|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 3:02AM
#41
|
|
|
So a second class has buy-in of 1K, a third has a buy-in of 2K, etc.?
That's not a bad idea.
Not a bad idea at all. I think the math may need fine-tuning though. It may be too easy to cherry-pick the first levels of a bunch of different classes for a very low XP investment. I'd take the cautious route and increase the buy-in much more dramatically after the second class.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 4:28AM
#42
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Hes my take on it. Multi-classing is an option. If you don't like it or it's not right for your character concept don't use it. I love multiclassing, and I think it's the one thing that 3e/3.5 really got right. Character level and class level as two separatethings, go up a level and buy a level of a class. I like the simple brilliance of that, as it allowed you to make interesting choices for your character. Dragon had a series of articles of 'themed characters' made up by combing two or three base classes. I loved that.
I think where multiclassing fails is when there are too many classes to choose from. A fighter is a fighter, a magic-user is a magic user and a cleric is a cleric, but a ranger is really a fighter-rogue-cleric multi-class mix and a paladin is a fighter cleric. So what I'd like to see is good solid base classes (and from the packet we've got those) mixed with a sensible robust MC system (easy to do) mixed with the themes and background system.
I like the themes and background system I think is where character creation is going to shine in 5e. I'm looking forward to learning more about those, particularly if theyre married to the MC system.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 6:10AM
#43
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
another solution to get rid of the Hp/HD problem in the split XP across classes would be, that every character has a Character Level, which corresponds the Class Level if he tooke only one Class. Feats and Ability increases (if they are, in would depend on this level. The character would have HD's equal to it's Character Level, the dices used for the HD's would be any combination of the dices from its classes, but with a maximal number for each dice type equal to the sum of the classes using this dice type. So a character level 13 with Wizard:12 (d4), Fighter:5 (d12) could have 5d12 + 8d4 in the best case. The Hole approach can become complicated if we throw dices, because if we get a level in a class but no character level we will eventually have to replace a lower dice with a higher.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 6:57AM
#44
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Coming back to the topic, looking back at 1e multi-classing, the rule is only a paragraph long:
"The game assumes that only non- or semi-human characters can be
multi-classed, and only certain class combinations are possible, depending
on the race of the character. Although these are listed in the section
dealing with each race of character, multi-class character possibilities are
also shown below in order to aid in selection of your character's class or
multi-class. Cleric combinapions (with fighter types) may use edged
weapons." (PHB, 1e, p.32)
No word on XP requirement...
We used to have the homebrew rule that each XPs should be divided evenly between the 2 classes, so multi-classes characters were always 1 to 3 levels below single class characters. But then we were a small group back in the early 80s, and everybody played a multi-class characters except for the paladin (me!).
Thinking back on it, this was a good system as any..
Anyold timers out there remember how they dealt with 1e multi-classing ?
When I played 1e we spilt the xp evenly between the classes (for multi-class). Dual classing was a different scenario because you stopped leveling a specific class and started another. Pretty sure that with dual classing you were limited to 2 classes though (as the name suggests).
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:16PM
#45
|
|
|
another solution to get rid of the Hp/HD problem in the split XP across classes would be, that every character has a Character Level, which corresponds the Class Level if he tooke only one Class. Feats and Ability increases (if they are, in would depend on this level. The character would have HD's equal to it's Character Level, the dices used for the HD's would be any combination of the dices from its classes, but with a maximal number for each dice type equal to the sum of the classes using this dice type. So a character level 13 with Wizard:12 (d4), Fighter:5 (d12) could have 5d12 + 8d4 in the best case. The Hole approach can become complicated if we throw dices, because if we get a level in a class but no character level we will eventually have to replace a lower dice with a higher.
Qmark had suggested something similar, and I think it's a much better idea than the math-intensive one I originally proposed. The worry I have - and this also applies to my proposals for feats and level-based abilities - is that asking players to track XP pools and levels for each class and also a "grand total" XP (which is the sum of the XP pools) and character level (which isn't the sum of the class levels) is still a little more complicated than some players may want.
I dunno, though, maybe I'm being patronizing. I know I myself would revel in the possibilities of this kind of system. I just remember running a 4e campaign with some new players who had a hard time sorting out the different damage dice for different powers, so I'm acutely aware that what I find easy and straightforward may not be easy and straightforward for everybody. The best can be said is that a split-pool system is very definitely a candidate for a module.
Spinning off from that line of thought a bit further, 3e multiclassing, for all its sins, did have the great virtue of conceptual elegance. You level up, you pick a class to take a level in. Very easy to understand. So maybe we should start a conversation about ways to work around the problems of 3e's system while retaining that admirably simple core.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:33PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
So a second class has buy-in of 1K, a third has a buy-in of 2K, etc.?
That's not a bad idea.
Not a bad idea at all. I think the math may need fine-tuning though. It may be too easy to cherry-pick the first levels of a bunch of different classes for a very low XP investment. I'd take the cautious route and increase the buy-in much more dramatically after the second class.
Well, that's the thing. In the system I'm proposing, you don't get to stop advancing in a class. Once you've bought in, you're forced to continue advancing all of your classes more or less equally.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:56PM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2006
|
from what i see in the play test if your thems and backgronds mesh with your multclass choces than some diping might be ok. but more then a few levels will kill you at hi levels
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 1:56PM
#48
|
|
|
Well, that's the thing. In the system I'm proposing, you don't get to stop advancing in a class. Once you've bought in, you're forced to continue advancing all of your classes more or less equally.
All right, I see that now. Sorry I misread you. I have to say, though, that I don't agree with that solution. I think dipping should be possible; it enables a large number of character concepts (perhaps most famously the Grey Mouser, master thief and dabbling magician). The trick will be to make dipping viable for players who really want to do that, without making it overly attractive to just dip into tons of classes for min/maxery. My own solution was pretty brute force: a hard cap on the number of classes you could have. But I think your increasing-cost approach could work well.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 3:03PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Multi-classing has always bugged me from the lore perspective. For example, the way it conflicts with the concept of "starting ages". In 3.5, rogues have a low starting age, and wizards have a high one. I thought this made sense because wizards spend years of devotion and training before they are able to fully understand basic arcane secrets, whereas rogues are often self trained, or simply scoundrels. But then, the rogue can multi-class into a wizard and gain all of the spell casting after gaining 1,000 experience points years earlier than the guy who started out as a wizard. I know this won't matter from the perspective of the power gamer, who will make up any contrived explanation to appease the DM and make his character build fit by any means necessary; however, I think that instead of multi-classing, 5th edition should have a hybrid class that starts out as a rogue/wizard.Perhaps the Rogue/Wizard would be called the "Trickster".  Fighter/Cleric: Crusader Cleric/Wizard: Mystic And so forth.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 4:12PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
...Say that I want a "Witch Hunter" archetype- for that I need some ranged ability as well as some divine power. I'll probably want some kind of Paladin/ Ranger or Cleric/ Ranger mix to be able to make that character work effectively...
I could see the background machanic used to create a witch hunter (or any multi class). Depending on how it works you could take a "base" class depending on your style of play, (ie. a fighter would be more melee focused where a rouge with the same background would be more stealthy and a wizard would have more spell access) the background would maybe allow access to some armor and a limited selection of weapons and spells.
Just my two copper pieces...
|
|
|
