|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 4:35AM
#91
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
In any case, that's the problem with considering class levels instead of overall character level, because in this case a F9/W1 will just be able to paralyze a kobold with his spell, which is not of much use at lv 10.
As has been said on numerous occassions. They're not trying to balance characters that have huge disparaities in levels of the classes they have.
It doesn't matter. Even a F5/W5 is going to be ineffective against a lv10 monster if spells/manouvers are performed at lv5.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 4:45AM
#92
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
In any case, that's the problem with considering class levels instead of overall character level, because in this case a F9/W1 will just be able to paralyze a kobold with his spell, which is not of much use at lv 10.
As has been said on numerous occassions. They're not trying to balance characters that have huge disparaities in levels of the classes they have.
It doesn't matter. Even a F5/W5 is going to be ineffective against a lv10 monster if spells/manouvers are performed at lv5.
WHich is why I suspect they will be performed at level 10.
Carl
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 4:54AM
#93
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
WHich is why I suspect they will be performed at level 10.
Hope so. It's the statement from the Q&A about Parry being based on the fighter level which left me perplexed.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 4:55AM
#94
|
Date Joined:
Jan 17, 2012
|
markb- nice.
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 5:37AM
#95
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
WHich is why I suspect they will be performed at level 10.
Hope so. It's the statement from the Q&A about Parry being based on the fighter level which left me perplexed.
True - but the flip side of that is the implicaton that your damage dice would be based on something other than your fighter level - ie. your total level.
I guess that as long as their Offense (spell damage and weapon damage) is relative to total level, there is nothing wrong with other powers being based on class level (e.g. parry).
As a general rules - I think that perhaps something that is reduced in frequency by multiclassing should have its effectiveness based on total level (i.e. spells: you should have fewer spells per day but the few you have should be appropriately effective) while something that is useable at-will should have its effectiveness based on class level (e.g. parry).
The challenge comes in because most fighter abilities are at-will and thus difficult to restrict in frequency and thus they will likely have to be restricted in effectiveness. One option would be for the multiclass fighter to recharge his MDD once per round rather than once per turn; but that doesn't do anything to those who start in fighter and become another class later.
We'll just have to see how it all works and reserve judgement till then.
Carl
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 6:01AM
#96
|
|
|
WHich is why I suspect they will be performed at level 10.
Hope so. It's the statement from the Q&A about Parry being based on the fighter level which left me perplexed.
I hope not, I was hoping for a more 1e/2e multiclass system. The hybrid stuff of 3e/4e is just not my thing.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 6:38AM
#97
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
Beyond a 4E hybrid or systems where each class much actually level to gain new abilities, I find it hard to accept that a 19 level fighter with 1 level of wizard can cast a magic missile as a 20th level character. That just goes against the grain of a class based system. You may expect some synergy between classes that share the same type of mechanics, so it is more likely that a 19th level figher, that takes 1 level of rogue, would have backstab equivalent to a 20thh level character, just because the fighter is learning sneak attacks to add on top of their martial training. A similar thing could be stated for wizard based classes, cleric and rogue. They chould just concentrate on not front loading classes and make each class level on its own.
I still think they should have different tiers of multiclassing, because it is basically adding a new metaclass mechanic on top of everything. So you can start with old school multiclassing where you must choose every class at first level, then implement a hybrid system, followed by 3E multiclassing.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 7:43AM
#98
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
In any case, that's the problem with considering class levels instead of overall character level, because in this case a F9/W1 will just be able to paralyze a kobold with his spell, which is not of much use at lv 10.
As has been said on numerous occassions. They're not trying to balance characters that have huge disparaities in levels of the classes they have.
It doesn't matter. Even a F5/W5 is going to be ineffective against a lv10 monster if spells/manouvers are performed at lv5.
WHich is why I suspect they will be performed at level 10.
Carl
Wel if you look at the casters and the spells the level of the caster is no longer ay factor in the spell.
more things are determind by spell slot used then the level of the caster.
The only things causing a problem is the magic bonus provided by the class so if this bonus would be tied to character level instead of class level it would work pretty well.
if this was done a magic missle using a level 1 spell slot cast by a level 20 wizard or a fighter19/wizard1 would be exacty the same of the ability scores where the same.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 8:37AM
#99
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
They really are going to try to do 3e-style multiclassing :facepalm:
Please show your factual evidence. Every article they've put out that I've read so far only says that they are basing 5e's multi-classing on 3e. That's far, far different from cloning 3e's method exactly. Go look at virtually any movie that is "based" on a true story and see how close to the actual story it is. Often you can't even tell it's the same story unless you are told that it is.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 4:00PM
#100
|
|
|
It's my guess that they started with parry being based on total level, and then noticed that it was almost always better to take rogue 7/fighter 3 than rogue 10, since once you got parry, you didn't need much other fighter abilities. And so they thought to combat that with making it based on fighter level. But that makes rogue 5/fighter 5 kind of weak.
There's probably a "balanced enough" point, but I wouldn't want to find it with only a calculator.
|
|
|
