Balance implications of Cheaper Multiclassing?

[Siberys]

Basically, how I've done it is;

There are three core multiclass feats. Each class has a description of what you get for each. Additionally, you get training in one skill from the class' skill list.

There are three 'Power Swap' feats, except you simply gain, not swap.

PMC is now a straight PP - There is an 11th level AP ability and a 16th level trait you get. It's now presented as a paragon path as well.

 

[Marshall]

Rogue going to Ranger? For Twin Strike? See one-trick pony build.
Fighter Barbarian? PP is always a better option. 3.5 damage vs. PP abilities is a lose option.

 

[keterys]

You and I may have different definitions of 'playable'. If you change your word of choice to, say, 'optimized' and _also_ exclude 'one tricky pony builds' from your optimized requirement, I suppose I could agree with you. I'm not entirely sure what would be proven by that agreement, but hey...

Otherwise:
1) Multiclass feats (all of them) are often worthwhile, sometimes extremely so
2) PMC is punitive, having no paragon path features and costing an at-will, on top of the three feats, so it's annoying and poorly setup for all but the most careful or exploitive of builds
3) This doesn't make _many_ PMC builds unplayable. Possibly unpalatable, or insulting, or the adjective of your choice, but playable? Certainly.

 

[eriktheguy]

I think that the root problem with MCing in this edition is that powers are balanced for their class and not balanced to another classes powers for the same level. A ranger or barbarian get their extra damage from their good attack powers, a rogue gets it from the backstab class feature. MCing barbarian gives you the great damage dice from its attacks, MCing as a ranger gives you multiple attack powers. MCing as a rogue doesn't give you the extra sneak attack dice whenever you use a rouge power. If one class gets most of its damage from a feature, and one class gets it all from a power, then it doesn't make sense to balance multiclassing around the powers.
I don't think that the MCing in this edition was done especially well or that it has a place in more than a few good builds.

 

[Eric Finley]

Contrariwise, I think that the "addition rather than swap" would work fine, and be appropriate, as long as you also addressed the "the strength here is in the power rather than the class" stuff. For example, maybe taking a multiple-attack power through multiclassing adds "you can add static damage bonuses at most once per round using this power." (Or just apply my personal fave, "any multiattack power - AOE stuff doesn't qualify - adds half static mods to damage instead of full" to the whole campaign and benefit in general.) All Barbarian powers have their explicit bonus die (like Howling Strike's) dependent on an actual Barbarian class feature; in the cases where the bonus is less obvious (e.g. Avalanche Strike), the DM will tell you ahead of time whether he feels it's appropriate to reduce the potency of the Barb power slightly, or not, as he sees fit, and what the new power would read; you can take it or take a different feat, as you like.

Mind you, there are still plenty of folks who are screwed due to the lack of a compatible second class (CON-locks have nobody they can borrow CON-based attacks from), but this might help satisfy the OP's goal.

The other thing you could do is put a span - say three levels - between the level of the power-gain MC feat and the level of the power gained. So if you want to take a feat to add, say, Spitting Cobra Stance to your repertoire, you have to be 8th level to do so.

Or 'spellbook-ize' the power swaps. You can, on a daily basis, pick either the power you swapped into, or the in-class one you swapped away. That would be interesting, actually, and clash very little with the existing MC rules.

 

[aurance]

3) This doesn't make _many_ PMC builds unplayable. Possibly unpalatable, or insulting, or the adjective of your choice, but playable? Certainly.

This was what I was getting at. Basically in 4e, unless you're making a build that doesn't or can't raise its primary attack stats, it can make a reasonable contribution to the party.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Fighter/Wizard. If you can pull it off at all, you really want a ranged area spell or at least a close burst at-will for maximum marking opportunities.

Of course, Fighter/Invoker might be an even better choice.

 

[Marshall]

This was what I was getting at. Basically in 4e, unless you're making a build that doesn't or can't raise its primary attack stats, it can make a reasonable contribution to the party.

Only in the same sense that you could 'play' a 10th level commoner in 3e.

If you are using a PMC, youre going to be severely behind the power curve, not an asset to the party and maybe a liability and flatly not as fun to play.

Can you create an Uber build using PMC? Yes. Will that build be a meaningful contributor at all levels of its playable life? No.

 

[keterys]

If you are using a PMC, youre going to be severely behind the power curve, not an asset to the party and maybe a liability and flatly not as fun to play.

Can you create an Uber build using PMC? Yes. Will that build be a meaningful contributor at all levels of its playable life? No.

Can you prove any of those points? Assuming you don't make bad choices (which is an important facet of any multiclassing in 4e), I don't see how you'd be more than slightly behind another build. For example, say +1 attack and +4 damage behind.

 

[Turtlejay]

Only in the same sense that you could 'play' a 10th level commoner in 3e.

If you are using a PMC, youre going to be severely behind the power curve, not an asset to the party and maybe a liability and flatly not as fun to play.

Can you create an Uber build using PMC? Yes. Will that build be a meaningful contributor at all levels of its playable life? No.

I think you are being a little hard on Multiclassing in general, and Paragon Multiclassing specifically.

With any feat, you spend the feat, and you get a benefit. With the Multiclass feats, that benefit is to pick a power from your chosen class. Any power. Every time you gain new powers. The power you pick is likely to be the stand out favorite for that class. Too many examples to list them all, but a Str based Melee fighter will almost never go wrong taking Come and Get it. This is an *increase* in power for them, as it is likely better than any other option. So, like any other feat, you spend the feat, you gain some power. Also like any other feat, it requires some thought going into it. Sure, you could multiclass sub-optimally. You could also spend all your feats on Skill Focus. This doesn't mean that every person that multiclases extensively is making bad choices.

With paragon multiclassing, you really do give up some things. You give up a paragon path and it's AP riders, powers, and extra abilities. In exchange, you get the same number of powers back (kind of a null trade there) and you can train in an at-will from your multiclass. The at-will is not as good as the stuff you are giving up, the PP abilities and whatnot. But that doesn't mean that you are garbage, and less effective than other characters. Again, there are many options for multiclassing that are stand out winners (Fighter/Wizard, Ranger/Barbarian, etc), but in the end it is the player's choice. If the character concept works for you, and you are not intentionally gimping your character, Paragon Multiclassing is a valid choice.

Jay