Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)

[katahn]

By this system I assume you mean 4th ed.

The ultramystic who has access to all magical powers. In third 3d I could take levels in Cleric, Wizard, Incarnate and Psion. I might not be really powerful at any of them, but by concept I could touch all powers (made for a fun Gestalt though ).

That was in basic answer to the question.


Personally I like the new multiclassing. I can't wait for the full rules so I can see how things work completely.

If by "kinds of magic" you mean "power sources" then yes 4e can't do it. But if you are referring to magic relating to roles then....

Cleric(Wizard)/Paragon:Warlock

A pure spellcaster type in a robe (mostly) capable of healing, nuking, and zapping. Also would have a very wide-variety of utility-type spells.

edit: just to clarify, this is tongue-firmly-in-cheek

 

[MindWanderer]

I don't really expect that most multi-classers will spend 3 feats to gain 3 powers. I expect most of them will spend 1 feat to gain 1 power. They'll look at their concept and make a decision as to in what manner their PC is going to draw on the secondary class. Is it going to be a utility power? A once-per-encounter signature trick? A once-per-day big boom to shock opponents? I don't believe that most concepts will require all three feats.

For example, on another board someone cited Dilvish the Damned as a potential multiclass character. Dilvish definitely solved most problems with cold steel. It was only in extreme situations that he would pull out one of his mega-powerful Awful Saying spells. Dilvish as a PC would likely want the Adept power feat, but not the Initiate or Acolyte feats.

An Initiatie feat plus one feat for one power is the same trade-off, but a much smaller investment. It still leaves plenty of feats for enhancing your base class abilities.

I dunno... I think the approach you state will be common, but I think many will take two or three of those feats. Partially it's the opportunity cost (I spent the Initiate feat to qualify for the Power feat and I'm going to milk that prereq for all it's worth) and partially it's for options. For instance, one of the two character concepts I plan to use for RPGA games is a dragonborn rogue who will eventually take sorcerer training. Assuming the sorcerer is a controller, I'll be getting a utility power and an encounter power from the sorcerer list. That'll give me one useful sorcerer trick, probably to help my mobility or defense (to set me up for a flank or protect me once I get there), and between the encounter power and my breath weapon I'll be able to function as a pretty decent secondary controller.

By this system I assume you mean 4th ed.

The ultramystic who has access to all magical powers. In third 3d I could take levels in Cleric, Wizard, Incarnate and Psion. I might not be really powerful at any of them, but by concept I could touch all powers (made for a fun Gestalt though ).

That was in basic answer to the question.

You can still do that in 4e, once we have all those classes. Be a half-elf wizard. Take your racial cross-class power from the incarnate list and take the initiate feat and a couple of power feats for clerics. At 11th level, skip your paragon path to multiclass into psion. Hey presto, you're quadruple-classed. And a lot more effective than the corresponding 3e character.

 

[Torchlyte]

Edit: To the post above me, I have a strong feeling you can't multiclass into a fourth class with the Paragon Tier swap.

By this system I assume you mean 4th ed.

The ultramystic who has access to all magical powers. In third 3d I could take levels in Cleric, Wizard, Incarnate and Psion. I might not be really powerful at any of them, but by concept I could touch all powers (made for a fun Gestalt though ).

That's not a character concept, it's a laundry list of mechanics.

Edit: To give my post more substance, let me create a character concept from your list.

Calvin is a gifted magic-user in many ways, but he lacks focus and dedication. He has learned the basics of a variety of different magical techniques, never able to persevere.

The fact is, you wouldn't actually have to have spells from all the lists to represent this concept. You could take a Cleric and use multiclass feats to obtain some Wizard spells and your concept would be fulfilled. If you wanted to be a Half-Elf, you could add in a Psion power, but there's no reason you'd have to; this is a concept where power atrophy is easily applicable.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

That's not a character concept, it's a laundry list of mechanics.

The character concept is, for example, a child of destiny born to unite magic. As part of the character concept, the character can access all form of magic.

That is a concept.

The laundry list was an example of how that could be done in third edition.

 

[Derren]

That's not a character concept, it's a laundry list of mechanics.

Every D&D character is in the end just a list of mechanics. A good roleplayer fills this list according to a concept and thanks to the 4E straitjacket a lot of concepts are now not possible anymore.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

edit: just to clarify, this is tongue-firmly-in-cheek

As was my concept, at least to an extent.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

You can still do that in 4e, once we have all those classes. Be a half-elf wizard. Take your racial cross-class power from the incarnate list and take the initiate feat and a couple of power feats for clerics. At 11th level, skip your paragon path to multiclass into psion. Hey presto, you're quadruple-classed. And a lot more effective than the corresponding 3e character.

Yeah. It could get much the same feel. Depends on how the Paragon multi-classing thing works.

I was mostly throwing out the idea because we couldn't get that right off. I've played characters like that, and yeah, from what I have seen the 4th ed version would be more effective.

I tend towards multiclassing. Been playing so long, I tend to come up with odd and wierd character concepts (Superheroes being my primary genre doesn't hurt in that direction either). I really do like what I am seeing for 4th.

 

[Dausuul]

I can't really say I've seen that straight-class arcane casters' abilities noticeably make the lack of spell failure for divine casters a balanced equation. But even if I were to agree in the case of the wizard, conceptually arcane spell failure for a sorcerer (who's magic is innate rather than studied) just doesn't makes sense to me. Of course I'd balance the supposed superior utility of an arcanist against the fact that they have weaker hit dice, poorer nonmagical combat ability, and don't start with any sort of armor proficiencies rather than all of that plus spell failure.

Conceptually, I've never felt that the arcane spell failure rules made any sense at all. But I don't see them hurting arcane casters particularly, certainly not at the higher levels.

The rule for any arcane caster past 10th level is, "If you need Armor Class, you're doing it wrong." High-level arcane casters in 3.X rely on their insane mobility, their magical defenses, and their battlefield control magic to protect them. Greater invisibility, mirror image, displacement, stoneskin, phantom steed, greater blink, time stop, and the like keep you from getting hurt, while save-or-die and save-or-lose spells take out your enemies. For bonus points, use scry 'n die tactics to ensure the fight is over before it starts, or just teleport to the objective and bypass the fight entirely. That's what I mean by making chop-off-the-hit-points combat irrelevant.

4E looks to be negating this, making arcane casters play the same basic game as everyone else--protect your hit points with AC/Fort/Ref/Will, defeat your enemies by chopping off their hit points.

 

[Torchlyte]

I edited my above post.

The character concept is, for example, a child of destiny born to unite magic. As part of the character concept, the character can access all form of magic.

That is a concept.

The laundry list was an example of how that could be done in third edition.

I guess I see that as more of a flavor change than something that must be represented by 1 Incarnum Power + 1 Arcane Power + 1 Divine Power + 1 Psionic Power. For example, you could do Divine/Psionic and have rituals represent the arcane side.

 

[The Shadow]

Every D&D character is in the end just a list of mechanics.

I... would find it very difficult to disagree more.

Every D&D character of mine is an idea in my mind - a personality, a way of speaking, a backstory, a set of imagined things they do. A sketch of a person - a heroic person in a fantasy world.

The list of mechanics is there to help me depict that person in the context of the game. It is not, by any stretch, "my character". It is a partial, always inadequate, and limited attempt to depict the character in my mind as he or she interacts with the imagined world.

A good roleplayer fills this list according to a concept and thanks to the 4E straitjacket a lot of concepts are now not possible anymore.

I can't imagine why you believe this. Really, I can't. I'll grant you that a druidic concept (say) will be more inadequately represented by the mechanics than usual until next year... but no reasonable concept is impossible. (Where by 'reasonable' I mean 'leaving room for the other people at the table to participate roughly equally'.)