Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7013271" data-attributes="member: 5142">With that in mind, based upon what you have seen with common multiclass combinations and such, what sort of classes or subclasses do you think are lacking in the game as-is? The hybrid system is far from perfect in that regard, as it can be just as dependent on the subclass abilities themselves. Not all subclasses were created equal. It is too absolute of an argument, IMHO, to say that a hybrid allows for &quot;the exact character concept in a mechanically powerful way.&quot; I would instead argue that it allows for an approximate character concept. It's often that dissonant approximation that creates the rub for many a multiclasser. Herein may be one of the other points of contention in this discussion. If I understand you correctly, you place a greater value on what you perceive as reaching &quot;powerful class abilities&quot; earlier over what a character potentially gains from multiclassing into another class. This strikes me as a difference of priorities rather than an accurate assessment of how &quot;piddy&quot; mutliclassing or those other class abilities are. You seem to be advocating for &quot;vertical class progression,&quot; for lack of knowing a better term, that values obtaining depth through gaining &quot;more powerful&quot; class abilities sooner. I think many multiclassers tend to place greater value on &quot;horizontal class progression.&quot; They do not mind delaying powerful class abilities, because that is not their objective. Many generally prefer creating well-rounded characters, or, in other words, a character with &quot;horizontal depth&quot; rather than &quot;vertical depth.&quot; This leads to the question of whether which approach has the greater volume. Obviously that depends on the particular build. But I don't think that a single-class character is inherently more effective than a multiclassed character.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7013271, member: 5142"] With that in mind, based upon what you have seen with common multiclass combinations and such, what sort of classes or subclasses do you think are lacking in the game as-is? The hybrid system is far from perfect in that regard, as it can be just as dependent on the subclass abilities themselves. Not all subclasses were created equal. It is too absolute of an argument, IMHO, to say that a hybrid allows for "the exact character concept in a mechanically powerful way." I would instead argue that it allows for an [I]approximate[/I] character concept. It's often that dissonant approximation that creates the rub for many a multiclasser. Herein may be one of the other points of contention in this discussion. If I understand you correctly, you place a greater value on what you perceive as reaching "powerful class abilities" earlier over what a character potentially gains from multiclassing into another class. This strikes me as a difference of priorities rather than an accurate assessment of how "piddy" mutliclassing or those other class abilities are. You seem to be advocating for "vertical class progression," for lack of knowing a better term, that values obtaining depth through gaining "more powerful" class abilities sooner. I think many multiclassers tend to place greater value on "horizontal class progression." They do not mind delaying powerful class abilities, because that is not their objective. Many generally prefer creating well-rounded characters, or, in other words, a character with "horizontal depth" rather than "vertical depth." This leads to the question of whether which approach has the greater volume. Obviously that depends on the particular build. But I don't think that a single-class character is inherently more effective than a multiclassed character. [/QUOTE]

Verification