The Multi-classing system we will be play testing is evoking a lot of strong emotions, but it is important to remember that it is deliberately sparse, only 4 classes because it is still under construction, like archetypes.
One of the things that seems to come up often as a complaint, is the idea that it cannot be done every level, and some concepts will take too long to build up.
What if the archetype feats and MC feats could be split up even further.
We could still have the scaling "heavy duty" multiclassing feats and archetypes that are full dedication feats, which require 3 full feats before any further dedications are selectable. These should grant the better abilities of the second class (without giving away everything) and have the high attribute gate, because they need to be restricted from easy access.
But then we could have Dabbler archetype feats that give much less of the umph of the class, but also require less of the commitment and less attribute restriction.
Perhaps Fighter dabbling has a STR requirement of 12, and gives a flat expert training in one weapon and training in one type of armor, but has no follow up feats required (or 1, we can play test this to make sure that dabbler feats don't completely outshine other feats.)
This would more easily let players feel like they have "dipped" in a class, and allow for some more flexibility of builds. It seems like general feats will probably allow for a lot of these builds anyway, but people seem attached to the idea that they are a member of a class, rather than just replicating some of the classes abilities through other means.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think what most people need to realize is that balance is going to be weighted more than the narrative behind the characters. Allowing you to dip into 4 different classes across your career while allowing each class to gain its key features immediately is nearly impossible to balance.
The rules are set for PFS use to level the playing field so one player won't easily outshine another. For general play, the rules are more of a guideline that the GM can adjust. You can allow multi-class and archetype dedications to be separate or remove dedication entirely with the knowledge that your players will tone their characters down if/when necessary.
The rules also allow easy use of the gestalt system. Giving your players bonus multi-class feats is super easy to implement in your game.
Finally, it should be remembered we are still in the playtest phase of things. Give the existing system a chance and try to give feedback based on the strength of your characters. If multi-classing feels weak, let them know. I could easily see dedications being separated into archetype and class, especially since the Pirate archetype really felt weak in comparison to Wizard multi-class. But they could also simply boost the archetypes up a bit. We'll have to see.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with all of your points, I just think some of the folks that have been opposed to this form of multi-classing are also latching too much on to the idea that a character should be defined by saying:
This is a fighter 5/rogue 3/ Sorcerer 5
instead of defining a character by what they can do.
We already know that classes are far less front loaded then they were in PF1 and so all level 1 and two characters are going to be a little different than level 1 or two characters were before.
But this version of multi-classing actually gives us as players multiple options for what multi-classing into a new class will look like. Once all the different classes are open and there are more archetypes, I think that this system can give even more flexibility than the old system did.
For the play test, I think it makes sense to test all archetypes (multi-class and otherwise) with a dedication that requires 3 additional feats before changing. It will help result in a clearer data-set.
But either as a house rule, or an eventual change, I could see dabbler archetypes that only have 4 or 5 feats total in the progression and only make you choose 1 more of them before you can select other ones.
It is as simple as having a different term than "dedication" for the dabbler feats.
Then dedication means you need three.
but dabbler means you need two.
FOr example:
Fighter multi-class archetype might give expert martial weapon proficiencies and training in some armors, as well as an accelerated future progression of those proficiencies (although slower than the base fighter). This feat requires a STR of 16, and is a dedication
Fighter dabbler might give Training in martial weapon proficiencies and maybe another benefit, requiring a STR of 12 and one future feat from the dabbler path.
The dabbler paths should never grant access to class features higher than 1st level class feats.
Maybe this will help you qualify for a prestige class at level 6, but it is not giving you anywhere near the same level of fighting power that you are going to be able to get by qualifying for higher level fighter feats.
Another example, a lot of hybrid classes might need access to some spell like ability that could probably be borrowed from another class, but they don't want everything else.
A dabbler feat that lets you pick up one cantrip from one spell list might help fufill the idea of a Inquisitor detecting for evil or someone being able to detect magic, without making them commit to being part wizard or cleric.
Another example, a lot of hybrid classes might need access to some spell like ability that could probably be borrowed from another class, but they don't want everything else.
A dabbler feat that lets you pick up one cantrip from one spell list might help fufill the idea of a Inquisitor detecting for evil or someone being able to detect magic, without making them commit to being part wizard or cleric.
I think there is a general feat for this in 5E.
Speaking of which, what are general feats gonna be in this edition? All the useful fighting stuff seems to be class feats, while skill stuff is Skill feats. Even metamagic is in class feats now.
So what's the design space of general feats? I can imagine some solid generic stuff like Spell Focus, Power Attack and maybe.. Gain a cantrip?
Another example, a lot of hybrid classes might need access to some spell like ability that could probably be borrowed from another class, but they don't want everything else.
A dabbler feat that lets you pick up one cantrip from one spell list might help fufill the idea of a Inquisitor detecting for evil or someone being able to detect magic, without making them commit to being part wizard or cleric.
I think there is a general feat for this in 5E.
Speaking of which, what are general feats gonna be in this edition? All the useful fighting stuff seems to be class feats, while skill stuff is Skill feats. Even metamagic is in class feats now.
So what's the design space of general feats? I can imagine some solid generic stuff like Spell Focus, Power Attack and maybe.. Gain a cantrip?
I think stuff like toughness, Saving throw feats, and ways to grab new proficiencies all qualify.