Which class will be the faveorite wrt multiclassing dips?

mach1.9pants said:
If multi-classing is in I reckon a few people might go for a level or 2 in fighter for wizard. I know I might: no armour arcane fail, pos triple HP at first level, and (as I have tried to do in 3E) put talents into things which help Wiz: 4E wep focus (spell) or some such?? with 3E I used wep Focus ray and imp init.
However if you are that much less likely to die at low levels maybe not, a <4E wiz has the life expectancy of a ice cube in hell at 1st level IME

HP, trained skills and armor proficiencies seem to be the big thing at first level, from what I've heard. One of the big downsides of the new skill system is that it seem like it'd be hard to prevent someone from taking a level of Rogue, grabbing 80 trained skills, and then putting the rest of his levels in Fighter or whatever. Likewise, without ASF and WITH a system that doesn't punish spellcasters as much for multiclassing, every wizard might as well take a level of fighter for the armor and HP.

They could fix the armor thing by spreading out armor proficiencies over the first few levels, so fighters can wear leather at first level, chainmail at second, etc. Same with skills, I guess; rogues get 2 new trained skills per level for 4 levels, whereas fighters only get 2 new trained skills at first level.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sitara said:
In 3e, the fighter was the most popular choice for a multiclassing dip (the 2 free feats at level 1-2). Heck, the fighter was popular in 2e as well. Now, in 4e from what I have read of general opinion so far, I think the warlord will be the most popular choice for multiclassing, followed closely by the warlock.

(Lets keep the training feats out of this, since we don't yet know how they work, and why someone would choose them over straight multiclassing.)

Like others, I haven't seen much to indicate that multiclassing will be in beyond the training feats. But without seeing the classes, their base bonuses and their powers, its impossible to answer your question.

If there is actual multi-classing, if its anything like Saga, your first class will be the dip, since it it grants the bonus hit points, class bonuses to defenses (and BAB, I guess) and skill access. Then, once you have the fundamentals you want, you go pick the real powers you want.
 

Well, I have a feeling it'll be a combination of these "Class Training" feats, which probably function a bit like the "Martial Training" feats in The Book of Nine Swords, and multiclassing á la Star Wars Saga Edition. In Saga, multiclassing is encouraged, but there's no "no-brainer" level-dip. Dipping for levels is good, but no single class is the be-all, end-all, because after first level, you only get one of the starting feats for a particular class.

So while a 1st-level Jedi (for example) gets his Jedi Talent, 30 hit points, a +1 bonus to BAB and all Defenses, and the feats Force Sensitive, Weapon Proficiency (lightsabers), & Weapon Proficiency (simple weapons), there's a lot he loses out on. He's stuck with only 2 trained skills to choose from the somewhat weak Jedi skill list.

So while it's a great level for a Jedi character, it's far from a no-brainer for any other character concept. And that's pretty much true of EVERY class.

Because after you start, you don't get all those bonus features for taking 1st-level in a new class - just a Talent and one feat. The defense "kickers" overlap, but don't stack. So for example, a 1st-level Scout who multiclasses into Jedi (like, say, Luke Skywalker) gets to pick a starting Jedi talent and his choice of Force Sensitive or Weapon Proficiency: lightsaber (1st-level scouts already get Weapon Proficiency - simple weapons).

Similarly, he gets to increase his Ref "kicker" from +1 (the Jedi class bonus) to +2 (the Scout class bonus) and his Fort "kicker" from +0 (the scout bonus) to +1 (the Jedi bonus). His Will "kicker" of +1 doesn't change, since both classes grant the same bonus. He gets to roll a d10 for additional hit points, and all the Jedi skills now join the list of skills he can become "trained" in.

It's nice, simple, and well-balanced multi-classing.
 

It seems that I am forever agreeing with John Snow. :)

I would hope that they have fixed the problem with multiclassing as cherry picking in 4e. The SWSE rules for multiclassing are much better IMO than anything we've seen in D&D so far.
 

kennew142 said:
It seems that I am forever agreeing with John Snow. :)

I would hope that they have fixed the problem with multiclassing as cherry picking in 4e. The SWSE rules for multiclassing are much better IMO than anything we've seen in D&D so far.

Well, you know what they say. Great minds think alike and all that. ;)

I actually think the only downside of the SWSE multiclassing rules is the inability to be "multiclassed" at 1st-level. It works fine in SWSE for Force characters, since Force use isn't completely tied to a particular class as to particular "feats" (Force Sensitive and Force Training). So you can dabble in the Force without multiclassing.

That might work really well for a system intended to model the way magic works in, say, The Wheel of Time, but isn't how it works in standard D&D. The logical answer is to allow people to pick up training by blowing a feat. And there's already a feat that kinda does that - the "Martial Training" feat from Tome of Battle. My guess is that "Wizard Training" for example, lets you use a feat to pick up a single wizard power. And so on.

It might even be the case that a fighter that wanted to be multifaceted could take a "Fighter Training" feat to get more fighter powers. Since the real currency of power limit is "actions," it doesn't seem to me that it would be terribly overpowering if a character could trade feats for powers. Sure, he'd have more options, but so what?

Does that make any sense?
 

Better, yes, but the Saga rules encourage cherry picking to an absurd degree. There are only a handful of useful talents in each class, and very little to be lost by grabbing the best talents from each one. And since you get a free feat and a wider variety of defense bonuses, you lose very little.

A scout 1/jedi 1/soldier 1 may lose a point of bab and a few hit points, but he has a giant pile of options compared to a jedi 3 or soldier 3. 2 feats and 3 talents compared to 1 feat and 2 talents, a lot more skills, and better defenses.

So, really, I hope not to see this again. Class should actually mean something, rather than just being a talent list you raid for min-maxing purposes.
 

Sitara said:
Its been hinted multiclassing will work similarly to 3e.

Where has it been hinted? Rich Baker's blogpost about his warlord/wizard is still the only description of a multiclassed 4e character I've seen, and it reads like it's just the crosstraining feats. Also, the line:

Rich Baker said:
Suffice it to say that multiclassing isn’t like it was in 3e.

would sort-of-imply that it won't be working similarly to 3e.
 

Voss said:
A scout 1/jedi 1/soldier 1 may lose a point of bab and a few hit points, but he has a giant pile of options compared to a jedi 3 or soldier 3. 2 feats and 3 talents compared to 1 feat and 2 talents, a lot more skills, and better defenses.

But is he really more effective? I assume you mean taken in that order. Shall we actually examine that?

Assume the following starting scores:

Scout 1 - Start with: Weapon Proficiency (Pistols, rifles, simple weapons); 1 feat of choice (or two if human), plus "Shake it Off" (if he trains in Endurance and has a 13+ CON); 5 Trained skills (but can't take acrobatics without spending a feat); 24 hit points; Defenses REF +2, WILL +1; and 1 Talent.

Assuming he's human (best case), and we're actually trying to be logical, we can take Force Sensitive and a force training feat. Evasion's a good talent, or we could take one from the generic "force" list. We now have a force sensitive scout - like Luke Skywalker at the start of Episode IV.

Jedi 1 - Adds: Weapon Proficiency (lightsaber) (the only one we don't have); 1d10 hp; jedi skills to available list (but none trained); Defenses FORT +1; and 1 Talent.

Soldier 1 - Adds: Armor Proficiency (light); 1d10 hp; soldier skills to list (still not trained); Defenses FORT +2; 1 Talent; and 1 feat for being 3rd level.

So, our Scout 1/Jedi 1/Soldier 1 has:
Weapon Proficiency (simple, pistols, rifles, lightsabers)
Force Sensitive
Shake it Off*
Armor Proficiency (light)
Two other feats (one of which should be Skill Training (Acrobatics), or he's gonna be a lousy Jedi).
3 Talents - Max of 1 each from the Jedi, Scout or Soldier lists.
Defenses: FORT 15, REF 15, WILL 14
Trained Skills: 6 (plus INT bonus), incl. Use the Force and Acrobatics, if he's picked wisely.
BAB: +2
Hit Points: 24 + 2d10

A Jedi 3 has:
Weapon Proficiency (simple, lightsabers)
Force Sensitive
3 other feats of Choice
2 Talents from the Jedi list.
Defenses: FORT 14, REF 14, WILL 14
Trained Skills: 2 (plus INT bonus), incl. Use the Force and Acrobatics, if he's picked wisely.
BAB: +3
Hit Points: 30 +2d10.

A Soldier 3 has:
Weapon Proficiency (simple, pistols, rifles)
Armor Proficiency (light, medium)
3 other feats of choice
2 Talents from the Soldier list.
Defenses: FORT 15, REF 14, WILL 13
Trained Skills: 3 (plus INT Bonus).
BAB: +3
Hit Points: 30 + 2d10

So your rampant multiclasser has slightly better defenses, but fewer hit points, and he's far less focused. He's gotta blow a feat on Skill Training (Acrobatics) if he wants to use a lightsaber effectively, and if he wants to benefit from that armor proficiency, he's got to use his soldier talent to take armored defense.

It's viable, but now he's gotta pick which class to focus on. And in the end, the only useful things he's gotten are 1 talent and an extra point to each of his defense scores. I don't disagree that the scout level was useful, but all he got for the soldier level was 1 mostly useless feat and a couple more skills he can waste feats to become trained in later.

This character does give things up to acquire his options. I would contend that a focused character is usually MUCH better at his job. Yeah, you can pick carefully to make this guy work, but that soldier level is, IMO, mostly a waste.
 

Voss said:
So, really, I hope not to see this again. Class should actually mean something, rather than just being a talent list you raid for min-maxing purposes.

I hope just the opposite. I have always found strict character classes to get in the way of a good character concept. 4e appears to elevate concept over class.

1) Choose character concept

2) Decide which role that concept fills

3) Take class/classes that best describe that concept and role

IMO this is a major improvement in the way D&D handles character design.
 


Remove ads

Top