Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5799570" data-attributes="member: 19675">Its not meaningless at all.In some languages, the base unit is a broad concept, reflected in the way the language is written.  In other languages, the base written unit may be a word or syllable.In the first kind of language, trying to reduce a written symbol to a single word in another language is essentially impossible.  Within the context of that language, that written symbol is irreducibly complex.  It cannot be broken down further.  Some things are thus not expressable within that language without creating new words & corresponding symbols or combining old symbols into increasingly complex ones.In contrast, languages of the latter kinds are able to break concepts down more into component parts, allowing for greater precision in communication.  Advantages of that sort are big reasons why Latin, then French were the languages of diplomacy before English became so ubiquitous.There is nothing in the game forcing you to multiclass- the archetypes remain solidly simulated.  You want to play an archetypal barbarian, don't multiclass out of barbarian.Besides, how many literary or mythological figures would be universally statted out as single-classed in D&D terms, anyway?Within the context of D&D?  Nothing major, really.  The only blips are:1) not being able to start off as a multiclassed PC at level 1 without going to the gestalt rules (which seem a bit gonzo to me).  Pretty minor, really.2) too many PrCls that are mechanically some kind of Base Class+. While this is a nasty problem, it is not the multiclassing system itself that causes it, but rather poor PrCl design.3) too many PrCls that are "fixes" for casters losing casting potency by multiclassing, which I think is a feature of the system.  If you're a caster dabbling in other classes, you shouldn't be as good a caster as your more single-minded contemporaries.  Flexibility comes at the price of excellence.Compared to Fantasy HERO?  There is a certain lack of flexibility in PC design, surprise, surprise.As with anything, the devil is in the details.  I can discuss past mechanics because I've seen exactly what I can and cannot model in 1Ed, 2Ed, 3Ed, 3.5Ed and 4Ed.  I won't know what I can model in 5Ed until I see the rules.If I can't model PCs that interest me, 5Ed will not interest me.Can't speak to themes since we're not using 'em in 4Ed and I haven't seen anything about their 5Ed incarnation.</blockquote>

Verification