Originally Posted by Peter Lubke:
I know that 3e is very much a free-for-all
and any character can be as many character classes as they like.
Personally I think this greatly disadvantages the specialists, it does
not promote group play, it does not promote role-playing, in fact I
can`t think of a single good reason for allowing it at all - it has
nothing but down-side.
Congratulations on expressing so much nonsense in so few words. Of course, I’m not going to deny you your opinion in this matter, but this claim isn’t strictly in the realm of opinion - you might want to examine your claim a bit better, from the viewpoint of a mechanical game balance.
Your claims are the following:
- The multiclassing system in 3e greatly disadvantages the specialists
- The multiclassing system in 3e does not promote group play
- The multiclassing system in 3e does not promote role-playing
The first claim is the one which can be most substantially examined; an examination in the context of #2 would also be helpful, as the second claim ties into the first.
First, to look at what exactly you mean by “greatly disadvantages” - my initial interpretation of this would be that you’re inferring that multiclass characters are somehow more powerful than singleclass ones. So, let’s take a case of three different characters - a 10th-level fighter, a 10th-level wizard, and a 5th-level fighter/5th-level wizard. I’m going to stat them up quickly, ignoring skills for the time being, using the standard spread for ability scores;
Ftr 10 - Str 17, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8; BAB +10, Fort +9, Ref +7, Will +6; Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Exotic Weapon (Bastard Sword), Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Blind-Fight, Improved Critical - all weapon-specific feats applied to his trusty bastard sword; melee stats +14/9, 1d10+5 (17-20); 80 hp; AC 22 (full plate, +1 large shield)
Wiz 10 - Str 10, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 17, Wis 12, Cha 8; BAB +5, Fort +5, Ref +6, Will +8; Scribe Scroll, Spell Penetration, Combat Casting, Lightning Reflexes, Spell Focus, Craft Wondrous Item, Craft Wand; Spells per day 4/5/5/4/3/2
Ftr 5/Wiz 5 - Str 14, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 16, Wis 10, Cha 8; BAB +7, Fort +6, Ref +7, Will +7; Scribe Scroll, Combat Casting, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Craft Wand, Iron Will, Craft Magic Arms & Armor, Spell Focus - all weapon-specific feats apply to the bastard sword; Spells per day 4/4/3/2; melee stats +10/5, 1d10+4 (19-20); 55 hp; AC 18 (mage armor, +1 small shield); 5% ASF (could have higher AC, but it’d be at a significantly higher ASF)
Now, in terms of raw power, the first two characters will whack the third one silly; in a straight melee, the fighter will take about 20-21 points of damage while killing the ftr/wiz, being left with about 60. Now, of course, the ftr/wiz could buff himself considerably given time to prepare, and bridge a lot of the gaps - endurance, bull’s strength, cat’s grace, displacement, haste - the fighter would presumably carry buffs (potions and items) of his own to match that, however, leaving him with the advantage, though by a smaller margin.
The wizard, of course, can execute a number of different maneuvers; his magical resources should, on the balance, far exceed the capabilities of his multiclassed rival. Summoning an achaierai or a fiendish giant crocodile, dominating him, fireballing him (at twice the damage output the multiclass character can do), etc. Given time to prepare, he might use planar binding and get a vrock or avoral to do his work for him.
Similar considerations apply in a lot of circumstances; the main advantage of being multiclassed is versatility - however, you will have less power and thus usefulness overall compared to singleclassed compatriots. A party consisting of a fighter 20, wizard 20, cleric 20 and a rogue 20 will dominate a party consisting of four ftr5/wiz5/clr5/rog5, to use an extreme example. Spellcasters especially suffer a lot from multiclassing, as they lose out on the higher-level spells, which are very important. Non-spellcasting types are better off, but they, too, have high-level abilities that they lose out on in multiclassing. The only class where this is not the case would be the fighter, but the benefit of so many feats weighing in on a combat is very large.
This is just one sample comparison; there are countless others to be made. The bottom line is, your former two claims are wrong in terms of game mechanics; the system does favor singleclassed characters, quite heavily, even; especially in a group context. The main difference in this regard to earlier incarnations is simply that 3e allows for greater depths of characterization of individual characters in mechanical terms.
Finally, as for systems and role-playing, if you consider role-playing as an isolated act, the system has nothing to do with it; you could role-play fine without any rules whatsoever - that’s what police and robber games are all about, for one. If, on the other hand, you view roleplaying as an extension of game mechanics, then mechanically being able to significantly differentiate characters becomes quite important, and in this regard, 3e is highly superior to previous editions, without unnecessarily weighing down the game, like certain other systems can do, or being vague.
There is one final qualifying point to be made, and that is about house rules or world rules. If you set the magic item levels to a lower level than the 3e default, you’ll find that spellcasting classes will gain much in power, compared to non-spellcasters. In this case, a multiclass fighter/wizard might be better than a simple fighter. A fighter/wizard with endurance, bull’s strength, cat’s grace, shield, displacement, haste, magic weapon, expeditious retreat, enlargement, and true strike up would be a deadlier melee fighter than the straight fighter - for about four rounds, assuming he could get all those buffs up. While such a character could do well in a peak fight, he’d suck on the balance in most encounters; an assessment of the classes that the fighter is the barbarian’s bodyguard that I saw a while back is very true - the fighter is superior in all the little fights, but the barbarian, with his rage, shines in the big fights. That is sort of tangential, but the bottom line remains - in terms of power, multiclassing is not generally advantageous. It can be advantageous if you have a very specific purpose in mind, or if you want a character that is more versatile. In terms of party dynamics, though, a party of singleclassed characters is generally superior to a multiclassed one.
Thus, I postulate
- Singleclassed characters are, on the balance, more powerful than multiclassed ones;
- Since singleclassed characters are more powerful, playing singleclassed characters makes much more sense within a party than playing multiclassed characters, promoting group play;
- The role-playing element is only tangentially tied into the rules mechanics.