Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herobizkit" data-source="post: 2978171" data-attributes="member: 36150">Personally, I love the party in the OP's post.&nbsp; Every character I've ever made ended up milti-classed sooner or later.Parties who are entirely multi-classed cover every base, just not as well as those characters who specialize.&nbsp; By the same token, they are still X level characters, and can stand toe-to-toe against other specialists... with a bit of strategy thrown in for good measure.D&amp;D authors create modules and dungeons based on the assumption that a party will consist of 4 PCs, and assume each party member is single classed (or multi-classed with a relevant PrC, relevant meaning one that suits the players' base classes).This in mind, a party of all multi-classed PC's are going to have a more difficult time going through a traditional &quot;dungeon-buster&quot; campaign if you use the modules 'as is', mostly due to increased DCs for skills (especially Rogue and Diplomacy skills), more &quot;mook&quot; monsters(assuming the players have an area-damaging mage or a warrior with Cleave/Great Cleave), and few &quot;rest stops&quot; (assuming the players have a high-level priest).On the flip side, a campaign with a greater focus on story-telling and character interaction is less dependant on character abilities.So, to answer your questions:&nbsp; Yes, I might consider tweaking combats and so forth based on PC ability, but it's ultimately up to the PCs to decide whether to fight or flee.&nbsp; If a player was extremely unhappy with his design, I would allow him to redesign the character with the caveat of my approval -- making an over-effective character to compensate for a formerly ineffective one is what usually happens in such a case. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herobizkit, post: 2978171, member: 36150"] Personally, I love the party in the OP's post. Every character I've ever made ended up milti-classed sooner or later. Parties who are entirely multi-classed cover every base, just not as well as those characters who specialize. By the same token, they are still X level characters, and can stand toe-to-toe against other specialists... with a bit of strategy thrown in for good measure. D&D authors create modules and dungeons based on the assumption that a party will consist of 4 PCs, and assume each party member is single classed (or multi-classed with a relevant PrC, relevant meaning one that suits the players' base classes). This in mind, a party of all multi-classed PC's are going to have a more difficult time going through a traditional "dungeon-buster" campaign if you use the modules 'as is', mostly due to increased DCs for skills (especially Rogue and Diplomacy skills), more "mook" monsters(assuming the players have an area-damaging mage or a warrior with Cleave/Great Cleave), and few "rest stops" (assuming the players have a high-level priest). On the flip side, a campaign with a greater focus on story-telling and character interaction is less dependant on character abilities. So, to answer your questions: Yes, I might consider tweaking combats and so forth based on PC ability, but it's ultimately up to the PCs to decide whether to fight or flee. If a player was extremely unhappy with his design, I would allow him to redesign the character with the caveat of my approval -- making an over-effective character to compensate for a formerly ineffective one is what usually happens in such a case. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification