The failures of the "You can do that with multiclassing" argument

One of the more annoying arguments I see coming up again and again on the various D&D boards I visit is that base classes should be "generic" and that you can create most new classes through multiclassing.

To which I say: Rubbish!

The purpose of a base class is not to be "generic" (for the paladin and monk surely are not!), but rather to give a particular suite of abilities [i]from level 1![/i] This is terribly important. It's very nice to say you're a swashbuckler, but when the mechanics don't back that up, we're back in the bad old days, the days that 3e with its options was meant to leave behind.

The 3e multiclassing system can be clunky at times, but through a combination of classes, prestige classes, substitution levels, modifier feats and suchlike, it allows a wide variety of characters. It allows the approximation of many concepts. However, there comes a time when those approximations are but a pale shadow of what could be created with a new class.

In theory, some of the abilities of new classes could be made into feats and acquired thereby. However, it doesn't take long for such abilities to overwhelm the feat structure.

Consider the Swashbuckler of Complete Warrior. While I don't consider it to be the best class, it does add together a few abilities that would not be properly gained through multiclassing:

* d10 Hit Die
* 4 skill points per level
* Balance, Bluff, Climb, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Tumble (plus a few others) as class skills
* Full Base Attack progression
* Bonuses when using light weapons (through Insightful Strike)
* Prime abilities scores Dexterity and Intelligence

The only way to get the skills is as a Rogue (or Bard?). The only way to get the Hit Die and Base Attack is as Fighter. And, unfortunately, the more Fighter levels you take, the worse your skills become, and the reverse applies to the Rogue.

At first level, the Swashbuckler can have good skills in Diplomacy, Tumble and other swashbuckley type of skills, and be a decent combatant (in a front-on capacity). A first level fighter just couldn't even approximate the Swashbuckler; a first level rogue is quite different in focus (and a combatant that then relies on Sneak Attack... again quite different!)

There is definitely a reason for the Swashbuckler to have those first five levels. It creates an identity that mere multiclassing would obscure.

Where, perhaps, the imagination of the D&D designers has failed them is in justifying a reason for certain classes to exist past the first five to ten levels.

Prestige Classes (which might well be termed as Advanced classes, as I believe they are in d20 Modern) provide options for higher levels. Base classes provide options throughout all 20 levels. Perhaps certain classes should only be Entry classes, with only the first 5-10 levels detailed?

That some concepts can be represented as both prestige and base classes should also not be contested - consider the Prestige Paladin of UA. I do not think that one option should preclude the other. It is options, not restrictions, surely?