Here's a question for DM's and players too

[Sir cryosin]

Would you run a game were a player can take the chassis for any martial class and then when it time to pick a archtype can pick any from all the martial classes
How would you feel if you were a player.

[pwykersotz]

I think there would be too many annoying edge cases that would be frustrating. I wouldn't do it unless I was prepared to do a LOT of handwaving or retooling. I think it would work better if it was a one-shot adventure with little or no leveling, since it's way easier to deal with a static character sheet in this regard.

[JNAProductions]

Would you run a game were a player can take the chassis for any martial class and then when it time to pick a archtype can pick any from all the martial classes

I'd allow it on a case-by-case basis. Not a universal thing.

[Flashy]

A specific case maybe, as a blanket rule definitely not.

[hymer]

Would you run a game were a player can take the chassis for any martial class and then when it time to pick a archtype can pick any from all the martial classes

Too wide for me, with all sorts of possible annoyances. I can't possibly see the full field on that kind of interchangeability. I'd prefer to try to work much more within the rules as they are for now.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Yeah, sure. Since I assume people won't pick archetypes that revolve around class features they don't have, I can't imagine what sort of issues would come up. Certainly nothing a minute or two of thought couldn't address.

And don't say "flavor." The player certainly has an image in his head, even if you/we can't see it from the Internet.

[PeteNutButter]

Oh so very much no! There is a reason class features are with the classes they have. Most archetypes have features that shore up their weaknesses, but when given to another class just become stronger. Rangers for instance are given abilities to deal weapon damage in a more AoE fashion, since they don't have as many attacks as a fighter. Barbarians are given the ability to deal and take more damage since they don't have heavy armor or as many attacks as a fighter. Assassin rogues get autocrit on surprise since they generally can only attack and sneak attack once, not including TWF.

The balance is if characters want these abilities they have to MC and forgo some of their core class progression. If you have even one player that likes to min/max he'll break your game in half so easily. If the player really wants a certain style, consider just playing the class that comes with that archetype or MC. Don't give them shortcuts, it'll just overpower the PC, and make you struggle to find appropriate monsters to challenge them.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Oh so very much no! There is a reason class features are with the classes they have. Most archetypes have features that shore up their weaknesses, but when given to another class just become stronger. Rangers for instance are given abilities to deal weapon damage in a more AoE fashion, since they don't have as many attacks as a fighter. Barbarians are given the ability to deal and take more damage since they don't have heavy armor or as many attacks as a fighter. Assassin rogues get autocrit on surprise since they generally can only attack and sneak attack once, not including TWF.

The balance is if characters want these abilities they have to MC and forgo some of their core class progression. If you have even one player that likes to min/max he'll break your game in half so easily. If the player really wants a certain style, consider just playing the class that comes with that archetype or MC. Don't give them shortcuts, it'll just overpower the PC, and make you struggle to find appropriate monsters to challenge them.
Which of the Ranger subclasses on a Fighter worries you, the 1/turn +1d8 damage? The multiattack options that work exactly the same for both classes? Or all the abilities limited by action use? An Assassin Fighter might be able to crit more times in the surprise round, but he won't have sneak attack dice-- 2d8+20d6+5 comes out way ahead of 8d8+20 (84 vs 56)-- even ahead of 16d6+20 (76) if for some reason you're using a greatsword on a stealth build. Barbarian subclasses are virtually useless to anyone else who doesn't have rage, and if you dip for it then you're facing severe usage limitations.

[PeteNutButter]

Which of the Ranger subclasses on a Fighter worries you, the 1/turn +1d8 damage? The multiattack options that work exactly the same for both classes? Or all the abilities limited by action use? An Assassin Fighter might be able to crit more times in the surprise round, but he won't have sneak attack dice-- 2d8+20d6+5 comes out way ahead of 8d8+20 (84 vs 56)-- even ahead of 16d6+20 (76) if for some reason you're using a greatsword on a stealth build. Barbarian subclasses are virtually useless to anyone else who doesn't have rage, and if you dip for it then you're facing severe usage limitations.

In response to the assassin question, rather than break out all the math, I'll link you to my build that MC into 3 assassin: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?479210-The-True-Murder-Hobo-A-one-trick-Nova-Build&p=20450622#post20450622

...if that build could get the assassin ability at lvl 3 and keep going in fighter it would do that avg 175 damage at level 5, assuming it hits with all attacks, but it does have advantage on them. Show me CR 5 or even a CR 10 that could survive that cheese. A straight halforc barbarian that surprised something as an assassin barb would deal 5d12+19 three times (163.5 without even breaking a sweat or his class progression.) Dip one level or two into a class that grants you hex or hunters mark, and he does and extra 21 damage, dip 2 fighter, and he does 2/3 of his damage all over again with action surge.

Really assassin is the biggest culprit with it's autocrit working with every attack roll, not even specifying weapon attack. Ranger hordebreaker combined with all the fighter attacks is even more attacks, kind of imbalancing. Barbarian subclasses don't work at all, so its a wash unless I go 1 barb, the rest fighter and pick up totem abilities from fighter as I go up so i can be resistant to all damage or frenzy... and still have the most amount of attacks. I could keep gonig, or you could just trust me as a hardcore min/maxer its imbalanced.:smallbiggrin:

[Grod_The_Giant]

Ranger hordebreaker combined with all the fighter attacks is even more attacks, kind of imbalancing. Barbarian subclasses don't work at all, so its a wash unless I go 1 barb, the rest fighter and pick up totem abilities from fighter as I go up so i can be resistant to all damage or frenzy... and still have the most amount of attacks. I could keep gonig, or you could just trust me as a hardcore min/maxer its imbalanced.:smallbiggrin:
Hordebreaker is once/turn, so it's only one additional attack in a limited set of situations; Barbarian 1/Fighter 19 means you only get the full benefits for two fights a day. I also don't see any combos that are more broken than what you can do normally though multiclassing, so there's that, too.

[Azedenkae]

As a DM I wouldn't allow it, unless they really really really want to and explain to me why it could be the case. But it can't be just any explanation about 'they are all martial artists, just in different ways' or something of the sorts, then I would point them to multiclassing rules and say 'if your character wants to diversify him/herself, see this'.

[PeteNutButter]

It's things you can do from MCing but you don't have to so get them faster, and are ahead of the power curve.
It's a basic fact of game theory: Anytime you give more options, you give more power.