Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1149727" data-attributes="member: 14225">reapersauraus: It's both, actually - that's not a flip-flop, it's simply that both are true.The reasons that a multiclassed character is better than a single classed character are:1> Saves add up in stupid ways for a multoiclassed character. This is a seperately solvable problem that has nothing whatsoever to do with any particular class.2> Warrior Core Classes get objectively less per level as they rise within their class, while Rogues and Spellcasters get objectively more every level as they rise within their class. This is a problem with each of the warrior classes, and has to be solved on the end of the classes themselves.A Wizard gets 2 (or more) new spells every level - cumulatively. Both known and castable. And the spells he gains at each level are at least as good as the ones gained at each previous level - and often better. A Fighter gets one new feat every level - which I could argue one way or another whether it is better or worse than two spells - but after a few levels the Fighter goes down and starts getting only 1 feat every other level. That's simply no contest. 2 Spells is obviously superior to nothing, which is what the Fighter is walking away with at 7th level.So the warrior classes - all of the warrior classes - need an infusion of butt kicking in the later levels so that they can compete with wizards of equal level - and for that matter so that they can compete with people who simply took two different Warrior Classes.Now the Fighter needs it worse than the others. His osolescence with regards to level advancement happens at level three. Heck, Paladin levels don't hand out a dud until level six. Many games don't even go to seventh level - Paladins are fine in those circumstances. Almost every game goes until level 3, so almost everyone notices the underlined point that Fighters should bail out of their class as soon as it starts to suck.---The multiclassed Saving Throw problem is a real problem. But the lack of good mid-level support for the Warrior Classes is a problem as well. Wizards get something cool every single level, Fighter/Ranger/Barbarians get something cool every level - "Fighters" need something cool every single level as well - because they are supposed to be playable and balanced in a party with a Fighter/Ranger/Barbarian and a Wizard in it.For the saves, I suggest handing out static and stackable bonuses for every level where you have a good save and a different and smaller bonus for every level where you have a bad save. Say 3/4 and 1/2. That way, a Rogue/Fighter will have the same save total as a Rogue or a Fighter - instead of the crap we have now where he has more.---In addition to that, however, the Fighter's combat schtick is not especially superior to that of the Barbarian or Paladin - and is often about the same. But what the Fighter does have - in addition to going obsolete early - is a very crappy non-combat ability in the form of class features or skills. A paladin has a very restricted skill list - but it's still better than a Fighter's and the Paladin has Detect Evil at will which is really cool. The Barbarian has all kinds of neat skills and the skill points to use them.Even after you fixed the Fighter class features and save accumulation system so that from a combat perspective you were not losing out by taking more levels of Fighter instead of multiclassing - the fact remains that being a Fighter is still sacrificing your non-combat schtick for nothing. The Barbarian or Paladin are still matching you in combat and they are doing cool and useful things outside of combat that you can't match.If the Fighter had 4 skill points and a bunch of skills that the Barbarian didn't have (such as Knowledge History and Sense Motive) - then the Fighter would have its own theme from a character standpoint. Right now it's just a Barbarian who traded 2/3 of his feats and half his skills and skill list in order to be able to spend those feats on a wider list. That's not balanced or flavorful.-Frank</blockquote>

Verification