Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1150050" data-attributes="member: 5171">Hey Magius,Yup, that was what I was getting at.  We've got a lot of threads floating around about how spellcasters are totally shafted because if they multiclass, it doesn't go well.  Now we've got threads about how fighters are shafted because multiclassing makes them more powerful -- and that, by inference, they are therefore underpowered in their natural form.If I had to pick one side or the other to believe, I'd go for the spellcasters.  I'd rather see spellcasting multiclassing improved (ie, made easier but not to the 2E "Sure, just as powerful in both classes as an ordinary person" level) than see the fighter gain a lot of powers that you only get if you go up to level 20.Of course, I'm coming at this after awhile in a d20 Modern game, in which a character with nothing but one class is considered to be something of an over-focused specialist.  I LIKE the idea of multiclassing (provided you fix saves and BAB progression so that you don't end up with a +10 Base Will Save character with a BAB of +0).At its heart, my argument is that I'm tired of people defining their characters by their classes.  There is not, and should not be, anything sacred about being a single-classed character, and I'd rather that people go with Fighter/Rogue mixes to get the wily old general -- or that they modify the fighter as the DMG suggests on a per-character basis, losing Climb and Swim and getting Diplomacy and Sense Motive -- rather than make the Fighter class into something it was not designed to be.To take a class designed for nothing except fighting and then complain that it is lousy at social skills is like berating apple pie for being the worst quiche you ever tasted.The argument that a barbarian or ranger will outfight a fighter of equal level and equipment is one that I'll leave for somebody else.  I personally have seen every class in the book performing well and badly, and I'm satisfied that the fighter does what he's supposed to do (fight in any style you want him to fight) as well or better than any other class in the game.  Competitive builds eventually degenerate into a rock-paper-scissors game.  Sure, your ranged guy can beat my tank, but my disarming/defensive master can beat your ranged guy, and my tank can beat that disarming/defensive master, and we've really not proved anything at all.</blockquote>

Verification