Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet" data-source="post: 7865002" data-attributes="member: 6689161">The days of war-mime, cake-baker, priestly acrobat prestige class and multiclassing options in 3e was such a turnoff.In fact these and kits in 2e tried to fill it all in.&nbsp; Coming from AD&amp;D in the 80s, I always worked at flavor and explanations that fit an image and felt too much coverage almost pigeonholed and restricted.I find multiclassing and feats to be fairly robust if you can self adhere enough to concept.This means taking only things that really fit the concept in terms of spell, subclass and fear selection.&nbsp; ANd sometimes it reduces options.How many witches of legend eldritch blast.&nbsp; Not many I would think.I worked on a witch with warlock class.&nbsp; They fit pretty well.&nbsp; Poison spray, hexes, with knowledge of poison and rituals fit too.&nbsp; How would you add some ability to tell fortunes?&nbsp; Would a splash of wizard or cleric help?I don't at all mean disrespect for those who want more.&nbsp; I just disagree that much more in terms of classes is in fact needed for coverage.I don't want others to define what I can myself make with roleplaying and system mastery.I played a swashbuckler before it &quot;existed.&quot;&nbsp; I built a knight of wee jas Without splat book treatment.There is endless variety with a lot of the tools that are present.&nbsp; When we have (what I do see as bloat) individuality and uniqueness is actually reduced.&nbsp; Some variety is necessary of course but there is a point of diminishing returns.&nbsp; I think the slow trickle has prevented many outright busted combos.&nbsp; Single classes characters often match or surpass the power of multi classes ones.Add too much without enough care and we are back to the most problematic parts of 3e.&nbsp; I'd prefer not do that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Warpiglet, post: 7865002, member: 6689161"] The days of war-mime, cake-baker, priestly acrobat prestige class and multiclassing options in 3e was such a turnoff. In fact these and kits in 2e tried to fill it all in. Coming from AD&D in the 80s, I always worked at flavor and explanations that fit an image and felt too much coverage almost pigeonholed and restricted. I find multiclassing and feats to be fairly robust if you can self adhere enough to concept. This means taking only things that really fit the concept in terms of spell, subclass and fear selection. ANd sometimes it reduces options. How many witches of legend eldritch blast. Not many I would think. I worked on a witch with warlock class. They fit pretty well. Poison spray, hexes, with knowledge of poison and rituals fit too. How would you add some ability to tell fortunes? Would a splash of wizard or cleric help? I don't at all mean disrespect for those who want more. I just disagree that much more in terms of classes is in fact needed for coverage. I don't want others to define what I can myself make with roleplaying and system mastery. I played a swashbuckler before it "existed." I built a knight of wee jas Without splat book treatment. There is endless variety with a lot of the tools that are present. When we have (what I do see as bloat) individuality and uniqueness is actually reduced. Some variety is necessary of course but there is a point of diminishing returns. I think the slow trickle has prevented many outright busted combos. Single classes characters often match or surpass the power of multi classes ones. Add too much without enough care and we are back to the most problematic parts of 3e. I'd prefer not do that. [/QUOTE]

Verification