The Gaming Den

Also, Mulit-classed is basically just gestalt, with just a slight bit of nerfage. Well, I'm frankly okay with this. Gestalt is completely broken, unless everyone in the campaign plays one, so if we can agree multi-classing is that, but closer to being balanced, maybe we can actually get back to top...

deaddmwalking wrote:I'm familiar with what it says.

It couldn't be more clear and if you actually read what it says rather than pretended that you know what you are talking about, you wouldn't be insisting that interpretation has anything to do with that. That is exactly why I won't continue discussing it.

RadiantPhoenix wrote:I'll bite: tell us exactly what abilities you think the character loses, by the book.

No, I'm through discussing AD&D multi- and dual. Since we all should be literate, posting on a forum, you can read it yourself.

deaddmwalking wrote:Would it hurt you to admit that it is unclear exactly what Fighter 'abilities' you lose access to when you become a 'wizard'?

If you'd read what Player's Handbook says about it, you'd know it's perfectly clear.

If we can all agree that dual-classing is bad, I'll have more hope about reaching a consensus on multi-classing. Would it really hurt you that much that I like dual classing as a way to dip into a mundane class before picking a magic using one? We don't need to discuss it, since I was looking for w...

You're probably too new to realize it, but the boards fucking DIE most Fridays. Threads tend to hang in stasis with only a few infrequent posts here and there until.... about Sunday. I said that in response to people thinking I might have ragequit the thread. During which time the thread got a full...

Continuing to complain that people don't understand 2e is really hilarious, given the people you're accusing. Kaelik didn't laugh nearly long enough. Namely there was the part where I demonstrated with numbers from the Player's Handbook that it's not as bad as someone thought, yet they still insist...

If anyone really cares, I've been getting wasted because I have better things to do on a Friday night than to discuss tabletop games on the internet. I also was interested in seeing if the thread will stop shitting itself over me liking the edition that isn't the most popular one if I wait it out. T...

It's getting clear to me that discussing the details of AD&D multiclassing is going nowhere, as differences between editions is too volatile an issue to be discussed rationally. May I suggest moving on and perhaps trying to get back to the topic: How to actually make multiclassing work?

OK, we can do this again: Multi-classing in 2e has you spend XP to level up both classes, so if you have 2 classes you get half the XP to split about those classes. This means you're getting level-appropriate abilities 2-4 levels after you should be getting them, so designing encounters around you ...

How exactly did you do this experiment, because I can't see how 2ed multi/dual class is better than 3rd's which is pretty bad? By playing the game. In higher levels it mostly consist of Baldur's Gate, not tabletop. It's not entirely perfect, but it matches up quite well. Apart from temporarily disa...

As this was your first post/thread here ever what were your expectations or hopes that this treaty on how great 2e was would become? This is just words getting put into my mouth. I did not claim that 2e was superior, but I did say that the multi and dualclassing is better than any of the following ...

Kaelik wrote: I don't know where you got the impression that I said you do.

Kaelik wrote:because you are insisting that a level 10 character play as a level 1-9 character instead of a level 10 character in order to earn the right to be a 10/11 character

I guess something like the thieving skills and backstab is the exact equivalent of losing the entire levels. I agree with you completely there.

??? Are you actually retarded? I literally just explained to you some of the problems with multi and dual classing, because you were whining about how it isn't fair for people to just state that it is bad. And your response is to... whine about how I didn't explain how the multiclassing is bad? I j...

I didn't need an explanation, because I have spent more than six seconds thinking about multi and dual classing, so I know that they are shit. I know that multiclassing is objectively superior like 75% of the time because of how stupid it is to give up one level of X for 10 levels of Y. I also know...

Yes, and that one fucking aspect you are talking about is multi-classing. Which by the way, is wrong, and is the only thing that anyone has said is wrong. But what FrankTrollman is saying is that the whole experience setup sucks and that would affect the entire edition, now wouldn't it? Yes manning...

If by 3e multiclassing suxxors, 2e multiclassing roxxors!" you mean that one aspect of 2nd edition is superior to the 3rd, I suppose, yes, I did say that.

This thread is taking a steep turn towards stupid. I don't care about your stupid personal opinions on the editions as whole or other people. If you really want to, post a "Tomawis is a big poopiehead because he has different standards than me" in MPSIMS or something.

I don't think levels and experience work in 2nd edition the way you think they do. First of all, even without multiclassing, the different classes gain levels at different amounts of experience, meaning it's very rare that everyone in the party is on the same level anyway. Until higher levels where ...

Fighter/barbarian/rogue doesn't have the raw power of just fighter/barbarian, that's true. But instead of imagining it in the place of the of the group's main warrior, imagine a party at level 7 where the "rogue" is something like fighter 2/barbarian 3/rogue 2. It has all the benefits that...

...You Lost Me wrote:The way you avoid multiclassing problems is by not doing multiclassing. Instead have required prestige classes or subclasses and call that "multiclassing" instead.

I guess there is no problem in not having a car if I never leave the house, right?

Do you actually think that a multi-classed fighter/barbarian/rogue should be weaker than it currently is? Admittedly, it's more fault of the class design than the multiclass system. But it'd help if the player wasn't able to choose exactly what they want. If you care about skill ranks in "thie...

I don't think you understand what I meant, You Lost Me. Third edition just goes all or nothing in terms of classes. I think third edition's multiclass rules are most broken in terms of casters, who don't work at all. I can see why would Wizards of the Coast want to prevent mages getting things outsi...

As it has become evident that stating that I second edition, that it is going to be assumed that I'm into arguing about things. I suppose I need to start off by establishing something very basic. Comparing features of different editions does not mean I'm here to bash on the other. I wouldn't want to...