Hybrid Talent
- Thread starter Mort_Q
- Start date
I think my main issue with Hybrid Talent, is some of the classes need it to function more than others. Take a wizard hybrid for example. No wand of accuracy/orb of imposition etc. Oh noes.
Compare that with some of the other classes who have multiple strong class features, and you only get to pick at most 1 of them. You give up alot more hybridising some classes compared to others.
The other issue I have is with classes that have multiple builds and many powers with riders requiring you to have that build (eg warden with wildblood/earthstrength, sorcerer with their 4 sources etc). I think that as a hybrid you should have the opportunity to pick one of those sources for free and get no benefit other than qualifying for those riders. As it is, a hybrid dabbling in one of those classes isn't half that class... he's half of some of that class, it doubly penalises them.
Compare that with some of the other classes who have multiple strong class features, and you only get to pick at most 1 of them. You give up alot more hybridising some classes compared to others.
The other issue I have is with classes that have multiple builds and many powers with riders requiring you to have that build (eg warden with wildblood/earthstrength, sorcerer with their 4 sources etc). I think that as a hybrid you should have the opportunity to pick one of those sources for free and get no benefit other than qualifying for those riders. As it is, a hybrid dabbling in one of those classes isn't half that class... he's half of some of that class, it doubly penalises them.
Stuntman
First Post
I don't think that hybrid characters need any more class features even at the expense of more feats or hybrid versions. They seem good enough with the one use of the Hybrid Talent feat. If you want another use of Hybrid Talent, you can choose the paragon hybrid option.
Single classed characters get the full set of class features. Allowing the HT feat to taken multiple times diminish the features that single classed characters gain exclusively. I like the fact that single classed characters have many things that hybrids do not get.
Single classed characters get the full set of class features. Allowing the HT feat to taken multiple times diminish the features that single classed characters gain exclusively. I like the fact that single classed characters have many things that hybrids do not get.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
I think the whole problem with the hybridization (and multiclassing in general) rules is that they're incredibly one-sided.
Take, for instance, a rogue multiclassing into fighter. He's stuck with low hitpoints, low surges, no armor proficiencies, no marking, no combat challenging, and no stopping movement on OAs. In short, multiclassing into fighter doesn't make him a defender, almost regardless of the paths, powers PP and ED that he takes.
Conversely take a fighter multiclassing into a rogue. What's he really missing out on? A bunch of skills and the potential to gain CA from winning initiative, and potentially a bonus to AC vs OAs (I'm not going to bother with the brutal rogue bonus, because there are enough fighter-only damage boosters to more than make up for it). He's still an effective defender, but now he's doing more damage. And as any number of sources will show, it's fairly trivial for him to get to striker level damage.
And what happens if you allow unlimited hybridization? The fighter gets every benefit the rogue has, while the rogue still ends up with inferior hitpoints and surges and makes for an inferior defender.
Put simply: I don't think that 4e was really designed to ever allow multiclassing, and it really shows.
Take, for instance, a rogue multiclassing into fighter. He's stuck with low hitpoints, low surges, no armor proficiencies, no marking, no combat challenging, and no stopping movement on OAs. In short, multiclassing into fighter doesn't make him a defender, almost regardless of the paths, powers PP and ED that he takes.
Conversely take a fighter multiclassing into a rogue. What's he really missing out on? A bunch of skills and the potential to gain CA from winning initiative, and potentially a bonus to AC vs OAs (I'm not going to bother with the brutal rogue bonus, because there are enough fighter-only damage boosters to more than make up for it). He's still an effective defender, but now he's doing more damage. And as any number of sources will show, it's fairly trivial for him to get to striker level damage.
And what happens if you allow unlimited hybridization? The fighter gets every benefit the rogue has, while the rogue still ends up with inferior hitpoints and surges and makes for an inferior defender.
Put simply: I don't think that 4e was really designed to ever allow multiclassing, and it really shows.
I think that is a bit strong. *Should* a multiclassed fighter be as good as a fighter? I don't think so. I think multiclassing is for dabblers, characters who picked up some moves during their career (hence the progressive aqcuisition of powers), and hybrids are for true dual classers.
I think both options work fine for what they are intended, and as a fighter, if some upstart rogue was able to do what I do for the cost of a feat, I'd be upset.
As for fighters taking rogue multiclass and being a rogue, that is pretty silly. Fighters may have some high damage potential, but that is not all there is to being a rogue.
Jay
I think both options work fine for what they are intended, and as a fighter, if some upstart rogue was able to do what I do for the cost of a feat, I'd be upset.
As for fighters taking rogue multiclass and being a rogue, that is pretty silly. Fighters may have some high damage potential, but that is not all there is to being a rogue.
Jay
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
I rather like hybrid + dabbling I mean multiclassing... my characters feel much more like themselves than ever before. I find I want to build them at 6th level ... for the number of feats and other crunchy goodness (which I do even when they arent mc/hybrids) and I no longer feel a serious need to hack the classes errr create my own. Combine liberal reskinning.... and its very awesome. ;-). A ranger with thieving skills from a background or dabbling is awefully close to a rogue fighter mix take the dungeoneering instead of nature... at least feels somewhat like an old fashioned fighter... he doesnt have the modern defendery cool but then again the 2nd and 3rd edition versons of the character didnt either.(and was a master at neither craft lagging behind his single class companions.). Someone on the list described 3e mc as the midgets standing on each others heads or smashed together depending on how good a game hacker the player was.
Last edited:
Stuntman
First Post
4E was designed to be a class-based system. One of the designers in an interview prior to 4E's release said so. They designed the classes and then later looked at how they may allow multiclassing.
A member of another forum also gave some more details about the development of multiclassing in 4E. Apparently they looked at a number of other ways to do it, scrapped them and ended up with the current multiclassing system.
I think that different players have a different expectations about what combining classes should be like. The current multiclassing system is not well liked by some players. Hybrid characters will probably appeal to some who do not like 4E multiclassing. I think that some will still not be satisfied with the official release of hybrid character rules.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
The fighter multiclasses into either of the two striker martial classes (or even doesn't bother, and simply picks high damage options), and he effectively fills the striker role.
Either of those two striker classes are not going to be able to compete in a defender role if they attempt it through multiclassing. They're always going to be well behind.
. . .and he still won't be a Rogue or Ranger. Both of those striker classes have mobility and power options that allow them to attack in different ways than the Fighter. In addition to class features that make it easier to do damage so they can focus their feats and Paragon Paths on other aspects of their character.
In any case, your point seems to be more about how Fighters do occasional Striker level damage than how multiclassing is broken (which it isn't, IMO).
Jay
In any case, your point seems to be more about how Fighters do occasional Striker level damage than how multiclassing is broken (which it isn't, IMO).
Jay
Nifft
Penguin Herder
Actually a two-blade Ranger (Cleric) -> Warpriest is quite sticky at level 16. It's a long road to get there, but he's a perfectly playable Ranger the whole time.
Cheers, -- N
