Should There Be More Multiclassed Feats?

[John Q. Mayhem]

I'm with Gez.

 

[blargney the second]

I like these feats and wish there were more. [...] Ascetic Mage lets you be a sorcerer/monk without being forced into taking Enlightened Fist, for instance. And that's a Good Thing (tm).

Ditto. I used Ascetic Mage for an NPC enemy and it's worked out beautifully!

 

[Nyaricus]

I'll mirror Li Shenron's remark. I don't like the general idea of such feats, although a very few might be useful or interesting. In general they seem to be an admission of failure on the "new" multiclassing rules, that they're (nearly?) as flawed as the 2E rules. Much as I like feats, they're not the right mechanic for the job.

How are they an admission of failure - if anything they annex the cruddy half+half PrCs (Mystic Thurge, Arcane Trickster, et al) and make multiclassing penalties not hurt as much (and if you don't play with them, they are simply nifty feats to have).

If you could, would you care to extrapolate on why these are an "admission of failure"?

 

[shilsen]

I like these feats and wish there were more. They make certain archetypes viable by letting the levels stack for some abilites. They let you cut down the need for dozens of different base classes/Pr Classes. Ascetic Mage lets you be a sorcerer/monk without being forced into taking Enlightened Fist, for instance. And that's a Good Thing (tm).

What he (and Gez) said.

 

[Masquerade]

Even though the individual feats are generally too boring or too specific, I like the idea. Anything that encourages mutliclassing is welcome in my game.

 

[CRGreathouse]

First of all let me say that IK agree with ehren37: feats that happen to require abilities of two classes aren't bad, and can be very good for some effects. I'm talking only about feats that are used to 'patch' multiclassing, like Ascetic Rogue.

How are they an admission of failure - if anything they annex the cruddy half+half PrCs (Mystic Thurge, Arcane Trickster, et al) and make multiclassing penalties not hurt as much (and if you don't play with them, they are simply nifty feats to have).

If you could, would you care to extrapolate on why these are an "admission of failure"?

As below, feats aren't the proper mechanic for the job. The idea behind multiclassing is that a character who wants to combine archetypes or class abilities simply takes different classes. If this isn't feasable, then the essential goal of multiclassing is lost. Attempts to 'patch' the system with feats is problematic, because:

• Not every combination will be addressed
• Only some of the archetypes within certain class combinations will be addressed
• Additional base (and even prestige classes) lead to a combinatorial explosion
• Requiring feat(s) for effective multiclassing limits certain archetypes which lack for feats

So if feats are not the right mechanic for the job, what do you think would be? Or maybe I'm just not sure what you mean by them being an admission of failure on the 'new' multiclassing rules...

Don't get me wrong, I like the 3.x multiclassing over the 2E dual/multi rules. Even so, I admit that the system has problems, most famously multiclassing spellcasters. I think that changes need to be directed at the system itself. An example of such a change is UA's magic rating. I'm not saying this is the solution (even to just this part of the problem), just that it's addressing the issue at the heart and not the periphery.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So if feats are not the right mechanic for the job, what do you think would be?

While I retain the favored class restriction, I've completely done away with the restrictions against multiclassing for classes like Paladin and Monk. No one seems to mind, nothing's been revealed as broken.

And, in fact, those Feats are useless in an OA campaign- Monks may freely multiclass there.

Thus I feel there is no need for such feats IMCs- the proper mechanic could be as simple as not restricting multiclassing on a "by class" basis. I'd even go as far as saying those Feats are a ripoff.

As for hypothetical Feats that may require multiclassing to take, and/or add certain functions to multiclass PCs only, I'm OK with that.

 

[zoroaster100]

I agree that feats are only a bandage on the fundamental problems with the current multiclaassing system, but since I'm not yet interested in moving on to fourth edition D&D, I like these feats because they are the best solution I've seen yet given that I currently have to deal with the existing multiclass system.

 

[Nyaricus]

Don't get me wrong, I like the 3.x multiclassing over the 2E dual/multi rules. Even so, I admit that the system has problems, most famously multiclassing spellcasters.

Basically, I don't really like the multiclassing rules as-is myself. They are usually pretty arbitrary. IMGs and IMCs, I have a list of "Allowed" and "Banned" classes for each race. Most of these choices simply make sense to me (Dwarves can't be sorcerers, etc) and my players are cool with playing it a little more "sterio-typical". Doesn't erally answer your comments, but just a thought of mine.

However, those feats are neat, IMO, although there are problems with the system - multi-classed spellcasters, indeed. However, I have graciously been bought a copy of EoM: ME R awile back and since the system is open-ended (you craft your own spells, whatever you please, really - although power is reduced to balance the versatitly) and spellcaster levels stack, you can build whatever sort of character you want. There a full-spellcasting class, and a half-spellcaster, and their magic-points stack when you multiclass, and you can continue on with you characters theme. Really neat system, IMHO.

I see your points, but I have to say that they (the multiclassing rules) are much preferrable to 4e

 

[Klaus]

Why are people focusing only on the multiclassing restriction removal? If that was all the feats did, they'd be the Knight Training and Monastic Training feats from Eberron CS. But the feats in CAdv remove restrictions *and* let you stack abilities or change them somewhat.

For instance, Ascetic Mage allows you to burn spell slots in exchange for atack and damage bonuses, and if you're a monk/sorceror, you can opt to not get Wis bonus to AC, but get Cha instead.

We don't need feats for *all* combos, though. Multiclass as a Fighter or Barbarian and you functions just fine, for instance.