4th edition

[Vicente]

I might be wrong, but you can swap a power of any level when you multiclass (as long as it's equal or lower level than the power you are swaping), you aren't tied to heroic tier powers only. And you can choose a second class instead of a Paragon Path if you want to truly multiclass (humans with their extra at will power are great for this).

So I don't see many problems translating someone like the Gorgon from 3e to 4e.

[Vicente]

I've been checking Wizards site and now I'm sure you can swap a power of any level. What you can't do is change a power gained specifically from your Paragon Path or Epic Destiny:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080430a

But you can change normal powers as shown in this excerpt:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080416a

If you check the table, you'll see that powers are changed when you gains levels. For example, at level 13 you can change your level 1 encounter power for a level 13 encounter power. So you could change your level 1 warrior encounter power for a level 13 wizard power (if you have the feats). But you can't change the power marked as P (from the Paragon Path).

[Blackfrost]

You can do a bit more power swapping if you choose to give up access to your Paragon Path. It would cost you a total of four feats do do it though (the multiclass feat along with the three mentioned below).

Here's the rule on how to do it:

Paragon Multiclassing

If you have the Novice Power, Acolyte Power, and Adept Power feats for a class, you can choose to continue to gain powers from that class rather than take a paragon path. If you choose this option, you gain several benefits. At 11th level, you can choose to replace one of your at-will powers with an at-will power from your second class. In place of the paragon path encounter power gained at 11th level, you can select any encounter power of 7th level or lower from your second class. In place of the paragon path utility power gained at 12th level, you can select any utility power of 10th level or lower from your second class. In place of the paragon path daily power gained at 20th level, you can select any daily power of 19th level or lower from your second class.

At 30th level, the maximum number of powers you will is 2/4/4/7 (modified by race) which is at-will/encounter/daily/utility. Unless your race grants you bonus powers this is the most that you can ever have.

I feel it's worth it to take the multiclass feat because you get a skill, once power, acccess to feats retricted to that class, and, in some cases access to magic items usable by that class.

[geeman]

When it comes to multi-classing in 4e it looks like its a set of
feats and then possibly switching around into "paragon" classes (4e`s
version of "prestige classes") at 11-20th levels. It might look a
bit odd to folks at first glance but being multi-classed in 4e
doesn`t require actually taking levels in a character class.

This shouldn`t really be a problem in BR. A lot of folks thought
multi-classing would be a bad thing when 3e came out because of RP
collection, but that never really seemed to be a problem in
practice. I don`t think that will be an issue in 4e either.

However, it will be a bit odd in trying to portray certain D&D
characters who in the original materials have multi- or dual
classed. The classic being, of course, the Gorgon, whose 16 wizard
levels are so problematic. But I think we could probably get away
pretty easily with 10 fighter levels, some "paragon" levels in an
appropriate class, some multi-class feats and then remaining levels
in paragon or epic classes that have to do with wizards. It`s kind
of hard to resist the possibility of the Gorgon having levels in the
demi-god epic level class, since that would appear to be his stony
heart`s desire, but I don`t think the powers and abilities of that
class really reflect the Gorgon all that well... and his inability to
take such levels might be an appropriate way of reflecting his
failure in that regard.

Of course, 4e also wants characters to "retire" at 30th level and
seems to have capped progression at that point, but as an iconic
campaign setting NPC we can surely ignore that sort of thing.

Gary

[Vicente]

Yeah, probably multiclassing into a wizard Paragon path would be a nice idea for the Gorgon (I think there's one that allows to use swords as implements, so something along those lines could be nice for him). Add the human bonus at will power and feat, take the power swap feats and you could get a nice character. For the epic destiny the probem seems more related to the lack of destinies in the Player Handbook, let's hope the Martial Sourcebook or future books solve that.

And about the level 30 thing, I agree there shouldn't be any problem having more than that, as there are monsters higher than level 30 in the Monster Manual (at least one, Orcus).

[Rowan]

If multiclassing is a problem because of the number of feats required, it may be possible to make a simple tweak to allow versatility more akin to some of the other major RPG's, where characters can essentially choose almost any powers and build their characters with little in the way of class-based straightjackets. That tweak might be just reducing the number of feats required to allow a character to select from another classes' options. Mixing and matching powers should be much easier in this edition than in any other because they are balanced better by level and broken down into easily-swappable at-will, encounter, daily, and ritual powers.

[geeman]

At 08:02 AM 6/2/2008, Rowan wrote:
>If multiclassing is a problem because of the number of feats required, it may be possible to make a simple tweak to allow versatility more akin to some of the other major RPG`s, where characters can essentially choose almost any powers and build their characters with little in the way of class-based straightjackets. That tweak might be just reducing the number of feats required to allow a character to select from another classes` options. Mixing and matching powers should be much easier in this edition than in any other because they are balanced better by level and broken down into easily-swappable at-will, encounter, daily, and ritual powers.

It looks like characters get a lot more feats in 4e than they did before, so my impression is that the number of them will not be that much of an issue. From what I`ve gleaned, feats are now available every other level rather than every third, one gets an extra feat here and there, and humans get extra as a racial ability. It does look very easy to "multi-class" using feats, though, and that`ll probably be an issue for our purposes.

Because multi-classing in 4e is a bit more conceptual, that might cause some confusion when it comes to the domain system. From what I
understand, one "multi-classes" by taking feats that give the character slightly watered down versions of powers and abilities from other classes. One can`t actually take levels in that other class, though. At the point at which one switches to "paragon" (at 11th level) or "epic" (21st level), then one can take a "paragon" class for something other the character`s standard "heroic" (1-10th level) only if one has taken the appropriate "multi-class" feat(s) for that class. In fact, "multi-classing" would appear to be something of a misnomer. It looks like no character ever has more classes than any other. One takes levels of a class for 10 level blocks and then one has access to a new pool of classes, and each class pool is discretely different from earlier blocks. What is called "multi-classing" is really more like cross-classing since one doesn`t really take levels in another class any more often than one would normally.

So, if my understanding of how this`ll work is correct, those who are concerned with RP collection need to decide when a regent is actually
multi-classed. Is it when he takes the first feat? Is it when he takes several? Is it not until he takes a paragon class that differs from those available to his original class? Should a regent get half RP collection for feats and full once he`s taken actual class levels? That sort of thing.

In more definitive terms, it might look like this:

A: Regent with one path of classes. That is, a cleric who takes levels as a war priest or whatever the paragon class might be.
B: Regent who has taken a "multi-class" feat that gives him access to another class` ability. That is, a fighter who has taken a feat that
gives him an ability that belong to the wizard class.
C: Regent who has taken 2+ such feats. (I think a total of 5 are possible, but all must be from one particular class.) This could be just B1-5, if one wants to be that particular....
D: Regent who has taken levels in a paragon or epic class that belongs to a class other than his original class.

The simplest solution is probably just to say everybody from B+ is multi-classed, but I expect people will have different ways of portraying this sort of thing. After all, there were a lot of opinions on how multi-classing should work before and after 3e came out, and just about every permutation under the sun was floated at one point or another. With this feat series in there between actually taking levels in a class, I expect some folks will want to differentiate between a cleric and a fighter who has clerical abilities through a feat for the purpose of RP collection. It seems reasonable, for example, that a DM might rule that one must have at least 2 or 3 such feats before one can collect RP from another type of holding.

Gary

[kgauck]

Its still eight days from my ship date of the new books, so thoughts here are tentative, but looking back on the conversion to 3e, I rather felt that there was too much confusion of the adventure level and realm level. BR, containing a full realm level of play should have its own skills and feats. I would prefer that a facility with any kind of domain require at least a single feat (Leadership, for instance).

[Thelandrin]

Well, the Leadership feat makes perfect sense, but wasn't it deliberate that the skills you need for realm-ruling are useful in adventuring and vice versa? The feats on the other hand weren't that integrable and blood abilities were pretty much ignored in realm play.

[Rowan]

I think blood abilities should be geared at least as much towards realm-level play as adventure-level, if not moreso. Perhaps each having an adventure-level effect (an at will, encounter, or daily power) and a realm-level effect?

Part of the fun and uniqueness of BR is the divine blood of the regents, yet this has fairly little effect beyond RP measures--blood abilities really aren't that big a deal as they are right now. This being the case, I wouldn't have a problem working up something special for scions reflecting a bit more of their divine heritage. For instance, perhaps there are indeed skills specific to realm rulership, but scions also attain more feats--primarily feats allowing more and better access to the skills or to realm-level play. These are instinctive aptitudes, divine talents made manifest in reality. This way, regents can remain strong adventurer-kings in tabletop play, but also effective rulers. The two dimensions of play need not detract from each other, and the bloodlines provide a mechanism for explaining this.

The blood abilities would exist on top of these, of course.