Multi-classing, yay or nay?

[Summer-Knight925]

the 4 basic classes are like the generic classes, rather than giving preset abilities its like giving bonus feats, just a different times, like the warrior gets them every other level meanwhile the thief gets them every three and the priest and mage get them every four, but again, the power levels are (I hope) balanced, but the idea is more control

I had worked on a 'no-class' version but quickly realized it was extremely prone to power gaming and what I call 'uni-gaming' where the only way to play a ertain character (say a wizard) is to take a single thing (like you're not powerful unless you have fireball)

It's going to take some work, but less is more sometimes

SOMETIMES

 

[MrMyth]

Multi-classing as a predominantly roleplaying tool - Yay.

Muti-classing solely as an optimization tool - Nay.

Yeah, this. Honestly, I care less about multi-classing and more about multi-abilitying.

In other words, I want a system that can handle a player who says "I want to play a skilled warrior in heavy armor - who is also good at picking locks and dodging fireballs!" Or even, "And one who is good at stabbing enemies in weak spots!"

As opposed to, "I want a Fighter who can Sneak Attack."

If the system can thematically construct the character concept one is looking for, that's all I care about. Whether than is done via a class-less approach, or via skills and feats (or, adding new elements like Themes, Backgrounds, etc) - finding ways to represent a character's desired abilities is more important to me than being able to have it say, on your character sheet, that you are a Fighter/Thief or whatever.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Most of the time, from what I've seen, multi-class characters are a result of someone trying to game the system to gain whatever advantage may be there, or perceived to be there.

You need to meet more "thespian" oriented players.









I said "THESPIAN!"

 

[Smoss]

Classes were actually a reason I made my own RPG system. I liked the idea of multi-classing, rarely liked the implementation. So I made a slassless system. I for one really grate against class based systems anymore - Gives me the feeling of being boxed in. It was why I orginally had high hopes for 4E after seeing the relatively elegant way SW Saga did classes and multi-classing. Of course, I quickly learned the fun evils of a classless system too - character building ends up with the "so many choices - Now I am brain-locked trying to decide" problem (Simpler systems can avoid this, sure, but I'm generalizing here).

Man, I totally need a Character Builder style program for my system. Wish I was a programmer.
Smoss

 

[Super Pony]

I much prefer a tree-like option-heavy advancement system, rather than a typical rigid class structure with crab-walk-multi-classing built in.

As far as optimization and alpha builds...it's going to happen. There will be ladies and gentlmen that will still dive into class X for Y levels to increase the potency of power/loophole Z. Just like they would always choose character-build options X and Y in order to boost the potency of power/loophole Z.

 

[JeffB]

I am not a fan really.

If you are going to have a class based system, why bother with multiclassing rules? Just get rid of the classes, and do something like RQ, GURPS, HERO.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I like 4E's take on it: First priority is to get the classes right, and then do what can be done to make multiclassing work without taking away from the classes.

 

[Krensky]

Witness Conan's evolution: Barbarian -> Thief -> Fighter -> King. Try writing a single class to cover that!

While builds for fictional heroes are always a bit subjective...

For my game of choice with the image I have in my mind of Conan:

Cunning Barbarian Explorer with Acrobatics and Sneak as his Origin skills, perhaps picking up levels in Regent after tenth level. Probably I'd just stick with Explorer though and use other options to acquire a kingdom. The Regent is a bit more politically oriented then my usual conception of Conan. I never really read any stories after he was King though. An argument could be made for Savage, Ruthless, or a number of other Talents too.


As for the original question...

I don't think they are a requirement, although I like them when done right. There is nothing wrong with the standard 3.X/d20/OGL multi-classing mechanism.

Typically the issue is in the class design that makes it all but de rigure to multiclass. I rarely saw more the four levels of Fighter in 3.X, for instance.

In the system mentioned above, the classes are appealing enough to take twenty levels in. The Expert and Master classes are also appealing. However one of the cardinal rules for building 'optimum' characters is to make sure your Career Level 14 is either your 14th level in a Base class, a 10th level in an Expert Class, or a 5th level in a Master class so you're not delaying your Gamebreaker.

 

[Dice4Hire]

In my opinion,

If there are classes, there needs to be multiclassing or dual classing or whatever it is called

This is one way to make a simpler base set of classes and let the players build the variations. I think it is much better than the designers building twenty classes that are variations of a few base classes.

But overall, I would prefer to see a good classless fantasy system. I have played D&D mostly, and the levels there work pretty well.

But a good classless system would be nice, as long as it was not too easy to abuse. I found M&M too easy to abuse for my tastes.

 

[Mournblade94]

Multi-classing as a predominantly roleplaying tool - Yay.

Muti-classing solely as an optimization tool - Nay.

I absolutely agree!

I have always loved multiclassing, but because I like the fighter/mage combination.

In PAthfinder though, I find multiclassing to be more of a sacrifice.

I had a player that wanted to multiclass his paladin to a fighter. He was honestly torn because both classes give great options that would turn out to be a sacrifice. MY games tend to go to high end, so If you want that cool 20th level fighter weapons master, you better not multiclass.

Pathfinder made every class cool, that I find it is a detriment to take a prestige class.

I think this works well because you won't sacrifice a class except to get exactly the CONCEPT, and not necessarily optimization you want.