Suggestion: The Balancing Act

[Joseph]

I am curious as to the opinions of those who know D&D rules - both old and new, and are familiar with the balance necessary to maintain the power edge in a game of this nature.

Before anyone flames me - my hats off to the developers, etc. for their work and effort. As someone who has written content an guides ages ago for other D&D games, I do understand just how difficult it can be.

So the question - why did DDO remove the multiclass penalties that exist in D&D 3.5?

In my opinion the 3.5 rule set was very, very well balanced. Removing the penalty has allowed players to marginalize what should be difficult content - and effectively made that same content much more difficult for non-optimized players.

The only reason I can think of to have removed that rule is due to the lack of content that was available at game launch. Now this is NOT to say that there was not enough content at game launch. I was quite happy with it at game launch - but it IS to say that at that time, a player with the experience penalties might not have been able to progress through all of his or her levels without feeling a great absence of content (that coupled with the old xp penalties, etc.).

As the game sits now, running single quests for my level, there is more than enough content at the lower levels to carry me through every level without running all of the quest. So - while I am a fan of many of the multiclass builds I see, I wanted to know why (as in the case of the old fighter's action boost), the experience penalty can not be introduced as it should be. This would provide enormous help in balancing the game - yet still allow players to level and complete their three class characters.

Likewise - how is it that I can level monk/paladin/monk/paladin/monk/etc... when both of those classes clearly state that they can not gain levels once they take a level in another class.

Anyway - just curious

I would like to see those changes brought into the game - and though I am sure many would not like it, there are also many who would.

Thoughts?

[Borror0]

So the question - why did DDO remove the multiclass penalties that exist in D&D 3.5?

While I'm not working at Turbine, I'm guessing that it's probably because they didn't do anything good in an MMO.

Multiclassing penalties only means you'll take more time to get there than a pure class character. In a PnP campaign, it is a greater penalty because less XP means you'll be taking more time to get to the a level than you party members. So, this will make you weaker and thus may balance the bonuses multiclassing would give you. (I have no clue of how effective that is, as no one in my groups ever multiclassed in a way to get the penalty).

Since in DDO, all an XP penalty means is spending more time leveling up your character (ie you'll reach the cap one day), I'm guessing it was judge an undesirable feature.

Likewise - how is it that I can level monk/paladin/monk/paladin/monk/etc... when both of those classes clearly state that they can not gain levels once they take a level in another class.

Could you explain me why that would be a good change? I don't see your point of view.

Personally, I see it as a bad idea as it would hurt existing builds as the game changes too much (compared to a PnP campaign).

[Turial]

....

So the question - why did DDO remove the multiclass penalties that exist in D&D 3.5?

.......

Likewise - how is it that I can level monk/paladin/monk/paladin/monk/etc... when both of those classes clearly state that they can not gain levels once they take a level in another class.

Anyway - just curious

I would like to see those changes brought into the game - and though I am sure many would not like it, there are also many who would.

Thoughts?

The XP penalty doesn't do anything in a game where players can play constantly and xp is something that can easily be obtained.

In a game where there is no full-respec option having players locked into particular classes at specific points is bad because the game can change dramatically at times.

[Borror0]

The XP penalty doesn't do anything in a game where players can play constantly and xp is something that can easily be obtained.

In a game where there is no full-respec option having players locked into particular classes at specific points is bad because the game can change dramatically at times.

I have to learn be more concise. -_-

[Tanka]

I have to learn be more concise. -_-

tl; dr

[Borror0]

tl; dr

LOL, I'm guessing those are abbreviations?

[Tanka]

LOL, I'm guessing those are abbreviations?

Too long; didn't read.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

I am curious as to the opinions of those who know D&D rules - both old and new, and are familiar with the balance necessary to maintain the power edge in a game of this nature.

Well to start with, D&D chars aren't balanced.

So the question - why did DDO remove the multiclass penalties that exist in D&D 3.5?

I don't know, it removed a lot of flavor and did make balance worse.

[Borror0]

I don't know, it removed a lot of flavor and did make balance worse.

Really? Mind elaborating on that? Mostly balance-wise, I don't see how.
(Not saying you're wrong, I'm really open on that.)

[Lorien_the_First_One]

Really? Mind elaborating on that? Mostly balance-wise, I don't see how.
(Not saying you're wrong, I'm really open on that.)

Well for example a strength of humans is that they could multiclass more easily.

The limits on multi classing also helps reduce unexpected playabilty issues from splash builds.

[Turial]

....
I don't know, it removed a lot of flavor and did make balance worse.

Flavor I can see but multiclassing away from paladin or monk in pnp only prevents you from taking another level in that class. It doesn't prevent you from using any powers gained from that class. Only moving away from a restricted alignment prevents use of powers.

Proper planning would allow you to take levels in pretty much any class that was originally allowed.

[sirgog]

Flavor I can see but multiclassing away from paladin or monk in pnp only prevents you from taking another level in that class. It doesn't prevent you from using any powers gained from that class. Only moving away from a restricted alignment prevents use of powers.

Proper planning would allow you to take levels in pretty much any class that was originally allowed.

Yep (although taking the levels consecutively might possibly cause you to have slightly fewer options with respect to skill selections - a Pal3/Rog2 that for some silly reason wants the maximum possible Heal skill may be slightly worse off on skill points by taking the Pal levels together).

[frugal_gourmet]

I don't think there's much use in an adding an experience penalty. Would have little effect.

However.

It's pretty clear that having -- say -- a level 10 ranger with 2 levels of monk and 2 levels of fighter (granting 4 extra feats + extra goodness) is something that was discouraged in the original D&D by said penalty. It's clearly a powergaming trick. You would at least hesisate in PNP because:

1) You'd be penalized and the rest of your group would advance faster than you (which sucks in a real campaign).
2) Your DM would want to have a little talk with you for totally metagaming rather than playing an actual character/fantasy archetype.

I personally think they should've more carefully considered this cheese. But, it's too late now most likely.

[Joseph]

I just wanted to say - wow...

Thanks for the candid replies and total lack of flame

I have been all over Afghanistan the last two years (managed to log in two or three times I think) - so the game is basically brand new for me again - and it is REALLY nice to see a post I expected to get set on fire five minutes after posting actually receive some decent responses.

Thanks

[negative]

I don't think there's much use in an adding an experience penalty. Would have little effect.

However.

It's pretty clear that having -- say -- a level 10 ranger with 2 levels of monk and 2 levels of fighter (granting 4 extra feats + extra goodness) is something that was discouraged in the original D&D by said penalty. It's clearly a powergaming trick. You would at least hesisate in PNP because:

1) You'd be penalized and the rest of your group would advance faster than you (which sucks in a real campaign).
2) Your DM would want to have a little talk with you for totally metagaming rather than playing an actual character/fantasy archetype.

I personally think they should've more carefully considered this cheese. But, it's too late now most likely.

I think you could RP those class choices just as much as any other combination. Plus, if you made that character human, you wouldn't be taking an XP hit.

As for the OP, the reason they were removed is because they don't achieve any sort of game balance in an MMO, they are just annoying and unfun in the MMO environment.