|
"Parent Classes: Each one of the following classes lists two
classes that it draws upon to form the basis of its theme.
While a character can multiclass with these parent classes,
this usually results in redundant abilities. Such abilities
don’t stack unless specified. If a class feature allows the
character to make a one-time choice (such as a bloodline),
that choice must match similar choices made by the parent
classes and vice-versa (such as selecting the same bloodline)."
Reading over this... does it mean I can make an MOMS Monk/Brawler? Or are we not allowed to mix the same class with parent classes of Hybrids from the new Advanced Class Guide?
Yep, ACG is written to strongly discourage multi-classing. It means your unarmed damage doesn't stack, AC bonus, and Flurry of Blows don't stack. All of which are perfect and ideal candidates for stacking.
The Parent Classes rule is one of the few I choose to flat out ignore and will continue to do so until someone shows me a good reason for it to exist.
|
I go the other way from Hark. In my games I just flat out say you cannot stack parent and hybrid classes. It makes no sense that a specialized class can start to magically unspecialize at higher levels and take levels in the parent class. It's a huge hole that will get exploited in pathfinder society play.
I'd hardly say it'll be "exploited." Dipping has always been a thing in PF, and it works the same now as it always has. Multiclassing is generally not the best plan, because PF really rewards people who stick to a single class..
I go the other way from Hark. In my games I just flat out say you cannot stack parent and hybrid classes. It makes no sense that a specialized class can start to magically unspecialize at higher levels and take levels in the parent class. It's a huge hole that will get exploited in pathfinder society play.I'd hardly say it'll be "exploited." Dipping has always been a thing in PF, and it works the same now as it always has. Multiclassing is generally not the best plan, because PF really rewards people who stick to a single class..
??? huh?
Dipping was originally strongly discouraged in PF, by the retooling of classes to give them "no dead levels" originally before expansion source books, it literally made no sense to "dip"
So you can't say " dipping as always been a thing in PF"
yes but its not necessarily )and specifically isn't) a PF thing… that was a 3.5 thing.
a cleric dip for channel gives you what? the smallest most useless channel ever?
The smallest most useless channel that qualifies you for channel smite/guided hand, and also becomes many more ki points through a bronze gong.
Thus allowing you to smite all enemies all the time as a Champion of Irori.
Every little helps. :)
prototype00
|
|
Again, it doesn't need to be a strong reason, and as you have stated, it is absolutely a thing from 3.X. Which means that, when people came from that rule system to this one, there were people who continued to dip, even if it wasn't the best idea.
I never said it was a thing specific to PF or that it doesn't happen anywhere else. I said it's happened since PF started, even as unfriendly to multiclassing as PF was (and still mostly is).
Considering that I hate class based systems, and only play Pathfinder because it is really well made and my friends play it, I don't find arguments that it prevent people from dipping to have any value.
People aren't mono-focused clones they are dynamic and complex individuals that readily learn an array of skills. If you have to use a class based system, multi-classing produces a much more realistic and believable character.
There are a handful of classes that are absurdly front-loaded, and are prime targets to enter for no more than 3 levels, so many people will multiclass to pick up those abilities.
