Community

Jan 22, 2013 -- 1:37PM, Rhenny wrote:

With bounded accuracy, and the idea that most level gains add maneuvers, skill tricks or abilities (spells being included) that don't become irrelevant as a PC advances levels, the 3e multiclassing should work better with D&DNext than it did with 3e.  

Two specific things made a lot of multiclassed PCs inadequate in most of the previous versions:  1) "to hit" disparity vs. monsters that gained higher and higher AC, and 2) sacrificing a super ability from the core class that was all but necessary to defeat new threats to gain a minor ability in the fledgling class.  If multi-classing in D&DNext gives manaeuvers, skill tricks, abilities and spells that can be used through many levels of play (not just for low level) multiclassing will add more versitility that is useful not irrelevant, and the trade-off will be that the PC doesn't gain a maneuver, skill trick or ability from his core class, which if done properly won't gimp a multi-class PC as badly as it might have done in previous editions. 

On the other hand, to prevent abuse, WotC will need to make sure that multi-classing does not gain too much from front loading too many class features, maneuvers, skill tricks and spells.   

I'm interested to see how it all works out.    

This has been my thought as well. +1

I'd like to add in the skill die as well, since it universally scales. I can see great potential in this as well. 

For multiclassing I think it would be best to have two ways to do it (you know this being a modular system and all)

The first being a modeified 3e multi-classing as we all know and love except the class you get when multiclassing is a different one than the single class one...IOW it uses a different table...one of the biggest flaws with 3e multiclassing was you could usually squeeze out alot of power from the first few levels in a class and makesing a charcater look something like this: 7/2/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/ but not having frontloaded classes sucks for the single class people cause ther very limiterd to satart...so if you have seperate tables than you can solve both problems single classes get to be front loaded whilst multiclasses still get to have their phone but not look like the spokeperson for ADHD career wise.

The other one I'd like to see is similar to 2e Multiclassing or 4e Hybriding where both characters level as you go obviously you'd end up a level or 3 behind but could still compete since you have two classes (you'd be 5/6 whilst a single class would be Level 7)

Now on top of that we have prestiges classes which I personally hate but I know spme people like them so I say keep but offer an alternative in the form of something similar to kits for 2e or themes from 4e so their more of a template that is applied on top of your current class as opposed to a new class entirely (ie. Assassin for Rogue more SA but less skill points) both of these ideas though I'd like to see feat,skill,etc. requirements removed and have roleplaying elements replace it like you have to accomplish something releated to the prestiges class or kit to earn the right to have that...the prestige classes you could choose to get at level up since its a class and the kits/themes the DM could offer to the player as almost a reward similar to gold or magic items

I'd like to see 2nd/4th style Multiclassing/Hybrid as an option as well.

Though, as long as they can solve the frontstacking AND the "oops this combo turns out to suck" factor I do appreciate the flexibility of 3.X multiclassing.

I find that ditching XP gain and doing story driven leveling helps a LOT with some of the potential disassociation (eliminating the "how the hell did you just learn to be a Wizard while we are trapped in this dungeon" factor).   

Jan 22, 2013 -- 5:25PM, dmgorgon wrote:

Jan 22, 2013 -- 5:20PM, Admiral-JCJF wrote:

I'd like to see 2nd/4th style Multiclassing/Hybrid as an option as well.
 

Many people share this opinon.  I just hope the designers are reading all these threads about multi-classing and it causes them to rethink what they are currently proposing.   

 

Yeah, it's one of the few places where I find my opinion matches that of people who otherwise disagree with pretty much everything I want D&D to be.

If WE are agreeing then it's likely that this is something they should be doing. 

Personally, I loved hybrid classing. I thought it was, mechanically and flavor-wise, one of the best forms of multiclassing ever. I'm really not crazy about the "3 levels of this, 2 levels of that, 5 levels of this" way of doing things.