Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)

[Rechan]

I'm not saying that it isn't worth a feat. I'm saying that swapping out an encounter, a utility and a daily is not worth three.

Acolyte power is not a pre-requisit for Adept power. If you don't want to waste a feat on a Utility power, then don't take Adept Power.

If you just want to get at SLEEP, just take the Wizard MC feat, and then the Adept power feat, and BAM, you have SLEEP.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Two things:

I really think, if you want skill training, it would be unfavourable to just take skill training and not train in a different class...

Student of the sword looks quite powerfull (+1 to all attacks AND skill traing) and if you don´t like it anymore, just switch it out with a different feat...

I would rather have gained certain armor or weapon proficiencies than skill training when I multiclass to fighter...

As it stands, right now it seems favourable to dip one class and don´t pick novice or adept feats etc... especially if you would have taken skill training anyway...

Right now i am thinking multiclassing needs houseruling...

 

[HeinorNY]

You're trading power for /flexibility/ IMO.

I know this point very well, and I understand it. But this same logic made sense in 3.5, and multiclassing didn't work very well back then.
The way it is presented it's very simple, you give up feat to be able to have powers from other classes than your primary class.

 

[FireLance]

Acolyte power is not a pre-requisit for Adept power. If you don't want to waste a feat on a Utility power, then don't take Adept Power.

If you just want to get at SLEEP, just take the Wizard MC feat, and then the Adept power feat, and BAM, you have SLEEP.

To put my quibble another way, I don't mind paying a feat, it's just that I look at what I'm getting for a feat and wonder, "Is that all?"

These feats remind me of 3e's metamagic feats. You pay once when you get the feat, and you pay again when you swap out one power for another. No doubt, flexibility is an advantage, but I don't think it's that much of an advantage.

 

[Mentat55]

Now, if everything works as advertised and all powers are equal (no really, I'm trying to be serious here, WotC designers said it, it must be so)

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.

 

[Rechan]

I know this point very well, and I understand it. But this same logic made sense in 3.5, and multiclassing didn't work very well back then.

Multi-classing worked well - for non-casters, because it messed with casting. That, and it was easily abused.

Feats look fairly weak, from what we've seen. I mean, look at the paragon level feats. Those don't really make me go WOW MUST HAVE.

 

[Spatula]

Except that you're keeping the benefits from your earlier class.

For instance, if it was not giving up a feat, then it would be totally worth it to start as fighter, and then just cherry pick encounter and daily Wizard powers. That way, you had your Sweet defender HP, Defenses, Surges, and armor proficiencies, plus the Wizard encounters/dailies.

If I can trade ALL my fighter abilities for wizard ones, then I'm not a great fighter, but I'm a BETTER wizard.

Except it doesn't work like that. You get one encounter power, one utility power, and one daily power, max (plus the class ability as an encounter power for the first feat). Well, there's the paragon path option, but we don't know how that works, still...

 

[Midnight Dawns]

BTW I did look and I saw one that was put up early and at the time I did not see any one place a link in it. The apology was in case it was put up before I hit the post button. I actually started typing the thread before midnight thank you but was called away for a few minutes.

 

[Rechan]

To put my quibble another way, I don't mind paying a feat, it's just that I look at what I'm getting for a feat and wonder, "Is that all?"

I could see you saying that IF you had to stick with the power you got with the feat. But, you get to trade up every level. That's pretty potent.

Also, look at the other feats that are on the table we've seen. I'm pretty sure that when you look over those feats, you'll be saying "Is that all?"

 

[HeinorNY]

Feats look fairly weak, from what we've seen. I mean, look at the paragon level feats. Those don't really make me go WOW MUST HAVE.

That's a good point. Maybe a feat is worth a tactical option gain.