NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cyberen" data-source="post: 6187247" data-attributes="member: 69074">With multiclassing, WotC is, at least, approaching the most difficult and contentious part of D&D Next design.Multiclassing is, IMHO, the most iconic feature of 3.x, for good or for ill. (You could tell where I stand concerning 3.x multiclassing when I called it "unbound madness"...).For compatibility reasons, WotC want Next to be compatible with previous material, enabling easy conversion. Unfortunately, that means being able to easily convert 3.x multiclass characters, so Next is doomed to support free multiclassing, which result in a big free-for-all where each and every level of each and every class compete with each other. As this thread shows, this path is irredeemably broken, as level dipping invariably leads to overpowered combos, or underpowered ones.There is still some hope ! I find this iteration has given us excellent gishes : Paladins, Rangers, Bards each very successfully cover some ground of the arcane warrior niche. I find these natural born hybrids remove a lot of pressure put on the multiclass system, natively supporting a broad range of character concepts.On the other hand, I duly acknowledge multiclassing is needed to support some cases of organic character growth. Rather than putting ineffective requirements on ability scores in order to limit optimization dipping, I would cut the middle man and directly put a level dipping limit on a dial : for instance, a rule saying you have to take at least X levels of any class in a row (X=3 sits nicely with me, X=1 is 3.x, pick your own value of X !).Concerning Fighters being best at hitting things :1) I don't believe Robin Hood or William Tell would be Fighters in my book2) the Fighter should be, and is, the last man standing3) the attack roll should not be litterally seen as a to-hit roll, but more broadly as a balancing mechanic evaluating the quality of an attack. If you don't, you can't accept damage on a miss and other HP peculiarities. This evaluation can't take place out of context (the most important element being outcome : a "crit" can barely scratch your opponent, whereas a mid roll causing min damage can sometimes be a killing blow...).</blockquote>

Verification