Multiclassing Update

[Wormerine]

So everyone: what's your thoughts on the change of how multiclassing works? I welcome the change - the only contact with 3rd edition of D&D multiclassing was NWN2 and I did find the system overwhelming. A more restricted, but safe, way of doing it means I might actually multiclass.

 

However, I am interested what some of you minmaxers thing of it? Disappointed? Indifferent?

[draego]

i was also curious about the power vacuums with the original multi class system. I like to play rangers with pets and it always seemed weird to me that if you took just 1 or 2 ranger levels it would leave your pet overall level to low. (I was assuming the pet level mirrored ranger power level not actual character level otherwise you could take one ranger level  to get 20 level pet which would be op.) This would be tough because your pet would die prob instantly against higher level mobs or you would have to just hide your pet across the map so you didnt get bonded grief. I am sure there are other examples of the issue of non viable multi classes as originally designed but rangers are always on my mind.  

 

This new way definitely simplifies the issues and now you 'just' need to balance for multi class characters where both class will always end with the same power level.

Edited September 20, 2017 by draego

[CottonWolf]

The other edge case I thought of was a multiclassed monk who was terrible with their fists. It's less of mechanical issue than the ranger one, but punching is the monk thing. Not getting full fist progression would probably have meant that a 50/50 multiclass monk would be forced to use melee weapons at 20.

[algroth]

I think it's an improvement over the previous suggestion. Sure, it might restrict one a bit more but I think it more than makes up for it by making it all more accessible and comprehensible.

[Sedrefilos]

I tent not to overthink game mechanics. First approach sounded good, this one's sounds good too imo. I trust the dev team will deliver solid and fun gameplay. I liked skill trees too. Helps knowing what's gonna be next when you level, in contrast to the 1st game where you got surprise skills and had to make a choice. Better this way.

 

2012 - to date (and counting)... wow, this is indeed the new crpg golden age; for real, no?

Edited September 20, 2017 by Sedrefilos

[DexGames]

All I know is that I'll spend the First 24 Hours in that Character Creation xD

[JerekKruger]

Looks pretty good to me. It's certainly less flexible but I suspect it'll end up working better. The UI they showed looked great, and it looks like there are more abilities that build on themselves which is cool.

[AndreaColombo]

Skill trees are the bomb (and IIRC a feature Pathfinder: Kingmaker is also going to have.) I love to be able to plan my build ahead.

 

Oh, and UI, models, and VFX are incredibly spiffy

[PugPug]

How about a link to what the hell you are talking about

 

https://www.fig.co/campaigns/deadfire?update=480#updates

[Lephys]

All I know is that I'll spend the First 24 Hours in that Character Creation xD

 

Gonna speed through it, eh? 

[Enoch]

Thought experiment:  Least viable Multiclass/Subclass combination?

 

Possibly any combination of a Cipher with another caster, who will have to use weapon damage (i.e., not cast spells) to generate focus?  Or will spell damage generate focus as weapon damage did?  If it does, then Cipher-Wael Priest sounds bad-- Waelites lose access to "Punishment"-type Priest spells, which I assume means most of the direct-damage ones.

[Osvir]

Thoughts on the update? I think it's great stuff, looking forward to play around many hours with just character creation and various adventuring parties. Will be helpful in all out Chanter parties and giving oddball groups more viability as well as different roles yet still keep them thematic to whatever wonky idea I get.

I think I'm going to upgrade my Barbarian into either a Berserker/Devoted or Mage Slayer/Devoted. My plan was to go Single Class, but can't deny that Multi-Classing looks so much fun! But there is that off-shoot of not gaining maximum power level of Barbarian though hmm. We'll see, I'll probably do like I always do, create tons of characters until I find something I enjoy most.

Probably during Beta/Early Access.

[MortyTheGobbo]

I'm thinking about a Devoted/Streetfighter myself, depending on how valuable it'll be to use multiple weapons. In Pillars, I only ever swapped away from a greatsword to open a combat with an arbalest.

[Doppelschwert]

Looks pretty good to me. It's certainly less flexible but I suspect it'll end up working better. The UI they showed looked great, and it looks like there are more abilities that build on themselves which is cool.

 

This.

 

It will have all the expressive power it needs, while avoiding a much bigger powergap between characters.

[Osvir]

I'm thinking about a Devoted/Streetfighter myself, depending on how valuable it'll be to use multiple weapons. In Pillars, I only ever swapped away from a greatsword to open a combat with an arbalest.

Devoted are the ones that are devoted to one weapon (Which I presume is, One weapon, and not a Weapon Category). I think?

 

Did we get an answer on that on Tumblr?

 

Anyways, restricted to Single-Handed.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Osvir

[rjshae]

In theory, a multi-class pure spell caster with plenty of modal talents sounds like it could be a very versatile combination, but I suspect it is going to be a struggle to manage well during game play. The number of choices may become overwhelming, particularly for a new player.

[blotter]

I voted for 3e style multiclassing back in the old poll, but I don't particularly mind the change. I like how throwing certain subclasses into the mix allows for something fairly close to three class combinations, though I'm not sure when I'll get around to trying that out. Beguiler/Trickster stands out to me as a somewhat hyperfocused example of this, though the wording for Beguiler's subclass benefits suggests that the Trickster's illusion spells wouldn't be boosted as well.

 

Thought experiment:  Least viable Multiclass/Subclass combination?

 

Possibly any combination of a Cipher with another caster, who will have to use weapon damage (i.e., not cast spells) to generate focus?  Or will spell damage generate focus as weapon damage did?  If it does, then Cipher-Wael Priest sounds bad-- Waelites lose access to "Punishment"-type Priest spells, which I assume means most of the direct-damage ones.

 

They also mention Condemnation priest spells, and I could see Condemnation or Punishment being the damage-dealing category for priest spells. Or maybe damaging spells are somewhat split across multiple spell types; it's not hard to imagine Protection spells that also deal damage, for example, or possibly even Restoration spells that simultaneously damage targets.

 

 

[PugPug]

 

I'm thinking about a Devoted/Streetfighter myself, depending on how valuable it'll be to use multiple weapons. In Pillars, I only ever swapped away from a greatsword to open a combat with an arbalest.

Devoted are the ones that are devoted to one weapon (Which I presume is, One weapon, and not a Weapon Category). I think?

 

Did we get an answer on that on Tumblr?

 

 

I have to assume it is based on the Weapon Master prestige class. Only one weapon, not a category.

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

I'm thinking about a Devoted/Streetfighter myself, depending on how valuable it'll be to use multiple weapons. In Pillars, I only ever swapped away from a greatsword to open a combat with an arbalest.

Devoted are the ones that are devoted to one weapon (Which I presume is, One weapon, and not a Weapon Category). I think?

 

Did we get an answer on that on Tumblr?

 

Anyways, restricted to Single-Handed.

 

 

One weapon, yes. I think weapon categories are no longer a thing. Not being proficient in a weapon only means that you can't use its modal. Devoted takes it a step further with accuracy penalties.

[algroth]

stuff

 

On one hand: Nooo! What happened to your Lingchi portrait?

 

On the other hand: Is that a wicht? Pretty cool.

[PugPug]

 

Chanter

• Beckoner - Summoning invocations are cheaper and summon more creatures, but the creatures are weaker.
• Skald - Offensive invocations are cheaper and melee crits grant phrases, but all other invocations are more expensive.
• Troubadour - Phrase linger is 50% longer, Brisk Recitation as a modal that increases the rate of phrase elapses, but shortens linger. All invocations are more expensive.

 

 

Troubadour doesn't make sense to me. Linger is longer, but it's shorter if you use Brisk Recitiation (presumably subclass exclusive) for faster phrases.

 

But the faster phrases lose their purpose because invocations are more expensive.

 

So... everything about it is a wash? Linger is longer, but if you use the class ability it's also shorter and you get more phrases, but invocations cost more.

[blotter]

On one hand: Nooo! What happened to your Lingchi portrait?

 

 

On the other hand: Is that a wicht? Pretty cool.

 

Yeah, I had to change my avatar and the new one's from the Wicht's concept art. I've always had a fondness for those critters.

[AndreaColombo]

 

Troubadour doesn't make sense to me. Linger is longer, but it's shorter if you use Brisk Recitiation (presumably subclass exclusive) for faster phrases.

 

But the faster phrases lose their purpose because invocations are more expensive.

 

So... everything about it is a wash? Linger is longer, but if you use the class ability it's also shorter and you get more phrases, but invocations cost more.

 

The way I interpret it, higher invocation cost is the price they pay for longer linger, which is their signature class ability.

 

Optionally, they can use Brisk Recitation to sacrifice the extended linger duration in favor of faster phrase build-up when they want to use invocations.

 

Makes sense to me.

[PugPug]

 

 

Troubadour doesn't make sense to me. Linger is longer, but it's shorter if you use Brisk Recitiation (presumably subclass exclusive) for faster phrases.

 

But the faster phrases lose their purpose because invocations are more expensive.

 

So... everything about it is a wash? Linger is longer, but if you use the class ability it's also shorter and you get more phrases, but invocations cost more.

 

The way I interpret it, higher invocation cost is the price they pay for longer linger, which is their signature class ability.

 

Optionally, they can use Brisk Recitation to sacrifice the extended linger duration in favor of faster phrase build-up when they want to use invocations.

 

Makes sense to me.

 

 

So it's a subclass that you can switch off? How does that make sense?

[Osvir]

 

 

I'm thinking about a Devoted/Streetfighter myself, depending on how valuable it'll be to use multiple weapons. In Pillars, I only ever swapped away from a greatsword to open a combat with an arbalest.

Devoted are the ones that are devoted to one weapon (Which I presume is, One weapon, and not a Weapon Category). I think?

 

Did we get an answer on that on Tumblr?

 

Anyways, restricted to Single-Handed.

 

 

One weapon, yes. I think weapon categories are no longer a thing. Not being proficient in a weapon only means that you can't use its modal. Devoted takes it a step further with accuracy penalties.

 

What I mean is.... Short Swords is a "Category", is the Devoted devoted to all Short Swords? Or just one specific Short Sword in your inventory? Will it be impossible to sell it? If not, it should be, so no accidents occur. Like Boo, you couldn't pick him up from the inventory, *squeak!*