Multiclassing Moritorium

[Ipissimus]

Ok, so they've let out a few more details on multiclassing in Podcast 20. Apparently:

-You won't get the same benefts as someone who took the core class at 1st level all at once.
-You start out with specific bonuses from your first multiclass level, then get more as you progress 'deeper' into the class, but probably not on a per-level basis.

At least, at the moment, that's how I'm reading it.

So, Class Training feats are probably for those people who want to dabble, while multiclassing is more 'hardcore', as we guessed or was hinted at.

I find this interesting because it seems that, while they've been handing out the healing and giving powers to the formerly powerless, feedback we're getting from Experience is suggesting that the classes are tightly focussed in their roles. Perhaps too tightly focussed.

So the question is, will it be worth multiclassing or dabbling in 4E? Could it still be beneficial for a Wizard to take a few Fighter abilities to help him survive toe-to-toe in cramped dungeon environments? Or will specializing in one job alone be more beneficial to the party in the long run?

I'm not sure where I come in the specialist/generalist category. Maybe it's too early to tell, but the possibilities do intrigue me as much as they did with 3e. At the moment, I can't see too many characters multiclassing within the same role. I don't see too much incentive for a Paladin to cross train as a Fighter. A Paladin/Warlord, however, does present to me some very interesting possibilities.

 

[Stalker0]

There's a couple of reason I think multiclassing will still be useful.

1) DCs remain competitive naturally. So far, all of the spellcasting like powers have been "attack rolls" modified by their prime stat. There doesn't appear to be any spell level bonus added in. That means a fighter that picks up a couple of wizard powers will still have a good chance of punching through some defenses, where as currently busting out a 1st level spell when there are 4th level spells around is a joke.

2) Many of the class restrictions are gone. Wizards can cast in full armor. Fighters can attack with any weapon, which may include wizard implements.

3) Everyone progresses at the same rate regardless of class choices. In this I mean the 1/2 level bonus to most things. In 3e, multiclassing often got you a ridiculous save in one area, a pathetic save in another, a garbage BAB, crazy armor and weapon proficiences, etc. Basically it tended to create min/maxing. In 4e, things are more consistent. As a fighter, I've already got my 1st level attack bonus for being a fighter. If I take wizard I'm still getting the 1/2 level bonus same as everyone else. Now I'm just adding some spells instead of getting more powers.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I really hope that multi-classing / using Class Training feats (MC/CTF)is a real viable option because classes are so tightly focused. I have no problems at all with the tight focus, that is what classes are. However effective flexible MC/CTF rules will be required for the vision of many players characters.

1) DCs remain competitive naturally. So far, all of the spellcasting like powers have been "attack rolls" modified by their prime stat. There doesn't appear to be any spell level bonus added in. That means a fighter that picks up a couple of wizard powers will still have a good chance of punching through some defenses, where as currently busting out a 1st level spell when there are 4th level spells around is a joke.

However we have only seen 1st level powers so we don't know how they scale with level. Hopefully you are right ans it is 1/2 character levels rather than class levels!

 

[Danzauker]

In a "standard" group, I think true multiclassing should not be so useful, except for background purposes.

With standard I mean one where every role is covered, which will always be the more effective way to handle adventuring. The fifth or sixth character could be a multiclass one, even if just to differentiate one figther to the other.

If one of the basic roles is missing, that's where I think we're in the true multiclassing province.

 

[Ipissimus]

I think there's been a 27th level 'Blinding Smite' power for the Paladin posted somewhere that sounded very rousetacular. I believe it prevented the target creature from attacking anyone but the Paladin at all. Paladin must equal Damage Sponge.

I agree with Danzauker that a well rounded party may need multiclassing less, but it might be nice at higher levels for you to know that when things go pear-shaped, the Wizard might be able to survive for a round in h-t-h so that the party can get her out of trouble.

Oh, another wicked thought. Warlock/Paladin... particularly Infernal Pact Tiefling...

 

[Pinotage]

The thing I'm seeing from Xath's interview with The Rouse, is that 4e discourages multiclassing. Which means it encourages you to stick to you, already unflexible, niche. I'd hoped multiclassing would solve the flexibility issues, but it looks like it might not.

Pinotage

 

[MaelStorm]

The thing I'm seeing from Xath's interview with The Rouse, is that 4e discourages multiclassing. Which means it encourages you to stick to you, already unflexible, niche. I'd hoped multiclassing would solve the flexibility issues, but it looks like it might not.

Pinotage

Exactly. (And I remember not long ago (4 or 6 weeks ago) Mr. Mearl's rambling about how much 4E was flexible... that it could almost be a classless system. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.) I don't mind classes but I would appreciate options. It would have been easy if powers/feats would fall under different talent trees and you could say well I exchange one branch of this tree with another one. Anyway, I agree with you totally that 4E discourage class flexibility, and I think the main reason is for preventing players to become too powerful.

EDIT: Or mainly to maintain their initial role.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

The thing I'm seeing from Xath's interview with The Rouse, is that 4e discourages multiclassing. Which means it encourages you to stick to you, already unflexible, niche. I'd hoped multiclassing would solve the flexibility issues, but it looks like it might not.

Pinotage

What I got from that interview is that there will be a difference between a Wizard 1/Fighter 1 and a Fighter 1/Wizard. The former is essentially a Wizard with some Fighterly abilities, while the latter is basically a Fighter with some Wizardly abilities. This is perfectly acceptable to me, and in fact resembles True20's approach to multiclassing.

 

[Quartz]

I'm willing to wait and see. However, from past threads, the proponents of multiclassing of base classes in actual play - of which I am one - seem to be in a distinct minority. So WoTC may simply have done their market research and decided to remove a level of complexity.

 

[Holy Bovine]

If multiclassing goes the way of the dodo I will not shed a single tear. One of the more annoying aspects of D&D in any form and has, ime, always been used as a way of power gaming your character like nobody's business.