Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FalcWP" data-source="post: 4183021" data-attributes="member: 16858">Well, Fighter/Mage (I'll use the word for Wizards and Sorcerers, since both are viable) types are big because there's so much difference between them.  A Fighter/Rogue isn't a big difference... its a pair of physical combat classes.  The two get features that naturally compliment each other - more feats gives a rogue extra options in combat or frees up general feats for other stuff, and sneak attack lets a fighter hit harder.  You might play a fighter/rogue a bit different than a fighter or a rogue... but you might not.A Fighter/Mage, though... the two aren't complimentary on the surface.  The fighter who takes Wizard levels loses out on BAB and HP, the Wizard who takes Fighter levels gains combat feats which aren't as big for him... and takes a casting hit.  So the Fighter/Mage relies on exotic combinations - he buffs himself or his weapons, or hinders his opponent, to make up for what he's sacrificed.  A Fighter/Mage can't be played like a fighter or a mage, so it merits more conversation and consideration.There are some other combinations like this, of course.  Basically, anything that adds a few levels of a wizard or sorcerer without concentrating fully on casting has to be played different, from rogue/wizards to ranger/sorcerers.  Most other combinations can get by focusing on melee, particularly one where half of the combo is a melee-focused class.  If the other half is a cleric or druid, they can go heavy on melee and just use some spells to supplement their attacks, or heal, etc.</blockquote>

Verification