Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)

[hong]

But getting access to something that opens new options that you Would Not have had before is Worth a feat!

Not if it also means throwing away options that you would have had otherwise.

 

[Rechan]

Not if it also means throwing away options that you would have had otherwise.

It is if you want to throw way the options that you would have had otherwise.

 

[hong]

It is if you want to throw way the options that you would have had otherwise.

What a strange concept.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Cutting off multiclassing from an entire power source was not "a few details". You could argue that the problems with the SW:Saga system were only details, but they ultimately are very different system, you could in no way use the Saga system with 4e without completely redesigning the classes around it, something they specifically decided wasn't worth it.

1) Never saw SW: Saga, so I can't speak to that.

2) I also have no idea what you mean when you say that 3.X multiclassing cut of entire power sources.

The idea that Arcane power is more "special" than other sources of power

3) It isn't more special. Its just different. And how do any of the older forms of multiclassing cut you off from arcane power?

 

[Kordeth]

Not if it also means throwing away options that you would have had otherwise.

If I go to the restaurant, peruse the menu, and decide to order a cheeseburger, am I throwing away options because I order the eggs benedict instead? (Assume for the moment I'm not an enormous glutton and am, in fact, capable of eating only one meal at any given mealtime.)

No. It's not throwing away options, any more than picking Wizard Attack Power #1 over Wizard Attack Powers #2-5 is "throwing away options." All of your options are still there, in fact you're adding more (because now you can choose between Wizard Attack Powers #s 1-5 and Fighter Attack Powers #s 1-5). What it neither adds nor takes away is the number of choices you can make. You still get your choice of one power from the list, it's just that the feat makes it a bigger list.

 

[hong]

If I go to the restaurant, peruse the menu, and decide to order a cheeseburger, am I throwing away options because I order the eggs benedict instead? (Assume for the moment I'm not an enormous glutton and am, in fact, capable of eating only one meal at any given mealtime.)

Well, it's like a generic food metaphor. Sometimes I want to compare things to ice cream, but I should not have to discard the ability to compare things to peanut butter as well.

No. It's not throwing away options, any more than picking Wizard Attack Power #1 over Wizard Attack Powers #2-5 is "throwing away options."

You are giving up a feat AND a power to get a power. That is the cost.

 

[Rechan]

To use the 3e example I was using earlier, this is what the argument seems to be:

If there was this feat:

Make Divinity Magic:
Pre-req: Prepare spells.
Benefit: Now you can prepare spells from both the Divine and Arcane spell lists.

The argument that seems to be is:

Well this is a waste of a feat, because even though you can pick spells off both lists, you still have the same amount of spell slots to prepare. You haven't gained anything but the access to another class's spells.

Except that now you have clerics casting fireballs in full armor and sorcerers who can flame strike for half holy damage.

 

[AtomicPope]

He wouldn't be a Fighter/Cleric/Mage though. I have an arbitrary limit on 2 classes. My character would fight, heal, and throw spells at his enemies. I could wear armor after casting my wizard spells if I wanted to, or I could save my wizard spells for utility and wear armor and fight well for the rest of the adventure.

Wear armor after casting your wizard spells. Gimme a break. You're really reaching for the supposed merits of 1e multiclassing.


Oh wait Mr. Monster! I've finished casting my two spells for the day. I'd like to put my armor on now.


Wizards have more spells than ever before. Fighters have manuevers. They have to give and take. I noticed you never addressed any of the issues I brought up. It's because you can't. It would be a hopeless case. There's absolutely no comparison to the limited scope of 1e classes with the plethora of features and abilities that a 4e class gains at level one. Rather than address it you give some bogus example of scenario playing perfect for a character with virtually no features by comparison. If that's the best you can do then enjoy your two spells and wardrobe rack you're forced to lug around in the dungeon. There's no hope for endless denial.

 

[hong]

To use the 3e example I was using earlier, this is what the argument seems to be:

If there was this feat:

Make Divinity Magic:
Pre-req: Prepare spells.
Benefit: Now you can prepare spells from both the Divine and Arcane spell lists.

Bad example. Now you can prepare one extra spell from the divine and arcane spell lists.

 

[Vendark]

You are giving up a feat AND a power to get a power. That is the cost.

But presumably you're giving up a power you didn't really care about in order to get a power that you really, really wanted and couldn't get any other way. If that's the case, giving up a feat doesn't sound so bad. If that's not the case, why are you doing it?