|
While it is true that you could spend quite a bit of time learning one particular skillset, and then never use it in your occupational career...I think it still defines you. I started in sales when I was 21, did it for quite some time...but when I moved to a different state was unable to find a job in sales. So I managed a Pizza Hut. Then I worked at a prison. But as soon as a sales position opened up I forsook the prison job and quickly took the sales position.
My point is this: I suppose "your skills define your occupation" is not necessarily valid...touche. *But*, to say that they don't to some degree define you is wrong. To limit a character's possibilities by offering him/her a "tree" or "multiclassing chart" or whatever...is fundamentally flawed. No matter how much multiclassing someone does, he/she is still bound by the limitations of that class/multiclass.
Overall I suppose a good argument could be made for either side. What I find is that when one tries to "improve" upon a class based system, the end up changing it and improving it with elements of a classless system. So why not just go classless and call it good?
|