Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7011388" data-attributes="member: 996">There's no reason you couldn't advance in two classes simultaneously, you just do it alternately.&nbsp; One level in one class, one level in the other.&nbsp; 1. 1/1.&nbsp; 2/1. 2/2, etc, topping out at 10/10.&nbsp; A simple rule to make it truly simultaneous would be to level only at even number.&nbsp; You start at 2nd, as a 1/1, at 3rd nothing happens - when you reach 4th, you're a 2/2.&nbsp; &nbsp;IDK.&nbsp; I always had the impression it was mainly about giving elves a sort of fey sense to them via magic, while also making them physically very competent with attributes of fighter and/or thief. Mechanically - perhaps counter-intuitively - it was about making the game humanocentric.&nbsp; No, hear me out.&nbsp; While non-/demi- human MC characters absolutely dominated at 1st level, brutal level limits quickly put them far behind human PCs, advancing, if at all, only as thieves getting 1/2 or 1/3rd the exp of everyone else.&nbsp; So the endgame was human-dominated (mostly by human wizards, of course).&nbsp; Old-school MCing, without those race &amp; level limits would be insanely broken.&nbsp; Actually, not 'would be,' since folks did it, no speculation is involved. ;P&nbsp; As broken as spell points, it was.But, maybe that's all academic, as balance wasn't exactly ever achievable back then, nor much of a priority, now.:shrug:&nbsp; have fun with it.5e really can survive very nicely without any MCing rules (not even the optional ones it provides) - thank to existing sub-classes like the EK and Bladesinger, Feat options that introduce mechanics from other classes, and Backgrounds that touch the concept space of various classes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7011388, member: 996"] There's no reason you couldn't advance in two classes simultaneously, you just do it alternately. One level in one class, one level in the other. 1. 1/1. 2/1. 2/2, etc, topping out at 10/10. A simple rule to make it truly simultaneous would be to level only at even number. You start at 2nd, as a 1/1, at 3rd nothing happens - when you reach 4th, you're a 2/2. IDK. I always had the impression it was mainly about giving elves a sort of fey sense to them via magic, while also making them physically very competent with attributes of fighter and/or thief. Mechanically - perhaps counter-intuitively - it was about making the game humanocentric. No, hear me out. While non-/demi- human MC characters absolutely dominated at 1st level, brutal level limits quickly put them far behind human PCs, advancing, if at all, only as thieves getting 1/2 or 1/3rd the exp of everyone else. So the endgame was human-dominated (mostly by human wizards, of course). Old-school MCing, without those race & level limits would be insanely broken. Actually, not 'would be,' since folks did it, no speculation is involved. ;P As broken as spell points, it was. But, maybe that's all academic, as balance wasn't exactly ever achievable back then, nor much of a priority, now. :shrug: have fun with it. 5e really can survive very nicely without any MCing rules (not even the optional ones it provides) - thank to existing sub-classes like the EK and Bladesinger, Feat options that introduce mechanics from other classes, and Backgrounds that touch the concept space of various classes. [/QUOTE]

Verification