Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kai Lord" data-source="post: 269490" data-attributes="member: 3570">Re: Re: prestige classes?Bad decision making?  A character who wants to be able to cast Epic Spells at 21st level but takes four levels of fighter before going epic is the victim of bad decision making, because no matter how you combine, choose, or structure 16 wizard levels and 4 fighter levels you still won't be able to get the Epic Spellcasting feat at 21st.But a combination of 20 fighter levels and 20 wizard levels CAN net you a BAB of +20 and all the wizard goodies as well.  There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why it should matter what order you take the levels in.  17 levels in Wizard gives you 9th level spells, period, and 20 levels in Fighter should give you a +20 BAB, period.Maybe I wasn't clear.  I would only have the BAB progress up to the maximum for 20 levels in their highest BAB class.  So straight wizards would never advance more than +10/+5.  Anyone who wants to improve their BAB to +20 could take 10 fighter levels but that guy is going to be a full 10 caster levels (plus the bonus epic feats) behind his single-classed buddies.  Quite the trade off.The same would go for saves.  They could multiclass around to get their saves all up to +12, but that means they forfeit caster levels, improved class abilities, and even a number of Epic Feats that could have gone toward bumping up the saves anyway.Of course decisions matter, but I look at the system from a dramatic/cinematic perspective.  There is just no reason whatsoever why an epic fighter shouldn't be able to advance in BAB and attacks up to the predetermined maximum.  None.The reason for the limitation isn't a logical one, since it completely defies all logic, and it isn't a game balance issue, since characters can still have BAB +20 plus whatever else they take after level 20 as long as they take all their fighter levels before they go epic.  So what other reason is there for the limitation?  There just isn't any.  The reason they DID implement it is so that characters don't get more than four attacks off of BAB per round.  All they had to do was say that four attacks is the maximum.Instead, they now encourage players to min/max their entire character progression to front load with warrior levels.  Anyone who thinks up a superheroic fighter mage of epic proportions that they want to play from level 1 now has to choose all fighter levels first to get that envisioned character, or they are crippled in their some of their most important combat abilities.I find that to just be dumb, but it appears that you prefer D&D to be more of a linear "game" that has no rhyme or reason for its rules.  I don't believe that's the case, but I sure can't figure out why else you'd be supporting that rule.</blockquote>

Verification