Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TwistedShadow 01-06-06, 10:00 PM	We have a new DM coming in for a new campaign who I have been working with for a few weeks at building my character, Tweaking background and going over possible builds of cross classing and feats and such. So I create a very Potent Build of Rogue4/Marshal4/Psychic Warrior4/Thief Acrobat4/Occult Slayer4 Which when the character somewhat handicaped in early levels but by 20th level left him with Base attack of 16, and all of his base saves at 11 The DM then set down rules that prevented characters from being cross classed more then once per 10 character levels and included limitations that only made cross classing an option if one of you classes was your racial favored class Now i know that I have a certain flair for cross classing, and it can rightly be said that I can mini-max with the best of them. But I keep it within the confines of the character concept. this character for example was intended to be a jack of all trades in a group predominated by Arcane and Divine spell casters. and the character was supposed to be a sort of traveling vagabond, going from here to there picking up all kinds of different skills but never really settling on one thing. which is why he doesn't have more then 4 levels in any class because he keeps moving on to something else and though he has Psychic ability he has never really spent much time developing it which is the reason for the psychic warrior But I thought I would see what others thought about it. what kind of limits if any should be placed on character cross classing?
inferno731 01-06-06, 10:08 PM	i think anycross classing is fine, but for a new DM it can be stressful. I drove my DM nuts by cherrypicking( 1 lvl of each class)
ressurrector 01-06-06, 10:14 PM	it's easy to make a character concept for a build. it's a bit harder to start with the concept, then get the build. IMHO, I think if you multiclass while using PrCs, you should finish one PrC before you start the next, also if you have base class levels, you should gain them 1:1 or 2:3, possibly other rates, but only if the DM allows, it makes sense (like a monk sorc, can't take any more monk levels till ascetic mage), or some other good reason. It's within the DMs purview to accept or deny any character concepts you can come up with.
ScipioX 01-06-06, 10:58 PM	PrC's initially specifically required DM approval. While that attitude has relaxed a bit, I'm pretty sure that putting restrictions on PrC's doesn't really qualify as a house rule. Personally I think haveing lots of classes makes for more interesting characters. But if the DM doesn't want it in his game, then you're just SOL.
IceFractal 01-07-06, 01:01 AM	Wait, do you mean that the DM was working with you on the character, knew that it multiclassed the way it did, and then decided to limit multiclassing? And he couldn't mention this to you before you started working on it? Because if so, that's pretty lame. But maybe I misunderstood the situation. But on to the build - I don't really see any problem with it, it's a pretty consistent character with an even level spread. Frankly, I think the DM is over-limiting things, perhaps because he wants to keep things simple, perhaps because he's a control freak. If he's a reasonable DM, maybe you can point out that your character's multiclassing is not cherry picking or inconsistent, but rather an logical part of the character's personality - jack of all trades, but not focused on any one. If he ends up being a jerk about it though, then just play a straight Druid, and own the game. Rampage around all day outmeleeing the fighters and outsummoning the summoners. Maybe he'll realize that a little multiclassing isn't the worst thing in the world.
Kalanth 01-07-06, 01:55 AM	IceFractal is right, if the DM was helping you to develop the character and then laid out his multiclassing rules after the fact, he basically screwed you without a word. If it was my game, I would have told you upfront that you can't have any more than 4 total classes (core or PrC). I would contact the DM and ask him if he could make a change since he was working with you before hand, but then again, he might have thought (incorectly from how I understand it) that you were going to do this concept with less classes.
ressurrector 01-07-06, 02:10 AM	IceFractal is right, if the DM was helping you to develop the character and then laid out his multiclassing rules after the fact, he basically screwed you without a word. If it was my game, I would have told you upfront that you can't have any more than 4 total classes (core or PrC). I would contact the DM and ask him if he could make a change since he was working with you before hand, but then again, he might have thought (incorectly from how I understand it) that you were going to do this concept with less classes. Actually, it sounds like the DM had a rule about multiclassing, and the poster is trying to get around it so he can play his 4/4/4/4/4 build. If your DM has rules against this sort of build, try to explain to him why you made the build, and if he still says no either build a conforming character or don't play.
Otto the Bugbear 01-07-06, 08:07 AM	This quote sums it up nicely. Not 100% applicable to this thread, but close enough. the most powerful way to disprove that is to play a C.o.D. (Cleric or Druid). Noncore material will not be necessary unless you are going for pure overkill (Draconic Wildshape? Divine Metamagic?). So by all means, if you must win that argument, take you C.o.D. to town. Annihilate the opposition. Make the NPCs and other players scream "Oh no, it's C.o.D.zilla!!!!!" in badly dubbed English. Breathe radioactive fire. Knock down buildings. Then stomp out of the burning Tokyo that is the ruins of the game and swim off into the ocean, seeking a DM with some basic cognitive functions. From this thread... If he ends up being a jerk about it though, then just play a straight Druid, and own the game. Rampage around all day outmeleeing the fighters and outsummoning the summoners. Maybe he'll realize that a little multiclassing isn't the worst thing in the world. True that. Espeically when comparing a character that's a little underpowered (as the OP's is) to a full caster. It gets even more lopsided when it's a melee character compared to a full caster, yet the DM still decides "OMG! You have 4 classes! That's too powerful! :rant: :looloo: So for advice, just go with a pure druid. Tell him that's what you're going to do. Own the game and make it seem easy. When he approaches you about it, whip out the 4/4/4/4/4 guy and ask if you can switch. Cheers Otto :)
Milandros 01-07-06, 11:40 AM	First of all, let me state that there is no "right" way to play. My following comments are based on my personal preferences, not divine law handed down from above. Without arguing about how he's handling it, which may or may not be well done, I must agree at least partially with the DM here. If he's going for a coherent or more RP based game, having characters who are members of multiple secret organisations, cults, specialised dedicated orders and so on doesn't make sense to me. Prestige classes were meant to be special. Many people have stripped the word "prestige" from them, making them equivalent to base classes where you can just take a little bit here or there, but I believe that the roleplaying requirements and limitations are there for a reason, and I enforce them. Getting access to a prestige class should be an extremely significant event for a character. Becoming a Red Wizard of Thay, being invited to join the Harpers, being chosen by a demon as a minion, all these things shouldn't just be something that happens quickly when you level up. There should be an in-game build-up reaching a dramatic climax when you finally gain access to those classes. The class list presented here doesn't really match the background, in my opinion. A travelling vagabond who picks up a lot of skills here and there is best played as a rogue. Maybe add a few fighter levels. If he was born with strong mental powers, and trained them or practiced them extensively, the psychic warrior is justified. But the Occult Slayer, to quote, "comes into her own through exhaustive training. Every regimen she performs is an excercise that refines her anger against spellcasters...". They are "driven to confront any arcane or divine spellcaster that crosses their path". It's not just a set of abilities with a title, it's a calling, even a way of life, like becoming a paladin. Travelling with your party of arcane and divine casters is not going to be easy! If "travelling vagabond" is a good enough background for this set of classes, then it's presumeably good enough for any other set of classes as well. Let's be honest here - this is a "build", not a "character". The set of classes and abilities were chosen first, and the background and personality sketched in afterwards. Now I think there's nothing wrong with selecting abilities and powers carefully - everyone likes a capable character - but there comes a point where you need to decide what style of play you want. There's nothing wrong with going for a "toon" with a cool "build" you run through a set of semi-random encounters, but that doesn't fit in with plot and roleplay heavy game, if that's what the DM wants to run. I think the question here is slighly wrong. A better question, without prejudice, is "I enjoy a min-maxxed game where I create a powerful set of abilities from a mix of classes and prestige classes and play it without having to worry too much about roleplaying limitations, and my DM prefers a different play style that means players can't build characters purely to threir own choice but have to accpet his limits and fit them into his world. How can we compromise?"
Milandros 01-07-06, 11:48 AM	I must also raise a small issue with those who scream "kick his head in! kill him! walk out of his game! Wreck his game! See if you can destroy all his and the other players' fun!" to any player who has a difference in play style with his DM. The DM has a right to have fun too, and he has a right to set limits on the game he wants to run. If the DM wants to run a psi-free game, he doesn't have to accept psychic warriors. If he wants a game set in an ancient greece analogue, he's within his rights to ban half-illithid feral half-dragon asimmar vampire drow templates. The DM has no right to be a jerk. He has no right to run the game as his own little ego trip. He has no right to force the players, as opposed to the characters, into anything. He has no right to be abusive or use his temporary position of authority during play as any sort of indication that he's in some way superior personally to the other players. He's not their whipping-boy either though, and he's under no obligation to have a boring and miserable time so players can feel like they're big men. If there's a difference in opinion, too many people on these boards reach for the hammer gun as a first option. The number one first option should always, always be "Talk about it"! Not (player's board) "Destroy his game and rough him up" or (DM's board) "Throw him out after breaking his legs!" Sorry, it's a bit of a rant and I'm exaggerating a bit, but I've seen far too much of this, and never seen a response "I stormed out and now I'm not playing, and I'm a lot happier!" Sure, leaving a game or kicking players out may be the final solution, but it shouldn't normally be the first option!
corcio 01-07-06, 02:28 PM	personally i like the straight one class deal with just the stuff from the players handbook but i think one additional class is acceptable fighter/cleric druid/ranger sorcerer/rouge type stuff sure but thats about it i dmed once and i didnt even allow psionics and you could forget prestige classes until you earned them i guess its just one of my little pet peeves
wonlee76 01-07-06, 02:47 PM	We have a new DM coming in for a new campaign who I have been working with for a few weeks at building my character, Tweaking background and going over possible builds of cross classing and feats and such. New DM, treat him kindly. He probably wants to keep games simple which is completely understandable. So I create a very Potent Build of Rogue4/Marshal4/Psychic Warrior4/Thief Acrobat4/Occult Slayer4 Which when the character somewhat handicaped in early levels but by 20th level left him with Base attack of 16, and all of his base saves at 11 The DM then set down rules that prevented characters from being cross classed more then once per 10 character levels and included limitations that only made cross classing an option if one of you classes was your racial favored class So if I understand this rule correctly, this limits you to 2-3 character classes and only available if one of the classes is a favored class? I admit the restrictions are pretty harsh but I'll defer to the fact that this DM is new and maybe he just doesn't want to deal with the headache of 3-4 classes on one PC. Now i know that I have a certain flair for cross classing, and it can rightly be said that I can mini-max with the best of them. But I keep it within the confines of the character concept. this character for example was intended to be a jack of all trades in a group predominated by Arcane and Divine spell casters. and the character was supposed to be a sort of traveling vagabond, going from here to there picking up all kinds of different skills but never really settling on one thing. which is why he doesn't have more then 4 levels in any class because he keeps moving on to something else and though he has Psychic ability he has never really spent much time developing it which is the reason for the psychic warrior I understand your overall concept of being a jack of all trades in a group of arcane and divine spellcasters but why can't you just be a straight rogue or maybe a straight bard? Maybe even a rogue/bard multi-class. I think either of those combinations work within your character concept without all the cross-classing. Sure, the combination may not be as "good" as your original plan but it still works and fits your overall concept. As an aside: How come whenever someone brings up a question about a DM restricting players in their choice of prestige class/multi-classing or whatever always say something like "Play a druid/cleric and teach the DM a lesson!" Honestly, restrictions placed by a DM may have nothing to do with powergaming. It may have more to do with simplifying the game for the DM (which is good for a new DM) or may have more to do with flavor of his game when he bans certain classes/prestige classes. Maybe when the DM gets more experience under his belt and gets a better feel of the game, he will lift the restrictions. Besides, you don't want to be one of those problem players who causes the DM to "quit" DMing a game because its just too hard. Its hard enough to find people willing to DM a game, don't contribute to the problem by making this new DM's first experience a painful one.
Jayr 01-07-06, 04:07 PM	Why don't you just play a Rogue 5/Thief-Acrobat 5/Occult Slayer 5/Marshal 5, with human or halfling as your race? I will admit that this build swipes 3 points off BAB, but it gives Improved Evasion, Mind Blank, +1d6 sneak attack, and extra minor and major auras, and also meshes with your DM's rules.