Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pinotage" data-source="post: 4196538" data-attributes="member: 15194">I'm trying really hard not to bring 3e into this!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> We all know that 3e multiclassing didn't really work very well in a lot of instances. That's a given. And we can all agree that a 1:1 power ratio between the classes just doesn't work either (it's stupidly overpowered). You can't be a full fighter and full mage at the same time. Some other power ratio between the two classes is required to make a fighter/mage as a concept of equality between classes work. 4e's feat system offers a few powers in a new class at the expense of feats that could've boosted the main class. You get versatility, but you water down the main class to provide the few extra powers (possibly even a lot depending on the general power level of feats) and in some instances to get them to work (like a fighter requiring a light blade for sneak attack). You get some additional versatility, but the classes are never equal. If you start fighter, you'll always be a fighter with a few wizard powers. You'll never be equal amounts of fighter and wizard in a ratio of power relative to a single class that actually works. Let's be clear. 3e never generally achieved this, but did very well with certain combinations. 4e's paragon path system might actually achieve this. The feat system? I don't think it can. It doesn't offer a 'true' multiclass that works with equal parts of each class since you'll always be more of one class than the other. Pinotage</blockquote>

Verification