"Can you have a mix class character in D&D 4th Edition" Topic

In 3rd you could have a character that might be a 6th Level fighter and 2nd level rogue, is that possible in 4th Edition?

I've played a little bit of 4th Ed and yes, you can split class. I'm not sure what the procedure is though.

Yes, but it is extremely dilluted.

Multi-classing is now reduced to a feat. You take the feat, and gain one of the basic abilities from one of the other classes. FREX, take Sneak of Shadows and gain training in thief skills and sneak attack. Take a 2nd feat, and gain an encounter power from another class (of the same class as the first), take a 3rd feat and get a utility power; finally take a 4th feat and gain an daily power. So 4 feats before you even start to resemble a 3e multiclass (though of course you gain a new feat every other level). Of course anyone can take ritual casting (another feat if you're not already a spellcaster).

Overall 4e nerfed multi-classing severely, and is one of my many, many dissatisfactions with the new rules.

Damon.

In Pathfinder, the offspring of 3.5, you can still multiclass fully. I don't know how much effort it would be to bend the Pathfinder rules to 4e.

There are Hybrid classes as well. With so many race/class options you almost don't need to multi-class. The Feat does help tone it down (and in earlier versions you could go wild).

Not an issue with my group, yet.

Yes, there are Hybrid characters as well as multiclassing via feats.

Basically you get a limited version of each class and get to pick powers from either (and get more class features from feats).

The Hybrid Character rules are currently only available as a playtest article in Dragon (and the Character builder, of course). They are slated to appear in final form in PHB3 next year.

And multiclassing by feat isn't bad. It's not a win-win like it could be in earlier editions, though, but neat.
You don't get both classes, but a mixture.

Your options:

Hybrid Class – choose two classes, you'll get some of the features of both. At higher levels and with the spending of feats, you could add even more of the features of both. You could also take multiclass feats to then multiclass into a third class.

Multiclass – you spend a feat to get a skill and a small boost/feature from the 2nd class. You then spend additional feats to swap an ability/power from your first class for one from the second.

At level 11, you choose a paragon path. There's a paragon multiclass one as well as a paragon hybrid class one. Basically you get even more access to the other class.

At level 21 you choose an epic destiny. The Eternal Seeker basically lets you take whatever powers/abilities you want.

Also, for the purposes of choosing feats, paragon paths and epic destinies, you count as a member of any class you are multiclassed or hybrid classed. Everyone can only multiclass into one additional class except for the bard, which has no limits. Also, choosing a class specific paragon path will definitely add some feeling of that class to your multiclassed character without going to the route of paragon multiclassing.

There are no levels by class. Your character will have a level, so no fighter 4, rogue 1. Instead you'd have a fighter with multiclassing into rogue who has one roque power, and can maybe do some rogue like things like sneaking or thievery. Humans get a bonus feat and a bonus power, so if you want to amp up the rogue thing a bit more then go that route.

The best way to think about it is to try to imagine what you want the character to do in actual play and then build towards that, rather than trying to recreate a fighter/wizard of a previous edition.

Nathaniel has it right.

The 4e 'multiclass feats' aren't the be-all end all that multiclass characters could be in 3.x, and they're really limited in effectiveness up until 10th level. Once you get to 10th level, then you have some abilities of each class.

The best way to think about it is to try to imagine what you want the character to do in actual play and then build towards that, rather than trying to recreate a fighter/wizard of a previous edition.

Quoted for truth. 4e is not the D&D you used to play, it's a very different game that requires some different thinking. Most importantly, you *must NEVER* split up in combat.

I love it when player's decide to have their character's go off on their own.

"They're just goblins, how bad could it get?"

As far as 4e being a very different game, I think of it as a return to the other evolutionary path which was left behind when 3.x came out. That is, the boxed set path (Basic, Expert, Campaign, Master, Immortals). 3.x really took the AD&D path to it's logical conclusion and 4e is more of a switch to the feel and approach of BECMI, but with keeping a larger amount of technical rules.

To bring this back to the discussion at hand, it's worth noting that the one of the characteristics of BECMI that 4e emulates so well is design for effect. The rules are there to produce results for a specific instance of play, and not for setting up a universal framework. So concentrate on that when thinking of how you want your character to be. For example, if you want to make an archer, take the ranger class and don't take the nature stuff-- it'll be far truer to the archer concept than if you think in terms of old editions and insist you must be a fighter to be an archer.