Roles - do they work?

[AngeltheTechrat]

Also, the Multi rules are the cleanest and best-functioning ones we've seen in D&D so far. Now spellcaster multiclassing actually works! Wow!

Oh I haaaave to call bull- on that... The multiclass rules in 4E are an agrivating waste of feats. Trade power for power? Fine. But you have to blow 3 additional feats (all during the heroic tier even) and any paragon path features just to get the option to trade out an At-Will. And trust to luck that maybe other feats in the * Power books might someday help you grab some other features. That is so many degrees of trash.

 

[ProfessorPain]

...And would have torpedoed the game's carefully-designed balance, and any reason to have a team, rather than a bunch of self-sufficient adventurers who happen to work together.

I don't think so. Not if the game were designed around the concept of customizing powers. The powers themselves would just need to be balanced against one another, and they would have to remove any potential stacking problems. As long as you have characters you will have a team. But I would prefer a more gritty assembly of heroes, than what you have in 4E.

You like 4E the way it is, and that is fine. I don't enjoy it as much as you; because I had different expectations based on my own sense of taste. Again, I am not here saying 4E is awful. I am just saying what I would have liked to see. And I think I am entitled to have an opinion on the system.

 

[yesnomu]

Oh I haaaave to call bull- on that... The multiclass rules in 4E are an aggravating waste of feats. Trade power for power? Fine. But you have to blow 3 additional feats (all during the heroic tier even) and any paragon path features just to get the option to trade out an At-Will. And trust to luck that maybe other feats in the * Power books might someday help you grab some other features. That is so many degrees of trash.

They aren't a waste at all! The initial feats are some of the best ones printed (especially the more stat-restricted MP ones, Battle Awareness is great), and spending feats to branch out and expand your versatility (say, a Barb becoming more of a defender by taking Fighter powers) is a fair trade. This helps prevent jacks-of-all-trades from being too powerful, and from losing their ability to cover their main class's role (only half your total powers can come from your multiclass, which is a fair limitation).

Multiclass Paragon Paths are also fantastic-- plenty of Wizards are well-advised to go Divine Oracle, and a Paladin with Pit Fighter is friggin' scary.

Paragon Multiclassing is weak, true, and I'd give it a couple of houserules to improve it. But at-wills are the cornerstone of a class, and are the basic method by which they accomplish their job in combat. Letting a class take another's A/Ws is very dangerous balance-wise (imagine letting all classes take Twin Strike), so it needs to be heavily restricted.

But the best evidence that 4e's multiclassing is awesome is the Wizard/Cleric. Once a total trap--even with Mystic Theurge--now well-balanced and even optimal for some builds. That's progress.

 

[AngeltheTechrat]

They aren't a waste at all! The initial feats are some of the best ones printed (especially the more stat-restricted MP ones, Battle Awareness is great), and spending feats to branch out and expand your versatility (say, a Barb becoming more of a defender by taking Fighter powers) is a fair trade. This helps prevent jacks-of-all-trades from being too powerful, and from losing their ability to cover their main class's role (only half your total powers can come from your multiclass, which is a fair limitation).

Multiclass Paragon Paths are also fantastic-- plenty of Wizards are well-advised to go Divine Oracle, and a Paladin with Pit Fighter is friggin' scary.

Paragon Multiclassing is weak, true, and I'd give it a couple of houserules to improve it. But at-wills are the cornerstone of a class, and are the basic method by which they accomplish their job in combat. Letting a class take another's A/Ws is very dangerous balance-wise (imagine letting all classes take Twin Strike), so it needs to be heavily restricted.

But the best evidence that 4e's multiclassing is awesome is the Wizard/Cleric. Once a total trap--even with Mystic Theurge--now well-balanced and even optimal for some builds. That's progress.

Um.. I think you read the majority of my reply wrong. ???

 

[Scars Unseen]

If it was just the word in the class description (which like many words, is easily ignorable), then you wouldn't have an issue.

Anyway, swashbuckler: fighter, tempest technique, take the rogue multiclass feat but swap the Thievery skill training for Acrobatics. Grab the utility power swap feat and take Tumble in place of a fighter utility. Choose the TWF and light blade and mobility powers. Done.

There was no (mechanical) customization of your character in 1e, aside from weapon choice.

Congratulations, you made a swashbuckler, which if you read one of my earlier posts, is a concept I identified with the rogue class earlier. Doesn't help my concept in the least.

 

[Spatula]

... or if he really wants a striker-role type, he could, y'know, play a TWF ranger (which people always ignore as an option when they go on a 'I want to play a lightly armored melee type who's not a rogue' rant).

That's good idea too, especially if you change out the nature-based class skills for social options.

 

[yesnomu]

Um.. I think you read the majority of my reply wrong. ???

You said it was a waste of feats, and that PMing to gain an at-will was too expensive. I pointed out that those feats can be extremely useful, and that at-will swapping is dangerous. Did I not address your point?

 

[yesnomu]

I don't think so. Not if the game were designed around the concept of customizing powers. The powers themselves would just need to be balanced against one another, and they would have to remove any potential stacking problems. As long as you have characters you will have a team. But I would prefer a more gritty assembly of heroes, than what you have in 4E.

You like 4E the way it is, and that is fine. I don't enjoy it as much as you; because I had different expectations based on my own sense of taste. Again, I am not here saying 4E is awful. I am just saying what I would have liked to see. And I think I am entitled to have an opinion on the system.

Well, that's totally legitimate, but now you're moving away from the class-based system entirely, and onto something more like HERO or GURPS. Building the classes you want out of the options available. That, of course, has its pros and cons, as does a more focused class system.

4e has a tightly focused class system to fulfill its goals of having every member of the party useful and able to fill a role in combat. If you don't see those goals as legitimate or don't want to have the system built around them, then of course 4e won't have turned out the way you wanted it.

Allowing characters to freely take powers from outside their role diminishes their ability to fill it, and makes them more of a Jack-of-all-Trades. They may still be an effective character, but they're less dependent on their party to cover their weak points and less effective at their primary role, which makes them (somewhat) less useful to the party. Both of these are against the goals of the system, so taking powers from other classes is restricted.

It all comes down to the goals of the system, what you want the system to do for you. I think 4e has accomplished its goals extremely well, which is both a good and a bad thing for the game's appeal towards gamers.

 

[AngeltheTechrat]

You said it was a waste of feats, and that PMing to gain an at-will was too expensive. I pointed out that those feats can be extremely useful, and that at-will swapping is dangerous. Did I not address your point?

No, you.. acted like I said heroic tier feats were a waste and that paragon paths were, or something...

I said I didn't like LOSING three of the heroic feats and all of the paragon path.

Novice Power, Acolyte Power, and Adept Power are the waste.

 

[Khuxan]

Congratulations, you made a swashbuckler, which if you read one of my earlier posts, is a concept I identified with the rogue class earlier. Doesn't help my concept in the least.

What do you associate with the duellist? What style of weapons, armor, etc.? What options do you want to use in combat? One man's duellist is another man's swashbuckler.