Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What's broken or needs vast system knowledge?
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="N'raac" data-source="post: 6048667" data-attributes="member: 6681948"><p>Not every dip is based primarily or exclusively on the mechanical advantages. Those, to me, are the problem. To clarify, my initial statement of </p><p></p><p> should be expanded to note that multiclassing in general, including dipping in some cases, can be used in either capacity. </p><p></p><p>However, "I only want one level" seems much more common in the Powergaming capacity than in the capacity of realizing an interesting character concept. </p><p></p><p>S'mon nails it. The issue isn't that a dip can never be a good thing, but the "every character X should have a 1 level Y dip" issue. Seriously, EVERY barbarian should be an Oracle and be Lame? And not one of them should ever take a SECOND level in Oracle, since that would not provide an equivalent power boost? Isn't advancement along that path also building on that interesting character concept that cried out for incorporating Lame Oracle? </p><p></p><p>[ASIDE: Simple solution to Lame Barbarian? Remove all Oracle Curse references to "level" with "Oracle level". If the Barbarian needed 5 Oracle levels to be immune to Exhaustion, that would be the end of Lame Oracle Dips. And that would also demonstrate how many of those constructs are based on great role playing reasons because that Lame Oracle so perfectly fit my character concept, and how many are based on a desire to eliminate the Rage drawback. What percentage of Barbarians for whom Lame Oracle is compelling based on that character background and concept take that level at any point other than 5th character level (ie as soon as it will eliminate Fatigue, and certainly not before)?]</p><p></p><p>Similarly, it sounds like Empirate's character fits well as a Lore Oracle. Since he has received these visions all his life, did he start his career as an Oracle or a Paladin? Seems like those visions wouldn't start at, say, third level. [ASIDE: I liked the 3e optional rules for starting out as a 1/2 level in each of two classes - has that ever been written into Pathfinder rules? That would seem eminently suitable to the Oracle/Paladin in question, who has clearly been lead to both classes from childhood.] </p><p></p><p>It also seems like this guy would advance as both a Paladin and an Oracle, rather than taking a 1 level dip then progressing exclusively in a single class. Mechanically, that might suggest a Paladin archetype that trades out his spells, since the Oracle will provide these, and probably better. But then the archetype also needs to fit the concept. It seems like advancement in both streams would be the logical path for a lot of well-reasoned concepts that cry out for more than one class.</p><p></p><p>In practice, of course, it's often very difficult to differentiate between a concept that cried out for specific mechanics and specific mechanics which synergize well being shoehorned into a concept after the fact. [And sometimes it's laughably easy, of course.] </p><p></p><p>Some are easier to justify than others - the Barbarian gets civilized fighting training, so he takes one or more Fighter levels (the 3e issue was that he took 2 levels, each with a bonus feat, but never 3 since he wouldn't get a bonus feat from that level) or gets enhanced training as a scout so he takes a Ranger level or two, seems a lot more plausible than the Barbarian getting some book learnin' and gaining a level of Wizard or Alchemist. Especially when the book learnin' ends now that I have that one thing I wanted from a single level of this particular class.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6048667, member: 6681948"] Not every dip is based primarily or exclusively on the mechanical advantages. Those, to me, are the problem. To clarify, my initial statement of should be expanded to note that multiclassing in general, including dipping in some cases, can be used in either capacity. However, "I only want one level" seems much more common in the Powergaming capacity than in the capacity of realizing an interesting character concept. S'mon nails it. The issue isn't that a dip can never be a good thing, but the "every character X should have a 1 level Y dip" issue. Seriously, EVERY barbarian should be an Oracle and be Lame? And not one of them should ever take a SECOND level in Oracle, since that would not provide an equivalent power boost? Isn't advancement along that path also building on that interesting character concept that cried out for incorporating Lame Oracle? [ASIDE: Simple solution to Lame Barbarian? Remove all Oracle Curse references to "level" with "Oracle level". If the Barbarian needed 5 Oracle levels to be immune to Exhaustion, that would be the end of Lame Oracle Dips. And that would also demonstrate how many of those constructs are based on great role playing reasons because that Lame Oracle so perfectly fit my character concept, and how many are based on a desire to eliminate the Rage drawback. What percentage of Barbarians for whom Lame Oracle is compelling based on that character background and concept take that level at any point other than 5th character level (ie as soon as it will eliminate Fatigue, and certainly not before)?] Similarly, it sounds like Empirate's character fits well as a Lore Oracle. Since he has received these visions all his life, did he start his career as an Oracle or a Paladin? Seems like those visions wouldn't start at, say, third level. [ASIDE: I liked the 3e optional rules for starting out as a 1/2 level in each of two classes - has that ever been written into Pathfinder rules? That would seem eminently suitable to the Oracle/Paladin in question, who has clearly been lead to both classes from childhood.] It also seems like this guy would advance as both a Paladin and an Oracle, rather than taking a 1 level dip then progressing exclusively in a single class. Mechanically, that might suggest a Paladin archetype that trades out his spells, since the Oracle will provide these, and probably better. But then the archetype also needs to fit the concept. It seems like advancement in both streams would be the logical path for a lot of well-reasoned concepts that cry out for more than one class. In practice, of course, it's often very difficult to differentiate between a concept that cried out for specific mechanics and specific mechanics which synergize well being shoehorned into a concept after the fact. [And sometimes it's laughably easy, of course.] Some are easier to justify than others - the Barbarian gets civilized fighting training, so he takes one or more Fighter levels (the 3e issue was that he took 2 levels, each with a bonus feat, but never 3 since he wouldn't get a bonus feat from that level) or gets enhanced training as a scout so he takes a Ranger level or two, seems a lot more plausible than the Barbarian getting some book learnin' and gaining a level of Wizard or Alchemist. Especially when the book learnin' ends now that I have that one thing I wanted from a single level of this particular class. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What's broken or needs vast system knowledge?
Top