Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Multiclassing ability score prerequisites—required for balance or an unnecessary hurdle?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mephista" data-source="post: 7227289" data-attributes="member: 6786252"><p>I've done flashback games, so that's not entirely true. And, even without flashbacks, the background does inform story going forwards in many games, so its still important, and still informs play. </p><p> Yes, it was. The example is specifically about leaving the field for a new one. Why else describe it as quitting an engineering job and going into sales? </p><p></p><p> Okay, now I agree that the Strength requirement for paladins is a bit unusual, in that the game is assuming the paladin is a Strength based class, and you won't see Dex-dins. You see it here and there in the rules. I can see arguments for either Dex/Str 13 as well as Cha 13. But there should be some innate melee skill involved here to fulfill that intent. What's being suggested, instead, is something that doesn't even come close to fitting the intent. Not a renegade, not a variation, someone that is very deliberately built to suck at their original class. To use your paladin example, it would be a hardy, highly intelligent, highly observational paladin with no social talent or skill at arms trying to multi-class with wizard.</p><p></p><p>Also, lets touch on the paladin thing losing touch with their order or god or whatever. Paladins are bound by their Oaths, not an order or a god. Even if the oath is to a god, you can simply find a new god. These Oaths can be entirely personal, so there's nothing to be bonded to. As such, even an Oath of the Crown can continue the same oath while seeking to replace the current tyrants or whatever with "the true ruler." Even failing all that, paladins leaving their Oath is handled by swapping their subclass. Generally to Oathbreaker or a different "fallen paladin" archetype (wasn't there another in the UA articles?), but to other Oaths are also possible. </p><p></p><p>But lets say that there's a paladin who's Oaths rely on gods like a cleric, and decided to quit all gods. By all rights, the paladin should be losing ALL their auras and smites and everything. But... they're not. The game assumes that they're going to carry on with access to all this stuff they got before. There's no mechanics for losing levels or leaving a class. You're always going to be a paladin, barring house rules.</p><p></p><p></p><p> You didn't actually answer my most important point, and the whole reason I find this argument to be trash:</p><p></p><p>WHY did you make a paladin without any martial ability or charisma? That's the real issue I have with this argument. Why did this paladin exist in the first place? Why would you make a wizard that has practically +0 in their main stat to begin with? That's where I'm extremely suspicious of this entire argument from the word go. Its assuming you have sub-standard ability in a class, whcih to me, is a very strong suggestion that the only reason you have such sub-standard ability is because you planned to have a character with such for power gaming reasons. Admittedly, there is some weirdness with Dex and Str, especially when I consider dex-paladins/barbarians and str-rogues/rangers to be common enough existances. But when the original example I was quoting was a <em>wizard</em> with a focus on one stat and a lack of reason to ever have a low Int? There's no finesse-weapon flexibility going on at all, unlike Str/Dex. </p><p></p><p>So, why is there a PC wizard with a Int of 12 and below after all the possible races with an Int boost? I have yet to hear a good answer that doesn't involve "planning on multiclassing" from character creation. As such, this entire argument reeks of after-the-fact justification. People are trying to make arguments for someone that happens to run into another class as part of the natural character progression. I find it very suspicious that a "natural character progression" would have such a dumb wizard in the first place.</p><p></p><p> I don't save links, but there's enough perponderance of evidence around that its enough for casual conversation. </p><p></p><p>5e multi-classing is based on part of 3e multi-class rules (which included prestige classes); ad&d 's multiclassing was to level two classes up at the same time, which has zero bearing on the current ruleset. As such, you can't just make complete comparisons to previous editions, given that hybridization has been clearly designed into subclasses, given the examples of said hybridized subclasses. Previous edition multiclassing is so vastly different from 5e's, that direct comparisons are meaningless. As well, 5e classes are built upon the idea of achieving certain tiers and milestone abilities - multiclass is designed to delay reaching those milestones and put you beind the projected curve. </p><p></p><p>Simply put, the game is designed to reach certain powers and abilities at certain levels. If you don't, your character stops being able to face the challenges your party faces. Delaying a level or two doesn't hurt as much, or swapping out after getting milestone abilities and quitting the game before the next milestone works, but in terms of hybridization? Its unviable - an evoker 4/life cleric 4 is going to have a hard time doing anything compared to an arcane cleric 8. The character suffers massively, and for many people, that undermines the fun of the game. This also applies to carreer changes - the abilities of low levels in classes aren't going to provide you with the necessary tools to keep up with the challenges faced by the troupe.</p><p></p><p>This is just how the game is designed, and the assumptions built in. There's a reason why multi-classing is an optional, advanced feature, because, if done poorly, it can make a character unable to meet with the challenges the game provides and assumes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mephista, post: 7227289, member: 6786252"] I've done flashback games, so that's not entirely true. And, even without flashbacks, the background does inform story going forwards in many games, so its still important, and still informs play. Yes, it was. The example is specifically about leaving the field for a new one. Why else describe it as quitting an engineering job and going into sales? Okay, now I agree that the Strength requirement for paladins is a bit unusual, in that the game is assuming the paladin is a Strength based class, and you won't see Dex-dins. You see it here and there in the rules. I can see arguments for either Dex/Str 13 as well as Cha 13. But there should be some innate melee skill involved here to fulfill that intent. What's being suggested, instead, is something that doesn't even come close to fitting the intent. Not a renegade, not a variation, someone that is very deliberately built to suck at their original class. To use your paladin example, it would be a hardy, highly intelligent, highly observational paladin with no social talent or skill at arms trying to multi-class with wizard. Also, lets touch on the paladin thing losing touch with their order or god or whatever. Paladins are bound by their Oaths, not an order or a god. Even if the oath is to a god, you can simply find a new god. These Oaths can be entirely personal, so there's nothing to be bonded to. As such, even an Oath of the Crown can continue the same oath while seeking to replace the current tyrants or whatever with "the true ruler." Even failing all that, paladins leaving their Oath is handled by swapping their subclass. Generally to Oathbreaker or a different "fallen paladin" archetype (wasn't there another in the UA articles?), but to other Oaths are also possible. But lets say that there's a paladin who's Oaths rely on gods like a cleric, and decided to quit all gods. By all rights, the paladin should be losing ALL their auras and smites and everything. But... they're not. The game assumes that they're going to carry on with access to all this stuff they got before. There's no mechanics for losing levels or leaving a class. You're always going to be a paladin, barring house rules. You didn't actually answer my most important point, and the whole reason I find this argument to be trash: WHY did you make a paladin without any martial ability or charisma? That's the real issue I have with this argument. Why did this paladin exist in the first place? Why would you make a wizard that has practically +0 in their main stat to begin with? That's where I'm extremely suspicious of this entire argument from the word go. Its assuming you have sub-standard ability in a class, whcih to me, is a very strong suggestion that the only reason you have such sub-standard ability is because you planned to have a character with such for power gaming reasons. Admittedly, there is some weirdness with Dex and Str, especially when I consider dex-paladins/barbarians and str-rogues/rangers to be common enough existances. But when the original example I was quoting was a [I]wizard[/I] with a focus on one stat and a lack of reason to ever have a low Int? There's no finesse-weapon flexibility going on at all, unlike Str/Dex. So, why is there a PC wizard with a Int of 12 and below after all the possible races with an Int boost? I have yet to hear a good answer that doesn't involve "planning on multiclassing" from character creation. As such, this entire argument reeks of after-the-fact justification. People are trying to make arguments for someone that happens to run into another class as part of the natural character progression. I find it very suspicious that a "natural character progression" would have such a dumb wizard in the first place. I don't save links, but there's enough perponderance of evidence around that its enough for casual conversation. 5e multi-classing is based on part of 3e multi-class rules (which included prestige classes); ad&d 's multiclassing was to level two classes up at the same time, which has zero bearing on the current ruleset. As such, you can't just make complete comparisons to previous editions, given that hybridization has been clearly designed into subclasses, given the examples of said hybridized subclasses. Previous edition multiclassing is so vastly different from 5e's, that direct comparisons are meaningless. As well, 5e classes are built upon the idea of achieving certain tiers and milestone abilities - multiclass is designed to delay reaching those milestones and put you beind the projected curve. Simply put, the game is designed to reach certain powers and abilities at certain levels. If you don't, your character stops being able to face the challenges your party faces. Delaying a level or two doesn't hurt as much, or swapping out after getting milestone abilities and quitting the game before the next milestone works, but in terms of hybridization? Its unviable - an evoker 4/life cleric 4 is going to have a hard time doing anything compared to an arcane cleric 8. The character suffers massively, and for many people, that undermines the fun of the game. This also applies to carreer changes - the abilities of low levels in classes aren't going to provide you with the necessary tools to keep up with the challenges faced by the troupe. This is just how the game is designed, and the assumptions built in. There's a reason why multi-classing is an optional, advanced feature, because, if done poorly, it can make a character unable to meet with the challenges the game provides and assumes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Multiclassing ability score prerequisites—required for balance or an unnecessary hurdle?
Top