D&D 5E New L&L for 22/1/13 D&D Next goals, part 3

[Balesir]

I prefer a Specialty-based "dabbling", or from-the-start Hybrids (both methods in 4e). Not really a fan of level-by-level multiclassing.

I'm with you, there - I really like the way 4e did multiclassing. Maybe it'll be in a "module"?

 

[gyor]

As I said before I bet 4e hybred multiclassing 4e style will be part of the advanced rules.

 

[LightPhoenix]

What I liked the best about this article is that Mike has finally come out and said balancing something like a 19/1 Fighter/Wizard may not be possible. Personally, I don't really think they should be spending too much effort trying to make sure it is. I'm generally against restricting multi-classing, but there should definitely be a paragraph or two about what to do when multi-classing goes wrong. For example, how to deal with severely sub-optimal multi-classing, narratively and mechanically, as in the F/W above.

I'm generally against feat-based multi-classing, as was done in 4E. While 3E had the proficiency problem, 4E definitely has an issue where the initial multi-class feats are much too powerful and generally were weaker post-Heroic tier. I'm not certain that you could make them in line with other feats and still maintain a viable system. I think a 3E-based per level system is generally the way to go. To emulate old-school multi-classing, there could be an optional rule/module that you have to choose your classes at first level, and advance them alternatively.

 

[Rhenny]

With bounded accuracy, and the idea that most level gains add maneuvers, skill tricks or abilities (spells being included) that don't become irrelevant as a PC advances levels, the 3e multiclassing should work better with D&DNext than it did with 3e.

Two specific things made a lot of multiclassed PCs inadequate in most of the previous versions: 1) "to hit" disparity vs. monsters that gained higher and higher AC, and 2) sacrificing a super ability from the core class that was all but necessary to defeat new threats to gain a minor ability in the fledgling class. If multi-classing in D&DNext gives manaeuvers, skill tricks, abilities and spells that can be used through many levels of play (not just for low level) multiclassing will add more versitility that is useful not irrelevant, and the trade-off will be that the PC doesn't gain a maneuver, skill trick or ability from his core class, which if done properly won't gimp a multi-class PC as badly as it might have done in previous editions.

On the other hand, to prevent abuse, WotC will need to make sure that multi-classing does not gain too much from front loading too many class features, maneuvers, skill tricks and spells.

I'm interested to see how it all works out.

 

[Sunseeker]

3rd ed Multiclassing rules still make me feel dirty. Eww.

 

[Li Shenron]

What I liked the best about this article is that Mike has finally come out and said balancing something like a 19/1 Fighter/Wizard may not be possible. Personally, I don't really think they should be spending too much effort trying to make sure it is. I'm generally against restricting multi-classing, but there should definitely be a paragraph or two about what to do when multi-classing goes wrong. For example, how to deal with severely sub-optimal multi-classing, narratively and mechanically, as in the F/W above.

Strange, I never thought that Ftr19/Wiz1 was severely sub-optimal. One level of spellcaster added to a near-full martial character generally worked well in 3e: you sacrificed 1 point of BAB and a few HP for a bunch of spells that could be really useful. Obviously, you needed to pick good spells... damaging spells were bad choices because by that time a 1st level energy spell may be to weak, but control spells or utility spells could make a very useful addition.

Also Wiz19/Ftr1 (or another martial class) could work decently.

What usually didn't work well at all in 3e were multiclass PCs with about half levels in one spellcasting class, and the other half in other class(es). Actually also 1/3 levels, 2/3 levels etc... basically spellcaster levels worked in multiclassing only when you took either very few levels (1 or 2) of a spellcasting class or almost all your levels were from the same spellcaster class.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Strange, I never thought that Ftr19/Wiz1 was severely sub-optimal.

...

Also Wiz19/Ftr1 (or another martial class) could work decently.

What usually didn't work well at all in 3e were multiclass PCs with about half levels in one spellcasting class, and the other half in other class(es). Actually also 1/3 levels, 2/3 levels etc... basically spellcaster levels worked in multiclassing only when you took either very few levels (1 or 2) of a spellcasting class or almost all your levels were from the same spellcaster class.

You're right, it was a poorly thought out.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

It's a good idea they're planning to possibly put the Warden inside the Barbarian, while the Warden was a neat concept thematically it was kind of "meh" as a class, and seemed like something that was quite niche.

And while it often seemed ridiculous in 3e to have a multiclass x/y/prestige class, often half of the fun was trying to come up with those combos.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It was a jaw-dropper for me when Wizards let us know that they had already collected hundreds upon hundreds of classic titles and had them all re-digitized at high resolution. Wizards had not been idle on the digital product front.

MT: Anything else you'd like to share?

SW: Customers who previously purchased Wizards titles at DriveThruRPG or RPGNow should know that as those titles are re-released, they can check their Library page on DriveThruRPG to get downloads of the new and improved files. Wizards has asked us to make sure that all previous DriveThruRPG and RPGNow purchasers get the updated files for free!

i hope now we will have to read a lot less of those "wizards will stop DDI" and similar posts... thanks.

 

[SkidAce]

Strange, I never thought that Ftr19/Wiz1 was severely sub-optimal. One level of spellcaster added to a near-full martial character generally worked well in 3e: you sacrificed 1 point of BAB and a few HP for a bunch of spells that could be really useful. Obviously, you needed to pick good spells... damaging spells were bad choices because by that time a 1st level energy spell may be to weak, but control spells or utility spells could make a very useful addition.

Also Wiz19/Ftr1 (or another martial class) could work decently.

What usually didn't work well at all in 3e were multiclass PCs with about half levels in one spellcasting class, and the other half in other class(es). Actually also 1/3 levels, 2/3 levels etc... basically spellcaster levels worked in multiclassing only when you took either very few levels (1 or 2) of a spellcasting class or almost all your levels were from the same spellcaster class.

Yup, this is how I looked at it.