Multiclassing ideas

[Baron Pampa]

Hello!

 Multi and dual classing was a strange thing in IE games. On the one hand dual and multi classes were usually stronger than single classes(Fighter 7/sth anyone?), on the other they brought a lot of variety and fun possibilities into the game.

Currently, the classes of PoE are well distinguished both in terms of their feeling and their role in the team, and at the same time every single one has it's way of pulling its weight in a team, so they are all fun. However, a very meaningful factor in class design is it's level one ability, i.e. rogue's sneak attack. Any attempt at combining two or more classes would have to bring a fraction of the first level powers to the character, without making the character useless or significantly more powerfull than single classes. Sounds like it's not a trivial task.

 I remember that Josh Sawyer said that he was thinking about ways of introducing multiclassing in PoE 2. Do you think it's possible and viable to introduce it to the current system? Do you have ideas on how to do that in a sensible way? Would you like it in the game(A rhetorical question, I guess;>)?

[Fiaryn]

Honestly, I'd say it's more headache than it's worth and a waste of development resources. I'd rather emphasize making each class fun to play and feature dense in its own right.

 

At a maximum, I'd like to see 4E style multiclass feats where you pick up a knack or two from <insert class>, as is the case right now.

[PugPug]

Character builds are a big part of the fun for RPGs. I'd love some more in-depth multiclassing.

[Heijoushin]

Hmmmm... Although I have pleasant memories of multi-classing, I'm starting to think it won't work with the current system. After all, any class can already use all the weapons and armour. A multiclass in POE would just be a strange mish-mash of abilities. 

For more character creation variety, I would prefer that they make more sub-classes. For example, more priest or paladin types with more unique abilities. Or different monk schools etc.

Or just more unique abilities in general. 

[MaxQuest]

Do you think it's possible and viable to introduce it to the current system? Do you have ideas on how to do that in a sensible way? Would you like it in the game(A rhetorical question, I guess;>)?

 

Hmm. Multi-classing is usually a nice thing to have. Loved it in nwn and even more so in nwn2 with kaedrin pack. There was 'so much room for activities'. Although it usually resulted in a huge gap between optimized-multi-class build and a simple single-classes one. And imho the point of multi-classing should be adding more playstyles, different in ways they are played, but not so different in power. 

 

As for PoE.. I can't imagine multi-classing the way nwn did it. We already have access to all talents and item types. So it will be a more plain approach like: - you don't like priests' spells of rank 7? - then instead of priest lvl 14, you can make a character with 12 levels in priest, 1 level in paladin and 1 in chanter. Or 12 in wizard + 2 in cipher. Or 1 in rogue + 1 in barbarian + 12 in warrior (basically a warrior with carnage and x1.5 sneak attack)

 

Although lets be honest: this can't be balanced in the current system.

Edited February 16, 2016 by MaxQuest

[anameforobsidian]

I forget where, but JE Sawyer expressed interest in multiclassing.  It could certainly lead to some interesting builds, but there's also the danger of everyone going to the same obvious optimal builds like DnD:Online.  (What you're playing a rogue 2 / paladin 12; surely that's because you wanted to play a redeemed character and not because you wanted evasion...)

 

Mind you, I'm not opposed per se.  However, the classes are quite unique.  There's less of a need for it than in BG, because weapons, stats, and talents are already open to most builds.

Edited February 16, 2016 by anameforobsidian

[Rooksx]

The problem with implementing meaningful multiclassing is that it's difficult to balance. A lot of those BG and NWN multiclass builds were seriously overpowered.

[Elric Galad]

I think not implementing Multiclass was a wise decision from Obsidian. The level of entropy that it brings to the balance would have been too high. This should never be priority to create original and interesting mechanics.

 

But I admit I miss it. I would have liked to create a barbarian tribe party (with bi-classed clerics, ranger, etc...), a rogue murderous sect or a school of magic.

 

The other threat coming with Multiclass is the risk of diluating the classes uniqueness. No character should be able to do everything.

 

For Gary Gygax sake, it would be ok to limit Multiclassing to 1 base class and 1 secondary (maybe 2) like in Guild Wars. I don't want to see "Jack of all trades, master of powergaming" build in PoE2...

 

PoE system starts becoming robust. Furthermore, class levelling follows a few patterns. (D&D 2e or 3e levelling was probably created by a Slaad somewhere in limbo realm.). So I think it could be possible to introduce balanced powergaming.

 

Basically, each class comes with a lvl 1 ability, often very powerful (sneak attack, soul whip, pet...) and scales by getting EITHER spells OR abilities. (Chanters don't have level 1 ability but 2 kinds of spells.)

 

I feel that it won't be so hard to imagine a more modular approach, with possibilities to choose spells or abilities from a couple of other class as you progress.

 

For me, the key problems are:

-the level 1 feature that should never be cumulated (sneak carnage. Ahem). One should get only 1 level 1 feature from his base class.

-access to high level ability. A fighter6/wizard6 restricted to level 3 spells might not be so good. The same accessing level 6 spell would be OP. But if he had a single lvl 5 spell ? Won't it be okay ?

 

I really hope to see this include in PoE 2. A mod for PoE would be a wonderful way to investigate this...

Edited February 22, 2016 by Elric Galad

[DKDArtagnan]

I love multiclassing in 3.0 and 3.5 - but I don't think the current designers would want to provide that kind of fun.

 

Seems to me PoE was largely designed around taking most of the fun away from D&D and turning it into an overly balanced and needlessly fiddly system.

[Rooksx]

Multiclassing in 3.0 and 3.5 was just broken. What does overly balanced even mean? Playing build that can slaughter its way through a game is fun for 5 minutes but then gets very boring.

[HawkSoft]

But I admit I miss it. I would have liked to create a barbarian tribe party (with bi-classed clerics, ranger, etc...), a rogue murderous sect or a school of magic.

My view is that *barbarian* should not be a class but a background.

The (few useful) barbarian talents should be rolled into Fighters as an alternative to the mainly defensive talents they have now,

[DKDArtagnan]

Multiclassing in 3.0 and 3.5 was just broken. What does overly balanced even mean? Playing build that can slaughter its way through a game is fun for 5 minutes but then gets very boring.

 

Overly balanced means too much balance and too little diversity.

 

The thing about "broken" builds is that they take time to find - and the journey can be great fun. It's rarely about the destination. Some of us enjoy the strategy of developing a strong combination of classes and race, with the right stats, feats, gear and skills. To me, it's rich flavor on top of all the other good things in a solid RPG.

 

I think some people forget that D&D is a very, very old and established system. Any system of sufficient complexity will end up exploited and "broken" - but it takes time to find the holes. I don't have to bring up Cipher and Monk in PoE, do I?

 

The difference is that finding a perfect multiclass build in 3.0 and 3.5 is much harder and a lot more fun. Building a powerful character in PoE is pretty straightforward in comparison.

 

Personally, I love coming up with unique builds in my RPGs - and the more the better. The fact that some builds end up being too powerful is of no concern to me, because I either enjoy it or find another build.

 

The story, puzzles, NPCs and quests don't go away because I have a powerful character.

Edited February 24, 2016 by DKDArtagnan

[Skladzien]

 

But I admit I miss it. I would have liked to create a barbarian tribe party (with bi-classed clerics, ranger, etc...), a rogue murderous sect or a school of magic.

My view is that *barbarian* should not be a class but a background.

The (few useful) barbarian talents should be rolled into Fighters as an alternative to the mainly defensive talents they have now,

 

Since very long time Barbarian and Fighters are in RPGs different classes (i think Warhammer 1 ed already make them different ones), and so are they in cRPGs. While Fighters are always more disciplined and in every system they rely on defense barbarians are wild warriors relying on raw power and damage. I won't touch that. Barbarian imo has nothing to do with warrior classes. It is like Warrior=Legionnaire, Barbarian=well... Barbarian.

[PIP-Clownboy]

Rather have Prestige class and/or Kits. 

[HawkSoft]

Since very long time Barbarian and Fighters are in RPGs different classes (i think Warhammer 1 ed already make them different ones), and so are they in cRPGs. While Fighters are always more disciplined and in every system they rely on defense barbarians are wild warriors relying on raw power and damage. I won't touch that. Barbarian imo has nothing to do with warrior classes. It is like Warrior=Legionnaire, Barbarian=well... Barbarian.

I know that and think its wrong.

In my view the original D&D did it better with fighters and berserkers either of whom could be from a barbarian (non-soap using) background.

 

(Roman) Legionnaires were drilled and issued with uniform equipment but were an attacking force, they did not lurk behind their shield and wait for their opponents to die of boredom

 

 

Historically *barbarian* was used in a lazy shorthand for people who were different.

[JJGee]

I really don't like the idea of having dual/multiclassing in PoE. The classes are pretty flexible as they are, especially disregarding metagaming, and allow for a lot of variety within any given class. I love having a definitive starting point for a character, yet being allowed to develop that character in almost any direction.

 

My main party had a Wizard whose background was Scientist, and her abilities were focused so that she was especially effective in fighting Spirits and Vessels - in other words, she was an "undead hunter", these walking corpses and lingering ghosts being also the field of her study. In terms of weaponry, she focused on swords (with one-handed combat style) and crossbows. She was essentially a fully fledged warrior, except she was a Wizard. If she had been a Fighter/Wizard, it wouldn't have felt nearly as original, and it would have over-emphasized the combat skills - she was still a Scientist first.

 

What I'm trying to say is, I don't see how Pillars of Eternity needs a system like dualclassing or multiclassing. There's already room to develop much more diverse characters than in a vast amount of class-based role-playing games, and I feel it would just turn a free-form, unrestrictive system into something binary and clunky.

[Skladzien]

I really don't like the idea of having dual/multiclassing in PoE. The classes are pretty flexible as they are, especially disregarding metagaming, and allow for a lot of variety within any given class. I love having a definitive starting point for a character, yet being allowed to develop that character in almost any direction.

 

My main party had a Wizard whose background was Scientist, and her abilities were focused so that she was especially effective in fighting Spirits and Vessels - in other words, she was an "undead hunter", these walking corpses and lingering ghosts being also the field of her study. In terms of weaponry, she focused on swords (with one-handed combat style) and crossbows. She was essentially a fully fledged warrior, except she was a Wizard. If she had been a Fighter/Wizard, it wouldn't have felt nearly as original, and it would have over-emphasized the combat skills - she was still a Scientist first.

 

What I'm trying to say is, I don't see how Pillars of Eternity needs a system like dualclassing or multiclassing. There's already room to develop much more diverse characters than in a vast amount of class-based role-playing games, and I feel it would just turn a free-form, unrestrictive system into something binary and clunky.

Well said. Due to lack of class-restriction PoE has it's own multi-classing mechanics. Like Melee-wizards, or blunderbuss Ciphers.

[why]

Rather have Prestige class and/or Kits.

Booo! I would rather they simply go classless before introducing multiclassing. That way, if you want a so called prestige class, create that class with your own vision rather than one that has a completely rigid path with minimal options so you have more 'freedom.'

 

As far as the fun of dual classing in the IE games (and 2nd edition altogether) is simple, there was no compelling reason not to take fighter, especially as levels went higher. Every other stat has 3-18, but somebody thought it would be a great idea to introduce 'exceptional strength' which meant that instead of incremental bumps for the eight or so points above baseline you had a tremendous increase in one stat. Then, to top it off, you get twelve extra hit points in your very first level because you used d10 plus 4 for constitution (whereas non-martial classes received a max of plus 2). Now, I'm not saying everyone rerolled to 18/00 strength and 18 constitution, but the advantage was huge even if you didn't get completely perfect scores.

 

I like the way that Pillars does the classes. If anything, like I said, I would even maybe prefer classless. I don't really hate prestige classes per se, but I would rather they arise organically from the setting and be uncovered and offered as a result of questing rather than a set goal identified straight away. One is an over engineered Monte Haul's dream and the other grows out of the campaign and reinforces the story.

[Rooksx]

DKD, you're overlooking the diversity PoE allows for with individual class builds. They've done an impressive job in designing a system that permits multiple viable ways to build any particular class. Just look at some of the builds in the character builds sub-forum or elsewhere on the net.

 

Oh and 3.0 builds like 19 Sorc/1 Paladin or 16 Cleric/4 Fighter were hardly difficult to figure out.

[Baron Pampa]

And here I was thinking that most people would like to see multiclassing introduced . I must strongly agree that current system is really flexible, with design goals achieved, at least those that I remember. And that means no trap builds, so every class, race and stat distribution is viable and fun, making each attribute meaningful for every class and allowing for a range diversity of builds within any given class. At the same time POTD mode is challenging enough, at least for me. If only level experience threshold was exponential...but that's offtopic. Those things make up for lack multiclassing, but I'm still interested if you have any ideas about sensible ways of doing it, if it had to be done for some reason?

[Karrade]

I know the soloist and the power gamers both often enjoy multiclassing, which is worth mentioning.

I don't use it much however in most of these game types, at least when a party is present.

[Abel]

I love muticlassing. I definitely want it. I'm a huge fan of Priest/warriors . Actually, i'm currently trying to emulate a Priest/warrior in my current playthrough. I chose a priest class, and then picked only weapon and martial abilities (currently lvl . But the fact is: my priest will never be the suboptimal fighter i hoped for, but is the suboptimal priest i anticipated. In the end, i missed some fighter abilities Eder can pick. It would be far more usefull and fun to me than this minor constant recovery i don't care at all about (since it doesn't help accuracy, tanking, or whatever a fighter could do depending of its build, according to my playstyle).

 

Maybe, a system where each class is limited in their multiclassing? BG did this. Not quite balanced yet, but it was a good start. Rather than picking 5 priest level and 3 warrior level, maybe creating cross class abilities, or allowing to pick a few actual warrior abilities to the priest would help. I'm unsure how to do this with a fighter/wizard though.

[Messier-31]

Any day now...

 

2015-03-16

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71014-dual-class-multi-class-or-similar/?do=findComment&comment=1584660

 

2014-03-20

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65829-update-74-the-mob-rulers-wizards-and-druids-and-our-partnership-with-paradox/page-9?do=findComment&comment=1432180

[boffmoffet]

I would say balancing 11 single classes in combat in relation to one another is difficult enough. For systems like dungeons and dragons where the rule set can be adapted to an infinite number of scenarios and possibility that can play themselves out for YEARS and YEARS, its worth taking the time to come up with multi class systems. For finite experiences within the context of a video game the amount of time it would take to balance a multi class system simply is not worth the design and development time.

[Luzeryn]

For more character creation variety, I would prefer that they make more sub-classes. For example, more priest or paladin types with more unique abilities. Or different monk schools etc.

Or just more unique abilities in general.

Yep, more animal companions for the ranger too.

 

I've never really cared about multiclasses, I prefer to have each party member specialized in something. Honestly I'd find more interesting having a completely new class than multiclassing (and it would be way easier to do too).

Edited March 15, 2016 by Luzeryn