Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)

[Ximenes088]

What do you think the downside would be of allowing 3 classes?
Why did they decide to limit it?
You still lose a feat that could have been used for something else.

I'd say that it's because keeping a lid on the synergies of any two classes is a lot easier than trying to chain up any three classes.

 

[MindWanderer]

I thought all classes were balanced relative to each other. Once you starting crossing class boundaries and poaching specific powers, you get unexpected synergies. I think a feat is well worth the cost of obtaining capabilities outside your normal class limits.

I second this. Take the rogue: do you think a rogue will be able to get a level 16 utility power as useful as Greater Invisibility? Probably not, not to him anyway. The combination of perpetual combat advantage and sneak attack is greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Wait so do es this mean I can get force orb on a level 1 fighter...

I assume it means use a Wizard at will power once per encounter.

 

[Khuxan]

One character that is always mentioned when multiclassing is discussed is Conan the Barbarian. I've never read the books, but I'm curious to know if people think that these multiclassing rules are robust enough to create Conan.

(It seems King Conan is a barbarian 15/soldier 2/thief 1/pirate 2 - which I think could be covered by a barbarian multiclassing into rogue in 4e).

 

[MindWanderer]

But still looks like if you want TWF at-will you have to start as ranger.

Technically, yes--but if you take a TWF-ranger encounter power, a TWF-ranger daily, and the Stormwarden PP, that's a lot of TWF-powers you can dish out.

Edit: Could you even take Stormwarden? If you need the "two-blade fighting style" to qualify, you may really have to be a ranger--and that'll be true for other PPs as well. That could be very unfortunate. Although I notice that Pact Initiate looks like it could qualify you for Doomsayer.

 

[Stalker0]

I assume it means use a Wizard at will power once per encounter.

Yep 1/encounter you can throw a little magic missile that does less damage than your weapon (because your int is lower) and has a lower chance to hit (because your int is lower).

Oh yeah, really feeling the fighter/wizard in this version


As for the novice/acolyte thing, I can understand that WOTC was concerned about cross class synergies, so they made a feat the cost of branching into other power trees. What I don't understand is why they though it needed to be 3 feats to get 3 powers. How about 1 feat to get access to all 3? You still have to be high level, you still have to give up your regular powers, unless you multiclassed just right you'll likely have a weaker ability score for those powers, and you still paid a feat. Seems like a much more reasonable tradeoff to me.

 

[frankthedm]

Combos like fighter/wizard now work much better, while traditional choices like fighter/rogue still function just fine.

If by 'just fine' they mean "can't figure out how to sneak attack with a weapon larger than a 1d6!" To say nothing of the ranger / rogue who may feel slighly "Nerfed to hell".

Now the changes were needed, but is kind of funny how making multiclassing usable was the LAST of the priorities.

The 4th Edition design had three primary goals for multiclassing:
1. Design the classes, make them cool, then force multiclassing to play nice with them.
2. Institute controls to prevent abusive combinations.
3. Institute controls to make every combination as playable as possible.

 

[Stalker0]

Technically, yes--but if you take a TWF-ranger encounter power, a TWF-ranger daily, and the Stormwarden PP, that's a lot of TWF-powers you can dish out.

Woo hoo, once in the whole freakin fight I can use my two weapons. As opposed to having a shield, giving me a permanent bonus to AC and reflex, AND having at will abilities I can use with it.

And let's not forget, that TWF is one of the ranger's tactical options. And many powers gain bonuses to one or the other of a class's options. But since no other class gets access to those options, those powers are weaker. So even if a fighter spends the feat to get ranger, AND spends another feat to get TWF powers, and assuming he actually has a decent dex to make use of those ranger powers, he STILL is not as good at those powers as a TWF ranger.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Some multiclassing feats look better than others. If we're going by this pattern you tend to get the lesser benefits multi-classing with Initiate of the Faith, Student of Battle, Singer of Song, etc. on anyone leading to leader classes, unless the later benefits are good going down that road.

Well it does answer one of the questions in my thread on martial characters using rituals, perhaps its better for some fighters to take Ritual Casting (and some possible skill training feats) instead of Arcane Initiate, as they may not be able to do the impressive magic stuff in combat, but might get a better chance at doing impressive magic stuff out of combat.

 

[Rechan]

Edit: Could you even take Stormwarden? If you need the "two-blade fighting style" to qualify, you may really have to be a ranger--and that'll be true for other PPs as well. That could be very unfortunate. Although I notice that Pact Initiate looks like it could qualify you for Doomsayer.

According to the article, multi-classing into a class gives you all the pre-reqs to take the PPs.

So a fighter MCing into ranger can go Stormwarden.