Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The_DarkAngel" data-source="post: 1133906" data-attributes="member: 14194">My point as far as mulit-classing is that a multi-classed fighter such as a mage/fighter, should not be a better wizard then an accual wizard. Nor should a Fighter/Barbarian be better than a pure Fighter. A pure Fighter from many of the arguements posted here say that the Fighter should be the best fighter. If thats the case then why doesnt that theory work? Ill tell you why:Im glad you know game designing, cause I have a little knowledge of it too. And if you broke down the classes into a point system (which I did) they dont match up. The average class, should have 250 points. Lets see you do the math and see how each class breaks down. Let me tell you what your going to find: The Fighter class is the weakest class in a direct comparison to all classes (this doesnt mean its the only class needing some adjusting or the only class needing some tweaking for the better or worse either). Its also shown in its lack the &quot;fun&quot; factor in latter stages of the class. Almost all peeps agree with this, and say the solution is to multi-class. However, when multi-classing makes a better Fighter then the Fighter class is, something is wrong. Multi-classing should be made to make a role-playing/diverse character he/she wants to have such as a fighter/mage. If you want to be a good wizard, you dont multi-class into a Fighter, because that would make you a better wizard/fighter not a better fighter or wizard.DAP.S. incase you want me too, once I have this class point system typed up, Ill be more than happy to send it too you Ketjak, especially if you say you are a &quot;game designer&quot;. Like me, I think you will be suprised.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The_DarkAngel, post: 1133906, member: 14194"] My point as far as mulit-classing is that a multi-classed fighter such as a mage/fighter, should not be a better wizard then an accual wizard. Nor should a Fighter/Barbarian be better than a pure Fighter. A pure Fighter from many of the arguements posted here say that the Fighter should be the best fighter. If thats the case then why doesnt that theory work? Ill tell you why: Im glad you know game designing, cause I have a little knowledge of it too. And if you broke down the classes into a point system (which I did) they dont match up. The average class, should have 250 points. Lets see you do the math and see how each class breaks down. Let me tell you what your going to find: The Fighter class is the weakest class in a direct comparison to all classes (this doesnt mean its the only class needing some adjusting or the only class needing some tweaking for the better or worse either). Its also shown in its lack the "fun" factor in latter stages of the class. Almost all peeps agree with this, and say the solution is to multi-class. However, when multi-classing makes a better Fighter then the Fighter class is, something is wrong. Multi-classing should be made to make a role-playing/diverse character he/she wants to have such as a fighter/mage. If you want to be a good wizard, you dont multi-class into a Fighter, because that would make you a better wizard/fighter not a better fighter or wizard. DA P.S. incase you want me too, once I have this class point system typed up, Ill be more than happy to send it too you Ketjak, especially if you say you are a "game designer". Like me, I think you will be suprised. [/QUOTE]

Verification