4th & Dragon : Dungeons and Dragons...and stuff

I am not too happy about the paragon multiclass path option.
It seems to offer very little for what you could get from the other paths.

My idea to fix it is to add a “synergy benefit” at 11th level for each class combination.
Since there are too many class combinations to invent meaningful benefits, I will restrict this to those class combinations that are actually viable in terms of ability score dependency and power/class ability synergy.

As for the power of the benefit, I’d peg it a bit more useful than a paragon feat and preferably unique.

I’ll need your help to balance things out and find out what combinations are viable.

As example synergy benefits I was thinking about something like the following (the first listed class is the primary class):

Fighter - Ranger
Mobile assault: When charging, you can use one of your at-will powers with the melee and weapon keywords instead of making a basic attack. You get an additional +1 to hit when charging. (I think it is quite fun to be able to use twin strike or cleave with a charge. Lots of fun combos here)

Fighter - Rogue
Confound the enemy: Enemies you have marked cannot make opportunity attacks.
(should be quite fun, maybe some small added benefit is needed)

Fighter - Warlord:
Phalanx fighter: As a minor action choose an ally adjacent to you, you and that ally gain +1 to all defenses and to hit rolls as long as he stays adjacent to you. The bonuses from this ability do not stack, but you may use it on any number of adjacent allies.

Fighter Wizard:
Smart tactics: You can make an additional basic melee attack as a minor action after using a wizard power with the “close” keyword. You can use this benefit twice per encounter (three times at epic tier)

Cleric - Fighter
Protect the fallen: When using a healing power on your ally or using the heal skill or a potion to stabilize a dying ally, you may mark any number of enemies adjacent to him. This is usable only on one ally per action.
(makes for a nice combat medic!)

Ranger Fighter:
Distracting attack: You may mark an enemy that you hit with a ranged attack or a melee attack.
Your allies get +1 to hit an enemy that is marked by you and is the target of your hunter’s quarry. (normal mark, -2 to hit anyone else)

Obviously a ton of these will be needed because I am planning to include all of the viable primary class/secondary class combos. My criteria is mostly that you should not need more than 2 main ability scores and one secondary to make it work. Preferably the classes should then share a primary or good secondary score (Fighter Rogue could have good Dex and Str for example and Cleric Warlord should obviously have good Str and Cha).

Combos that I think are normally viable for multiclass:

Cleric: Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Warlord
Fighter: Cleric, Rogue, Paladin, Warlord, Wizard
Rogue: Fighter, Paladin, Warlock
Ranger: Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Rogue, Wizard
Paladin: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue,
Warlock: Paladin, Wizard (high con and int)
Warlord: Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Paladin
Wizard: Cleric, Warlock

Please critique and propose potential other benefits for some combos!

I maybe misunderstanding how you’re planning on using this, but I don’t like the idea of granting abilities neither class could get on their own when a character multi-classes.  It would make more sense to me to create individual Paragon Path’s for each combination and granting the abilities that way.  Require the appropriate base class and appropriate multi-class feat as the base entry requirements.

Phalanx fighter is underpowered compared to the rest.  Distracting attack’s wording is confusing.

Warlock - Cleric
Divine Boon: When you would otherwise use you pact boon, you may instead allow yourself or an ally to spend a healing surge. (seems a little underpowered to me, compared to the others, but I like the concept)

Wizard - Cleric
Heavenly Surge: Twice per encounter (three times at epic level) you may add your Holy Symbol’s modifier to the attack and damage rolls of a Wizard power.  The power must normally include the Implement keyword.  If you are able to wield both your holy symbol and your arcane implement, you gain the bonus from both.

Cleric - Wizard (I liked the idea of this but it seems broken the longer I stared at it)
Faith in the Arcane: You can use an Arcane Implement you have mastery of as a Holy Symbol and once per encounter you can add your holy symbol’s modifier to the healing effect of one of your cleric powers.

I maybe misunderstanding how you’re planning on using this, but I don’t like the idea of granting abilities neither class could get on their own when a character multi-classes. 

My aim is to give class synergy benefits. In essence benefits that result when you mix two kinds of skillsets.
At the moment multiclassing is pretty underwhelming at paragon tier as you don’t really gain any of the cool things that the paragon paths can get. The whole idea is that the character has created a unique style by mixing the teachings from both of his classes and has some insight that single classed characters lack. Single classed characters gain similar benefits by taking up paragon paths and specializing further into their class.

It would make more sense to me to create individual Paragon Path’s for each combination and granting the abilities that way.  Require the appropriate base class and appropriate multi-class feat as the base entry requirements.

It is only to be used when the character does not select a paragon path (those prestige class like paths) but instead selects a multiclass paragon path, thus not gaining any class abilities from a path as in the rules now. This is to make the paragon multiclass option more interesting.

Making paragon paths is so much work for this amount of combinations that I’d rather think of these benefits and maybe later incorporate them into paragon paths that are similar to taking the paragon multiclass option at the moment.

Your ideas for benefits are good by the way.

Warlock - Cleric is a bit unbalanced IMO. It is too easy to use surges with this if there are plenty of minions.
What about giving the pact boon effect to an ally instead of yourself? This could make it more interesting as you could teleport allies for example (fey pact).

Wizard - Cleric is pretty good, unless there is a way to use holy symbol as an arcane implement or vice versa (see below).

Cleric - Wizard could actually work better if he can use his holy symbol as an arcane implement (actually a big benefit). Remember he does not have implement mastery since he has Cleric as primary class. It needs a bit of something extra to make it more interesting.

Rothe, I like the idea of a synergistic effect when multi-classing.  Its good.  I think it needs to be fleshed out a bit more, but the concept is viable and worth it, in my opinion. 

I feel that the multi-classing in 4e is a bit on the down trodden side, too.

From what I have read from wizards and other sources they really brought down multi-classing from its 3.x level.  Now it seems like something that will occur rarely (at least until people figure out useful strategies, maybe ones that come from the power books for martial and arcane)

But was anyone around at the start of 3E?  I did not even really know what D&D was back then, and am just curious about it.  Was multi-classing always such a seemingly good idea?  Because many of the 3E characters and such I read about waiting for 4E showed multiple classes on a character and I was wondering if maybe it started out as not such a good idea but once people figured out more it became much better.  Just wondering if there is any relation to now

I don’t mind multiclassing as long as it does not create characters that are clearly more powerful than those made with any single class. This means that it is ok to gain synergistic benefit and/or versatility, but absolute “power” should not increase much.

3.x had plenty of character builds that end up very much more powerful than any single classed character. Actually, the class balance was not good even between single classes… but enough of this…

For character builds multiclassing should offer a good chance of customization while keeping the build balanced with other character options (single class - paragon path vs. single class - multiclass paragon path).

As for the actualy benefits listed above, they don’t have to be exactly as powerful as long as they make the class combination more special in some way.

Anyway, keep on listing the different potential combo benefits and I’ll try to keep them organized and uniform when I can.

Like Rothe said, they don’t have to be “deal-breakers” like 3.x had in some of its multi-classing.  But, as 4e stands, you have to take, what like 4 feats to really multi-class.  And what do you really get for it?  The ability to swap powers… I think a little synergy is acceptable. 

And as for Chad’s question, 3.x’s multi-classing was like picking the best candy from the bowl during Halloween.  I almost always ended up a multi-classed character.  But, and I can’t stress this enough, I was not one of those guys who took three base classes, six different PrC’s just to get my Saves up.  You know the type Im talking about.  I was usually a 2xBase Class plus 1 PrC… maybe 2 if it made sense for the character.

Oh ok.  Well to be completely fair to the makers and totally honest with ourselves, there never will be completely perfect balance unless you just give players no options.  I really don’t see how it could happen without years and years of work on just giving a few options.

But the beauty of D&D is that we (the players and DM’s or people that do both) have the option to alter the game and change things around as we see fit.  From what I read, it is actually encouraged
So i think that everyone should take a leaf from fessus viator’s book and even when you do find something broken (whether it be you or a fellow gamer you play with) try to not use or abuse it.  Just let it go, and realize that not being the center of attention for awesome damage or armor all the time is a good thing.  This is a community game and we should definitely play it that way.  I don’t think anyone would want someone to take all the limelight from them, so try not to do it to other people.  Or if you absolutely must have it your way, help everyone else out in the group and tell the DM to bump up the difficulty a notch or two

*clap* for fessus doing the right thing

Thanks for the clarification Roth.  I am still a little squeamish about the idea.  This seems a little overpowered, about as much as not having it is underpowered.  Granted I think it would be fun, and it give you the opportunity to do things you otherwise couldn’t, ever with hybrid classes.  Some play testing will go a long way, that’s for sure.

Chad Reynolds - 08 August 2008 11:30 AM

Was multi-classing always such a seemingly good idea?

In 3E, it was, only because you could get super builds where when certain class abilities combined it was exploit city.

In 2E, not so much.  If I remember correctly (I start D&D in 2E but only for a year before we 3E came out and we switched over) it was generally a bad idea.  XP loss and the like.  Except for humans who could duel class.  But the mechanics there were so different from 3E and certainly 4E.

Well I would be happy to be involved in any playtesting because it sounds like a good idea if it was able to be balanced properly

That would be the tricky part, making sure it is the same effective-ness as when you just go straight with a class’s paragon path

Why not add a Paragon Feat for multiclassing that give a bit more access to your second class like gaining a full class feature or gaining the full use of the class feature you had access once per encounter at heroic?

And maybe add a epic feat too for multiclass or 2 actualy, one that give a second class feature and one that enable you to swap a at-will?

darklink, I don’t like the idea of a multiclass character losing any more feats to compete against the single class + paragon path characters. The benefits from multclassing at paragon tier (not just the 4 feats, but taking up the path) should be only a little less than those granted by a path.

My idea is to try and avoid the pitfall of multiclassing in 3e which was to fully gain class abilities (one way or another) from several classes. It is not good for the system. There should be no way to gain full use of both hunter’s quarry and sneak attack for example - it is just too good.

I actually still try to encourage tactics that make use of both classes’ stregths.
As an example, Ranger-Rogue benefit could be to gain +1d6 damage against your quarry if you also have combat advantage (added only once per round). It is a bit like sneak attacking, but not really unbalanced since it is not increasing by tier and is not available before 11th level. It still encourages the ranger to use sneaky tactics though.

I am still a little squeamish about the idea.  This seems a little overpowered, about as much as not having it is underpowered.

Can you give an example of where this is unbalanced? Compare to eventually gaining the 3 abilities of a paragon path.

Actually, as a further balancing act you could be giving out the benefit only at a higher level than 11th, but not too high. Maybe 13th?

God I wish I could verbalize my gut feeling on this.  It just seems to me that this could get carried away.  Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea (I wouldn’t have worked so hard to come up with why I wouldn’t work if I didn’t).  Feat very rarely add powers (granted you’ve already spent 4 (I think, it’s something like that) to get here.  Is gaining access to more power choices really worth a feat (let alone 3).  That is somewhat underpowered - we all know that, that’s why were reading this thread to being with .  There really isn’t a precident for granting [class-like] features via feats.  A lot of the features (even the ones I created) make more sense for a specialized character to have over a de-specialized multi-classer.

For example “Mobile assault” is something any melee class would want...gah this is hard to express...I guess the best way to make my point is to ask a question.  How can a Fighter who alters/delays his quest for Fighter perfection learn something that no other Fighter can?  His focus is split, so how does he learn something greater then the sum of the two parts.  A straight Ranger could never have figured it out on his own, same with a straight Fighter.  Instead of granting new features do something like what darklink suggested (though not through a feat) and enable the 2nd class feature to be fully realized.  The feature ideas you have are outstanding.  The deserve to be their own focal point - like their own path of study (getting back to my previous idea of cross-class paragon paths).  I guess saying overpowered wasn’t the correct terminology; it’s more that is just doesn’t make sense to me.

Either way, it’s your project and I like the type of features that would come out of this and as I said before I don’t think we can really nail down how they will best work (balance-wise) with straight classes until play testing is done.

You have a good point there Lakoda, and I believe you put it pretty well for not having known how to express it.  Maybe the fighter delays his fighter perfection, but is “opened up to a new idea of how to do something.” Like perhaps fighters have always done something this way, and maybe it was not the most efficient way, and if they change up an action they do it allows them this new move and what-not

But looking at that there is a lot a maybes and ifs in there, so I definitely see your point.  I think that this is just trying to make multi-classing a viable option for people to use so that there are more ways to build your character.  I am happy with the kind of straight building now (then again I have not been making characters for years and years like some of the people here) but if this is something people want i would love to help out.And who knows, maybe I will get tired of a straight ranger or whatever else and want to branch out a little bit in the future sometime so this will be a good option

The mobile assault idea is that normally a fighter is more about holding position against attacks and rangers are more about mobility - the fighter learns that mobility is really important and combines it with his great skill with weapons to come up with a new trick. He may have observed rangers moving in and out of combat and got more interested in the benefits of that.

And really, the ability to charge and use at-wills is not so powerful. Fighters tend to stick to the enemies and moving away to charge provokes an OA. He will need his ranger powers to get out of the fight and then he can charge again - makes perfect sense for a fighter-ranger to develop a tactic like this, but it would not work well for a single class fighter because of the OA’s.

Get the feat Defensive Mobility, Fast Runner and Powerful Charge and you get a fighter that can launch himself around the battlefield. Take the Paragon path Swordmaster and you get yourself a charging fighter.

The thing is most people want to recreate their abombination that they had in 3.x, and with the current rule system we cant. I kinda agree that multi-classing lack, maybe without adding a feat the basic multi-class feat could add something more at paragon and another something at epic. That would keep balance i think maybe for wizard for exemple you can use one time per day the bonus of the implement mastery you choose.

But i knwo you guys dont like the fact to add another feat, but i really think we need one to swap 1 at-will, a fighter droing for exemple reaping strike to get twin strike, wouldnt be a bad idea or maybe add it to the basic feat and when you hit lev 11 you get to swap a at-will(that would be the paragon bonus of the feat)and for epic i have no idea of the balance of powers there yet so i can really say what we could do there.