Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6462954" data-attributes="member: 92511">Someone, and I'm sorry i can't find it now in the thread, but it was something about a disconnect between 3+e multiclassing and pre-3e multiclassing and how the one creates an &quot;illusion&quot; of something...which I wanted to joke must be at least Spectral Force if not Shadow Monsters, because I feel the illusion is, at least partially, real. [failed my save?]&nbsp; But there is a degree of disconnect, and/or to expand on the thought [or what I took as the thought it was making], between players who have used and accepted the 3+e mode of MC and enjoy that and those, like myself, that didn't. Pre-3e and Post-3e are two completely different ways of approaching Multiclassing.We simply will not agree on what is/isn't justified via multiclassing or necessary for multi-classing or why MC should/must be allowed, etc... That's not &quot;good/bad/indifferent&quot; or anyone's fault. It just is. There are characters that can be MCed. Of course. I've certainly created and played my fair share...pre-3e. But with the classes and subclasses and backgrounds, and optional feats if you want, way 5e is constructed plus the additional concept options that all of those can be opened up to via roleplay, there is no real argument beyond &quot;but I want&quot; to warrant making MC necessary in play. Thankfully, it is optional. There always will be &quot;other&quot; characters or types of characters one can create/play. That, for me, is not an argument to permit MCing when there are the myriad array of options which you CAN play with, without MCing in the game at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6462954, member: 92511"] Someone, and I'm sorry i can't find it now in the thread, but it was something about a disconnect between 3+e multiclassing and pre-3e multiclassing and how the one creates an "illusion" of something...which I wanted to joke must be at least [I]Spectral Force[/I] if not [I]Shadow Monsters,[/I] because I feel the illusion is, at least partially, real. [failed my save?] But there is a degree of disconnect, and/or to expand on the thought [or what I took as the thought it was making], between players who have used and accepted the 3+e mode of MC and enjoy that and those, like myself, that didn't. Pre-3e and Post-3e are two completely different ways of approaching Multiclassing. We simply will not agree on what is/isn't justified via multiclassing or necessary for multi-classing or why MC should/must be allowed, etc... That's not "good/bad/indifferent" or anyone's fault. It just is. There are characters that can be MCed. Of course. I've certainly created and played my fair share...pre-3e. But with the classes and subclasses and backgrounds, and optional feats if you want, way 5e is constructed [I]plus[/I] the additional concept options that all of those can be opened up to via roleplay, there is no real argument beyond "but I want" to warrant making MC necessary in play. Thankfully, it is optional. There always will be "other" characters or types of characters one can create/play. That, for me, is not an argument to permit MCing when there are the myriad array of options which you CAN play with, without MCing in the game at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification