Community

Sep 13, 2012 -- 10:05PM, Rory wrote:

Sep 13, 2012 -- 8:10PM, lokiare wrote:

If they do multiclassing I hope they do it using the 4E Hybrid rules or something along those lines. They should cap the number of classes you can take to 2 classes and 1 prestige class.

 

Why have a hard cap when its already discouraged in 3e with xp penalties and the incentive to reach high lvls in a single class?

While this is 100% true, there were those few exeptions that made multiclassing crazy good. I mean cmon, splashing 1 level of fighter alone was pretty sweet. Instant Armor Profs, Weapon Profs, d10 hit die, and a feat to boot. All you needed was 1.

But yes, I don't think multiclass as a whole was too good in 3.5, I just think those specific little combos were too good >.> But this is something you are never going to be able to avoid with the legion of powergamers out there  

I like multiclassing. I never enforced Favored Class penalties since I didn't like penalizing my players for creativity. 
I actually liked the idea of the 2nd edition multiple classes at creation multiclassing (not dual classing).
Now there is nothing that says that Next multiclassing will be like 3rd edition or 4e hybridization. 
Let's wait and see what they present before breaking out the pitchforks and torches and scream about how they ruined everything. 

Sep 14, 2012 -- 12:52AM, Jenks wrote:

While this is 100% true, there were those few exeptions that made multiclassing crazy good. I mean cmon, splashing 1 level of fighter alone was pretty sweet. Instant Armor Profs, Weapon Profs, d10 hit die, and a feat to boot. All you needed was 1.

Or take a lvl in Barbairan and get Barbarian rage, or Paladin for aura of courage or rogue for a load of base skills. Learning the basics of a second class was sensible strategy that created diverse, practical characters.  I even made them realistic with the way I required players to call their next class before advancement and pay for training if they couldn't find a proper instructor. It was also balanced since doing the same with a third class forced you to include your race's fave class in one of the three, and level up a 2e styled utility character.

The only thing broken about 3e's multiclassing was that it created huge complex stat blocks and certain class combo's had stacking issues with feats based on ability scores.

Sep 13, 2012 -- 3:17PM, 603 wrote:

1e and 2e had multiclassing. It was rare because it was fairly hard to actually pull off...

It was actually very easy to follow the rules for multiclassing in AD&D. Multiclassing into a 2e bard wasn't hard but it was arduous. you level really slowly in AD&D so making even the quickest bard took twelve levels or something. 

90% of the characters in my pile of personal PCs from those by gone years are multiclassed. The real problem was that at least until the unearthed arcana came out the restrictions on what levels you could achieve were very low.

A dwarf for instsnce needed a really high wisdom score if he ever wanted to see 8th level as a cleric, or 9th level as a fighter with an 18 strength.

An elf could never be more than an 11th level magic user and he needed an 18 intelligence score to do it.

Many players didn't multiclass, but it was because there wasn't much point in doing it, not because it was hard.  Then again simple division and adding percentages to the result might be concidered too hard for some players. I know I've suffered through them at the table often enough.

Others didn't like being a couple of levels behind the rest of the party, although in game it meant at worst one spell level , but usually only a spell or os less than a straight caster and being ten percent behind the fighter for attacks never really mattered with armor classes staying within a range where even the wizard to hit for most of the game.

I actually loath 3e multiclassing. I have hated it for so many reasons since I first tried to convert AD&D multiclassed characters over to 3e.

Sep 13, 2012 -- 7:16PM, DontEatRawHagis wrote:

If the game gets so complicated at the higher levels that everyone has to multiclass I will still require my players not to multiclass. I have had too many games with power gamers who ruined the experience because their Bard/Wizard/Paladins could take out entire armies before the other players even touched the enemy.

I have seen this happen 

personaly i say keep multiclassing but make it harder to do. 3.Xe multiclassing kinda broke the book. But if you take that and mix it with Prereqs or something to make it harder to do. Then maybe.


Truthfully a fighter who has never tried to learn about magic should not beable to become a wizard and vice versa.  Multiclassing takes time, lots of time, you basicly have to learn everything anew.