3 by 20

[AlfarinIcebreaker]

3b30 for me. I don't see the point of b20, but definitely keep 3 levels in class as minimum.

[Mallore]

while it makes sense to a point... conjuration specialty could equate to feat selection as opposed to a new class, if it is just about the RP. By the same token Guild Thief or Master of Disguise is not the sole way to represent your ascension in to the next chapter/step in your career. This could be done with levels of Rogue just as simply. I can see the RP reason to take classes after 20, but I just can't see how not being able to take those classes somehow invalidates a type of RP or is required for another. The RP presented does not require a new class to represent the growth of the character.

Well take master of disguise. No number of ranks in disguise because of extra rogue levels will ever equal master of disguise alter self at will.

Each of those prestige class's have some really cool benefits. It's why they are unquie. Which one I chose I do not know yet but excited in rp to find out.

Granted I know I am the rare exception so other then meta reasons. Why can't exceptions be made?

Because then everyone looks to be the 'exception' and the DM team is flooded with requests - most of which will be thinly veiled attempts at powerbuilding. You talk about your characters journey ... what is the difference from a non- mechanical perspective between level 18 and level 20? From an IC perspective it is very little ...

It's your perspective and my rp.

Though once again. I do not know what I want to take next. I really don't. I like to choose when I get there. I also commit to 5 to 10 levels in a class.

I do not meta build. I do not sit and think huh, if I do this and that I end up with these abilities, this AB, these saves. That is meta to me.

Sorry if you do not agree. Maybe I'm a purist.

[taylorstar]

I quite enjoy the 3 by 20 rule, for one it stops the single class dips for crazy op builds, two it allows you to build more emphasis on your character and classes and the reasons you picked, for example at level 3 shadow dancers get their own shadow companion.

At this point so much balance has been put in place with the rules in mind that i feel it would be counter intuitive to go back and take this rule out, especially when there is so much cool stuff in game, so much cool stuff coming and stability that is much needed as oppose to needless re balancing i'm sure QC would look at it like a nightmare.

[Mallore]

I am not against the rule as a guide. I believe in flexibility and the need for it.


I also do not agree that the rule exists for anything buy mechanical reasons. But those things are needed.

[Blame The Rogue]

keep seeing posts against 1 sd, etc, so i'll quote my earlier post

it's part of certain aspects of multi-classing and prcs

we should ask ourselves, why did the game devs give hips at first level sd? let's think about that for a moment

it was intended

dipping is another one of those derogatory terms i see used for utilizing a multi-class system in the proper manner

1 sd is not a rp killer. it's not a fun killer. it's not a mechanical killer

hence my thread

the entire point of this multi-class system, is to be able to take as many levels, or as few levels, in up to four classes, as one chooses, by level 30, to match rp, and be capable within the engine

a character can be 1 sd, or 3, or 5, or 10

[Young Werther]

If this were changed I could make my cleric/wm/hierophant picking up expose weakness instead of taking a war domain. Even add in some fighter levels too if I wanted to eat the dispels.

Really though I think the 3b20 serves its purpose leveling the playing field away from the 1 dip maestros.

[Thorsson]

1. There's little logic to it, e.g. why not 2b10 or 4b30, if you're introducing some arbitrary handicap.

2. It doesn't stop power builds; never has and never will. It merely stops some builds.

3. If you wanted to stop some power builds, then a set of specific rules, like we have with Druid/Monk, would be far superior (and could stop EDM FS, for example).

OTOH, it's not that big a deal.

[Keenar]

I think It would be nice to he able to do 3b30. I almost always make non caster builds and I think this would give them a nice little bump with an extra feat or two. But at the same time casters will also get that benefit. But this is not a rule that I would be heavily against if it stayed. If just prefer it to change. I do not think 1 level dips should be allowed. Just my opinion though.

[Blame The Rogue]

1. There's little logic to it, e.g. why not 2b10 or 4b30, if you're introducing some arbitrary handicap.

2. It doesn't stop power builds; never has and never will. It merely stops some builds.

3. If you wanted to stop some power builds, then a set of specific rules, like we have with Druid/Monk, would be far superior (and could stop EDM FS, for example).

OTOH, it's not that big a deal.

ty for this. i know your knowledge of the game engine and building is second to none. it's good to have this post from someone who knows how to build within 3.0-3.5 structure

arbitrary build rules make everyone play to the sensibilities of a few imo

agreed that some rules are necessary. the no monk/druid rule is a good one

also, i hunted this down >>

Elminster Aumar
Aliases The Old Mage
The Sage of Shadowdale
The Great Oversorcerer[1]
Home Shadowdale, originally Athalantar
Gender Male
Race Human
Born 212 DR
Age in 1374 DR 1162
Class
3.5 ed. rules Fighter 1
Rogue 2
Cleric of Mystra 3
Wizard 24
Archmage 5
{{{11}}} {{{12}}}
{{{13}}} {{{14}}}
{{{15}}} {{{16}}}
{{{17}}} {{{18}}}
{{{19}}} {{{20}}}

Alignment Chaotic good

so poor elminster, a rp icon in our setting, is not a legal build by current server standards. so ed greenwood is an evil dipper? a power builder? shame on ed greenwood, the creator of the realms?

[NeonAvenger]

so poor elminster, a rp icon in our setting, is not a legal build by current server standards. so ed greenwood is an evil dipper? a power builder? shame on ed greenwood, the creator of the realms?

Err... I don't care about the build rules but I just thought I'd point out that Elminster is a terrible example to use since he has five classes and isn't a valid build in NWN under any circumstances.

[Blame The Rogue]

valid enough to show the intent of taking 1 lvl in a class. fighter in his case

other cases would be rogue, sd, cleric, etc

[Mallore]

One would note.. that Elminster only took 1 level of fighter which is a core class.

One could say, that it should be impossible to take 1 level in prestige class, just clearly based on the lore and the name of the sub class.

[Boddynock]

valid enough to show the intent of taking 1 lvl in a class. fighter in his case

other cases would be rogue, sd, cleric, etc

Not really. He was statted out to match an already extant history. Those levels were assigned to him upon the creation of the 3.0 ruleset to reflect an already existent history. That is the opposite of organic character creation.

Honestly, I, and every DM I have ever played tabletop with, is far FAR FAR stricter with multiclassing than we are here. In 3.5, particularly in PnP, there are just too many synergistic combinations (even with limited classes as our server has) that can make campaign balancing a nightmare for there to be no rules regarding this. Those same people complaining about the gap in power between powerbuilders and non-powerbuilds, and how that affects entertainment value particularly in DM events, are going to be even further ostracized by anything that lets powerbuilders be even more overpowered.

And I understand that this change will let the underpowered builds/classes get stronger, but it won't close the gap between them and the top, it will widen it.

[Blame The Rogue]

we can agree to disagree

the fact that sd gets hips at lvl 1 in the game engine clearly shows the devs intent

[Boddynock]

we can agree to disagree

the fact that sd gets hips at lvl 1 in the game engine clearly shows the devs intent

Are you talking about the software developer or the D&D developers.

If the D&D developers, well, the rules also state the intent that campaign balance and well, everything really, is up to what the DMs decide, here they decided 3b20.

If talking about the software developer, well...their intent is also shown in the things they didn't do, like all the extra PrCs we have but weren't in vanilla or the expansions. So, game developer intent sort of has to be taken with a grain of salt.