D&D 5E Dual classing; solution to multiclassing?

[TwoSix]

Having run a campaign that went to high levels (19th) and played in several that got to the mid-teens, I can tell you from experience that this is false.

(Not the part about wanting those slots; at 1st level you want those slots, you just can't have them.)

You have one of each slot at high levels (two 7th level slots at 20th). These are spells that you certainly want to have, but they're probably not going to end a challenging fight on their own at 20th. High level casters are designed to need to use lower level spell slots.

Having more castings of fireball and polymorph is not insignificant, even at 20th. (And that doesn't even take into account the utility uses of lower level slots, like rope trick, which you never truly outgrow.)

If it was insignificant, then there would be zero decision involved. You need to give back something substantial to make giving up high level spells and capstones even a possible consideration. I mean, I'm not arguing that extra fireballs and polymorphs is really good; I'm arguing that having fireball or spirit guardians or conjure animals a 4th, 5th and 6th time is not a no-brainer trade off compared to being able to cast storm of vengeance in air elemental form or at-will shield and mirror image. Not to mention being down a spell level starting at 3rd, and 2 spell levels by 8 or 9.

 

[Blue]

at 20th level as a caster you WANT 9th,8th and 7th level slots.

others are more or less waste of an action, unless the fight streches to 15-20 rounds.

many low level buff spells compete for "concetration slot" so many slots does not help much. But it is some comfort for losing highest level slots.

And if it spammable damage spells, most cantrips at lvl17 outperform lvl1 and lvl2 and some lvl3 damage spells.

Best use you get from is "reaction time spells" like shield.

I have always said you lost the top two spells - one eight and one ninth. Just say that you want them doesn't invalidate all of the extras you DO get.

And how much of your adventuring career do you spend at 20th? The current setup gives you a large boost in both spell slots and total spell levels castable (so you're using higher-level slots on average) for most levels. I have a breakdown in one of my earlier emails.

To bring this whole thing back on target, I'm not arguing against the dual classing concept. But the current spell progression means a caster/caster gets more slots and more total spell levels than a single classed casters, and a caster/martial get more spell slots, more total spell levels, and higher level spells known then a single classed half caster (and definitely a EK or AT). That part isn't balanced against single classed characters.

A solution I put out a while ago is reducing the number of slots. To but some mechanics behind it, say that a dual classed character gets one less spell per level, minimum 1. So they get new spell levels at the expected rate, but go up to a maximum of 6 slots per level instead of 8.

This still gives a 50% increase in lower level slots over a single classed caster, but now it's more in line with the single classed caster getting higher level spells first and balances out.

A caster/martial still gets new spell levels faster than a single-classed half-caster, but it's not overwhelming in every category as it was before.

 

[TwoSix]

Possible solutions.

1) Add caster levels together, and determine spell slots as a normal multiclass character, up to a caster level equal to your character level. If your combined caster level is greater than your character level, gain additional spell slots equal to a caster with a level of the difference between your combined caster level and your character level.

Example A: A dual class paladin/sorcerer 14 has a caster level of 4 from his paladin level equivalents and 9 from his sorcerer level equivalents. He gains spell slots as a 13th level caster.

Example B: A dual class sorcerer/bard 14 has a caster level of 9 from his sorcerer level equivalents and 9 from his bard level equivalents. He gain spells slots as a 14th level caster (his character level), and additional slots equal to a 4th level caster (the difference between his combined caster level of 18 and his character level of 14).

2A) Use spell points. Dual class caster characters have 2 pools of spell points, one for each caster class, and must track casting separately.

2B) Use spell points for single class casters only, dual-class characters must use slots. Splitting their focus means dual class characters have less spellcasting flexibility than their single class peers.

 

[akr71]

[MENTION=6801299]Horwath[/MENTION], I understand - others at my table may not. However, it is a moot point - as I've said, I haven't played at that level and I'm not sure I will any time soon.

 

[hejtmane]

1e was dual classing and it sucked compared to 5e's more elganet multi classing. I wil pass on dual class and I prefer the hard choices of multiclassing give up something to get something in 5e (few exceptions) there is a trade off for Multiclassing and I liek that from spells to core abilities

 

[Blue]

You have some interesting ideas.

1) Add caster levels together, and determine spell slots as a normal multiclass character, up to a caster level equal to your character level. If your combined caster level is greater than your character level, gain additional spell slots equal to a caster with a level of the difference between your combined caster level and your character level.

Example A: A dual class paladin/sorcerer 14 has a caster level of 4 from his paladin level equivalents and 9 from his sorcerer level equivalents. He gains spell slots as a 13th level caster.

Example B: A dual class sorcerer/bard 14 has a caster level of 9 from his sorcerer level equivalents and 9 from his bard level equivalents. He gain spells slots as a 14th level caster (his character level), and additional slots equal to a 4th level caster (the difference between his combined caster level of 18 and his character level of 14).

This seems to take away the disadvantage of lower level spells known AND add additional spell slots. That seems to be more powerful that a straight caster.

And that sorcerer/paladin stays within spitting distance of casting as straight sorcerer at any level, with all the paladin advantages.

2A) Use spell points. Dual class caster characters have 2 pools of spell points, one for each caster class, and must track casting separately.

SP totals at level for dual caster/caster vs. single caster:
5th (3/3): 28 / 27
8th (5/5) : 54 / 44
11th (7/7): 74 / 73
14th (9/9): 114 / 83
17th (11/11): 146 / 107
20th (13/13): 166 / 133

This isn't too bad. The separate pools help keep the spells known in check. It's still more powerful, and my limited experience with using SP was that more high-level spells got cast, so a greater pool probably means more upcasts. But still closer than adding together slots.

2B) Use spell points for single class casters only, dual-class characters must use slots. Splitting their focus means dual class characters have less spellcasting flexibility than their single class peers.

This I like. Focuses on the "different but equal". A dual class character gets very good on both sides, but a single classed character can really excel.

A do still have a concern, which is that a dual classed caster/martial (or caster/half-caster) will still far outstrip a half-caster in terms of spell levels known as well as slots/total spell levels while the half-caster isn't able to take huge advantage of their flexibility. But that's a smaller problem.

Just to be inclusive of a suggestion that's deep in a reply-fest on this thread, also suggested that dual class casters and half-casters know one less spell per level, minimum 1. So they learn spells at the same rate, but max our at 3+3 per level vs. the 4 per level of single classed. Then it's not overwhelming in terms of more casting and the higher spell levels known of a single caster balances it. Your idea of SP for single casters only is similar but even better way to give single casters something special to help keep them on par with the dual caster/casters.

 

[TwoSix]

You have some interesting ideas.

I do what I can.

This seems to take away the disadvantage of lower level spells known AND add additional spell slots. That seems to be more powerful that a straight caster.

And that sorcerer/paladin stays within spitting distance of casting as straight sorcerer at any level, with all the paladin advantages.

Well, he loses 3 sorcerer spells known, of which he could have had more 5th level options, as well as 6th and 7th level options. In exchange, he gains 12 bard spells, up to level 5, and 4 more 1st and 3 more 2nd level slots.

Is it too powerful? I'm honestly not sure. Are 6th level and 7th level spells worth 3-4 spells under level 5? (At best, a 9th level bard could know 2 5th level, 4 4th level, 4 3rd level, and 2 2nd level spells.) Are 9 levels of lower level features worth 5 levels of higher level features?

My gut says a bard7/sorcerer 7 isn't worth it in the current system, compared to a bard 14 or sorcerer 14. Is it close enough that adding 2 ASIs, 4 spells known, 2 sorcery points, and access to 5th level spells onto a 14th level character make it totally obvious to choose? I feel like it might tip me over, but only just barely.

 

[corwyn77]

I do what I can.


Well, he loses 3 sorcerer spells known, of which he could have had more 5th level options, as well as 6th and 7th level options. In exchange, he gains 12 bard spells, up to level 5, and 4 more 1st and 3 more 2nd level slots.

Is it too powerful? I'm honestly not sure. Are 6th level and 7th level spells worth 3-4 spells under level 5? (At best, a 9th level bard could know 2 5th level, 4 4th level, 4 3rd level, and 2 2nd level spells.) Are 9 levels of lower level features worth 5 levels of higher level features?

My gut says a bard7/sorcerer 7 isn't worth it in the current system, compared to a bard 14 or sorcerer 14. Is it close enough that adding 2 ASIs, 4 spells known, 2 sorcery points, and access to 5th level spells onto a 14th level character make it totally obvious to choose? I feel like it might tip me over, but only just barely.

Well, the ASI issue is an easy solve. Make them character-level based instead of class-level, giving bonus ASIs to those classes that get them. Then both characters are getting 3. Since they're only class based to mitigate the "overpowered-ness" of multi-classing, that's fine.

 

[TwoSix]

Well, the ASI issue is an easy solve. Make them character-level based instead of class-level, giving bonus ASIs to those classes that get them. Then both characters are getting 3. Since they're only class based to mitigate the "overpowered-ness" of multi-classing, that's fine.

Well, they aren't really getting than many extra ASIs. They get ASI #2 one level early (7 instead of 8), ASI #4 three levels early (13 instead of 16), and a bonus ASI #6 at level 18.

Putting ASIs at character level makes some levels really dull (nothing is gained at 6 AND 7, for example), and some levels overstuffed (at character level 8, you'd get both 5th level features AND an ASI). I'd rather do something like make the ASI for your second class not count, or only give a +1 bonus for it, or something like that.

 

[corwyn77]

Well, they aren't really getting than many extra ASIs. They get ASI #2 one level early (7 instead of 8), ASI #4 three levels early (13 instead of 16), and a bonus ASI #6 at level 18.

Putting ASIs at character level makes some levels really dull (nothing is gained at 6 AND 7, for example), and some levels overstuffed (at character level 8, you'd get both 5th level features AND an ASI). I'd rather do something like make the ASI for your second class not count, or only give a +1 bonus for it, or something like that.

It's true about the dead levels, but it's a players choice for a package deal. I concede that it's an issue using the vanilla system - do I take a 4th level for my 1/3 character when I've already gotten my feat/whatever.

However, using this old school MCing, your choices are fixed at character creation (I assume you couldn't mix this with normal MC) so no stressing over dead levels. You only have a dead level because you already got that benefit a level or two earlier.

If a player was really bothered by it, I'd allow moving the ASI to the closest dead level since we know exactly where they will be from day 1. So lvl 4 ASI could go to 6 where your first class gets to 4, lvl 8 could move to 7, etc. I don't think it's worth the bother (as player or GM) but if it's that important to the player...