Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Primitive Screwhead" data-source="post: 4202107" data-attributes="member: 20805">I haven't been following every little bit, but I did read the reveal on multi-classing closely. I very much enjoyed stress testing the 3x multi-class rules and I completely agree where 4e is going.&nbsp;The excerpt included a designer talking about the why of the 4e multi-class. One of the main items I took from the article was that they were trying to eliminate the hidden bad choices. 3x multiclassing was an art and you could end up with some strong characters...and you could end up with a glass cannon. So yes, the designers intent is to be less flexible mechanically.&nbsp;As to the rest, IIRC we have seen a couple 1st level characters and a dabbling of powers. Can we really say that you can't model any given concept within 4e's rules at this point? Yes, some stuff will have to wait for future releases... but I think many 'standard' character concepts can be built right from the box.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Primitive Screwhead, post: 4202107, member: 20805"] I haven't been following every little bit, but I did read the reveal on multi-classing closely. I very much enjoyed stress testing the 3x multi-class rules and I completely agree where 4e is going. The excerpt included a designer talking about the why of the 4e multi-class. One of the main items I took from the article was that they were trying to eliminate the hidden bad choices. 3x multiclassing was an art and you could end up with some strong characters...and you could end up with a glass cannon. So yes, the designers intent is to be less flexible mechanically. As to the rest, IIRC we have seen a couple 1st level characters and a dabbling of powers. Can we really say that you can't model any given concept within 4e's rules at this point? Yes, some stuff will have to wait for future releases... but I think many 'standard' character concepts can be built right from the box. [/QUOTE]

Verification