We have a new UA release with two subclasses. The College of Spirits Bard is a fortune teller or spirit medium type character with a big random effect table. Meanwhile the Undeath Pact Warlock is a a do-over of the Undying Pact Warlock.
It's your choice to think what you do. I don't have to agree with your assessment, however.
There is certainly more than one way to be "good at the game", however, and mechanical acumen is just as valid a source of fun as character immersion.Personally, I would consider a player who was "good at the game" is someone who can immerse themselves in a character and perform them entertainingly.
Why does it matter if it can literally only be realized through multiclassing?I'm skeptical.
Sure, there are combinations of abilities that require multiclassing. And I can easily imagine somebody complaining that "my concept can't be fulfilled without ability X."
But I'm skeptical that there are narrative concepts that can only be realized through multiclassing.
So how about some examples?
Absolutely, I would be glad to. The classes really are limiting.I'm skeptical.
Sure, there are combinations of abilities that require multiclassing. And I can easily imagine somebody complaining that "my concept can't be fulfilled without ability X."
But I'm skeptical that there are narrative concepts that can only be realized through multiclassing.
So how about some examples?
Since there is no immutable law against attempting to provide perspective to another poster's post when one believes that the poster was being misunderstood, it's not up to you to tell me what I can or cannot do. You are not a moderator.Nothing to do with accessing, it's simply not up to you to explain racism ("academic" or not) and challenge moderation.
Why does it matter if it can literally only be realized through multiclassing?
Some concepts aren't going to be satisfying for the player without multiclassing. In an edition where MC builds absolutely will not break the game in any way, why do you care?
Sure, but that feels like a separate conversation from what I replied to, which was a challenge of multiclass character concepts.The issue is that the MC system is not loved by many tables as it's complicated and feels like a trade off (not getting those 9th level spells or capstone features, etc). Same thing with feats - many tables prefer simpler.
So if there's ways to do MC without MC, they should be strived for. That means MC-lite feats (last month's UA) and MC-lite subclasses (Eldritch Knight Fighter, Arcane Trickster Rogue, Scout Rogue, Wild Soul Barbarian, Bladesinger Wizard, Divine Soul Sorcerer, Celestial Patron Warlock, etc).
Spirit/Totem Bardarian?So, a lot of people have mentioned multiclass characters with the Undead Warlock. Any ideas for the Spirit Bards? Maybe with the Stars Druids, as a character who speaks with the stars and spirits of the dead?
If they were taking it into account, I doubt we'd have this many multiclassing-related complaints. You can adjust threats to account for more or less powerful PCs. It's much harder to adjust other aspects of the game, particularly player-side options.Sure, but that feels like a separate conversation from what I replied to, which was a challenge of multiclass character concepts.
Enough people like MC characters that they have to take it into account when making new options. Alternatives are great, and I vote them up whenever the opportunity arises, but MC is also totally valid and a good part of the game.