What do you think it will be like? I'm wary about this one, but I've like much of 4th so far, so I'm reserving my judgment till I see it.
Gimme some speculation!
The major missing hurdle to fully realized multiclassing is the class features. Replacing the epic-level abilities with class features is certainly more on-par than paragon-level abilities.
Right now, there exists the Eternal Seeker ED. I would expect that if Dual-Classing is an ED, it should be roughly balanced with Eternal Seeker. I would think that if you get all class features, they would be watered down. An at-will feature would be usable once per encounter. An encounter power would be usable once per day.
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
Ideally, I would hope for some sort of watered-down version of the 3.5 rules for gestalt classes. You choose two classes, and gain the class features of each which are listed in the rules for dual-classing (so a Fighter/Wizard won't have all the normal Fighter's or normal Wizard's class features). Then you can pick your powers from either class' list.
Something like this makes more sense.
A already predetermined list of what features from each of the two classes you want to combine are available with a small point cost shown for each feature, and you basically buy between the two classes features until you spent all the points would be the most ideal in my opinion, assuming of course the designers are fair with their assigning of value. (example Sneak, HQ, Oath of Enimity, ect ect, cost 3 of the 5 points, leaving you with only 2 points to spend on the other class features. Perhapa, the majority of the other features only cost 1.)
it might well be an option instead of paragon multiclassing
perhaps instead of 11th+ level powers, you start over in a new class with 1st level powers?
I don't thinkl it will be an epic level thing
more likely a paragon option instead of a paragon path, instead of paragon mulitclassing
perhaps it is an upgraded version of paragon multiclassing?
My ex wife had two of them. Other than that I have only met one other person.
That's seriously commendable (very cool). Do you know of anyone who got close to Grand Master of Flowers?
Of course it won't be like 1st/2nd Ed Dual Classing.
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
I not only know someone, I am someone that had a 1e bard.
The sickest dual class we ever had in a party was a mu/cl/monk/ftr/thf/bard
The sickest dual class we ever had in a party was a mu/cl/monk/ftr/thf/bard
I thought you could only have 2 classes – dual?
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
I know of two people who played Bards, but never played through the levels to become a bard. They chose bard in one-shot or higher-level start adventures/campaigns.
I thought you could only have 2 classes – dual?
As long as you had more 17's you could "dual" class as many times as you wanted. It was what made humans awesome in 1/2e.
I played a Fighter/Thief/Mage dual classed human quite a bit, that was lots of fun.
As long as you had more 17's you could "dual" class as many times as you wanted. It was what made humans awesome in 1/2e.
I played a Fighter/Thief/Mage dual classed human quite a bit, that was lots of fun.
Ah, right on, I forgot – thanks.
My buddy once ran a Half-Elf Druid/Mage/Psionicist in a Dark Sun campaign, boy, was that hard work.
Dual classing was all second edition was it not? I never saw any rules for it in first edition, is why i ask.
Same with me, although it's been since 1988 that I played 1E. The memory, she fades...
Dual classing was all second edition was it not? I never saw any rules for it in first edition, is why i ask.
I haven't played any 1st edition in over 20 years, but the reason I thought it was 1e that my friend had the 6 way dual classer was because I remember him moving away before 2e, but my memory may be affected by "pollutants" at such a young age as I was then.
It was actually the only way to become a 1st. Ed Bard.
The only problem with it was that when you chose a second class, you had to start completely over as that class, and couldn't use any of your old abilities until you achieved a higher level in your new class than your old one...
I.E., If you were a fifth level fighter and you decided to become a wizard, you then spent five levels being a 1st lvl wiz with 50 HP before you could start acting like a fighter/wiz...
So although you could "dual"-class into a third or even fourth class, there was a seriously diminishing return for it.
It was much easier to just play a demihuman that had that particular class combo available to them.
Back in 1st Ed., demihuman multiclassing was limited to a handful of choices for each race, but human dual-classing was basically unlimited as long as you had the high stats for it.
It was actually the only way to become a 1st. Ed Bard.
The only problem with it was that when you chose a second class, you had to start completely over as that class, and couldn't use any of your old abilities until you achieved a higher level in your new class than your old one...
I.E., If you were a fifth level fighter and you decided to become a wizard, you then spent five levels being a 1st lvl wiz with 50 HP before you could start acting like a fighter/wiz...
So although you could "dual"-class into a third or even fourth class, there was a seriously diminishing return for it.
It was much easier to just play a demihuman that had that particular class combo available to them.
Yeah, it also had the caveat that if you did act in a capacity as your old class you lost all XPs for that SESSION (not just encounter). Which led to the ruling that if your hit with a SoD effect and your new class chart had you missing the save, but you would make by your old class chart you saved and by using your old class, you forfeited all XPs for that session.
But, it had certain benefits too. If you dual-classed magic-user and an armor wearing class you could wear armor and cast MU spells (this was the only way humans could accomplish that.
Man, I am getting all misty with remembrance LOL
The only problem with it was that when you chose a second class, you had to start completely over as that class, and couldn't use any of your old abilities until you achieved a higher level in your new class than your old one...
I.E., If you were a fifth level fighter and you decided to become a wizard, you then spent five levels being a 1st lvl wiz with 50 HP before you could start acting like a fighter/wiz...
In 1E you start off as a level 1 wizard with your 50 hp. Then you level up as a wizard. Once you reached level 6 as a wizard, you can use your fighter abilities again. While you are levelling up to a level 6 wizard. If in any adventure you use any of your fighter abilities such as attack with a sword, you gain no XP for that whole adventure.
It's not that bad, because the XP table is logarithmic for the most part from level 1 to 10ish (depending on class). The XP required to go up to the next level is roughly double the XP needed to get to your current level. A fighter needs about 4,000 XP to reach 3 and 8,000 XP to reach level 4 and about 16,000 XP to reach level 5 and about 32,000 XP to reach level 6 and about 64,000 XP to reach level 7. If you get to level 5 and then switch to a wizard, you will need another 40,000 XP to reach a level 6 in wizard. (The XP tables are weird and different for each class in 1E.) That means that if you dual class, you will reach fighter 5/wizard 6 before you would have reached fighter 7 had you remained single classed. You probably spend the equivalent of less than 2 levels feeling really inferior before you start becoming on par with your other party members.
Another interesting thing is that in 1E, if you are a multiclassed fighter/wizard, you can cast spells in armour. If you are a dual classed fighter 5/wizard 6+, you cannot cast spells in armour. That is one of the advantages of multiclassing over dual classing in 1E.
I'm hoping that either the schedule is wrong, or it's just a delayed April Fool's joke.
Hmmm.
Quite possible. The timing would seem approprate. It could be that the April Fool's joke is in the calendar since it comes out in late March.Another interesting thing is that in 1E, if you are a multiclassed fighter/wizard, you can cast spells in armour. If you are a dual classed fighter 5/wizard 6+, you cannot cast spells in armour. That is one of the advantages of multiclassing over dual classing in 1E.
Hmmm, I seem to have misremembered it. I thought you could gain the ability to throw spells in armor by dual-classing.
It's not that bad, because the XP table is logarithmic for the most part from level 1 to 10ish (depending on class). The XP required to go up to the next level is roughly double the XP needed to get to your current level. A fighter needs about 4,000 XP to reach 3 and 8,000 XP to reach level 4 and about 16,000 XP to reach level 5 and about 32,000 XP to reach level 6 and about 64,000 XP to reach level 7. If you get to level 5 and then switch to a wizard, you will need another 40,000 XP to reach a level 6 in wizard. (The XP tables are weird and different for each class in 1E.) That means that if you dual class, you will reach fighter 5/wizard 6 before you would have reached fighter 7 had you remained single classed. You probably spend the equivalent of less than 2 levels feeling really inferior before you start becoming on par with your other party members.
This was the advantage. Every class had a different XP table so if you were starting above level 1 the DM would give you an XP value to make your character with.
I could make a straight 9th level mage or I could be a fighter5/thief6/mage 8(no idea if that's accurate but you get the idea). Minor reduction in one area for massive gains in another. Optimizers wet dream.
Hmmm, I seem to have misremembered it. I thought you could gain the ability to throw spells in armor by dual-classing.
If you are demi-human and multiclassed as a fighter/wizard, you can cast spells in armour. If you are a human dual classed fighter X/wizard X+1, you cannot. There is a little trick where if you dual classed as a level 9 ranger and then go wizard, when you reach ranger 9/wizard 10, you can cast wizard spells in armour. The reason is the level 9 ranger can cast wizard spells and he can wear armour as well.
I found out this trick when playing the Secret of the Silver Blades computer D&D game. Because of level limits, you do not want to play a elf fighter/wizard. The human ranger-wizard is the level 10+ version.
This was the advantage. Every class had a different XP table so if you were starting above level 1 the DM would give you an XP value to make your character with.
I could make a straight 9th level mage or I could be a fighter5/thief6/mage 8(no idea if that's accurate but you get the idea). Minor reduction in one area for massive gains in another. Optimizers wet dream.
Unfortunately, dual classing 1ed almost never happend. You needed 17's or 18s(I think. It was high.) in the prime stats for the class you were in AND the one you were going to AND you could not use any of the abilities from a previous class during the adventure or you got no exp for the whole thing. Once you passed your former class in level, you could freely use the abilities from that class. This meant that if you went to 6th level fighter and dual classed into wizard, you were a level 1 wizard in a party of 6th-7th level adventurers and you would be behind them in power until you hit 7th level. That = fail.
If you are demi-human and multiclassed as a fighter/wizard, you can cast spells in armour. If you dual class, you cannot. There is a little trick where if you dual classed as a level 9 ranger and then go wizard, when you reach ranger 9/wizard 10, you can cast wizard spells in armour. The reason is the level 9 ranger can cast wizard spells and he can wear armour as well.
I found out this trick when playing the Secret of the Silver Blades computer D&D game. Because of level limits, you do not want to play a elf fighter/wizard. The human ranger-wizard is the level 10+ version.
Only humans could dual class.
Only humans could dual class.
Fixed. When I was referring to the dual classed fighter-wizard, I intended it to be human in contrast to the elf fighter/wizard.
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
Yes, me
And I have been disappointed with the Bard class ever since from second edition on.
Aribeth
In addition, what everyone above has already said, you needed a 17 or higher in the primary stat of what you were going to dual class into as well as 15 or higher in the primary stat of your current class.
Yes it was a pain going back to level one when all your buddies were still high level but overall it evened out because the dual class had greater capabilities.
As for the Bard itself, there was nothing like it... a class that was able to fight toe to toe, do all the thief things one may encounter and the ability to cast druid spells.. the class was only limited by my own play skill.
I still have faith WotC, don't disappoint me.
Of course it won't be like 1st/2nd Ed Dual Classing.
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
I played one. It took years to move from Fighter (actually an Archer/Ranger from DRagon) to Thief and then to Bard-Acrobat (also from Dragon Mag). No other character will ever come close to him. And Bards have been lame in every edition since...
Fixed. When I was referring to the dual classed fighter-wizard, I intended it to be human in contrast to the elf fighter/wizard.
Gotcha.
Of course it won't be like 1st/2nd Ed Dual Classing.
Does anyone know someone who actually became a 1st Ed Bard?
I had 1 in 1st edition.
Now I have one more burning question: did anyone play a 1st Ed Monk and get near Grand Master of Flowers?
My favorite dual classed character I ever made was a Gladiator 3/Rogue 8. Nothing like being proficient with any single item you happen to pick up and use as a weapon, while being able to do a backstab multiplier.
Now I have one more burning question: did anyone play a 1st Ed Monk and get near Grand Master of Flowers?
As a follow up to this question, I would like to know if any of those players played a lawful evil monk. Can you imagine someone as evil as Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars having the title, "Grand Master of Flowers?"
Ooo, I'm quivering in my boots.
I would like to point out that the editorial calender says nothing about Dual Classing; it specifically mentions Hybrid Classes. The druid was originally supposed to be a hybrid class, by which WotC mentioned in things like Races & Classes would be a class with more than one role or power source. I think the original idea was to build the Druid as a Leader/Controller. It was still a singular class, with powers and class features just like any other class. They decided to scrap the idea because they couldn't get it working properly; they obviously left it on the back burner and think they have perfected the idea.
It said dual classing first. They just changed it. The entire community is not on shrooms.....some of us
I for one protest the name change. I don't care what it ends up being, I like the name Dual classing, it has heritage in the game. Hybrid classing sounds to much like the environmentally conscious cars, has the R&D team become tree huggers? :P But seriously Hybrid classing is a terrible name, change it back!
I care less for the name, more for the mechanics.
They can calling it character splicing omega for all I care.
"If all else fails, you can always get your multiple character fix by building a hybrid character. Using the playtest article for Player's Handbook 3 that comes out next Monday, you can wrap the best of two classes in the body of one adventurer."
Directly from the editorial.
Ye-gads. I just read the editorial and I must retract my above statement. As a lover of Multiclassed characters in 3.X this makes me happy in the pants, but I hope to all that is good and holy this gets done right, not broken.
"If all else fails, you can always get your multiple character fix by building a hybrid character. Using the playtest article for Player's Handbook 3 that comes out next Monday, you can wrap the best of two classes in the body of one adventurer."
Directly from the editorial.
I hope this allows more of a secondary roll type thing, rather than giving something two rolls. Or maybe finding a way to change the roll of the class somehow, difficult as that may be.
I can forsee some full blown class features that would appear to be very powerful, such as hunter's quarry and sneak attack. Dealing an additional 8d6 damage is pretty awesome even for epic.
I could get this to 11d6/11d8 or some combination there of with a half-elf who picks up howling strike or devastating strike and versatile master and uses a double sword. So I hope this isn't the case.
I care less for the name, more for the mechanics. They can calling it character splicing omega for all I care.
I, on the other hand, would choose an option called "Character Splicing Omega" regardless of what the mechanics were.
Quaestor the Wanderer
Rather than a pure gestalt combination (which could require alot of work), I hope it is as simple, perhaps something like:
- Choose primary class, choose secondary class
- HP, Surges, Skills etc are that of primary class
- Choose 1 At-Will power from each class
- Can select encounter, daily and utility powers from either class
- Lose some class features from primary class
- Add some class features from secondary class (with limits)
- class skills are from both classes; (the required skill from secondary class must be chosen at 1st level)
- Implements will work only for that classes relevant powers (although both classes may have the same implement type eg: Wand for Wizard/Warlock)
- Weapon proficiencies are maximum of both classes
- Armour proficiencies are the minumum of both classes (prevents abuse to avoid feats)
- Cannot take multiclass feats for either class
so they renamed it from Dual-Class to Hybrid Classes.
It's a cumbersom name but then again it might be an indication of broader options.
Dual implies 2
Hybrid implies who knows how much
2 classes only but you can still take a Multiclass Feat, so that can lead to triple classing if you want.
At 1st level you are getting powers from both of your hybrid classes and watered down versions of the Class Features (EX: Hybrid Cleric can use Healing Word but only once per encounter.)
Powers ultimately get devided between the two. EX: Fighter/Wizard. At 1st level you could have an encounter from either power list, but when you reach 3rd your new Encounter power has to come from the other class. So if you take a Wizard Spell as your 1st level Encounter Power. Your 3rd level encounter power Must be a Fighter one.
They only really cover the PHB1 classes plus the sword mage and this isn't going into the character creator anytime soon. Be interesting to test this out though
BTW: It is supposedly going to be in PHB3, correct? That's a future release. As long as no one is giving up specific information, I wouldn't say it's a big deal being here.
Many of the neuterings just make simple sense, in my opinion. Ranger/Rogues can Hunters Mark and Sneak Attack whenever they want, but HM only adds to Ranger powers and SA only to Rogue. So maybe not the same potential burst damage, but similar overall and equally effective in the back with a longbow or up close with a shiv.
Thing that has me the most interested is that you can use any implement either class allows for all Implement powers from both classes. Something about Warlocks getting all blasty with a Holy Symbol makes me giggle.
All of them end up missing some class features (which can be recovered using a feat)
Where did you see this? I haven't gotten around to reading the whole of it, but that would make them slightly more attractive.
Thats SECOND edition of D&D. 1E was Dungeons and Dragons, and it didnt have dual or multi classes. Actually, it didnt even have races, they were treated like different classes.
You guys are all talking about multi and dual classing from AD&D
Thats SECOND edition of D&D. 1E was Dungeons and Dragons, and it didnt have dual or multi classes. Actually, it didnt even have races, they were treated like different classes.
you are probably too young a gamer to remember...
D&D got out in 1974...
then, around 1977-79, they made AD&D, which was initially supposed to be the real game of which the "simple" d&d was an introductory step: that's the edition many people refer to as "1st ed".
however, the d&d (i.e., without the "advanced") eventually got a life of its own, and grew up to encompass 36 levels and beyond. that game is often referred to as 0d&d or Od&d ("O" for Original, to distinguish from the Advanced brand).
up to your choice to name what you like as "1st ed", but there is no doubt multiclass was in the first AD&D player's handbook
you are probably too young a gamer to remember...
D&D got out in 1974...
then, around 1977-79, they made AD&D, which was initially supposed to be the real game of which the "simple" d&d was an introductory step: that's the edition many people refer to as "1st ed".
however, the d&d (i.e., without the "advanced") eventually got a life of its own, and grew up to encompass 36 levels and beyond. that game is often referred to as 0d&d or Od&d ("O" for Original, to distinguish from the Advanced brand).
up to your choice to name what you like as "1st ed", but there is no doubt multiclass was in the first AD&D player's handbook
Dual classing was in 1st edition as well (only for humans since humans couldn't multiclass).
I hope this allows more of a secondary roll type thing, rather than giving something two rolls. Or maybe finding a way to change the roll of the class somehow, difficult as that may be.
It's two roles, not a secondary role.
Standard multiclassing gives you a secondary role. A Fighter/Wizard multiclass is a pure Fighter, with all of the Fighter's traits. By multiclassing, they gain some Wizard powers and a skill or 2, but they're generally more Fighter than they are Wizard. It's like they took a chunk off the Wizard and attached it to a Fighter.
A Fighter/Wizard hybrid has part of the Wizard's HP, healing surges, weapons, skills, class features, etc, and part of the Fighter's. It's like they chopped both the Fighter and Wizard classes in half and glued them back together.
to put it in 3E terms, if multiclassing were like a Cleric with a domain that granted some arcane spells, hybrid classes would be like the Mystic Theurge.
Even though they only have 9 classe so far (Ph1 + Swordmage) there's already a few combinations that would be hard to play effectively in 4e due ot the stats they use. Race selection is much more important for a hybrid class than a pure class or multiclass due to the stat bonuses.
Also yes 1e is considered AD&D (the first run), 2e is the Revised AD&D, then 3/3.5e is the first run by WotC. The confusion for many comes from the fact that with 3e they dropped Advanced off the product title. OD&D (or just D&D) itself had at least 3 'editions' from the point it evolved past Chainmail to the five-boxed set (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortals). After all the five-box set was released between 1983 and 1985 during the same time that 1st Edition AD&D was released. The games are related but seperate rules systems. Funny thing is 4e is closer to OD&D than any previous edition of the 'Advanced' line.
The new hybrid system looks interesting but it will be hard to min/max with it because of the sacrifices made. It will definitely be nice for the roleplaying types out there that aren't worried about losing effectiveness.
Even though they only have 9 classe so far (Ph1 + Swordmage) there's already a few combinations that would be hard to play effectively in 4e due ot the stats they use. Race selection is much more important for a hybrid class than a pure class or multiclass due to the stat bonuses.
Also yes 1e is considered AD&D (the first run), 2e is the Revised AD&D, then 3/3.5e is the first run by WotC. The confusion for many comes from the fact that with 3e they dropped Advanced off the product title. OD&D (or just D&D) itself had at least 3 'editions' from the point it evolved past Chainmail to the five-boxed set (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortals). After all the five-box set was released between 1983 and 1985 during the same time that 1st Edition AD&D was released. The games are related but seperate rules systems. Funny thing is 4e is closer to OD&D than any previous edition of the 'Advanced' line.
Not being able to min/max with hybrid is a good thing. I hope they tweak it some more but keep it pretty much the way it is.
Now I have one more burning question: did anyone play a 1st Ed Monk and get near Grand Master of Flowers?
As a follow up to this question, I would like to know if any of those players played a lawful evil monk.
*raises hand* :D
I make it a personal goal of mine to play a lawful evil character of pretty much every class. No particular reason, I just find it fun to see how many ways you can make a tyrannical dictator. Well, in 1e, I rolled really high in one particular game--Str 17, Int 17, Wis 16, Dex 15, Con 12, Cha 10--after a terrible streak of bad rolls (max roll 11, second-highest 6). I figured I wouldn't waste the opportunity to played a monk, since you needed Str 15, Wis 15, Dex 15, and Con 11, so I made my LE monk. Which brings me to...
Can you imagine someone as evil as Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars having the title, "Grand Master of Flowers?"
...getting all the way up to Grand Master of Flowers, after a loooong campaign. By that point, the party fighter was 20th level, and we'd been having a friendly rivalry as to who was the quicker learner, as he'd also rolled a mid-to-high Int. Well, it's 250,000XP per fighter level after 11th, so by the time he got to Fighter 24, I was a Monk 17/Wizard 11. Being the rabid Star Wars fan I am, I actually modeled him on Palpatine; I think I used lightning bolt and other lightning spells in that campaign more than I have with any caster characters in all the years since! The fighter conceded the rivalry and became my best
:evillaugh
Of course, that was the last 1e campaign we played in, so it went longer than usual because the DM wanted to upgrade to 2e as soon as it finished and the druid and bard players wanted to stick to 1e...I doubt I'd have been able to make it to Grandmaster in any prior campaign.
...getting all the way up to Grand Master of Flowers, after a loooong campaign. By that point, the party fighter was 20th level, and we'd been having a friendly rivalry as to who was the quicker learner, as he'd also rolled a mid-to-high Int. Well, it's 250,000XP per fighter level after 11th, so by the time he got to Fighter 24, I was a Monk 17/Wizard 11. Being the rabid Star Wars fan I am, I actually modeled him on Palpatine; I think I used lightning bolt and other lightning spells in that campaign more than I have with any caster characters in all the years since! The fighter conceded the rivalry and became my bestminionfriend.
That's killer, colour me impressed…not Badd!