Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)

[tombowings]

There's an assumption that "Skill Training" means you get to choose the skill that the class you're emulating chose at level one. For instance, Rangers choose between Nature and Dungeoneering.

Not sure.

Even still, if you were going to pick up either Nature or Dungeoneering anyway, there would be no reason not to pick up the "Warrior of the Wild" feat instead.

I have faith that the devs balanced everything out, but I like playing characters with lots of skills and plan on taking the "skill training" (or whatever it's called) feat at least a couple times. I'm sure everything will work out fine though.

 

[tombowings]

Double posts, sorry.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Hmm, interesting, though not as much information as I'd hoped. The initial feat is tailored by class and gives you an extra trained skill & encounter power. All well and good, but... You spend 3 more feats for the novice, acolyte, and adept options and you gain effectively nothing; the option to swap out powers you would have gotten anyway with other powers of the same level. That strikes me as being very much like the TWF tax in 3e: spend feats so that you can almost do as much damage as a 2H fighter! Have they made multiclassing beyond the first feat too weak, in order to keep the powergamers away from it?

And no information on how paragon-path-multiclassing works or how it interacts with the feats.

well, the first feat generally looks good, since it's something on top of your normal abilities, however yeah, and I'd say the utility powers would allways be good, since they'd often give you access to wacky things, but with the attack power feats look like you'd want to be careful you had a high enough appropriate stat, and/or it gives you access to something helpful and different. An int based Warlord taking Fireball, or a Warlock taking a nice chr based Paladin healing power would be worth it, but a Wizard taking Fighter powers could easily just end up being pointless.

 

[neceros]

You're about 13 hours late.

 

[muffin_of_chaos]

Tombowings, I'm pretty sure that the skill training and power/feature are a package deal.
Aren't they?

 

[DanChops]

Another thought - both Initiate of the Faith and Student of Battle create further mechanical alternatives to the old "someone's gotta play the cleric" trope. Assuming that Inspiring Word does the same thing as Healing Word, these mechanics have built in two flavorful ways for a group to get around needing a character to play the heal bot.

Something else - I've long enjoyed games where every character in the party has a shared functional background - whether it be a pre-historic game where all are barbarians, or a Harry Potter-style scenario where all are students at a wizardry college. In 3.5, the best way I found to mechanical simulate this was gestalt classes. I would run a gestalt game, but stipulate that everyone take the same class as one of their two classes. This made for some fun, high-powered romps, but it would have been nice (i.e. much less work for the DM) to have been able to create the same idea while staying within the bounds of normal power levels. 4E multiclassing allows for that. I could either stipulate that everyone take the same Multiclass Feat at first level, or give it to them for free, depending on the power level of game I'm looking for.

Very nice indeed.

 

[Cadfan]

Ok, so I start my elf rogue at level 1, with a feat to allow me to fight with a rapier. Then I take Student of the Sword to get +1 attack, a new skill, and a little marking. Then I take Kensai as my paragon path at level 11. I end up with a swashbuckler who deals serious damage with his rapier.

This... makes me happy.

 

[Stalker0]

It's Up. Sorry if someone else already put it up.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080430a

There are three threads about this already, all the them predominately displayed on the top of the page, and have been since midnight. Look before you post a topic.

 

[neceros]

Something else - I've long enjoyed games where every character in the party has a shared functional background - whether it be a pre-historic game where all are barbarians, or a Harry Potter-style scenario where all are students at a wizardry college. In 3.5, the best way I found to mechanical simulate this was gestalt classes. I would run a gestalt game, but stipulate that everyone take the same class as one of their two classes. This made for some fun, high-powered romps, but it would have been nice (i.e. much less work for the DM) to have been able to create the same idea while staying within the bounds of normal power levels. 4E multiclassing allows for that. I could either stipulate that everyone take the same Multiclass Feat at first level, or give it to them for free, depending on the power level of game I'm looking for.

Very nice indeed.

Interesting. Isn't it enough to just put it in the back story, though?

 

[HeinorNY]

Hm, seems that multiclassed characters got the nerfstick. You use a feat, and you get a limited benefit. You can use another feat, which lets you subtract a class power and add a multiclassed power.

When you buy the swap-power feat, you don't add anything, you just trade powers.
A character with such a feat has, power-wise, one feat less.
You are trading power for concept.