What is your thoughts on multiclassing?

[Evilhalfling]

In an online game I cherry picked a single warlock utility (shadow form) and added it to a cleric. I added a lot of RP baggage and the character has been a blast to play. The bonus skill and at-will (underpowered by ability selection and lack of leveled implement) have been useless.

At my tabletop game I HR that a single ability swap feat allows up to 3 swaps. One at a time, no more than one each enc/ut/daily. These choice are fixed unless retrained as any other choice is.

So far no one has even taken the basic multiclass feat. One tempted player was barred by not having the required 13 stat, he took skill training instead, before retraining to a new MP feat.

One player does have a paladin/feylock cross planned, but is currently trapped as the only leader in a small party.

 

[Cadfan]

My opinion of 4e multiclassing- its a really powerful concept, with a few flaws.

The flaws are the need for extra hands to hold your new weapons or implements, and the need to max two stats that may or may not help with your class. Its odd, and perhaps not the best, that multiclassing is at its most powerful if you can find powers worth taking that don't require attack rolls.

The neat things- multiclassing is mostly unnecessary. The wide power selection means that if you want to play a rogue who is kind of fighterish, there are powers that let you do that. Ditto a fighter who is kind of roguish. Or a cleric who is kind of wizardy. Basically, if your class has a slight tendency towards another role, with careful power choice you can avoid the need to multiclass.

There's also the design space available to use paragon paths as a means of cancelling out the need for multiclassing.

Imagine a paragon path designed for wizards who want to multiclass into rogue. We'll call it Arcane Trickster, out of nostalgia. To get in, you need to be a wizard, but you also need to have at least one rogue multiclass feat. The paragon path itself is a bunch of perfectly compatible abilities and powers designed to give you maximally wizardy rogue powers, and/or vice versa.

We already have one path kind of like that- Wizard of the Spiral Tower. We could have more.

 

[Dausuul]

I like the idea of 4E multiclassing, but in practice I find it has one major problem - the fact that different classes need different tools. If you multiclass wizard/cleric, for instance, you have to either drop yet another feat on Quick Draw, or spend all your minor actions getting your holy symbol out and putting it away again, or resign yourself to not getting an enhancement bonus on your cleric powers.

What I'm finding in practice is that multiclassing is great to cherry-pick another class's utilities, but seldom worth it to get any kind of attack powers. I'm currently playing a swordmage who's multiclassed into wizard purely to get Shield, which is a truly awesome - some would say broken - power for any melee warrior. I'm probably not going to do any more multiclassing.

The exception is martial classes, who can do fairly well out of multiclassing - most martial classes' powers key off either Strength or Dexterity, so you can easily find a class that uses the same stat you do, and they all use weapons.

It's kind of ironic, really; all that effort to make a new multiclass system, and it ends up being just like 3E. Non-casters do fine with multiclassing, while casters suck at it.

IMO, we really need a feat that lets you choose any one type of implement (rods, staves, orbs, etc.) or weapon category (light blades, heavy blades, etc.), and use it as an implement for a class that couldn't normally do so.

(Edit: And apparently Cadfan has multiclassed ninja.)

 

[Evilhalfling]

If you multiclass wizard/cleric, for instance, you have to either drop yet another feat on Quick Draw, or spend all your minor actions getting your holy symbol out and putting it away again

Except that holy symbols are the exception, they don't need to be brandished, only worn. Clerics were designed so they were not penalized for going mace and board.

Paragon multiclassing as presented is terribly weak, losing the AP bonus that is built into all PP's, and only learning understrength powers.

 

[bert1000]

I think it is great, except for paragon multiclassing. I think you should get more class features to offset the paragon abilities you are giving up. For instance, I have been playing around with:


Paladin:
11th: Whenever you use an action point for an extra attack, you can use Divine Challenge as a free action immediately before the attack.
16th: You gain Lay on Hands

Ranger:
11th: Whenever you use an action point for an extra attack, you can use Hunter’s Quarry as a free action immediately before the attack.
16th: You gain two blade or archer fighting style

Rogue:
11th: Whenever you use an action point for an extra attack, you can use Sneak Attack if applicable.
16th: You gain artful dodger or brutal scoundrel

Warlock:
11th: Whenever you use an action point for an extra attack, you can use Warlock’s Curse as a free action immediately before the attack.
16th: You gain Shadow Walk

Warlord
11th: Choose inspiring presence or tactical presence. Whenever you use an action point in an encounter, you are considered to have inspiring or tactical presence for the rest of the encounter.
16th: You can use Inspiring Word once per encounter (in addition to once a day from your multiclass feat)

Wizard:
11th: Pick an implement to master. Whenever you use an action point for an extra action, you gain the benefits of implement mastery.
16th: You create a spell book. You can choose 2 wizard daily and utility spells for each wizard spell slot you have.

 

[Jhaelen]

What if my fighter starts to dabble in magic, and discovers he likes it more than fighting? In 3e-style multiclassing, I just keep taking more Wizard levels. But in 4e (and GW) style multiclassing, the best I can hope for is a 50/50 hybrid.

However, in 3E multiclassing your fighter-gone-wizard will suck for all eternity because he'll always be a step behind in access to spells and caster level.

That's not a problem that 4E multiclassing has, you'll never be behind those who didn't multiclass.

And in fact I like it that a fighter/wizard is different from a wizard/fighter. I think it's more like AD&D 1E's human dual class. The implement problem is annoying, though. But it's probably something that can be fixed by specific feats and/or items.

 

[Prism]

I generally like many of the multiclass options in 4e and one thing worthy of a mention is the flexibility it offers over a campaign rather than just in any individual situation.

Multiclass characters love to level up! Every time you level up you can swap all your multiclass powers for other powers in addition to being able to retrain, which provides all sorts of options.

For example a character with 3 power swap feats in fighter could upon leveling, after finding that the player of the recently dead cleric has decided to roll up a wizard, swap all 3 powers at once to 3 that provided a healing or regen benefit such as boundless endurance and victorious surge

The next level the party discovers they are about go on an adventure to fight undead so the same character retrains the mc feat to maybe paladin and then swaps 2 powers to radiant smite and martyrs retribution which deal radiant damage (still str based) and the other power back to their original class (i'll let you worry about the back story)

A couple of levels later the undead adventure is over and the character swaps back to fighter taking some now higher level powers

This flexibility is very hard to gain in any other way - effectively being able to change up to 4 powers per level up including retraining.

Paragon multiclassing as presented is terribly weak, losing the AP bonus that is built into all PP's, and only learning understrength powers.

I agree that losing the AP bonus and other abilities is not made up for by the swapping of the at will but I disagree that the powers are understrength. A 7th level encounter, 10th utility and 19th daily is about right for a paragon class. Most paragon classes have 1 cool, 1 ok, and 1 pretty meh power I'd say. At least with paragon multiclassing you can pick the best. Lets be honest - all powers are far from equal

To continue the fighter theme, imagine a paragon class with rain of blows, strength from pain and quicksilver stance. You would snap it up (we're all powergamers right ;-) )if it had even a half decent AP power to go with it (of course it doesn't which is a shame).

It's kind of ironic, really; all that effort to make a new multiclass system, and it ends up being just like 3E. Non-casters do fine with multiclassing, while casters suck at it.

I reckon thats just because there are 5 classes which key off strength with lots of secondary CHA and WIS effects. And only two of INT. Hopefully PHB2 will improve this

But in 4e (and GW) style multiclassing, the best I can hope for is a 50/50 hybrid.

By 10th you can get about 25% there, by 20th its close to 50% and in epic you can make it to nearly about 85%. You can create a fighter which has no fighter encounter powers, no fighter daily powers, 4 fighter utilities and 1 at will. Meanwhile it has 4 encounter and 4 daily powers from up to 3 other classes and 3 utilities from 2 classes. The main problem is having to wait until epic to do it

 

[garyh]

I don't play much 4e, but I'm somewhat wary of its multiclassing system based on experience I had playing Guild Wars (yes, the MMO), which uses a similar system.

In GW, you have both a primary and a secondary profession. You can use powers from both professions, but you gain access to a special attribute to level up for your primary profession that you don't get for your secondary. The upshot is that a primary warrior is always better than a secondary warrior, because the former has leveled up his special warrior stat while the latter hasn't.

This all seems fine and dandy offhand. I started playing with a Warrior/Dervish, and all was well: my character was 60% warrior, 40% dervish. But, over the course of play, I discovered that I really liked playing as a dervish more, with a little bit of warrior thrown in. But, no matter how many dervish skills I used, I would never be as good as someone who had started as Dervish/Warrior.

Basically, I don't like the fact that one class has to be considered primary, and the fact that the class that is primary is fixed at character creation. What if my fighter starts to dabble in magic, and discovers he likes it more than fighting? In 3e-style multiclassing, I just keep taking more Wizard levels. But in 4e (and GW) style multiclassing, the best I can hope for is a 50/50 hybrid.

This is where there's an advantage to playing a pen and paper game. While it's not RAW, with your DM's okay, you CAN change your fighter/wizard to a wizard/fighter if it makes sense.

 

[DM-Rocco]

No, I meant that at Paragon level everyone gets to take a paragon path of their choice (which may well include ones which are designed for their multiclass as much as one designed for their class). There wouldn't be any 'paragon multiclassing' as per 4e though, as I don't think it would add anything to the party. The multiclasser can get pretty much what he wants from the existing stuff.

I get it now.

I'm not sure what you mean by contradicts itself? The first feat swaps an at will, in the same what the other feats swap encounter attacks, utilities and daily attacks.

I wasn't refering to your system, sorry, I was refering to the current 4e system. That is where is says your first power you gain is an at-will useable once per day and your futures feats swap out your powers rather than something like gain an attack encounter power usable once per day. Or something simular.

The at-will powers are where a huge amount of the flavour of the class resides, hence why I introduce them as a swap at the early point (and it isn't a no-brainer for most classes which of their existing at-wills they would lose either - most classes have at least 2 good at-wills they are interested in).

I agree.

I'm not sure that I completely follow your question, sorry!

For the class feats I'm just going to include a few prereqs to ensure that there should be a logical connection (e.g. warlock curse must come before warlock pact boon) and that some of the 'top' class features can't be bought too cheaply (e.g. must take either Brutal Scoundrel or Artful Dodger before you take Sneak Attack) or in the case of leaders the general powers (inspiring word) come before the specific powers (tactical doo-dah for tactical warlock, turn undead for the cleric).

I don't think my solution is a panacea that will suit everybody by any means, although I think it is interesting that I've been talking about this for months and now I see some class feature feats appearing in Martial Power

These are just my thoughts on multiclassing

Cheers

I was trying to ask everyone, not just you, what prerequisites do you think a feat should have to gain an additional power? Obviously an attack encounter, utility and attack daily power would have different level requirements and it would have to be limited to being only taken once and most likely be a paragon or epic tier feat. Does that make more sense now?

 

[DM-Rocco]

What I'm finding in practice is that multiclassing is great to cherry-pick another class's utilities, but seldom worth it to get any kind of attack powers. I'm currently playing a swordmage who's multiclassed into wizard purely to get Shield, which is a truly awesome - some would say broken - power for any melee warrior. I'm probably not going to do any more multiclassing.
[/I]

This is why I started to take a closer look at multiclassing to begin with. Swordmage and wizard are like peanut butter and jelly, mmm, good.

I figured shield for utility but you also can't beat disintegrate for a power offensive daily at just about any level and the wizard has plenty of good close burst encounter powers that a normal wizard might think about taking but would rather sit a little further out of combat.