Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="satori01" data-source="post: 4197666" data-attributes="member: 7859"><p>I have a number of issues with what I have read regarding "multi-classing".</p><p></p><p>1) I think fundamentally this design does not address some fundamental complaints about multiclassing & PrCs, namely: complexity & delay in time for a concept to kick in.</p><p>Arguably you can say multi classing is easier now since it requires solely a feat investment, and Saving Throws and To Hit charts are simplified. Of course given that every class is now just a list of powers you pick and chose from means classes are fundamentally all like spell casters of previous editions.</p><p></p><p>Delay in a concept is also a big concern. You wanted to play a Fighter/Mage in 3.5...there where a billion & 1 ways to do it, some at 1st level, some thru feats or magic items, some thru PrCs.....but the concept could kick in in force between 7-10th level. Look 4E and now that has become 11th level....whaaa? The delay got longer...</p><p>Whaa?</p><p></p><p>2)Is Cherry Picking 1 power really multiclassing? If a Fighter that throws the occasional Fireball really a Fighter/Mage. Sure the player can play up the "magical training" they have had and everyone at the table can play along......but come on this is more like putting lipstick on a pig, and everyone at the prom pretending its a real date. Can we not already predict what classes will be "multiclassed to" people will pick up area attacks if area attacks are rare, people will pick up rogue, because Thievery as a skill lets you do all of the cool things that skill ranks and dedication in terms of level required previously. People for the most part will probably not chose fighter unless they are martially minded because HPs being static makes it the new Multiclassing problem as spell casting was in 3E.</p><p></p><p>You will see fighters that lob fireballs, but not as much I suspect of Wizards that can fight, because do you want to be the guy with lower Hit Points than a defender Marking the solo mob....I think not.</p><p></p><p>3) If 3E multiclassing was so elegant why abandon it completely? I hate disingenious statements like that. A magical BAB system solves the multiclassing issue there.</p><p>4e designers wanted to build from the ground up. That is fine. What I suspect though is that classes are just long lists of narrowly defined powers. Like WoW characters there will be nuance differences say between 2 different Warlocks, but not alot of fundamental ones.</p><p></p><p>This is a big change from 3.5 where with the multiclassing, PrC, & feats characters of the same class could be vary different.</p><p></p><p>Star Wars Saga has been mentioned a few times, and I think the points people have made are interesting. One thing I have fear for in 4e is that my reaction to classes is going to be similar to my opinion of Star Wars Saga classes:</p><p></p><p>Interesting mechanics, but no soul.</p><p></p><p>If everyone has the same to Hit table, if everyones powers are balanced to military like precision, if every class is a list of powers and feats alone, with no quirky other features, then to quote the Incredibles: "everyone is special, and thus no one is".</p><p>4e mechanics sound fine, I like them, but this "multiclassing" system sounds like a compromise due to the fundamental nature of some design decision, and one has to wonder do these great mechanics have heart.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="satori01, post: 4197666, member: 7859"] I have a number of issues with what I have read regarding "multi-classing". 1) I think fundamentally this design does not address some fundamental complaints about multiclassing & PrCs, namely: complexity & delay in time for a concept to kick in. Arguably you can say multi classing is easier now since it requires solely a feat investment, and Saving Throws and To Hit charts are simplified. Of course given that every class is now just a list of powers you pick and chose from means classes are fundamentally all like spell casters of previous editions. Delay in a concept is also a big concern. You wanted to play a Fighter/Mage in 3.5...there where a billion & 1 ways to do it, some at 1st level, some thru feats or magic items, some thru PrCs.....but the concept could kick in in force between 7-10th level. Look 4E and now that has become 11th level....whaaa? The delay got longer... Whaa? 2)Is Cherry Picking 1 power really multiclassing? If a Fighter that throws the occasional Fireball really a Fighter/Mage. Sure the player can play up the "magical training" they have had and everyone at the table can play along......but come on this is more like putting lipstick on a pig, and everyone at the prom pretending its a real date. Can we not already predict what classes will be "multiclassed to" people will pick up area attacks if area attacks are rare, people will pick up rogue, because Thievery as a skill lets you do all of the cool things that skill ranks and dedication in terms of level required previously. People for the most part will probably not chose fighter unless they are martially minded because HPs being static makes it the new Multiclassing problem as spell casting was in 3E. You will see fighters that lob fireballs, but not as much I suspect of Wizards that can fight, because do you want to be the guy with lower Hit Points than a defender Marking the solo mob....I think not. 3) If 3E multiclassing was so elegant why abandon it completely? I hate disingenious statements like that. A magical BAB system solves the multiclassing issue there. 4e designers wanted to build from the ground up. That is fine. What I suspect though is that classes are just long lists of narrowly defined powers. Like WoW characters there will be nuance differences say between 2 different Warlocks, but not alot of fundamental ones. This is a big change from 3.5 where with the multiclassing, PrC, & feats characters of the same class could be vary different. Star Wars Saga has been mentioned a few times, and I think the points people have made are interesting. One thing I have fear for in 4e is that my reaction to classes is going to be similar to my opinion of Star Wars Saga classes: Interesting mechanics, but no soul. If everyone has the same to Hit table, if everyones powers are balanced to military like precision, if every class is a list of powers and feats alone, with no quirky other features, then to quote the Incredibles: "everyone is special, and thus no one is". 4e mechanics sound fine, I like them, but this "multiclassing" system sounds like a compromise due to the fundamental nature of some design decision, and one has to wonder do these great mechanics have heart. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Excerpt: Multiclassing (merged)
Top