16 replies to this topic

[ramza]

In my own p&p sessions, I have noticed that noone multiclasses his or her character. Everyone sticks with his base class from the beginning to the end of the campaign. For example, I will stick with my human Mimic (see my other threads about this special class) while my friends will stick with their fighter or wizard characters. Some people will say that this is unoriginal, but I personally prefer it that way. If everyone started multiclassing and adding prestige classes, the whole game would become too messy with numbers and various calculations. Everyone stays with a specific character and makes the best out of him.

In order to add a little variety to the game, I decided to change a bit the 3.5E rules and replace the prestige classes by kits (yup, the way they work in BG2). Someone told me that the result would be exactly the same as with using a prestige class, but I do not agree with that claim (I will go into details for this in another post since I don't have the time to do this now). The main idea is that it will allow us to play "unique" characters starting from lv1 (I believe kits will be easier to use than prestige classes). You will no longer need to meet some prerequisites in order to take levels in those kits. However, the kits will have the same development table (from lv1 to lv20) as their respective core classes (ie: the assassin will have the same table as the rogue and the only difference will be that I will remove someof the rogues abilities to replace them with the assassin's ones).

Do you really use the multiclassing system? What do you thing about my idea?

Cheers.

[Rosbjerg]

In most games we often do as you .. and use the 'kits' instead of prestige classes ..

I multiclass if it's necessary .. just played as a lvl 8 Ranger lvl 4 Fighter recently (in a powergaming session), I think it was because I needed to get some extra feats.. and later a lvl 6 fighter lvl 1 mage lvl 5 Arcane Archer (very effective little bastard)

[Kaftan Barlast]

I dont play any games that have classes or careers, they're too restrictive.

[Laozi]

Very rarely, but I think twice, maybe

[Baneblade]

If everyone started multiclassing and adding prestige classes, the whole game would become too messy with numbers and various calculations. Everyone stays with a specific character and makes the best out of him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree.

Someone told me that the result would be exactly the same as with using a prestige class, but I do not agree with that claim.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're right, as the result would be better.
this however is subject to personal preferences.

The main idea is that it will allow us to play "unique" characters starting from lv1 (I believe kits will be easier to use than prestige classes). You will no longer need to meet some prerequisites in order to take levels in those kits. However, the kits will have the same development table (from lv1 to lv20) as their respective core classes (ie: the assassin will have the same table as the rogue and the only difference will be that I will remove someof the rogues abilities to replace them with the assassin's ones).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This will unbalance the game, but to each their own.

Do you really use the multiclassing system?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, It works.

And premade characters are made by original rules.

What do you thing about my idea?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's cra... Horrible. (not meant as an insult, just my opinion)

[J.E. Sawyer]

If the character concept calls for it, yes. I've only played one multi-class character in 3E/3.5: a human fighter/rogue. He was a pirate, and going the multi-class route helped him have the skills I believed he should have.

[Reveilled]

When the character concept calls for it, yes. I don't get the chance to be a player much (since I'm the DM), but I fondly remember my valiant Knight of the Realm who was an Aristocrat/Fighter. (the Aristocrat class was changed to balance it to regular PC classes).

As the DM, multiclass NPCs come up only occasionally,because there's not much point in having a multiclass NPC when you can have two single class NPCs, unless having just one adds to the story somehow.

[Darque]

I mix and match as I want on a whim

Though I'd probably play a single classed character if it were the new Warlock class.

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

In d20 Modern it assumes that the player is going to multiclass and promotes it. In it you have basic generalized classes that have ten levels, advance classes that are more focused than basic classes which have 10 levels, and prestige classes that are very focused that have 5 levels.

In the current game that I play, which is a variant of Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved, I have a character who has 3 levels of Mage Blade, 3 levels of Human, as described in Unearthed Arcana from WotC, and 1 level of Runechild.

A fairly effective character who uses science, healing, and crafting has his main skills. Yeah, he is pretty much the group's cleric.

[Aponez]

Until now only played single classes, multi only if I find any class "interesting"

[The Merciful]

Since I restarted playing in PnP I've had two characters: a ranger/druid half-elf in 2nd edition AD&D, and a wookie scout/soldier in Star Wars d20. I quess its because I like to have as much flexibility as possible, so my charcter has a lot to do and is useful both in combat and out of it. I'm not very atracted to standing idle when playing...

Multiclassing also makes them much more my characters for me.

[Loof]

well not that I have managed to play much PnP in the last 5 years or so.
But when I did play more regularly we didn't use classbased systems so no I don't generaly multiclass.
But if I was forced to use a classbased system I would probably multiclass in a vain atempt to escape from the steriotypes...

[Jorian Drake]

I'm using multiclassing, prestige classes, gestalts, templates and everything else !

Why? Becouse they make more unique characters, and none of the other players really know what to expect from you (this is most important if you play villain party), or you can make your char. more variable(like: you're an Rogue/Wizard, and you got in an Antimagic field. Now you get your knife or bow, and you get more personal. )

[jcrapes]

In the star wars I am running I encourage prestige classes. So far 2 out of 3 have stated they are setting up their characters to prestige.

[Alkera]

Have been playing in a quite slow D&D campaign since 3rd Edition was new, and now have a character that is Bard 6, Fighter 4, Virtuoso 7.

Yes, it is very far from a powerful build, but a lot of fun as a backup character that can work as enchanter mage, healer, support mage, frontline fighter (!) and information gatherer.

With feats, skills and a lot of multiclassing I don't really feel that classes limit the players. Actually, most classless systems seem to lead to people building characters according to just a few archetypes anyway, except that they can sound a bit more snobbish about their creativity...

[Cantousent]

To build on Alkera's post, it seems to me that a single-class character need not be a "stereotype." What stereotypes a character is the style of the player.

Some players want a stereotype at any rate. They want to play the stereotypical half-orc barbarian who rushes into battle. They want to play the halfling thief who skulks around in the shadows and steals things. As long as the player has fun and the group has fun, then that style is no less valid than playing a one legged, near-blind half-fairy, half-dragon with two levels of street urchin, five levels of food critic, and three levels of poser.

...And a character will be differentiated as much as the player wants him to be, whether he is single class, multi-class, or classless.

I rarely multi-class my characters, but I am currently playing a level 1 thief/level 5 mage in one campaign. In the campaign I DM, the players have all opted for single classes. One has stated, however, he'd like to play a prestige class. I hate prestige classes. Some players love them. I want the game to be fun. The players win.

[EnderAndrew]

I dont play any games that have classes or careers, they're too restrictive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Buy this person a cookie.

I'll play a class based system if I have to, but I really prefer not to.