Skill Training Vs Multiclassing

[King-Panda]

Let's say a player wants to gain training in a skill. Assuming you had a 13 in the stat required by the Multiclassing feat, what reason would there be to choose the Skill Training feat over a Multiclassing feat that contained the skill in question?

Example

I'm a fighter with 13 strength or higher, and I want training in Stealth. I can:

A) Take the feat Skill Training, and be trained in Stealth.

B) Take the feat Warrior of the Wild, be trained in Stealth, and gain the Hunter's Quarry class feature to use once per encounter. Also, I am considered to be a Ranger for qualifying for feats and paragon paths with the Ranger prerequisite.

This only works once (can't multiclass more than once), but seriously? This may just be me, but almost all my characters use a feat slot for skill training. I just realized I could do this instead. Crazy.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

You can only have 1 multiclass. Therefore if you want training in more than just one skill you will have to take the skill training feat.

 

[Mengu]

what reason would there be to choose the Skill Training feat over a Multiclassing feat that contained the skill in question?

What reason is there for a dwarf to get weapon proficiency waraxe instead of dwarven weapon training?

It's just the nature of the beast. Yes, you should take multiclass if you are trying to get a skill that multiclassing provides you with. You get a free extra ability out of it. If you want another skill (or multiclassing doesn't give you the skill you want), that's why the skill training is there. For instance warlocks who don't have a 13 strength or dexterity, might get stealth via the skill training feat instead of warrior of the wild.

 

[themilkman]

Think of how much fun this is going to be with bards! Multiclass into cleric, warlord, shaman, and (eventually) Artificer. 4x healing powers per day (plus your normal 2x healing per encounter) plus multiclass skills.

You can just keep standing people up all day.

 

[fba827]

Think of how much fun this is going to be with bards! Multiclass into cleric, warlord, shaman, and (eventually) Artificer. 4x healing powers per day (plus your normal 2x healing per encounter) plus multiclass skills.

You can just keep standing people up all day.

True - though it would take a lot of feats and some stat requirements (Wis 13 for the Cleric and Shaman thing; can't remember warlord guessing cha 13 or str 13; and artificier is probably int 13...? - and then whatever stat you want to be "good" for your own bard abilities.

 

[King-Panda]

It's a shame it has to be this way, IMO. You obviously don't have to multiclass, but if you choose to take Skill Training instead, you'll be behind in potential. I almost wish I hadn't noticed this. As much as I love what 4th edition has done for standardization, ease of use, streamlining combat, and balancing classes, I get irked by these... "fluff-killers" it's imposed. Anyways, I apologize for my nostalgic b*tching; thanks for the clarifying everyone.

 

[HeirToPendragon]

You know what I get irked at? When people say 4e is killing the fluff.

Good lord in heaven people this is a ROLEPLAYING GAME! Yes, Profession (__) isn't there anymore, but if you want to be a Sailor you go ahead and be one.

If you want to multiclass instead of just taking Skill Training then go for it. Just because you're a Fighter/Ranger doesn't mean you have to suddenly be all woodsy! You could play it off that during a great war years past in which you served with the elves, you picked up some training from their warriors. Does that mean you suddenly have to love trees and worship Melora simply because you have multiclass ranger? NO!

Christ people.

 

[King-Panda]

I'm not going to jump at your flame bait. I'd like to thank those people who clarified this rule for me, and then formally call this thread dead.