Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 7652845" data-attributes="member: 85870">One of my initial, still-standing hesitancies to fully embrace &quot;the 4e way&quot; for D&amp;D is tied to this. Multiclassing for 4e upon release was lackluster at best. Until &quot;hybrid&quot; classes arrived in PHB3, multiclassing was pretty much a non-starter. And even with &quot;hybrids&quot; a lot of class synergies were haphazard. When I brought up the issue on D&amp;D's forums, 4e proponents said the lack of multiclassing wasn't an issue--&quot;Why multiclass? If you want to play CONCEPT X, simply use CLASS Y and adjust the powers fluff as needed&quot;--natch, an eladrin swordmage masquerading as a blink dog. To me the point of multiclassing was to represent, at least in some fashion, an &quot;organic&quot; character progression arc. For me it was never about character optimization, it was about creating a character I wanted to inhabit within the game world. I was just so hesitant to fully divorce &quot;class&quot; from the gameworld this way; divesting class mechanics from the game world just goes too far into &quot;gamism&quot; for my comfort (I am a fairly &quot;classic&quot; actor stance / simulationist). Taken to its logical endpoint it seems to argue that D&amp;D doesn't really need classes at all--they're just game artifacts meant to represent player inputs, not a sense of reality.In this light, it's pretty obvious why games like Runequest and GURPS quickly appeared on the scene post-AD&amp;D--their creators didn't like the &quot;gamist&quot; disconnect to classes either (among other things).I'm not so sure I buy the argument that a class represents a conflict to be solved, or a natural evolution of a problem in the game world. It's true, we adapt our economies, skillsets, livelihoods, and social structures to address and solve issues, but at the same time, representing this sort of thing in an RPG through the mechanical construct of a class feels arbitrary--&quot;Your character can evolve and progress in these, and only these, specific directions.&quot;I'm having a hard time putting thoughts together at the moment, but there's something about this idea percolating in my brain that I haven't quite pinned down yet.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 7652845, member: 85870"] One of my initial, still-standing hesitancies to fully embrace "the 4e way" for D&D is tied to this. Multiclassing for 4e upon release was lackluster at best. Until "hybrid" classes arrived in PHB3, multiclassing was pretty much a non-starter. And even with "hybrids" a lot of class synergies were haphazard. When I brought up the issue on D&D's forums, 4e proponents said the lack of multiclassing wasn't an issue--"Why multiclass? If you want to play CONCEPT X, simply use CLASS Y and adjust the powers fluff as needed"--natch, an eladrin swordmage masquerading as a blink dog. To me the point of multiclassing was to represent, at least in some fashion, an "organic" character progression arc. For me it was never about character optimization, it was about creating a character I wanted to inhabit within the game world. I was just so hesitant to fully divorce "class" from the gameworld this way; divesting class mechanics from the game world just goes too far into "gamism" for my comfort (I am a fairly "classic" actor stance / simulationist). Taken to its logical endpoint it seems to argue that D&D doesn't really need classes at all--they're just game artifacts meant to represent player inputs, not a sense of reality. In this light, it's pretty obvious why games like Runequest and GURPS quickly appeared on the scene post-AD&D--their creators didn't like the "gamist" disconnect to classes either (among other things). I'm not so sure I buy the argument that [I]a class represents a conflict to be solved, or a natural evolution of a problem in the game world[/I]. It's true, we adapt our economies, skillsets, livelihoods, and social structures to address and solve issues, but at the same time, representing this sort of thing in an RPG through the mechanical construct of a class feels arbitrary--"Your character can evolve and progress in these, and only these, specific directions." I'm having a hard time putting thoughts together at the moment, but there's something about this idea percolating in my brain that I haven't quite pinned down yet. [/QUOTE]

Verification