Do Multiclassed Epic Characters Get The Shaft?

[Caliber]

First of all, I am against allowing an Epic Character to multiclass into a new class and take Epic Feats as Bonus Feats.

A 20th Ftr / 20th Bbn has so many feats, a certain number of which are possibly Epic.

A 20th Bbn / 20th Ftr has the same number of feats, but 1 more Epic feat than the character above.

If an Epic character multiclasses into a new class, he is stuck with the non-Epic Bonus Feat list until the new class is also Epic leveled.

All that aside, I think multiclass characters can be viable at Epic levels assuming they are created intelligently. Their regular feat every 3rd level can still be Epic and they are still gaining lots of bonuses each level (more and better spells, more SA, more FA, more Rages, more ... well you get the point.)

 

[Cloudgatherer]

If an Epic character multiclasses into a new class, he is stuck with the non-Epic Bonus Feat list until the new class is also Epic leveled.

Rules aside for a moment, doesn't this serve as a huge penalty for those who do multiclass?

Take a Ftr10/RogX. So we are going to say at level 30 the rogue can now take Epic feats with his bonus feats?

Meanwhile, his straight classed companions will have a tremendously greater amount of options, most likely a large number Epic feats compared to our multiclass Ftr/Rog.

That's just not right. It's a *very* strong incentive to play a straight classed character and a strong dis-incentive to multiclass.

 

[Morose]

For the record

As an outside observer, it looks to me like you are taking Shard's comments and twisting them Corwin. My advice is to let it go. Quoting someone a line at a time is a bad idea in general. You lose context that way and it instantly looks like you are attempting to misrepresent things... even when you're not. Just an FYI.

Now, back to the subject of epic feats, look at it this way. Say someone is a 40th level character. Should it matter what path they took to get there? Should a Wizard 20/ Fighter 20 end up being a BETTER fighter than someone who was primarily a Fighter, then became a Wizard (i.e. Ftr 20/ Wiz 20). After all, if you allow someone to get epic bonus feats solely based off character level IN THEORY the folks who take Fighter last are going to have better bonus feats than those who took it earlier.

This debate has been around forever though. Same thing to a lesser extent already exists in the basic PHB. Just pointing it out again.

 

[Archer]

I think Corwin is right and Shard is wrong

Ok, now on to the thread. Simply put, it does matter what you take in what order. If you take rogue as your first level then you get 8x skill pts, if you took fighter you only got 2x. The same thing applies if you start taking fighter at epic levels for epic feats. You probably don't have 4 attacks per round but hey, whatever.

The fact that the ftr20/bar20 has 1 more non-epic and one less epic feat than a bar20/ftr20 is no big deal. I think it is ridiculous to make an issue of it. I see epic as a feat with a prereq of ECL 21 in addition to the others.

 

[Caliber]

Rules aside for a moment, doesn't this serve as a huge penalty for those who do multiclass?

Take a Ftr10/RogX. So we are going to say at level 30 the rogue can now take Epic feats with his bonus feats?

Meanwhile, his straight classed companions will have a tremendously greater amount of options, most likely a large number Epic feats compared to our multiclass Ftr/Rog.

That's just not right. It's a *very* strong incentive to play a straight classed character and a strong dis-incentive to multiclass.

Note that a Ftr10/ Rog20 has only missed out on 10 levels of Bonus Epic Feats, not 20. And during those 10 levels he was gaining all of those high-level Rogue abilities, like Improved Evasion and Roll With the Punches (or whatever that ability is called.) as well as increasing his Sneak Attack.

The Ftr10/Rog20 will be a better Fighter and will likely have more feats, albeit fewer Epic ones.

The Rog30 will be a better Rogue in general, and will possess a few more Epic Feats, although will have fewer in general.

Obviously individual builds will vary, but these two characters seem pretty equal to me.

My major thing with allowing Epic Feats to be taken as Bonus Feats at non-Epic levels is not an unbalance thing.

Its that a character who multiclasses into Fighter at Epic levels gains more of a benefit than a character who has stuck with the Fighter class the entire way. Sure its only 1 feat more, but I think its kinda unfair to those single classed Fighters.

If that doesn't bother you go ahead. I'll admit that by the book it sounds like it should go the other way. I just disagree.

 

[toberane]

Take a Ftr10/RogX. So we are going to say at level 30 the rogue can now take Epic feats with his bonus feats?

You may be a bit confused. A rogue doesn't get bonus feats (IIRC, I don't have the book in front of me). We aren't talking about the general feats you get every three levels--those are unqestionably epic feats for anyone with a total character level of 21 or more. We are talking about the bonus feats you get as part of your class abilities, like the fighters bonus feats he gets at levels 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, etc.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Re: Re: Re: Counter point

Whether you are right or you are wrong, I don't find your line of thought useful. Equating "problems" with "problem players" (or "problem DMs") is all fine and dandy, but it doesn't tell me jack about how to fix it. Nor does it give me guidance on what isn't really a problem and what is, what to do and what to avoid.

One on the principle functions of rules and mechanics is to give guidelines for those of us who are not (yet) perfect players or DMs. If a game/mechanic can only be played by perfect people, then the game/mechanic is a failure in the real world. If multiclassing can only be done correctly by perfect people, then multiclassing rules are a failure in the real world.

My point is mechaically there isn't much of a problem. So they get a bonus epic feat in what 2-3 classes, if they multiclass. Big whoop, it doesn't do much for or against the player. The vast majority of epic feats aren't that much better than standard feats. Epic lightining reflexes an entire +4 o my reflex saves now, yipeee. Generally the problem isn't a problem, unless you have a player who is doing there best to make uber death god in a group that doesn't play that way.

Now if you have flavor problems with the bonus feats going towards epic feats if the class you get the bonus feats in isn't epic enough, that's another thing entirely, but there isn't much anyone but you can do about that.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Counter point

Ah, there it is. That's the root of your point. Us "powergamers" are ruining the fun for all you real "role-players". When one of "us" shows up, we wreck it for everyone.

Boy, I guess multiclassing really is for munchkins.

Nope not the root of my point. Because I'm us powergamers, which virtually any purusing pf my posts will display. My point is one player shouldn't enforce their style upon a group who has a different style. I curently play with "role-players", guess what I tone down my powergaming so I don't steal the groups fun. I'm one guy, I don't think it's fair to do it. Similarly when I lived in NY, I ran a game for mostly powergamers, who were mostly interested in action. We had one heavy "role-player" who wanted to role-play everything. I gave him just enough role-playing so that I didn't slow down the fun for the rest of the group. I would cut him off from role-playing frequently when he wanted to role-play the purchase of a dagger or other things that would bore everyone else in the group. Why he was one guy, and it was a gorup of 6. His enjoyment shouldn't be more important than the 5 people enjoyment.

Now if I was unclear and I insulted you I appologize. But maybe, you should accept the fact that this isn't the clearest medium to communicate in and give people some benefit of the doubt before you flame them.

 

[Corwin]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Counter point

I appreciate your trying to clarify your point. And if that is indeed what you are doing, cool. But this new post is soooo not anything like what you originally posted.

I understand this is a difficult medium to relate ideas in. So please explain how you associated your original statement to the one you just made.

For sake of completeness (and I won't snip any off this time ), here's the post that originally ticked me off:

yep they are saying the fighter gets their bonus feats as epic. And I agree with them. A character who is level 20 wizard who takes a level of fighter for the bonus epic feats isn't a problem with the rules, but a problem with the player. Same as if your fighter at level one decided to start as a monk for the +2 to all saves, evasion, 1d6 unarmed damage, good skill selection and 4x4 skill pointsand other benies, and then prompty became a fighter from then on. You don't have bad multiclassing rules, you have a bad player. Now if they have good legitimite reasons for multiclassing not allowing them to use their bonus feats as epic is putting a large hinderence on them that their single class brethren don't face.

Now, this is pretty clear. You aren't saying that it is only inappropriate to base leveling decisions on class abilities when no one else in the group is. It seems obvious you are saying that it makes them a "bad" player all the time. The's no conditionality to your statement. A very insulting statement, IMO. That's what I took offense to.

I'd still like to hear the difference between the two examples I gave previously. It seems clear you feel multiclassing for the class features is "bad". Please explain your reasoning. I don't see a difference between them, in the end. Especially when any half-decent player worth his salt, is going to be able to "reverse engineer" his IC reasons for taking whatever the heck class he wants for his PC. I'm sure I could come up with at least as good a role-playing reason for my hypothetical 4th level fighter to take that level of monk as you could just to simply take that 5th level of wizard. So, what's the difference?

 

[Cloudgatherer]

You may be a bit confused. A rogue doesn't get bonus feats (IIRC, I don't have the book in front of me). We aren't talking about the general feats you get every three levels--those are unqestionably epic feats for anyone with a total character level of 21 or more. We are talking about the bonus feats you get as part of your class abilities, like the fighters bonus feats he gets at levels 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, etc.

No, I'm not confused. I was referring to the bonus feats a Rogue can choose to take (versus the "special abilities" he can take, such as slippery mind). The same applies to Fighter, but either way works.

My point was that if the Ftr10/Rog11 could only take Epic feats at every 3 character levels, and cannot take Epic feats as part of his bonus feats, then this character is at a *significant* disadvantage compared to single-classed characters, who can opt to take Epic feats for all their feats.

Face it, Epic feats are more powerful (hence, Epic). Allowing one character to take more of them (the single-classed character) isn't at all fair (to the multi-classed character).