Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 igniz Jul 27, 2009 9:17:10	Anyone else feel the new Hybrid classes and the old Multiclassing could do with a power book of their own. Okay so it could get quite obscene in terms of structure, but a book dedicated to boosting Hybrids and MC would be handy. Instead of having each section by class, you could just have each section by role or power source and just list powers with requirements.
#2 Stuntman Jul 27, 2009 10:58:16	I think that hybrid and multiclassing can be adequately covered in the power source accessories. Both of these character options basically allow you to combine features of two classes together. You take a feature of class A and another of class B. What is there that a power book for class A and a power book for class B cannot cover when it comes to hybrid and multiclass characters?
#3 igniz Jul 28, 2009 6:38:58	I'm thinking of a power book that facilitates specific combinations with PP's and feats and then has powers that possibly meld aspects of two power sources. So you might have some Arcane Powers that work best with a melee weapon and can be taken by any arcane powered character willing to use a weapon. Any Arcane class would be free to take them, and they might be geared towards a particular role (like Striker). And then you'd have a prestige class that focused on mixing Martial with Martial for Martial/Arcane hybrids or MC's. Something like an Arcane Trickster or Bladesinger, or whatever. The power books haven't specifically focused on MC's or Hybrids, they give enhanced options in some cases (like with the extra MC feats) but they don't offer a suite of new options or specifically provide powers suited for MC's/Hybrid.
#4 Stuntman Jul 28, 2009 15:23:55	I'm thinking of a power book that facilitates specific combinations with PP's and feats and then has powers that possibly meld aspects of two power sources. It would be difficult to focus on specific combinations of classes because there are just so many of them. Also more and more classes come out with each handbook and some supplements. With 8 classes, there are 28 combinations. With 16 classes, there are 120. With 24 classes, there are 276. Double this number for multiclassing because it matters which class you start off as first. It would be difficult to provide enough material to cover enough combinations and feel complete enough without neglecting a great many other options. Over time, you end up only providing material for a small percentage of the combinations. There are fewer power source combinations, but power sources have very little mechanically that different classes within the power source has in common. There are a lot more differences than similarities between two classes of the same power source. And then you'd have a prestige class that focused on mixing Martial with Martial for Martial/Arcane hybrids or MC's. Something like an Arcane Trickster or Bladesinger, or whatever. The power books haven't specifically focused on MC's or Hybrids, they give enhanced options in some cases (like with the extra MC feats) but they don't offer a suite of new options or specifically provide powers suited for MC's/Hybrid. If you already multiclassed, you already inherently gain a suite of new options. You have options of two classes already instead of a single class. If of all the options available from both of your classes there are none that you want, then you probably wanted to play a third class instead. With so many options already available to a hybrid or multiclass character, there seems to be little need for more. I don't think that there should be an abundance of PP's that require you to be a member of two different classes as a prerequisite. In 3E, they had prestige classes like the Arcane Trickster because the multiclassing system does not allow you to mix certain classes together to make a character that is comparable to a single classed character. If you were a rogue/wizard, you either sucked at being a rogue, sucked at being a wizard or sucked at both. In 4E, if you want to combine 2 classes together, the multiclassing (and hybrid) system allows you to do that without severly compromising the viability of your character. You can be an "Arcane Trickster" in 4E with the existing rules without really needing to take a paragon path. Better yet, you can be a rogue/wizard MC or HC in 4E and be useful where you cannot in 3E.
#5 igniz Jul 28, 2009 15:48:42	MC and Hybrid work to an extent, but at some point you're going to lean on one rather than the other, and that may conflict with the type of character you want to convey. Perhaps though, it would be simpler to do combinations for Power source and Role? When you make a Wizard/Rogue or Rogue/Wizard in 4e, be it MC or hybrid, you can easily end up with someone with little synergy between powers. In some cases there are obvious choices, like illusion and invisibility for a Rogue/Wiz, but the Rog has few control powers and the Wiz has few Striking powers. So your ability to synergise the two roles is made harder, but if you had powers that stood somewhere between the needs of the two classes then you'd a better realised character. An Arcane Trickster PP would still make sense in 4e as it could properly offer a mixture of control and striking powers, or at least powers that suit control and offer stealth benefits, if you see what I mean. Okay, so I could probably make a Sorc with Blade chanelling or such, but i'm going to miss out on stealth, invisibility and mobility options. If I make a Lock, I miss out on melee options and some of the stronger control option. if I make some other combination (possibly Sorc/Lock) then I compound other issues. And it goes on.
#6 Stuntman Jul 28, 2009 16:14:05	MC and Hybrid work to an extent, but at some point you're going to lean on one rather than the other, and that may conflict with the type of character you want to convey. The conflicts you may encounter when building a character in 4E may be due to the fact that the system is designed with balance in mind. Perhaps though, it would be simpler to do combinations for Power source and Role? When you make a Wizard/Rogue or Rogue/Wizard in 4e, be it MC or hybrid, you can easily end up with someone with little synergy between powers. In some cases there are obvious choices, like illusion and invisibility for a Rogue/Wiz, but the Rog has few control powers and the Wiz has few Striking powers. So your ability to synergise the two roles is made harder, but if you had powers that stood somewhere between the needs of the two classes then you'd a better realised character. The idea of roles in 4E is that you make a character that is supposed to be able to fill in one of those roles. The powers and features of a wizard is supposed to make you a controller and those of a rogue is supposed to make you a striker. A rogue/wizard MC or HC is supposed to allow you to be a striker sometimes and a controller other times. When you need to be a controller, you rely on your wizard features and powers. When you need to be a striker, you rely on your rogue features and powers. That is the flexibility you get for being a hybrid or multiclass. You have a mix of powers and features from both classes. An Arcane Trickster PP would still make sense in 4e as it could properly offer a mixture of control and striking powers, or at least powers that suit control and offer stealth benefits, if you see what I mean. A rogue/wizard mix do allow you to have access to controller and striker abilities. Wizards also grant abililities to enhance your stealth. You end up with character with some striker abilities and some controller abilities. You even have stealth abilities as well. A set of powers that can do both striking and controlling, sound too powerful. You basically made the paragon multiclass or hybrid rogue/wizard obsolete. Okay, so I could probably make a Sorc with Blade chanelling or such, but i'm going to miss out on stealth, invisibility and mobility options. If I make a Lock, I miss out on melee options and some of the stronger control option. if I make some other combination (possibly Sorc/Lock) then I compound other issues. And it goes on. That's the beauty of 4E. You have to make some meaningful decisions about your character. You cannot do everything. You have to choose what you can do and what you cannot do. Those examples you gave each have advantages and disadvantages. A PP or a class that ends up doing more is probably unbalanced.
#7 darth_singe Jul 28, 2009 22:57:53	I think the biggest issue has to do with the fact that these rules in a book would be kind of optional, and that would go against the 4e plan. think back to unearthed arcana for 3e. i think this should be done though, for those of us who like it, but maybe as a regular dragon article.
#8 mkill Jul 29, 2009 4:35:31	"Hybrid Power" is a splatbook that I'll happily skip, no matter how much the Charop crowd will probably fawn about it.
#9 igniz Jul 29, 2009 15:42:27	I still don't see any compelling reason why breaking down the roles should be so taboo when they're already considered guidelines of play and only impact the design of a class. There's already material out there for specific multiclasses and to support multiclassing and more varied characters, I don't see the grand problem with a book specifically geared towards such material.
#10 gregt_314 Jul 29, 2009 23:36:23	Anyone else feel the new Hybrid classes and the old Multiclassing could do with a power book of their own. Okay so it could get quite obscene in terms of structure, but a book dedicated to boosting Hybrids and MC would be handy. Instead of having each section by class, you could just have each section by role or power source and just list powers with requirements. They should have been a book of their own to start with. Then those who love hybrid multiclassing could really get the attention such a complex system deserves, and those who hate it as though it were Robo-Hitler (like myself) could safely get their hands on the new classes in the PHB3 without rewarding Wizards with money for dabbling in such a fundamentally terrible idea.
#11 Vael Jul 30, 2009 10:54:37	Rather than a full book, this is something that'd be best broken up and handled in a series of Dragon articles.
#12 Stuntman Jul 30, 2009 10:59:50	They should have been a book of their own to start with. Then those who love hybrid multiclassing could really get the attention such a complex system deserves, and those who hate it as though it were Robo-Hitler (like myself) could safely get their hands on the new classes in the PHB3 without rewarding Wizards with money for dabbling in such a fundamentally terrible idea. I don't think that there is enough material for multiclassing and hybrid to justify a book of its own. The multiclassing system takes 2 pages of text out of the PHB. Expanded multiclass feats in the power books take about a page for 2 or 3 feats for each class. Probably all of the multiclass related rules in 4E will take what 6 or 7 pages of text. The hybrid system takes a little more space. There are a few pages to describe hybrid characters. There is a single feat and then paragon hybrid. For each class, the picture takes up half of a page. Without pictures, you could probably fit 2 or 3 hybrid classes per page. Probably all of the hybrid related rules will amount to 15 or so pages of text. Now you can fill in the rest with paragon paths. However, you end up not being able to cover all combinations of classes because there are so many of them. On top of that, each class combo you do cover will in all likelihood have one PP option. If you look at all of the other power books, each class has a great many PP options. A multiclass/hybrid power book will probably give you either no option or only one option other than the paragon multiclassing/hybrid. If multiclassing and hybrid are available only in a power book, what happens when new classes are introduced? Right now, it only takes less than a page to include the hybrid and multiclass rules for each class. It makes sense to include these rules with each class instead of waiting for the next hybrid power book.