Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet" data-source="post: 7463905" data-attributes="member: 6689161">Respectfully, I am not sure where the distaste for multiclassing started!  In 1e demihumans were able to do so.  It was assumed that they had more than one sort of knowledge/ability baked into their 'concept' and no one I knew ever balked at it.Now, some express concerns about multiclassing being too artificial.  Perhaps that is because you can "suddenly" take on a class which seems to have no relationship to your history or character.  I guess I can see where there is an issue for some campaigns here.In my groups, both the ones I play in and DM, there is no issue.  We talk about what the character is supposed to be--have an idea and then foreshadow it.For my part, I like arcane casters who can also fight in melee.  Even if I were to say start as fighter, I make sure I am taking arcana or magic initiate or the sage background...something.  At second level, it is no shock that the character has interest in magic.What does blow me away is the absolute hatred for multiclassing as artificial or contrived.  The whole concept of classes and levels is artificial and contrived but we are conditioned to accept them.  I feel NO SHAME about wanting to play a fighter magic user or whatever.  Those abilities in combination seem fun to me, fit with the game and make sense as anything else.  I do not think that Eldritch Knight, even with feats, provides quite enough magic for my taste and therefore either blade pact warlock or multiclassing.Look back at 1e and the discussion of multiclassing.  They talk about the strengths of the combinations.  Fighter clerics can use better edged weapons!  Cleric magic users have better defensive options!  It did not appear that anyone was having heart burn about this.  It was assumed that people wanted a certain style of play and the RP would follow.I am no apologist for some late game addition of a class to get an extra +1 here or there if it is foreign to the concept.  But my approach i am learning is this:  I want to adventure and overcome challenges in game.  There are different styles of meeting those challenges.  Sometimes I want one and sometimes another.  Multiclassing seems to offer more styles.  You are no more forced to roleplay a champion fighter than a wizard rogue and so many of the RP arguments, fluff as I termed it don't move me.  Unless of course there is little concept to start with...or there is a cheese factory being made or something.I guess I have concluded for myself that many choices are about the style and mechanic one might prefer but that is OK...where I start to feel some trepidation is when it is less about a style and an approach to the challenges of the game and more about incremental efficacy (stacking stuff a la prestige classes or pathinder). The latter approach leaves me cold but I think is a far cry from multiclassing in the general sense.If you do not think it fits the lore, I might ask in which case and in which what world.  Because hopefully you are not telling me you cannot fathom a fighter/rogue...</blockquote>

Verification