|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 12:25AM
#91
|
|
|
Single Class should be better casters, but it shouldn't also result in stuff like rogue/sorc being super gimped. This is another thing I didn't like about 3.x multiclass, as it pretty much disabled any combination of mundane+magic multiclassing being functional (until you threw a specialised prc at them, which had another set of problems still).
I most definitely agree. In my view, the greatest weakness of the 3E/3.5E multiclass system was spellcaster progression (or lack thereof). This would need to be adressed in D&D Next somehow, perhaps by granting multiclass casters some spell progression for non-caster levels, just a bit slower (kind of like how BAB worked).
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 3:44AM
#92
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2008
|
I never minded the 3e multiclass system that much, simply for one simple reason: Characters are not aware of their class. They don't know they even have a class, or two or three. They know what skills and abilities they have, but they don't know that they are a game construct collected under a specific title.
So, your Paladin 5/Order of the Holy Hand Grenade 2/Knight of the Hokey Pokey 4/Righteous Brothers Band 10 isn't aware of any of that. He's just 'a warrior in service to Pelor'. Mr. Ranger 2/Scout 4/Order of the Bow Initiate 5/Deep Hunter 6? "What do you do for a living?" "I'm an archer."
Class is not concept.
Salla it doesn't matter if the character knows it because it's not a character knowledge issue. It's an issue of being to darned fiddly and having to wait 5 levels to even approach the character I want to run (sometimes longer).
It's also an issue of dipping to min max.
etc
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 5:55AM
#93
|
|
|
Salla it doesn't matter if the character knows it because it's not a character knowledge issue. It's an issue of being to darned fiddly and having to wait 5 levels to even approach the character I want to run (sometimes longer).
It's also an issue of dipping to min max.
1. That's a problem with any class/level based system. Certain stuff just doesn't unlock until you reach a certain point in the game. You can't fly 'til you hit X level, can't teleport until you hit Y level, can't make multiple attacks until Z level, etc.
2. That was a problem with the poor balance in the 3e class system. Fix that, and it's not so much of an issue.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 6:51AM
#94
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
I diden't read the whole tread but some of my thoughts on multi clasing.
in my opinopn one of the problems in 3.X was thet there where to many classes, becouse of the prestige class system making it intresting to have a few le vevels in al kind of difrent classes.
as far as i can see this would be less of a problem in the 5th edition system as you could dual class but not dual theme.
Each class should have a recource, day,encounter, round based does not realy matter, as long as it is based on how many levels you have in the class.
simplest example would be vancian casters.
a 20th level singel class wizards has more spell slots and higer level spell slots then a multiclass wizard 10/ rogue10 .
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 7:50PM
#95
|
|
|
A player's view on character class identity might have a lot of bearing on their views on multiclassing. I'm of the preference that D&D should attempt to re-capture its roots as a game with high character class identity. You aren't a collection of skills. You are a ranger. Now, what words exactly are used to describe your skill sets in-character can vary. But they come in certain groups. Classes are in-character entities, to some extent. From my perspective, I'm not a fan of what became of 3e multiclassing in general. It makes sense that someone might take a few levels in another class rather than splitting their levels equally, but I still prefer the latter. In either case, I see it as a character identity issue. If you have a couple of levels of fighter, a few of rogue, and a then the rest in sorcerer, you are someone who really went through those stages in your life and changed your identity for a reason. If you are a fighter/wizard, it's because you are pursuing two different identities concurrently.
I know other people prefer it to be a game where you build your own adventurer from a collection of skills and abilities, represented by classes and prestige classes. I see that as leaning more towards a skill-based system rather than a class-based system.
I'll make a confession. I hate class-based systems in general. At the same time, I think D&D should be a class based system, and it's the only way I want my D&D rules. There are a lot of other games out there that aren't class-based. If I felt a desire to play D&D without classes, I'd rather just choose another system and convert the D&D setting to it, than try to change the D&D game into a skill-based system.
Maybe I'm too old school here. Maybe a lot of people would be overjoyed if WotC threw out classes and made D&D into a skill-based system.
But I think it's difficult to really support both a strong sense of class identity and the sort of "create your own class" that evolved from 3.x prestige classes and multiclassing rules.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 31, 2012 - 8:12PM
#96
|
|
|
IMHO, I think the 2e way of dual classing is the best, can't use the old till the new is equal to it without penalty. Just open it up to all races.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 01, 2012 - 2:37AM
#97
|
|
|
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I would much prefer a 2e style for true multiclassing- set the xp tab;es up so 50/50 split of xp leaves a character 2 levels or so behind a single class at mid to high levels and call it a day. A 7/7 or 6/6 sorc/rogue is much more comparable to a level 9 sorc or rogue than 1/8 rogue sorc would be.
I'm not that familiar with 2e, does it have BAB and HP per level? If yes, I'd propose not 7/7 but 7 gestalt - you can play a gestalt but get a xp penalty for that (maybe together with a dampener on HP like that you get a lot of HP at first level and only little of it per new level)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 01, 2012 - 4:42AM
#98
|
|
|
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I would much prefer a 2e style for true multiclassing- set the xp tab;es up so 50/50 split of xp leaves a character 2 levels or so behind a single class at mid to high levels and call it a day. A 7/7 or 6/6 sorc/rogue is much more comparable to a level 9 sorc or rogue than 1/8 rogue sorc would be.
I'm not that familiar with 2e, does it have BAB and HP per level?
IIRC, you wound up with the best THACO of your various classes, but when you levelled up in a class, your HP were halved or thirded depending on if you were multi-ing 2 or 3 classes.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 4:46AM
#99
|
Date Joined:
Dec 19, 2007
|
I like class, race, skill, specialities and background choice to mean something while still allowing variety.
Once upon a time I played a game where the fighter/rogue took a level of dread pirate. In game he didn't meet anyone or have a book on pirate lore, just got enough exp to level. Despite the fact we were 200 miles inland and not even near a river... this seemed ridiculous to me.
While training for skills/level can bog the game down in logistics, you can roleplay making/meeting contacts for new skills or spells, this also encourages interaction to break up the hack'n'slash and remind characters they live in a world, not just them, their employers and their next targets.
Personally i'd love to have a caster with divine and arcane spells, no special abilities other than a huge variety of spells. Maybe later specialities can allow this with say 'pick 1 divine spell from 1st, 2nd and 3rd level' for Arcane casters. It would still be a wizard, but a wizard with a clerical style, atleast sometimes.
I think backgrounds and specialities can allow parts of other classes to allow dual-roll (tank/dps/aoe etc) characters without taking away the power of other characters. To some extent it must be tied in, your cleric suddenly taking arcane spells without arcane lore skill seems to throw plausibility out the window.
Also you can roleplay other classes, for instance an Illusionist wizard with nature lore who wields his magic against destroyers of nature can still be a member of the druid circle without ever casting a divine spell.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 5:33AM
#100
|
|
|
I am a big fan of multiclassing because I am not much of a fan of bounded archetypes. When you look at charaters from books/movies translated into game terms, they are often mixtures of different classes (and often in ways that break existing rules). Ultimately, I would prefer a skill based system, but that doesn't seem to be on the table.
I would like a multi-class system that offers intersting choices. It should allow the character to be as effective (but not more effective) than a typical party member. It should come with penalties that balance out the advantages.
It should allow varying mixtures so that a player could make the Grey Mouser (excellent thief, but knows just enough magic to know that it is dangerous) or Conan (incredible warrior, but a couple or rogue tricks up his sleeve). What about Elric? How does Gandalf learn to use a sword?
A really well thought out multiclass system would eliminate the need to 941 classes and allow us to build exactly what we wanted.
Instead of Cleric, Avenger, and Invoker, just have choices in the cleric tree that create one of those.
You could even go so far as to say instead of paladin, ranger, or swordmage, you just multiclass fighter with cleric, thief, or mage.
If you want to prevent ludicrous combos, make certain choices exclusive either by expense or by fiat (you cant have lay on hands AND Swordmage Defense because one requires devotion to the god of healing and the other requires devotion to the order of magic as your primary allegiance).
I seem to like mage-thief combos, and if I cant build one in this game I am much less likely to buy it.
4e multiclassing had the right idea, but it was too expensive featwise, especially as the classes expanded with new abilities and better feats showed up. It got to where the feat you were giving up to swap powers was too valuable, and the power you were swapping into was not good enough to justify the one you could have had instead.
Hybrids were ok if you were looking for a 50-50 split, but not everyone is.
3e multiclassing became a min-max powergrab, and that is not what I want either.
I do not want infinte attacks of stun-locked monsters. I want interesting characters in interesting stories.
|
|
|
