Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mathew_Freeman" data-source="post: 4289759" data-attributes="member: 1846">What exactly do you want from a Fighter/Mage? That's a questions I've not seen answered by anyone who doesn't like the current multi-classing rules.If you want a Fighter who can cast a few very Wizardly spells (eg Fireball) then the 4e rules work perfectly (assuming you're willing to have your ability scores favour Str and Intelligence).If you want a Wizard who has a few neat tricks for when they get into (or find themselves in) melee combat then the current rules work.If you want a fighter that uses magic in melee combat to defend themselves and hurt the enemy - then you do indeed need a base class as those sorts of powers aren't suitable for what the straight Wizard does, nor should a straight Fighter have magic powers. I'm confused as to why it's assumed that Multi-classing should entail mashing two wildly different classes together and expecting them to work.Personally, I like the rules, as it prevents people repeating the scenarios of previous editions (frankly, aside from level limits, why wouldn't you play a fighter/cleric, say, from 2e, when they're so much more powerful than either a straight fighter or cleric? In 3e, the choice was less stark, but obviously lots of people used the cherry-picking technique to build very powerful characters). The 4e rules also force you to make a choice - sacrificing feats to create a character that has great versatility.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mathew_Freeman, post: 4289759, member: 1846"] What exactly do you want from a Fighter/Mage? That's a questions I've not seen answered by anyone who doesn't like the current multi-classing rules. If you want a Fighter who can cast a few very Wizardly spells (eg Fireball) then the 4e rules work perfectly (assuming you're willing to have your ability scores favour Str and Intelligence). If you want a Wizard who has a few neat tricks for when they get into (or find themselves in) melee combat then the current rules work. If you want a fighter that uses magic in melee combat to defend themselves and hurt the enemy - then you do indeed need a base class as those sorts of powers aren't suitable for what the straight Wizard does, nor should a straight Fighter have magic powers. I'm confused as to why it's assumed that Multi-classing should entail mashing two wildly different classes together and expecting them to work. Personally, I like the rules, as it prevents people repeating the scenarios of previous editions (frankly, aside from level limits, why wouldn't you play a fighter/cleric, say, from 2e, when they're so much more powerful than either a straight fighter or cleric? In 3e, the choice was less stark, but obviously lots of people used the cherry-picking technique to build very powerful characters). The 4e rules also force you to make a choice - sacrificing feats to create a character that has great versatility. [/QUOTE]

Verification