Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Technik4" data-source="post: 1050904" data-attributes="member: 7211">I think this whole argument has to do with parts not adding up very well. For instance those 4 sorceror levels you take are 4 levels where you aren't getting bonus feats as a fighter, moving towards better rage and damage reduction as a barbarian, not improving your favored enemy and a myriad of other skills, or not gaining powers for your mount, spells, and smites. You do get, 2nd level spells, crappy hp, 1 good save, and crappy skills (for most fighting types). And you are 2 BAB lower than your brethren.There hasnt been really a problem with the lopsided prcs that require some arcane ability. Take Arcane Archer, no spellcasting progression, so you are essentially still a fighter - hence fighter HD, BAB, etc. You are an archer that casts a few spells, or perhaps more depending on how you gained the levels/other prcs you may have. Most of the spellsword/bladesinger variants would give half-casting, with a good bab, decent hp,  wizardly skills etc. Except that, your BAB is still behind the fighters, and your magic is still behind the mages. Its the entire trade-off of multiclassing, but apparantly it has been decided that it was too weak in a party, despite its versatility. The answer are prcs like Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and Mystic Theurge. These 3 prcs patch the 3 core "roles" with regards to wizard multiclassing - Fighter, Rogue, and Cleric.The reason they look so powerful is because of the inherent weakness that multiclassing has already caused their BAB and spellcasting, if you don't agree then perhaps these prcs aren't for you and your campaign.Technik</blockquote>

Verification