D&D 4E Love It or Leave It: 4E Multiclassing
- Thread starter CleverNickName
- Start date
Love it, for the reasons Cadfan stated. It's not as conceptually elegant as the 1E or 3E solutions, but it'll be a lot cleaner and better balanced in actual play.
I don't care if I can have a "fifty-fifty hybrid" in some abstract sense; I care whether I can make a guy who switches easily between fighting with a sword and hurling fireballs, while remaining effective in either mode. 3E didn't let me do that until quite late in the edition's life cycle, and required various splatbooks to pull it off. 4E will let me do that from the get-go. Therefore I am happy.
There is no 11th level limit--the basic multiclass feats are available from the start, and the extra power feats are available from 4th level on--and the trade-off is optional. You can multiclass without giving up your paragon path or epic destiny. It's just that if you don't like any of your paragon path options, you can choose to get extra multiclassing stuff instead. At least that's how I read it.
I don't care if I can have a "fifty-fifty hybrid" in some abstract sense; I care whether I can make a guy who switches easily between fighting with a sword and hurling fireballs, while remaining effective in either mode. 3E didn't let me do that until quite late in the edition's life cycle, and required various splatbooks to pull it off. 4E will let me do that from the get-go. Therefore I am happy.
CleverNickName said:
There is no 11th level limit--the basic multiclass feats are available from the start, and the extra power feats are available from 4th level on--and the trade-off is optional. You can multiclass without giving up your paragon path or epic destiny. It's just that if you don't like any of your paragon path options, you can choose to get extra multiclassing stuff instead. At least that's how I read it.
Last edited:
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
It's fine.
Multiclassing has always been an answer to a very specific problem: "I can't realize my character concept through the existing base classes!"
I think 4e's solution to this will, in general, be "Then here's a new base class!"
To a lesser extent, in 3e, multiclassing was about expanding your options while diminishing your potency. This had the unintended side effect of making characters kind of sucky, and thus unable to really muster a powerful defense against various high-level threats (though you wouldn't notice it with a level or two, or at low levels), while their options (and thus their unwieldiness) ballooned.
4e will lack this option entirely because it doesn't want to have any suck whatsoever in it. You won't be having jack-of-all-trades/master-of-none type characters anymore, in part due to the strengthening of roles and the avoidance of suck like it was kryptonite. The archetype is great for fiction, but is VERY difficult to get right in a team-based RPG. You're not good enough to replace anyone, and you're not good enough to shine in the light being cast by someone else's excellent job. In 4e, everybody's gonna be a master of SOMETHING (and probably not too shabby at the rest).
I mourn the loss of the archetype a bit, but I think it's possible to get it right by working outside of the box a little bit (though I wouldn't expect it from WotC). Aside from that, the new "class training" rules work for what they really intend to do: give you a bit of a taste of some other class's abilities.
Multiclassing has always been an answer to a very specific problem: "I can't realize my character concept through the existing base classes!"
I think 4e's solution to this will, in general, be "Then here's a new base class!"
To a lesser extent, in 3e, multiclassing was about expanding your options while diminishing your potency. This had the unintended side effect of making characters kind of sucky, and thus unable to really muster a powerful defense against various high-level threats (though you wouldn't notice it with a level or two, or at low levels), while their options (and thus their unwieldiness) ballooned.
4e will lack this option entirely because it doesn't want to have any suck whatsoever in it. You won't be having jack-of-all-trades/master-of-none type characters anymore, in part due to the strengthening of roles and the avoidance of suck like it was kryptonite. The archetype is great for fiction, but is VERY difficult to get right in a team-based RPG. You're not good enough to replace anyone, and you're not good enough to shine in the light being cast by someone else's excellent job. In 4e, everybody's gonna be a master of SOMETHING (and probably not too shabby at the rest).
I mourn the loss of the archetype a bit, but I think it's possible to get it right by working outside of the box a little bit (though I wouldn't expect it from WotC). Aside from that, the new "class training" rules work for what they really intend to do: give you a bit of a taste of some other class's abilities.
Daeger said:
Yes. Because the first levels of classes had to avoid frontloading. Because otherwise the opposite problem to what you point out here would happen. In other words, 3.x did nothing wrong, and avoided the pit trap almost entirely -- and now it doesn't have to avoid it at all.
Lord Mhoram
Hero
Like it, but don't love it.
I think feat+Power = Power from another class may be too high a price, but won't know till I see the feats, so I'm reserving judgment until then. Easy to houserule though if I think it is.
I can't think of a single classed character that I've run in over 20 years, so multiclassing is something I was very much concerned about. As someone mentioned multiclassing is a way to get character concept if the class doesn't do it (and I tend to have non standard concepts, which explains why I haven't run a single class character in forever.)
And something to think about, and was touched on by other posters. If all goes to plan we get a new PH every year, likely with 8 base classes each time (I hope so anyway). Plus any that come out in setting books or expansion books, after a few years we will have a huge base class list, and a totally obscene paragon path list I'm sure. With that many base classes (each with a multiclassing feat), using paragon path to multi, or to paragon in other directions, I can easily see just about any character concept being workable.
So yeah, I'm positive, waiting to see the full system.
I think feat+Power = Power from another class may be too high a price, but won't know till I see the feats, so I'm reserving judgment until then. Easy to houserule though if I think it is.
I can't think of a single classed character that I've run in over 20 years, so multiclassing is something I was very much concerned about. As someone mentioned multiclassing is a way to get character concept if the class doesn't do it (and I tend to have non standard concepts, which explains why I haven't run a single class character in forever.)
And something to think about, and was touched on by other posters. If all goes to plan we get a new PH every year, likely with 8 base classes each time (I hope so anyway). Plus any that come out in setting books or expansion books, after a few years we will have a huge base class list, and a totally obscene paragon path list I'm sure. With that many base classes (each with a multiclassing feat), using paragon path to multi, or to paragon in other directions, I can easily see just about any character concept being workable.
So yeah, I'm positive, waiting to see the full system.
Engilbrand
First Post
This is a much simpler system. I like it. It adds some versatility to a class, which is definitely a good thing. The only thing that I see that could be tricky (and I realize that this may be covered somewhere else) is the inherent problem of a character changing over time.
Mike's a Wizard. After adventuring for 5 years, he realizes that he's satisfied with his body of knowledge and would like to move on to learning something else. He wants to learn the ways of the Rogue, too.
In 3.5, Mike would have 8 levels of Wizard and then start taking Rogue. In 4th, though, he would probably just start taking the multiclass feats as he levels up. He may even then take a Paragon Path for a Rogue to emphasize his growing skills. What's the problem that I see? Well, he's just as powerful as he's always been, even though he's not focusing on his spellcasting.
That's the only problem that I have. Thankfully, it's a minor one that I can easily live with. I'll probably stay with one class, throw in a little bit of something else, and then happily take my Paragon Path. I'm not too worried about a character making a major change like that.
In retrospect, though, after taking enough of the multiclass feats, it would probably make sense to retrain to being a Rogue with Wizard feats. That would show that his arcane abilities are starting to atrophy and he's becoming specialized as a Rogue.
Well, I think I just completely solved my minor "problem" with the whole multiclassing thing.
For those who have problems with the whole "only 2" thing:
Picture, if you will, a college kid. He's studying Law, Medicine and Education. He does his internship to be a doctor. After school, he becomes a teacher who practices a little law on the weekend. Eventually, he decides to just focus on teaching.
You can only really have one career. Anything else is a job. As time goes on, our hypothetical student probably forgot a lot of his medical stuff. When he's old and ready to retire, he probably won't be up to date on current laws and will probably have forgotten most of the things he used to know.
In 3.5, they would have you believe that, at the age of 75, this guy would still be as fine a doctor as he was 50 years before, he could be thrown into a courtroom after being out of one for 45 years and be just as effective as he was back then, and he was as good a teacher as he was a few years before that (which makes sense). Technically, though, 3.5 wouldn't be able to recognize the teaching and lawyering as happening at the same time.
In 4E, though, by the age of 75, he's forgotten nearly everything about medicine, enough that it doesn't even really matter anymore. He spent most of his life as a teacher, so has all of his class levels there, and he might have a few "feats" when it comes to being a lawyer.
Is 4E perfect? Nope. I'm sure that you can come up with arguments against it. Does it make more sense than 3.5? Yes.
Mike's a Wizard. After adventuring for 5 years, he realizes that he's satisfied with his body of knowledge and would like to move on to learning something else. He wants to learn the ways of the Rogue, too.
In 3.5, Mike would have 8 levels of Wizard and then start taking Rogue. In 4th, though, he would probably just start taking the multiclass feats as he levels up. He may even then take a Paragon Path for a Rogue to emphasize his growing skills. What's the problem that I see? Well, he's just as powerful as he's always been, even though he's not focusing on his spellcasting.
That's the only problem that I have. Thankfully, it's a minor one that I can easily live with. I'll probably stay with one class, throw in a little bit of something else, and then happily take my Paragon Path. I'm not too worried about a character making a major change like that.
In retrospect, though, after taking enough of the multiclass feats, it would probably make sense to retrain to being a Rogue with Wizard feats. That would show that his arcane abilities are starting to atrophy and he's becoming specialized as a Rogue.
Well, I think I just completely solved my minor "problem" with the whole multiclassing thing.
For those who have problems with the whole "only 2" thing:
Picture, if you will, a college kid. He's studying Law, Medicine and Education. He does his internship to be a doctor. After school, he becomes a teacher who practices a little law on the weekend. Eventually, he decides to just focus on teaching.
You can only really have one career. Anything else is a job. As time goes on, our hypothetical student probably forgot a lot of his medical stuff. When he's old and ready to retire, he probably won't be up to date on current laws and will probably have forgotten most of the things he used to know.
In 3.5, they would have you believe that, at the age of 75, this guy would still be as fine a doctor as he was 50 years before, he could be thrown into a courtroom after being out of one for 45 years and be just as effective as he was back then, and he was as good a teacher as he was a few years before that (which makes sense). Technically, though, 3.5 wouldn't be able to recognize the teaching and lawyering as happening at the same time.
In 4E, though, by the age of 75, he's forgotten nearly everything about medicine, enough that it doesn't even really matter anymore. He spent most of his life as a teacher, so has all of his class levels there, and he might have a few "feats" when it comes to being a lawyer.
Is 4E perfect? Nope. I'm sure that you can come up with arguments against it. Does it make more sense than 3.5? Yes.
keterys
First Post
One route for Mike could be to retrain somewhere in the paragon tier to a rogue with wizard multiclass, or swap his base class to 'Arcane Trickster', or whatever option has since come out.
I'm warming up a little to it - I think the core problem I have is
Feat + Power = Power doesn't look good to me.
I'm warming up a little to it - I think the core problem I have is
Feat + Power = Power doesn't look good to me.
I'm not sure which way to vote in this at all.
On the one hand, the basic concept is excellent. Use feats to snag class features from another class. I'm very positive about that and it seems like a mechanic you can use to balance the features by feat.
On the other, they seem to indicate that this is THE multiclass table. As in you can never, never, never ever get a character with at-will sneak attacks unless you start out as a rogue. Or perhaps give up your paragon path. And the opportunity cost for the multiclass powers is insanely high. One feat for each power you want to swap just seems excessive.
So, as it stands, it looks like a good basic system that will never be used because it costs too much and you can't go far enough with it. But obviously I might just not be seeing enough of the picture.
On the one hand, the basic concept is excellent. Use feats to snag class features from another class. I'm very positive about that and it seems like a mechanic you can use to balance the features by feat.
On the other, they seem to indicate that this is THE multiclass table. As in you can never, never, never ever get a character with at-will sneak attacks unless you start out as a rogue. Or perhaps give up your paragon path. And the opportunity cost for the multiclass powers is insanely high. One feat for each power you want to swap just seems excessive.
So, as it stands, it looks like a good basic system that will never be used because it costs too much and you can't go far enough with it. But obviously I might just not be seeing enough of the picture.
