Jump to content

Care to guess the names of the other multiclasses?


Recommended Posts

 

Chanter/Priest - Liturgist (I think Hierophant's actually a better fit for this combination where the etymology of the term is concerned - showing/revealing what is holy seems a close match for the concept of a priest who also brings stories to life, after all - but I've already seen it here in various capacities)

 

I think both of these are fantastic names for Ch/Pr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Druid + Barbarian = Beast

​Druid + Fighter = Gardeneer

​Druid + Paladin = Horticult

​Druid + Priest = Apothecate

​Druid + Cipher = Shaman

​Druid + Chanter = Song Bird

​Druid + Ranger = Keeper

​Druid + Rogue = Prowler

​Druid + Wizard = Sage

Sage as in the herb? (^_^)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Chanter/Priest - Liturgist (I think Hierophant's actually a better fit for this combination where the etymology of the term is concerned - showing/revealing what is holy seems a close match for the concept of a priest who also brings stories to life, after all - but I've already seen it here in various capacities)

 

I think both of these are fantastic names for Ch/Pr.

 

 

Thanks. Another route that occurs to me is focusing on speaking in tongues, but "Glossolalist" sounds a bit awkward to me.

 

 

-snip-

 

I like these..

 

 

Glad to hear it, though I still consider "Transcendalist" to be overly cumbersome as a title. To be honest, I simply forgot to edit it out from my cut/paste when I posted. Still, it is a combination that seems likely to merge mortification of the flesh with the cultivation mental powers as part of a shared assertion of the mind/will's supremacy over the body; I just couldn't think of a more elegant way to express that.

Edited by blotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dont believe they are gonna be giving anything a high tech name.

 

If Brute and Battlemage are anything to go on...

 

 

Theyll be like witch stalker knight shaman things...

 

A taste of something... but not an avalanche of meaning. Something plausible and non commital.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A taste of something... but not an avalanche of meaning. Something plausible and non commital.

 

All of the examples you gave come with associated meanings and characterizations, and it's hard to avoid committing to particular characterizations with naming schemes regardless of how basic they (I'm looking at you, "Brute"). They do seem to be favoring the low-hanging fruit where it's available, but not all combinations are that simple to distill into straightforward one to two-word titles. We've already seen them get more abstract in their reasoning with Avenger, which combines no obvious traits from either the Rogue or Druid, and we're likely to see more of that as they work their way through less obvious combinations.

 

Whatever they end up with, though, I really hope that they provide with the ability to rename them. It seems likely to spare them a lot of griping from people who think the names are too overwrought, too simple, or just nonsensical for whatever reason.

 

 

 

Or Blackguard

 

That's definitely not a non-commital one by any stretch, and actually does a pretty good job of demonstrating how even simple titles can easily lock things into a particular direction where multiclass characterization is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since rogue already has the scallion ring blackguard carries it over ofc

 

Same with wizard rogue trickster

 

Except you can easily be a Kind Wayfarer/Rogue who's neither treacherous nor cruel. Or a wizard/rogue doesn't play tricks. There aren't many real no-brainers for multiclass names if you truly want to make them non-committal in regards to meaning.

 

 

 

general word blackguard

 

It doesn't make a difference. The meanings aren't all that far apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Or Blackguard

 

That's definitely not a non-commital one by any stretch, and actually does a pretty good job of demonstrating how even simple titles can easily lock things into a particular direction where multiclass characterization is concerned.

 

 

Yes, that's why I went with:

 

Paladin + Rogue = Commando

 

 It seems like zealous plus guile (or committed plus covert) and nothing else. The character could be zealous for any cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackguard means "low, contemptable person". That's not a lovable rogue we're talkable about. Even if it doesn't go into specifics like demon worship (which isn't required for D&D blackguards either) it clearly indicates a person who'll do just about anything if they see an advantage to it.

 

 

 

Dirty TRICKS.

 

Or they're just pragmatic tactics in combat. Trickster has implications that go well beyond that.

Edited by blotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackguard means "low, contemptable person". That's not a lovable rogue we're talkable about. Even if it doesn't go into specifics like demon worship (which isn't required for D&D blackguards either) it clearly indicates a person who'll do just about anything if they see an advantage to it.

 

Dirty TRICKS.

Or they're just pragmatic tactics in combat. Trickster has implications that go well beyond that.

Actually... peaceful contact with an evil outsider is a prerequisite for the blackguard class. They also get imp pets and.... guess what.... SNEAK ATTACK

 

 

But anyhoooooo i said i didnt mean dnd blackguard ;)

Edited by Leeuwenhart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Actually... peaceful contact with an evil outsider is a prerequisite for the blackguard class. They also get imp pets and.... guess what.... SNEAK ATTACK

 

Peaceful contact isn't the same as worship and ordering around a fiendish thrall is pretty much the opposite. I'm not sure why sneak attack matters in this conversation unless you've decided that you were basing the multiclass title on the D&D class after all.

 

As for the point about definitions, I think that if you do look into it, you'll find that rogue has a far greater range than blackguard in regards to its moral characterizations, from ruthless criminal to lovable scamp. Regardless, I think I've spent enough time harping on this particular subject. You'll agree with me or you won't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One problem with making subclasses is they will never satisfy the masses when it comes to which subclasses are implemented. Kits and prestige classes had their fans and their haters between 2nd and 3rd editions. I'm interested in seeing where this goes but ultimately I think I will feel this endeavor will be incomplete as there is no way they satisfy everyone's wants and desires for the gajillion types of subclasses we can brew in the cauldron of forums, let alone satisfy my own.

 

And yet..... part of can't me wait for this to be released so I can both enjoy it immensely no matter what subclasses are chosen and at the same time bitch about how the made all the wrong choices. Sorry in advance for my bipolarism/advanced years 'manopause'.

No matter which fork in the road you take I am certain adventure awaits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Actually... peaceful contact with an evil outsider is a prerequisite for the blackguard class. They also get imp pets and.... guess what.... SNEAK ATTACK

Peaceful contact isn't the same as worship and ordering around a fiendish thrall is pretty much the opposite. I'm not sure why sneak attack matters in this conversation unless you've decided that you were basing the multiclass title on the D&D class after all.

 

As for the point about definitions, I think that if you do look into it, you'll find that rogue has a far greater range than blackguard in regards to its moral characterizations, from ruthless criminal to lovable scamp. Regardless, I think I've spent enough time harping on this particular subject. You'll agree with me or you won't.

 

And the lightbulb goes to==> you ;)

 

He finally gets it.

 

Carry on my fellow player :)

 

Btw. Thanks for the convo.

I was trying to push out a log the size and structure of the Rock of Giblraltar.

And i was losing that battle.

 

You distracted me long enough so i could be like Elsa and... let...it....gooo...

 

Hahaha.

True Story!

 

Was fun. Thanks for help. And thanks for the like of my other post!

 

Harp on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...