Huh? When did multiclassing become a bad thing? Its not bad, its called 'diversity'! I like multiclassing, because thieves are ok, but sometimes you really need a few more hitpoints with a few levels in fighter. And a larger weapon selection too. ^_^
Well, there is a certain school of thought that holds that it is somehow always preferable to pick a single class (or one or two classes) and stick with it, rather than to spread out over a variety of classes. I think the main argument is that many classes are heavily "front-loaded," and so you get all the goodies of a class in the first few levels.
This was occasionally true in 3.0, particularly in regards to the ranger and the barbarian; but it is patently false in 3.5 (and one of the major things they worked to change in the revision).
Ah, yeah, I was about to say... I was just curious. I mean, most of the uber cool stuff comes later on with classes now. I mean, multi-classed mages are especially Underpowered with spells unless you've got overlapping spells and what not. Oh, anyways, yeah, don't listen to the nay sayers. Go for it!
One of the reasons I prefer the Spycraft system to d20 Modern is, I hate being this shallow, that the names for the classes are just so bland in Modern. Fast Hero? Tough Hero? Charismatic Hero? Just doesn't have the ring of such greats as D&D's Paladin and Ranger or Spycraft's Soldier and Infiltrator, or Star Wars' Fringer or Noble. No point I guess, just needed to get it off my chest.
Comments 4
Reply
This was occasionally true in 3.0, particularly in regards to the ranger and the barbarian; but it is patently false in 3.5 (and one of the major things they worked to change in the revision).
-The Gneech
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment