So, basically, the only cited reasons for dipping and etc. boil down to:
Originally Posted by Atomic Dog
- "I want more pluses!"
- "The Fighter isn't a good class, ergo, no class is a good class and I should be able to compensate for the Fighter's suckitude on my wholly unrelated character!"
- "This handbook on the Internet said this is the best thing to do to get more pluses!"
- "I'm actually a roleplayer, and I need to cheese out my character in order to play this role! If you think otherwise, it's actually you who are ROLLplayer!!" <hair toss>
- "Because I'm a rebel and won't be kept down by the Man!"
- "<Random multiprogression prestige class> requires abilities from multiple classes, ergo, all dipping is not only acceptable but required and D&D is all about multiclassing, OMG! So what if all the base classes go from 1-20, that's not proof of anything, D&D is 100% multiclassing!"
- Edit: "Oh, I'm actually only cheesing out because I like the name of the ability."
Pretty much as expected. A bit imflammatory, maybe, but fairly accurate nonetheless after reading through all this.
You know what's funny? None of these have actually been quoted as reasons by anyone but opponents
of dipping. Silverwolf has made a wonderful answer of why those are
actually good reasons, but straw men may make for good archery practice, but they have no place in a serious discussion.
Also, nobody mentioned 'cheesing out' their character, only dipping in classes. Please make at least a token effort to stay on topic.
Also, since we're gatherings of answers, so far the "contra" seems to have,
"It's cheesy", which is untrue simply because most builds with dips are woefully underpowered as compared to the dipless druid 20, and "I just feel it insults the game", which is silly because it's a game. It can't be insulted. Just like you couldn't insult, say, thin air.