Multi classing Objections: Rules vs. Fluff?

Tallifer · Jul 17, 2018

TheCosmicKid said:
I disagree completely. Subclasses (and hybrid classes) are an inelegant way to handle multiclassing because each combination of classes requires a different rules entity, inflating the necessary amount of rules multiplicatively. You said it yourself: to get an uncovered combination, you have to homebrew. It eats up page count or creative time and energy to create each new combination. That is the opposite of leaving design space open. That is a system which makes you reinvent the wheel 12 x 11 times. (More, once you start adding new classes to the game.) A single set of rules which lets you immediately create any class combination is vastly more elegant. If one of my players wants to be a bard/monk, I don't have to do a thing.

Forsooth. 4E (which overall I enjoyed) had very restrictive and weak multiclassing rules. Therefore in order to create a greater variety of characters, the designers resorted to pumping out a multitude of classes... which still could not satisfy every niche. 5E's more generous multiclassing allows great variety without a needless stream of Players Handbooks 2, 3 etc to create new classes.

MechaPilot · Jul 17, 2018

I object to the Ability Score requirements for Multi-classing. Makes no sense story wise when there's no ability score requirements for being that class from level one. And, all it does is discourage sub-optimal MC choices. I mean, requiring a 13 or 15 in a class' main stat to MC into it just ensures that what you'll get from MC-ing is better than it would be if you did it with a lower stat.

MechaPilot · Jul 17, 2018

Tallifer said:
Forsooth. 4E (which overall I enjoyed) had very restrictive and weak multiclassing rules. Therefore in order to create a greater variety of characters, the designers resorted to pumping out a multitude of classes... which still could not satisfy every niche. 5E's more generous multiclassing allows great variety without a needless stream of Players Handbooks 2, 3 etc to create new classes.

4e's biggest issue with multi-classing right from the book was the power swap feats. If a power is of the same level and on the same refresh cycle (i.e. at-will, encounter, daily) you should've been able to swap them if you pleased because they generally would be balanced for their level and frequency of use. When I DM'd 4e I gave players the power swap feats for free when they took the MC feat and it worked out much better than the RAW.

Tony Vargas · Jul 17, 2018

MechaPilot said:
I object to the Ability Score requirements for Multi-classing. Makes no sense story wise when there's no ability score requirements for being that class from level one.

I suppose the idea is that you're not getting trained up in the class for a long period, like you presumably would be for your first 'Apprentice' level, but are cramming to master the new class more quickly, which requires greater raw talent?

And, all it does is discourage sub-optimal MC choices. I mean, requiring a 13 or 15 in a class' main stat to MC into it just ensures that what you'll get from MC-ing is better than it would be if you did it with a lower stat.

Not a terrible thing. There's enough 'traps' as it is before adding MCing to the mix...

MechaPilot · Jul 17, 2018

Tony Vargas said:
I suppose the idea is that you're not getting trained up in the class for a long period, like you presumably would be for your first 'Apprentice' level, but are cramming to master the new class more quickly, which requires greater raw talent?

Depends how it's handled. I've never used 5e's MC ability requirements, but I do require finding a trainer, paying said trainer, and taking the time to learn from her to MC. If you can't get in all the training before the next adventure or session, you can get some features of the class based on how far you made it through the training.

Tony Vargas said:
Not a terrible thing. There's enough 'traps' as it is before adding MCing to the mix...

I agree about there being enough traps, but MCing is an optional rule that really should only be employed by experienced players. The section on MCing should probably point out that multiclassing in some combinations can leave a character worse off (effectiveness wise) than if they stayed as a single class. Plus, as a DM I typically require my players to clear multiclassing with me (I want them to have some story rationale for it that at least minimally makes sense) and part of that is me letting them know about potential traps and pitfalls of multiclassing.

Although, that's not a worry at my table right now. Only one player has multiclassed and he's been playing D&D since 3e, so he's got a bunch of experience under his belt. And, he's a bit of a power-gamer, so he's generally on the look out for sub-optimal choices to avoid.

Tony Vargas · Jul 17, 2018

MechaPilot said:
Depends how it's handled. I've never used 5e's MC ability requirements, but I do require finding a trainer, paying said trainer, and taking the time to learn from her to MC. If you can't get in all the training before the next adventure or session, you can get some features of the class based on how far you made it through the training.

Add some formal downtime-day requirement and that sounds like a perfectly reasonable alternative to the stat preq.

MechaPilot · Jul 17, 2018

Tony Vargas said:
Add some formal downtime-day requirement and that sounds like a perfectly reasonable alternative to the stat preq.

Thank you.

I usually go with the standard 250 days. Although any increases to HP, HD and Proficiency Modifier are automatic on the first day.

I'm also willing to credit days for certain things. For example, if you're proficient in the Arcana skill and MC into Wizard, I'll usually credit the character 50 days to represent their having some existing training in the fundamentals.

MichaelSomething · Jul 17, 2018

So who here plays Warlords in 5E by multi classing Fighter and Bard?

cbwjm · Jul 17, 2018

MichaelSomething said:
So who here plays Warlords in 5E by multi classing Fighter and Bard?

Battlemaster/valour? That would work pretty well for a warlord, I'd think.

Tony Vargas · Jul 17, 2018

MichaelSomething said:
So who here plays Warlords in 5E by multi classing Fighter and Bard?

Warlords don't cast spells.
It'd make an OK Skald, I guess - though, really, Valor Bard by itself makes an OK Skald.

Multi classing Objections: Rules vs. Fluff?

Tallifer

Hero

MechaPilot

Explorer

MechaPilot

Explorer

Tony Vargas

Legend

MechaPilot

Explorer

Tony Vargas

Legend

MechaPilot

Explorer

MichaelSomething

Legend

cbwjm

Seb-wejem

Tony Vargas

Legend

Similar Threads