Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cutty Sark" data-source="post: 479377" data-attributes="member: 4643">My favorite part about 3E when it came out was multiclassing.  I've played a Rogue/Sorcerer halfling, a Ranger/Rogue scout, a Ranger/Druid woodsman, a fighter/monk finesse polearm wielder, and a wizard.  What I've noticed is that unless you're the primary spelcaster for the group, it's more fun to develop a multiclass character.  It's also less fun for your magic-user not to have the best spells.Most of the rest of my group have played all single-class characters.  They remember bad experiences with 2nd edition multiclassing and they wanted to keep everything simple for a new game system.  They also notice that you're not necessarily more powerful if you multiclass.  However, they were impressed with some of the things multiclassing could do at low and middle levels to keep the party alive, like a two-weapon sneak attack from the middle of a huge melee, or a polearm wielder who could make attacks at 10ft and kick at adjacent foes.</blockquote>