Multi Classing

OK I have been looking up stuff on multi-classing for 4th edition and have a few points and thoughts.

1. Currently you can take a feat and "dabble in a second class but never a third" *(PHB pg. 208)
a. This gives you basically the ability to use a feat to get another skill and an encounter power that is at will for another class.

2. I think having the ability limitations by level is plenty of hindrance for multi-classing.
b. For instance you can only have 2 at will powers at any level (except for humans who have 3) so why should it matter if at level 1 I am a wizard with 2 at will powers of a wizard, then at level 2 I chose warlock as a class I STILL can only have 2 at will powers so I can have one from wizard and one from warlock or take 2 from warlock or whatever. I don't think this unbalances anything. The only thing that may be tricky is the class powers and I believe it would be quite possible to create a house rule about this as well i.e. you can only have one class power at a time for your "Main" class etc.

Please discus...

As far as i can tell they wanted to almost get rid of the multi-class, after reading like optimization forums and the like I can see why. It was really easy to "break" certain aspects of the game and classes by combining them and whatnot. I think the goal here was to offer it as something unique but not overpowered. In the case below of a warlock and wizard from the brief research I have done it seems like the reason they do it like that is if you could have at-wills from both and potentiall take like the "best" of both and get some pretty hardcore combos. I don't think it's a good idea to have whatever a wizard that can control and DoT enemies or a Warrior that can mark with spells and whatever else you could come up with.

The main point of the multiclass in this is to exactly as it said "dabble" in a class not be part of it so to speak. Now the good thing is you take a multiclass and count as that class for other feats and paragon etc I think that right there could be pretty solid.

My answer on it is that it stays as is unless players can all come up with some good arguments as to why to change the rules. I dont think we have enough play time at level 2 to decide if that is to much, also as DM I dont know the limits of monsters. Haha also if that rule ever WERE in it could allow for some crazy NPCs that might be overpowered as well

For what it's worth, Jon, I agree with you in principle. Not that this matters, since it seems like Dean has smacked you down like the bitch you are.

It's probably a good idea NOT to mess with the rules for the time being, at least until we have a better handle on them. As Dean pointed out, the WotC guys generally know what they're doing, and if they don't want the mix-and-match powers from different classes it's probably because they foresaw that there were potentially troublesome combinations of powers that would break the game. Personally, I'm hoping that they come up with some kind of better system in future products, but for the time being it seems like a good idea to focus ourselves on testing the limits of the ruleset as written.

Yeah you guys are right it does seem a bit too soon to mess with it. I just keep seeing certain things that seem silly to me. For instance if you have 13 STR as a cleric it would be silly NOT to take the Warlord multi-class feat as it would give you another heal that does the same as your current healing word AND another skill, and vice versa for the Warlord if you are the main healer. It just seems like they turned Multi-Classing into just another feat to get a different power.

Yeah I mean I know what you are saying like the feat of a multi-class gives you more than just a standard feat. I mean I guess that just falls back into the realm of roleplay versus powerplay. Like having to figure out why your guy is a fighter and a paladin but didn't take up the paladin altogether (in your case it worked with the story but just as a hypothetical). I still haven't scoured the low level feats so I can't comment on if there is better choices etc.

I guess just see what they put in for PHB2 or whatever supplement comes out. I guess the other thing is they took out the PC losing ground in levels to make up for the loss of multi-class power. Because generally those multi-class guys would get double growing pains before and be weaker than other party members for a few more levels unless they took the multiclass later in "life". So I guess the balance was take that out so the multi-class isn't as powerful now.

Multi-classing has always been a problem for D&D. The 1e system was horrible and stupid, and the 2e system was not much better. In 3e you had some combinations that led to serious deficiencies (especially for spellcasting classes) if you made certain choices on the one hand, but also had the potential to become ridiculously broken in the hands of a savvy player. It was also really complicated, with a lot of room for customization (especially when you started sprinkling in prestige classes) but also a lot more work. It looks like in 4e they tried to step away from the concept entirely and focus on the "iconic" classes that have been there since the beginning. As I've mentioned, I think that this is a shame, especially since from the beginning of sword and sorcery fantasy there have been characters that straddle the line between two "classes." But, simply from a design perspective, I think it works for the system, and it probably avoids a lot of headaches that might come from cherry-picking amongst a huge pool of powers.

I always wanted to try one of the games out there that do not have a class system. For example, there's a superhero game called Mutants & Masterminds that simply assigns every character a number of "power points" per level. The player can then purchase his stuff in any way he sees fit. So a +1 attack bonus would be 3 points, +1 to Defense (equivalent to AC) is 2 points, 4 skill points cost 1 power point, a feat costs 2 points, etc. The bulk of these you wind up spending on special superhero powers, which are analogous to various D&D class features. It was an interesting system that I had wanted to explore but never got the chance because the planned game fell through. Anyway. I hope you have enjoyed the preceding random digression. The end.

I think multi-classing with the Role system in play just doesn't work that well which is why it is extremely limiting. If you let Mutli classing go then you coud end up being a Defender/Striker or a Controller/Leader which would become very very powerful and be combining the core elements of these roles. Essentially you could break the game just with the over powerdness of having multiple roles being encompassed by one player. I gaurantee they will exapnd multi classing in the future, it seems like they just made itunderwhelming for now without a better idea to get the product out.