Hybrid Classes

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Seems weak. I'll agree that hybrid Talent seems to be near a requirement and could have been given as a free feature. Classes that have a modular feature need that feature for their powers to work well, especially locks (who also need it for fluff reasons). Also it goes against the design intent of 4E which up until now seems to have been "You cannot screw up while building your character".

Which is why they warn you several times that it is "risky".

I like this. I am not sure if I am really interested in using the mechanics, but I think this points out one thing: The designers are not as much in a straight jacket as some of us might have feared. They explore the game to their fullest, and are willing to go beyond the original assumptions - and communicate with us when they do.

The mechanics itself seem okay, but note that sometimes multiclassing is still "better" than hybrid classes (depending on what you want).
A Fighter/Wizard (multiclass) can mark with a Scorching Burst (especially as Paragon multiclass), a Fighter|Wizard (hybrid) can't. The Fighter/Wizard can use his wizardry to be better at defending, but a Fighter|Wizard can (and has to) control and defend at the same time.

 

[Mentat55]

I think the Hybrid Class playtest rules are a good start, though it has rough spots. I think it is works well for the hybrid cleric and warlord, because you get a healing encounter power and one of their good at-wills (thinking righteous brand and commander's strike), and obviously access to all the powers. I think it works well for the wizard, because the cantrips are fun and flavorful, if not powerful, and the main attraction of a hybrid wizard is access to all the spells.

The strikers and defenders are where things seem to break down. You don't want a hybrid striker/X to be as good as a pure striker, so you somehow have to limit the ease with which you access the striker's bonus damage. They have addressed this by making the bonus damage (Sneak Attack, Hunter's Quarry, Warlock's Curse) only accessible when using powers from the corresponding class. But the restriction does seem a bit artificial. I am ambivalent on this implementation -- I could see it working in either direction.

The fighter, paladin, and swordmage are another story. I think the hybrid fighter's Combat Challenge should work on all attacks (or maybe all melee and close attacks). The fighter's defender shtick comes from Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority -- Combat Challenge is more important (hence its inclusion in the hybrid fighter). I think the hybrid fighter's Combat Challenge could use some sort of limitation, but the fighter power limitation is not to my liking.

The paladin's defender shtick is a weird combination of Divine Challenge and its ability to heal and bolster his comrades through Lay on Hands and other powers. I think Divine Challenge <<< Combat Challenge in terms of how integral it is to the paladin's defender role, so the hybrid paladin should probably have Divine Challenge as it is written in the PHB, no changes.

The swordmage is trickier -- Swordmage Aegis is its sole defender trick, outside of any specific effects granted by powers. So you can't give a hybrid swordmage that, otherwise the hybrid swordmage begins to equal a full swordmage in its defender prowess. So I agree with the need of a decrease, but perhaps not their specific implementation.

One thing I didn't mention with defenders is AC. Since AC is especially important to them, since they have to put themselves in front and in harm's way, the loss of armor proficiencies (depending on how you hybrid) is particularly devastating. It can be mitigated somewhat by taking a complementary class where you are boosting Int or Dex, but if you don't...maybe some sort of intermediate solution is needed re: armor proficiencies. For the swordmage in particular, I'd probably implement some sort of reduced Swordmage Warding, like +1 or +2 AC if you have a free hand, otherwise no bonus.

The PHB2 classes and how they would interact with the hybrid classes must be considered, so here are my thoughts on each class and how they might work (or not work):

Avenger: Oath of Enmity would only work with avenger and avenger PP powers. Probably would have to stick to that, if only because rolling two dice and its interaction with the accuracy of other class powers could have far-reaching effects.

Barbarian: Rage Strike could be limited to once per day. But the limitations on daily powers for a hybrid class is already limiting Rage Strike indirectly. In truth, the barbarian's striker firepower is not part of a class feature, but is rather locked up in the class powers -- and those are fully accessible to a hybrid barbarian. Could be the hardest class to implement as a hybrid for this reason.

Bard: I think 1/encounter Majestic Word is pretty obvious. And since you are already a hybrid class, and can still take one multiclass, you've largely replicated the bard's multiclassing insanity (at least the nonextreme forms).

Druid: Wild Shape as is, and a bonus beast form at-will. But then what is the hybrid druid giving up? Another tricky one. Maybe Wild Shape as a twice per encounter ability?

Invoker: You probably can give the hybrid invoker one part of the Covenant feature. The question is: which one? I would lean towards the Channel Divinity power, but I can see the covenant manifestation as well. The tricky part is wording this so you don't give the hybrid invoker the full covenant ability, so they don't access the special benefits in the related powers, since that seems to be something that should stay with the full class.

Shaman: I think the full Call Spirit Companion and 1/encounter Healing Spirit makes sense. How important are the spirit's OA abilities? I am not sure -- maybe they could be included as encounter abilities, or excluded all together.

Sorcerer: The extra damage feature is the obvious one here. Is keeping it limited to arcane powers (as opposed to sorcerer and sorcerer PP powers) ok?

Warden: Nature's Wrath, plus the powers warden's fury and warden's grasp, represent the core of the warden's defender prowess. I think it makes sense to limit Nature's Wrath to marking one or a few adjacent creatures and/or making the hybrid warden choose one of warden's fury and warden's grasp to have (not both).

 

[Rechan]

The Fighter/Wizard can use his wizardry to be better at defending, but a Fighter|Wizard can (and has to) control and defend at the same time.

I don't agree with this statement. The hybrid Fighter Wiz doesn't have to, unless he's the only controller and the only defender in the group.

The article points out that, a Hybrid character really works in a group where there's all ready those two roles covered, so the hybrid doesn't feel too thin in terms of meeting the needs of his role.

The only place where I think you are right, in that his powers are split down the Role middle: it's hard to be a good controller when half your powers are single target melee.

 

[Mentat55]

A quick follow-up to my rather verbose previous post.

IMO, the roles vary in terms of how dependant they are on class features vs. class powers.

Defenders: Role is very tied to class features (e.g., Combat Challenge, Swordmage Aegis)

Strikers: Role is very tied to class feature, specifically the bonus damage mechanism -- except for the barbarian.

Leaders: Role is very tied to the healing class feature.

Controllers: Role is not dependent on class features -- it is really all about the powers.

As a result, I think hybrid Leaders are easy to implement using the hybrid class rules because the modifications to the healing power seem pretty straightforward to me. Hybrid controllers are similarly easy to implement, though if you choose mostly powers from the controller class, you might be approaching the effectiveness of a pure controller as a result of their lack of class features that strongly reinforce the controller role; thus, this could be a problem. Strikers and defenders are the trickiest, IMO.

 

[Rechan]

The more I think about it, the more I think this was the Designers being very cautious, and giving this playtest article out to see if it works.

Because looking at it, the rules here strike me as very conservative.

There are limitations here where there is little reason for there to be limitations.

Like the fighter's Combat Challenge only working on fighter powers. Why? I understand the fear - a Fighter|Wizard could mark everyone in the area of a spell. But a Fighter with a Wizard multi-class can do that already. Marking everyone in an area isn't that big a deal - the Fighter only has ONE Immediate action per round, and the mark goes away at the end of his next turn.

Same with Sneak Attack/Hunter's Quarry. Sneak attack is only possible with rogue weapons, and it can only be done once per round. So, what's the big fear? Even if a rogue is using a power where he gets to attack multiple times or multiple targets, he is still limited to the rogue's weapons as far as SA is concerned, and can only do it on one attack per round. Same with the Ranger; he can only deal Hunter's Quarry to one target, once. So what if the Hunter's Quarry target is in an area affect from a spell?

I think Wizards went the path of "We'll give them something very limited, let the folks play with it, see how it runs, and then increase its power later." It's easier to give something weak, and beef it up, then it is to give something broken and nerf it later.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The more I think about it, the more I think this was the Designers being very cautious, and giving this playtest article out to see if it works.

Because looking at it, the rules here strike me as very conservative.

There are limitations here where there is little reason for there to be limitations.

Like the fighter's Combat Challenge only working on fighter powers. Why? I understand the fear - a Fighter|Wizard could mark everyone in the area of a spell. But a Fighter with a Wizard multi-class can do that already. Marking everyone in an area isn't that big a deal - the Fighter only has ONE Immediate action per round, and the mark goes away at the end of his next turn.

The Fighter/Wizard multiclass can do it only a few times per encounter (as much as he has wizard powers). Only if he uses Paragon multiclassing can he do it all the time, and only with one power.
A hybrid classed Fighter|Wizard could do it every round (if the rules weren't as they are). He might have only one Immediate Action per round, but the -2 penalty still applies all the time.

Same with Sneak Attack/Hunter's Quarry. Sneak attack is only possible with rogue weapons, and it can only be done once per round. So, what's the big fear? Even if a rogue is using a power where he gets to attack multiple times or multiple targets, he is still limited to the rogue's weapons as far as SA is concerned, and can only do it on one attack per round. Same with the Ranger; he can only deal Hunter's Quarry to one target, once. So what if the Hunter's Quarry target is in an area affect from a spell?

Rogue/Ranger: Combine Sneak Attack and Hunters Quarry all the time? With Twin-Strike preferably?

 

[Rechan]

Rogue/Ranger: Combine Sneak Attack and Hunters Quarry all the time? With Twin-Strike preferably?

I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.

Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.

Twin Strike keys off Dex or Str. The only Dex-based attacks the ranger does are ranged. But, getting CA with ranged attacks is fairly difficult; you do it while you flank, you incur an OA.

Essentially it's a pro/con situation, not a sure thing.

 

[jbear]

I haven't read the article, but A rogue with Eye-bite as an at will power would no longer have to flank to get CA.... and cursed!!!! Ouch. And the person he is stabbing can't see him either! Do Hybrid Rogues get backstab? I imagine they do.

 

[Jack99]

I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.

Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.

Twin Strike keys off Dex or Str. The only Dex-based attacks the ranger does are ranged. But, getting CA with ranged attacks is fairly difficult; you do it while you flank, you incur an OA.

Essentially it's a pro/con situation, not a sure thing.

I think MR is responding to the thought about not limiting which powers are needed to be able to use CA/HQ. Meaning, if you made your rogue/ranger and could get CA + HQ on every attack (using for example twin strike).

Which would be horribly broken.

 

[jbear]

I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.

Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.

Twin Strike keys off Dex or Str. The only Dex-based attacks the ranger does are ranged. But, getting CA with ranged attacks is fairly difficult; you do it while you flank, you incur an OA.

Essentially it's a pro/con situation, not a sure thing.

There is a feat that gives CA from a Distance on targets that allys flank in PHBII