I thought that Dave’s musically inclined poll last week was great, because it’s one of those general questions that I probably would have never thought to ask. It looks like the most people prefer the alternative/indie/college rock genre (69%), which I find interesting when you consider that our age poll surprised us with more people over 30 than we had anticipated! That’s not to say I don’t think people that age don’t listen to alternative music, it really means that I’m scared…of old people? I’m kidding, I think. Second most preferred goes to Classic Rock with 65%, now THERE’S our demographic matching! Hard Rock/Metal is in third with 60%, while Classical just barely edged out Jazz/Blues, Dance/Electronic, and Other with 48%. It’s good to see ALMOST half of us can enjoy the finer things in life.
On to the now time, Dave and I had a brief discussion (we tend to do that) and I was delighted that we actually got onto the topic of things about 4th Edition which we are not all that thrilled with. One we both agreed upon was what little we know about the changes to Multi-Classing. The way Dave described it was that in previous editions you could be a Fighter/Wizard, but in 4th Edition you’re really more like a Fighter with Wizard powers, or vice-versa. There is definitely a large amount of satisfaction that comes with the “slash” designation which might be lost with the coming of these new rules. Naturally, the first goal is to know thy enemy, so:
[poll id=”76″]
I feel like this is a much needed change and definitely one of the best ways to fix the entire idea of multi-classes. A first level character has to have a certain level of abilities to be any fun to play, because a fun beginning is vital for any game’s survival, so naturally you have severely front loaded characters in that if you were playing a level 0 commoner it’d be way less dynamic than a level 1 Wizard. In that sense, allowing a level 4 Fighter to gain all of the abilities of a first level Wizard, it can seem to outshadow the benefits of simply going to being a level 5 Fighter. Allowing characters to continue progression in their primary discipline but instead pick and choose a few powers from another class, now THERE’s balanced dynamism. Your character gains a taste, perhaps even a full flavor (doube fudge chocolate?) but without all the gratuitous save bonuses that make a 4th level Fighter/Ranger/Paladin/Rogue Halfling more hardened than a large dragon.
The other obvious argument relates to the image above, “Because Wizards run out of spells.” Now that this issue is being fixed, multi-classing might become more a specialty and less of a requirement for experienced players. What do you think? Is multi-classing being butchered for all the future generations of D&D players, or is this a good and much-needed fix? What should the ultimate goal of multi-classing really be?
I tend to multiclass because although I role play I tend to ‘roll’ play heavily and make effective characters. To be frank, multiclassing (by that I mean non-prestige class multiclassing) is definitively effective for everything save straight up spellcasters. I don’t like giving up higher level spells with my arcane casters, but if you’re going to be fighty or sneaky its generally better to dip into something else, especially 2-4 levels of fighter for tons of feats and proficiencies. Some prestige classes used to demand multi-classing to make effective use of them (dragon disciple- i mean, why get an enormous STR bonuses to be a caster?). Anyway, assuming that the new multiclass rules feel multiclassish without being more overpowered than paragon paths (which I think they replace) I will keep an open mind.
The thing I DO worry about however is that spellcasters may not feel spellcastery with the streamlined rules. Time will tell.
The problem with 3e multiclassing was that the Fighter/Wizard sucked at both, at least without extensive PrCs.
I think that while the 4e version will be more restrictive, it will allow you to excel at your primary role, while still being competent with your secondary role(s?).
@TheMainEvent
There is also multiclassing through feats, though we don’t know how that works yet.
@TheMainEvent
I can’t speak to the finished product, but I played a 4e demo game a couple weeks ago. From that experience, I can say that casters definitely feel like casters. Even partial casters (like my halfling paladin that I played) definitely had a split of “caster-feel” abilities, and some “martial-feel” abilities.
4th Edition removes the “run out of spells” problem. Casters have effectively unlimited spells in many cases.
Trask
I’ve probably multiclassed with 90% of the 3.x characters I’ve played. I don’t always set out that way, but I often find myself in situations where I just feel like adding another class based on how the campaign is going.
The primary reason I don’t like the (probable) 4e system is that it sounds like once a Fighter, always a Fighter, even if you happen to be taking all Wizard spells or whatever. The retraining rules might address this somewhat too, but I will miss the days of Fighter 4/Wizard 2/Dread Pirate 5.
I think this week the WotC preview is on multiclassing, so we’ll see!
I generally go single class, although I occasionally deviate if I see some cool prestige class that I want to try out (i.e. the first time I came across the Legendary Leader in Heroes of Battle)…
I’m skeptical about everything in 4e, this included…I’ve never really exploited the multiclassing system like said Halfling Fightrangaladogue, so I haven’t seen the problem that needs fixing…but I’m hoping for the best…especially since I’ve already preordered the core…
Being one of those people who hack and house rule 3.5 to get it to be more like the play experience I like, my games just tend to go gestalt right off the bat. We do tend to multiclass (without the xp penalty) after that. It helps us get the character options we want. Usually we don’t have 4 to a group though, so it doesn’t become outbalanced. If we do have 4 to a group, then whoever is DMing (usually me) gets to throw much tougher enemies and traps the groups way.
WotC’s preview for multiclassing is up. Thoughts about it to come later!
Regarding the Multi-classing Rules in 4E: At first, I was a bit let down by the ‘cost’ of multiclassing… you have to take a feat to get some minor powers then take a feat to swap out some of your powers for another classes powers. However, upon further reflection, this flexibility (IE a high level rogue that simply takes INVISIBILITY for craps sakes) and the fact you can change this choice EVERY LEVEL means that, if each class has a core competency you basically get to retool your character EVERY level to optimally cherry-pick from a second class. I think its much less ‘obvious’ and it certainly means you can’t become a fighter that matures into ‘more’ of a Mage, but in terms of play balance and effectiveness I really enjoy it.
I usually (in 3.x) go single class for my characters. This is because, like someone said earlier, the split class characters tended to suck at both their chosen classes. You’d have fighter 4/Wizard 4 who supposed to be an 8th lvl character but just didn’t stack up. ECL for some of the more exotic non-human races created an even greater disparity between your supposed character level and the actual ability to compete/contribute with standard characters of the same level. But I digress.
I like the way 4e is going to address this because it should, as Mearls put it at ICON: allow characters to still be good at what they do and not penalize them for branching out. Also, this new method should (theoretically) put a stop the the ‘cherry picking’ players, who multiclass to pick up some quick class abilities and move on. ie: grabbing a level of ranger for the tracking and 2 weapon fighting or a level of barbarian for the additional movement, rogue for the sneak attack bonuses, etc. Some players in my group have done this and I feel it kills the character concept and kind of ruins the adventure when you have one ‘munchkin’ who can do a little of everything and doesn’t have to/want to rely on any other party members to do things. This tends to lead to the “well, while they are resting I’m going to do ….”
Okay, I’ve rambled enough. The last thing I’ll say is this: That picture of Gandalf is awesome. Good job
Rauthik: I wish I could take credit for that Gandalf motivational poster, but I can’t! It was found through the gloriousness of the internets.
I wasn’t really impressed by the multiclassing preview, mostly because of the “satisfying /” as you put it. It’s almost like a mashup of point-buy and level-based systems, with the added benefit of being able to lose powers to gain powers as you go up in level. Like all things 4e I’m going to wait until I see the aggregate in actual play, but that’s only because I haven’t been very impressed by the bits and pieces.
Man, that reminds me…I need to get back making motivationals when I finish finals…there are actually a good number of RPG-related posters floating around that I can take credit for…not this one mind you…but, “FIRE! Relax. It’s just 1d6 damage/round.”…all over that shiz…
Yea Mike, because the world doesn’t have ENOUGH fake motivational posters. 😛
Propagandroid: I also wasn’t completely satisfied by the Multi-class preview, but I definitely get very excited with each monster preview that comes out. It just looks like it is going to be so much fun to DM in 4th Edition!
@Bartoneus: I agree about the DMing, it does look like it’s going to be fun. I read a review on EN World today that summed it up…it may not look like D&D or feel like D&D, but in the end it’s pretty fun. 🙂
Propogandroid: I have arguments and agreements with that statement, but I feel a post might be about it soon! If that happens, the check will be in the mail.