one-class characters through 20th?

[Sejs]

For a good number of classes, I'd dip at least somewhat. If I'm playing a rogue, I'd probably do something in order to get access to Hide in Plain Sight, as it's very useful for a sneaky character, for example.

However, for a Monk, Druid, Bard, Warlock, Scout, Ninja, or Spellthief - yeah, I'd stay with the base class for the full progression of the character.

 

[Darkness]

Hehehe. I always multi-class and so do my players.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

For pure min/max considerations, I would probably stick with a single-classed druid or artificer unless some really wild options were made available. From roleplaying considerations, however, I usually like archetypes that are at best poorly served by single-classed characters.

I usually end up with 2-5 classes. I have, however, seen several single-classed PCs who've lasted to fairly high (10+) levels.

 

[Remathilis]

In Star Wars, I am taking a Jedi Guardian all the way to level 20, with the possible exception of becoming a master...

 

[Turanil]

I haven't done it, but I've seen it done.

Ditto. One friend of mine is in a campaign where most players are single classed since 1st level, and now around 26th level (monk, cleric, rogue, and fighter). The only one who is multiclassed is a Wizard 23 / Sorcerer 3.

 

[Von Ether]

Ditto. One friend of mine is in a campaign where most players are single classed since 1st level, and now around 26th level (monk, cleric, rogue, and fighter). The only one who is multiclassed is a Wizard 23 / Sorcerer 3.

I had a 16th level druid in 3.0 that pretty much killed off the campaign with his Wind Walk. The GM gave up when the PC could do the ambushing instead of his NPCs.

I don't have anything against multiclassing, but I tend to stick to a single class.

 

[cybertalus]

I almost always stick to a single class. The last campaign I was in ended at 13th level. Because of character death I played three different characters over the course of the campaign, all single-classed.

It was sort of an unwritten rule in the 1E/2E games I played in that nobody multi-classed. We had some early bad experiences with multi-classing power-gamers and that kind of sealed it. I even had a letter published in the old "Forum" section of Dragon suggesting people who had problems with multi-classing take a blue highlighter to the multi-class rules in the Player's Handbook (because optional rules in the 2E books were all inside blue boxes).

Yeah I know multi-classing is totally different now, but old habits die hard and all.

 

[kenobi65]

In Star Wars, I am taking a Jedi Guardian all the way to level 20, with the possible exception of becoming a master...

My Living Force character was a Scoundrel from the start, and I had every intent of keeping him a "pure" Scoundrel until the end of the campaign (at which point he'd be 13th level or so).

But, with the increasing focus on combat as the campaign moves to its climax, I finally broke down and multiclassed into Soldier (for proficiency with my Underslung rotary carbine, armor proficiency, and that bonus Soldier feat at 2nd level). So, he's now a Scoundrel 10 / Soldier 1, but I still think of him as a Scoundrel.

 

[Stone Angel]

I never get to play but in the rare occasion. I have taken a fighter to 7th where we quit playing. I have taken a cleric to 18th and that is about it.

My only other character was a 17th level sorcerer but he had 6 levels worth of templates and such.


The Seraph of Earth and Stone

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Half Dragon Human Sorcerer (epic level)
Human Wizard (epic level)
Orc Barbarian (epic level)

Currently:
A minotaur pyschic warrior (but might take some barbarian levels)
A hobgoblin fighter

We see a fair number of both multi/prestige classed and straight up characters.