This is hard to answer unless we know in what context the classes are used in.
If your trying to make it diverse so you can form a well rounded groups, then no to multi-class. There should be more than one way to defeat content, where you don't need pre-defned roles to get through the battle. The gameplay should be that good, that you can win battles with differant types of tactics base on what classes you have. Unique and distinct classes are important.
If pantheon wants to allow some multi-classes because it going to be a really cool multi-class character and fits the lore, then ok. There should be trade offs for multi-classes. Like you did with the Rogue trading DPS for crowd-control. Not really a multi-class, seems like a bit of a hack, and a little OP in the steam. but if you balance it... (I don't like using the word "balance", because it feels like balancing means making the classes more or less the same.)
I would love to see an artisan type multi-class. like the prestige Class I played in D&D. a Candle Caster. My DM made sure I had strict inventory and I took time to craft the candles and I needed to devise ways to quick lighting wick that could burn under water, and had a failure rate, but it was a fun class to play. - https://www.realmshelps.net/charbuild/classes/prestige/Candle_Caster
Solo or Group hybrid, raiding classic.
Hybrid is tons of fun for the vast majority of the game. Fill the gaps, focusing on what is missing in the group or adapt to what you are fighting solo. Once you turn to raiding though you really want to do one thing well. It all depends on what you want to do more.
Gottbeard said:Firstly, success in a role is not a binary pass/fail.
This is just flat out wrong, at least for tank and healer. Either you can get the job done within a reasonable tolerance level or you can't, period. If one class requires the rest of the group to make up a role performance drop of 30% compared to another class then the first class will be excluded.
I think there is a valley of space between adequate performance for a role and perfection. My point still remains that pure classes are user friendly and therefore there isn't much room between baseline success and perfection. A highly skilled player gets more value modifiers for their skill with a hybrid class. And I believe that is perfectly balanced. Skill has to be put under consideration when measuring balance. I don't think its fair to laugh at a hybrid class for being weak then also simultaneously want it nerfed because a dedicated player out-performs a pure class. Binary thinking creates this paradox where the hybrid class is simultaneously too weak to be a part of a competitive raid but also too strong therefore deserving of nerfs.
The language for this topic can obviously get a little tricky. I'm definitely not a fan of "hybrids" in the sense of classes that can spec multiple different ways in order to be great at anything. I would much rather see classes that have a defined main role that can't be switched to another. HOWEVER, I am very much a fan of hybrid classes in the sense of classes that have some secondary abilities belonging to another archetype, allowing them to flex into other roles in a limited way. What we've recently seen of the Monk is a great example of this. It's a dps class that can pull off some tanking for brief periods, not a class that can be a full tank in addition to their normal role. Rogues, too, would fit this definition, as they are a dps class with some cc abilities. (Though I hope their cc is dialed back a bit so they don't become the very definition of a "bad" hybrid.) Though we haven't seen it spelled out as much for them yet, Paladins, Druids, and Shamans also strike me as potentially "good" hybrid classes. I could see a group that already has a main tank and healer bringing a Pally along as an offtank with extra heals for emergencies, or a group with already adequate dps and a main healer employing a Druid or Shaman as an extra healer who sometimes contributes to dps when the main healer has things covered. I think with a little creativity there will be a lot of exciting group combos to be formed with the right kind of hybrid classes.
I believe deeply in class identity and that tends to necessitate more pure classes (non-hybrid). I like the approach that Pantheon seems to be taking with archetypes that clearly define the intended role of each class, but with different flavors to fulfill that role. I will be happy as long as we stay away from the idea of being able to respec to a new role like you can/could in FFXIV, WoW, Rift, etc... Being able to quickly or fundamentally change your role makes each class less special and tends to lead to less skilled players in the traditional role.
Kilsin said:Community Debate - Classic vs Hybrid Classes - What are you more drawn to, a classic Tank, Healer, DPS, CC class set-up or a more hybrid version that may blend a few classes together and why? #MMORPG#CommunityMatters
Hybrid classes, despite the fact they were generally less effective at pure roles, they had a cool factor the pure classes did not. Outside of say, Necro, Wizard, and Druid, the Warrior and Cleric were bland. You needed them as pure raid tank or raid heals/rez. Beyond that, from a personal player perspective... It's just so much more cool to be a hybrid class. A tank that throws debuffs, poisons, and diseases. A tank that can heal, rez, or remote stun. A melee class that can snare, SOW, and ignite flames... This is just cool.
Warriors, no matter how much spin/flips/flaily arms you give them are always just going to be that... Boring and without 'pizazz'.
That said, when I was first in EQ I mained a monk and then in P99 the Shaman/Rogue was the only class I got to 60 (mainly because hybrid epics were impossible to get). Shamans were all powerful at soloing large mobs, which was very nice for money making.