Ross left mine up because he's just tired of deleting my posts and has given up entirely. XD
We stopped reporting Loopy to Paizo, and started reporting him to rabies control.
XD
At least he's good-natured about it.
I like the people in the white coats with the muzzle and syringes. It gets me kinda hot.
At least he's good-natured about it.I like the people in the white coats with the muzzle and syringes. It gets me kinda hot.
They also have those really cute "I love me" jackets that let you hug yourself all day long.
|
If you are disappointed with Pathfinder, then you would hate 4e. It's nearly pointless to multiclass in 4e.
Actually, since multiclassing in 4e is just a feat, it's very worth it to multi in warlord for the bonus healing power and the skill training in a warlord skill. It's really one of the best feats you can take, especially if you want athletics for free.
Except the new Hybrid system. And seriously, do you people get off on randomly attacking 4e?
Yes. :P
[rant]Why the heck can't I play a rogue that uses a bow?!? I'm an elf. Elves are supposed to be proficient with bows!!! Seriously, not one single rogue power???[/rant]
Back to the issue... I'm speaking from my experience. I'm currently in 3 gaming groups (3.5, Pathfinder, and 4e), and 4e feels like a straightjacket. And really, multiclassing in 4e isn't "just" 1 feat, it's 4 feats. The first feat is not that good, and a requirement for the other 3. Actually, the other 3 feats are not that good either, since you have to burn a feat to be able to trade a power for an equal level or lower alternate power. In the end, your character is 4 feats behind the rest of the party, and AT BEST, on equal footing for powers.
My point is/was, it's not that hard to "dip" in Pathfinder, and the benefits are much better than other editions/versions/whatever of D&D.
Also, PHB3 JUST came out. a) I don't own it. b) I'm not spending any more money on 4e. c) The discussion is about multiclassing, not hybrids.
Except that hybrids is more true to what people considered multi-classing in 3.5, therefore it is misleading when comparing multi-classing between 3.5 and 4E. And I prefer hybrids over multi-classing in any edition.
However, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Therefore, the problems with 3.5 was multi-classing, which made sticking to a core class in most cases obsolete, unless you were a pure spell caster. I applaud Pathfinder for bringing elements more inline, but that will not satisfy everyone.
I whole heartedly support GURPS, accept that it is more complex then 3.5 or 4E combined. So unless Steve Jackson games breaks down and offers some decent software tools, then I am afraid that game no longer holds my interest.
One difficulty is having a preference with one system, only to find everyone prefers another. Add to that the scarcity of quality GMs, and I can see how that may generate concerns that any given system does not meet your tastes.
Uchawi,I suggest you look at the Hero System and the Hero Designer character creator.
You know, we're missing a really perfect opportunity for a gurps/HERO system war here.
But those both suck. I play Burps. It's the Best Universal RolePlaying System, period.
Personally, since I spent alot of time with 2nd Edition which pidgeon holed the hell out of you (but gave you 'options' with the fighters, bards, rogues handbooks, etc)... then I went to 3.X...now, I dont mind people 'dipping' into classes, I remember in 3.0 nobody ever went past a level or two of ranger for the bonus feats it gave you. They sort of fixed that in 3.5 but not by much.
My problem is...when I make my characters or NPC's for my game, I take into account an idea for my character and use whatever classes I have to with whatever levels I have to fabricate it. While some classes offer more immediate bang for your buck than others (namely spellcasters which require a deeper investment), I still stay true to my concept.
At the end of the day, when people design characters, its easy to get caught up in the 'I want this ability, that, and that one too and some of this as well'...and pretty soon characters devolved from being a character than someone to being all about the numbers (stats, AC, saves, skills and HP) who designs their character to do anything/everything all on their own.
I ran a group like that once, where everyone more or less designed characters that relied on noone but themselves, they didnt cooperate or they would complain out of character about who had the stronger character/better build and pretty soon they were coming in every other week with a 'new' character that was stronger or more optimised than the last using this "dipping" mechanic.
Now, I understand that people want to make their character strong, they want them to survive what the GM throws at them, but really, characters are designed to fit some concept but importantly, they should be working together to defeat their challenges - but its easy to be lost in the sea of 'optimising' your character to be the best it can be, but I frankly like Pathfinder for reigning in this chaotic melodrama of having a character with two to three levels in a tonne of classes just for the keystone abilities (Divine Grace, Evasion, etc.)
A good example of how aggravating this became was a book I once read called Slayers Guide To Dungeonmasters, which was a comical look on 'what' the GM is to the player characters and how to 'beat him', and mockingly joked about these 'uber characters' that more or less were the pinnacle of everyone's desire to create...
...but the problem is, such characters are uncredible. Why someone in character would want to jump out of a class all of a sudden and into a second class, to abandon that after a few levels and then to do this a few more times to other classes offers the following 'problems'.
1.) Technically, it could be roleplayed and justifed why a character wanted to pursue another class...but anymore than two or three classes smacks of metagaming. The 'character' should have a reason to want to leave their class and pursue another, at least, thats how I run it in my games, its not some random spontaneous life changing choice they make on a whim - you dont see a Pizza Delivery Person becoming a Astronaut at the drop of a hat unless he gave it some serious consideration and did some research first do you?
2.) The players and NOT the characters know 'whats ahead' for the character class theyre playing, but its easy for players to go "Ugh...the next two levels are boring, I'm gonna skip off and take some levels in XXXXX". Alright, well if the player wants to change career like that...fine, as long as they have a better reason than "I want to because the class is boring for the next two levels". The character pursued that profession for a reason, they'd need a logical reason to walk out of it.
3.) A character who has Prestige Classes in particular, might in some instances, require to 'join' an orginisation (such as Assasins might need to join a Guild). Now, questions about 'loyalty' to the orginisation might arise if the character is seen going off to join another orginisation for Prestige Class X, and there may be retribution for the character 'abandoning' the first order/orginisation OR they may have some explaining to do...especially if they plan on going up anymore levels in the former originisation.
I know this is simply roleplaying logic from a GM and players perspective, but I personally think there should be a good reason for characters to want to 'dip' into other classes beyond smacking ones lips at some other characters 'abilities' they get for the first few levels. If the character expresses an in-character interest, does some research, asks around, etc and insists he wants to do it, sure...otherwise, I'd wonder if metagaming was involved (which it clearly would be) and deal with it accordingly.
The whole dipping problem was a 3.X issue, and turned characters into walking piles of abilities and stats rather than well rounded and well roleplayed characters (in my experience, they was never a good reason for such abominations of class mixes/prestige classes...simply that they 'were' these things and everyone had to accept it).
At the end of the day, nobody should have to go overboard with "dipping" in Pathfinder if their party works together as a team, each character fills a niche that the others likely wont.
...but the problem is, such characters are uncredible. Why someone in character would want to jump out of a class all of a sudden and into a second class, to abandon that after a few levels and then to do this a few more times to other classes offers the following 'problems'.
1.) Technically, it could be roleplayed and justifed why a character wanted to pursue another class...but anymore than two or three classes smacks of metagaming. The 'character' should have a reason to want to leave their class and pursue another, at least, thats how I run it in my games, its not some random spontaneous life changing choice they make on a whim - you dont see a Pizza Delivery Person becoming a Astronaut at the drop of a hat unless he gave it some serious consideration and did some research first do you?
2.) The players and NOT the characters know 'whats ahead' for the character class theyre playing, but its easy for players to go "Ugh...the next two levels are boring, I'm gonna skip off and take some levels in XXXXX". Alright, well if the player wants to change career like that...fine, as long as they have a better reason than "I want to because the class is boring for the next two levels". The character pursued that profession for a reason, they'd need a logical reason to walk out of it.
Except, people do this stuff all of the time in real life. Heck, I've done this in real life. If you look at every job (and college major) I've had, there are some things I've done that are completely unrelated from each other. While I was never a pizza delivery driver turned astronaut, I was a pizza delivery driver turned pilot. The job I do now has NOTHING to do with either pizza or aviation, and three years ago, I was in yet another completely different field. That's 4 completely different types of work, and I hope to one day add a 5th (game designer). Plus there are tons of semi-related jobs I've had (waiter, barback, etc.)
If you've been to college, I'd bet you know more than one person that changed their major.
So, if changing jobs happens in real life, I don't see a problem with it in a fantasy world. However, I DO believe that changing careers should come with consequences. I think Pathfinder found a nice ballance between single class and multi-class power.
There was an issue of Dragon many years ago in the 1st/2nd days (don't recall which, but 1st I think) that proposed something similar. Basically, you could customize your own class with any set of features you wanted, and each feature added a multiplier to a base XP cost per level. You could have lots of spells or a few or none, fast progression up spell levels or slow or a cap, high or low HD, great or average or poor Saves ... whatever you wanted was there for the taking, but the more you took the more your required XP per level would increase.
Wow, Rez. That took me back! I had to pull out my old DMGs to find it. While I can believe it was discussed initially in Dragon, it was implemented in the 2nd Ed. DMG as "Creating a New Character Class (Optional Rule)" p22-23.
Regards,
~sr
If you want a fully customizeable d20 system, go for BESM d20. The company publishing it went out of business a few years ago, but you can still find the SRD for their system at http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/animesrd.html
I use it all the time, usually just for creating custom races in my 3.5 or pathfinder games, but I'm currently running a pathfinder game where I give out 2 character points every 4 levels instead of a free stat boost, and let the players buy whatever they want.
You don't always have to rely on the game system to define the character for you, i.e. it is not the end of the world if a class does not represent everything in regards to your concept. That is where roleplaying or a little imagination does the rest.
But if a concept is your main goal, you may have to subsitute for an optimized one, or accept you will be a little behind in comparison to a core class. This is even harder based on pre-conceptions from a previous system.
But I think everyone is well aware of these tradeoffs, so once I actually try the Hero system, perhaps we can have a GURPS/HERO system war, with the appropriate flame retardent.
|
After playing some PF, I am surprised I feel the same way.
Classes not being dippable should be a good thing, but in practice, it's not so good. Staying in one class is so much better than multi-classing now.
After running into this problem, I reexamined, and after some thought and discussion, I realized it wasn't because classes was dippable that made things "broken" in 3.5.
It was the fact that PRESTIGE CLASSES being dippable that was the problem. Prestige classes often have immediate benefits when characters first enter them.
Trying to enter certain 3.5 prestige classes that required or strongly recommends 2 base classes ended up being really difficult.
So I think prestige classes are the problem in 3.5 in the end. Especially the really well designed 5 level prestige classes.
Core classes perhaps can be 'dippable' to some degree without any difficulty, but Prestige Classes are another matter.
Some, not all classes some more orginisational than others (for instance, "Assassin"), if players want to join the class then fine, as long as its roleplayed out appropiately. However, if the guild who taught them was to see them going off after a few levels and joining another Prestige Class (for instance, Pathfinder Chronicler) they would question said characters loyalty (and if the connection to the Assassins was known to the second orginisation, then vice versa also).
I knew characters back in 3.5 who were abominations of Wizard 5th/Cleric 5rd/Fighter 2nd/Blackguard 2nd/Thrall Of Malcathanet 2nd/Cancer Mage 2nd (for example) that made no sense at all thematically, they were walking piles of stats and abilities that werent so much a clever character concept but rather, something assembled from all the useful class features they wanted with the focus on being personal survival over party survival.
The fact characters in Pathfinder arent as dippable is a good thing, characters are supposed to work in groups after all.
But if your playing a game with limited players and want more power between the characters to make up for it, check out Unearthed Arcana for the Gestalt system which was a headache for 3.5 but would work much better here.
|
|
Has the OP taken a look at True 20? I haven't had a chance to actually play it, but it is pretty much completely modular. The Revised edition even has rules for building classes with a point-based system which seems pretty balanced, as long as it's the GM doing it and NOT the players. (Given free reign, I think munchkin players could really abuse it but YMMV).
Even without building your own classes, it strips things down to a fight-ey class, a skill-ey class, and a magic-ey class. You get a feat every level, with a few extra at first level, and most of the things you'd see as class features in other d20 games is turned into a feat (or series of feats for things like backstab damage, raging, or unarmed strike damage) and most of those types of feats are restricted by class.
There's nothing wrong with wanting the game to be more modular, but it really isn't balanced to do that as it is. I like the system, but that's because I know players who would make characters that don't make any sense thematically just so they could be powerful.
GURPS, which was already mentioned, is also a highly customizable and modular game. Look around into some of the alternatives to D&D/Pathfinder and you might find something closer to what you want. Pathfinder as it is, though, is definitely what I want.
Well, if I'm able to put my 2 cents in here...
PrC seemed powerful by "dipping" into them because most people house-ruled away the mechanism which is designed to balance them out. That is, when classes are too far apart in level, you take xp penalties. Does the powerful 3 or 4 multi-class character still seem powerful if he starts lagging behind the rest of the party by a level or two?
I gotta say - when people house rule things then complain that the result is broken should perhaps not blame the original system.
Well, if I'm able to put my 2 cents in here...
PrC seemed powerful by "dipping" into them because most people house-ruled away the mechanism which is designed to balance them out. That is, when classes are too far apart in level, you take xp penalties. Does the powerful 3 or 4 multi-class character still seem powerful if he starts lagging behind the rest of the party by a level or two?
I gotta say - when people house rule things then complain that the result is broken should perhaps not blame the original system.
Except, if I recall correctly, that rule did not apply to prestige classes and was a horrible rule in general.
Except, if I recall correctly, that rule did not apply to prestige classes and was a horrible rule in general.Well, if I'm able to put my 2 cents in here...
PrC seemed powerful by "dipping" into them because most people house-ruled away the mechanism which is designed to balance them out. That is, when classes are too far apart in level, you take xp penalties. Does the powerful 3 or 4 multi-class character still seem powerful if he starts lagging behind the rest of the party by a level or two?
I gotta say - when people house rule things then complain that the result is broken should perhaps not blame the original system.
Most people also hand-waved the "organization" requirement, such as with the Harpers.
And yeah, EXP penalties explicitly didn't apply to PrCs. And for obvious reasons. Just taking one level in a PrC would trigger the penalty.
|
I am a big fan of multi-classing. It allows me to build a character that fits the vision I have of them rather than the designer's vision of what "Class X" should be.
My main problem with multi-classing in pathfinder (why I don't find it very dip friendly) is that the DC's of many abilities never increase unless I keep taking levels in that class (Bardic music, Many cleric domains, Many wizard powers, etc). This makes those options unpalatable. Why would anyone dip into a class to gain an ability (no matter how much it makes sense from an in game perspective) if they know that the DC to resist that power will never be higher than (10 + ability mod) and essentially useless when they are medium level?
By not taking more levels in a class I should miss out on new abilities, it should not gimp the abilities that I did choose to take. They should make all abilities with scaling DCs progress by character level, rather than class level.
My 2 cp.
And yeah, EXP penalties explicitly didn't apply to PrCs. And for obvious reasons. Just taking one level in a PrC would trigger the penalty.
Not that I doubt you, but is there a reference to this somewhere? I can't seem to find it in the PHB or DMG. I was under the impression that the xp penalties were only waived for the 3-level paragon classes from Unearthed Arcana.
During my time playing 3.5, we did apply these rules and they are far less restrictive than you might think - even if you include PrCs. With favoured classes not counting towards the penalty, you have a good deal of freedom.
I guess I just find it interesting that many people (not just here, but in general) find PrCs overpowered but then think that a rule which could balance it is bad.
Not that I doubt you, but is there a reference to this somewhere? I can't seem to find it in the PHB or DMG. I was under the impression that the xp penalties were only waived for the 3-level paragon classes from Unearthed Arcana.
And yeah, EXP penalties explicitly didn't apply to PrCs. And for obvious reasons. Just taking one level in a PrC would trigger the penalty.
It's in the Prestige Classes section of the DMG/SRD:
Prestige Classes
Prestige classes offer a new form of multiclassing. Unlike the basic classes, characters must meet Requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. The rules for level advancement apply to this system, meaning the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the Requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class. Taking a prestige class does not incur the experience point penalties normally associated with multiclassing.
Huh. I guess that must have been an errata at some point since that line is not in my DMG.