Notices


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


DnD3.5e: Flavour vs Crunch: Multiclassing and Dipping

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
I like picking and choosing what I'm doing and having things just the way I like. Or because I just wanna. Or because I like the names of the abilities, or for any other reason. But, you've still not said, why not Fighter 2/Warblade 5/Swordsage 1/Avenging Executioner 2?
Yeah, it's hilarious how no one's used any of those reasons, least of all you.

That said, yes, Silverworlfer did indeed reply to my post. And yes, he did indeed say that because the Fighter is a lackluster class, that's reason enough for his arcane caster should dip and cheese out like nobody's business. Oh, and also that he's doing it just because he's a rebel. Or, really, he pretty much just agreed with each and every asinine example I gave that pretty much exemplifies the munchkin mindset.

I am in the boat of disliking optimization builds that involve heavy dips and multi-classing. As this is a total measure of opinion, I will give my own.
I like to read the background in a campaign and write myself in similar to a short story, picking out aspects of that story(not unlike Fate) to write a character background. I build my character's abilities around that background, and not the other way around. I don't ever come into a game with a long list of mechanics in mind. It's anathema to my style of gaming, but there is a balanced split between those that embrace mechanics and those that merely use them to move along their actions.

When I look at these huge lists of multi-class leveling, I can't help but think... Why the hell would my character do all of this and when did he have the time for all of these specializations?

EDIT: Now, when I play Warhammer 40,000 or Battletech or something, I will build a force that is strong and can win. But to me, that is why I wargame. I don't want peanut butter in my chocolate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarium View Post
I am in the boat of disliking optimization builds that involve heavy dips and multi-classing. As this is a total measure of opinion, I will give my own.
Can you provide one singular reason why an optimization build with heavy dips and multi-classing is any worse than an optimization build without heavy dips and multiclassing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Dog View Post
Or, really, he pretty much just agreed with each and every asinine example I gave that pretty much exemplifies the munchkin mindset.
Asinine reasons are still better than none, which is all you've provided so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Dog View Post
Yeah, it's hilarious how no one's used any of those reasons, least of all you.
None of these were reasons for "cheesing out". They were potential reasons (I was rattling off random examples of why I could want to. I never once said anyone does want to for those reasons) to multiclass and dips. I have never even touched on the subject of cheesing out. Stop putting words in my mouth.

@ Atomic dog

I build things not as a munchkin, but so that I can stay relevant against the level 20 caster, having a 4 in con, for roleplay reasons is not a good reason. There is two curves in this game that matters, Roleplay, and Usable , those two need to match against each other for all folks int he group to enjoy it. If your wizard can fireball everything before a warrior can draw a sword, true that may be the DM fault for not balancing things.

Certain class's suck when compared to others, I will go with an easy one, the samurai , no one uses it, folks rather take a level 20 fighter and level that , then use that class. Would you as a DM force them to use the samurai instead of the fighter to rp it? At the same time gish builds are some of the usual character arches of Magic+Sword , you know typical elf stuff. Before player handbook two came out, you should have seen how convolted some of these builds are.


Your Job as the DM is to make sure we don't break the power level of the game, not to say, I hate multiclassing so we are not going to do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
You know what's funny? None of these have actually been quoted as reasons by anyone but opponents of dipping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Dog View Post
<insert Ikul's detailed quote citing half of those reasons here>

Yeah, it's hilarious how no one's used any of those reasons, least of all you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
None of these were reasons for "cheesing out". They were potential reasons (I was rattling off random examples of why I could want to. I never once said anyone does want to for those reasons) to multiclass and dips. I have never even touched on the subject of cheesing out. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Could you please at least try to remain internally consistent? First you say those are only arguments offered by "opponents of dipping" (nevermind that each and every one of them came from posts to the contrary), then after showing the exact quote where you did in fact bring up at least three of them in a single paragraph, you've decided to twist it so that it's a discussion about cheesing out the rules rather than the stupid reasons people are giving for why dipping should be allowed despite each and every one of those aforementioned stupid reasons.

But now, despite you having actually cited those reasons, they've mysteriously transformed into non-existent reasons? Okay. Whatever floats your boat. I wish arguments like that worked in reality. "No judge, I only confessed to why I killed that person as a possible explanation for why I killed that person, not for the real reason I killed that per... I mean, for why I might have wanted to kill that p... frag me."

I think you both are taking this rather to serious, if either one of you DM's a game, just don;t apply for it. that is what it comes down to really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwolfer View Post
Your Job as the DM is to make sure we don't break the power level of the game, not to say, I hate multiclassing so we are not going to do it.
Wow.

Sorry, but no. My job as the DM is to play the role of the rest of the game world, to set the stage, to referee the rules being used, and to set whatever god damned rules I want to set in order to make all those things happen. Your job as the player is to abide by those rules -- including the intent of them in spirit -- and to play your character's role in the game. Your job is not to abuse the game system at every corner, forcing everyone else you're playing with to do the same in order just to keep up. That's the epitome -- the epitome -- of why being a munchkin is such a wretched and disgusting thing. You're effectively ruing the game for your own silly little reasons, many of which have not only already been pointed out, but rallied behind by the likes of yourself and others.

An I agree with you, but I also think that forcing your players to certain classes and stick to them, creates resentment rather then creativity . Sadly D&d is a crunch game, if you want a fluff game, may I suggest White Wolf? If i have to roll a dice to see if I persuade someone, you are going to be damn sure, I build a character that does that job .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
Can you provide one singular reason why an optimization build with heavy dips and multi-classing is any worse than an optimization build without heavy dips and multiclassing?.
Uhhh...because it doesn't make any sense from a role-playing perspective? Because it doesn't come from a role-playing perspective. It comes from a numbers perspective, which is in itself a product of optimization and wargaming.

If it makes perfect sense in a story-based campaign, which is what a role-playing game is, to have a character with all sorts of across-the-board abilities that he has no reason of knowing, let alone the impossibility of learning, as well as class suites from all over the 'verse, well, then I must be just role-playing incorrectly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwolfer View Post
Your Job as the DM is to make sure we don't break the power level of the game, not to say, I hate multiclassing so we are not going to do it.
That is crazy talk. I'm not going to get heated over this or anything, but the job as a DM is to have fun. Which is supposed to be the job of the player as well. If a DM is forced to spend the whole gaming limiting the outlandish maximizations of a certain PC, how does he get to have fun? How are those that aren't doing that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarium View Post
That is crazy talk. I'm not going to get heated over this or anything, but the job as a DM is to have fun. Which is supposed to be the job of the player as well. If a DM is forced to spend the whole gaming limiting the outlandish maximizations of a certain PC, how does he get to have fun? How are those that aren't doing that?
I will highlight on this one part, as it seems I was maybe to vague.


Someone that makes a slightly powerful character, I would say is okay, anyone that picks a tier one character and we are not arguing that is wrong, then that is where the pinball buffers need to show up during the creation step. If someone is taking a tier 4 and low tier 3, and combines them to make a high tier 3 or even a tier 2, yet we only yawn at the level 20 wizard/druid. I think is what is unfair.

Going one level in everything is a little hair raising, dipping around your PRC's to make your melee viable no matter whatever the story could be, I do not think is a sin. A Duskblade is not "cheating" just because it can wear heavy armor and hit a few folks with a spell on his sword.





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Blog   Myth-Weavers Status