Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mkill" data-source="post: 4330212" data-attributes="member: 55985">The difficult part about building true dual classing in 4th edition is how to handle the roles and the class features connected to it.If players dual-class within the same role, synergy between the class features can become simply too good. Imagine a ranger-rogue doing both hunter's quarry and sneak attack damage in one strike! That's too much.On the other hand, if you dual-class across roles, you have the problem that some roles and features just don't mix well. A wizard/fighter can't defend the front lines and give artillery fire from the back at the same time. You might end up with the character that might be able to do two different things a bit, but none really well. Like the 3rd edition bard. The design explicitely aims to avoid that.There are more issues. For a striker, the damage bonus class feature is key to the role. As is healing for the leader and the marking ability for the defender. The controller at the other hand, where we only have the wizard example now, does not need his class features to work. Implements and cantrips are just icing on the cake.I wouldn't say it's impossible to do proper dual-classing in 4th edition. But it is very difficult to implement it in a general catch-all way without either being just too good or pretty useless, or worse, both at the same time but for different combinations.Probably the best way to do it is create a new class that has access to powers from other classes within certain limits. That way, you can keep the whole thing within well-defined boundaries.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mkill, post: 4330212, member: 55985"] The difficult part about building true dual classing in 4th edition is how to handle the roles and the class features connected to it. If players dual-class within the same role, synergy between the class features can become simply too good. Imagine a ranger-rogue doing both hunter's quarry and sneak attack damage in one strike! That's too much. On the other hand, if you dual-class across roles, you have the problem that some roles and features just don't mix well. A wizard/fighter can't defend the front lines and give artillery fire from the back at the same time. You might end up with the character that might be able to do two different things a bit, but none really well. Like the 3rd edition bard. The design explicitely aims to avoid that. There are more issues. For a striker, the damage bonus class feature is key to the role. As is healing for the leader and the marking ability for the defender. The controller at the other hand, where we only have the wizard example now, does not need his class features to work. Implements and cantrips are just icing on the cake. I wouldn't say it's impossible to do proper dual-classing in 4th edition. But it is very difficult to implement it in a general catch-all way without either being just too good or pretty useless, or worse, both at the same time but for different combinations. Probably the best way to do it is create a new class that has access to powers from other classes within certain limits. That way, you can keep the whole thing within well-defined boundaries. [/QUOTE]

Verification