The missing feats and the easy solution (high level play)

[Wermut]

As the title says a lot of talk centers around the need to invest in dedication feats of varying power to unlock progress in another race/class. Part of the problem is the loss of toys.

Well yes a fighter dedicating himself to be a wizard can read scrolls and use wands. But he can't scribe scrolls or has actual spell slots. When does he get those spells? Around level 5 I'd assume. Whereas in PF1 a character mixing barbarian and sorceror has no problems using all his tools at level 2. He might not be the most powerful possible build, but its a rewarding experience.

So with a lot of character concepts missing features they have to unlock with certain levels I wonder if higher level play could even things out a little. Builds using multiclassing and/or archetypes won't be as strong as other characters but still have access to the tools the player wants to have.

I wonder with a lot of mentioning high level abilities in the blog (the famous legendary medic for example), if the second edition aims for a higher level play experience? And if that could remedy that problem?

[Tallow]

I think what the multiclassing-as-an-archetype system does, it it essentially eliminates the ability of someone to "dip" a class just to gain more power. It alleviates the biggest problem of dipping, in that there won't be any unintended consequences of different abilities working with one another in unintended ways.

In other words, the idea is that if you want to multiclass, its because you have a concept that requires the two concepts instead of just to gain more power.

[Wermut]

Tallow wrote:

I think what the multiclassing-as-an-archetype system does, it it essentially eliminates the ability of someone to "dip" a class just to gain more power. It alleviates the biggest problem of dipping, in that there won't be any unintended consequences of different abilities working with one another in unintended ways.

In other words, the idea is that if you want to multiclass, its because you have a concept that requires the two concepts instead of just to gain more power.

First I'm not debating the idea behind that change, I'm thinking more about the consequences and ways too use these rules within the system. So less the "why" and more the "what now".

Also I don't see the problem with dipping, yes there are some powergamery builds combining 4 classes (and varying amount of archetypes) just for more efficiency. But there also build that combine classes for roleplay and concept purposes.

For example, taking 1 Level Barb, 4 Level Sorc and then Dragon Disciple is a complete concept. Does the dip provide power? Yes of course.

Does it fit that the character struggles with his dragon blood, experiences fits of rage and only learns with time to harness that blood, heck yes.

The same could be said about two levels of paladin in the same build. Yes it has oomph, but its also a whole concept.

Its hardly feasible in the system. Dragon Disciple relies on features that would surely end up class feats, class feats invested into becoming a sorcerer in the first place and so on.

[Secret Wizard]

> Does it fit that the character struggles with his dragon blood, experiences fits of rage and only learns with time to harness that blood, heck yes.

How does a Barbarian MC Sorcerer not fit this concept?

You'll have your rage and scaling Barbarian features to represent Draconic power – even a Dragon Totem if the option is there.

You'll have Sorcerous features to add in a spice of damage.

You'll have viability.

The fact that you don't need a perfectly catered PrC means that the guy who wants the same concept except Fey-based or Ghoul-based can also do his concept too.