<sarcasm>Originally Posted by Failedlegend
Ok I'm gonna get started...I'll be editing this post when I'm done so bear with me
Remember all my below statements are guesses on whats in which enhancements ends up where but its the best we can do right now.
Wizard12/Fighter6/Rogue2 (PM2/SD1) "Arcane Knight"
Now let's see enhancements
Ok so let's that tallies up to Palemaster, Stalwart, Kensai, Archmage, Wild Mage, Mech and possibly Assassin...so that 6 Trees..possibly 7.....yep that one is brokeCode:Enhancement: Fighter Armor Class Boost I Stalwart Enhancement: Rogue Damage Boost I Likely Assassin Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost II Kensai Enhancement: Rogue Skill Boost I Mech Enhancement: Dwarven Armor Mastery I Enhancement: Dwarven Axe Damage I Enhancement: Fighter Armor Mastery I Stalwart Enhancement: Fighter Stalwart Defender I Stalwart Enhancement: Wizard Improved Empowering III Wild Mage? Enhancement: Wizard Improved Maximizing III Wild Mage? Enhancement: Racial Toughness I Enhancement: Racial Toughness II Enhancement: Improved Intimidate I Stalwart Enhancement: Improved Intimidate II Stalwart Enhancement: Improved Open Lock I Mech Enhancement: Improved Search I Mech Enhancement: Acid Manipulation I Enhancement: Frost Manipulation I Enhancement: Storm Manipulation I Enhancement: Flame Manipulation I Unsure but their likely going to be split up Enhancement: Wizard Energy of the Scholar I Archmage? Enhancement: Wizard Energy of the Scholar II Archmage? Enhancement: Wizard Intelligence I Enhancement: Wizard Intelligence II Probably all 3 Enhancement: Fighter Strength II Kensai Enhancement: Fighter Toughness II Stalwart Enhancement: Wizard Wand and Scroll Mastery I Enhancement: Wizard Wand and Scroll Mastery II Enhancement: Wizard Pale Master II Palemaster Enhancement: Shroud of the Wraith Palemaster Enhancement: Shroud of the Zombie Palemaster
Sorc16/Paladin2/Rogue2 "Tukaw"
Damage spells are likely to be split up so that Wild Mage, Palemaster & Archmage than he has HP boost from Defender of Syberis, than there's rogue haste boost which is likely Acrobat and SKill boost which is mech, SA Boost yeah thats Assassin.Code:max in fire/cold 40% in force, max lineage of force (9% crit) but none in boost crit sneak damage bonus +3 full wf power attack (-8 +16) skill boost +2 haste boost 1 inscribe armor +3 cha, +1 dex, +1 con, +40 hp (30 racial and 10 pally) OK this one is a little less fleshed out..but here goes
So Tukaw clocks in at 7 Trees...yep that one is broken
Ok next up lets go with its Wizard cousin the "Mind Filleter"
Monk12/Wiz7/Fighter1
Code:Enhancement: Fighter Haste Boost I Kensai Enhancement: Fighter Strategy (Stunning Blow) I Kensai Enhancement: Static Charge Enhancement: Way of the Patient Tortoise III Enhancement: Touch of Death Ninja Spy Enhancement: Fists of Iron Enhancement: Porous Soul Enhancement: All-Consuming Flame Enhancement: Monk Improved Recovery II Shintao Enhancement: Monk Ninja Spy II Ninja Spy Enhancement: Winter's Touch Enhancement: Master of Stone Enhancement: Master of Bonfires These ones a little hard to place Enhancement: Racial Toughness II Enhancement: Improved Balance IV Enhancement: Improved Concentration IV Enhancement: Improved Jump II Enhancement: Improved Tumble II Enhancement: Acid Manipulation I Enhancement: Frost Manipulation I Enhancement: Storm Manipulation I Enhancement: Flame Manipulation I Likely a mix of all 3 wiz prestiges Enhancement: Wizard Energy of the Scholar I Enhancement: Wizard Intelligence I Enhancement: Monk Wisdom II Enhancement: Fighter Toughness I Stalwart Enhancement: Wizard Wand and Scroll Mastery II Enhancement: Wizard Pale Master I Palemaster Enhancement: Shroud of the Zombie Palemaster
Ok when we look at Monk its really hard to place abilities but it will likely take at least 2 PrEs, than from fighter stuff we have Kensai and Stalwart and than for wizard there's at LEAST Palemaster but the elements will likely be broken up so could be all 3...so that tallies up to any where between 5 & 9 Trees...regardless this build is broken.
Want me to show more I'm pretty sure these remaining builds won't fair any better. Even if the above and below builds aren't completely broken they at LEAST lose ALOT...and honestly there's no reason NOT to remove the 3 Tree Limit.....its your turn guys now that I proved builds WILL be broken or at least brought down to a few rungs. Now prove to me that there's reason NOT to unlock it (and no your "options" math is bubcus try something else)
Rogue13/Favored Soul6/Monk1 (Acro2/AoV1) "Favoured Pole"
Rogue13/Monk6/Fighter1 (Acro2/NS1) "Ugly Stick"
Monk12/Fighter6/Rogue2 (NS2/Kensai1) "Monkcher"
Arty8/Rogue6/Ranger6 (BE1/Mech1/DWS1) "Long-shot"
Also the only system that is changing is enhancements so debating anything outside of that is frankly unrelated.
After seeing that breakdown I am 100% certain these builds will all be better than they are today.
Just look at all the AP they will save by not being able to waste them on trees we dont think are useful the build concept. Top that off with a racial prestige (that doesn't fit in the limit but whatever) and you will be that much more uber. Ignore the fact that you would have been better if you never multiclassed in the first place and that every build rolled after this point will be strictly better than yours. You will be better than you are today though so you will love it. trust me
</sarcasm>
Results 2,941 to 2,960 of 5050
Thread: Let's Talk: Enhancements!
-
01-24-2012, 10:45 AM #2941Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 34
<sarcasm> Originally Posted by Failedlegend
After seeing that breakdown I am 100% certain these builds will all be better than they are today.
Just look at all the AP they will save by not being able to waste them on trees we dont think are useful the build concept. Top that off with a racial prestige (that doesn't fit in the limit but whatever) and you will be that much more uber. Ignore the fact that you would have been better if you never multiclassed in the first place and that every build rolled after this point will be strictly better than yours. You will be better than you are today though so you will love it. trust me
</sarcasm>
-
01-24-2012, 10:57 AM #2942Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 34
Another thought
Lets say they implement the changes as presented with a three tree limit. What if at some point down the road they decide they really want to add a new PrE? What happens to all the enhancements that were split among the 3 original trees? Do they create a full tree of new enhancements only available to that PrE? What happens to builds at that point? Does everyone get access to 4 trees now since at least one class would have 4 PrEs?
-
01-24-2012, 11:02 AM #2943The Mad Multiclasser
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Posts
- 0
This is why I honestly think a tab system similar to the Spell UI would work much better in the first place and would be future proof for any additions....and stuff like the Arty's Dog (hopefully in the future Ranger Animal Companion,Familiars and Halfing Dinos) would have a spot to go. It could even have the Summary of Enhancements Page where amount of points spent in each tree...you class levels and any received PrE bonuses are well summarized Originally Posted by boomer70
Last edited by Failedlegend; 01-24-2012 at 11:04 AM.
Originally Posted by Cordovan
-
01-24-2012, 11:07 AM #2944Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 3,930
It is obvious that we are looking at and discussing the most likely hypotheses given the info we have. There's much more to that than "guesswork". Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
I said accurately. Yes there is a LOT of guesswork happening at this point. I thought that would be fairly obvious however after 2,900 posts!
But you've been speaking about Genghis, and SDI/NSII builds remaining viable, yet are unwilling to entertain any attempt to compare them to pure or splash builds.As for which builds remain viable or gain more mojo, I used the word potentially.
OK, then let's discuss. I gave my analysis of how I think an SDIII/NSII pure Monk is likely to compare in the new system. What do you think of it?That doesnt mean we cant talk about how actual builds may prosper/or may not prosper with what we know at this point.
So far, anytime anyone attempts to compare builds, you just say we can't, because we don't know enough yet. Yet you are willing to speculate on how "viable" certain builds will be. It seems like you're willing to engage in speculation only when you're trying to prove your own points.
But talk such as "the ruleset described in this thread is likely to move in a direction away from viable multiclassing" is entirely reasonable at this time. Which is the point I've been trying to make. Reserving such talk is entirely counterproductive to the point of the thread.I would reserve talk such as ITS BROKEN! until we get more info on tree structure, access and exactly what they contain.
We can make reasonable hypotheses about the unknown info, and use them to draw reasonable conclusions on what the implications of ruleset described in this thread are likely to be.
-
01-24-2012, 11:30 AM #2945Community Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 0
Answers in beige. Originally Posted by dkyle
I will say deep splashes like 9/9/2, 10/6/4, 10/8/2 etc might seem the most challenging. However its perfectly possible that they also gain depending on the details in those builds and the details yet forthcoming from Turbine. Its the really deep splashes that I expect will become the most reliant on the new enhancements and tree access rules that we just dont have information on yet. That does not mean they are doomed, but there will be those that will insist "its broken", until the day Turbine releases a workable model with all the small print so we can create new toons and morph our builds into the new format.
Last edited by LeslieWest_GuitarGod; 01-24-2012 at 11:41 AM.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Dungeons & Dragons Online Guild
No Drama. Cameraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | GHALLANDA GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
-
01-24-2012, 11:36 AM #2946Founder
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,903
This is all speculative. Devs have already said some enhancements will be going away completely, likely some of them you list. We've also had feedback that suggests that some enhancements will be combined. Also there is no way to know what tree an exisitng enhancement gets put in. Originally Posted by Failedlegend
Im not necessarily for limiting of trees but this kind of speculation does nothing for saying that they should do away with it.
People saying a three class character gets only 33% of their current options is blatently false as currently those three split characters don't have full access to a class line anyways. A ftr tree with 12 levels in it is not the equal of a rog tree with only 2 levels in it. So if the new system goes in and I use my 13 rog 6 ftr 1 monk and I take two trees of rog and one ftr I probably still have access to well over 50% of the enhancements that would be available to me if there was no tree limit. Sure I could take three monk trees but that would be pretty moronic on my part.
What it really boils down to as far as whether to allow more trees is does limiting the trees still allow us to make equal or better characters than we have now. And also would having access to 6 tier 1 pre's for a 6/6/8 type build be too OP when compared to someone running two tier 3 pre's form the same class.
I don't think the 6 tier 1 prestige character would be op. With the exception of course of stacking stat enhancements that would probably need to be removed if all tiers are opened up. A dual tier 3 prestige character would probably be much more focused and stronger.
However, that's really hard for me to say with any certainty without knowing what each pre entails and what enhancements are available in each tree.
This thread has blown up into way too much speculative banter over the same topics that are rehashed over and over.
-
01-24-2012, 11:51 AM #2947Founder
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,903
Not sure anyone would understand it better than anyone else as so little information has been put out there. A lot of assumptions have to be made to even speculate what you could or could not take. First most in your example would be can human's even take stalwart. Originally Posted by grodon9999
From what has been put out though I would think in your case you would be more limited by total action points. Feat requirements should be going away from what I can tell which will be a big boon to tempests. Tempest III would be 30 points stalwart another 30 (either would go to 41 if you are able to take and want the capstone). You have to also take a set number of human tree points to unlock stalwart. You would definitely not be able to take anything from the other two ranger lines if you wanted rog stuff. However it may be more beneficial to you to drop any rog stuff as you can only get 1 levels worth of stuff for a second ranger tree like deepwood for some favored bonuses.
I think it's far more likely for something to get broken in this new setup from some combo of new enhancements versus someone not getting enough of what they already have.
-
01-24-2012, 11:57 AM #2948Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 3,930
Of course we are. And there is nothing wrong with that. We're giving feedback on the specific set of rules described in this thread, and what we expect is likely to happen if they were to be released. We're not able to discuss what the game will actually be when the new system is released, with any real certainty, but that's entirely besides the point. Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
Future information, and changes in plans, will not change my opinion of the specific set of rules described in this thread so far. Only arguments on the basis of the info we know now can change my opinion on the ruleset we've been told about so far. Once we find out more, we'll be looking at a new set of rules, and my opinion on those rules may very well be different than my opinion on the current set of rules. But it would be silly to let that stop me from giving feedback on the current set of rules.
Except that you have expressed a quite clear opinion that both Genghis and Emerald builds are likely to be viable. A declaration of viability inherently implies a comparison to all possible alternative builds. Why is it that you can express a clear, and seemingly quite certain, opinion on that, but looking at even a single comparison is just impossible for you?At this point, I just don't consider it feasible. Now I'm not trying to stop you from coming to your own conclusions, however I'm going to reserve judgement until I have more information about the tree structure, access and costs involved. Without that information, there's not a whole lot of certainty that can be drawn.
Since I dont know what's in those trees, I have no opinion at this point, sorry.
We're looking at SDI/NSII vs. SDIII/NSII. How can you not have a sense of which is likely to be stronger? The pure Monk gets basically all the enhancements the multiclass split gets, and more. There have been no class feature changes stated in this thread, so 20 Monk vs 14Monk/6 Fighter shouldn't be a mystery. Really the only unknown variable is if there's a race with racial enhancements that's incredibly well suited for the build, moreso than Dwarf. Does that really seem likely?
And I do not disagree. But this does not mean that Emerald and Genghis will remain viable builds. Viability is about comparison to alternatives. If you cannot compare builds (as you've said you can't), then calling a build "viable" is meaningless.Aash and I both believe the Emerald and Genghis lose very little and potentially gain.
Essentially, making a reasonable hypothesis of viability requires the ability to make reasonable hypotheses about comparisons of builds. Yet you are claiming that one is possible, and the other is not.
But what benefit is there to requiring the degree of certainty you're demanding? Why is it better to throw up our hands and say "we can't even try to compare builds", instead of doing the best we can? We don't need to be absolutely certain of anything at this point. Or even close to certain. Any feedback regarding what biases and tendencies might be present, no matter how subtle or uncertain, in the ruleset the devs have presented to us, is potentially useful feedback. We're not deciding whether to respec or delete characters, or stop playing, or actually changing the game ourselves. We're just giving feedback.Reasonable is the big word there. I think its perfectly natural that we can see totally different outcomes from the same set of criteria.
-
01-24-2012, 12:09 PM #2949Community Member
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Posts
- 4,666
I have to agree with Cyr here... Pointing out all the possible worthless combos like it's a good thing scares me. Ten good builds, and 54,000 crappy ones is not a good system... Originally Posted by Cyr
All we care about is that we still have 100+ decent builds like we do today. Originally Posted by Teh_Troll
Originally Posted by Eth
Originally Posted by TedSandyman
-
01-24-2012, 12:14 PM #2950Community Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 42
My hubby & I have been playing on DDO for over 4 yrs and we play daily. My first year was literally spent creating and deleting toons as I learned 'how' to build. If this new system makes it easier on noobs, so be it, as long as it doesn't hinder the dedicated and experienced players.
I am concerned with the possiblility of nerfing custom built toons via unnecessary pre-reqs. Some enhancements are just unrealistic when you have a vision of what you want your toon to be.
It'll be a pain when all the enhancements are reset, specifically for players that have multiple toons on multiple servers. I have 6 on Sarlona, 4 on Cannith, etc. etc. This 'reset' is going to be seriously time consuming, in particular for level 20's and TR's.
I'd also agree completely that the nerfing of rangers needs to be corrected. Its one of my favorite classes to play.
I'm just going to keep my fingers crossed and hope this all works out for the best. I maintain a certain amount of faith in the developers, as its in their best interest to draw more players to the game, not drive them away. I'm sure they have the interest of the dedicated players at heart. Guess we'll see when the changes take place.
-
01-24-2012, 12:18 PM #2951Community Member
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Posts
- 4,666
Actually, it's the opposite... Most crys of "It's going to break the game!" have been completely wrong in the past... Originally Posted by Failedlegend
I'm willing to mostly wait and see without declaring doom... I'm very glad we get a chance to offer feedback. Originally Posted by Teh_Troll
Originally Posted by Eth
Originally Posted by TedSandyman
-
01-24-2012, 12:19 PM #2952Community Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Posts
- 8,517
Originally Posted by LeLoric
its' still looking like my pures, 18/1/1s, and 18/2s will wind-up getting better with these changes. My 12/6/2s on the other hand we'll have to see. It won't be able to get everything I want but a net-gain is looking likely.
Turbine needs to give us more information.
-
01-24-2012, 12:24 PM #2953Community Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Posts
- 11,045
I see you guys are tralking about the Ghengis build...
I think the Ghengis is going to be blown right off the map. Ive been playing one for 4+ years now with X bard 2 fighter 2 barbarian - (cap being 20 its 16/2/2) - Its a fantastic melee warchanter.
Why be anything less than 20 bard when its likely the most popular and functional bards will be pure + racial combat PRE.
Hmmm, 2 capstones over 0 capstones possible, enhancements, spells, and buffs all the way to 20, on top of whatever racial PRE you choose.
What would you gain from 2barbarian + 2fighter enhancement wise that doesnt get completely destroyed by being able to go up 2 bard trees and an entire racial melee PRE? Top that off with more spell points for not splashing, capstone, +1 more hit and damage on song.
Going up spellsinger AND warchanter tree + racial combat tree will turn multiclass bards into second rate builds. Heres where the discussion splits because while the "optimists" (LOL) will claim that the new bards will still be more powerful than the old ones were, the realists (s'right) understand that we have entered the cookie cutter bard era. Trees will likely be warchanter + spellsinger + racial combat. 16/2/2 wont hold a candle to it. The reasons to take barbarian and fighter levels decrease due to the three tree limit. I like my point of con, point of str, extra rage, 10 more HP, run speed, attack speed boost, but if you take all that, now you have to be either warchanter OR spellsinger - cant be both. Goodbye Ghengis, nice knowing ye....Was a great build under the current system, but will disappear once we can be both warchanter and spellsinger in the same bard, with a three tree limit. Ghengis is a perfect example of a build that WOULD BE viable if there was no tree limit, because all the enhancements from barbarian and fighter can still be taken while still being able to go up spellsinger and warchanter trees. This will not be the case however.... Originally Posted by Teh_Troll
-
01-24-2012, 12:31 PM #2954Community Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 0
Very true. This is exactly why until we get more data, there is no way to know for certain how one build compares to another, as we don't even know what the prestiges will come packaged with and how they will relate to each other. Originally Posted by dkyle
We can only speak loosely at this point, and I agree fully, as I've said all along, our opinions may change drastically when Turbine divulges more info.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Dungeons & Dragons Online Guild
No Drama. Cameraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | GHALLANDA GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
-
01-24-2012, 12:43 PM #2955Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 3,930
We don't need to be certain how one build compares to another! I am not claiming to be certain. It is needlessly restrictive to demand certainty at this stage. That is the whole point I'm trying to make, that you keep dodging. What we believe is likely given the available evidence is sufficient for the purposes of feedback. Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
And you seem to understand this on some level, seeing as you've made statements about the viability of Genghis and Emerald. All I'm asking is why those statements are certain enough to be said, yet a comparison of Emerald and pure Monk is somehow so uncertain it can't even be attempted. Again, a statement of viability requires the ability to compare builds. Claiming that a build will be viable is a stronger claim than comparing two specific builds, because the claim of viability inherently implies a comparison to all alternatives. Do you not agree?
First, whether or not our opinions may change drastically is entirely besides the point. This thread is about the specific set of rules that the devs have proposed. We should not withhold our feedback or throw up our hands and give up just because our opinions might change with more info. That defeats the whole point of the thread.We can only speak loosely at this point, and I agree fully, as I've said all along, our opinions may change drastically when Turbine divulges more info.
Second, you haven't always been speaking "loosely".
These statements both sound at least as certain as anything I currently believe about where the system will end up:
Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
Why can you make statements like these, but not compare what you expect of Emerald vs. Pure Monk? Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
But, I cant imagine a mixed class monk with 800+ hp, 40+ saves, 90+ AC with an abundance of DPS and further gains from the new trees have a whole lot to worry about!
-
01-24-2012, 12:52 PM #2956Community Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 0
Ok Chai, anyone who starts off with "Why be anything less than..." makes me laugh. Such a narrow viewpoint is not very well fitted for character creation, most certainly not a bard! Originally Posted by Chai
There will be plenty of reasons for bards to multi-class in the new system. Pure bards do not get 100% ownership in any tree. There hopefully will be many reasons to go pure or to go multi, and if I need to make adjustments I'm perfectly willing to make them if they make sense to the build.
Now about the "blown out of the water" comment, you are on dream street...
Bards versatility will make it much more likely to integrate smoothly into the new system. I think bards might be gaining the most of all the classes out of these changes, as we get rehauled enhancements and finished PrEs, its just pure unlettered to think any bard is "blown out of the water" at this early stage (6+ months to go, and very incomplete info released thusfar, including absolutely nothing about bard PrEs).
You are welcome to debate in my thread this summer whether the choices I make are valid or not, and whether it is worth persuading as a build option vs pures, or any other split. Im going on my intuition that there room for almost everybody, if you plan effectively.Last edited by LeslieWest_GuitarGod; 01-24-2012 at 01:04 PM.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Dungeons & Dragons Online Guild
No Drama. Cameraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | GHALLANDA GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
-
01-24-2012, 12:56 PM #2957Ultimate Completionist
2014 DDO Players Council
Open Guild for All Founder - Hardcore
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Posts
- 0
Silly, silly, silly me...
Overlooking the obvious that I already know.
Epic level are coming.
The level cap will eventually go to 30 (maybe higher).
Going back to the Epic Rules for 3rd edition handbook~~
When one hits level 21, one can take an epic level in a class that already has 20 levels,
or you can take a level in another class.
Hence, a fighter might have 20 normal levels along with 10 epic levels,
or a fighter might have 18 normal levels for Kensie 3 along with 12 cleric levels for Radiant Servant 2.
Obviously the list would go on, and the Epic enhancements are separate from heroic enhancements, but the class potential splits could be far different than people are describing here in this thread.
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Epic_Level_Basics
-
01-24-2012, 12:58 PM #2958Founder
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,903
2 capstones is 82 total ap spent not mention the ap spent for racial lines to unlock the racial pre. Originally Posted by Chai
Bards are notoriously light on feats and even with some relaxing of feat requirements a splash for feats alone is probably still going to be a decent choice. 16/2/2 may no longer be that good but if they sayed with the current setup and added just tier 3 of warchanter odds are the 16/2/2 would morph to 18/2 anyways. I think many melee focused bards may go 18/2 warchanter 3 and racial like you said with the two ftr being for feats and maybe a small splash into kensai tree or possibly pdk depending on what it does. 18/1/1 may be good too and keep the run speed many love.
-
01-24-2012, 01:01 PM #2959Founder
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,903
Yeah in all reality things will probably see a slight increase for the most part even if they don't get exactly what they have now. Originally Posted by grodon9999
More info would be nice yes. Tease us a little more with some tidbit today MadFloyd.
-
01-24-2012, 01:01 PM #2960Community Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 3,930
What rules described in this thread seem likely to increase viability of deep multi-class and multi-splash Bards, compared to pure or single-splash Bards? Because, obviously, being unable to reasonably take enhancements from those Rogue/Fighter/Barb levels tends to reduce the viability of multiclasses, compared to the current system. What new rule do you believe counterbalances that loss, in favor of deep multis? Originally Posted by LeslieWest_GuitarGod
Or are you simply speculating based on wishful thinking, and just assuming that the devs will get it right, and accomplish the goals they've stated? Your "hopefully" sounds like that's the case.
