# Hybrid Classes



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

It's up, time to discuss.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Apr 6, 2009)

Wow, there is a lot to dig in here, this will take a while to digest.


----------



## Thasmodious (Apr 6, 2009)

I've already fully analyzed it and come to the carefully considered conclusion that this is way overpowered and broken.  Power creep has come to 4e.  We are all doomed.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

My head just went boom!

It's kinda exactly what I was hoping for - but the question is whether it's balanced enough.


----------



## Hawke (Apr 6, 2009)

Interesting approach... I think the forced 2-powers-per-class will work out as intended most of the time. The restriction to striker class features to powers of that class is an easy way to prevent certain crazy combinations. 

I'm eager to hear some playtests with this... we're taking a break in a few weeks as the players finish up this story arc and letting a player DM that orc delve w/ the pregens wotc gave out. Depending on how much time I have to generate a character, I might see if he'll let me try out a hybrid character instead.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

I have the exact opposite reaction to Thasmodious. It requires so many hoops to jump through to powerful, that it's for the most part, weaksauce.

You get an aspect of the class's features, but not all of them (for instance, Warlock Curse, but not Warloct's Pact stuff), and they're obviously not as good (curse damage only works with warlock powers). Very meh. (not to mention, how do you handle things like the Beastmaster ranger)?

Also disappointing that it only did PHB (+SM) hybrids, rather than PHB2. I have a player who wants a hybrid Druid/Invoker, and so looks like we're going to have to go at that from scratch.

The nice consolation prize is that you can use implements of both classes and use any power with them (I.e. a Cleric/Wizard using a holy symbol to cast Thunderwave).


----------



## chaotix42 (Apr 6, 2009)

For those without DDI subscriptions:

You choose two classes. Each class has a unique entry - "Hybrid Cleric" for example. I'll use clerics and fighters as examples, but they give us all the PHB1 classes as well as the swordmage in the preview. 

Each entry lists the armor, weapons, and implements you become proficient in (although you only gain proficiency in armor shared by both classes), and the bonuses you gain to defenses. You combine the defense bonuses: cleric gets +1 Will, fighter gets +1 Fortitude, etc. 

You also gain a combination of hit points at 1st level and every level after. Hyrbid clerics get 6 hp at 1st level and 2 at every level gained. Fighters gain 7 and 3. The same goes for healing surges - clerics get 3 surges per day, fighters 4. 

You combine the list of class skills from both classes and gain 3 trained skills from that list. Some classes grant you extra trained skills - rangers get 1, rogues get 2, for example.

When you select your powers, you get 1 at-will from each hybrid class. When you get 2 or more powers in a category at least 1 of those powers must come from each class. 

You gain the class features listed for your hybrid classes, which are watered down when compared to the true class. Hybrid clerics get Healer's Lore and Healing Word, though they can only use the later 1/encounter. Fighters only gain Combat Challenge and can only mark enemies with fighter powers/fighter paragon path powers.

You are considered a member of both classes for meeting pre-reqs, for things such as feats and paragon paths. Your class features still count as the original version for meeting pre-reqs too. 

You can still take multiclass feats!

That's it, mostly.


----------



## HeirToPendragon (Apr 6, 2009)

Sounds sort of, Gestalt like

Anyone else notice that a Paladin/Fighter starts with 14 HP at level 1 and gains 6 a level?


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Apr 6, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> My head just went boom!
> 
> It's kinda exactly what I was hoping for - but the question is whether it's balanced enough.



Well it definitely seems that WoTC knows that this could be quite unbalancing and are being careful. What with it not being currently allowed in RPGA or put into the Character Builder.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

This actually makes me think about breaking class features down into feats, in order to allow hybrid characters to get the class features in full (or at least, access to class features they don't have).

For instance, Feat: Turn Undead [Pre-Req: Cleric Hybrid] (works as normal). 

Or Feat: Healing Word [Pre-Req: Cleric Hybrid] (you can use it twice per encounter).

Maybe that's too broken, though.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

1. Its going to take me a while to assimilate this.

2. Some people are going to be inevitably unhappy because they want SPECIFIC combinations of class abilities, and this doesn't give you all possible combinations.

3. I admire that WotC had the balls to say, up front, that hybrid characters aren't automatically good in every combination.  That your combination may just plain not work well.  That you may have to come up with some other way of creating your character concept, or that you may have to give up.  This was going to be true of any system they possibly could have invented, due to the combinatorial issues and the underlying ability score architecture.  I salute them for having the guts to put up a warning sign that admits this, rather than to try to pretend that everything is fine even when it can't be.  A good "use at your own risk" is worth so much in terms of people's expectations and demands.


----------



## SlimeGuru42 (Apr 6, 2009)

Check page 3-4 for the feat Hybrid Talent. It lets you gain a class feature from one of your classes that you don't already have hybridized. It does -not- mention being able to take it multiple times.

It will let you play a beastmaster ranger hybrid though.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Apr 6, 2009)

I can guess what the hybrid versions of the PHB2 classes would be:
Avenger: Oath of Emnity only works with Avenger powers.
Barbarian: Ragestrike - Barbarian dailies only, possibly get rampage.
Bard: Majestic Word once, skill versatility
Druid: Wildshape, likely the same as the full feature.
Invoker: You might get the covenant ability but not the associated channel divinity power.
Shaman: You get a companion spirit, but it might be a standard action to call.  And maybe Healing Spirit 1/enc.
Sorcerer: Spell source bonus damage, sorcerer powers only.
Warden: Nature's Wrath to only one adjacent enemy.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Apr 6, 2009)

SlimeGuru42 said:


> Check page 3-4 for the feat Hybrid Talent. It lets you gain a class feature from one of your classes that you don't already have hybridized. It does -not- mention being able to take it multiple times.
> 
> It will let you play a beastmaster ranger hybrid though.



It's assumed that all feats can only be taken once, unless otherwise specified.  I noticed that a lot of the defensive abilities aren't hybrid abilities.  

And I'm sure that anyone who actually takes the Swordmage hybrid will probably want to get Swordmage Warding with that feat right away, because they're stuck with the worst armour proficiencies of both classes.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Kobold Avenger said:


> Barbarian: Ragestrike - Barbarian dailies only, possibly get rampage.



The problem with Rage-Strike:

You have to be Raging, and use another rage for the strike.

Since Hybrid classes have to go "One power of this class, one power of that", you come to something like this:

Barb Daily 1: BloodHunt Range
Other Class Daily 5: Whatever.
Barb Daily 9: Black Dragon Rage.

So Ragestrike wouldn't be usable until level 9.


----------



## ppaladin123 (Apr 6, 2009)

Well...there is the feat, "hybrid talent," so it looks like you can pick up one extra class feature. That only works once though.

The swordmage's aegis and the paladin's divine challenge are seriously nerfed in hybrid-form. 

You could probably build a interesting wizard/cleric (pick up implement mastery as your hybrid talent). Maybe you could make a fun warlord/paladin too.

This looks rather weak overall though. You'll have to spend at least one feat on hybrid talent in most cases. You'll also likely have to spend several feats on the armor/shield proficiencies you've lost. It ends up being rather feat-intensive just like multi-classing.

I'm going to go try to build a hybrid cleric/warlord and see what I can come up with.


----------



## chaotix42 (Apr 6, 2009)

SlimeGuru42 said:


> Check page 3-4 for the feat Hybrid Talent. It lets you gain a class feature from one of your classes that you don't already have hybridized. It does -not- mention being able to take it multiple times.
> 
> It will let you play a beastmaster ranger hybrid though.




Yeah, that feat will go a loooooong way toward making hybrid characters more robust. This way your hybrid fighter can be nice and sticky (lol).


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Heh. Another drawback is that, since you don't get the particular class features like Artful Dodger/Rageblood Vigor, etc, then you don't get the enhancements to those powers you choose with those qualities.

So, for all intents and purposes, you're treated like you multi-classed to get that power.

Also, this might really impact classes that get boosts to AC as part of their class features, to balance them out: The Avenger, Druid, Barbarian, and Swordmage. 



SlimeGuru42 said:


> Check page 3-4 for the feat Hybrid Talent. It lets you gain a class feature from one of your classes that you don't already have hybridized. It does -not- mention being able to take it multiple times.



Thanks, I totally missed that.



			
				ppaladin123 said:
			
		

> The swordmage's aegis and the paladin's divine challenge are seriously nerfed in hybrid-form.



Aye.


----------



## Stalker0 (Apr 6, 2009)

Up front I think its pretty interesting, and almost a true blending of the classes.

WOTC seems to be concerned that it will be too weak, but I bet there are plenty of powerful combinations to be made.

I think it definitely fills some of the hole people feel when they lost 3e multiclassing. Its not quite the same, but close in its customization.

I wonder if when all is said and done, WOTC will not go with the modular approach and will instead provide tailor made hybrid class combinations. Modular design is 3e, the old "build how you want it, but don't come crying to us when its broken or too weak". 4e is more about the "we will craft great classes for you, but you need to take what your given and wait for the splats to see more options."

But have their advantages, so it will be interesting to see where it leads.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

Wait... with the Hybrid Talent feat, I can combine the fey pact boon with a melee class?  Like the Barbarian?  A teleporting melee combatant?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> A teleporting melee combatant?



Otherwise known as a Swordmage?


----------



## NMcCoy (Apr 6, 2009)

Ooh, things are looking quite good indeed for my Warden/Ranger+Fighter character idea.

(Notation Proposal: Using a slash to denote hybrid classes and a plus to indicate multiclassing seems like a good idea to me.)


----------



## ppaladin123 (Apr 6, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Wait... with the Hybrid Talent feat, I can combine the fey pact boon with a melee class?  Like the Barbarian?  A teleporting melee combatant?




Yup...you'll just be stuck with leather armor proficiency. 

I think you'd also want to pick up eldritch blast and take, "reaper's touch," to make it a melee touch attack. 

You could have a bit of fun once you got to the paragon tier and took the fey-touched paragon path. Slashing wake is neat.


----------



## Xris Robin (Apr 6, 2009)

Hm.  Fighter|Barbarian using Hybrid talent to get Battlerager Vigor?

I wish we had the PHB2 classes.  Oh well, maybe I'll go with Warlock|Wizard.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Otherwise known as a Swordmage?



Not _nearly_ enough teleportation.


ppaladin123 said:


> Yup...you'll just be stuck with leather armor proficiency.



Eh, I'll blow a feat on chainmail.  I'll hardly notice.


----------



## Xris Robin (Apr 6, 2009)

Oh.  Hm.  Just thought, Warlock|Rogue, using Hybrid Talent to get Shadow Walk. Take Fleeting Ghost as your level 2 utility, and stealth all over the place.

Hm.  If you take Hybrid Talent (Spellbook), does it still only apply to Wizard dailies?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

I wonder what happens to the power distribution when you multi-class a hybrid character.

For instance, if you're a Cleric/Rogue, you need 1 encounter that's cleric and one that's rogue. Well, if you Multi into Avenger, and now you have an Avenger and a Rogue power... now what? What about the cleric one? Do you have to always have 1 Cleric/1 Rogue/1 Avenger?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

ppaladin123 said:


> I think you'd also want to pick up eldritch blast and take, "reaper's touch," to make it a melee touch attack.



Reaper's Touch is what?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Christopher Robin said:


> Oh.  Hm.  Just thought, Warlock|Rogue, using Hybrid Talent to get Shadow Walk. Take Fleeting Ghost as your level 2 utility, and stealth all over the place.



You'd have to look at the PHB2's stealth errata and see if that works.

Stealth is one convoluted mess tho.


----------



## Sadrik (Apr 6, 2009)

Now this is what I am talking about. From what I have read from this thread it apears I can now play my wizard as a striker (wizard sorcerer) or a defender (wizard fighter). I can take the shtick I want and attach it to the mechanics I want. Kudos, nicely done.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Reaper's Touch is what?



Feat from Dragon Magazine.  Makes a bunch of different at will ranged powers into melee attacks.  Could be interesting, but isn't really what I'd be going for.  Mostly I just want to mix power sources and carefully loot out choice parts of the magic power sources to combine them with martial characters.


Sadrik said:


> Now this is what I am talking about. From what I have read from this thread it apears I can now play my wizard as a striker (wizard sorcerer) or a defender (wizard fighter). I can take the shtick I want and attach it to the mechanics I want. Kudos, nicely done.



Well, not really.  Your sorcerer or fighter powers would still be sorcerer or fighter powers.  Your Fireball spell would still be a Fireball, and your Reaping Strike would still be a Reaping Strike.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Sadrik said:


> Now this is what I am talking about. From what I have read from this thread it apears I can now play my wizard as a striker (wizard sorcerer) or a defender (wizard fighter). I can take the shtick I want and attach it to the mechanics I want. Kudos, nicely done.



Not... really.

It's essentially the same thing as using the multi-class rules, except that instead of 1 + 1/6th, you get 1/2 and 1/2. 

So your Wizard/FIghter still has to use weapons for his fighter powers, still has to use implements for his wizard powers, he only is trained in Cloth (Because Wizards are only trained in cloth), and he still would incur an OA if he casts fireball next to an enemy.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Feat from Dragon Magazine



It doesn't seem to be in the Compendium.


----------



## ppaladin123 (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> It doesn't seem to be in the Compendium.




It is there. Don't use an apostrophe. The compendium doesn't seem to like those.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> It doesn't seem to be in the Compendium.




It is there but something odd is happening:

If I search for "Reaper's Touch" or "Reapers Touch", no luck.

If I search for "Reapers" or "Reaper's", no good, but the Paragon Path Dread Reaper is found.

If I search for "Reaper" or "Touch" it's there under feats, as "Reapers Touch"
in the list or "Reaper's Touch" in it's description.

I'm guessing that the Compendium search doesn't like the possessive apostrophe.

As for what it does: Reaper's Touch allows you to take choose an invoker, sorcerer, warlock or wizard at-will that can be used as a ranged basic attack and use it as a melee basic attack as well. The feat description actually lists the powers it works with, but they are all the at-wills from those classes that are ranged basic attacks.


----------



## mach1.9pants (Apr 6, 2009)

Opens up a whole can of whoopass, fun and worms! I like it though and (once it is in the compendium) I'll be whiling away spare hours just making up PC's... even more than I do now.

I like a bit of warlock/rogue with Shadow Walk....Drow of course!


----------



## Khaalis (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm still absorbing the mechanic specifics and what might actually work as combinations, but my 1st gut instinct says I don't like these mechanics. Overall, the "class features" aspect of the mechanics seems broken.

<JMHO>

As it stands I think most of the class' “Class Features” are massively gimped, not to mention they run contrary to the stated focus of the hybrid class. 

The idea, as stated, is to make a *single unified class*, however you have class features like Combat Challenge that only work with half of your “class” – in this case only working with “Fighter” powers and “Fighter paragon Path” powers. So much for a unified class… My personal opinion is that if you are a Hybrid Fighter, your "class feature" should work with any attack. You should be a true hybrid, not be considered Half-Fighter Half-SomethingElse. 

I also think some of the other class features are nerfed so far into the ground they are practically worthless, like Divine Challenge.

As it stands I don't see some of these features combining to come anywhere near close to 1/2 as effective their original role. 

I also hate that they have created yet another “MUST HAVE” feat. No one is going to build a Hybrid WITHOUT the “Hybrid Talent” feat. It is a required feat to make a build effective, especially if you want most of the better class powers to function optimally since many powers require a class feature to "boost' the effectiveness of the power, such as most rogue powers (artful, etc.).

I'll be watching this to see how it develops and what changes it goes through over the next year. I hope they get a lot of feedback to help work out the kinks, as the core concept of mixing class features to make a unique new hybrid class is a great concept.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

Seems weak. I'll agree that hybrid Talent seems to be near a requirement and could have been given as a free feature. Classes that have a modular feature need that feature for their powers to work well, especially locks (who also need it for fluff reasons). Also it goes against the design intent of 4E which up until now seems to have been "You cannot screw up while building your character". If you burn all your feats you can probably get a paragon multiclass too and end up with three classes (and a lot of suck because of MAD I guess). I expect there will be a few worthwhile combos but not many.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

From an early age, all Barakas could think off was fire. As he grew and started training, he was always (and still is) torn between the blade and the magic, but he always stayed true to his first passion - Fire

At 11th level
Tiefling male
Str 13, Con 16, Dex 12, Int 21, Wis 9, Cha 18
Hit points: 86
Healing Surges: 10
AC: 28, Fortitude 21; Reflex 23; Will 24
Skills: Arcana, Endurance, Athletics
Class Features: Hybrid Swordmage Aegis of Shielding, Cantrips
Feats: Intelligent Blademaster, Toughness, Leather Armor Prof, Hellfire Blood, Surging Flame, Ferocious Rebuke, Hybrid Talent (Swordmage Warding)
At-Will: Greenblade Flame (1), Scorching Burst (1)
Encounter: Burning Hands (1), Incendiary Sword (3), Fire Burst (7), Bolts of Bedevilment (11)
Daily: Flaming Sphere (1), Swordmage Shielding Fire (5), Wall of Fire (9)
Utility: Shield (2), Armathor's Step (6), Blur (10)
Paragon Path: Turathi Highborn

Flaming Longsword +2 (lvl 10), Leather Armor +3 (lvl 11), Cloak of Resistance +3 (lvl 12)

Overall, looks playable, and it could be fun! Even though I like 4e multi-classing, hybrid classes do have that old-school feel.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Apr 6, 2009)

I really like the way it looks. The feat is going to be a must (it let's you pick one of the 'build' options for one of the classes). For example a rogue/sorceror could either take the artful dodger path or the wild mage path, and thus get those extra benefits from the powers. 

I think that doing it for other classes wouldn't be too hard. They look to be taking the main "role" class feature and giving it at a limited ammount. So, basing it on that idea it shouldn't be too hard to work it out, especially comparing things to what you get via multiclass, which is often similar. (and the other parts are pretty simple, like the skills, the hit points, etc as they are mostly straight conversions, or halved).

Some stuff does seem a little underpowered, in part because of the rounding down of HP that has been halved. Giving any combination that doesn't include a defender only 4 HP per level might not be the best idea. Perhaps including the 1/2 (i.e. rogue gets 2 1/2 points) and say that, after adding them together you round down, might be a bit better. A rogue/ranger, for example, would get the 5 HP per level instead of only 4.

Either way, it seems they may have tried to start it off on the low end of the power scale and leave chance for improving it instead of having it start off too powerful and scaling it back.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 6, 2009)

Nymrohd said:


> Seems weak. I'll agree that hybrid Talent seems to be near a requirement and could have been given as a free feature. Classes that have a modular feature need that feature for their powers to work well, especially locks (who also need it for fluff reasons). Also it goes against the design intent of 4E which up until now seems to have been "You cannot screw up while building your character".




Which is why they warn you several times that it is "risky". 

I like this. I am not sure if I am really interested in using the mechanics, but I think this points out one thing: The designers are not as much in a straight jacket as some of us might have feared. They explore the game to their fullest, and are willing to go beyond the original assumptions - and communicate with us when they do.

The mechanics itself seem okay, but note that sometimes multiclassing is still "better" than hybrid classes (depending on what you want).
A Fighter/Wizard (multiclass) can mark with a Scorching Burst (especially as Paragon multiclass), a Fighter|Wizard (hybrid) can't. The Fighter/Wizard can use his wizardry to be better at defending, but a Fighter|Wizard can (and has to) control and defend at the same time.


----------



## Mentat55 (Apr 6, 2009)

I think the Hybrid Class playtest rules are a good start, though it has rough spots.  I think it is works well for the hybrid cleric and warlord, because you get a healing encounter power and one of their good at-wills (thinking _righteous brand_ and _commander's strike_), and obviously access to all the powers.  I think it works well for the wizard, because the cantrips are fun and flavorful, if not powerful, and the main attraction of a hybrid wizard is access to all the spells.

The strikers and defenders are where things seem to break down.  You don't want a hybrid striker/X to be as good as a pure striker, so you somehow have to limit the ease with which you access the striker's bonus damage.  They have addressed this by making the bonus damage (Sneak Attack, Hunter's Quarry, Warlock's Curse) only accessible when using powers from the corresponding class.  But the restriction does seem a bit artificial.  I am ambivalent on this implementation -- I could see it working in either direction.

The fighter, paladin, and swordmage are another story.  I think the hybrid fighter's Combat Challenge should work on all attacks (or maybe all melee and close attacks).  The fighter's defender shtick comes from Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority -- Combat Challenge is more important (hence its inclusion in the hybrid fighter).  I think the hybrid fighter's Combat Challenge could use some sort of limitation, but the fighter power limitation is not to my liking.

The paladin's defender shtick is a weird combination of Divine Challenge and its ability to heal and bolster his comrades through Lay on Hands and other powers.  I think Divine Challenge <<< Combat Challenge in terms of how integral it is to the paladin's defender role, so the hybrid paladin should probably have Divine Challenge as it is written in the PHB, no changes.  

The swordmage is trickier -- Swordmage Aegis is its sole defender trick, outside of any specific effects granted by powers.  So you can't give a hybrid swordmage that, otherwise the hybrid swordmage begins to equal a full swordmage in its defender prowess.  So I agree with the need of a decrease, but perhaps not their specific implementation. 

One thing I didn't mention with defenders is AC.  Since AC is especially important to them, since they have to put themselves in front and in harm's way, the loss of armor proficiencies (depending on how you hybrid) is particularly devastating.  It can be mitigated somewhat by taking a complementary class where you are boosting Int or Dex, but if you don't...maybe some sort of intermediate solution is needed re: armor proficiencies.  For the swordmage in particular, I'd probably implement some sort of reduced Swordmage Warding, like +1 or +2 AC if you have a free hand, otherwise no bonus.

The PHB2 classes and how they would interact with the hybrid classes must be considered, so here are my thoughts on each class and how they might work (or not work):

Avenger: Oath of Enmity would only work with avenger and avenger PP powers.  Probably would have to stick to that, if only because rolling two dice and its interaction with the accuracy of other class powers could have far-reaching effects.

Barbarian: Rage Strike could be limited to once per day. But the limitations on daily powers for a hybrid class is already limiting Rage Strike indirectly.   In truth, the barbarian's striker firepower is not part of a class feature, but is rather locked up in the class powers -- and those are fully accessible to a hybrid barbarian.  Could be the hardest class to implement as a hybrid for this reason. 

Bard: I think 1/encounter Majestic Word is pretty obvious.  And since you are already a hybrid class, and can still take one multiclass, you've largely replicated the bard's multiclassing insanity (at least the nonextreme forms).

Druid: Wild Shape as is, and a bonus beast form at-will.  But then what is the hybrid druid giving up?  Another tricky one.  Maybe Wild Shape as a twice per encounter ability?    

Invoker: You probably can give the hybrid invoker one part of the Covenant feature.  The question is: which one?  I would lean towards the Channel Divinity power, but I can see the covenant manifestation as well.  The tricky part is wording this so you don't give the hybrid invoker the full covenant ability, so they don't access the special benefits in the related powers, since that seems to be something that should stay with the full class.

Shaman: I think the full Call Spirit Companion and 1/encounter Healing Spirit makes sense.  How important are the spirit's OA abilities?  I am not sure -- maybe they could be included as encounter abilities, or excluded all together. 

Sorcerer: The extra damage feature is the obvious one here.  Is keeping it limited to arcane powers (as opposed to sorcerer and sorcerer PP powers) ok?

Warden: Nature's Wrath, plus the powers _warden's fury_ and _warden's grasp_, represent the core of the warden's defender prowess.  I think it makes sense to limit Nature's Wrath to marking one or a few adjacent creatures and/or making the hybrid warden choose one of _warden's fury_ and _warden's grasp_ to have (not both).


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The Fighter/Wizard can use his wizardry to be better at defending, but a Fighter|Wizard can (and has to) control and defend at the same time.



I don't agree with this statement. The hybrid Fighter Wiz doesn't _have_ to, unless he's the only controller and the only defender in the group.

The article points out that, a Hybrid character really works in a group where there's all ready those two roles covered, so the hybrid doesn't feel too thin in terms of meeting the needs of his role.

The only place where I think you are right, in that his _powers_ are split down the Role middle: it's hard to be a good controller when half your powers are single target melee.


----------



## Mentat55 (Apr 6, 2009)

A quick follow-up to my rather verbose previous post.

IMO, the roles vary in terms of how dependant they are on class features vs. class powers.

Defenders: Role is very tied to class features (e.g., Combat Challenge, Swordmage Aegis)

Strikers: Role is very tied to class feature, specifically the bonus damage mechanism -- except for the barbarian.

Leaders: Role is very tied to the healing class feature.

Controllers: Role is not dependent on class features -- it is really all about the powers.

As a result, I think hybrid Leaders are easy to implement using the hybrid class rules because the modifications to the healing power seem pretty straightforward to me.  Hybrid controllers are similarly easy to implement, though if you choose mostly powers from the controller class, you might be approaching the effectiveness of a pure controller as a result of their lack of class features that strongly reinforce the controller role; thus, this could be a problem.  Strikers and defenders are the trickiest, IMO.


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

The more I think about it, the more I think this was the Designers being very cautious, and giving this playtest article out to see if it works.

Because looking at it, the rules here strike me as _very conservative_. 

There are limitations here where there is little reason for there to be limitations.

Like the fighter's Combat Challenge only working on fighter powers. Why? I understand the fear - a Fighter|Wizard could mark everyone in the area of a spell. But a Fighter with a Wizard multi-class can do that already. Marking everyone in an area isn't that big a deal - the Fighter only has ONE Immediate action per round, and the mark goes away at the end of his next turn. 

Same with Sneak Attack/Hunter's Quarry. Sneak attack is only possible with rogue weapons, and it can only be done once per round. So, what's the big fear? Even if a rogue is using a power where he gets to attack multiple times or multiple targets, he is still limited to the rogue's weapons as far as SA is concerned, and can only do it on one attack per round. Same with the Ranger; he can only deal Hunter's Quarry to one target, once. So what if the Hunter's Quarry target is in an area affect from a spell? 

I think Wizards went the path of "We'll give them something very limited, let the folks play with it, see how it runs, and then increase its power later." It's easier to give something weak, and beef it up, then it is to give something broken and nerf it later.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think this was the Designers being very cautious, and giving this playtest article out to see if it works.
> 
> Because looking at it, the rules here strike me as _very conservative_.
> 
> ...



The Fighter/Wizard multiclass can do it only a few times per encounter (as much as he has wizard powers). Only if he uses Paragon multiclassing can he do it all the time, and only with one power. 
A hybrid classed Fighter|Wizard could do it every round (if the rules weren't as they are). He might have only one Immediate Action per round, but the -2 penalty still applies all the time. 



> Same with Sneak Attack/Hunter's Quarry. Sneak attack is only possible with rogue weapons, and it can only be done once per round. So, what's the big fear? Even if a rogue is using a power where he gets to attack multiple times or multiple targets, he is still limited to the rogue's weapons as far as SA is concerned, and can only do it on one attack per round. Same with the Ranger; he can only deal Hunter's Quarry to one target, once. So what if the Hunter's Quarry target is in an area affect from a spell?



Rogue/Ranger: Combine Sneak Attack and Hunters Quarry all the time? With Twin-Strike preferably?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Rogue/Ranger: Combine Sneak Attack and Hunters Quarry all the time? With Twin-Strike preferably?



I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it. 

Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.

Twin Strike keys off Dex or Str. The only Dex-based attacks the ranger does are ranged. But, getting CA with ranged attacks is fairly difficult; you do it while you flank, you incur an OA. 

Essentially it's a pro/con situation, not a sure thing.


----------



## jbear (Apr 6, 2009)

I haven't read the article, but A rogue with Eye-bite as an at will power would no longer have to flank to get CA.... and cursed!!!! Ouch. And the person he is stabbing can't see him either! Do Hybrid Rogues get backstab? I imagine they do.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.
> 
> Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.
> 
> ...




I think MR is responding to the thought about not limiting which powers are needed to be able to use CA/HQ. Meaning, if you made your rogue/ranger and could get CA + HQ on every attack (using for example twin strike).

Which would be horribly broken.


----------



## jbear (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.
> 
> Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.
> 
> ...



There is a feat that gives CA from a Distance on targets that allys flank in PHBII


----------



## jbear (Apr 6, 2009)

Also isn't there a feat that allows Warlocks to use their Attacks as a melee attack through the pact dagger?


----------



## Rechan (Apr 6, 2009)

jbear said:


> I haven't read the article, but A rogue with Eye-bite as an at will power would no longer have to flank to get CA.... and cursed!!!! Ouch. And the person he is stabbing can't see him either! Do Hybrid Rogues get backstab? I imagine they do.



Eyebite: You use a standard action, and now you're invisible to the target until the _beginning_ of your next turn.

The rogue doesn't have another standard action to backstab, unless he spends an AP.


----------



## jbear (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Eyebite: You use a standard action, and now you're invisible to the target until the _beginning_ of your next turn.
> 
> The rogue doesn't have another standard action to backstab, unless he spends an AP.



Or he moves and provokes an opportunity attack. But yes, quite right.
My mistake. However, still very cool to get into a flanking position without provoking opportunity attacks. Multiclass into Ranger and you'd be pretty lethal.

Minor Action: Curse
Standard Action: Eyebite: Invisible
Move Action: Move into Flanking Position
AP: Sneak Attack Damge with Warlock power through Pact Blade (I think this feat exists, correct me if I'm wrong) And Feat that allows repplication of curse damge when spending an action point

next round:
Minor: Choose as Prey
Standard: Strike now for Sneak Attack + Curse + Prey damge
And a move or minor action to spare. If still alive, target is still prey til end of next turn so you can repeat. With a Sticky Fighter defending on the other side of the flank this is brutal!

A Human with Dex and Char or a Drow would be pretty darn nasty


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

I have to say I prefer their apporach of designing something from an underpowered restrictive basis and up. It is easier to tell players (and yourself as well) that something needs to be buffed, and do so slowly and methodically, than it is to design something that is overpowered and try to nerf it.

I have to agree with WalterKovacs' comment on the previous page; the hit points need to give .5 values when rounded down, and we can round them down after adding them up for both classes, otherwise anything that does not include a defender becomes suboptimal.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> I don't think that combo is broken. Primarily because the rogue would need CA to maintain it.
> 
> Not to mention that the stats are not in favor for that.
> 
> ...




It is not that hard to get Strength and Dexterity as high ability scores. And the Rogue always had to rely on getting Combat Advantage, and everyone that can get into melee is trying to get Combat Advantage.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Apr 6, 2009)

regarding marking with only fighter powers:

the problem would be at-will close/area attacks... 

but: without any armor profeciencies and lower hp it doesn´t strike me as such a good idea...


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 6, 2009)

So, about classes that are hybrid for defenses.  Does a paladin get +1 fort or +1 ref or +1 will?  Or does he get some other combination?

Same with warlock, does he get +1 ref or +1 will?  Or does he only get +1 will as a hybrid and reflex is forgotten?


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

malcolm_n said:


> So, about classes that are hybrid for defenses.  Does a paladin get +1 fort or +1 ref or +1 will?  Or does he get some other combination?
> 
> Same with warlock, does he get +1 ref or +1 will?  Or does he only get +1 will as a hybrid and reflex is forgotten?




You get to choose +1 in one of those defenses


----------



## Thanlis (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> The only place where I think you are right, in that his _powers_ are split down the Role middle: it's hard to be a good controller when half your powers are single target melee.




Have you let beast form druids know about this problem?  Controller doesn't mean multiple target, it means control of the battlefield.


----------



## Mengu (Apr 6, 2009)

The worst abuse I can come up with is a fighter/ranger with doublesword or urgosh. You're essentially stacking fighter striker damage from tempest with ranger striker damage from hunter's quarry, using twin strike. At higher levels with all the static bonuses you can get, damage output will go through the roof, especially since you can also pick up a multiclass feat such as Avenger to become super accurate for 2 rounds per encounter with your zounds of attacks.

Aside from that, it seems balanced, leaning toward the weak side for most combinations (which I prefer over leaning toward the strong side). 

There are some interactions that are sort of unclear to me. It looks like a human hybrid something/warlock could start with one something at-will and two warlock at-wills, and then pick up a pact with the hybrid feat for eldritch blast and the pact at-will, giving him 4 warlock at-wills and 1 something at-will, for a total of 5 at-wills. Not sure if this is intended or not.

The wizard hybrid made me chuckle. They get cantrips, yippee. Oh and yeah, that's all they get. Oh wait I forgot, they also eat all of another hybrid class's armor proficiencies for good measure.


----------



## proto128 (Apr 6, 2009)

Looking over the article, I'm pretty glad - mostly because what problems I have with the system as written can be fixed by addition, not subtraction.  

Several of the class abilities (combat challenge, divine challenge) can be fixed by having them work at full power.  Others (rogue, ranger) could be written to work with all powers, but put in a provision that they can't stack if that's too powerful.  The wizard hybrid feature is pretty lol; spellbook would probably be a better replacement, if not a possibly limited version of implement mastery.

Otherwise, you could add another feat (which is a band-aid fix, but again, addition) in conjunction with Hybrid Talent :

Improved Hybrid Feature 
Prerequisite:  Hybrid character
Benefit:  Choose a class feature from one of your classes that you possess as a hybrid version.  You replace the hybrid version with that class feature.

I still think the system needs some tweaking, but either way it's a start.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

Mengu said:


> The worst abuse I can come up with is a fighter/ranger with doublesword or urgosh. You're essentially stacking fighter striker damage from tempest with ranger striker damage from hunter's quarry, using twin strike. At higher levels with all the static bonuses you can get, damage output will go through the roof, especially since you can also pick up a multiclass feat such as Avenger to become super accurate for 2 rounds per encounter with your zounds of attacks.



Are you referring to a hybrid fighter-hybrid ranger multiclass avenger taking a hybrid feat to get tempest technique? 




> There are some interactions that are sort of unclear to me. It looks like a human hybrid something/warlock could start with one something at-will and two warlock at-wills, and then pick up a pact with the hybrid feat for eldritch blast and the pact at-will, giving him 4 warlock at-wills and 1 something at-will, for a total of 5 at-wills. Not sure if this is intended or not.



AFAIK, the warlock pact forces you to pick a specific at-will, it doesn't give you that at-will per say.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

Well the striker features need to stay in their hybrid forms. Otherwise players will be able to double up on them every round.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

After further review, a great weakness I see in this system is the way it deals with armor proficiency. Would it be so unbalancing to get the better of the two armor proficiencies or at least a compromise? I have a player who plays a cleric with some fighter multiclassing and if he could ask for one thing is that he did not have to waste so many feats for shields and armor to match the archetype he had in mind.


----------



## Remathilis (Apr 6, 2009)

Nymrohd said:


> After further review, a great weakness I see in this system is the way it deals with armor proficiency. Would it be so unbalancing to get the better of the two armor proficiencies or at least a compromise? I have a player who plays a cleric with some fighter multiclassing and if he could ask for one thing is that he did not have to waste so many feats for shields and armor to match the archetype he had in mind.




Heh, it actually reminds me of second edition multi-classing. You had to obey the restrictions of the worst class. So a Ftr/Thf got all fighter weapon but only leather armor. A Ftr/Wizard couldn't cast in armor. In theory, they could wear heavier armor, but doing so forfeited thief skills or spellcasting. Clerics were the oddity, they got all armor but forced blunt weapons. So a cleric/wizard was double screwed; blunt weapons and no armor. But the spells!


----------



## Byronic (Apr 6, 2009)

Mengu said:


> There are some interactions that are sort of unclear to me. It looks like a human hybrid something/warlock could start with one something at-will and two warlock at-wills, and then pick up a pact with the hybrid feat for eldritch blast and the pact at-will, giving him 4 warlock at-wills and 1 something at-will, for a total of 5 at-wills. Not sure if this is intended or not.





Actually, assuming that you can only take the Hybrid feat once this wouldn't be true. Eldritch Blast is a different class feature then Eldritch Pact. This means a human Warlock Hybrid will only have 4 at-wills rather then their usual 3. 

I like the new rules though.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

I don't think the armor thing will be a noticeable issue when people actually play the game.  To get a functional armor class, you need either heavy armor or light armor plus a focus in dexterity or intelligence.  Its going to be a rare hybrid character without at least one of these.  On top of that, the hybrid character's ability scores are probably going to qualify it for armor feats, easily.

So there is a cost, but its not that big of one.

I think I like this more than granting the best armor from each class.  I'm sure people will be able to come up with specific examples where it wouldn't be unreasonable for their hybrid character to have the better armor options of the two hybridized classes, but the game can't be balanced on making the worst option match par, or else the best options will be unreasonable.  I'd rather things be balanced for the best and the majority of the best options, and then leave people to their ingenuity to work out the rest.


----------



## proto128 (Apr 6, 2009)

Nymrohd said:


> After further review, a great weakness I see in this system is the way it deals with armor proficiency. Would it be so unbalancing to get the better of the two armor proficiencies or at least a compromise? I have a player who plays a cleric with some fighter multiclassing and if he could ask for one thing is that he did not have to waste so many feats for shields and armor to match the archetype he had in mind.




Maybe take the worst of the two hybrids, plus the next best armor proficiency of the better hybrid?


----------



## Byronic (Apr 6, 2009)

Oddly enough I don't think hybrid classes get any "free" skills. With "free" I mean like the Wizard automatically gets Arcane and the Cleric gets Religion. However a Wizard/Cleric hybrid would have neither automatically. 

That should be rectified with a house rule I think...


----------



## MrMyth (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think this was the Designers being very cautious, and giving this playtest article out to see if it works.
> 
> Because looking at it, the rules here strike me as _very conservative_.
> 
> ...




Those restrictions are actually the _only_ thing keeping the hybrid classes from being overbalanced. 

The thing to understand is that the goal, here, isn't to produce a class that can fill two roles at the exact same time. You don't want that, after all! If a character is able to be a perfect defender while unleashing full striker damage, why should you bother with a standard defender or standard striker?

The goal instead is to have a character that can fill either role perfectly well at _any given time_, but not both at _once_. 

So, the Fighter/Ranger can spend one round using his fighter powers, and marking opponents, and keeping them from attacking his allies. Then, the next round, it looks like his allies are in a safe spot - so he instead uses his ranger powers and does striker damage to take them down fast.

And what you especially don't want is for striker classes to compile their damage. If there was no restriction on Sneak Attack and Hunter's Quarry, and you could simply stack them? That is really, really overpowered. The handful of minor abilities you lose out on in order to get this doesn't compare to how much higher damage you deal compared to a standard Rogue or standard Ranger. 

Sure, you need to both quarry an enemy and get combat advantage. But that is not difficult at all. The system is designed for rogues to have combat advantage nearly all the time, as long as they are attempting to do so - and even ranged rogues have quite a few ways to do so. 

In fact, the one primary balance problem I've noticed with these rules is that you _can_ get in 3-4 rounds of super-striker damage, by focusing on encounter powers that give attacks that are minor actions or immediate actions.That's a good chunk of the fight to have that level of inflated damage. I don't think it is gamebreaking levels of damage, but it does seem the one large area of abuse for these rules.

Aside from that, I am very impressed at their elegance. The limitation on class features only working with class powers does go a long way towards making sure you only fill one role at a time. The big issue just seems to be making sure the right features are chosen for each class - someone pointed out that the hybrid Warlord currently seems a bit too strong, since of his three class features, it gives him one for full (Combat Leader), he can get another for full via Hybrid Talent (Commanding Presence), and it gives him Inspiring Word at one less use per encounter - which, if he Hybrids cleric, he makes up by gaining Healing word once per encounter. 

Thus, the Cleric/Warlord Hybrid is just like a standard Warlord, except he can pick between Cleric and Warlord powers and has Healer's Lore, in return for losing a feat (on Hybrid Talent), and Light Shield Proficiency. And lower hitpoints, admittedly, which is significant - but still seems a pretty low cost for what he gets. 

I'm concerned that similar set-ups (where you get something for very little loss) will only be more likely as they add more hybrid class options with other classes as well. As long as they choose what each gets very cautiously, this system seems mostly workable, but it will require some very careful design.

I don't think these builds are underpowered. They have the potential to be, certain, like any build does, but I think every combination gets interesting options and abilities that will make up for what they are missing out on.


----------



## Lord Zardoz (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> This actually makes me think about breaking class features down into feats, in order to allow hybrid characters to get the class features in full (or at least, access to class features they don't have).
> 
> For instance, Feat: Turn Undead [Pre-Req: Cleric Hybrid] (works as normal).
> 
> ...




It might not be too powerful of those feats are at the Paragon Tier instead of the Heroic tier.  However, it might end up having strange 'stacking' effects with respect to multi-class feats, (ie, a hybrid-classed Warlord taking the multi-class feat to gain a 2nd Inspiring Word).

I am not surprised that this kind of system is what they ended up going with.  There were obviously many people who wanted something like this.  I suppose we will see how this evolves between now and the PHB 3 release.

END COMMUNICATION


----------



## Mournblade94 (Apr 6, 2009)

I don't have access to D&D insider.  Still I think there should be some way that non subscribers should be able to read 1 or 2 particular articles that might interest them.

After reading everything here, I do not see how it is a more thourough merging of classes than multiclassing.

IS it a more thourough merging?  How so?


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

Mournblade94 said:


> I don't have access to D&D insider. Still I think there should be some way that non subscribers should be able to read 1 or 2 particular articles that might interest them.
> 
> After reading everything here, I do not see how it is a more thourough merging of classes than multiclassing.
> 
> IS it a more thourough merging? How so?



You get at least one class feature from each class, in part- for example, instead of Healing Word twice per encounter, you get it once per encounter.  You get access to powers from both classes, including at will powers.  You are permitted to take a feat which grants you an additional class power of your choice, in full.  You get both class's weapons and implements, but only the lesser armor.  Your initial starting stats are a merge of both classes.

The goal was to create a class who could function as a full X in one round, and a full Y in another.  This means that a lot of class abilities are altered to not stack.  You won't be marking AND sneak attacking at the same time with your fighter/rogue hybrid, though you certainly could mark someone one round and sneak attack them the next.

I find this to be a sufficient hybrid, but there will be a lot of people who want fighters who mark with scorching burst, or rogues who sneak attack with twin strike and hunter's quarry.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

I'd say it is quite more thorough since there a much smaller feat tax (just one feat) and a very flexible setup for choosing powers (you need to have at least one at-will, encounter, utility and daily from each class, but potentially the rest can be from the other class).It is different from multiclassing were you are a member of one class who picks up a few tricks since the hybrid really is a member of two classes, and just doesn't have access to all their tricks. 
I do think they can give more class features for some classes for free though. Certainly can be improved, but as I said earlier, feels easier to improve it now that the early release is the bare-bones version.


----------



## Mengu (Apr 6, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> Are you referring to a hybrid fighter-hybrid ranger multiclass avenger taking a hybrid feat to get tempest technique?




Yup, that's exactly what I'm referring to. Tempest teqnique is a feature that essentially rolls extra damage, extra defense, and extra attack bonus all into one feature. So at around level 5 you could have something like:

Half-orc Hybrid Fighter/Ranger 5
Str 19 Con 13 Dex 18 Int 8 Wis 13 Cha 10

Feats:
Hybrid Talent: Tempest Technique
Weapon Proficiency: Doublesword
Divine Bloodline

At-Will:
Twin Strike (R)
Footwork Lure (F)

Encounter:
Off-Hand Strike (R)
Rain of Blows (F)

Daily:
Jaws of the Wolf (R)
Rain of Steel (F)

Against your quarry, the round you are positioned to use Oath of Enmity, you go to town with Rain of Blows, Off-Hand Strike, and Furious Assault. You can do this combo once every encounter, there will be other combos possible as you level up, some requiring an action point.

At some point you'll also grab weapon focus, lethal hunter, expertise, etc. Stormwarden or Kensei are great for Paragon path, and eventhough wisdom won't be very high, pit fighter is still a great choice too.



Byronic said:


> Actually, assuming that you can only take the Hybrid feat once this wouldn't be true. Eldritch Blast is a different class feature then Eldritch Pact. This means a human Warlock Hybrid will only have 4 at-wills rather then their usual 3.




Ahh, that sounds better, I knew I was missing something.


----------



## Asmor (Apr 6, 2009)

Hawke said:


> Interesting approach... I think the forced 2-powers-per-class will work out as intended most of the time. The restriction to striker class features to powers of that class is an easy way to prevent certain crazy combinations.




Until Supplement X*, which includes the new cross-class powers and inadvertently allows hybrid ranger/rogues multied into warlock to deal sneak attack, hunter's quarry and warlock's curse damage all on the same roll.

*Supplement X has a 30% chance of being PHB 4, 50% chance of being a future dragon article, and 20% chance of being a third party supplement.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

Why make cross class powers? If you make powers that are not class specific, they should simply not be class powers for anyone.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

Mengu said:


> Yup, that's exactly what I'm referring to. Tempest teqnique is a feature that essentially rolls extra damage, extra defense, and extra attack bonus all into one feature. So at around level 5 you could have something like: [snip]




Yes, indeed it's very good. That's not a multi-class issue however, merely an issue with tempest (which is OP), rain of blows (which is totally broken) and Oath (which should never have been allowed as a multi-class ability).

Together they are scary though


----------



## Sadrik (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> So your Wizard/Fighter still has to use weapons for his fighter powers, still has to use implements for his wizard powers, he only is trained in Cloth (Because Wizards are only trained in cloth), and he still would incur an OA if he casts fireball next to an enemy.



Ah, yes but now I can have him use a staff and do defendery stuff and still be able to do his "learned book guy" shtick. Theoretically I could define the fighter powers (within reason) as wizardy. This is what was missing imho from the game, how do you attach a class shtick to a character when you wanted to play a slightly modified role. From what I have read in this thread the concept seems to be cleared up (however the rules for it are not it seems).



Cadfan said:


> Well, not really.  Your sorcerer or fighter powers would still be sorcerer or fighter powers.  Your Fireball spell would still be a Fireball, and your Reaping Strike would still be a Reaping Strike.



This is all fine, the real interest here is the class features that are gained.

As to stacking striker damage this is an easy fix that I have not heard yet. But it also addresses the barbarians built in damage bonus. 

You may not apply more than one source of bonus damage from a class feature. Powers that provide bonus damage may not be used with bonus damage class features.

In this way, who cares if they are quarried, cursed, and are in combat advantage with sneak attack, they only can apply one in any given round.




The "bonus skills" wizard-arcana, cleric-religion, rogue-stealth and thievery, and ranger-wilderness or dungeoneering what would it hurt to give these out as bonus skills to the hybrid classes?


----------



## Mengu (Apr 6, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> Yes, indeed it's very good. That's not a multi-class issue however, merely an issue with tempest (which is OP), rain of blows (which is totally broken) and Oath (which should never have been allowed as a multi-class ability).




Agree on all accounts, though you forgot double sword being light blade *and* heavy blade *and* off-hand *and* defensive *and* 1d8/1d8 *and* proficiency 3.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 6, 2009)

Sadrik said:


> This is all fine, the real interest here is the class features that are gained.



Right, I'm just saying that you aren't going to get a "defending wizard" in the sense of a guy using wizard powers to defend.  You're going to get a fighter who defends people with his sword and occasionally controls the battlefield with spells.

Which is fine for most people, I think.  Fine for me.


----------



## Sadrik (Apr 6, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Right, I'm just saying that you aren't going to get a "defending wizard" in the sense of a guy using wizard powers to defend.  You're going to get a fighter who defends people with his sword and occasionally controls the battlefield with spells.
> 
> Which is fine for most people, I think.  Fine for me.




Absolutely, I think that people will see this as a more organic way to create the character and role you want rather than the mechanical niche you hold. At least I do. It will be interesting to see if those turned off initially by the character generation of 4e will give it a second chance once PHB3 comes out years after the first one.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 6, 2009)

Mengu said:


> Agree on all accounts, though you forgot double sword being light blade *and* heavy blade *and* off-hand *and* defensive *and* 1d8/1d8 *and* proficiency 3.




Hehe. Yeah, I never even think about those, because we have never used double weapons in our gaming group. The DM (that's me) think they are silly, and the players think something I can't post here due to the Grand-ma clause, so we have always ignored them.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 6, 2009)

One day I hope someone will errate the AV madness of superior weapons and a lot of the overpowered builts will suddenly disappear. One can only hope.


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 6, 2009)

I have a question about the hybrid fighter combat superiority (and by default similar features).  Do you still get to make a melee basic attack any time a marked enemy shifts or make an attack that doesn't include you?  I feel that would keep him feeling quite fightery if it's the case.


----------



## Nifft (Apr 6, 2009)

malcolm_n said:


> I have a question about the hybrid fighter combat superiority (and by default similar features).  Do you still get to make a melee basic attack any time a marked enemy shifts or make an attack that doesn't include you?  I feel that would keep him feeling quite fightery if it's the case.



 Combat Challenge, you mean? Yeah, he gets everything except what's specifically changed.

He can get Combat Superiority with a feat.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Sir Brennen (Apr 6, 2009)

Lord Zardoz said:


> It might not be too powerful of those feats are at the Paragon Tier instead of the Heroic tier.  However, it might end up having strange 'stacking' effects with respect to multi-class feats, (ie, a hybrid-classed Warlord taking the multi-class feat to gain a 2nd Inspiring Word)



If you're a hybrid Warlord, you count as a Warlord. You can't take multi-class feats for a class to which you already belong (this is explicitly stated in the article.)


----------



## Roger (Apr 6, 2009)

It's sort of interesting that it makes certain anti-social characters a lot easier to play via beastmaster ranger.  The rogue can set up flanking all by himself, the cleric can give the Righteous Brand bonus to his beast, etc.  Depending on how a particular party is constructed, it might open up some options.


Cheers,
Roger


----------



## Plane Sailing (Apr 6, 2009)

Rechan said:


> This actually makes me think about breaking class features down into feats, in order to allow hybrid characters to get the class features in full (or at least, access to class features they don't have).
> 
> For instance, Feat: Turn Undead [Pre-Req: Cleric Hybrid] (works as normal).
> 
> ...




I did something similar for my own 'multiclass fix', you might find some of it useful planesailing / Multiclassing-Fixed

Cheers


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm working on the PH2 classes for hybridization, and they're pretty straight forward (at first glance), except the invoker.

I'm thinking let the invoker get its covenant manifestation as written, but no other benefit of the divine covenant, channel divinity, or ritual casting.  Then, if somebody takes the Hybrid Talent for Invoker, they can pick up Channel divinity and get Rebuke Undead and the Power from their covenant.  Sound fair?


----------



## Vael (Apr 6, 2009)

The swordmage hybrid seems really good to me, as you get the actual full Aegis, limited only in that you cannot retarget the mark, but once the marked foe is dropped or another mark supercedes yours, you regain the power. This to me, suggests some interesting options.

1. Warlock/Swordmage. Since warlock damage triggers only on warlock powers and only once per round anyway ... use Swordmage powers that can be activated on an aegis trigger. Mark and curse a brute, and shoot from a safe distance. Brute goes after you, party members can lay into him. Brute goes after someone else, you get more damage when your aegis triggers and you attack. Powers like Transposing Lunge or Thunder Riposte are great for this.

2. Cleric/Swordmage. Higher-level option, this really comes into it's own with the Wandering Swordmage Paragon Path, and at Epic, with the Total Aegis feat. The range you can mark gets huge, then get back and laser your foes. It's a great buff for your allies, and you can use any blade as an implement, not just Holy Avengers. Dwarf would be solid here.

3. Fighter/Swordmage. Mark a foe, go over to the other side of the battle and mark with fighter powers. Don't know if this works, but you might be able to regain your Aegis mark if you override it with your Fighter mark.


----------



## Cor Azer (Apr 6, 2009)

I don't know if I could really comment whether the hybrid rules are overpowered or underpowered, but I think I like the idea, but I'm a bit iffier on the implementation.

My main concern with the implementation is that it now means that any new classes in future books also need to specify a roughly 1/2 to 1 page blurb about its hybrid version (well, unless an alternate means of detailing such is found). Adding a multiclass feat for each class isn't too tough, but in a book like the Player's Handbooks that have 8 new classes means an extra 8 pages. A much better implementation of the rules would be some sort of generic/algorithmic definition of how to build the hybrid version. Such a thing seems to exist, since several people in this thread already threw out ideas for the hybrid versions of the PH2 classes.

Assuming the Hybrid Talent feat is able to be taken multiple times, I wonder if it would be (or how badly) broken to open it up to anyone (ie, spend a feat to pick up another class ability that you otherwise don't have). So your beastmaster rangers could take it to pick up the prime shot feature they lost for not picking two-weapon or archery, etc... I wouldn't suggest letting it pick up alternate versions of the same ability (so you couldn't be both a brutal scoundrel and artful dodger rogue), so it might have limited applicability in that sense, but it think it would open up design space for alternate class features.

Also, with some minor tweaks, these hybrid rules could be used as a basis for those people who want apprentice level stuff (ie, at level 0, you have a single hybrid class with maybe 1 at will and 1 encounter, and then at level 1 you either move to the full version of your hybrid class or pick up a second, gaining the rest of a level 1 character's abilities (a second at will and your daily)).


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 6, 2009)

ppaladin123 said:


> The swordmage's aegis and the paladin's divine challenge are seriously nerfed in hybrid-form.




without writing the full power, could you explain what they did to nerf them?  

Are they only once per encounter?

Maybe they can only be used again after the target is reduced to 0 or fewer hit points?

Thank you for the clarification.


----------



## Vael (Apr 6, 2009)

malcolm_n said:


> without writing the full power, could you explain what they did to nerf them?
> 
> Are they only once per encounter?
> 
> ...




That is what they did for the Swordmage, the Paladin just got its Challenge Damage reduced.


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 6, 2009)

Thank you 

So, is Hybrid Talent worded in such a way that a hybrid warlock cannot have eyebite from his class and take the feat to also gain Hellish Rebuke?  Or is hybrid finally a way to get other warlock at-wills besides eldritch blast?

As an example, to be a better fey pact hybrid warlock, would I want to have Dire Radiance as my warlock at-will attack, then take hybrid talent for fey pact and also get eyebite and misty step?

Or, do you get eldritch blast handed to you and have to use the feat to get the other at-will?


----------



## Nifft (Apr 6, 2009)

Vael said:


> That is what they did for the Swordmage, the Paladin just got its Challenge Damage reduced.



 Not exactly. The Swordmage mark is 1/encounter... but you get it back when the target drops, or someone else marks the target. (So basically: it's still at-will, but you can't use it while it's still in effect. They could have worded this one better.)

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Nifft (Apr 6, 2009)

malcolm_n said:


> So, is Hybrid Talent worded in such a way that a hybrid warlock cannot have eyebite from his class and take the feat to also gain Hellish Rebuke?  Or is hybrid finally a way to get other warlock at-wills besides eldritch blast?
> 
> As an example, to be a better fey pact hybrid warlock, would I want to have Dire Radiance as my warlock at-will attack, then take hybrid talent for fey pact and also get eyebite and misty step?
> 
> Or, do you get eldritch blast handed to you and have to use the feat to get the other at-will?



 Hybrid Talent just gives you one class feature.

The class feature "Eldritch Pact" says this:



			
				PHB said:
			
		

> The pact you choose determines the following warlock abilities:
> At-Will Spells: Your pact determines one of the at-will spells you know.



 ... so yeah, if you choose this class feature, you lose the choice of one of your at-will powers.

Hybrid Warlocks can't have a Pact and learn Eldritch Blast if they're not human, it seems.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 7, 2009)

Thank you for updating me on that.

I don't see the loss of 1-31 HP being too big of a deal.  You're not a full-fledged fighter, so you don't have all of the tough guy-ness that one would.  You're paying in Hit points what a multiclass character would pay in feats.  Most hybrid classes will probably have at least a decent Con to make up for their lack of hit points.  And there's always Toughness.

Granted, a warden|wizard loses out on 64 hp.  Ouch; there's one of those bad combinations they talk about.
--

Okay, I now have the ph2 hybrids complete.  Some of the more difficult ones were shaman, sorcerer, and invoker.

I used the structure they used with warlord when making the shaman hybrid, and let hybrid invokers get only their covenant manifestation.  On sorcerer, I figured they have to pick a spellsource anyway, so they get the "X Soul" feature from that source; then clarify that a sorcerer cannot gain spellsource features other than from his chosen spellsource with Hybrid talent.

The rest of the PH 2 classes had enough similarities to other classes that their hybrid was easy to deduce.  Anyway, it was a fun exercise for me.  If anybody wants a copy of it for their use (no powers are written out, only explanations), I'll be happy to PM.


----------



## deadsmurf (Apr 7, 2009)

My feeling on a fix so the striker classes can use their extra damage abilities would be give those abilities a special keyword, or something to the effect of

Sneak Attack (Hybrid Striker Damage)
Functions just as Sneak attack except cannot be used in conjuction with another Hybrid striker damage ability.

This works for all the strikers, and with a cleaned up wording, would work just great.  Even can use them with Basic attacks then too!

I'm not sure what to do with the Defenders.  But I'm not a fan of not being able to multi-mark with a Dragonborn's breath Weapon.

other things:
Wizards should get a little more than just cantrips (though they NEED them)... leave the implement mastery off, but maybe Ritual Caster with fewer rituals known and no recurring?

There are a lot of class features that are a lot better than others for the Feat, so that needs to be looked at a bunch.

This looks like a lot of fun, I wish it was being added to the character builder so I could play with some builds.


----------



## keterys (Apr 7, 2009)

Deadsmurf that would result in broken hybrid strikers, unfortunately. It'd be a no brainer to hybrid with striker to non-striker.

I do think halving the striker damage effectively would work fine, though. I think that and give some form of other class feature (potentially in a slightly reduced capacity) would work well.

The swordmage and paladin marks both work as partial defenders - yes, they're less powerful but they pretty much have to be. I do think they could see some of the other class feature-ness here, like the swordmage "shield".

The fighter I just really don't like, though - or any of the 'only the powers from your class' ones - I think I'd prefer something like:

Combat Challenge (Hybrid)
This class feature functions as the fighter class feature
(Player’s Handbook, page 76), except that you can only make an immediate basic attack once per encounter.

Combat Superiority (Hybrid)
This class feature functions as the fighter class feature (Player's Handbook, page 76), except that you do not add your Wisdom to your attack bonus with opportunity attacks.

The hybrid article really did reawaken my gripes about wizard's lack of class features, though. Cantrips, indeed.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Apr 7, 2009)

Vael said:


> That is what they did for the Swordmage, the Paladin just got its Challenge Damage reduced.




The Divine Challenge also requires you use up an immediate reaction to dish out the damage instead of it happening automatically with a normal divine challenge. This is probably to prevent doubling up on defender interupts.

It seems to be mainly the goal of the hybrid. If you combine two of the same role you get effectively the same defender/leader/striker ability of a single classed, just split between two methods. A ranger/rogue, for example, can go with quarry damage when he doesn't have combat advantage and be arguably better at dishing out constant damage than a ranger or rogue on it's own. The leaders are easy, a dual leader has 2 healing 'words' per encounter when you add each hybrid to the whole. The defender pair would have multiple ways of marking, and multiple things to spend their immediate interupts/reactions on.


----------



## Nifft (Apr 7, 2009)

keterys said:


> Combat Challenge (Hybrid)
> This class feature functions as the fighter class feature
> (Player’s Handbook, page 76), except that you can only make an immediate basic attack once per encounter.



 So after 1 use, your Mark would be non-threatening? That would greatly reduce the Defender aspect.



keterys said:


> Combat Superiority (Hybrid)
> This class feature functions as the fighter class feature (Player's Handbook, page 76), except that you do not add your Wisdom to your attack bonus with opportunity attacks.



 I like it as-is, where a Feat nets you both the +wisdom and the "halt movement".



keterys said:


> The hybrid article really did reawaken my gripes about wizard's lack of class features, though. Cantrips, indeed.



 Yeah. He should get Ritual Caster for free, at least, and then Spellbook is a very good buy for just one feat.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Lizard (Apr 7, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Wait... with the Hybrid Talent feat, I can combine the fey pact boon with a melee class?  Like the Barbarian?  A teleporting melee combatant?




You mean, like the Swordmage?


----------



## keterys (Apr 7, 2009)

Nifft said:


> So after 1 use, your Mark would be non-threatening? That would greatly reduce the Defender aspect.
> 
> I like it as-is, where a Feat nets you both the +wisdom and the "halt movement".




And both aspects _only_ work if you give up your secondary aspects... you're not going to mark on a ton of your attacks and won't get the immediate benefit at all in those circumstances. If you want to spend the feat instead for beastmaster ranger or tempest or battlerager... nope, no combat superiority at all.

And to my mind, the combat superiority is the key for fighter so I'd much rather it was in the hybrid package.

I really need to wrap my mind more around the 'literally like half the time you're just not getting the abilities from the other class at all' for fighters and strikers.

On the other hand, looks like leader hybrids are pretty golden at least until mid-Paragon where they'll start falling behind.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 7, 2009)

Lizard said:


> You mean, like the Swordmage?



Not nearly enough teleportation, and too much of it has obligatory destinations.


----------



## Eldorian (Apr 7, 2009)

It's a cool idea.  I hear dual classing will be in phb 3, this is probably a playtest for it.

They need to remove the ability to take any class feature with the feat, and instead make a larger list of hybrid class features for each class, and let each character choose 1 from each class, feat for third.


----------



## fissionessence (Apr 7, 2009)

To solve the fighter issue, we would first need to determine exactly what they were trying to 'fix' by watering it down. Assuming they didn't want a constantly-marking _scorching burst_, I think the following idea would work. That is, make the restriction, "You can't use this feature with at-will powers from your non-fighter class." 

That would allow you to mark with encounter and daily wizard powers, for example, but not constantly run around marking with _scorching burst_ and _thunderwave_. If that still proved problematic, then just cut the whole other class . . . but do it exclusively, so that the fighter/X could still mark with basic attacks and _dragon breath_.

Also, deadsmurf's idea from several posts ago was pretty much what I was going to suggest. My version's a bit different, so here it goes: tag the 'striker' class features with some kind of keyword, like some of the features are currently tagged [hybrid]. Then say that only one [striker] feature can be used per round. Under this method, the avenger's oath could also be tagged [striker], so as to be mutually exclusive with hunter's quarry, etc. For things like the barbarian's _howling strike_, the power could be specifically keyed in the barbarian hybrid section as counting as a [striker] feature, so as not to function with warlock's curse, etc. 

Keterys stated he thought deadsmurf's version of the idea was broken, but I'm not sure why. I don't think it excludes striker/striker combinations from being viable, in that having two different [striker] features just makes you more versatile in applying your damage (or whatever). I guess warlock/ranger would be kind of silly . . . but that's true for many reasons  Sneak attack/warlock's curse would be great; curse when you don't have combat advantage, and otherwise do sneak attack. Even if you had CA all the time, cursing could still be useful for some powers/effects. Also think of a barbarian/avenger, who would _howling strike _when charging, but otherwise roll twice when his oath would apply. These combinations are more versatile in their striker-ness, just as a defender/defender has more versatile (but not stacking) marking.

This method also solves the problem Asmor brought up a few pages ago (which is also something I had considered before reading this whole thread -_- ), which is the prospect of some future supplement introducing cross-class powers. That is, a power that is available to both rogues and rangers, and is therefore accessible to both classes, and is therefore benefited by the [striker] feature of each, according to the current hybrid rules. I guess this is kind of weird design space that may never actually develop, but the fact that at least two people have considered it means it's something to watch out for.

An alternative would be a derivation of my above fighter suggestion . . . just specifically exclude the 'other class' from gaining benefits of your [striker] feature. This way you could still apply one or the other to your basic attacks and whatnot. Then the issue is if you multiclass into a third class and can apply both [striker] features to powers of that class since it isn't either of your 'other classes' . . .

Another thing . . . my version of the pdf shows the warlord gaining a second use of his _word_ at level 16, but not the cleric. Is this intentional? Perhaps to prevent a warlord/cleric from having four _words_ at level 16? Perhaps because the cleric's Healer's Lore is considered to be powerful enough to make up for it? Or maybe it's just an oversight one way or the other . . . thoughts?

Anyway, I'm really excited about these rules overall, and it's something I've wanted from the multiclass system since before 4E came out, so I'm really pretty excited . . . plus I'm excited about some possible designs it opens up for writing third-party products . . .

As a final note to everyone who's said they were making hybrid versions of PH2 classes: none of you has stated what you did with the druid's beast-form/non-beast-form at-wills. What were your solutions? You can't just make the druid choose one or the other. Maybe one of each?

~ fissionessence


----------



## Lizard (Apr 7, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Not nearly enough teleportation, and too much of it has obligatory destinations.




Shrug. There's a Swordmage NPC who occasionally pals around with our group of cutthroats and ne'er-do-wells, and he bloops all over the battlefield like a frakkin' pinball. But you're right, his choice of destination is limited.

I guess my point, if I had one, is:
a)Teleporting melee is already a concept in-game.
b)Based on my ranger experience, mobility is not that important to melee, once you've closed with your foe; I shrug off slowed/immobilized effects most of the time with a "So? I'm right where I want to be." (We mostly fight in relatively close quarters due to it being a city game; this is one reason my DM is ending it at level 10, he has decided 4e doesn't "work" in cities because the game system really assumes vast tracts of land. So I need to make a new character. Sigh.) IOW, a melee teleporter won't be dramatically more effective; at best, he'll be better at keeping up with a fleeing foe or getting to high spaces, a nice advantage but not an overwhelming one.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Apr 7, 2009)

These multiclass rules do the #1 thing I want in a multiclass.

* at-wills from two different classes.

This alone gives tonnes of flexibility and promise in developing new characters.

I'd actually be quite happy with a fighter/wizard multiclass. Getting the wizard cantrips means I can play my 'jedi knight' character now!


at-wills: cleave and thunderwave (aka 'force push')
mage-hand at-will as my 'force telekinesis'
ghost sound at-will to distract the guards while I disable the tractor beam
Featherfall or jump for those big force-based jumps

I could have a lot of fun with a character like this


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 7, 2009)

Lizard said:


> Shrug. There's a Swordmage NPC who occasionally pals around with our group of cutthroats and ne'er-do-wells, and he bloops all over the battlefield like a frakkin' pinball. But you're right, his choice of destination is limited.
> 
> I guess my point, if I had one, is:
> a)Teleporting melee is already a concept in-game.
> b)Based on my ranger experience, mobility is not that important to melee, once you've closed with your foe; I shrug off slowed/immobilized effects most of the time with a "So? I'm right where I want to be." (We mostly fight in relatively close quarters due to it being a city game; this is one reason my DM is ending it at level 10, he has decided 4e doesn't "work" in cities because the game system really assumes vast tracts of land. So I need to make a new character. Sigh.) IOW, a melee teleporter won't be dramatically more effective; at best, he'll be better at keeping up with a fleeing foe or getting to high spaces, a nice advantage but not an overwhelming one.



I didn't say that a melee teleporter would be dramatically more effective.  I fully expect that it won't, given that existing melee strikers are loaded with powers that let them shift long distances.

I expect it to be dramatically more awesome.

I will rely on my general skills at optimization to make the sub par choice more effective.  I'm thinking a lot of two handed weapon, close burst 1 melee attacks, with teleportation to get in and out of position.

My condolences on your DM being crazy.

Slowed and immobilized really have only three purposes.

1. Annoying skirmishers.
2. Use on the first round so that only some of the enemy can close distance, splitting them and denying some their attacks.
3. Use on someone you intend to move away from, traveling far enough that they cannot catch up and attack in the same round.

They take a little finesse.  Our dragonborn fighter makes pretty good use of steel serpent strike, she hits with it, and shifts back a space.  Just as good as a stun against a foe with only melee attacks.


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Apr 7, 2009)

I'm really liking these rules they do a good job of filling the 50% split whole, as well as making non-half-elf triple classing viable.


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 7, 2009)

fissionessence said:


> As a final note to everyone who's said they were making hybrid versions of PH2 classes: none of you has stated what you did with the druid's beast-form/non-beast-form at-wills. What were your solutions? You can't just make the druid choose one or the other. Maybe one of each?
> 
> ~ fissionessence




I set mine up like this.

*[FONT=&quot]Balance of Nature[/FONT]*
  [FONT=&quot]You begin play with two at-will druid attack powers and one at-will attack power from your other hybrid class.  At least one of those powers, and no more than two, must have the beast form keyword.[/FONT]

*[FONT=&quot]Wild Shape[/FONT]*
  [FONT=&quot]You can use the _Wild Shape_ druid power.
--
By writing it this way, it removes Balance of Nature as an option for Hybrid talent and still lets you choose whether you want to be more animal druid or not.
[/FONT]


----------



## WalterKovacs (Apr 7, 2009)

I've made up rules for my players that includes the PH3 classes. That was the same thing I did with my Druid (hybridizing Balance of Nature). Some of the others are a bit harder actually. The Sorcerer, _technically_ has only one class feature. I made it like the other strikers and gave a hybrid version of the "X Power" part of Dragon/Wild Magic that gives the damage bonus, limiting it to sorcerer attacks. Not sure what they should unlock using the feat though. They should be able to pick one of the magic 'paths' to be able to unlock the powers that give bonuses, but getting everything goes against the hybrid concept.

For the Shaman as well it involved giving a limited healing spirit, and starting with call spirit companion (but not the companion spirit class feature that you would have to take via the feat). 

The others were a bit easier (Warden I went with only being able to mark one adjacent enemy; the barbarian I just gave rampage ... it's already locked into only working with barbarian powers anyway).

The basic rule was "give them the role defining power, don't give them the 'build' powers, like artful dodger or fey pact", which makes sense. You give them enough to accomplish _about_ half their role (which can be full if you combine two classes of the same role) and give them the option to get one build out of one of the classes via the feat. In some cases (non-beast ranger, fighter, cleric, paladin, wizard) your build choice is independent of the build class feature, so they can work well as hybrid characters since they may be a bit less reliant on getting the feat to get the most out of their powers.

In order to test it out I was going to try out a ranger/rogue hybrid (half-orc to go with good STR and DEX). I was able to ensure that every encounter and daily power did not require a standard action. Hypothetically, by this method, you would be able to do both sneak attack and quarry damage for at least 3 rounds each encounter, not to mention the dailies and action point situations (assuming you hit of course). With a beast companion as your class feature you give yourself your own flanker as well. It has the potential at least to be better than 'just' a rogue or ranger, as you'd ultimately be able to do extra damage nearly every turn (the only exceptions would be when you lack combat advantage, the ability to attack your quarry and the ability to set a new quarry) and occaisionally get both extra damages off in the same turn. A ranger that can occaisionally deal more extra damage or a rogue that can still do some extra damage when he lacks combat advatage is pretty good, even if it means being unable to do that extra damage with dilletante or multiclass powers.

As for 'fixes' so far that I'll probably let my players use: Put the .5's into the places where they had already been rounded down, and will only round down after they've added them together. Also they'll be able to start with the feat for free.

On the subject of why they don't allow for say ... quarry damage on a basic attack. Ranger/rogue as stated above. Put it in a group with a warlord. If I hit sneak attack this turn, the warlord let's me get my quarry damage. If I hit quarry damage this turn, the warlord let's me get my sneak attack.

Losing the ability to do the damage on a charge (or with multiclass/dilletante powers) does kind of suck, but being able to double up with opportunity attacks or free attacks provided by other people is something they'd want to avoid.


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 7, 2009)

Shaman - I let the shaman pick a spirit companion and it's shaman at-will had to be that companion's at-will power.  Hybrid Talent unlocked the rest of the abilities of the companion spirit.

Sorcerer - Similarly, I gave Sorcerers their "Soul" feature and specified that they could only take hybrid talent to gain another feature from their spell source.

Barbarian - I did the same with Barbarian, but also gave him Rage Strike once per day so he could still use both of his rages in one encounter if he wants.

Warden - I did this one a bit differently.  While I agree let them only mark one creature per round as free action, I also still let them have both at-wills they get as features.  Since they're already limited to one free mark per round, there's no reason for them not to be able to take advantage of it like a paladin.  It also makes hybrid into another defender role decent, since marking is generic.

Bard - Lesser healing and Multiclass versatility made sense here, even for hybridization.  Then, you have your feats to take the multiclassing instead of having to give up an extra one for hybrid talent.

I disagree with "fixing" the classes.  It's my belief that as a hybrid you're not as tough as a regular member of either class.  Like multiclassing costs you feats, Hybrid costs you some hit points and features.  But, that's just how I run it, since it keeps things like .5 out of D&D vocabulary (Nobody pass word of this on to Mark Rosewater over in Magic Land, or he'll suggest we make an Un-D&D for sure  )


----------



## jbear (Apr 7, 2009)

A Beast ranger Hybrid with a Wildshape Druid would be a very fun one to play. Two angry and very intelligent bears flanking and tearing enemies to shreds.


----------



## fissionessence (Apr 7, 2009)

WalterKovacs said:


> On the subject of why they don't allow for say ... quarry damage on a basic attack. Ranger/rogue as stated above. Put it in a group with a warlord. If I hit sneak attack this turn, the warlord let's me get my quarry damage. If I hit quarry damage this turn, the warlord let's me get my sneak attack.




In my suggestion, I stated that only one [striker] feature could be used per round, so this wouldn't work. Worst case scenario:

1. I try to use an attack; I don't have combat advantage, so I'm trying to do quarry damage . . . but my attack misses, so I haven't used up my [striker] feature per round.

2. The warlord grants me an attack with combat advantage. Since I haven't used my [striker] feature, and now I have combat advantage, I'm attempting to add sneak attack on a hit.

You still don't get both. Once you've taken advantage of one feature, you can't take advantage of another one until your next turn.

~


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 7, 2009)

Well you still get to deal extra striker damage twice in action point rounds (you can with a feat for rogue and hunter through MP though so it's not that great a gain).


----------



## MrMyth (Apr 8, 2009)

fissionessence said:


> In my suggestion, I stated that only one [striker] feature could be used per round, so this wouldn't work.




There are two main issues I see with that as a solution:

1) It works for the striker damage features from the PHB. What happens when the hybrid rules expand to cover other, newer strikers, that might not use such a flat damage bonus mechanic? 

2) Would you also have it prevented from use when using fighter marks, which have a similar restriction in the hybrid rules? If not, then you can have a Fighter/Striker that can basically act like a perfect defender all day long while doing striker level damage - the exact thing we want to have the hybrid rules avoid creating. 

There needs to be trade-offs. Right now, I'm a fan of the method they are using to restrict these class features, as it very well fulfills the ability to be a full striker or a full defender at any given time, but not both at once. It does limit the usefulness of basic attacks and some other tactics, but that seems a fair trade for the versatility gained.


----------



## Stormtalon (Apr 8, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Wait... with the Hybrid Talent feat, I can combine the fey pact boon with a melee class?  Like the Barbarian?  A teleporting melee combatant?




A teleporting melee combatant that can curse, and possibly rampage?  EEP!  I'm now envisioning a Barblock (Warbarian?) critting, killing, poofing, and rampaging on the unlucky fool he appears next to.... 

All while raging....


----------



## Sir Brennen (Apr 8, 2009)

Here's a bit of feedback from the designers already over on the WotC boards, from this thread:



WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey everybody. I was wrapping up for the day but wanted to pop in and thank you all for the feedback on Hybrid characters that you've given so far.
> 
> For those that don't already know or may have forgotten, if you want to increase the amount of eyes looking over your feedback, write it up and send it to this email: dndinsider@wizards.com
> 
> ...


----------

