Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8787567" data-attributes="member: 18">Funny thing is WotC agree, they even said so in I believe the previous playtest video.The idea that people need to &quot;learn their class&quot; is obviously laughable. Most classes don't even get some of their core abilities until L3 anyway, and a lot of classes play virtually identically at L1.As [USER=6780330]@Parmandur[/USER] said, this seems to be a backwards-compatibility thing. If they did move it to L1, which I believe they agree makes sense, they'd invalidate all existing subclasses, which, honestly they're going to do anyway, eventually, but doing it instantly might cause er... some uproar?As for multiclassing, pfft, who cares? If that really matters either:A) Disallow or limit multiclassing (i.e. maybe you don't let people pick another class until they've done three levels in this one, for example).orB) Make it so that you only get the &quot;subclass&quot; for one class (I've seen games do things like this).To be honest disallowing multiclassing in 5E/1D&amp;D does basically no damage to the game. There are very few genuine RP concepts which benefit from multiclassing, and 95% of multiclassing is either:A) System experts exploiting synergies to attempt to make an OP character.or B) System noobs/ninnies picking &quot;kewl&quot; classes because they're allowed to and usually creating barely-playable junk characters full of anti-synergy.Neither of those is a good things and that's the overwhelming majority of 5E multiclassing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8787567, member: 18"] Funny thing is WotC agree, they even said so in I believe the previous playtest video. The idea that people need to "learn their class" is obviously laughable. Most classes don't even get some of their core abilities until L3 anyway, and a lot of classes play virtually identically at L1. As [USER=6780330]@Parmandur[/USER] said, this seems to be a backwards-compatibility thing. If they did move it to L1, which I believe they agree makes sense, they'd invalidate all existing subclasses, which, honestly they're going to do anyway, eventually, but doing it instantly might cause er... some uproar? As for multiclassing, pfft, who cares? If that really matters either: A) Disallow or limit multiclassing (i.e. maybe you don't let people pick another class until they've done three levels in this one, for example). or B) Make it so that you only get the "subclass" for one class (I've seen games do things like this). To be honest disallowing multiclassing in 5E/1D&D does basically no damage to the game. There are very few genuine RP concepts which benefit from multiclassing, and 95% of multiclassing is either: A) System experts exploiting synergies to attempt to make an OP character. or B) System noobs/ninnies picking "kewl" classes because they're allowed to and usually creating barely-playable junk characters full of anti-synergy. Neither of those is a good things and that's the overwhelming majority of 5E multiclassing. [/QUOTE]

Verification