So it seems that many people think that you should/have to go with a single class to be at par. For many casters this may be true but for any build concept that is not a caster I say why not multiclass. I frequently do one to two level dips in many classes to make a solid build of any type and believe that multiclassing is the way to go.
What brought this up with my most recent build concept. It is a trip build that will have monk/fighter/magus/barbarian/alchemist by the end of the build. This may seem like a lot of classes to many with low synergy and missing out on all of the strong later game abilities for each class but I think putting a couple level of each together can come up with a stronger build than any solo class.
I am wondering what your thoughts are on this subject and why?
Well, many dislike the idea of abandoning the capstone ability at 20th level. Granted, most campaigns will never go anywhere near that far, but people like the concept.
Secondly, Pathfinder is built around the concept of multiclassing = poor choice. Favored class bonuses, delayed class abilities, etc. all attest to this. The more time you spend in a class, the better your rewards are, essentially.
All that said, I personally enjoy dipping and PrCs to add unique twists to my builds. Especially a themed build, which your tripping smorgasboard definitely falls under.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am wondering what your thoughts are on this subject and why?
Since you asked, reasons I don't usually multiclass;
- I have a hard time justifying the spontaneous gaining of a completely new and unrelated skillset when I gain a level and take a new class.
- I dislike the extra bookkeeping. With one class all you need to make sure your character is correct is a single table.
- I hate giving up my favored class bonus, it's like toughness for free
- Taking bits and pieces of classes that weren't designed with the each other in mind to become uber good at one specialized thing doesn't appeal to me and probably wouldn't fly in my group.
- I live in hope that one day I'll get a character to 20 and get to play with a capstone.
That being said, I've run a few multiclass characters and they've been fun. I'm currently running a Weapon Master Fighter/Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple that will eventually go into Eldritch Knight, she's just getting into her prime and I'm having a great time with her.
- Torger
Given the way that class abilities accrue and grow in power as one gains levels in that class, staying single classed or at most dipping tends to produce better results.
Mechanically, single class characters are usually more powerful (at one specific thing which is generally rewarded by the game) than multiclass characters which are decent at many things but not very good at any of them (which the game challenges).
If you are a jack of all trades, you are a master of none.
The game rewards specialization, not diversification.
Sometimes, small dips of a couple levels can help to specialize into something but randomly taking dips in lots of classes will make weaker characters.
Also, some gamers who were too mired in 3.X have been unable to drop the mentality of multiclassing (including Prestiege classes) from their character building. In 3.x multiclassing general made your character much stronger as most classes were front loaded and did not build upon themselves. Pathfinder is not very front loaded, and classes get much better by increasing their abilities through leveling.
|
Casters should usually stay single class or take a prestige class that has full casting.Spell casting is tied to caster level, and anything that drops caster level is to be avoided if at all possible.
Martial character can actually be more powerful by multiclassing than they can by staying single classed. They gain better save more abilities, access to more feats, or synergy between class abilities.
A lot of people dismiss multiclassing because of the myth of the capstone. Capstone abilities are held up as this reward for staying a pure class 1-20. The truth is normal play will never see 20th level, and a multiclass dip that will benefit you for 75% - 95% of you character's career is worth more than something that is only available for less than 5% of it, no matter how powerful that capstone may be.
I multiclass all the time. Is it optimized? No.
Is making the best character possible my objective? No. I'm just playing for fun and trying to develop a character in a way that makes sense.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like multi-classing on a conceptual level.
Perhaps it is partly because I started with Ad&d, but I see a class as having a more central role in a character's life than taking a couple throw away levels in an extra class or multiple extra classes would suggest. If a player told me when they first made their character that they wanted to do it (for example "I want the character to be a street urchin who discovers they have magic powers, so rogue/sorcerer), and alternated each level between the two (eventually resulting in rogue 10/ sorcerer 10), I'd probably be fine with it.
I don't like prestige classes either, as they require multi-classing by design. If a player really wanted to use one, I'd most likely expand it out to a 20 level class for them, or figure out how to swap it's abilities into an existing class as an archetype.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
|
I find multiclassing to be the way to fine tune a character Idea. I want a Duelest style character from level 2? Urban Barbarian/unarmed fighter. Do I need a Holy wizard? Wizard/Mystery Cultist. Same basic rules apply all over the place, I only find three exceptions.
1. If I am making a full caster (level 9 spells) I stay in that class or a prestige class that grants at least 9 out of 10 levels of progression.
2. If I am not going for a prestige class I will only dip 1-3 levels, if I am going for a prestige class I will almost always take all 10 because the capstone (which you can get well before level 20) are great and because of personal desire for character consistency.
3. I have found that using more that two classes tend to cause a loss of verisimilitude. The character's fighting style and abilities generally get lost in all of the odd powers that I picked up along the way (like having extracts, spells, rage, flurry, Wis Ac, arcana and weapon training in the list you made).
Edit: Important note. All of these ideas comes from the fact that I believe that classes and ability names don't define a character in any way. The Barbarian/Fighter I mentioned above was a character of Mine that I labels a Duelist. The Wizard/Mystery Cultist called himself a Celestial Mage. I also have plans for a Cleric Inquisitor multiclass that I call a Scion of Erastil.
I don't like multi-classing on a conceptual level.
Perhaps it is partly because I started with Ad&d, but I see a class as having a more central role in a character's life than taking a couple throw away levels in an extra class or multiple extra classes would suggest. If a player told me when they first made their character that they wanted to do it (for example "I want the character to be a street urchin who discovers they have magic powers, so rogue/sorcerer), and alternated each level between the two (eventually resulting in rogue 10/ sorcerer 10), I'd probably be fine with it.
I don't like prestige classes either, as they require multi-classing by design. If a player really wanted to use one, I'd most likely expand it out to a 20 level class for them, or figure out how to swap it's abilities into an existing class as an archetype.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
I cannot imagine wat you would say about the monktopus...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like multi-classing on a conceptual level.
Perhaps it is partly because I started with Ad&d, but I see a class as having a more central role in a character's life than taking a couple throw away levels in an extra class or multiple extra classes would suggest. If a player told me when they first made their character that they wanted to do it (for example "I want the character to be a street urchin who discovers they have magic powers, so rogue/sorcerer), and alternated each level between the two (eventually resulting in rogue 10/ sorcerer 10), I'd probably be fine with it.
I don't like prestige classes either, as they require multi-classing by design. If a player really wanted to use one, I'd most likely expand it out to a 20 level class for them, or figure out how to swap it's abilities into an existing class as an archetype.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
This is why I prefer skill based systems to class based systems. Class defines your abilities, it does not define who you are or what flavor those abilities have.
Multiclassing does not have to be a change on you life view or that you stop doing what you were doing before. It's a lot less jarring for me than in AD&D when only elves could be fighty, sneaky, and cast spells at the same time.
Sometimes, small dips of a couple levels can help to specialize into something but randomly taking dips in lots of classes will make weaker characters.
I totally agree with you about the jack of all trades not working as well as a class specialized in one of those areas. What I do not understand is why you think that taking many level dips into different classes like the trip build mentioned above would make it weaker than a full classed build.
For all those out there here is a challenge to look at the mention of multiclassing being "weaker".(I am not calling you out Claxon im just shinning a light on the topic)
The trip build mentioned above will have a trip of +18 at lvl 4, +23 at lvl 5 for duration of rage, +27 at lvl 6 for duration of rage and mutagen. With knowing these numbers can someone post the best single classes trip build they can think up or find to see if multiclassing is not up to par.
Again I do not want to call anyone out on their opinion I just want to show both sides of this topic with a little bit of number comparisons now.
(I take it as a challenge to create a well developed build that does not use the usual conventional class choices.)
With the advent of Alternate Class Features and some of the new classes, there is less reason to multi-class than there used to be. Still I find that there are often reasons to multi class.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
"I've practiced with the sword every day, but have found that sometimes it just isn't quite enough to deal with some of the situations I get into. Time to try a different way."
A fair number of people in real life change careers. Some careers actually benefit from a wider base of experiences. Why shouldn't a fantasy character have more options like that.
I do have to admit that I find it strange that for spell casters, there is the Magical Knack trait to help deal with multi classing, but no feat that provides caster level relief. I thought traits were supposed to be half-strength feats. It really does limit the ability of spell casters to multi class.
while I can agree that multiclassing can be underpowered, I only see that as a downfall if you have an exceptionally small group, if you have what I think is the average. 5-6 underpowered doesn't matter as much. And even with a small group, f*~+ it. Play what you wanna play.
Sometimes, small dips of a couple levels can help to specialize into something but randomly taking dips in lots of classes will make weaker characters.I totally agree with you about the jack of all trades not working as well as a class specialized in one of those areas. What I do not understand is why you think that taking many level dips into different classes like the trip build mentioned above would make it weaker than a full classed build.
For all those out there here is a challenge to look at the mention of multiclassing being "weaker".(I am not calling you out Claxon im just shinning a light on the topic)
The trip build mentioned above will have a trip of +18 at lvl 4, +23 at lvl 5 for duration of rage, +27 at lvl 6 for duration of rage and mutagen. With knowing these numbers can someone post the best single classes trip build they can think up or find to see if multiclassing is not up to par.
Again I do not want to call anyone out on their opinion I just want to show both sides of this topic with a little bit of number comparisons now.
(I take it as a challenge to create a well developed build that does not use the usual conventional class choices.)
Well, I'm not sure what build you're talking about as I'm not seeing one.
In any event, it looks like you're talking about a barbarian alchemist build. Yes, because of dipping it is very possible at early levels to gain a lot. And if you only ever play low levels this can work okay.
But when you do more than the 15 minute work day you will run out of rounds of rage/mutagen and then the trick doesn't work so well.
I'm also not sure where you're getting such large bonuses without seeing the actual build.
And if, it's just a only a alchemist barbarian combo I wouldn't say that it violates what I said. "Randomly dipping classses" as I called it was referring to having sveral different classes.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is the specific issues I see with your idea without seeing the actual build:
1, you will take time to get into your abilities. I don't know what you have but at very least you mutagen takes a standard action, most magus arcana take a swift or standard action to use, same with spells and extracts.
2, your +27 at level 6 won't last you a whole day. after 6 rounds their goes your rage (-2) after 10 min there goes your Mutagen (-2) Spells will last a minute or so (-2 or -3 depending spells) Flurry can't be used on Aoos (-1) so then you end of with something like a 19 for most of the day.
3. your defenses will suck. You can't wear armor, your stats are going into strength, your wisdom will be middling at best and you get -2 to ac for raging (-1 for being fatigued after raging).
Here is a build with a more consistent cmb, better ac and no start time.
Human Lore Warden 7
Feats: 10
Weapon Fitness, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes,Imp Unarmed Strike, Two weapon Fighting , Vicious Stomp, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Trip, Piranna Strike
level 3: CMB 12 (plus aoo on hit) no magic yet
Level 5: CMB 16 (plus Aoo on hit) no magic yet
Level 7: CMB 23 (plus two Aoo on hit) +1 weapon
Not perfect and just a quick thought but strong tripping good skills, decent ac (19 at level 1) and lots of options if trip doesn't work.
Sometimes, small dips of a couple levels can help to specialize into something but randomly taking dips in lots of classes will make weaker characters.I totally agree with you about the jack of all trades not working as well as a class specialized in one of those areas. What I do not understand is why you think that taking many level dips into different classes like the trip build mentioned above would make it weaker than a full classed build.
For all those out there here is a challenge to look at the mention of multiclassing being "weaker".(I am not calling you out Claxon im just shinning a light on the topic)
The trip build mentioned above will have a trip of +18 at lvl 4, +23 at lvl 5 for duration of rage, +27 at lvl 6 for duration of rage and mutagen. With knowing these numbers can someone post the best single classes trip build they can think up or find to see if multiclassing is not up to par.
Again I do not want to call anyone out on their opinion I just want to show both sides of this topic with a little bit of number comparisons now.
(I take it as a challenge to create a well developed build that does not use the usual conventional class choices.)
Well, I'm not sure what build you're talking about as I'm not seeing one.
In any event, it looks like you're talking about a barbarian alchemist build. Yes, because of dipping it is very possible at early levels to gain a lot. And if you only ever play low levels this can work okay.
But when you do more than the 15 minute work day you will run out of rounds of rage/mutagen and then the trick doesn't work so well.
I'm also not sure where you're getting such large bonuses without seeing the actual build.
And if, it's just a only a alchemist barbarian combo I wouldn't say that it violates what I said. "Randomly dipping classes" as I called it was referring to having several different classes.
Sorry I figured you saw it. I am talking about the monk/fighter/magus/barbarian/alchemist trip build I mentioned in my first post. I did not post the whole character build because I was just focusing on the one aspect of what it is ment to do and that is trip. Also you are correct after I run out of rage and alchemist tricks I will only be at a +19 at level 6 which is definitely less than without the rage/mutagen combination but still a strong number. I am coming up with the +19 from 12 dex(agile manuevers+fury's fall) + 3 bab + 2 feat + 1 weapon focus +1 magic weapon. I can also add +1 from magus for 1min, 2x daily, +4 from rage urban barbarian dex, +4 dex mutagen. Hope this answers your questions about where I am getting the numbers.
Two levels of Monk can add a lot to a Fighter build.
So can one level of Cleric (Domains).
Two levels of Monk can add a lot to a Fighter build.
So can one level of Cleric (Domains).
Yeah. Oracles can make pretty sweet dips with those revelations, too. Basically if you are running a campaign where the level progression is really slow and unlikely to hit 20, and you plan it right, multi-classing can be sweet. More class skills is always cool.
This is why I prefer skill based systems to class based systems. Class defines your abilities, it does not define who you are or what flavor those abilities have.
Multiclassing does not have to be a change on you life view or that you stop doing what you were doing before. It's a lot less jarring for me than in AD&D when only elves could be fighty, sneaky, and cast spells at the same time.
Which FRP systems are Skill Based and still fun to play?
Have you ever tried converting a WOTC or Piazo product to a Skill Based system? How did that work?
I have played many, many FRP's, some Skill based, and have had fun with most of them. What makes a game fun is the DM and your fellow players, not the system. T&T can be fun (but isn't skill based). Runequest was a blast.
But the issue is that knowing the rules makes the game more fun. The more popular the game, the more people who know the game.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
To be honest, I find the idea that a sudden and unprecedented event of picking something is the only precursor to multi-classing, as you presented it, spurious.
However, applying that, one could call out a lot of feats as spurious:"You haven't been grappled anyone since we met, how did you suddenly get good?" [Improved grapple]
"Hang on, how the hell did you suddenly adopt a fighting style that isn't all brute force? It's what you did before." [Weapon Finesse]
In the former (although probably demanding another player co-operate to the narrative), you can point to that amorphous thing of downtime. Or general off-screen events. Heck, does anyone role-play every second of their character?
In the latter, one can call it a result of slowly attempting something that isn't well-represented in mechanics. In the example, it finally clicks for someone, to attack in a more...dexterous way (sorry, can't find another word).
The former can be made with something like the multi-classing for a Mystic Theurge; "I know I'm good with a spellbook, but I think it best to learn more than that." The latter provides far more sense for a Fighter going into Rogue; "I admit it, my methods have got pretty under-handed of late."
I would say the latter can be a smooth process, which makes it seem permissible "out of the blue", as it were. Now, admittedly in the former case - if a player did lack a narrative precursor, it gives the impression of meta-gaming. Which rubs a lot of people wrong but eh, their games, not my business.
Now, onto the OP:
I think part of it is a result of people not reading into the game. Tale your trip build, it draws on looking as a series of disparate mechanisms and engineers them such that they bring a desirable outcome. To successfully engineer that required a knowledge of the mechanisms and study of their interaction (or you know, thinking about it).
The point being:
Some players prefer to look at the characters as acting roles, not as tools by which you have autonomy on the system (role-players vs roll-players, if you will).
Some players just aren't that familiar, and don't care to become so familiar.
Some people identify the benefits of staying single-classed as better for their goals (playing a caster normally).
Now, generally, none of these are universal constants for any one person and indeed, people who don't enjoy the mechanics will multi-class for story's sake, but the point remains: Your approach here is one in several options to approach the game. The fact that the majority don't pick a given option when there are a lot more is unsurprising.
|
|
This is why I prefer skill based systems to class based systems. Class defines your abilities, it does not define who you are or what flavor those abilities have.
Multiclassing does not have to be a change on you life view or that you stop doing what you were doing before. It's a lot less jarring for me than in AD&D when only elves could be fighty, sneaky, and cast spells at the same time.
Which FRP systems are Skill Based and still fun to play?
Have you ever tried converting a WOTC or Piazo product to a Skill Based system? How did that work?
I'm quoting Imbicatus here but these questions are open to anyone.
I've played a lot of GURPS fantasy, in the Yrth setting, in the Hyborian age, Modern (Using normal GURPS magic, psionics, minor superpowers, and ritual magic from the voodoo book), and as a conversion of Greyhawk.
It's more work to convert existing adventures written for D&D to GURPS than it is to convert from 1st/2nd edition to 3.5/pathfinder, but not THAT much more. I also played Shadowrun in GURPS, and that was a lot more fun to play than the Shadowrun system.
I also once played a low tech game of Call of Cuthulu set in the Hyborean Age where there was no Conan, but the sorcerers were still calling dark powers. It was.... memorable, but like most CoC games, ended with a TPK, but we stopped Dagon from rising, so that was a win.
Some classes compliment each other (mechanically) for multiclassing, but unfortunately some great thematic ideas for multicasting don't work out too well.
Example: I once had a Sorcerer with the Fey Bloodline, and the character wanted to research the fey source of his power. This led him to discover the existence of an ancient fey entity his ancestors treated with and eventually sired children from. The idea was that the character would seek out this fey lord to be his patron to multiclass as a Sorcerer/Witch.
After taking a look at how this character would develop, it would produce a terribly week character as it would not reach any high level spells compared to what he would have had if he just stuck with Sorcerer. It would have a whole lot of spells per day, but it would not match up well with the other characters in terms of raw power.
I'm firmly in the camp that believes a player should not base his choices for his character on raw power over the idea he want wants his character to be, but this route was just too much of a sacrifice.
I do seem to remember a 3.5 prestige class that would have been an option for arcane prepared spell cast/spontaneous caster multiclassing (Ultimate Magnus?), but don't recall how well it would translate to a Pathfinder game which often makes a core class by itself more appealing than a prestige class.
Classes and class levels are nothing more than mechanical constructs.
Sometimes, the best way to represent the character concept one has in mind involves multiclassing. Sometimes, it doesn't.
As a general rule, Pathfinder rewards specialization, so keep in a single class is often the better deal, but multiclassing is still very useful for certain builds.
For example, the best unarmed warrior I've seen was a Monk 1/ Fighter (Brawler archetype) 3/ Ranger 6. :P
Very few characters are going to be "who they are" at level 1. How does a character spontaneously manifest his 2nd level abilities? How does he even know he can do what he can do? What about when he puts a skill rank in a class skill for the first time, and suddenly he's 4x better at something? What about when he gains a feat?
If you are starting play at level 1, you just have to accept that there are going to be some "formative" levels, where you are not fully "you", so to speak.
That said, multi-classing is always balancing what you gain, which is usually fairly obvious, against what you lose, which is a little more nebulous.
Multi-classing, for most people, is usually restricted to 1-2 level dips in a class that has front loaded abilities. My personal favorites, in no particular order, are:
Ranger: First level nets you +1 BAB, 6 + INT skills (including a lot of good class skills), Favored Enemy, Track, and Wild Empathy. A second level can let you "cheat" into some Combat Feats you might not qualify for otherwise.
Barbarian: First level gets you d12 hp, +1 BAB, 4 + INT skills (with another good class skill list), Fast Movement, and... oh, yeah... Rage. This is a great dip for non-melee focused characters, archers and support-types. Fast Movement and class Acrobatics lets you avoid a lot of danger, and when all else fails, surprise them with some Rage!
Bard: Hard to quantify this one... +0 BAB, which is bad. But, if you have a positive CHA bonus, you just get so many things... skills, spells, knowledge, performances, two good saves (one is will!), etc... Archetypes make this even better, and there are too many that are so good for me to even list. They even have great spells that have no somatic component, so you don't even have to worry about that heavy armor you're wearing!
I'll give the Oracle an honorable mention. It's abilities are fairly RP heavy, though...
With the advent of Alternate Class Features and some of the new classes, there is less reason to multi-class than there used to be. Still I find that there are often reasons to multi class.
From a story perspective, the idea that someone will suddenly switch their investment of learning and time is jarring. Especially since it's an actual matter of life and death for them, I see adventurers as the sort of people who would find competence very important, and it's difficult to become competent by dabbling.
"I've practiced with the sword every day since I was 16, always hoping my skill would grow to make me the best in the land. Now, I'm learning to cast spells from a book."
"I serve my diety faithfully, and work to protect my allies. Instead, let's focus on punching things and being all Zen for awhile."
"I've practiced with the sword every day, but have found that sometimes it just isn't quite enough to deal with some of the situations I get into. Time to try a different way."
A fair number of people in real life change careers. Some careers actually benefit from a wider base of experiences. Why shouldn't a fantasy character have more options like that.
I do have to admit that I find it strange that for spell casters, there is the Magical Knack trait to help deal with multi classing, but no feat that provides caster level relief. I thought traits were supposed to be half-strength feats. It really does limit the ability of spell casters to multi class.
Changing careers is more like how humans multi-classed in Ad&d. Give up old job, take on new one. I would imagine precious few people quit their career, get a new one, work it for a little while, then go right back to the first one, which is what "dipping" seems like.
All of that is irrelevant to me though, as I don't view the game as a way to model real lives, so much as a way to tell stories and create engaging fun. In the vein of storytelling, imagine if midway through the movie "Empire Strikes Back" Luke had told Yoda that he wanted to suspend his Jedi training in order to learn to wear armor and use a blaster better, but he'd get back to it in awhile. It would disrupt the flow of the story and character arc.
|
I have been drawn to Multi-Classing by just preference.
But what I have found is that a multi-classed charter usually
has better saving throws than a single class due to stacking.
Further it opens up skills, abilities that you might not have considered
as a single class Charter. The down side comes in not getting access
to some of the high level spells or traits. Your BAB may be lower
he upside is that you have other choices. When Barbarian Bard
is fatigued he can still sing and help himself and the party.
In PFS sometimes you find you have a cure light wand and no one
can use it accept through use magical device.
Sometimes multi-classing can be a good way to compensate for charter deficit. I have a Gnome barbarian who is also an alchemist because
I lost out at character creation with a minus 2 strength
But when I drink my mutigen an alchmemical bonus
Drink a potion of bull strength a Enhancement bonus
and rage a Moral bonus they all stack and I can do a lot of damage
and have a better chance to hit in melee I also can deal with swarms something a standard barbarian doesn't do as well.
The most powerful Blaster wizard build I have seen is a multiclass charter
Cross blooded sorcerer orc and draconic and an admixture wizard.
The cross blooded does extra damage per die The Admixture
adjusts for imunities I fireball the sucubus she's immune to fire
Lighting so I change my fireball to an acid Fireball that hurts her.
The best advice is play the charter you want to play regardless what the rest of us say it will be the more interesting and fun to play.
However if you shoot your self in the foot and don't like the charter
either discard it or do retraining from the ultimate campaign
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Changing careers is more like how humans multi-classed in Ad&d. Give up old job, take on new one. I would imagine precious few people quit their career, get a new one, work it for a little while, then go right back to the first one, which is what "dipping" seems like.*snip*
*snip**snip*
So, think of it more like this:
When I train new managers to be Assistant Managers, I train them in every aspect of working in a Restaurant, cooking, prepping, cleaning, serving, etc., just like I would train staff. Then I teach them how to train others in the same jobs. Eventually, they learn how to run a restaurant.
But, if they want to go on to become GM's, they also have to learn how to run a business. That's a different discipline. But, they need it to become the Mystic Theurge that is Restaurant GM...
Dipping isn't about straying from your path. It's about adding to your path.
Changing careers is more like how humans multi-classed in Ad&d. Give up old job, take on new one. I would imagine precious few people quit their career, get a new one, work it for a little while, then go right back to the first one, which is what "dipping" seems like.So, think of it more like this:
When I train new managers to be Assistant Managers, I train them in every aspect of working in a Restaurant, cooking, prepping, cleaning, serving, etc., just like I would train staff. Then I teach them how to train others in the same jobs. Eventually, they learn how to run a restaurant.
But, if they want to go on to become GM's, they also have to learn how to run a business. That's a different discipline. But, they need it to become the Mystic Theurge that is Restaurant GM...
Dipping isn't about straying from your path. It's about adding to your path.
If someone wants to be a Theurge, that's something that I would prefer be part of the character concept at level one, and I'd be happy to turn the Mystic Theurge into a 20 level class of it's own for a player that wanted to make that character.
What kind of addition to a path could possibly require 1-2 levels in four different classes, but couldn't be done in a single class without a little effort (from DM and player) ? If a player just wants some shiny trick that another class offers, why not figure out a way they can just get that, or something similar? To use your example, I can learn how to conduct a pre-employment interview without becoming a manager.
Edit: fixed formatting error.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*snip*... Dipping isn't about straying from your path. It's about adding to your path.But then you've just made a far better argument for eliminating classes entirely and going to a skill based system, than you have for answering Scythia's "class-dipping" point.
Thank you, that is the answer that I'm reaching towards, but I hadn't thought about it that way. I'm happy to adjust classes and give people other ways to get class based abilities, but somehow it hadn't occurred to me that what would completely solve the problem is a freeform approach in general.
Thank you, that is the answer that I'm reaching towards, but I hadn't thought about it that way. I'm happy to adjust classes and give people other ways to get class based abilities, but somehow it hadn't occurred to me that what would completely solve the problem is a freeform approach in general.Your welcome.
That's why I'm so keen on finding a group that runs GURPS, Runequest or ArsMagica. That method of character generation for RP just seems so intuitively better to me. I may be wrong of course after trying it but still I would like to try (with a competent group).
My preferred game is White Wolf (old) World of Darkness, where your character's powers, abilities, skills, and growth were up to you in many ways, and that's a nice way to be.
I don't know that I would go full GURPS though, as I like to have some set guidelines. I can certainly see why it would appeal to some though.