TangentBoy's page

Hi again!

Well, both Bagpuss and DM4hire have both made very good points and I think both the game rules and DM'ing style suggestions actually fix any problems that I personally have with multiclassing. I personally will be using these ideas.

Many thanks!

Hi,

more options is nice, I'm all for more options, it means your fighter and your other fighter can be very different in gameplay. What I do have problems with is munchkin style playing, the 3.5 forums are full of spiked chain build warriors, and 1 level of rogue\3 levels of fighter\2 levels of something else\5 levels invisible blade\4 levels of something else improbable etc etc. I do personally think there should be a limit on the amount of classes you can take - a class is what you do, even if you're multiclass I think a maximum of three classes should be in effect.

Is there really no xp penalty for multiclassing? I thought it was limited to you could multiclass to one extra core class without penalty. If there's no penalty at all that's just opening the doors for the ridiculous amounts of take one level here, one there, add a feat here and there and now i'm unstoppable in combat. It can (and often does) lead to having one player who has the spare time and the inclination to do so, outclassing every other player round the table by min-maxing characters. Either that, or the amount of level-dipping means that you're treading on other people's toes as far as your role in the party is concerned. I understand you won't be as powerful as them as goes level defined abilities, but having seen this happen time and time again myself, it creates disharmony around the roleplaying table when you constantly have the same player taking over from others round the table because they've min-maxed their way into having virtually an ability from every basic class.

In response to Bagpuss regarding 2nd ed AD&D, 2nd ed wasn't really that different from 1st ed, other than it was cleaned up and included some houserules that a lot of people had found made the system run smoother (although it was far from perfect). The "bloat" I found with it was when they introduced Skills and Powers, along with kits, which is basically the foundation for 3rd and 3.5.

I do concede that my opinions on the subject are coloured by bad experiences GMing for groups. The big problem was allowing them to have unrestricted access to whatever was in the rulebooks, because I found that allowing them to chose anything they wanted meant they would go for something to make themselves unbeatable in combat, nevermind the fact that none of it made any sense rp-wise, all they were interested in was the requirements for the PrC. If i'm playing a tabletop wargame, go for it, max out your miniatures power level, screw the rp. But I'm not, I'm here to roleplay, and if the PC's can't justify to me why they've suddenly gained the ability to smite magic users seeing as they've spent the last 5 years of their life as a footpad breaking into tombs with local adventurers then I won't give them it. I mean, someone who has played a rogue for 6 levels suddenly saying "I take a level in Druid", I'm going to ask why they've decided to be a druid and insist they rp the transition between the two classes, because classes are more than a group of abilities and free feats, they're supposed to be careers.

Apologies for the rant, but I've seen too many munchkins ruins games for myself and other people simply because there's no restriction on what classes and prestige classes they can take. It's not aimed at a person in particular, it's just my reason's why I believe that there should be an rp reason behind why you take a class and how you received training in it to be able to use these new-found abilities.

Hi,

I'd like to see prestige classes to be what they were originally supposed to be - an in character advancement with a roleplaying aspect to it, i.e. linked to an organisation, someone who taught you something extra so you gain those extra abilities at the cost of notmaintaining your current training (i.e. your class). It devolved into dipping into different prestiges, and taking levels here and there so you could do "sick damage", which ruined the roleplaying aspect of the game. Oh, and you can only take one, not two or three, and no 5 level prestige classes, they were never really worth it unless you were trying to stack other classes or prestige classes with it. "Yes that's right, I'm a fochlyan Lyricist AND a bear lord!", which got silly. (With a folly-rol-diddle-ol-day ....grrrr)

Psionics, but only if you can make it fit in with the feel of the system. Even in 2nd Edition Psionics never really felt like part of the system or setting, although I feel the same way about monks (an old hatred stemming back to the Mystic class, what with every other class being based on western feudal society, and all of a sudden kwai chang caine appears).

The ability to customise classes, but not necessarily through the use of yet more feats. Perhaps a guide on how to mix and match (or swap out) abilities from other classes. I know this would be a pain, and there'd always be some munchkin sitting at home thinking I'd let him play a skirmishing warrior with backstab and the ability to cast arcane magic AND heal himself, all for the loss of heavy armour and the ability to use a greatsword, but even the DMG 3.5 gives an example of giving leeway for mixing and matching abilities (at the DM's discretion of course). Limits would have to be set of course. (edit: I think I may have accidentally described an actual existing 3.5 class....)

I agree with others on the forum that any "complete" books that replicated the quality of the 2nd Edition handbooks would be marvellous. I still hold my Paladins Handbook as one of my greatest treasured posessions, simply because of the background material in it (as kit's blew mightily). Also a must is how to flesh out your character in these, many people I've roleplayed with have no concept of their character beyond "fighter have sword. Smash thing over there. Nothing over there? Stand about looking bored". A simple guide to character traits, motivations, appearance etc would probably be useful for at least some people. (Have you always wanted to be a wizard? Were you taken from your peaceful fishing village by an old man who tested you for magical ability and your father sold you into his service, one less mouth to feed?) Oh, and alignment, which is far too often abused. Bring back the xp loss for consistently breaking with alignment (giggles with joy as he hears the sound of a million powergamers weeping).

Any new professions would be good, along with any benefits they would give you. I appreciate that the majority of us are pouring skill points into maxing out our acrobatics and spellcraft ranks, but some of us would like to have something to fall back on, just in case the adventuring lark proves too hard, or to represent what you did before you were slaughtering innocent beasties and stealing their treasure.

Races - No new races,(well, PC races anyway) they always end up as a powered up version of a pre-existing race. Iron Kingdoms tried producing geographically different humans (different ability score variants, different feats etc) and it just felt like an exercise in making up silly names and changing where the +2 and the -2 went. Races that involve a level penalty should never ever ever exist and as far as I'm concerned that includes drow - boo hoo, no-body gets to play Drizzt Dil do'Urden (that's right, I used his rarely seen middle name). Oh, and seeing another elf race that gets the whole "four hours sleep in a trance" would actually make me weep, as elves are obviously inherently lazy, as if you harnessed the extra four hours manpower per elf over the standard 5 day working week, with alternate saturdays off, they'd take over the world and have already gone through the industrial revolution. (NB although if I'm not mistaken, the "Reverie/Trance" has been removed in Pathfinder. Hugs and Kisses.)

Hope this is readable and makes sense, and that there's possibly something of use in it.