|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 3:18PM
#21
|
|
|
A gish class is all fine and good. A friend of mine has been wanting a class where the character really combines martial and magical techniques into something new and different for a while.
But what I want out of multi-classing isn't that at all. I want to be a character with a university dual-major. I know people who dual-major in music and political science. Entirely different fields with very little overlap. You aren't going to use your musical talents to interpret politics. They are different areas you happen to have an interest in.
I want my 10th level fighter/wizard character to be someone who casts 4th level spells and fights a bit better than a single class cleric. He should be able to fill the role of the party wizard in a pinch. He isn't just someone who uses magic to enhance his melee abilities. He is a character who might swing a sword, or cast a fireball, depending on the situation. He is a character who can practice swordplay with the single class fighter, trading combat stories, while later on having a discussion with the single-class wizard over who gets to scribe that scroll into his spellbook.
It's a character tradition that has been hallowed by generations of non-D&D gaming, but which only found true D&D expression in the AD&D demi-human multi-classing rules (and the BECMI elf class).
As the forerunner and inspiration for this concept in modern fantasy gaming media, D&D owes it to its own product identity to bring the concept back home and put it in Next.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 3:26PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Nov 12, 2012
|
Some thoughts I had in another topic...dunno how well it would work...
It seems like there is so much potential for abuse in multi-class mechanics, so much so that it sometimes produces a result far greater than the sum of their parts. Let me give an example. Back in 3rd edition, a character starts as a rogue. He gets a lot of skill points. He then takes levels of fighter for durability and feats. Returns to rogue to up skills that he can't on the fighters list as easily. Returns to the fighter to get class related goodies, such as weapon specialization: Scythe. Goes back to rogue for skills and more sneak attack damage. As far as I am concerned, that character can outfight a fighter while being a pretty good rogue.
My point is that maybe we need a new mechanic for multi-classing and perhaps a subclass/mundane prestige class sort of structure could be the way to go. It could slide over the existing class and specify what is gained and what you don't end up getting from your base class(if applicable)
For instance, maybe a "shadow priest" or cleric/rogue class could work something like this...
Shadow Priest:
Requirement: at least one level in cleric or rogue
Level 1: Divine or skill mastery(you gain the other component of your multi-class, but don't get everything you'd get for just being that class: May have some options for the sake of customization)
Level 2: +1 divine caster level, +1 level rogue expertise
Level 3: +1 level rogue experise, rogue maneuver
Level 4: +1 divine caster level, +1 level rogue expertise
Level 5: +1 divine caster level, unique divine spell-like ability feature
...and so on...
+1 level rogue experise: Treated as a rogue of one level higher for purpose of determining expertise dice
+1 divine caster level: Treated as gaining a level in cleric for the purpose of determining spells/day
This above example is imbalanced because it was made up spontaneously. Only performing as a cleric and rogue of one level lower at level 6 is too much. I was merely trying to show an alternative set of mechanics. My issue with multi-classing as it has performed historically is that the practice just begs for you to dabble in classes for the sake of attaining an early class feature. In my opinion, a first level character has some experiences in his or her vocation to that point that warrants having that bonus. I don't really want to see the following anymore...
Fighter: I want to take a level in druid so I get an animal companion. C'mere tiger...
Tiger: *growls*
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 3:27PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
But what I want out of multi-classing isn't that at all. I want to be a character with a university dual-major. I know people who dual-major in music and political science. Entirely different fields with very little overlap. You aren't going to use your musical talents to interpret politics. They are different areas you happen to have an interest in.
You could also have a major in music, with a minor in political science.
3e style multiclassing allows for this, the unrestrained, fine-resolution specification of a particular mix of classes.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter whether you started off with some music classes, took a little political science, and then finished off with music. Or if you started with political science for a bit, and decided it wasn't your thing and went to music. The end result is the same: on graduation, you have a music major and a political science minor. What you know at the end is the same, but the process to get there was different. This is exactly how 3e style multiclassing works. So, yes, wiz5/ftr5 = ftr5/wiz5.
3e style multiclassing also allows for a mechanical representation of major life changes, as well. A scurrilous rogue who finds religion, and becomes a cleric. He never forgets his techniques that he used, and he can still call on them, but he uses them in service of his god, instead of his own pockets. Requiring class determination to be chosen at character creation, whether single-class, multi-class, hybrid/dual-class, eliminates this possibility without a complete character rewrite. That involves too much mechanical retcon, to me.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 3:46PM
#24
|
|
|
But what I want out of multi-classing isn't that at all. I want to be a character with a university dual-major. I know people who dual-major in music and political science. Entirely different fields with very little overlap. You aren't going to use your musical talents to interpret politics. They are different areas you happen to have an interest in.
You could also have a major in music, with a minor in political science.
3e style multiclassing allows for this, the unrestrained, fine-resolution specification of a particular mix of classes.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter whether you started off with some music classes, took a little political science, and then finished off with music. Or if you started with political science for a bit, and decided it wasn't your thing and went to music. The end result is the same: on graduation, you have a music major and a political science minor. What you know at the end is the same, but the process to get there was different. This is exactly how 3e style multiclassing works. So, yes, wiz5/ftr5 = ftr5/wiz5.
3e style multiclassing also allows for a mechanical representation of major life changes, as well. A scurrilous rogue who finds religion, and becomes a cleric. He never forgets his techniques that he used, and he can still call on them, but he uses them in service of his god, instead of his own pockets. Requiring class determination to be chosen at character creation, whether single-class, multi-class, hybrid/dual-class, eliminates this possibility without a complete character rewrite. That involves too much mechanical retcon, to me.
I understand the argument you are making, but I don't think 3e really allow for it, not in the straight-up way I described. To attempt to simulate it by the book, I'd have to use prestige classes like eldritch knight (which I prefer not to), and I'd usually end up with a mechanically weak character, since vertical power in spellcasting is so much more useful than breadth of abilities in 3e.
I eventually came up with a house-ruled modification to the gestalt rules that more or less allows duplication of the concept, but it was a lot of work and only counts at my own table.
I don't want to have to houserule my multi-classing in Next.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 3:56PM
#25
|
|
|
Different.
From what I gather since multiclass classes will be different from base classes I'd like to see that play out in practice.
So a Figher 5 who takes 5 levels in Multiclass Wizard is different from a Wizard 5 who takes 5 levels in Multiclass Figher if only slightly. I'd like to believe they would look almost more like a Fighter 8/Wizard 6 and a Wizard 8/Fighter 6. Multiclass classes should improve the base classes abilities slightly as well.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 4:57PM
#26
|
|
|
All that being said, I have no problem with an option to take class levels a la carte like 3e, as long as it doesn't end up with some of the problems, and maintains some sorts of limits on the number of classes and benefits derived from dabbling. I just want my old-school, full-powered, high-octane, dual-majored multi-classing supported by the books.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:02PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
So a Figher 5 who takes 5 levels in Multiclass Wizard is different from a Wizard 5 who takes 5 levels in Multiclass Figher if only slightly.
I would hope that the frontloads would be all backloaded by level 5. Three or four levels seems about enough to me to be able to 'grow' into full competency in a second class.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:10PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Nov 12, 2012
|
All that being said, I have no problem with an option to take class levels a la carte like 3e, as long as it doesn't end up with some of the problems, and maintains some sorts of limits on the number of classes and benefits derived from dabbling. I just want my old-school, full-powered, high-octane, dual-majored multi-classing supported by the books.
The problems are what I am afraid of, though. 3 and 3.5e were great...when powergamers didn't manipulate the system so badly that they come up with a result much greater than 20 levels of a pure class. That doesn't even factor in what they could do with prestige classes. WoTC needs to make this system, so it takes the best of 4.0(which was better at limiting the powergamer a bit, but not perfect), meld it with what was good in 3.0 and 3.5, and new mechanics and improvements of this new version...
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:33PM
#29
|
|
|
I'd like to think it'd be possible for both to be somewhat the same and somewhat different and balanced to level 10 fighters and wizards.
- Remove spell slot levels entirely
- Frontload level 1 abilities, giving each class 3 maneuvers/spells and 2 expertise dice / spell slots on top of 3 class features as well
- Multiclass characters can choose 1 maneuver + 1 spell and gain 1 expertise die / spell slot, as well as 1 class feature from each class they came from
- You gain additional maneuvers / spells and expertise dice / spell slots as you level
- Multiclass characters can choose to gain an expertise die or a spell slot, but not both
- Similarly, multiclass characters can choose to gain a new maneuver or a new spell, but not both
That way, let's say by level 10, you'd have as a baseline of
- 10 Fighter with 4 Expertise Dice and 11 maneuvers
- 10 Wizard with 4 Spell Slots and 11 spells
- 10 Fighter / Wizard with 3 expertise dice + 1 spell slot, 2 expertise dice + 2 spell slots, or 1 expertise die + 3 spell slots, and a total of 10 maneuvers + spells
So you don't get screwed out of not going to level 10 in one class, but at the same time you're not too powerful by going multiclass. Plus, you can customize your multiclass nature in a myriad of ways, all without breaking the bank so to speak  EDIT: To clarify, the idea is that getting a level in a different class would not grant you the entire level 1 feature of the class, and at best trades what you should've gotten in your original class with something else from the new class. There's potential for abuse yes, but frankly it could work if only multiclassing (and possibly classless design) is given serious consideration in the design. |
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 11:21PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Different, but not so different as the playtest suggests. Going back to the question "fighter with magical help or wizard that can use a sword," the playtest rules supply "1st level" abilities that allow for a fighter to have magical help, but I can't be a wizard that can use a sword 'cause the multiclass lvl 1 fighter grants no additional weapon or armour proficiencies. I can understand the armour, but I think a few of the basics with weapons should be covered. I've always liked the idea of 3e multiclassing and I've used it tons so more of that is fine, but I do love the concurrent AD&D multis. 4e hybrids felt a lot like the AD&D multis but eesh, all those tables.
|
|
|
