Player Dimension: Hero or Group?

[Vision]

I therefor suspect that this game will be far less conducive to solo character play. We have pre-defined character classes and as far as I know, no means to multi-class. This is not a deal breaker for me, I have still backed the game (belatedly). It is however a failing in my opinion.

For most of players, including me, the entire charm remains to create a party with synergy between them and i can t get some satisfaction in soloing.
In a RPG videogame, I can t accept an adventure with a one man army for at least these three reasons :
- I m old player of RPG table, so i enjoy interaction, diversity and nostalgia
- I feel alone in my real life, so interactivity inside a game is kinda helpfull
- I will play for my pleasure AND experiencing difficulty (i won t be extremly proud if i achieve this game with a solo hero...)

What would be a failure to me, is the opposite : i.e, developpers allows a class which overlaps in every different class... In my opinion, developpers workout is to balance class between them.   

[Panpiper]

As long as the game is moddable, you can play your game, and I can play mine.

[Vision]

As long as the game is moddable, you can play your game, and I can play mine.

Just skip the wizard class, that s how you can find a real hard core experience...

[Dark_Ansem]

As long as the game is moddable, you can play your game, and I can play mine.

Just skip the wizard class, that s how you can find a real hard core experience...

HERESY!

[Silverstar]

Maybe the prestige classes will allow for more flexibility that is missing because there is no multi classing. For example if bladesingers or arcane tricksters are available as wizard prestige classes then you kind of get some of the benefits of fighter or thief without  multi classing though i suppose we wont know how the prestige system works until closer to release.

[kanisatha]

Not having multiclassing is such a shame, unfortunately. It brings so much flexibility and range to your party-making decisions. But given that multiclassing is out, yeah it would be good if we had prestige classes available that help make up the difference at least a little bit.

[mąlërfjernér]

Can someone link me to a thread where the devs discuss why they decided on a 'no multi-class system'? I'm just curious to know why they decided to not to add that feature when it brings so much depth and creativity to rpgs of this sort.

[Sapistas]

Can someone link me to a thread where the devs discuss why they decided on a 'no multi-class system'? I'm just curious to know why they decided to not to add that feature when it brings so much depth and creativity to rpgs of this sort.

Budget

[Panpiper]

Can someone link me to a thread where the devs discuss why they decided on a 'no multi-class system'? I'm just curious to know why they decided to not to add that feature when it brings so much depth and creativity to rpgs of this sort.

Budget

Yea, what he said. The devs specifically talked about it and lamented not having sufficient budget to include it. They wanted to but it just wasn't possible given their limited resources. I cannot recall the thread sadly. You'll just have to trust us.

[Speculator]

what would be a failure to me, is the opposite : i.e, developpers allows a class which overlaps in every different class... In my opinion, developpers workout is to balance class between them.

I agree. I much prefer the idea of the complete party dynamic , not the lone hero with some hangers on. Also  i much prefef the feeling that the party has several members each with different/unique strengths and weaknesses - this again fits in much more with the type of tabletop  DnD i'm used too and the old school tabletop version the developers intimate they are after.

[Night]

what would be a failure to me, is the opposite : i.e, developpers allows a class which overlaps in every different class... In my opinion, developpers workout is to balance class between them.

I agree. I much prefer the idea of the complete party dynamic , not the lone hero with some hangers on. Also  i much prefef the feeling that the party has several members each with different/unique strengths and weaknesses - this again fits in much more with the type of tabletop  DnD i'm used too and the old school tabletop version the developers intimate they are after.

Agree to all!

[MadBeard]

Well, I don't mind there is no multiclassing. Multiclassing in 3.5ed is quite broken and powergamey and I really don't miss it

[daveyd]

Well, I don't mind there is no multiclassing. Multiclassing in 3.5ed is quite broken and powergamey and I really don't miss it

True, you can come up with some pretty cheesy builds that exploit multi-classing, and we don't really need jack of all trades characters when we can create a party of 6 .  I think the prestige classes will offer a nice compromise though. For example, if you can make wizards become an eldritch knight to let them be able to actually hit enemies with melee attacks without casting "True Strike".

[MadBeard]

True, you can come up with some pretty cheesy builds that exploit multi-classing, and we don't really need jack of all trades characters when we can create a party of 6 .  I think the prestige classes will offer a nice compromise though. For example, if you can make wizards become an eldritch knight to let them be able to actually hit enemies with melee attacks without casting "True Strike".

I agree. Better to have prestige classes that add little bit of variety than multiclass.

[LadyBard]

Don't get me wrong, I totally get lone adventurer

but I play party because I can build it up with more beef than lone adventurer. I loved IWD2 and that's why I back this up. I hope you really can do stuff like Storm of Zehir party/adventuring or something like IWD2, but with recruitables.
Definitely NOT in favor of BG approach because then you clearly have only one guy and any other party member from beginning is extra baggage.