Multi-classing - Old vs. New...

[ronan]

On the xp reduction, I thought the idea of having the xp gap increase between level gain as you got more powerful dealt with this problem.ie. killing 10 orcs at 1st level would gain you a new level but at 10th level you would need to kill 500 or so. The reduction in xp gains doesn't make any sense to me, my 9th level paladin could go on a holy quest to purge a beleaguered hamlet from a horde of orcen foes, come back a month later after escaping death several times and protecting innocent serfs from a fate worse than a fate worse than death and yet not of gained a single xp on the way? I don't like it.

[Nightowl2]

There's a provision in the rules for "ad hoc" experience, usually applied in a situation like the one you mention. In other words, the DM is free to award experience even against low-level foes (ie, 8 or more levels below you) in special circumstances. The CR table is mostly for the usual run of combat, where enemies become progressively more difficult.

Nightowl2

[Zoltan]

First of all, all clerics can use edged weapons in 3rd Ed. It must be related with domains. Maybe few of them can use but NOT ALL OF THEM!

One more absurd thing is,

There's no minimum requirements. IT'S EXTRA WEIRD!!

You can be a paladin with 10 Charisma!! or 12!!

It's really stupid

Half-Orc bards? You're crazy [img]smile.gif[/img] )

I like the "bludge weapons only" cleric system. It creates difference between classes. Bludgeon weapons are really effective against many undead creatues such as skeletons and such. In 2rd ed, your cleric uses maces and flails. Your figter grabs his sword. It's much better. Me, I cant imagine a cleric with a sword.

[Madrigal Five]

I disagree on the only "Only Blunt Weapons for Clerics rule", because I can't imagine how an Elven Cleric of Solonor Thelandira could not be proficient with Bows. So I like the way Battleguards of Tempus get automatic feats with the axe.

I think restricting weapon use is silly. Unless we're talking about things like Thor's Hammer, what PHYSICALLY restricts a guy from picking up a weapon and using it? At least this way, a cleric can pick up a knife if it's the only weapon available in the room.

Speaking of restricting weapon use: I'd like to see the day when the game designers restrict the use of Holy Avengers by non-paladins by delivering damage instead of just making it un-equipable in the inventory. Maybe evil characters who try to use it suffer AUTOMATIC DEATH.

[Luvian]

Originally posted by Madrigal Five: I disagree on the only "Only Blunt Weapons for Clerics rule", because I can't imagine how an Elven Cleric of Solonor Thelandira could not be proficient with Bows. So I like the way Battleguards of Tempus get automatic feats with the axe. I think restricting weapon use is silly. Unless we're talking about things like Thor's Hammer, what PHYSICALLY restricts a guy from picking up a weapon and using it? At least this way, a cleric can pick up a knife if it's the only weapon available in the room. Speaking of restricting weapon use: I'd like to see the day when the game designers restrict the use of Holy Avengers by non-paladins by delivering damage instead of just making it un-equipable in the inventory. Maybe evil characters who try to use it suffer AUTOMATIC DEATH.

Actually, in the pen and paper game, anyone can wield an holy avanger, but in the hand of a non-paladin, it's just a +2 sword.

Originally posted by Zoltan: First of all, all clerics can use edged weapons in 3rd Ed. It must be related with domains. Maybe few of them can use but NOT ALL OF THEM! One more absurd thing is, There's no minimum requirements. IT'S EXTRA WEIRD!! You can be a paladin with 10 Charisma!! or 12!!

As was said, why would cleric NOT be able to use an edged weapon because of a rule? it's a Roleplaying game, not a Roll Playing one. If there is a particular religion that does not allow a cleric to use an edged or slashing weapon, you don't use them. That's that simple. Just because there is no rule dictating that you can't does not mean you can't decide it yourself for your character.

And what is wrong with a Paladin with 10 charisma? Or even 3? Maybe he got an horrible scar while fighting a dragon, or maybe he is suffering from a curse... Just the fact that a paladin has low charisma is already a great opportunity to roleplay.

Thats, what we call a Roleplaying game. Rules kill roleplaying, it does not help it...

[Yanez]

I like 3rd Ed rules. Finally I can play a dwarven fighter/mage. From roleplaying point of wiev it was kinda stupid restriction that dwarves couldn't be mages. Don't they produce enchanted weapons? Of course they do. There had to be dwarven mages. I was very annoyed at the fact that programmers in
BG II cheated and created duergar mages in Irenicus dungeon. I also like the loss of dualclassing (again from RP point of wiev). Look, if you are a fighter and dual to mage you had to EXCEED level of your previous class BEFORE you got the abilities of old class back. Don't you think that a year of waving your hands at spellcasting wouldn't affect your ability to swing a longsword and use longbow if you don't train that, all the time?

[Madrigal Five]

Originally posted by Luvian: Actually, in the pen and paper game, anyone can wield an holy avanger, but in the hand of a non-paladin, it's just a +2 sword.

Forgot all about that. Been playing CRPGs waaaaaaaaaaaay too long.

I found the old 17 CHA requirement of Paladins just plain crazy. It just stereotyped paladins into a bunch of brave 'n dashing Lancelot-wanna-be's. Now you can have a gruff, surly, butt-ugly paladin with bad people skills, but he still whacks the asses of evildoers everywhere. Cool.

[Imrahil]

Heh - I started this to be a multi-classing discussion, but if we're gonna get into 2nd vs 3rd editions, I'll jump back in...

I liked the bludgeoning Clerics better, although I was all in favor of certain deities (e.g. Tempus) allowing edged weapons while sacrificing something else (Turn Undead, for instance). They "balanced it out" by giving Fighters more Feats I guess. OTOH, I like that any class can learn (basically) any Feat - a Wizard with a Sword, for instance.

Race-Class restrictions - I'm kinda glad they're gone, but maybe there should be penalties. Yes, you can have a Dwarven Mage, but maybe he should get a -10% XP penalty (that's how I generally handled it when DM'ing). Perhaps there should be an XP penalty if your Prime Requisite is too low or something.

Overall, 3rd Edition seems a bit "watered down" to me, almost a step back towards Basic, just in the over-simplification.

Multi-classing - ah, the original topic - I'd be fine if Humans could use 3rd Edition rules & non-humans could use 2nd or 3rd. I like a good old Elven Fighter/Mage or Gnome Illusionist/Thief. OTOH, if you want to run a demi-human (hey, where'd that term go, by the way? PC D&D?) by human, i.e 3rd Ed., rules, I'd be all for that. One or the other, of course, at character creation (not really viable for a CRPG, obviously).

Kits - I miss Kits.

Spells - a bit of an improvement in 3rd Ed, IMO. I like that a particular spell takes Wiz X / Cle X +2 to be available, for example (also like the deity specific spells). I just wish the IWD manual was layed out better. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Variable XP - I'm only familiar with 3rd Ed through CRPG's, so if monster XP varies by level in the P&P version, that would totally suck, as it does here (IMO, monster X should be worth XP Y - if you are high enough level that monster X is no challenge, then XP Y should be insignificant to you - no adjustment needed).

AC - OK, I admit, the (Basic/1st/) 2nd Ed system was counter-intuitive & the 3rd Ed system is better, but it's still a tough adjustment. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Difficulty Checks - I understand the need for them & they're a good idea & were somewhat implemented in 2nd Ed, but... whew! I'm glad the computer is handling them - I'd hate to have to DM all of them!

Skills & Feats - Skills I like for the most part (though Fighters seem limited to Intimidate +1/level), Feats not so much. Maybe if they awarded Feats more frequently (it just seems to me that my 18th level Wizard should have WAY more Feats than she actually does - does she really have to hit lvl 30 to have the majority of the good ones?!?) I might like it more.

Rolling Stats - I don't like it. Plain & simple. Is the P&P game now set up this way? Maybe let the bonus points be random at least - I don't like the fact that all characters (well, OK, some races are at +/-2) start off with the same total points. OTOH, I do like the +1 attribute every 4 levels. That seems like a good idea.

OK, that's all I can think of riht now... [img]smile.gif[/img]

- Imrahil

[Zoltan]

you spend CHA and WIS points to STR and CON to have a powerful character. That's the thing that kills the role-playing. And about charisma, charisma is not only the beauty. It's the ability to lead. The leadership. In 2nd ed, you have to have at least 17 CHA TO be a paladin.

About clerics. Please read my post carefully. I agree that SOME clerics can use edged weapons or bows. BUT NOT ALL OF THEM! It should be something special spesific.

Wizard dwarves!? You're INSANE!!! or next generation. hope everybody had cross the path of 1st ed and 2nd ed..

[Luvian]

Originally posted by Zoltan: you spend CHA and WIS points to STR and CON to have a powerful character. That's the thing that kills the role-playing. And about charisma, charisma is not only the beauty. It's the ability to lead. The leadership. In 2nd ed, you have to have at least 17 CHA TO be a paladin. About clerics. Please read my post carefully. I agree that SOME clerics can use edged weapons or bows. BUT NOT ALL OF THEM! It should be something special spesific. Wizard dwarves!? You're INSANE!!! or next generation. hope everybody had cross the path of 1st ed and 2nd ed..

I satrted playing D&D with the first edition.

Who said all paladins where good leaders? What about the lone guy, who is very bad in social situations, but dedicated his life to killing undeads? Is he not worthy of some godly help? Is less pure than a natural born leader?

And about cleric. It's not because a Cleric of Sune, godess of Beauty, could use a sword, that you have to. If your cleric feel like using edged weapons is bad, he just has not to use them. If the head priest of your religion decide that no priest should use swords, then don't use them. There is no need for a rule. It's all about roleplaying.

And what's wrond with a Dwarven mage? Maybe he got a blessing from Mystra, for helping defend one of her church, of maybe he has some dragon blood.