Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The mechanical problems with Multiclassing
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 1842469" data-attributes="member: 537"><p>No. I mean adventuring, as in killing monsters and taking their stuff. This can take place underground, in the wilderness, in a tower, on another plane, or wherever. The point is that the rules are designed to facilitate violence as the prime activity, and most people will play it that way.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. Notice that the consensus is that bards suck.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Are you kidding me?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really. The ranger is basically a light fighter with wilderness abilities thrown in. It's essentially a hybrid class, and suffers from the problem of hybrid classes having to be played in a special manner to get the most out of them. That said, from what I've seen, a ranger is perfectly viable in a combat-heavy campaign; just don't expect them to be a replacement for a full plate-wearing tank.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. Notice the large number of people who also say that monks suck.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Try 2 1/2 out of 11. In any case, how is this supposed to justify rules on multiclassing that also fail to meet the design goal?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Correct. That's why you have wimpy classes like the bard, to keep the drama queens happy.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a furphy.</p><p></p><p>1) A multiclassed cleric/wizard may not be specialised, but they are also far _less_ flexible than either a single-classed cleric or a single-classed wizard. It doesn't matter how many bulls strength, spider climb or invisibility spells you can cast, it doesn't make up for not having dim door, divination, contact other plane, wind walk, teleport, planar ally/binding, etc. Notice that the semi-regular complaints you hear about spellcasters breaking games refer to high-level spells, not low-level ones. And that's not even mentioning the 9th level cheese.</p><p></p><p>2) D&D is a game designed for a team, not an individual PC. A group that has access to a single-classed cleric and a single-classed wizard will be able to meet a much greater variety of challenges than if they have two cleric/wizards, for the reason stated above.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Non sequitur. You can have non-problematic multiclassing rules, and still have flexibility in what sorts of games you run. In fact, since any proposed fixes to the rules would have the effect of making multiclassed PCs stronger, they could only _add_ to the flexibility of the ruleset, not detract from it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hong, post: 1842469, member: 537"] No. I mean adventuring, as in killing monsters and taking their stuff. This can take place underground, in the wilderness, in a tower, on another plane, or wherever. The point is that the rules are designed to facilitate violence as the prime activity, and most people will play it that way. Yes. Notice that the consensus is that bards suck. Are you kidding me? Not really. The ranger is basically a light fighter with wilderness abilities thrown in. It's essentially a hybrid class, and suffers from the problem of hybrid classes having to be played in a special manner to get the most out of them. That said, from what I've seen, a ranger is perfectly viable in a combat-heavy campaign; just don't expect them to be a replacement for a full plate-wearing tank. Yes. Notice the large number of people who also say that monks suck. Try 2 1/2 out of 11. In any case, how is this supposed to justify rules on multiclassing that also fail to meet the design goal? Correct. That's why you have wimpy classes like the bard, to keep the drama queens happy. This is a furphy. 1) A multiclassed cleric/wizard may not be specialised, but they are also far _less_ flexible than either a single-classed cleric or a single-classed wizard. It doesn't matter how many bulls strength, spider climb or invisibility spells you can cast, it doesn't make up for not having dim door, divination, contact other plane, wind walk, teleport, planar ally/binding, etc. Notice that the semi-regular complaints you hear about spellcasters breaking games refer to high-level spells, not low-level ones. And that's not even mentioning the 9th level cheese. 2) D&D is a game designed for a team, not an individual PC. A group that has access to a single-classed cleric and a single-classed wizard will be able to meet a much greater variety of challenges than if they have two cleric/wizards, for the reason stated above. Non sequitur. You can have non-problematic multiclassing rules, and still have flexibility in what sorts of games you run. In fact, since any proposed fixes to the rules would have the effect of making multiclassed PCs stronger, they could only _add_ to the flexibility of the ruleset, not detract from it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The mechanical problems with Multiclassing
Top