D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games

[Callie Del Noire]

Seen this over and over again as a criticism of 4e.  For me, it is incredibly ironic as every single D&D game I have every played in, from Basic to 4e, has been about killing things and taking their stuff.  I think the reason this particular banner gets hoisted is that it appears to add authority to the simple fact that 4e does not fit someone's preferences.

I have no idea why gamers specifically and geeks in general can not simply say, "Meh, not my thing" and leave it at that.  I know I am guilty of this.

I have done that. I like Pathfinder over 4e because ... well it didn't feel like a MMORPG in dead tree format.  Which I find ironic given that both the EQ games and the World of Warcraft RPGs both felt more like a tabletop than 4e.

I felt a bit betrayed by the whole outlook of 4e, but then I'm a big multiclasser and right out the gate it was not possible to get a multiclass type like I was used to. Add in the 'simplified' alignments, the 'disenchanting for materials' enchanting and no 'ultility' spells (but that is a minor point).

I do dislike the way that WotC and Hasbro pulled out their support of the 'Friendly Local Comic shop' and the fact that they killed off the dead tree versions of Dragon/Dungeon. Those are my rants. One of my buddies spent the last 20 years working as an 'at home' dad and sometime comic clerk. He told me when the orginal release of 4e came out, the folks working through Diamond (who supplies most of the FLCS' stocks) paid full price while WALMART got to buy the starter set at 50% off. Amazon I can understand, there is a HUGE Military market as well as otehrs, but WALMART? And let's be honest, after Amazon the FLCS is the people who do most of the sales.

I'm sure, given the impending anniversary, we'll be seeing a 'New' DnD sooner or later.

Now, in their defense, I think the folks at Hasbro got chumped a bit. They bought WotC RIGHT after the biggest sales rush of their short history (right after the release of 3e) and were expecting sales like that ALL the time.

[MasterMischief]

Walmart forces all of their suppliers to sell at a steep discount.  If you ever shop there, you will notice the same name brand labels are different then if you buy them somewhere else.  Companies have to cut corners to sell to Walmart and they are pretty much held over a barrel if they want to reach their customers because such a large chunk of America buys everything from Walmart.

[Genbu83]

*begins lurking*

[Callie Del Noire]

Walmart forces all of their suppliers to sell at a steep discount.  If you ever shop there, you will notice the same name brand labels are different then if you buy them somewhere else.  Companies have to cut corners to sell to Walmart and they are pretty much held over a barrel if they want to reach their customers because such a large chunk of America buys everything from Walmart.

I realize that but most publishers don't have to do so. I find myself wondering why they would even sell to Walmart, given that they were LOSING cash given that they would have to buy back unsold books after a time. How many of you ever seen an RPG for sale at Walmart? Hand up?

[Genbu83]

I realize that but most publishers don't have to do so. I find myself wondering why they would even sell to Walmart, given that they were LOSING cash given that they would have to buy back unsold books after a time. How many of you ever seen an RPG for sale at Walmart? Hand up?

That and Walmart tends to only sell more marketable RPG products. So mostly you will see Collectable card Games aimed at kids and teens, some magic, and if you're lucky some minatures or some of these new begininer's boxes that WoTC and Paizo are comming out with.

[Thufir Hawat]

I'd like to see a D&D 5 that returns to D&D's anthropocentric roots...with more emphasis on different ethnic groups and cultures within the human race.  A return to the proficiency system that lets you customize characters in ways beyond combat styling.  A dialing-down of the emphasis on tactical combat.  A dialing-down of character power in general.

Could you please quote the edition of D&D that has more emphasis, rules-wise, on different human cultures instead of differences between fantasy races, dialled down tactical combat, and proficiency system? You've got to have some roots in order to return to them, otherwise, it's just new territory. And it's uncharted to you, even if many other systems have been cruising it for years.

Mind you, D&D isn't by far my preferred system, and D&D 4e isn't the edition I found most fun, but I have tried almost every single edition, including the ones created before I was born ;). Fantasy races and combat features were just as prevalent in every single one of them. And in fact, the D&D 4e actually allows for more non-combat customization than most other editions.

[LunarSage]

MasterMischief:  There is a point buy system for Marvel Super Heroes (the old one) and it actually works very well.  I'm using it for the (semi-freeform) cosmic Marvel game that I run here on E. 

As a side note, there's going to be an even newer Marvel game soon.  It's in development using the Cortex+ system via Margaret Weis Productions.

Incidentally, here's the info for the new Marvel game if anyone's interested.

Linky Linky!

[MasterMischief]

If Walmart can get RPGs to a broader audience, I may take back some of the nasty things I have said about them.

Nah, probably not.  Walmart is one of the reasons I could never be a Libertarian.

[Callie Del Noire]

If Walmart can get RPGs to a broader audience, I may take back some of the nasty things I have said about them.

Nah, probably not.  Walmart is one of the reasons I could never be a Libertarian.

Just think what it would have been like if they had gotten their bank charter. :D

I'm willing to bet that someone at Hasbro brokered the deal in hopes of 'growing the brand'.

[Dhi]

Could you please quote the edition of D&D that has more emphasis, rules-wise, on different human cultures instead of differences between fantasy races, dialled down tactical combat, and proficiency system? You've got to have some roots in order to return to them, otherwise, it's just new territory. And it's uncharted to you, even if many other systems have been cruising it for years.

Mind you, D&D isn't by far my preferred system, and D&D 4e isn't the edition I found most fun, but I have tried almost every single edition, including the ones created before I was born ;). Fantasy races and combat features were just as prevalent in every single one of them. And in fact, the D&D 4e actually allows for more non-combat customization than most other editions.

2E and previous editions did have a stronger emphasis on humanity. Product lines like Dark Sun and Planescape were an exception to the rule of human-centric West European fantasy. The rules supported that assumed setting in all kinds of ways, such as nonhuman racial level limits, hundreds of character kits that defined human cultures, editions like BECMI where you picked your race or your class, and a number of failed settings like Jakandor where the entire fantasy was a nonstandard human culture, or Birthright which is not even nonstandard.

I imagine the proficiency system he's talking about is the 2E Nonweapon Proficiency system, although there was a more crude precursor starting with the 1E Wilderness Guide, if I'm not mistaken. The NWP system was extensive and well supported. I think people who jumped into D&D post-2E mistake the 'optional' status of NWPs to mean that most groups didn't use them. What 'optional' really meant was that NWPs provided a more codified system for ability checks, and it was rare that a group did not use them. 3E relegated the openness of NWPs to generic skills like Craft, Profession, and Perform, which 4E then removed entirely.

It's true that almost nobody took Craft and Profession ranks in 3E, but I think that speaks to the tone of the game. In 2E folks would get genuinely interested in NWPs like fishing and agriculture. When you offer Profession (fishing) next to Tumble, very few people will take the former. Of course, nothing stops you from fishing without NWP or skill rules for it. However, D&D is no longer a game that fosters that sort of atmosphere. It falls on the players to inject it themselves.

As a 4E player, I'm unsure what you mean by 4E having more noncombat options. Even utility powers have been remolded over time to mostly be centered around combat, and rituals are being phased out. It seems like a really bizarre thing to assert.

[Callie Del Noire]

2E and previous editions did have a stronger emphasis on humanity. Product lines like Dark Sun and Planescape were an exception to the rule of human-centric West European fantasy. The rules supported that assumed setting in all kinds of ways, such as nonhuman racial level limits, hundreds of character kits that defined human cultures, editions like BECMI where you picked your race or your class, and a number of failed settings like Jakandor where the entire fantasy was a nonstandard human culture, or Birthright which is not even nonstandard.

I imagine the proficiency system he's talking about is the 2E Nonweapon Proficiency system, although there was a more crude precursor starting with the 1E Wilderness Guide, if I'm not mistaken. The NWP system was extensive and well supported. I think people who jumped into D&D post-2E mistake the 'optional' status of NWPs to mean that most groups didn't use them. What 'optional' really meant was that NWPs provided a more codified system for ability checks, and it was rare that a group did not use them. 3E relegated the openness of NWPs to generic skills like Craft, Profession, and Perform, which 4E then removed entirely.

It's true that almost nobody took Craft and Profession ranks in 3E, but I think that speaks to the tone of the game. In 2E folks would get genuinely interested in NWPs like fishing and agriculture. When you offer Profession (fishing) next to Tumble, very few people will take the former. Of course, nothing stops you from fishing without NWP or skill rules for it. However, D&D is no longer a game that fosters that sort of atmosphere. It falls on the players to inject it themselves.

As a 4E player, I'm unsure what you mean by 4E having more noncombat options. Even utility powers have been remolded over time to mostly be centered around combat, and rituals are being phased out. It seems like a really bizarre thing to assert.

Skills can be utilized in game. You (that is the GM and players) need to work it out. I had one character in a game who was a smith, his 'day job' was a smith and from time to time he'd go adventuring when things popped up. I had another GM who would go 'You pay X gold for upkeep, and it's been 10 months since you had a clue in the quest for your father's killer/ect, and what are you doing to stay fed?'

Craft/Knowledge/Profession can come into play, just like when I played 2e and had a Fighter/Cleric/Wizard who was (in)famous for her musical skills (she was a priestess of Finder) and made a KILLING in song creation (Like the song of the Paladin and Faerie Dragon. A humorous retelling of an 'epic prank fight' between a faerie dragon, 2 adopted white dragon wyrmlings and a stodgy paladin. A few criticial successes and her fame got the party into/out of trouble. Her song let them negotiate a deal with a green dragon who literally fell off her horde at the song)

Skills/NWP and such all come into play in how the GM uses them. I, as a GM, enjoy challenging players outside of combat, and most games I've seen at least call for a few Knowledge/Craft checks for various 'Oh I know about that..' sort of things.

[Thufir Hawat]

2E and previous editions did have a stronger emphasis on humanity.

No, it gimped non-human races via racial limits. Totally not the same thing. Non-humans being weaker doesn't mean the game provides any meaningful content for human cultures. In most games I've been in, human cultures were just as uniform as elven and dwarven culture.
Mind you, I prefer games where non-humans aren't even an option. Doesn't mean D&D2e or before made this easier. Some settings might have it, but you can make a setting with every system, included a system that doesn't support it very well.
And I remember kits, too. Most of them were open to non-humans as well, or gave advice to DMs how to incorporate, say, elves in the Savage warrior kit. Also, most of them had mostly combat-related differences with the "basic" class.

I imagine the proficiency system he's talking about is the 2E Nonweapon Proficiency system, although there was a more crude precursor starting with the 1E Wilderness Guide, if I'm not mistaken. The NWP system was extensive and well supported.

Great, but it was optional, wasn't it? And yes, that means that at least some groups have ignored it. Never been in one of those, but read the accounts of other people.
Also, for all it was "well-supported", it still depended primarily on physical attributes, unless I'm mistaking it with another game. Which is a failure for a skill system.

3E relegated the openness of NWPs to generic skills like Craft, Profession, and Perform, which 4E then removed entirely.

I beg your pardon, D&D 4e removed Perform? And I thought it's just renamed.

It's true that almost nobody took Craft and Profession ranks in 3E, but I think that speaks to the tone of the game. In 2E folks would get genuinely interested in NWPs like fishing and agriculture. When you offer Profession (fishing) next to Tumble, very few people will take the former. Of course, nothing stops you from fishing without NWP or skill rules for it. However, D&D is no longer a game that fosters that sort of atmosphere. It falls on the players to inject it themselves.

I remember my characters taking Professions and Craft was a powerful skill for making your own items.
I also remember the time when we played with NWPs. Almost nobody was taking Profession NWPs, unless they were all his class could get.

As a 4E player, I'm unsure what you mean by 4E having more noncombat options. Even utility powers have been remolded over time to mostly be centered around combat, and rituals are being phased out. It seems like a really bizarre thing to assert.

Well, let me compare D&D 2e and D&D 4e here in the non-combat sphere.
D&D 2e gets NWPs, which show training or natural aptitude in a given skill, and that's it.
D&D 4e has Skills, non-combat feats that give you a bonus to skills you'd need outside of combat, utility powers and rituals. Sure, it makes the skill list shorter, but most skills are included together with another skill! So, which list is longer? This edition gets more diversity in the non-combat sphere!
Since I'm not a D&D player, I can't say anything about recent developments in the last couple of years at least. Maybe there is a movement away from non-combat abilities. Still, if you go only by the core books, D&D 4e definitely has more non-combat options. How much use they see depends wildly by the group, I'd guess.
Mind you, they still aren't equal to combat skills, but there is more diversity at least! Of course, they never were equal to begin with, no matter what edition. If I wanted a game where non-combat skills are just as important as combat, I'd look elsewhere. Which is one of the reasons why, despite having tried almost all editions of D&D as I stated, I prefer other games ;) .

[LunarSage]

So let's get a soundoff! 

What games are people playing in that are system games currently?  Online or offline.

I'm in a Call of Cthulu game on Thursdays and a Pathfinder game on Sundays offline.

I run a semi-system Classic Marvel game here on E.

That's sadly it for me for the time being.  Everything else I play or run is freeform.

[Callie Del Noire]

Online..

I got a Fantasy Grounds II game (Warhammer FRPG 2nd Edition) where I play a Elf Scout.


There are a few Pathfinder games here and on RPoL and a Buffy game that is dying slowly.

Offline.

I'm on attempt 2 for finding a real life group here in Jax.. not having much luck.

[Brandon]

I mostly play pathfinder right now

Online: I run one Kingmaker Adventure path and I play in a Jade regent (playing a summoner), Carrion crown (playing a paladin), 2 kingmakers (A sword/shield fighter and a wizard, Legacy of fire (Druid with Saurian shaman archetype), and second darkness (elemental bloodline sorcerer). I play in a homebrew Pathfinder game here on elliquiy (Playing an Inquisitor of Shelyn). I play Exalted on Web of memories which is an exalted chat site. Finally there is a play by post Rifts game that I play in where we are all soliders of the coalition states (and I play a CS ranger)

Offline: I run a weekly group that plays Pathfinder only in the planescape setting and there has been talk of a Shadowrun game being started but its just talk for the moment

[Callie Del Noire]

Well Herolab has made SR 4 a bit more easy to understand. (Not to mention I can build characters now.. designed my very own Troll Street Samurai.. still miffed that the availability rules preclude me making some of my old archetypes.

[HairyHeretic]

My pen and paper group regularly play Dresden Files and a supers game using the Smallville system. We kinda alternate between those two depending on GM. Some of us are also playing Scion, currently at Demigod. We also have L5R in reserve.

Online ... 7th Sea, Feng Shui, Dresden Files, L5R, Star Wars, Qin.

I want to get a Black Crusade game going next month, which given my pen and paper groups lack of interest in 40k will likely be online.

[AtlasEros]

I'm definitely a 3.5 girl

I'm with you on that, my favorite game.  Also big on COC & WOD (not NWOD).  I have a youtube rpg channel, under the name woodwwad, so I love talking rpgs from all standpoints.

Great topic  :D

[Thufir Hawat]

So let's get a soundoff! 

What games are people playing in that are system games currently?  Online or offline.

I'm in a Call of Cthulu game on Thursdays and a Pathfinder game on Sundays offline.

I run a semi-system Classic Marvel game here on E.

That's sadly it for me for the time being.  Everything else I play or run is freeform.

That's a good question indeed.
Offline, I have a Reign group on Saturday, which I'm running with a historical fantasy "Silk Road" setting, a currently-on-hiatus FATE group on Sundays, and a GURPS group on irregular days.
Online, I've got a Qin game here, and running a Talislanta game on this site, which is houseruled to use Aspects. On other sites, I play in a Dragon Age RPG, a Lady Blackbird game, and 3 Runequest PbP games.
Online, but via Skype, I'm running an MRQ2 game which is houseruled to use Pendragon Passions, and play in an Eclipse phase game. Not sure whether to add the 5X5 RPG game here which I was running one-on-one for a player from this site.
We also have an Exalted: Solars game on Wave, but it's moving with the speed of hurrying glaciers due to some of the players slacking off.
That's about it.
As it's probably obvious, I don't run or play freeform. The only exception are one-shots on E., which just have no use for a good system anyway, for reasons you can probably guess :P. But even then, I need some persuading to participate in said one-shot >:)!

[Callie Del Noire]

I REALLY want to play in an Eclipse Phase game. :(

[Thufir Hawat]

I REALLY want to play in an Eclipse Phase game. :(

Yeah, the setting is lots of fun >:).
Can't really invite you, though. We simply don't play it in English.

[Callie Del Noire]

Yeah, the setting is lots of fun >:).
Can't really invite you, though. We simply don't play it in English.

Boo!!

I think that I'd have fun playing one of the lost generation.

Of course since I got SR4 on Hero Lab ..now I want to play a character in it too! Only problem I have is I can't make some of my old archetypes since the Availablity restriction really humps them. Can't be a skill wired corportate lackey with only a Skill wires of 3

[Chris Brady]

I have done that. I like Pathfinder over 4e because ... well it didn't feel like a MMORPG in dead tree format.  Which I find ironic given that both the EQ games and the World of Warcraft RPGs both felt more like a tabletop than 4e.

That right there tells me you've never touched 4e in any regular manner.  Maybe once to confirm your pre-existing bias and then dropped when you forced it to fit your expectations.  The "4e is an MMO" meme is old, is tired and completely false.  If anything 3.x is closer to an MMO with their key elements.

Fighters are low damage/high armour.  Just like a World of Warcraft protection warrior.

Wizards are glass cannons, with scaling spells per level, just like the WoW mage.

Rogues are high damage, medium armour 'positional' killers.  Just like the WoW rogue.

The Cleric is harder to pigeon hole, but he can be just as healy as the Priest.  And really, as devastating as the Priest when NOT healing.  (I think my Arms Warrior still has scars from that Shadow Priest beat down he got 5 years ago...)

Of course, being a table top game, 3.x does and can have major differences, but the basics I outline above?  All there in WoW and 3.x.  4e more or less flattened that playing field by making some classes better at what they do.

Now before I go on, I'd like to state that I HATE 4e.  The only reason I play it is because Essentials makes it a little more palatable than the overly focused core books, but really, if I could, I'd rather run Dark Heresy, Deathwatch, Unisystem, Savage Worlds (either something generic, pulpy, sword and sorcery or Pirates of the Spanish Main) or Mutants and Masterminds 2nd or 3rd editions.  But I try to make it the best 4e game I can, because my players like it and are having fun, which helps ME have fun too.

However, one thing I cannot stand is people repeating incorrect internet whinings.  Now, believe me, I understand not liking 4e because you don't like what it brings to the table, but please do not insult us like this.  We are NOT stupid.  We will know when you haven't played it.

I felt a bit betrayed by the whole outlook of 4e, but then I'm a big multiclasser and right out the gate it was not possible to get a multiclass type like I was used to. Add in the 'simplified' alignments, the 'disenchanting for materials' enchanting and no 'ultility' spells (but that is a minor point).

And you think 3.x multiclassing actually WORKS?  Try making a Fighter/Mage that allows you to have full caster progression, without breaking into the Prestige Classes, which tend to fall into two categories of 'Broken' anyway.  Crazy Good, and Stupid Bad.  I ran 3.x since release and I've yet to see anyone happy with multiclassing.  They'd rather do hybridizing of classes (Which by the way 4e apparently does REAL well.  However, as Essentials doesn't really have it, I cannot and will not make any assessment nor put for an opinion on it.  I'd rather be educated on something rather than open my mouth) where you take the best of whatever classes you want and run with it.  Not a perfect solution, but much better than Multiclassing.

Still, whenever someone trots out this little horse, I get warning bells.  Now, I understand not everyone is this way, but whenever I hear someone whine about multiclassing, it's often (not always) because they want to do EVERYTHING, have no weakness, and not need the rest of the party.  Essentially want to play God.  Now, I'm not saying anyone here is like that, it's just that LOCALLY, I've had players all say similar things that make me cringe whenever I hear about multiclassing.

I do dislike the way that WotC and Hasbro pulled out their support of the 'Friendly Local Comic shop' and the fact that they killed off the dead tree versions of Dragon/Dungeon.

Really?  Completely dropped game stores.  Crap, I better tell mine to stop selling 4e then.  Or promoting the Encounters (and soon to be for the Hardest of the Hard core, Lair Assault.)  You know what's funny?  Their newest book?  Neverwinter Campaign Guide?  Retail store EXCLUSIVE.  Amazon and other On-Line retailers are not getting copies.  Ever.  You want the NCG, you go to your local game store (And honestly I am extremely lucky, because the guys who run the local one here in Ottawa are some of the coolest guys I know.  I understand that some of you have less than good gaming stores, and for that you have my honest sympathies.  Good customer service makes the store in my opinion.)

So for a company that's going online only, I...  Am not seeing it.  Especially with all the dungeon tiles, minis, tokens (I admit that I am a less than total fan of mini gaming, but eh, it's what they like, and it doesn't hurt anything really) maps, adventures, source books like Dark Sun (which I actually love, it feels very old school), Eberron, Ravenloft and so on and so forth.  My local gaming store has a shelves of the stuff (And they also have plenty of shelf space for Paizo's stuff, like Pathfinder, I think at one point they had all the adventure paths, but now that some are out of print...)

So no, you're information is wrong about them going on-line only.  In fact, if you're a game store, you used to get the settings and books (like the aforementioned Dark Sun, as well as Essential lines) days before Amazon.  If you had a Tuesday release date for a certain book (Which is when WoTC releases stuff), there were very good odds you'd get the stuff a WEEK before release on FRIDAY, which you could sell immediately.  Because WoTC dislikes online retailers.  Even Paizo (which sells 4e stuff on top of Pathfinder.  Smart company them, having their cake and eating it too) gets it only on the Tuesday date because they're on-line primarily.

Those are my rants. One of my buddies spent the last 20 years working as an 'at home' dad and sometime comic clerk. He told me when the orginal release of 4e came out, the folks working through Diamond (who supplies most of the FLCS' stocks) paid full price while WALMART got to buy the starter set at 50% off. Amazon I can understand, there is a HUGE Military market as well as otehrs, but WALMART? And let's be honest, after Amazon the FLCS is the people who do most of the sales.

Did you know that the original Red Box, way back in...  '82?  It was sold in department stores?  In the boardgames section?  It's true.  And back in the 80s, D&D was at it's peak of popularity.   And the various crazy groups proclaiming that it was a 'tool of the Devil!' was only helping TSR sell copies.  I remember being mildly amused when I read that back in '89.

I'm sure, given the impending anniversary, we'll be seeing a 'New' DnD sooner or later.

Of course there will be a 5th edition.  There'd better be, if Wizards wants to remain in business.  However, I'm afraid that it won't look anything like 3.x as you're likely to be wishing.  Hell, it's not likely to look much like 4e, to be honest, because gaming will evolve.  So you'll have to find your vindication elsewhere.

No, the only reason 4e haters bring this out is because they have this fantasy of Mike Mearls and whomever it is they blame, waist deep in excess 4e products, begging them for forgiveness by not sticking to 3.x, so they can look down on WoTC from up high and tell them 'No'.

Now, in their defense, I think the folks at Hasbro got chumped a bit. They bought WotC RIGHT after the biggest sales rush of their short history (right after the release of 3e) and were expecting sales like that ALL the time.

Yes, yes.  4e is a complete disaster and caused the downfall of both Wizards and Hasbro.  Oh wait, it didn't.  Why?  Because Hasbro bought WoTC for one simple reason:  Magic: The Gathering.  Which is STILL going strong.  And I have a sneaking suspicion that since 4e is STILL selling stuff (Hell, like I said, Paizo is selling various 4e books too) that they're doing well enough.

In short, you don't like 4e, and didn't want to give it a chance.  That's fine.  But stop making stuff up about it, or repeating what the internet posts.  Go do some research, or just state that you wished to stick with 3.x or go with Pathfinder.  That's fine, we have no right to criticize your game choice, you have every right to keep playing what you like, but please, don't do this.

[Thufir Hawat]

Now before I go on, I'd like to state that I HATE 4e.  The only reason I play it is because Essentials makes it a little more palatable than the overly focused core books, but really, if I could, I'd rather run Dark Heresy, Deathwatch, Unisystem, Savage Worlds (either something generic, pulpy, sword and sorcery or Pirates of the Spanish Main) or Mutants and Masterminds 2nd or 3rd editions.  But I try to make it the best 4e game I can, because my players like it and are having fun, which helps ME have fun too.

You purported to live in Ottawa, didn't you?
Then go out and run those games you want ;)! Seriously, I have trouble seeing a halfway decent GM ready to run a game of his choosing that stays without players in a big city.

Still, whenever someone trots out this little horse, I get warning bells.  Now, I understand not everyone is this way, but whenever I hear someone whine about multiclassing, it's often (not always) because they want to do EVERYTHING, have no weakness, and not need the rest of the party.  Essentially want to play God.  Now, I'm not saying anyone here is like that, it's just that LOCALLY, I've had players all say similar things that make me cringe whenever I hear about multiclassing.

Do you really see anything wrong with playing Nobilis or Enemy gods ;D?
Because I can report both are excellent games and you should totally try that 8-)!
And both are about playing gods, so obviously, it's quite doable, and fun, too >:)!

[ofDelusions]

And you think 3.x multiclassing actually WORKS?  Try making a Fighter/Mage that allows you to have full caster progression, without breaking into the Prestige Classes, which tend to fall into two categories of 'Broken' anyway.  Crazy Good, and Stupid Bad.  I ran 3.x since release and I've yet to see anyone happy with multiclassing.  They'd rather do hybridizing of classes (Which by the way 4e apparently does REAL well.  However, as Essentials doesn't really have it, I cannot and will not make any assessment nor put for an opinion on it.  I'd rather be educated on something rather than open my mouth) where you take the best of whatever classes you want and run with it.  Not a perfect solution, but much better than Multiclassing.

If one removes multiclassing xp penalty, 3.x multiclassing works rather well. (Or maybe even too well in some cases). And why would you avoid going to the Prestige classes? Many of them are perfectly viable (though most are completely underpowered, only few are actually broken). Single class druid is most likely more powerful than 99% of the prestige classes.

On another note:

I currently GM a Dark Heresy game (that started yesterday) and play in 3.x Tome game. Also planning on starting 1k xp all dragonblooded Exalted game (yes I know that is crazy, thank you very much).