An idea on multiclassing.

[Elennsar]

If you want the powers of being a rogue, then you need to be a rogue. Not dip into, commit to. If you want the powers of being a wizard, same.

As stated, abilities that make sense for anyone who is personally skilled enough to do it to learn should not be tied to classes, but abilities that only a X can do should be tied to being that class.

Similar to how in 2nd edition, only a single class fighter can have maxed out weapon specialization, but more so, and with abilities more useful than that.

[Kuroimaken]

Kuro: Because I rather doubt that they give away pdfs of the whole system for free. Just because X talent/mark/feat/whatever works great doesn't mean the feat/talent/mark/whatever system works great.

 

Now that was just... dense.

I obviously won't tell you where to get those, but the PDFs are certainly available on the internet. And I have this gut feeling that your hatred towards WotC would be the first incentive you would have to actually look at the system without giving them money.

#2: And of course, those abilities are foreign to each other. Being good at semantics and information gathering require abilities that do not occur together at all. In game terms, both are part of Intelligence (which may be too broad, but it is the game term).

Strangely as it may sound, that's actually true. Many of my colleagues happen to have great Google-fu and a complete inability to debate logically and coherently through ANY medium (which makes me worried about the next generation of the media around here, but I digress). Similarly, I've seen would-be Journalists who have awesome writing/debating skills but can't be asked to do any research lest their brains implode.

So sorry, but going through law school does not qualify you to be even halfway competent as a journalist - such skills are not interchangeable.

#3: "some" kenjutsu is not enough to make you a Swordsman. "Some" Judo is not enough to make you an Unarmed Guy.

Wrong again. Contrary to what one may think, the difference in levels of competence between two given swordsmen is not in amount of different ways one learns to attack, but how quick one's reflexes/ability to attack are. Similarly, the difference between two judoka resides more on how fierce the grip is and how flexible your body happens to be than how many ways from sunday your foe will the ground (it's not impossible for a white belt to defeat, say, a blue belt or yellow belt, even when both weight the same).

[Elennsar]

No, it was a statement that just because they did some particular thing stunningly well does not mean that I'm inclined to put faith in them doing well on the whole.

Hatred is the wrong word. Disdain is too subtle a word for it, too, however.

#2: Not saying it does, but they're not totally foreign abilities with no connection whatsoever. Being able to handle zero gravity and being able to handle the confines of a submarine, on the other hand, are.

Not arguing that they're related in the sense "being good at one means you're good at the other", but they're not utterly foreign, either.

German and oh, English, not Gaelic and Japanese.

#3: The point is, "I know some kenjutsu" doesn't mean that you're a Sword Guy. Any reasonably well trained and talented (some people do not have the bodies to pull some things off, which is what I have in mind by talent in this arguement.) can do "some kenjutsu".

Sword Guy can do the *insert fancy Japanese name here*.


Ultimately, that last bit is what I want to do in regards to classes. If anyone can learn Weapon Focus, it isn't something you should need to do anything but note you'll take it as your next feat.

So being a Fighter isn't about that.

And of course, if being a fighter-mage is a valid idea, we need a fighter-mage class, not a way to make fighter/wizard/whatever suck less, because wizard and fighter aren't made to mix (too many abilities of the fighter that the wizard finds a burden rather than a benefit of the multiclass, to be precise).

[Kuroimaken]

Tell you what, Elennsar.

I'd like to propose something to you. A bit of a challenge, if you will.

Make me Hiei from Yu Yu Hakusho. As a single-classed character. The character in question is reasonably driven (as well as a bit of a training freak), so he doesn't have abilities all over the place.

Do that, and I'll shut up on the issue (I can't promise for the others, though). At least it will be one less guy you have to reply to.

If you find it can't be done, we'll split the threads like you suggested 5 or so pages ago. Everyone's happy either way. Agreed?

#3: The point is, "I know some kenjutsu" doesn't mean that you're a Sword Guy. Any reasonably well trained and talented (some people do not have the bodies to pull some things off, which is what I have in mind by talent in this arguement.) can do "some kenjutsu".

Sword Guy can do the *insert fancy Japanese name here*.

Ah, so it's a matter of semantics, then. I don't really have a problem with -that-. What I might have a problem with, however, is that Sword Guy can't be just as well represented by SwashbucklerX/FighterY/WarbladeZ rather than, say, WarbladeXYZ; I feel that commitment to a single class is good, but option variety is better.

[Elennsar]

If and when I know enough about Hiei I'll get back to you on that. I'm going to assume stats can start (at level 1) at no more than 18, and assume a minimum of "+X" magic items (that is, belts of +6 to Strength). First have to know what I'm trying to write up, which will take a while, so paitence is a virtue.

Personally, I don't mind character variety, but I think any reasonably coherent character archetype shoudl be one that can be played as a single class.

"Boolean: Yes! Yes, multiclassing as a concept is deeply stupid, and has always been stupid, and will always be stupid. The entire fucking point of having classes is to say that somebody who is a Monk is not a Druid and vice versa.

That doesn't rule out any particular *concept*. Because we aren't tied down to the D&D classes. So we can totally have "Dawnwarden" be a class, for members of a holy order who run around stabbing fools with gilded swords, firing lazer beams and Summoning demons. Or whatever. The Spells and sword character lives on. But he should probably run around in gilded armor covered in arcane symbols. And even if he's under cover, the minute some guy whips out a sword and starts lasering, you should know that's a Dawnwarden. And if he starts animating vines or tunring into a snake, you can and should call bullshit, because Dawnwardens don't do that , Fangthanes do."

So you can play whatever you want...but not everything you want in one character. That is made of fail. Wanting to be Inigo instead of Gawain instead of Beowulf instead of Gilgamesh is not. Wanting to be Gawain and Inigo winds up with ludicrious characters.

As for option variety:

Here, let me grab the quote from Frank:

FrankTrollman: Swinging a sword is NOT A PROTECTED ROLE! It's not even interesting. "Using Magic" is far too fucking broad to count as a protectable role as well. The Kach? Tenshin Amaguriken is a protected technique. The Dragon Slave could be a protected technique.


That's what I mean by "Sword Guy". Being a "Sword Guy" means you get techniques that no one not a Sword Guy can get.

Whether the ideal basis for the Sword Guy class is something like the Fighter (almost certainly not) or warblade is another story.

So, a character shouldn't need multiclassing if all of his abilities are part of the "I'm a samurai" shtick.

Now, that would require rewritten classes. But honestly, the game could use those anyway.

That quote clear it up? Because I don't think we really have that big a difference in terms of what archetypes we want to be available beyond "I don't want a setting with ____.", which is purely setting.

[JaronK]

If you want the powers of being a rogue, then you need to be a rogue. Not dip into, commit to. If you want the powers of being a wizard, same.

So if I want to be a skillfull and intelligent character who dabbles in both magic and mundane skills, I have to hope the designers made that class?  If I want to be a character that combines fury with skill in combat (much like a dark jedi) I have to hope the designers made that?  If I want to mostly be a martial character, with just a touch of skills to represent my background, there's something wrong with me if the designers didn't think of the exact combination I want?

Elennsar: are you only a poster on the internet?  Is that all you are?  Or is there more to you?  Me, I'm a theatrical audio technician and a fire dancer and a website security tester who's dabbled in staged combat, juggling, puppetry, and carpentry.  I'm practicing tango and I foster kittens and raise chickens and work as a Burning Man Ranger.  I've worked in game design quite a bit and painted a little.  I'm not just one thing.  Real people are many things, many wildly different things in fact.  I find that the best roleplayers (here meaning, people whose roleplay makes the most sense to me) usually do make characters that bounce around a lot within classes, because they're trying to make a realistic character.  Realistic characters do not walk around saying "yes, I'm a paladin.  That's all I am.  I just wear this heavy armour and champion causes all day long."  Real characters usually have a very wide variety of abilities, often focused around a theme (for me, artistic expression comes up a lot, for example), but many of the abilities are totally out there.  

And what you're saying is that people who dabble around aren't realistic, whereas a guy who's just an archer is realistic.  I don't buy it, any more than I buy that you're nothing more than a guy who posts about D&D on the internet.  I don't think that a soldier is nothing more than a guy with skill with a gun.  I don't think the baker down the street goes home and just bakes more.

JaronK

[Elennsar]

Either hope the designers do or make it yourself. If the game actually has a clear class creation system, that wouldn't be hard.

"Being a guy with a gun" is not "being anything". Its one of the everyman skills.

Being a guy with some level of "battle fury" might not be either.

Now, being a guy who can fieldstrip something and put it back together again, that might be at least worth saying is not a class skill (to use the current terminology) for everyone.

Being able to use the Force actively (as opposed to just unconsciously/passively as Han probably does...assuming Force-sensitive isn't a unusual "gift", but that's another story.) is definately a niche...though I'd break that down into Jedi (Light), Jedi (Dark), Sith, and any other Force traditions with meaningfully different abilities.

Being "just an archer" isn't realistic. Being a guy who has "I'm a great archer, I have great archery tricks" and a great baker and a great pilot and a great giver of blowjobs isn't either.

As stated: Dragon Slave is a technique that could be "only X class". "I use magic' is not.

[AndyJames]

I give you...

Danica McKellar!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danica_McKellar

[Elennsar]

Neither of those skills are necesssarily not "everyman" in the sense anyone sufficiently talented (and it may be hard to be sufficiently talented in diverse areas, but that's a seperate isuse) could learn them, given the time/energy/money/instruction.

Earth Mage and Order Warrior on the other hand (to borrow from Lords of Magic) are. Though the Warriors in the game are too much alike, as are the thieves, I digress.

[AndyJames]

And what are classes if not a pre-determined set of *learnt* skills?

Please. All you are doing is to call everything that blows your silly theory out of the water as "everyday" skills and all those that agree with you as "super class only abilities".

[Elennsar]

Classes are a set of skills that you only those who "become members" of that class can/will master.

Any idiot can give a blow job, fly a plane, shoot a gun, walk across the room, start a flame war on the internet, and look up things in a dictionary.

Being a Courtesan, Flying Ace, Marksman, and Scholar would involve more than just "I can give blow jobs and shoot people" level of knowledge.

When all classes are are "skills and abilities"...there's no point using a class based system. None. If you want ot mix skills and abilities as you see fit regardless of whether or not they fit anything other than what crawled out of a sleep deprived brain, then classes are of no use to building the character!

If you want to have classes, you have to have being a Courtesan involve things beyond what anyone else can do. You have to have being a Marksman involve things that only a Marksman can do.

[AndyJames]

What do you call being a successful actress and acclaimed author and having a blooming mathematical theorem named after you?

That is right, you call it "everyday" skills. I'd like to see you do even ONE of the above. When you have, then you can come back and we will discuss this more.

The way you sideline and cheapen other people's achievements disgusts me. You fail.

[Elennsar]

The way you assume that "anyone sufficiently talented can learn this, therefore it is not an exclusive skill." means "anyone can do it" is hillariously dumb.

Any idiot can use a gun, I'm still impressed by the people whose hit rate in combat is over 70%. But its not a skill that you need "guy with gun" levels to learn or improve.

[AndyJames]

You don't equate having a math theorem named after you as being at least as good as a hit-rate of 70% with a gun? You, sir, are delusional.

[Elennsar]

Having something named after you is proof that someone felt like naming something after you. It doesn't mean (though it may very well mean) that you're worth remembering at all.

Hell, Hawaii was called the Sandwich islands after the same guy who sandwiches are named after.

A rather less than impressive fellow, but that didn't stop people from naming islands and foot items after him.

So...while this particular woman might well deserve it for accomplishments, "a therom named after her" isn't stating much besides good reputation.

As for hit-rate: 70% in combat. The average soldier in combat shoots with an accuracy that uncomfortably resembles the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy.

[AndyJames]

And now Elennsar demonstrates his lack of knowledge of academia

[Elennsar]

No, Elennsar points out that "named after" does not require, on pain of instant obliteration, anything other than the namer/s feeling it is justified and it being accepted as justified.

Certainly, it is highly probable that she did not get it without good reason, but saying that someone had something named after them means they must have been a great person is...an odd conclusion.

Regardless, as stated in my signature, the fact that she had multiple skills does not mean multiple classes.

I can talk and I can walk. I'm pretty sure both of those (along with eating, sleeping, pooping, and other things) are part of being "human".

Multiple skills do not require multiple classes.

Sure, being a paladin means you have a Holy Warrior list of things you can do. There's also the "universal" list. Anyone sufficiently talented can get a Ph.D. (very few people are, but its not exclusive to "Nerds").

So its not something that should be a class feature.

[AndyJames]

Class abilities are skills. They can be learnt. Hence you can choose to be a Wizard or a Druid. To say that x should not be a class ability because it can be learnt is to say that class abilities should not be class abilities.


Elennsar, there is already a system whereby you can do EXACTLY what you want. It is called a "skill-based system" or a "classless system" whereby you start with a human and just tack on skills to him instead of classes. Stop frakking with 3.5 and just play than instead.

[Elennsar]

Stop clogging my thread.

More to the point, what I want is a class based system that is actually based on classes, instead of a class based system trying (and failing) to be skill/ability based.

X should not be a class ability if anyone can learn it. If anyone can learn "magic missile", it isn't a class ability. If only paladins can destroy undead, its a class ability.

[AndyJames]

Whatever, man. Whatever. It seems that classes just grants stuff. You don't have to learn it or anything. Simple saying "I am Harry Potter!" allows you to cast magic missile.

Pfft!