Paragon Multiclassing vs. Paragon Path

[logopolis]

If I understand correctly, taking one of the multiclass Initiate feats qualifies you to take a paragon path for your second class.

Taking your second class' paragon path gives you:

• two class powers at level 11 and one at level 16
• level 11 encounter power
• level 12 utility power
• level 20 daily power

...with only one feat as a prerequisite.

Paragon multiclassing gives you:

• no class powers
• level 7 encounter power (at level 11)
• level 10 utility power (at level 12)
• level 19 daily power (at level 20)

...with four feats as a prerequisite.

Realistically, a multiclass character would probably take at least some of the power swap feats, so the paragon multiclassing prerequisite isn't all that burdensome. Still, I can see no advantage to paragon multiclassing, since it has fewer and weaker powers.

Am I misinterpreting the rules, or is paragon multiclassing just plain useless? Can anyone think of a scenario where it's preferable to take paragon multiclassing over a paragon path?

 

[James McMurray]

Nope, you're right on the money.

I like the way they handled the "multiclassing" of Spellscarred in FRPG. The Spellscarred feat works like multiclassing, but instead of trading stuff for less at paragon, the multiclass path is a paragon path itself.

I'd like to see it work that way for all classes, with each class getting a paragon multi-class path. At least then it might see some use. Around here multiclassing usually happens so someone can dip into a Leader class for an extra daily heal for the party, or because they want to combine their base class with the powers of another class's paragon paths.

 

[MrMyth]

You missed the only reason to take Paragon Multiclassing - the ability to swap an At Will for your new class.

Even with that, however... yeah, Paragon Multiclassing is rather disappointing, and I'd take a Paragon Path instead nearly every single time.

I do agree with pretty much everything James says above - I was impressed with how they handled the Spellscarred Savant as a blend of the two, and would be eager to see similar for the core classes.

 

[Mercule]

I don't think the 7/11, 10/12, and 19/20 swaps are that bad. Certainly, they're not quite as good as a power of the appropriate level, but my reading of the paragon paths makes me think the paragon powers are more focused than general powers, so it may be a matter of trading potence for utility. Closer balance (if desired) might be as easy as granting an additional at-will, rather than a swap.

Another idea, that would only have taken up about one more page, would be to grant an additional class ability from the new class. Multi-class fighters get the weapon bonus, clerics get channel (once, not twice, per day), rogues get sneak attack (at ten levels lower), etc. There's probably some numbers that would need to be run and playtested, but I don't see why the basic idea wouldn't work.

It seems to me that the only reason paragon multiclassing is less powerful than paragon pathing is an imposed flavor, like 3e paladins and monks not being able to multiclass effectively.

 

[Atlatl Jones]

I don't think the 7/11, 10/12, and 19/20 swaps are that bad. Certainly, they're not quite as good as a power of the appropriate level, but my reading of the paragon paths makes me think the paragon powers are more focused than general powers, so it may be a matter of trading potence for utility.

I agree. The powers are roughly equivalent. Some of the powers available are excellent. In addition, the character can pick and choose which powers he wants from the entire class list, so he can fine-tune the powers he gains to the character. It seems equal.

The real problem with paragon MCing is that it lacks the 11th level action point feature, and the 16th level PP feature, which are often very potent.

Closer balance (if desired) might be as easy as granting an additional at-will, rather than a swap.

Another idea, that would only have taken up about one more page, would be to grant an additional class ability from the new class. Multi-class fighters get the weapon bonus, clerics get channel (once, not twice, per day), rogues get sneak attack (at ten levels lower), etc. There's probably some numbers that would need to be run and playtested, but I don't see why the basic idea wouldn't work.

That would help a lot, especially as a 16th level feature. The design would have to specify what powers each gets, since it could potentially be very broken. The ability definitely shouldn't make the character gain the "role" ability of the MC class, like a fighter's stickiness or a striker's extra damage. But certainly things like a fighter or rogue's weapon talent, or a warlock's curse and pact boon (without the extra curse damage) might be fine.

 

[Mercule]

The design would have to specify what powers each gets, since it could potentially be very broken. The ability definitely shouldn't make the character gain the "role" ability of the MC class, like a fighter's stickiness or a striker's extra damage. But certainly things like a fighter or rogue's weapon talent, or a warlock's curse and pact boon (without the extra curse damage) might be fine.

Agreed, which I tried to indicate in my train-of-thought suggestion. I don't think it's bad to turn the character into a semi-hybrid role, but the emphasis shouldn't change. That's why I suggested sneak attack at level -10, for example.

Again, I really think this would take some thought and a bit of play-testing to find just the right balance. I still see it as an improvement over the current rules, though.

 

[chitzk0i]

I think it's really only there for the people who want a 50/50 style character.

 

[Jhaelen]

Am I misinterpreting the rules, or is paragon multiclassing just plain useless?

It isn't useless. It's just an option that trades power for more flexibility.

Can anyone think of a scenario where it's preferable to take paragon multiclassing over a paragon path?

Sure! It can be an important part of realizing certain character concepts.

 

[aurance]

It works okay. If you just compare number of powers and features, it looks like PMC lags behind. However, its two (rather good, in my opinion) features are:

1) The at-will swap, which can lead to some powerful combinations.

2) The ability to choose your own Paragon powers. In general, being able to choose the best powers of levels 7, 11 and 19 from your second class is slightly more powerful than being stuck with the three powers of a Paragon Path.

It's true that without some deeper examination, it's quite easy to make a hideously unoptimized PMC character. But the opposite is true also - with careful selection of second class / powers, you can make one that can at least compete with a non-PMC character.

 

[HighTemplar]

Sure! It can be an important part of realizing certain character concepts.

Yeah like the caracter concept that really dosen't fit any paragon path... we all like that one

Honest to god, I HATE inventing stuff thats not in the books, but I made up 2 paragon paths inspired by what existed before. Feels like they worked out fine. I really can't see why someone would sacrifice flavor, and the three greatest featues of his character(lv 11,11&16). Better just fabricate another paragon class almost exactly like anothers that fit without making imba changes(focus on flavor).

Nope, you're right on the money.

I like the way they handled the "multiclassing" of Spellscarred in FRPG. The Spellscarred feat works like multiclassing, but instead of trading stuff for less at paragon, the multiclass path is a paragon path itself.

I'd like to see it work that way for all classes, with each class getting a paragon multi-class path. At least then it might see some use. Around here multiclassing usually happens so someone can dip into a Leader class for an extra daily heal for the party, or because they want to combine their base class with the powers of another class's paragon paths.

Couldn't agree with you more