Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ingolf" data-source="post: 4220755" data-attributes="member: 1783">The problem with the OPs scenario isn't character classes, it's the approach. He's confusing combat roles (Leader) with character stories, histories and personality. From a mechanics perspective, character class is the main determinant in how your character goes about overcoming discrete challenges in the game. Most challenges take the form of combat, but traps and hazards fit the role as well. The four combat roles of Leader, Defender, Striker and Controller are only relevant in regards to these discrete challenges. What the  OP is talking about is almost exclusively a role-playing issue. The challenge - establish a dynasty - isn't a discrete one and shouldn't be handled by something as inorganic as game mechanics, it should be handled by the player and DM working out the details together. Perhaps having Diplomacy as a trained skill might be a rules related requirement, but there are many ways to achieve that without multi classing. Put another way, suppose the question had been "I want to play a Cleric who is the foremost defender of his church, but I don't want to multi class into Paladin since my charisma won't be that high and I don't like playing fighters. This is therefore a problem because those are the only two defender classes in the PHB." The flaw there is obvious.</blockquote>