Can we stop with the everything must be pure kick?

[Qhualor]

"Only multiclasses" is a far better situation than "only pures". The reasons why have been repeated many times already.

Multi classing is supposed to offer versatility. That is where the power should be, not making it the obvious choice over a pure because they can excel at class specific attributes.

[Axeyu]

Well, there it is, isn't it? Why does it have to be "only" anything? If the goal is more possibilities and more choices, then the clear winner should be "both".

I obviously don't disagree with that. He framed it as "no reason to go pure", I.E. only multiclasses. I just think that that is a far better situation than only pure builds.

[Qhualor]

How good you are at trapping is determined by your skill level. Your skill level is not a function of your rogue level.

Exactly, but you miss the point. You want to trap? Take levels of a class capable of trapping than invest in those class specific skills to get better at trapping. 2 levels of rogue can make a better trapper than 20 levels of rogue who has more access to improving trap skills. How it should be, the multi class should have to close the gap with a pure with gear, feats, past lives, etc.

[Axeyu]

Multi classing is supposed to offer versatility. That is where the power should be, not making it the obvious choice over a pure because they can excel at class specific attributes.

No, multiclassing is for specializing aswell. You are trying to make it look like all the classes are specialized in a specific area. That is just not the case, most classes are very versatile as pure.
Classes are not defined by specific a attribute or power, they are defined by a set of attributes or powers.


Don't bother responding if you don't also adress this:
If multiclassing is a fringe for "versatile jacks of all trade" then multiclassing is pretty much dead. The pure classes are already versatile, so if they are also strongest at any specific task then why would you ever multiclass? And if there is no significant multiclassing the game loses 90% of its character customization. Multiclassing is the only thing that makes DDOs character customization really stand out compared to other games. In periods where multiclassing has thrived we have had a near endless amount of builds being played. Every day you could see a new variation. That is just not happening when the pure meta is dominant. People just play the same no-brainer characters. Yes, making a pure build requires very little thought, and if you happen to mess up you can just respec when you do an ETR.

[FranOhmsford]

Yes, you specifically said you were upset when you started playing DDO because you "couldn't do a 'proper' multi-classed" 20/20/20 fighter/thief/mage.
https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...=1#post5690758
Try to avoid the revisionist history, mmmmmkay?

Oh for goodness' sake!

Being surprised at the changes to Multiclassing does NOT = I had 20/20/20 Multiclassed Characters in PnP!
My highest ever character was a PURE Lvl 12!

And DDO is a computer game where I knew I didn't want to play only Low level characters! I also figured it wasn't going to take a year to get a character past Lvl 10! {It didn't but Lvl 13-20 was a pain for my early characters!}.
I also wanted to play my favoured role of Fighter/Mage/Thief - Something that thanks to Mage being a Pure or Close to Pure requirement wasn't possible! {EK has helped but in my view not enough!}.
That first character ended up as a badly gimped 18 Wizard {Pale Master} / 2 Rogue {Now I know that he's NEVER going to be a Wizard again until he has 3 of each other Caster/Divine Past Life!

It actually did take me about 3 years to get him to 20 {I think he was Lvl 14 for about 6 months!}, It's taken me another 2 to get him through 2 Druid past lives!

My second character was meant to be a Fighter/Cleric - Ended up as 17 Cleric / 3 Fighter / 5 Epic {Yep she got to 20 in about 18 months and stayed there for a long time!}.
Second Life on her was Pure Cleric {TRd at 20}
Third Life is Pure Paladin {will go to 28}

This means you ignored the fact that humans could only have two classes.

That quote was specifically about Demi-Humans and Multiclassing NOT Dual-Classing Humans!

And we have already been over this anyway and it's been proved that there was NO Rule in 2nd Ed. saying that Humans could only have two classes! {It was possible to have 3, 4 or even more as a Dual-Classed Human, It was simply ludicrously unlikely based on stats!}

[FranOhmsford]

Actually, the bolded part is wrong. From the wiki: "A Ranger receives this feat for free at level 6, even if the prerequisites are not met." I know from experience that you don't have to take Point Blank Shot to get Manyshot at Ranger level 6. Paladin/Ranger is a nice combination if you're going for a Silver Flame bow user. Even without Holy Sword, you could get some nice DPS out of such a combination.

Why on Eberron would you not take PBS?

Even if you don't have to?

OK maybe you don't need to take it before Manyshot but taking it is in my view pretty much a given if you're going to be using a Bow!

[Axeyu]

Exactly, but you miss the point. You want to trap? Take levels of a class capable of trapping than invest in those class specific skills to get better at trapping. 2 levels of rogue can make a better trapper than 20 levels of rogue who has more access to improving trap skills. How it should be, the multi class should have to close the gap with a pure with gear, feats, past lives, etc.

It's not a class specific skill. You can take the skill with any class aslong as you have unlocked it. It's not the 2 levels of rogue that makes you a better trapper, it's the 18 levels of double skill investment and higher int.
It works just as intended. If you don't like the skill system that's a different topic.

[Coyopa]

Well, there it is, isn't it? Why does it have to be "only" anything? If the goal is more possibilities and more choices, then the clear winner should be "both".

This. I don't understand why people are so hung up on "one must be empirically better than the other". Why can't they be equally good, providing more build choices and making the game more interesting? I've tried to say this in other posts. Apparently, I didn't say it clearly enough. So, thank you, walkin_dude, for stating it so simply.

[Coyopa]

Why on Eberron would you not take PBS?

Even if you don't have to?

OK maybe you don't need to take it before Manyshot but taking it is in my view pretty much a given if you're going to be using a Bow!

I didn't say you wouldn't take it. I said you don't have to take it. I was simply correcting your assertion and attempting to provide you some valuable information at the same time.

[FranOhmsford]

The way I assess it, there are more fun and viable builds possible now than was the case when I first joined DDO in early 2011. You can do some very cool things by multi-classing, and you can also do pure classes, which wasn't so much the case back then.

Well yeah - There's 3 Classes that didn't exist back then for one: Arti, Druid, Warlock!
There's 6 Races that didn't exist back then: Half Elf, Half Orc, Morninglord, Bladeforged, Shadar-Kai, PDK!
The Enhancement Trees have been completely revamped and bare absolutely no resemblance to the Prestiges we had back then!

However: Ranger back then was "Never take more than 12 Ranger Levels or you are a Gimp"
Ranger now = "Never take more than 12 Ranger Levels or you are a Gimp"
So no change there then!

Monk back then was a Splash Class where unless you needed a Past Life or actually wanted to play a Monk for Flavour you didn't take more than 2 Levels!
Monk now = a Splash Class where unless you need a Past Life or actually want to play a Monk for Flavour you don't take more than 5 Levels!
Yay!

Cleric back then was take 17 levels minimum or you won't get into Groups!
FvS back then was take 18 levels minimum or you won't get into Groups!
Cleric and FvS now DON'T EXIST!


Paladin, Bard and Rogue have been updated and allow for many different Pure and Multiclass combinations yes BUT:

Barbarian back then was either Pure, a Warchanter Bardbarian or Had a couple of Fighter Levels for Feats.
And Barbarian now is PURE ONLY!

[Qhualor]

No, multiclassing is for specializing aswell. You are trying to make it look like all the classes are specialized in a specific area. That is just not the case, most classes are very versatile as pure.
Classes are not defined by specific a attribute or power, they are defined by a set of attributes or powers.


Don't bother responding if you don't also adress this:
If multiclassing is a fringe for "versatile jacks of all trade" then multiclassing is pretty much dead. The pure classes are already versatile, so if they are also strongest at any specific task then why would you ever multiclass? And if there is no significant multiclassing the game loses 90% of its character customization. Multiclassing is the only thing that makes DDOs character customization really stand out compared to other games. In periods where multiclassing has thrived we have had a near endless amount of builds being played. Every day you could see a new variation. That is just not happening when the pure meta is dominant. People just play the same no-brainer characters. Yes, making a pure build requires very little thought, and if you happen to mess up you can just respec when you do an ETR.

They should be specialized, but since MOTU we have drifted away from that. There used to be sacrifice to multi classing, but not anymore. Enhancements were revamped to allow us to dip into multiple trees and not have to specifically invest in a prestige. There was a lot of hoopla because players were complaining about front loaded and low fruit power easy enough to get making reasons to want to go pure less attractive. That's why we have seen more focus on back loading some of cores and T5 while also giving specific power to classes in thematical way like barbs get extra damage at class level 11.

Pure classes are already versatile? I guess you need to be specific. I can see rogues being versatile because they can dps and scroll heal. I don't see fighters as very versatile because they can dps but not heal, trap, CC, only have what's available to them in the 3 fighter trees, racial and for some, Harper tree.

Multi classing has always been considered like a jack of all trades. They can do multiple things that some classes can't do, but it shouldn't mean they should be the best at it or the worst either. It all depends on the investment.

Putting in how much thought into a build on a pure shouldn't matter when talking about multi classing to acquire another classes power. Build customization is a whole different thread. We are talking about how unbalanced the power is when 2/6/12 levels is more powerful than, what we need more of in this game, class specific attributes.

[FranOhmsford]

I didn't say you wouldn't take it. I said you don't have to take it. I was simply correcting your assertion and attempting to provide you some valuable information at the same time.

Valuable information?

How valuable exactly when you're going to take that Feat on a Bow build anyway?

In fact it's pretty much the FIRST feat you'll take! AT LVL 1!


The fact that it's not needed for Manyshot IF you get Manyshot through Ranger Levels doesn't change this! It's just a relic from when PBS was a weak Feat....It's a very strong Feat now!

[FranOhmsford]

They should be specialized, but since MOTU we have drifted away from that. There used to be sacrifice to multi classing, but not anymore. Enhancements were revamped to allow us to dip into multiple trees and not have to specifically invest in a prestige. There was a lot of hoopla because players were complaining about front loaded and low fruit power easy enough to get making reasons to want to go pure less attractive. That's why we have seen more focus on back loading some of cores and T5 while also giving specific power to classes in thematical way like barbs get extra damage at class level 11.

Pure classes are already versatile? I guess you need to be specific. I can see rogues being versatile because they can dps and scroll heal. I don't see fighters as very versatile because they can dps but not heal, trap, CC, only have what's available to them in the 3 fighter trees, racial and for some, Harper tree.

Multi classing has always been considered like a jack of all trades. They can do multiple things that some classes can't do, but it shouldn't mean they should be the best at it or the worst either. It all depends on the investment.

Putting in how much thought into a build on a pure shouldn't matter when talking about multi classing to acquire another classes power. Build customization is a whole different thread. We are talking about how unbalanced the power is when 2/6/12 levels is more powerful than, what we need more of in this game, class specific attributes.

Let's stop beating away the bush here and accept that Giving out Tier 5s with only 5 levels of the Class associated with them is BROKEN!

We're not talking about Low Hanging Fruit!

Tier 5s are meant to be the strongest abilities of a Tree!

And you can get them with just 5 levels in that Class - This is wrong on so many levels!


Why don't the Devs just make Tempest available to Fighters, Paladins, Rogues and Barbarians and have done with it!
Why don't the Devs just make Swashbuckler available to Fighters, Rangers and Rogues?
Why don't the Devs just make Assassin available to Monks and Bards?
Why don't the Devs just make Mechanic available to Artificers?
How about making Sacred Defender available to Clerics and FvSs?
How about making Vanguard available to Barbarians? {Vikings are Barbarians and tended to use Axe and Board! Yet Shield use is not covered in any way for Barbarians in DDO!}.

[Coyopa]

Valuable information?

How valuable exactly when you're going to take that Feat on a Bow build anyway?

In fact it's pretty much the FIRST feat you'll take! AT LVL 1!


The fact that it's not needed for Manyshot IF you get Manyshot through Ranger Levels doesn't change this! It's just a relic from when PBS was a weak Feat....It's a very strong Feat now!

Valuable from the standpoint that you'll stop telling people you're required to take Point Blank Shot to get Manyshot, even when splashing 6 ranger. There is value in posting good and accurate information, you know.

[Enoach]

Point Blank Shot is valuable if you are planning to use your Bow within that range - There are ways to expand it.

If you are using the Hybrid Melee/Range approach the value of Point Blank Shot is lower simply because if you are in that range you are more likely to be using your melee weapon.

So if you do plan on holding the bow more often then Point Blank Shot and any enhancement to improve its range is valuable in increasing your Bow DPS as you are trading it for the number of swings you could get as melee.

In DDO the Ranger class is set up much better as a Hybrid Melee/Range incorporating features of both. Giving a player First Strike while running to the fray. These features are available in the first 6 levels so it makes 6 Ranger a very good base for builds that want Bow with TWF.

In PnP you would be going one path or the other but not everything that was iconic ranger was added to DDO, so Turbine choose giving them Hybrid model.

[Axeyu]

They should be specialized, but since MOTU we have drifted away from that. There used to be sacrifice to multi classing, but not anymore. Enhancements were revamped to allow us to dip into multiple trees and not have to specifically invest in a prestige. There was a lot of hoopla because players were complaining about front loaded and low fruit power easy enough to get making reasons to want to go pure less attractive. That's why we have seen more focus on back loading some of cores and T5 while also giving specific power to classes in thematical way like barbs get extra damage at class level 11.

Pure classes are already versatile? I guess you need to be specific. I can see rogues being versatile because they can dps and scroll heal. I don't see fighters as very versatile because they can dps but not heal, trap, CC, only have what's available to them in the 3 fighter trees, racial and for some, Harper tree.

Multi classing has always been considered like a jack of all trades. They can do multiple things that some classes can't do, but it shouldn't mean they should be the best at it or the worst either. It all depends on the investment.

Putting in how much thought into a build on a pure shouldn't matter when talking about multi classing to acquire another classes power. Build customization is a whole different thread. We are talking about how unbalanced the power is when 2/6/12 levels is more powerful than, what we need more of in this game, class specific attributes.

You are constantly saying how things should be and are supposed to be, without giving any reasons why.
It's pointless for me to try to argue against "because that's how I want it".

I, and others, have given many good reasons why it's important that multiclassing is alive and well (which is always at the cost of pure builds). None of it has been adressed for some reason.

[Gremmlynn]

As I think I've stated multiple times: Many of the rules even in older editions of D&D were nonsensical and there were a lot of places where House Rules took over from the very basic rules in the PHB/DMG.
The Complete Handbook sets are in my view invaluable in clarifying a lot of these!

One thing to remember about those books. They were a product of the "post coup" TSR. So selling those splat books had a big influence on their content. In other words, adding favorable (to the purchaser) rules options to drive sales tended to override game balance concerns. Not so bad with 2e, but taken to the extent that 3.5 took splat books resulted in Pun-Pun the omnipotent Kobold.

I haven't changed my mind about Fighter/Paladin or Fighter/Ranger or Fighter/Barb - I still feel that those should be valid multiclass options.
I even find Barb/Ranger to be a Lore specific exception!
My feelings are heavily based on Lore than Law and I don't agree with Paladin/Ranger or Paladin/Barb {which thankfully isn't possible anyway} for that reason alone!

With 2e rules, why would anyone even want to multi-class fighter and paladin? It would basically just mean taking twice as much xp to level for no real gain.

Also, barbarians only existed as a kit that most classes could take, not as a class onto itself. Late 1e had it, as well as cavaliers and archers, as a class but that was dropped with 2e.

[Vooduspyce]

I will admit it.... I love to multiclass. I love to try and fit class levels together to make some nicely working combos. I am getting rather ?annoyed? I guess you would call it with all the people that seem to think all the most powerful things MUST be in the 18/20 core.... Its annoying and completely contradictory to the whole point of having the build flexibility we do in this game. Should certain abilities be so powerful to be a must have for certain archtypes be so powerful to be a must? I dont think so either.

Should pure builds be viable? heck yes. Should they be the best? nope not in the least. A pure build is the easiest and simplest build to plan and as such should not be made to be the absolute best.

Just wanted to see what others think about the recent everything should be pure kick the forums seems to be headed down....

I didn't know this was a thing now but I'm really glad to see some capstone abilities that make it worthwhile to go pure. I like the theme of pure classing and getting awesome capstones. I think the most powerful abilities in a class should be at the highest levels.

[Gremmlynn]

"pure should be best" why?

First off there are specialties or graduations or degrees of roles or abilities that "classes" don't cover, there are also flavor archetypes that the classes don't cover... the original impetus to multiclass was to blend two classes into something that more covers BOTH the utility and the flavor aspects of some Fantasy heroic archetype or someones personal "character they dreamed up". Pure Classes are often too rigid to do a good job of expressing those ideas, utilities and flavors.

Let me point out an example: the classic mythology and 80's pop culture mixture Ninja Assassin you can't be an assassin without Rogue levels in DDO so multiclassing is required for a ninja assassin...however the game has Assassin so tightly pigeonholed into pure 20 Rogue only that even 6 levels of monk severely gimp the DC's and result in a mostly flavor character that can't really serve the archetype or allow someone to create what DDO doesn't already have.

I would hope that any reasonable person would view this as a shortcoming of the game, too rigidly defining assassin. I view it that way. As a DM I would relax the assassinate DC formula to Half rogue levels with a higher base DC thus taking a loss of 6 DC down to say a loss of 3 DC (rework these numbers however you want to for balance this is just an example) allowing someone to create a Ninja Assassin if they wanted that was losing some assassinate specialty but not so much that it plays lousy.

As a DM I would do the same. But for the person who tries to grab off some low hanging fruit and is thinking more power than flavor, I wouldn't.

Sadly mixed into this conversation irrevocably is the arbitrary "I think multiclass is nearly cheating" aspect that some people for whatever reason feel, and usually express as sentiments like "pure should always be best" without any reasoning to go with it.

Why? Why should it be best? Because you say so? Are you doing something creative by going pure? Are you exploring uncharted waters? Are you taking a risk that your character will be less able when finished?

Nope...

It's because you prefer no one be able to multi class except for flavor only because gaining abilities is next to cheating in your eyes and "because I say so" doesn't ring your own internal "Uh oh I am about to say something arbitrary in 3..2..1" self censor.

There are a lot of people in this thread who love to just say so... they don't have a reason, they don't even know their own reason, they just arbitrarily say things like "pure should always be best" this is actually a classic logical fallacy disguised as a completely arbitrary irrational preference... it's a disguised appeal to authority, Pure must be best because that's the way the makers first designed it, and the makers couldn't be wrong! if the makers can be wrong it upsets their concrete world view of everything the maker did being "the best".

I am on board with making pure 20 the best specialist (not the ONLY specialist just the best), the most practiced and learned at one class specialty... But by in large that's not what they are doing with core 18 and 20, they are just handing out generic heaping chunks of DPS and mitigation. With the old Enhancement pass T5's being the way to specialize currently; the cores have become the place to back up the dump truck and make the whole class much more powerful overall, instead of the place there the "diploma of specialization" is obtained. The cherry on top is fast becoming the Steak and Potatoes.

Mostly because it is competing with 5 levels for enhancement trees and other low hanging fruit.

[Duskofdead]

And vice versa.

Again I would have left years ago without the puzzle of builds. One sided? Am I supposed to enjoy the loss of what I value the game for most because some people don't like multi-classing and secretly think of it as "cheating" (some of them even just outright say it)

So by all means disagree all you want, I am here because of build customization, and I wont be if that keeps going away. I don't need to point out that I'm not alone in that, you all know very well that it's what draws a lot of us to the game.

What you addressed in this post is not what we disagree about. Nothing in my post even remotely implied either "remove customized multiclassing, or neuter it into pointlessness." I responded to you essentially saying you think multiclassing should be able to access, equal, and/or surpass anything a pure class can do in its various constituent splashes or mixings. To which my response remains unaddressed: if that's what you want, why even allow pure classes. Why not cap any individual class at 12? If the game worked as you apparently want it to, the only reason for any pure class option to be there is to trap people into gimp builds.

My sympathy for what you want ends when you essentially plant a flag saying that all you care is about what you want, and you don't care if there's any other viable option. Which is exactly what you are doing. (And, ironically, you paint people who think pure classes should have any sort of edge in that class over mixers as being guilty of exactly that.)