Multiclassing.

[neceros]

Hmm, this is a good point. Diluting the ninja factor is likely to be as much about feat selection as multiclassing.

This is my point.

 

[Ximenes088]

I think a lot of people are simply so hardwired to assume that concept differentiation can only take place via multiclassing that they can't see that the new normal way to do so is via feats. We've already been told that there are about three times as many feats in the PHB than there were in the 3.5 PHB. In 3.5, you multiclassed because all classes had roughly the same abilities at any given level, barring feat and spell picks. In 4e, every class has about 80 powers to choose from, plus three times as many feats. You can shift HP brackets with Toughness, you can (presumably) shift armor types with proficiencies, we know you can grab new weapon proficiencies... you can do a great deal to modify a character without ever leaving your class. That was not the case in 3.5.

 

[Ravingdork]

I would love to see the developers of the new 4E Forgotten Realms products try and stat out Elminster with these rules.

 

[HeinorNY]

I think a lot of people are simply so hardwired to assume that concept differentiation can only take place via multiclassing that they can't see that the new normal way to do so is via feats.

The "problem" I see is that it is almost only by feats. I wished that it would also be via Powers. As we can see from the article, you have to be very loyal to your prim.class Powers, since you need to waste a feat just to be able to trade a prim.class Power for sec.class Power. You don't add anything at all, you just trade them.

Regarding the sec.class feats though, it's a total swing party.

 

[Imp]

You can shift HP brackets with Toughness, you can (presumably) shift armor types with proficiencies, we know you can grab new weapon proficiencies... you can do a great deal to modify a character without ever leaving your class. That was not the case in 3.5.

MWP: longsword. Again, this is a promise at this point. I do hope you're right. Not that I particularly agree with your last assertion: people would say "you could do a great deal to modify a character with your feats" in 3.5, if they couldn't multiclass in that edition.

 

[Green Knight]

I would love to see the developers of the new 4E Forgotten Realms products try and stat out Elminster with these rules.

Seeing as how NPC's don't have to be built according to class rules, they can give Elminster whatever abilities they want him to have.

Although getting down to it, is there anything that Elminster has that can't be accounted for with Skill Training and Weapon Training Feats? He had one level of Fighter, and two levels of Rogue. Give him Skill Training in Thievery and Stealth, and a weapon and armor proficiency or to, and you're set. Give him a couple Cleric multiclass Feats, and that ought to cover it. Will he have Sneak Attack and Fighter maneuvers? No. But it's not as if he needs them.

And that's assuming you can't retrain your class (No evidence of that, but one can always hope, after all). In which case Elminster could've started as a Level 1 Fighter, then when he levelled up he could've retrained into a Level 2 Rogue. Once he levelled up, again, he could've retrained into a Level 3 Cleric, and last but not least, he could've then retrained into a Level 4 Wizard, and proceeded from there.

 

[Ximenes088]

MWP: longsword. Again, this is a promise at this point. I do hope you're right. Not that I particularly agree with your last assertion: people would say "you could do a great deal to modify a character with your feats" in 3.5, if they couldn't multiclass in that edition.

I think you could modify your concept pretty powerfully in 3.5, too- if there were no feat chains, no prerequisites beyond class, race, and level bracket, class prerequisites could be bypassed with a feat, and you got twice as many feats as you normally did.

 

[HeinorNY]

I would love to see the developers of the new 4E Forgotten Realms products try and stat out Elminster with these rules.

Elminster is an NPC, he has no class. He needs no class.
Just give him all the powers and abilities you think Elminster should have and you are done!

 

[Falling Icicle]

Elminster is an NPC, he has no class. He needs no class.
Just give him all the powers and abilities you think Elminster should have and you are done!

I for one hate the clunky, metagamy idea that the players use entirely different rules from everyone else, even other human wizards, simply because they're controlled by the players. But that's a discussion for another thread. I digress.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

A blend of a heavily armoured tank and a lightly armoured, fragile striker.

You want someone to switch between the two styles? Like say "Today, I'll leave my plate mail at home and wear leather armor, since we need to sneak a lot..."

Or do you want a Heavily Armoured Tank Striker?

The second sounds... broken.

The first sounds impossiblehard, but doeable. (It wouldn't really be "effective" in 3E, either, but maybe you had a certain illusion it was this case.)
But maybe there is an approach. Set your "favored" style first. This decides whether you pick Fighter or Rogue, or possibly Ranger (Two-Weapon Fighting is what I'd suggest.)
Then take weapon and armor profiency feats as needed (starting with Fighter definitely seems easier), and then pick the multiclass feats for the other class you wanted.
In "Defender" mode, you will focus in using Fighter encounter and daily powers first, in "Striker" mode, you will focus on using Ranger/Rogue encounter and daily powers first. Mix At-Will powers as you see fit.

I think from the know abilities of Ranger and Rogue, you should definitely look into those powers that let you shift with your attacks or shift larger distances. Movement is important for the Striking stuff, and your Fighter powers will probably take care of the damage you inflict. (Even if you don't achieve the heights of a pure Striker).