Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Matthias" data-source="post: 6021285" data-attributes="member: 3625">For multi-classing in a d20-derivative game, there is a range of functionality: at the &quot;fancy&quot; end of the spectrum you can create &quot;the perfect multiclass&quot; which really just means you synthesize a whole new base class from two or more existing ones. At the opposite end you have the &quot;cookie cutter&quot; approach which gives us the level-stacking phenomenon that 3E and PF do. The problem with &quot;fancy&quot; multiclassing is that it takes too much work to make and properly balance a class that is unique to the character you intend to use it for. The problem with the &quot;cookie cutter&quot; method is that multiclass characters lose high-end powers for some versatility in middle- and low-end powers. So you might agree, neither extreme is perfect for what you want to do.A more workable alternative method of multiclassing might be to employ a variant of archetyping, where you attempt to write a new concept-specific archetype for the primary class you want to use, where existing class features are swapped out for some of the features from the secondary (or tertiary, etc.) classes you want to mix up with the primary one. For example instead of a Fighter/Rogue of matched levels, you would swap out a few Fighter class features for some of the Rogue's (of equivalent power and appropriate flavor).Of course, some of Paizo's published archetypes already do this, so unless your character is pretty unique in what flavor and personality you are aiming to create in the campaign, it may be easier for you to mine some of Paizo's extant publications (especially Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat) to find an archetype you really like.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Matthias, post: 6021285, member: 3625"] For multi-classing in a d20-derivative game, there is a range of functionality: at the "fancy" end of the spectrum you can create "the perfect multiclass" which really just means you synthesize a whole new base class from two or more existing ones. At the opposite end you have the "cookie cutter" approach which gives us the level-stacking phenomenon that 3E and PF do. The problem with "fancy" multiclassing is that it takes too much work to make and properly balance a class that is unique to the character you intend to use it for. The problem with the "cookie cutter" method is that multiclass characters lose high-end powers for some versatility in middle- and low-end powers. So you might agree, neither extreme is perfect for what you want to do. A more workable alternative method of multiclassing might be to employ a variant of archetyping, where you attempt to write a new concept-specific archetype for the primary class you want to use, where existing class features are swapped out for some of the features from the secondary (or tertiary, etc.) classes you want to mix up with the primary one. For example instead of a Fighter/Rogue of matched levels, you would swap out a few Fighter class features for some of the Rogue's (of equivalent power and appropriate flavor). Of course, some of Paizo's published archetypes already do this, so unless your character is pretty unique in what flavor and personality you are aiming to create in the campaign, it may be easier for you to mine some of Paizo's extant publications (especially Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat) to find an archetype you really like. [/QUOTE]

Verification