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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="77IM" data-source="post: 4478338" data-attributes="member: 12377">Depends on how you frame the problem.  For me, the multiclass problem is one of "concept-rules impedance," that is, the effort involved in translating a concept in my brain into a workable rule.I tend to think in terms of characters that have multiple contradictory elements, or at least orthogonal traits, as opposed to the tightly focussed archetypes of the D&D classes.  For example, when I'm thinking of character classes, I never think in terms of "How about a half-elf paladin?"  I instantly come up with something like, "How about a half-elf paladin with an infernal pact (he fights fire with fire), and he does two-weapon fighting with a flail in each hand?"  That's just the way my brain works.  In 4e, that's a tough character to create.  Paladin-warlock is a weak multiclass choice, and the TWF feats aren't very good, and it still takes a lot of work to make that character even though he's not going to be that great.Somewhat.  I do think the idea of a jack-of-all-trades character, or highly versatile character, has been unnecessarily abandoned in 4e.  I think part of the reason is niche protection; one way to ensure that defenders are the best defenders is to deny that to everyone else.  It also helps group cohesion -- party members get along better when they need to rely on one another because every individual has glaring capability gaps.  However, these factors aren't as important to all groups (the people I play with aren't that into mechanical niche protection, for example, as much as personality niches).The other reasoning (given by the designers) that there are no trans-role classes in 4e is that it can lead people to accidentally build characters that are not good at anything.  I think this is an implementation problem.Yes.  The thing players want when they play a well-rounded character is versatility and adaptability to many situations.  The wizard has area-effect spells, but in a solo encounter he's not as useful as a striker.  A hybrid striker-controller can fulfill both roles adequately and so he can go where needed as the battle progresses.I like the "switch" idea.  Another way to design the class is surprising powers.  For example, maybe your at-will powers are like a defender (causing marks and so forth), your encounter powers are like a controller (area-effects and status ailments), and your daily powers are like a striker (massive single-target damage).  Maybe your at-will and encounter powers are a little bit boring but your dailies have more variety (maybe they can be cast multiple ways -- 2d6 as an area attack or 3d6 against a single foe). -- 77IM</blockquote>

Verification