Multi classing Objections: Rules vs. Fluff? - Page 8
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678
Results 71 to 80 of 80
  1. #71
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    2,021
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block TheCosmicKid


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by Satyrn View Post
    Although I could see a compromise, where something like pming's suggested text is a sidebar suggesting that some DMs might want to use it as an optional rule when deciding to use multiclassing.
    I wouldn't suggest a hard rule. I do think the PHB could stand to remind players and DMs a little more to put some effort into making the multiclass plausible. "It's best to talk to your DM before multiclassing, and cooperate with them to work it into the story" is better than "You must inform your DM of your intention to multiclass by deadline X".
    XP Satyrn gave XP for this post

  2. #72
    Member
    Pit Fiend (Lvl 26)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edenvale, San Jose, CA
    Posts
    13,853
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block Tony Vargas


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCosmicKid View Post
    If you need the "1st-Level Spellcasting" ability to get the "2nd-Level Spellcasting" ability, and the "2nd-Level Spellcasting" ability to get the "3rd-Level Spellcasting" ability, and so on, then that ordered list of abilities is a class
    Not if it's just one of many things a character can acquire.

    . It's basically all the wizard class was in D&D until 5E.
    It was also HD, attack & save matrices, and learning another crappy weapon every 5th level, back in the day. Kits (backgrounds) & schools since 2e, skills & feats since 3e, class features since 4e...

    I dunno about "exclusive", but other than that I think we're saying the same thing.
    Exclusive, yes, until you get into multiclassing to circumvent it.

  3. #73
    Member
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    NE Ohio, USA
    Posts
    2,314
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    D&DWotC Evacuee

    ° Block ccs


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by pming View Post
    I beg to differ. Having something like this would do the trick, I think...

    "In Game Considerations
    Multiclassing can not just be taken on a whim. If you are planing on having your PC learn a level in another class, you must inform the DM at least one full level before you take on a new Class (e.g., a 4th level character could not add a new class at 5th level, but could at 6th). This gives both you and the DM time to work in just how the character learns the arts of Wizardry, or suddenly finds himself having visions from a particular deity, etc. This only applies to adding a new class, not another level to a class you already have. Remember, the Multiclassing rules are here for those who want to create a character who's abilities and skills don't quite fit into the Class system as presented here. With Muliclassing you and your DM can create unusual secret orders who's members are trained in the arts of Fighting as well as have innate magical abilities as Sorcerers, or perhaps there is a clan of Barbarians who have special individuals who are trained to use gurrila tactics of hit and run, communing with animals, watching the stars for portents, and speak in the sacred language of the Druids."

    There. Now there's a rule. It fixed a "RP'ing problem".
    And in doing so? Quashed spontaneity & creative, unforeseen plot/character developments. Things vital to this game.
    XP Tallifer gave XP for this post

  4. #74
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    2,021
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block TheCosmicKid


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    Exclusive, yes, until you get into multiclassing to circumvent it.
    Why is multiclassing "circumventing" anything? As far as I'm concerned, multiclassing is how classes are supposed to work.
    XP Tallifer, 5ekyu gave XP for this post

  5. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCosmicKid View Post
    That can happen the the very next level, even if he doesn't multiclass: arcane trickster.

    This is a houserule that you're welcome to implement, but it should not be in the PHB. It makes lots of assumptions about the pace of the campaign (is it days between leveling or years?), the narrative style (do they roleplay down time or handwave it?), and the nature of the classes (do they really need that much time to break through as a sorcerer or sign a deal with a devil?) that may be true at your table, but not others. Furthermore, it actively encourages preplanning character "builds", which a lot of roleplayers don't like. The open-ended approach WotC took is the correct one: present the basic rules, and leave it to the DM and player to work out the best explanation for the specific circumstances rather than impose one-size-fits-all limitations. Turning all the numbers into a compelling story is, as ever, your job.
    Absolutely agree.

    The core rules are silent on the issue because those are very group and style considerations, subjective setting, etc - not core rule mandates.

    As I have been saying, if a player and gm are seeing one type of "leveling abstraction" as a problem, dont choose that one and choose another. It's what I did with my halfling, sow the seeds of considered multiclass at first level background and play them thru.No rule was broken by me doing that and so no rule requires it to be

  6. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by pming View Post
    Hiya!

    Phew! Lots to get to before I head of to bed...



    A Rogue learning "Cunning Action" is a Rogue thing. A Rogue NOT learning "Cunning Action", but in stead knowing how magic works and being able to cast Cantrips and 1st level Wizard spells...when 8 hours ago he was finishing his dinner and beer down in the common room. HUGE difference, imnsho.



    I beg to differ. Having something like this would do the trick, I think...

    "In Game Considerations
    Multiclassing can not just be taken on a whim. If you are planing on having your PC learn a level in another class, you must inform the DM at least one full level before you take on a new Class (e.g., a 4th level character could not add a new class at 5th level, but could at 6th). This gives both you and the DM time to work in just how the character learns the arts of Wizardry, or suddenly finds himself having visions from a particular deity, etc. This only applies to adding a new class, not another level to a class you already have. Remember, the Multiclassing rules are here for those who want to create a character who's abilities and skills don't quite fit into the Class system as presented here. With Muliclassing you and your DM can create unusual secret orders who's members are trained in the arts of Fighting as well as have innate magical abilities as Sorcerers, or perhaps there is a clan of Barbarians who have special individuals who are trained to use gurrila tactics of hit and run, communing with animals, watching the stars for portents, and speak in the sacred language of the Druids."

    There. Now there's a rule. It fixed a "RP'ing problem".



    It's not a matter of "it doesn't usually happen like that"...it's that there is nothing in the rules that prevent or even really deter it. As I listed in my example above, they designers could have come up with something to make MC'ing this way a little more...sensical. At least to my old eyes anyway.

    Just like Feats, I'm glad others use them and have fun. I'm also glad that MC and Feats are both listed as OPTIONAL. But for me (and my group), they just don't. Our games run fine without Feats and Multiclassing, so...yeah.

    ^_^

    Paul L. Ming
    Ok so to you there is a line between spontaneous abilities which pop up without previous in game events foreshadowing them that are ok and some that aren't and you want that line to be codified in rules to match your subjective sub-sets. Great.

    I prefer them having a core rules to that is a little more flexible than that.

    As for your new rule, doing exactly what you describe in an AL official game would afaik break no rule. It does not break any phb rule to tell your gm ahead of time and to work your future multiclass options into the game.

    So, that rule is not needed to enable the gameplay style and choices you want. It's totally fine within the RAW to do that.

    So, what you seem to be after is a rule stopping others who have different preferences from playing by those within RAW.

    I prefer core roles allowing more flexibility to those playstyles to choose how those elements play out in game.

    Edit and Aside
    In my current game... in addition to my character whose background and in-play performance sell both the potential multi-class choices I foresee the other expected MC is a rogue going fighter who also sold that idea to the GM at charger - so have them heads up. No rule was needed for this to be done and no rule was broken when it happened. So, not seeing a need to add a rule to enable it in your 5e games.

    Now, technically, my sorc has other mc options open such as rogue and fighter. With 3 other rogues in party plus certain background elements a rogue twist could easily be possible caused on developing story but it's not one I actively sought to include. Fighter I cannot see happening but it certainly could develop out of story with a shift to having sorc spells focus in on supporting a stealth fighter role.
    Last edited by 5ekyu; Yesterday at 01:47 PM.

  7. #77
    Member
    Pit Fiend (Lvl 26)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edenvale, San Jose, CA
    Posts
    13,853
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block Tony Vargas


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCosmicKid View Post
    Why is multiclassing "circumventing" anything?
    To model a wider range of characters without creating a class for each. Multiclassing options move a game from the class based extreme towards a build system. 3e is an example of a hybrid of the two, though still clearly on the class side since it preserves exclusivity with distinctions like class level, favored classes and exp penalties.
    5e, as always it seems when compared to 3e, is muddled, it eliminates exp penalties/favored classes, makes class level a less prominent restriction, but adds preqs for MCing, defends against 'dipping' and of course, makes MCing explicitly optional.

  8. #78
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    2,021
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block TheCosmicKid


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    To model a wider range of characters without creating a class for each. Multiclassing options move a game from the class based extreme towards a build system. 3e is an example of a hybrid of the two, though still clearly on the class side since it preserves exclusivity with distinctions like class level, favored classes and exp penalties.
    You missed my point. You keep writing stuff with the implicit assumption that exclusivity is an essential feature of a class system and multiclassing rules in some way reduce a system's "classiness". I am challenging that assumption. It's like claiming that a bicycle with a gearshift is less of a bicycle.

  9. #79
    Member
    Pit Fiend (Lvl 26)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edenvale, San Jose, CA
    Posts
    13,853
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block Tony Vargas


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCosmicKid View Post
    You missed my point. You keep writing stuff with the implicit assumption that exclusivity is an essential feature of a class system .
    Exclusivity is a key feature of class systems, yes. If any character can take any feature, at the same 'cost,' you have a classless system.

  10. #80
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    2,021
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    ° Block TheCosmicKid


    ° Friend+
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    Exclusivity is a key feature of class systems, yes. If any character can take any feature, at the same 'cost,' you have a classless system.
    Is D&D a classless system?

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Similar Threads

  1. Brand new to C&C; Questions about Multi-classing Rules
    By Warunsun in forum *Pathfinder, Starfinder, Older D&D Editions (4E, 3.x, 2E, 1E, OD&D), D&D Variants, OSR
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Friday, 21st February, 2014, 02:19 AM
  2. [House Rules] Multi-Classing
    By Viktyr Gehrig in forum *D&D 5th Edition News, Rules, Homebrews, and House Rules
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Sunday, 25th November, 2012, 02:27 AM
  3. My Possible Multi-Classing Rules/Guidelines
    By Brainwatch in forum *D&D 5th Edition News, Rules, Homebrews, and House Rules
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Friday, 21st September, 2012, 06:31 PM
  4. Are there multi-classing rules for C&C?
    By Devall2000 in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Friday, 27th October, 2006, 03:20 PM
  5. Anyone have house rules for multi-classing?
    By Tuzenbach in forum *Pathfinder, Starfinder, Older D&D Editions (4E, 3.x, 2E, 1E, OD&D), D&D Variants, OSR
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Sunday, 5th September, 2004, 04:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •