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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5837555" data-attributes="member: 32536">That has the problem, though, of forcing the multiclassed character to pay feat taxes in order to approach the heart of what the character concept is about. This is on top of the problem that 3E-style multiclassing is generally very poor for characters of two different archetypes. The reason many fighter/mage PrCs and things like the Mystic Theurge existed is because that kind of multiclassing just doesn't work without patches and bandages. If you add feat taxes on top of those kinds of problem, it just makes the entire concept worse.If you repeat 3E's mistakes, you'll eventually just repeat all of its problems. If you use 3E-style multiclassing, you'll eventually need to make classes to either patch it (like PrCs of old) or ignore it entirely in order to make a concept that actually works (like the 3E Duskblade). Ultimately, 3E multiclassing really only served to make terrible characters or allow optimizers to break the game. If you ask me, it would be better to either take a totally different approach to multiclassing, or to drop it entirely and simply create classes to fill in the different archetypes that were classically left for multiclassing.I don't think that would really be sufficient. Self-buffing, particularly taking buffs from the normal wizard spell list, is generally not enough to fill the more iconic magical warrior archetype.Also, well, as the rest of my post indicated, if magic/warrior multiclassing can't pull this off, then it really isn't any good. I don't think multi-classing is essential to a class system, after all.</blockquote>

Verification