tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2657266526705426756.post1556756304294597685..comments2024-03-26T04:58:54.326-04:00Comments on The Wandering Gamist: Of Multiclassing, 'Roles', and Henchmenjedavishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08586249502818922886noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2657266526705426756.post-33667755028364702002012-12-05T00:50:34.196-05:002012-12-05T00:50:34.196-05:00Handle, as in with some difficulty and improvisati...Handle, as in with some difficulty and improvisation, rather than "Oh yeah, Bob's character is specialized for just this sort of situation. There's minimal chance of failure, Bob feels awesome for the duration, and the rest of us are bored. Then Bob goes back to being useless for the rest of the campaign." When you have a lot of players in 3.x, people specialize because a bunch of specialists is better than a bunch of generalists, and when you have enough specialists you can get away with it. When you have fewer players than specialties, it is best to have generalists if the system permits it. 3.x does, via multiclassing, but your multiclassing delivers you fairly weak generalization, and so you have to scramble a bit when your secondary capabilities are put to the test; 4e does not permit anything approaching this degree of 'spreading oneself thin', to my knowledge. ACKS permits generalization via henchmen, but likewise also permits specialization via henchmen; if you want a 4-man team of just dwarf fighters, it's certainly doable.<br /><br />I'm not entirely clear what point you are making with the 4e note, though. And I'm not sure I'd agree on your resource management point; in general, it is very easy for PCs to make the game much more difficult for them than it was intended :P But I am also unsure of your meaning there; if you could elaborate, I'd be quite grateful.jedavishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08586249502818922886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2657266526705426756.post-91141016911498902992012-12-03T19:59:18.999-05:002012-12-03T19:59:18.999-05:00Yep! But there's also the counterbalancing po...Yep! But there's also the counterbalancing possibility that he'll survive if you bite it. He can also be fired if you decide that you really didn't want a cleric; multiclassing schemes are a bit less forgiving of mistakes. I guess the gist of what I was aiming for is that "Henchmen and multiclassing both succeed in granting players the ability to achieve 'secondary competencies' in things other than the specialties of their PCs' main classes, which lets you meet challenges even with a short-handed group. A system which readily encourages one does not need the other, but a system with neither is likely to have trouble with an undermanned party if certain specialties are required."jedavishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08586249502818922886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2657266526705426756.post-35870450913611901022012-12-03T16:15:35.003-05:002012-12-03T16:15:35.003-05:00John, you write that multi-classing allows a small...John, you write that multi-classing allows a smaller group to handle challenges. But then you write that having a smaller group is more fun because you don't have "all the bases covered"<br />You could run a two person 4e game and not have all the bases covered. My gut feeling on this issue is that "difficulty" and "resource management" is completely the domain of how the game master setups the world in which the character's move through.<br /><br />Random Wizardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16200875405900408519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2657266526705426756.post-43802565725677765882012-12-03T16:02:38.965-05:002012-12-03T16:02:38.965-05:00With retainers, your levels in cleric (or whatever...With retainers, your levels in cleric (or whatever) can also fail a morale check or be bribed by an enemy.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.com