attack. Like Twin Strike, for example.

I agree.
A Fighter might want:
Twin Strike (if dual weilding or bow using)
Righteous Brand (hit + buff ally)
Priest's Shield (again buff ally)
Valiant Strike (only if expected to be surrounded)
Viper/Wolf pack (occasionally useful)
Cloud of daggers (instant damage power)

Plus, Every Pally will get Eyebite and always be able to be invisible instead of 1/battle.

[Mad Hamish]

I'd say there are problems with that feat.

I don't know how bad it'd be in most cases but it'd be pretty damned tempting for my elven archer ranger with 20 dex and 10 str to burn it to get a rogue at will and attack in hth with dex...

Without a lot of experience in 4th ed yet the rest is theorycraft but
A rogue going for eyebite would also be likely broken case

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Originally Posted by Jack99

Therefore, I was considering to institute a change in the rules. I was considering adding the following feat:

NMore Power
[Multiclass At-Will]
Prerequisite: Any class-specific multi-class feat
Benefit: You gain the use of an at-will power from your second class.

Will this make multi-class characters more powerful than single-class ones? Versatility is great, but how powerful is it really?

Thanks in advance for any feedback

I think it will make multiclass characters more powerful, simply because it is the only way I can see to get a third at-will power outside of being a human; and humans will get a fourth at-will.

If it was "Benefit: Swap one of your at-wills with an at-will from your second class" it would be much more in line with the other multiclass feats.

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by catsclaw227

Interesting idea.


What are the issues with multiclassing that you are trying to solve?

Is the value of a feat equal to the value of an additional at-will? At-Wills in the heroic tier are all 1st level, but some are significantly more powerful than a basic attack. Like Twin Strike, for example.

My beef is that multi-class lacks some ... well multi-classing in 4e. I understand the dabbler reasoning and all that, but that doesn't change the fact that I would like a multi-classed character to be able to do more than something once per encounter.

Regarding the power of at-will. While I do not dispute that some are more powerful than others, I am just not convinced that it would unbalance and make MC characters way more powerful than regular characters.

Originally Posted by underfoot007

Yes, it will make multi-class chars much more powerful than single class chars. 4E brings multiclassing down to a reasonable level, imho. I think it is best to keep 4E multi-classing as written.
Good Luck.

See. This is where I disagree. Could you site some concrete examples of how it would overpower MC characters?

Originally Posted by Kaelkatar

At the very least you need to make it replace an old at will power. Secondly Twin Strike, and to maybe a lesser extent Righteous Brand and quite a deal more powerful than other at wills, and may easily unbalance a class.

Yeah, this is my back-up solution.

Originally Posted by Mengu

I wouldn't want to run into a Paladin who could Eyebite at will, or a Brawny Rogue with Wolfpack Tactics or Twin Strike at will.

I would say no to that fix. I actually don't mind the new approach. You want a fighter/wizard who feels like they can do both? Play a Swordmage. My ideal solution is a new class for each flavor of character you want to create. I like the simplicity of the current system, and the "dabbler" feel to all multiclassing.

A paladin that eyebites? I fail to see the power of that, unless you plan on using divine challenge and then playing chicken. A rogue using wolf-pack or twin strike would indeed gain some utility, but he would lose the ability to attack using his dex whenever he did. I really do not see the big deal.

Originally Posted by Starbuck_II

I agree.
A Fighter might want:
Twin Strike (if dual weilding or bow using)
Righteous Brand (hit + buff ally)
Priest's Shield (again buff ally)
Valiant Strike (only if expected to be surrounded)
Viper/Wolf pack (occasionally useful)
Cloud of daggers (instant damage power)

Plus, Every Pally will get Eyebite and always be able to be invisible instead of 1/battle.

Thinking more about it, I can see how a fighter with righteous brand would be pretty nasty to have around. However, he isn't much different from a str-based melee cleric, who can easily have just as high str.


In general, thanks for the feedback so far. I acknowledge that maybe it would be more in line with other feats to make it a power swap instead of an extra at-will.

Would that help any?

[Starbuck_II]

Originally Posted by Jack99

My beef is that multi-class lacks some ... well multi-classing in 4e. I understand the dabbler reasoning and all that, but that doesn't change the fact that I would like a multi-classed character to be able to do more than something once per encounter.

Regarding the power of at-will. While I do not dispute that some are more powerful than others, I am just not convinced that it would unbalance and make MC characters way more powerful than regular characters.


See. This is where I disagree. Could you site some concrete examples of how it would overpower MC characters?


Yeah, this is my back-up solution.


A paladin that eyebites? I fail to see the power of that, unless you plan on using divine challenge and then playing chicken. A rogue using wolf-pack or twin strike would indeed gain some utility, but he would lose the ability to attack using his dex whenever he did. I really do not see the big deal.

Thinking more about it, I can see how a fighter with righteous brand would be pretty nasty to have around. However, he isn't much different from a str-based melee cleric, who can easily have just as high str.


In general, thanks for the feedback so far. I acknowledge that maybe it would be more in line with other feats to make it a power swap instead of an extra at-will.

Would that help any?

Personally, yeah I think is power swap is pretty balanced. But let us know how playtesting of it goes (or actual game session if don't plasytest).

[FireLance]

I don't think an extra at-will for a feat would be mechanically unbalanced. After all, the additional value of an extra at-will power is the difference between it and the next best thing that the character can do with his standard action. Depending on the situation, this could be an encounter power, a daily power, or the next best at-will power.

Where taking an at-will power is problematic, the problem usually lies with the specific at-will power than with the idea of taking additional at-will powers in general. I would be wary of giving fighters access to righteous brand, but that's because I think righteous brand is a little overpowered itself.

The recent changes to invisibility have also made eyebite less of a concern. Unless the character succeeds at a Stealth check that beats the passive perception of all his enemies, they still know where he is.

However, although I don't think that it would be mechanically unbalanced, I think that it would take away something that was previously a distinctive quality of half-elves, in much the same way that a feat that gave a character access to a third at-will from his class would reduce the distinctiveness of humans.

[keterys]

I think that one solution might be to present an option as attractive for single classed people.

For example, give an encounter power if you're _not_ multiclassed.

[KidSnide]

Originally Posted by FireLance

I don't think an extra at-will for a feat would be mechanically unbalanced. After all, the additional value of an extra at-will power is the difference between it and the next best thing that the character can do with his standard action.

I tend to disagree with this assessment. At-will powers can be quite powerful situationally (except Twin Strike, which is powerful all the time), and it is a big advantage to have the best at-will powers from multiple classes.

Now, if the at-will power was granted as a per-encounter power... that would still be a very good feat, but would probably be balanced. (Although any of these ideas cuts into the half-elf's special territory...)

-KS

[keterys]

Clearly, the trick then is to change the half-elf to get a true at-will from another class (drop his aura to balance it)

At any rate, the power level of at-wills depends a bit on how long combats run in your games and which level ranges you examine. A high level game with fairly optimized characters might see at-will use be fairly rare with a couple exceptions. Certain at-will powers like Righteous Brand, Twin Strike, Thunderwave, Sacred Flame, Riposte Strike, Eyebite will see uses no matter what due to longevity of usefulness or being overly powerful in the wrong hands (striker powers in defender hands often get a bit odd).

One way you could avoid it is by only allowing certain powers. I don't think you'll see nearly as much objection to Eldritch Blast, Ray of Frost, Commander's Strike, Cleave, Enfeebling Strike, Lance of Faith, etc. So pick like 2 powers per class that are eligible, while ignoring the crazier powers.

[Stalker0]

I agree that at bare minimum this should REPLACE an at-will, not add another one.

If you want to return to the spirit of 3e multiclassing, then you have to give up something to gain your new flexibility, and one feat is not enough.

There are plenty of powerful synergies already mentioned that shows that even with a feat and swapping the at-will, there are plenty of people who would do it.

[Plane Sailing]

Moved to house rules.

For your proposed solution it might be more in line with the existing feats for encounter, utility and daily powers to make the feat swap one of your existing at-wills for one of your multiclass at-wills.

I've got a thread somewhere in this forum about a change to multiclassing which I'm testing whereby the multiclass feat doesn't give you skill + minor benefit but instead gives lets you swap one of your at-wills for a multiclass at-will and gives an appropriate minor benefit.

My reasoning is that at-wills are more of a defining feature of a class in many ways, and I'd like to make them available to multiclassers without waiting until paragon level and missing out on extra stuff there to boot.

One of the nice things about this approach is that it makes it easy to make a two-weapon fighting fighter (who swaps his cleave for ranger twin-strike, for instance). The fact that the fighter is using a normal weapon and an off-hand weapon rather than two normal weapons like the ranger prevents him treading so much on the strikers toes, while still allowing for something pretty flavourful. Other similar mixtures seem to work quite nicely too.

Cheers

[Plane Sailing]

Originally Posted by Mengu

Also from a design standpoint, rather than trying to balance multiclassing, it's much easier to create a new balanced class that "feels" multiclassed.

Surely you jest sir! Creating a new class now entails creating 80+ powers for the class... a monstrously time consuming task

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by Plane Sailing

Moved to house rules.

For your proposed solution it might be more in line with the existing feats for encounter, utility and daily powers to make the feat swap one of your existing at-wills for one of your multiclass at-wills.

I've got a thread somewhere in this forum about a change to multiclassing which I'm testing whereby the multiclass feat doesn't give you skill + minor benefit but instead gives lets you swap one of your at-wills for a multiclass at-will and gives an appropriate minor benefit.

My reasoning is that at-wills are more of a defining feature of a class in many ways, and I'd like to make them available to multiclassers without waiting until paragon level and missing out on extra stuff there to boot.

One of the nice things about this approach is that it makes it easy to make a two-weapon fighting fighter (who swaps his cleave for ranger twin-strike, for instance). The fact that the fighter is using a normal weapon and an off-hand weapon rather than two normal weapons like the ranger prevents him treading so much on the strikers toes, while still allowing for something pretty flavourful. Other similar mixtures seem to work quite nicely too.

Cheers

I read your thread. It seems I have some more thinking to do, before I make up my mind. But I like your house rule. Have you had any experience with it yet?

[LostSoul]

Originally Posted by keterys

One way you could avoid it is by only allowing certain powers. I don't think you'll see nearly as much objection to Eldritch Blast, Ray of Frost, Commander's Strike, Cleave, Enfeebling Strike, Lance of Faith, etc. So pick like 2 powers per class that are eligible, while ignoring the crazier powers.

I think that could work out well. Maybe you replace one of your current At-Wills with this new one.

[Plane Sailing]

Originally Posted by Jack99

I read your thread. It seems I have some more thinking to do, before I make up my mind. But I like your house rule. Have you had any experience with it yet?

It is out there as an option, but no takers yet. Two replacement characters being created this Sunday, and I hope I'll be able to persuade at least one of them to give it a go!

Cheers