Why can't you have more than one multi-class feat?

[Saeviomagy]

Paladin with warlock powers will be able to teleport away from an enemy that is challenged, will be able to eyebite them from range thereby making it impossible for the enemy to avoid taking the challenge damage, etc...

The foe merely sucks down a penalty for attacking the paladin in this situation. In fact, he can ready an action for when he can see the pally and charge him.

 

[HeirToPendragon]

RAW and RAI are thus:

You can have ONE multiclass, meaning at most you can qualify as two classes.

You can't multiclass as your starting main class.

You can take multiclass feats with the prerequisites of having the multiclass feat that granted you your second class. ie you can take Sneak of Shadows and then take First In

You can not take multiclass feats that have the prerequisite of having the multiclass feat of your main class due to the fact that you can't multiclass as your main class. ie as a Ranger you can't take Courageous Shooter.



I don't know why you guys are having such a bickering over this.

 

[Ryujin]

Okay, let me elaborate...

I have a player who wants to take the Beast Companion Ranger build... but wants to use the ranger Multi-class feats to get the other abilities. You can take toughness and defensive mobility as regular feats.

However, the Prime Shot (which I think is useless, and yet it's a paragon multiclass feat) can be taken using the courageous shooter feat in Martial Power. The two-blade warrior feat in Martial Power can give you the two weapon abilities of the ranger.

Yet by the rules, a Ranger can't take them. I told my players that it's not a problem, but they shouldn't get the extra skill for the feats....

Am I missing some balance issue with this? They just want to be the best ranger they can be... Also, what the heck is so special about Prime Shot? MY wife NEVER uses it, because as a ranged combatant, she's never the closest to ANY creature..


Thanks
Chris

Wizards have gone to extensive lengths in order to maintain game balance in this version of D&D. If your player wanted to take Two Blade Warrior then he/she could do it in the same way that everyone else has to obtain feats that are available to other classes; first spend a feat to multiclass into Fighter, then use a second feat in order to take Two Blade Warrior. I've done precisely that in order to become effective with a longsword with my Eladrin Feylock; multiclass into Swordmage, then take Intelligent Blademaster.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think, thundershot, your "real" question is more: "Why can't I pick multiclass feats for my own class". The answer would usually be: Because you're only getting stuff you already have.

But there are exceptions. In those cases, it depends on the special case if it can be "broken" to create a new feat that gives the power you wanted.

In the case of Prime Shot, I don't think it would be broken to hand out a feat for it. I think a feat that gives at-wills of your class as encounter power (some Multiclass feats do that) might be broken, especially if you can pick multiple ones of them (and in addition to multiclass feats). A Warlock being able to pick a feat for an extra daily Inspiring Word could stack this with a Healing Word from the Cleric, for example. With regular multiclassing, he couldn't get that much.

RAW and RAI are thus:

You can have ONE multiclass, meaning at most you can qualify as two classes.

You can't multiclass as your starting main class.

You can take multiclass feats with the prerequisites of having the multiclass feat that granted you your second class. ie you can take Sneak of Shadows and then take First In

You can not take multiclass feats that have the prerequisite of having the multiclass feat of your main class due to the fact that you can't multiclass as your main class. ie as a Ranger you can't take Courageous Shooter.



I don't know why you guys are having such a bickering over this.

That's how Rules discussion often work. There is one relatively straightforward path to understand the rules, but it _can_ be understood differently and certain ommisions or formulizations can introduce things that the "straightforward" path doesn't seem to imply.

The problem is there are cases where the straightforward path does not cover everything as intended.

Generally speaking, I go by this: If a rule interpretation seems to result in a rule being redundant or useless, it's probably the wrong interpretation. If there are no other interpretation possible, the rule itself is broken and you should probably ask/check for errata.

 

[thundershot]

It's true that 80% of the time, taking a multiclass feat for your own class would be redundant. The Ranger is the easiest example I can think of, which is why I used the Beast Ranger concept. There's no harm, as far as I can tell, to let the player take the multiclass feats necessary to make him a more well-rounded ranger.

Having said that, I also hope that Arcane Power has more multiclass feats so people who multiclass into Wizard can pick up the cantrips and other minor features.