D&D 5E Multiclassing in Next

Lanefan · Sep 18, 2012

keterys said:
So, if a 10th level fighter / 3rd level wizard can't cast any better than a 3rd level wizard, can they fight better than a 10th level fighter?

How about a 10th level fighter / 3rd level rogue compared to a 10th level fighter (or 3rd level rogue, whatever)?

Fighter/Barbarian?

That's a heck of a double standard... and more and more reason not to use 3rd edition's multiclass model by default, to dodge it

To all three example questions the answer should be that the F-10 side determines the Fighting ability - you take the better of the two and an F-10 fights way better than an anything-3.

Fighter/Barbarian is an almost-redundant multiclass in that all you're gaining - or should be gaining - from the B side is rage.

Lanefan

Bluenose · Sep 18, 2012

Dannyalcatraz said:
Anyone can learn to fight, not everyone can bend reality to their will with a few words and gestures.

So what's the requirement for someone to be able to "bend reality to their will"? Int 11, as far as I can see. Not too hard, half the population has that by random generation.

Also, if "anyone can learn to fight", why did so many cultures put so much effort into training certain people into being good at it? Were they all unaware how easy it was? Or maybe it's harder than you think.

keterys · Sep 18, 2012

Lanefan said:
To all three example questions the answer should be that the F-10 side determines the Fighting ability - you take the better of the two and an F-10 fights way better than an anything-3.

Fighter/Barbarian is an almost-redundant multiclass in that all you're gaining - or should be gaining - from the B side is rage.

Lanefan

"Take the better of the two" is an interesting theory. So that sounds like a fighter 15 will be much better at fighting than a fighter 10 / barbarian 5.

Which I guess would match well with the effectiveness of multiclassing with a caster, and just mean that multiclassing is almost always a poor idea from a performance standpoint, but a reasonable option for adding character breadth. Still potentially a trap for those who don't understand the system enough to avoid system problems, and a potential paralysis point for new players.

It'd still be an advantage to drop people planning out their characters level by level before play, to make sure they get all the benefits from the classes they want, get into the right prestige classes, etc.

Li Shenron · Sep 18, 2012

GreyICE said:
NO

GOD

NO

NO

NO

This philosophy is what got us quadratic wizards in 3E. It's what got us into this mess in the first place. "Glitterdust is always useful! Grease is always useful!" Well by the time the wizard hits level 16, he has like 30 useful spells! He's not a limited caster, he's the goddamn Batman!

If spell slots are just as useful at level 16 as they are at level 1, Wizards better get them reeaaaaalllll slowly (like, starting with 4 at first level and moving to 8 at 20th, with no spell being higher than level 3).

So what's your alternative? That after a few levels a large number of the Wizard's spells progressively become useless? :erm:

mlund · Sep 18, 2012

Li Shenron said:
So what's your alternative? That after a few levels a large number of the Wizard's spells progressively become useless?

Should they become useless? Never. You can strike fear into the hearts of 1/2HD Kobolds and impress folks at children's birthday parties with those until the cows come home.

Should they become statistically irrelevant to appropriately leveled challenges? Definitely!

They idea that you get to defeat Level 12 challenges with the same spell slots you could use at level 1 or 3 while you now have level 6 spell slots is just absurd.

- Marty Lund

tlantl · Sep 18, 2012

Dannyalcatraz said:
Anyone can learn to fight, not everyone can bend reality to their will with a few words and gestures.

I guess this isn't as true as one would like to believe in a game where two-thirds to three-quarters of the base classes are spell casters of one kind or another.

DEFCON 1 · Sep 18, 2012

All this talk makes me want to just send things back to where multi-classing only occurred at character creation and the two classes leveled simultaneously (either by being a few levels behind single-classes characters but with full abilities a la AD&D, or with less ability from each class but at top level a la 4E Hybrids).

If some PC really needs to "change" what he is halfway through his career... use the Prestige class system at Level 11 for that. Have them select a PC like "Swordmage" that begins granting arcane spells to a class that doesn't have them.

Li Shenron · Sep 18, 2012

mlund said:
They idea that you get to defeat Level 12 challenges with the same spell slots you could use at level 1 or 3 while you now have level 6 spell slots is just absurd.

So should there be also something the Fighter or the Rogue has, that becomes irrelevant at higher levels?

BTW, you don't have to imply that those 1lv slots are as good as the 6lv slots to defeat the lv12 monster. Maybe it takes 2-3 of those 6lv spells but it takes 10-15 of the 1lv spells to achieve the same results. Just because you have a bazooka with 2 ammos, doesn't mean that you can leave your gun home... maybe the gun can't take out a tank, but maybe it can, if you use it smart. But once again, the comparison doesn't work well because we only think about damaging spells, but that Grease or Glitterdust can and should still be useful, maybe you just need to use them more cleverly to make them so.

Bluenose · Sep 18, 2012

Li Shenron said:
So should there be also something the Fighter or the Rogue has, that becomes irrelevant at higher levels?

What new abilities do the Fighter and Rogue get at high levels that are more powerful than their low level abilities? If there aren't any, just bigger numbers, then you might find it rather hard to take abilities away and leave them anything to do.

slobster · Sep 18, 2012

Li Shenron said:
So should there be also something the Fighter or the Rogue has, that becomes irrelevant at higher levels?

Fighters and rogues work differently. They don't have a dozen low-level maneuver slots left over from earlier levels, they have a handful of tricks (slowly widening, but at nowhere near the pace of the wizard) that they use to meet challenges at all levels.