Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jbear" data-source="post: 5003822" data-attributes="member: 75065">Thank you for your response Abdul. If you are correct, then this is an area which needs to be reworded, especially when it come to the Multiclass feats, to add clarity.&nbsp;Also it raises an issue of disparity between classes and which combinations make viable combinations. For example, mechanically and flavourwise a Sorceror Multiclassed into Barbarian is a viable option. Arcane Imp. Prof. would also be an attractive option for such a build, as they could choose a heavy blade (swordmage) and thus have high damage on melee attacks gained from multiclass barbarian powers. &nbsp;In this way, the AIP feat does not need to be a simple patch to make multiclassing between arcane classes more viable with regard to implement use.&nbsp;Also a warlock might be justified taking AIP in order to gain access to high damage implements like Staff of Ruin, with no multiclassing involved at all.&nbsp;Flavourwise, A Bard/Druid is very viable. Yet mechanically they are at a disadvantage with regard to implements. The bard is going to have this problem every time he multiclasses into anything except Wizard (as they use Wands). Also the Half-Elf Dilettante power is inferior chosing any implement power from a class that the player doesn't intend to multiclass into.&nbsp;I have trouble imagining that these are intentional limitations placed by Wotc to make multiclassing between some classes more attractive than others, especially considering their efforts to push 'non-optimal' flavoursome combinations (for example, all the racial feats for mecanically non-optimal classes). It seems more like an oversight, that fails to function as intended. &nbsp;Given all that, although I'm interested in reaching an 'official' conclusion, as there is a grey area in the wording of the multiclass feats, I'm going to rule it as I have up til now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jbear, post: 5003822, member: 75065"] Thank you for your response Abdul. If you are correct, then this is an area which needs to be reworded, especially when it come to the Multiclass feats, to add clarity. Also it raises an issue of disparity between classes and which combinations make viable combinations. For example, mechanically and flavourwise a Sorceror Multiclassed into Barbarian is a viable option. Arcane Imp. Prof. would also be an attractive option for such a build, as they could choose a heavy blade (swordmage) and thus have high damage on melee attacks gained from multiclass barbarian powers. In this way, the AIP feat does not need to be a simple patch to make multiclassing between arcane classes more viable with regard to implement use. Also a warlock might be justified taking AIP in order to gain access to high damage implements like Staff of Ruin, with no multiclassing involved at all. Flavourwise, A Bard/Druid is very viable. Yet mechanically they are at a disadvantage with regard to implements. The bard is going to have this problem every time he multiclasses into anything except Wizard (as they use Wands). Also the Half-Elf Dilettante power is inferior chosing any implement power from a class that the player doesn't intend to multiclass into. I have trouble imagining that these are intentional limitations placed by Wotc to make multiclassing between some classes more attractive than others, especially considering their efforts to push 'non-optimal' flavoursome combinations (for example, all the racial feats for mecanically non-optimal classes). It seems more like an oversight, that fails to function as intended. Given all that, although I'm interested in reaching an 'official' conclusion, as there is a grey area in the wording of the multiclass feats, I'm going to rule it as I have up til now. [/QUOTE]

Verification