Is variant multiclassing sub-par?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
No one cares about Armor Training? More like - every dex combatant in the game (of which there are now quite a few varieties) sans most monks wishes that they had Armor Training. Primary dex combatants max out their armor's dex bonus pretty quickly.

Agree. While Armor training may not be that exciting, it's better than many feats. It's basically +1/+2 to AC and Dex skill checks, as long as your dexterity is high enough.

And if you rule that it also gives you this: "In addition, a fighter can also move at his normal speed while wearing medium armor. At 7th level, a fighter can move at his normal speed while wearing heavy armor." Then the armor training opens up equipment freedom. You can trade out that medium mithral armor for some other material. Or if you have the proficiency, you can wear mithral heavy armor without taking a movement penalty.

yes yes, this has a niche ability to make heavy armor usable for a dex build, or even a breastplate on a dex pumping rogue or swashbuckler by 15th level... well worth the 4 feats so far... especially since it allows this new equipment at... 15th level...

yeah i'm not seeing it. you could just get dodge and/or weapon focus and power attack, hell the new stamina feat is great. any class that can make use of this to it;s full effect is a feat starved class, rogues, oracles, bards, swashbucklers. it's not worth it.


What was really needed was something like the rules for how adding class levels effects the CR of monsters with racial hit dice. Probably with a special case for stacking casting of same source magic like wizard and magus or druid, hunter, and ranger.

Remember, XP used to be tracked separately. A fighter 10 magic user 10 needed as much XP as the sum of his levels, not as much XP as a level 20 character. Or I think with demihuman multiclassing you split your XP in half and the levels wouldn't line up, but until some class capped out the sum of the XP for each class would still be your total XP.

In 3.x a fighter 10 wizard 10 requires far more XP than the sum of his classes. The change that's needed is to fix that or at least remediate it as much as practicable if there's no way to truly fix it without being too complicated for the average GM to audit at the table.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
I feel reasonably certain that that's not how the VMC Magus's arcane pool is supposed to work. ^_^

There is a similar problem with the VMC wizard for some schools, as they also have abilities that let you do something (such as change which ability score gets an enhancement bonus) when you prepare spells. Prior to Pathfinder Unchained, this was only an issue with 3rd party products -- but not Paizo has introduced that issue into their own rules.


You prepare spells after you rest.

Everybody rests.

Connect the dots. It's not hard. Hell, this isn't even the first time-- look at the Eldritch Scion and the Arcane Pool.

Atarlost wrote:
What was really needed was something like the rules for how adding class levels effects the CR of monsters with racial hit dice. Probably with a special case for stacking casting of same source magic like wizard and magus or druid, hunter, and ranger.

We already have rules for how you add class levels to monsters?

Beyond that, you're asking for something-- stacking disparate class' casting abilities-- that is literally designed to be outside the scope of Pathfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kestral287 wrote:

You prepare spells after you rest.

Everybody rests.

Connect the dots. It's not hard. Hell, this isn't even the first time-- look at the Eldritch Scion and the Arcane Pool.

I don't think anyone is confused about how it's supposed to work. The problem is, that's not what the rulebook says.


kestral287 wrote:
We already have rules for how you add class levels to monsters?

Yes. Yes, we do. Monsters have key and non-key classes. Key classes add fully to CR. Non-key classes add half until there are as many class levels as either racial hit dice or the monster's base CR, I forget which.

I'm suggesting something like that for multiclassing

So for instance if your largest level total is wizard there are no key classes for wizard because nothing stacks with it. Any levels of anything else would count half for APL or CR and you get two per XP threshold until you have more of that class than wizard. On the other hand fighter and barbarian do stack pretty well and would reasonably both count fully to APL or CR and come with no XP discount like they do now.

The two to one ratio used form non-key classes on monsters is certainly not the right ratio to use for multiclassing because a non-key medium BAB class would give better than full BAB and there probably needs to be three ratios rather than two for classes where some stuff works together and other stuff doesn't. Or possibly half the levels of the lesser class could be treated as gestalt with the primary class to keep BAB and HD from going over 20.

Multiclassing needs a proper fix and it needs to acknowledge like the monster class rules that some classes stack and others don't.


That sounds very very very complex...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
kestral287 wrote:

You prepare spells after you rest.

Everybody rests.

Connect the dots. It's not hard. Hell, this isn't even the first time-- look at the Eldritch Scion and the Arcane Pool.

I don't think anyone is confused about how it's supposed to work. The problem is, that's not what the rulebook says.

Unchained is the Big Book of Houserules and this is not a PFS-legal section.

If nobody is confused on how it's supposed to work, why even bring it up? No sane GM is going to actually run it that way, so who cares?


kestral287 wrote:
Chengar Qordath wrote:
kestral287 wrote:

You prepare spells after you rest.

Everybody rests.

Connect the dots. It's not hard. Hell, this isn't even the first time-- look at the Eldritch Scion and the Arcane Pool.

I don't think anyone is confused about how it's supposed to work. The problem is, that's not what the rulebook says.

Unchained is the Big Book of Houserules and this is not a PFS-legal section.

If nobody is confused on how it's supposed to work, why even bring it up? No sane GM is going to actually run it that way, so who cares?

Because it's still a mistake that needs an FAQ/Errata. The fact that 99.9% of GMs can agree to the same common-sense houserule doesn't change that.


Milo v3 wrote:
That sounds very very very complex...

Only because leveling up is already very, very complex, and if multiclassing weren't fundamentally broken an awful lot of archetypes could be deprecated which might actually make things easier.

What it is is in need of tuning.


Melkiador wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
Seerow wrote:
Features granted are too unfocused and come online too late, resulting in characters feeling like they are just wasting feats for the half of the game they are likely to play, to get the effect they actually want in the half of the game they are unlikely to see. And even when they do get it, in many cases it is diluted or limited in some way to make it less useful.

I'd say this is mostly true, but actual multi-classing has the same problem.

Personally, I would have preferred if the VMC was just an actual feat chain that you could take at your own pace. So, my VMC could just as easily be my 1st,3rd,5th,7th and 9th level feats. And indivivdual VMC feats could have had a character level requirement to keep the VMC character from getting an ability before the true class can get it.

The problem with that is that some of them are front-loaded. You could grab the first one and ignore the rest. As others have said - a feat for Bardic Knowledge is freakishly sweet, but past their second one they're weak. That was the balance factor.
I'm not saying that the entire system could just be converted as is to free form feats. It's not as if you couldn't have designed VMCs around this though. The most obvious solution to your issue is limiting how high your VMC class level counts by how many of the feats you have taken.

One of the problems is that all feats cost exactly one Feat Slot each (not counting prerequisites). Think of having Feat costs reflect how much they do for you (make the really good ones cost 1.5S or 2X as much as an average feat, while the minor ones cost 0.5X as much). That would fix not only problems with the free-form VMC proposed above, but also a lot of other issues in D&D/Pathfinder.


And be a huge pain in the ass on the poor sod doing it, but... have fun with that!


Atarlost wrote:

Only because leveling up is already very, very complex, and if multiclassing weren't fundamentally broken an awful lot of archetypes could be deprecated which might actually make things easier.

What it is is in need of tuning.

I'd say more because of how classes work. Not because leveling up is complex. It isn't, especially not if your using fractions rather than totals for saves and BAB.


^Might as well use fractions for feats (and some other things) too. Instead of gaining 1 feat at every odd Character Level, you get 1/2 per Character Level, +1/2 feat Starting Bonus. You can spend 1/2 on a Trait or Half-Width Feat, or save it for a Full-Width Feat, or even save a few for a Sesqui-Width or Double-Width Feat. (The difference between this and other fractional subsystems is that a fraction can actually do something by itself.) This would also have the advantage of letting you take a feat that you qualify for at an even Character Level (some feats inconveniently become available at such levels -- for instance, Vital Strike and Greater Vital Strike) even if you don't get a Bonus Feat from your class. Could rename things to make 1/2 into 1, but that would cause a huge conversion chore.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

^Might as well use fractions for feats (and some other things) too. Instead of gaining 1 feat at every odd Character Level, you get 1/2 per Character Level, +1/2 feat Starting Bonus. You can spend 1/2 on a Trait or Half-Width Feat, or save it for a Full-Width Feat, or even save a few for a Sesqui-Width or Double-Width Feat. (The difference between this and other fractional subsystems is that a fraction can actually do something by itself.) This would also have the advantage of letting you take a feat that you qualify for at an even Character Level (some feats inconveniently become available at such levels -- for instance, Vital Strike and Greater Vital Strike) even if you don't get a Bonus Feat from your class. Could rename things to make 1/2 into 1, but that would cause a huge conversion chore.

By that stage you might as well use a proper point buy system for feats.

I know, we could use that one SKR made up that one time. The one that was really well thought out and balanced. *said no one ever*


Melkiador wrote:


Examples?

I think it is easier to find examples that are worth more than a feat.

I think the bardic knowledge one is worth more than a feat, for example. The other abilities are bad, but that one is good.

Liberty's Edge

CWheezy wrote:
Melkiador wrote:


Examples?

I think it is easier to find examples that are worth more than a feat.

I think the bardic knowledge one is worth more than a feat, for example. The other abilities are bad, but that one is good.

Inspire Courage is also worth more than a Feat.


I would like to add a note on the Oracle VMC: Lame curse will grant immunity to fatigue at level 10 (Hello Barbarian and Bloodrager). Many revelations grant multiple feats, such as Skill at Arms and Weapon Mastery, making up for the loss from the first place. The only problem with it is that's a really late-game VMC, as you stay at an effective oracle level of 1 in regards of revelations till level 8 and only progress halv level in regards for curses. Around level 11-15 it really kicks off though.

Liberty's Edge

Rub-Eta wrote:
I would like to add a note on the Oracle VMC: Lame curse will grant immunity to fatigue at level 10 (Hello Barbarian and Bloodrager). Many revelations grant multiple feats, such as Skill at Arms and Weapon Mastery, making up for the loss from the first place. The only problem with it is that's a really late-game VMC, as you stay at an effective oracle level of 1 in regards of revelations till level 8 and only progress halv level in regards for curses. Around level 11-15 it really kicks off though.

Several of the Revelations you can grab at 3rd are great, though. All Martial Weapons and Armor for one Feat? Heck yeah. Also...that one allows Wizard 5 and then straight into Eldritch Knight. You admittedly don't get Power Attack until 5th, but that's not the end of the world.


If you're just trying to get fatigue immunity then Oracle VMC is not worth it. Barbarian is a very feat starved class due to the massive amount of rage powers you want, and the VMC is more expensive and comes online later than the Internal Fortitude solution.


On the other hand, if you want an Oracle with Rage for a limited number of rounds /day, with immunity to fatigue at level 5, Barbarian VMC seems like a rather tempting option.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd still go with the level of Oracle rather than VMC for a Barbarian build. It lets you do some really neat stuff.

For example, I still dream of playing my Oracle of Lore 1/Barbarian X with a dumped Dex and maxed Cha, Sidestep Secret, and Focused Trance for any length of time (best done as a Half Orc with Sacred Tattoo and Fate's Favored).

It's a Barbarian build that can actually be the face of a party, and wins at all Knowledge checks forever outside of combat. In short, for one level of Oracle and a little Int investment, you get to be one of the better skill characters in the party on top of Barbarian stuff. Your in-combat stuff suffers a bit (and you can't go the Come and Get Me route), but Divine Favor + Fate's Favored and free Rage Cycling help make up for that to a large degree.


Deadmanwalking wrote:


Inspire Courage is also worth more than a Feat.

You get a garbage inspire courage, so I disagree


Pounce wrote:
On the other hand, if you want an Oracle with Rage for a limited number of rounds /day, with immunity to fatigue at level 5, Barbarian VMC seems like a rather tempting option.

This is way, way worse than just taking a level in barbarian.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CWheezy wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:


Inspire Courage is also worth more than a Feat.

You get a garbage inspire courage, so I disagree

Eh, it's mediocre at 7th when you get it, but even there it's a valid party buff. At 9th, it goes to +2 and is very solid, and way better than a Feat. At 11th when it becomes a Move Action? It's amazing.

And then you get Versatile Performance, which is amazing (and easily worth a couple of Feats) if you're willing to retrain a little.


Milo v3 wrote:
Atarlost wrote:

Only because leveling up is already very, very complex, and if multiclassing weren't fundamentally broken an awful lot of archetypes could be deprecated which might actually make things easier.

What it is is in need of tuning.

I'd say more because of how classes work. Not because leveling up is complex. It isn't, especially not if your using fractions rather than totals for saves and BAB.

Maybe if you play core only. Otherwise there are too many badly organized character options to decipher to call it anything less than ridiculously complicated. Do I dip another class? Is this the level to do so? What feat do I want? Can I actually take it this level? What feat that I don't want do I need to take before I take the feat I do want? Do I still want that feat? What spells should I learn? What spells known should I retrain? Do I have any slack in my skill plan? What skills are worth scattering points in that won't become useless if not maxed?

Compared to that a little math is the very platonic form of simplicity.


Frankly Atarlost, you're playing the wrong game.

Because if you carry out your plan... you still have all the same feat options so nothing is solved. You still have skill points. The only thing that you've 'fixed' that's listed in that post is dips, and those are easy. 90% of the time you just don't dip. The other 10% of the time you already know what you want, and it's a marginal gain that you can freely ignore anyway. The builds that require dips are not the builds that casual players play.

I suppose you could fix feats too. And skill points.

At that point, you've replaced literally the entire d20 character building process*. If you're not happy with the game to the point that you're seriously suggesting "throw everything out and start over", then you're probably never going to be happy with the game.

I mean, it's one thing to complain about one aspect of the system. I can get behind that in a heartbeat. And I can understand fixing the details all day long, that makes sense. But the entire system? At that point you're probably better off playing a new game.

*Okay, save for the actual raw stats that don't carry a lot of meaning on their own and traits, which would probably get 'fixed' alongside feats.


Atarlost wrote:

Maybe if you play core only. Otherwise there are too many badly organized character options to decipher to call it anything less than ridiculously complicated. Do I dip another class? Is this the level to do so? What feat do I want? Can I actually take it this level? What feat that I don't want do I need to take before I take the feat I do want? Do I still want that feat? What spells should I learn? What spells known should I retrain? Do I have any slack in my skill plan? What skills are worth scattering points in that won't become useless if not maxed?

Compared to that a little math is the very platonic form of simplicity.

Considering me and my players have never played a core only game (even when it was people's first ever sessions of pathfinder) I'm going to disagree. Most of the game is organised enough you can find what your going to need pretty quick.

Only gets ridiculously complicated in the manner your speaking if your looking in books or sections that aren't relevant to your character. Like looking in a player companion on monks when your a wizard or something.


If this thread acomplished nothing else it just made me buy the PDF:)


Cap. Darling wrote:
If this thread acomplished nothing else it just made me buy the PDF:)

Good purchase! I think the gold om VMC is for GMs that can take a fighter NPC and slap something for a more interesting fight.

For example a fighter that turns into s whirlwind! (uh..forgot how I got there..sorcerer bloodlines? Got it writtem somewhere). I bet your players would remember that more than NPC Genericmfoghter #23.


Now i have looked at it and i Think we Can see what the favorites are magus and wizard have great parts of the class with hardly any level reduction where oracle have both-6 level on the revalations and the Can never take extra revalation clause. These rules look like a exelent starting point but not somthing i would use as they are printed.

And my players wouldent know genericfigther2345 from some multiclass freak. Since most of my badguys and baddies are homemademonstrosities:)


Yes but the difference is that you slapped on some bloodline power and tool 3 feats away from an NPC library fighter, instead of using half hour to create a multiclassed weirdo thing and crunching numbers and restatting :) not always, the multiclass "oh my god he's doing what and does..huh??" does have a sire spot in my heart too.


I dint crunch numbers when i make NPCs they miraculerusly have the numbers i need them to have.
And a relatively, (relative to my friends) good grasp of the rules make it seem reasonable in game.


kestral287 wrote:

Frankly Atarlost, you're playing the wrong game.

Because if you carry out your plan... you still have all the same feat options so nothing is solved. You still have skill points. The only thing that you've 'fixed' that's listed in that post is dips, and those are easy. 90% of the time you just don't dip. The other 10% of the time you already know what you want, and it's a marginal gain that you can freely ignore anyway. The builds that require dips are not the builds that casual players play.

The point isn't that complexity is a bad thing. It's that Milo is straining at a gnat.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:


Inspire Courage is also worth more than a Feat.

You get a garbage inspire courage, so I disagree

Eh, it's mediocre at 7th when you get it, but even there it's a valid party buff. At 9th, it goes to +2 and is very solid, and way better than a Feat. At 11th when it becomes a Move Action? It's amazing.

And then you get Versatile Performance, which is amazing (and easily worth a couple of Feats) if you're willing to retrain a little.

Versatile Performance is not so amazing if your original class neither requires charisma as your highest stat nor has Perform as a class skill.


Atarlost wrote:
The point isn't that complexity is a bad thing. It's that Milo is straining at a gnat.

-.-

But picking abilities and making characters currently isn't complex at all. The most complex thing that comes up is picking what spells to prepare from the wizards high-level spellbook, and that just takes time and decision making rather than straight boring number crunching.

Forcing some individuals my group to do what your suggesting would require ridiculously more effort than any form of benefit that could be gained.

Liberty's Edge

David knott 242 wrote:
Versatile Performance is not so amazing if your original class neither requires charisma as your highest stat nor has Perform as a class skill.

Eh. The second of those is easy to get around. And the first is just bad planning: If you're gonna take a Bard VMC, you should have high Charisma to do it with.

That doesn't make it bad, it just means you need certain prerequisites to make it good. Y'know, like most stuff in Pathfinder.

Sovereign Court

David knott 242 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:


Inspire Courage is also worth more than a Feat.

You get a garbage inspire courage, so I disagree

Eh, it's mediocre at 7th when you get it, but even there it's a valid party buff. At 9th, it goes to +2 and is very solid, and way better than a Feat. At 11th when it becomes a Move Action? It's amazing.

And then you get Versatile Performance, which is amazing (and easily worth a couple of Feats) if you're willing to retrain a little.

Versatile Performance is not so amazing if your original class neither requires charisma as your highest stat nor has Perform as a class skill.

That's like saying that wizard spellcasting is lame if your Int is 10 or less. You can't base power levels on the idea that it doesn't mesh with the character in question.


You still effectively gain your HD in skill points.

When you gain the Versatile it actually allows you to retrain the skills involved.

Ex: You have 10 ranks in Diplomacy and Sense Motive each. You then hit 11 and gain VP. You retrain Diplomacy and Sense Motive as per the VMC, put 10 of those points into your VP and you still have 10 left (plus your level up).

While your Charisma might be low you still get more skills this way and have the option to spread them out at 11.


Hubaris wrote:

You still effectively gain your HD in skill points.

When you gain the Versatile it actually allows you to retrain the skills involved.

Ex: You have 10 ranks in Diplomacy and Sense Motive each. You then hit 11 and gain VP. You retrain Diplomacy and Sense Motive as per the VMC, put 10 of those points into your VP and you still have 10 left (plus your level up).

While your Charisma might be low you still get more skills this way and have the option to spread them out at 11.

If you have a low CHA you effectively lose the difference between your CHA mod and the other skill's ability mod in skill points. It also effectively lowers your skill point cap, which may or may not be relevant.

Liberty's Edge

Snowblind wrote:
If you have a low CHA you effectively lose the difference between your CHA mod and the other skill's ability mod in skill points. It also effectively lowers your skill point cap, which may or may not be relevant.

Eh. With low Charisma you can always go Comedy or Acting or something that's already two Cha skills.

It's not ideal, but you should've known that going into Bard VMC with low Cha.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I still don't understand why people are expecting the Bard VMC to be good for characters with low charisma.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
If you have a low CHA you effectively lose the difference between your CHA mod and the other skill's ability mod in skill points. It also effectively lowers your skill point cap, which may or may not be relevant.

Eh. With low Charisma you can always go Comedy or Acting or something that's already two Cha skills.

It's not ideal, but you should've known that going into Bard VMC with low Cha.

If you have a low CHA you probably don't want face skills that much anyway.

Not that all of this is really an issue. The VMC for a CHA based class needing CHA for some of it's features to be valuable isn't unreasonable.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
Versatile Performance is not so amazing if your original class neither requires charisma as your highest stat nor has Perform as a class skill.

Eh. The second of those is easy to get around. And the first is just bad planning: If you're gonna take a Bard VMC, you should have high Charisma to do it with.

That doesn't make it bad, it just means you need certain prerequisites to make it good. Y'know, like most stuff in Pathfinder.

Well -- let's take a wizard with slightly above average charisma. The bardic knowledge bonus is great for this character, and even the bardic performance feature is a decent feature. If I could stop there, the Bard VMC would be a no-brainer for this character. But then we get to Versatile Performance -- and that feature doesn't look so good.

So whether any of the Bard VMD features are "amazing" depends on the character in question. An intelligence based character would find bardic knowledge "amazing" and be gradually less impressed with each feature that follows. A charisma based character, on the other hand, would see this VMC as starting out weak and gradually improving.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I feel like someone should go around and redo them, and not necessarily make them 1 per class, druids or cavaliers and what not have enough different abilities to fill out a few VMCs on a theme. Also, getting something at every other feat level is pretty limiting, i think they should just swap 5 feats for a whole package.


^Actually a pretty good idea. Make feat costs (if using variable-width feats) and prerequisites such that you can't just cram everything in at the beginning, but otherwise make the package semi-a-la-carte (obviously you have to keep prerequisites where an upper level class feature improves upon or otherwise depends upon a lower level one), so if you really need to get something like Vital Strike as soon as it is available, you can delay the class feature feat a bit.

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sort of like Eldritch Heritage, but for more classes? ^_^


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I'm thinking more like at character creation you decide on a VMC and agree to drop the 5 feats or so you lose, and then gain stuff at level appropriate levels instead of wedging everything into 3rd 7th 11th, etc levels.

like make them archetypes that don't replace class abilities and replace character advancement.

like the barbarian rage pack one still loses feats at 3rd ~ levels, however it gains rage at fourth level and rage powers every 3 levels there after(counting level-3 as your effective barbarian level). along with greater rage at 15th level.

then also the Barbarian Warrior pack could give fast movement at first level, uncanny dodge and greater at 2nd and 5th levels, and then damage reduction at 7th level.

Druid wildling pack could give wildshape at fourth level, but pushes back all the upgrades by 2 levels per upgrade (thus the upgrades occur at 8th level 12th level and 16th level at that level giving

Spoiler:
a druid can use wild shape to change into a Large elemental or a Large plant creature. When taking the form of an elemental, the druid's wild shape now functions as elemental body III. When taking the form of a plant, the druid's wild shape now functions as plant shape II.
)

Wizard caster pack gives 1/2 casting for three schools of your choice, can't write other spells in your spellbook or cast them, don't count as being on your class spell list for spell completion, etc. bloodrager spells per day.

wizard researcher pack gives you wizard bonus feats at 6th, 12th and 18th level that must be used on At each such opportunity, he can choose a metamagic feat, an item creation, Spell Mastery, or arcane discoveries.

Liberty's Edge

David knott 242 wrote:
Well -- let's take a wizard with slightly above average charisma. The bardic knowledge bonus is great for this character, and even the bardic performance feature is a decent feature. If I could stop there, the Bard VMC would be a no-brainer for this character. But then we get to Versatile Performance -- and that feature doesn't look so good.

Yeah it does. It still gives two skills for the price of one. It's not really super, but there are few Wizards with decent Cha who won't get any use out of it, after all they get to be pretty good at two social skills at discount prices.

David knott 242 wrote:
So whether any of the Bard VMD features are "amazing" depends on the character in question. An intelligence based character would find bardic knowledge "amazing" and be gradually less impressed with each feature that follows. A charisma based character, on the other hand, would see this VMC as starting out weak and gradually improving.

I agree in general, that some are certainly better than others for some characters, but frankly, by 11th, Bardic Performance is worth at least two Feats by itself, making Versatile Performance almost superfluous.

101 to 150 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Is variant multiclassing sub-par? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.