Multi classing Objections: Rules vs. Fluff?

[MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION],
Not to be rude, but let me say it again. I. Don't. Care.

Tony Vargas said:

You wouldn't want do that with all classes, but maybe one of each role: Fighter, Rogue, Cleric... OK, each role other than controller, "Simple Controller" is just an oxymoron...

Click to expand...

Sorcerer was always the simple striker by virtue of always having the extra damage on, later slayer came and was even simpler.

I suggest we move this conversation to the old eds' forum before you keep pounding a dead horse.

Generally people multiclass because they want to use the mechanics of another class, normally one with some sinergies, the current class is not giving them what they want.
Then you have the fluff people want to add, personally I find most multiclassing fluff is just an excuse to use some powers and it can get a bit ridiculous, no sacred cows for me.

Oofta said:

Yes you could add fluff that says "you can't do X because you've already pulled that trick once and now they're expecting it". Bit of a stretch, but okay. But then you hit a completely different group of people who didn't see you do X.

Click to expand...

I tried writing up a resource system that limited abilities on a per-opponent basis. I decided it'd be kind of annoying to track if it was the primary system for a class and you were throwing around lots of different effects with it. I still use the mechanic for one or two pressure-point-type attacks in a monk thing I'm working on, though - I figured it made sense, and it wouldn't be too hard to remember if it's just a binary "I've hit that guy/I haven't hit that guy yet".

dco said:

Generally people multiclass because they want to use the mechanics of another class, normally one with some sinergies, the current class is not giving them what they want.
Then you have the fluff people want to add, personally I find most multiclassing fluff is just an excuse to use some powers and it can get a bit ridiculous, no sacred cows for me.

Click to expand...

This is a character I played for over two years. In 3.5, I made a sorcerer, with a focus on weapons and low wisdom. I spent a feat on a martial weapon -as I think halberds and glaives are quite elegant-. I first I was playing my character as a bit of a trickster with a criminal past and ties to the mob -that came back to be a pain big time-. I was always roleplaying an admiration for warriors and was the number one fan of the paladin in the party. During one incursion into enemy territory the paladin died, we were outnumbered and we couldn't even retrieve the body. I wanted to retrieve the body despite the consensus that finishing the mission was more important. The Cleric had to drag me away. This all happened too close to level up, by the time we returned to civilization I started to roleplay being more serious and not wishing more people to die. Also I decided that since I couldn't give him a proper burial I would keep his spirit alive by continuing his mission in the world. Of course I took all of my new levels in paladin from that point onwards. Do you honestly think I did it for mechanical reasons?

MoonSong said:

This is a character I played for over two years. In 3.5, I made a sorcerer, with a focus on weapons and low wisdom. I spent a feat on a martial weapon -as I think halberds and glaives are quite elegant-. I first I was playing my character as a bit of a trickster with a criminal past and ties to the mob -that came back to be a pain big time-. I was always roleplaying an admiration for warriors and was the number one fan of the paladin in the party. During one incursion into enemy territory the paladin died, we were outnumbered and we couldn't even retrieve the body. I wanted to retrieve the body despite the consensus that finishing the mission was more important. The Cleric had to drag me away. This all happened too close to level up, by the time we returned to civilization I started to roleplay being more serious and not wishing more people to die. Also I decided that since I couldn't give him a proper burial I would keep his spirit alive by continuing his mission in the world. Of course I took all of my new levels in paladin from that point onwards. Do you honestly think I did it for mechanical reasons?

Click to expand...

Yes.

dco said:

Yes.

Click to expand...

Even though mutliclassing left me with an objectively worse character? (Wasted proficiency feats, too low Wisdom to cast paladin spells, unable to wear armor and still cast, not high enough constitution to be a good frontliner, not to mention that not being able to still spells later on almost gets my character killed more than once and I didn't learn spells I was planning to that could have helped the party many times more than minimal healing and one or two smites per day that got wasted on trivial enemies)

MoonSong said:

Do you honestly think I did it for mechanical reasons?

Click to expand...

The 3e pally's Divine Grace (+CHAmod all saves!) with the Sorcerer's CHA-primary is tempting, but no, not worth losing the caster levels over.
Now, Pally2 to get the bonus & some low-level survivability, /then/ Sorcerer X, sure... But how to RP that without falling from said grace? Mebe your supernatural ancestor was a celestial, and your sorcerous powers are your 'true destiny' through which you serve your god? Bit of a stretch.

But, 'inspired by a Paladin's sacrifice to take up their cause?' Totally IC reason to go PallyX, even in the face of it being a terrible idea for a full caster, mechanically.

TheCosmicKid said:

I tried writing up a resource system that limited abilities on a per-opponent basis. I decided it'd be kind of annoying to track if it was the primary system for a class and you were throwing around lots of different effects with it.

Click to expand...

It could end up more than a little complicated to book-keep if you had too many such abilities. And there's also the question of whether it no longer works on enemies who have just seen it, as well as those you've already used it on (if just seeing it means you aren't vulnerable, at least for the moment, then there's probably less tracking, net, - and obviously, less opportunities to use it), and whether they could also warn those unaware...

But, if you kept the number of such abilities low, went with enemies seeing it also no longer being susceptible, and applied a reasonable level of abstraction to the tracking mechanism, itself, it could be quite workable. Essentially, it could be a single (successful?) use ability that recharged when next initiative is rolled, rather than on a rest.

If this thread can multi class into edition waring, can't my paladin multi class into a sorcerer?

MichaelSomething said:

If this thread can multi class into edition waring, can't my paladin multi class into a sorcerer?

Click to expand...

Edition warring isn't a class... (...though I could probably teach a class on edition warring...)

Edition Warrior, OTOH, that's a class! ;P

...OK, maybe sub-class....

What?...sub-race, you say? ...
...of troll-
-hey?!










.... hm, if we can check my XP c2008, we could figure out how many levels I have in Edition Warrior(4venger)....