D&D 5E 5e niggles:- Multiclassing Spellcasters; Dragonborn Sorcerers; Tavern Brawler; Warlocks

[Snapdragyn]

3. The absolute key to making an effective warlock is invocation and spell selection. If you don't plan these out carefully, you can flat out miss what's basically a core class feature. Hex, for example, adds to your damage for pretty much a whole encounter, since it transfers from one target to the next and doesn't have a saving throw. And if you DON'T take Agonizing Blast or Thirsting Blade, you're really screwing yourself. But if you plan this stuff out carefully, you can have a quite effective character, IMHO.

(Bolding added)

Or you're taking Misty Visions and planning a crowd-control oriented Warlock who can pop off slot-free illusions at will. Seems pretty decent to me. YMMV.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

(Bolding added)

Or you're taking Misty Visions and planning a crowd-control oriented Warlock who can pop off slot-free illusions at will. Seems pretty decent to me. YMMV.

Oh, there are definitely other cool ways to go with the warlock; I only meant "screwed" in terms of keeping up on at-will damage output. And hey, there's nothing saying you can't take misty visions AND agonizing blast!

 

[NerfedWizard]

Well I have thought about it some more and I guess if WOTC have done their job in what I would consider to be the proper way (which presumably they have) then the boost in spell slots that a single-classed partial caster receives at each new level will have been balanced against the other boosts that other classes get at that exact level in a broad general way, rather than against spell-slots specifically. So it may not be a good idea to tinker with single-classed spell progression. And as for tinkering with the multi-classed spell progression, I guess it would need a detailed analysis of different examples to be sure you weren't sabotaging careful balancing work done by WOTC.

But take this example for how it might be considered thematically off.

Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight have, I think I am right in (now booklessly) saying, the same spell progression.

Bill, Arcane Trickster 6, Eldritch Knight 6, has the same spell slots as Ben, Eldritch Knight 12.

But when Bill advances to Arcane Trickster 7, Eldritch Knight 7, and Ben advances to Eldritch Knight 14, Ben now has a full multiclassed spellcaster level's worth of extra spell-slots. (Ben is equivalent to a level 5 pure spellcaster; Bill is equivalent to level 4.)

Unless you are meant to add your AT and EK levels together before rounding down (wording seemed to suggest not, from what I recall of reading the book), this gets even worse when Bill reaches AT 8, EK 8, and Ben reaches EK 16:- Ben is now equivalent to a level 6 pure spellcaster, and Bill is still stuck at equivalence of level 4 pure spellcaster. (If however you add your AT and EK levels together before rounding down, then Bill would now be equivalent to a level 5 pure spellcaster.)

Yet when Bill reaches Arcane Trickster 9, Eldritch Knight 9, and Ben is Eldritch Knight 18, Bill miraculously catches up with Ben (both being equivalent to a level 6 pure spellcaster).

This seems thematically odd to me, especially if Bill makes a 2-level jump (my recollection of the wording of the rules supports that interpretation but it could be house-ruled the other way).

As I say, this may all fit in with careful balancing of other abilities gained by class and level, but I just don't like it.

 

[jadrax]

Unless you are meant to add your AT and EK levels together before rounding down (wording seemed to suggest not, from what I recall of reading the book),

Bot sure that is how you are supposed to do it, but it would definitely be how I would do it.

 

[Deltabeoulve]

Okay, a few issues:

1. All three of the pacts, in themselves, do little to boost your combat effectiveness most of the time. It's when you combine them with the pact-specific invocations that they become powerful.

2. My reading of Agonizing Blast is that you add damage to each blast. (That way, it more or less keeps up with at-will DPR from other classes.) This really needs to be officially clarified, though.

3. The absolute key to making an effective warlock is invocation and spell selection. If you don't plan these out carefully, you can flat out miss what's basically a core class feature. Hex, for example, adds to your damage for pretty much a whole encounter, since it transfers from one target to the next and doesn't have a saving throw. And if you DON'T take Agonizing Blast or Thirsting Blade, you're really screwing yourself. But if you plan this stuff out carefully, you can have a quite effective character, IMHO.

I believe you get the bonus for each ray. When the whole Empowered Evocation and Magic Missile came up it was said that magic missile only gets the INT mod once per target. Granted, this was a spell that had no attack roll but you could divide the missiles. The difference between this and Agonizing Eldritch Blast, is each ray has to roll for an attack. Theoretically that means each ray could crit (assuming you roll 20) and would also get the CHA bonus (just like each melee attack from a fighter gets his STR or DEX mod).

 

[TwoSix]

As I say, this may all fit in with careful balancing of other abilities gained by class and level, but I just don't like it.

I don't think it's a deliberate balance attempt, I think it's just a case of not carefully parsing the multiclassing rules for corner cases like multiple partial casters multiclassing together.

The best way to get the same progression for a single class partial caster and a multiclass partial caster is to do this:

(Paladin level / 2) + (Ranger level / 2) + (EK level / 3) + (AT level / 3) + (Full caster levels), take this total and round up.

Using this formula will make a multiclass paladin/ranger have the same spellcasting as a single class paladin and ranger for all level combinations. Same thing for a multiclass AT/EK.

 

[NerfedWizard]

The best way to get the same progression for a single class partial caster and a multiclass partial caster is to do this:

(Paladin level / 2) + (Ranger level / 2) + (EK level / 3) + (AT level / 3) + (Full caster levels), take this total and round up.

Using this formula will make a multiclass paladin/ranger have the same spellcasting as a single class paladin and ranger for all level combinations. Same thing for a multiclass AT/EK.

Provided you don't add anything for Paladin level 1, Ranger level 1, EK levels 1-2 or AT levels 1-2.

Otherwise using the above a level 1 Paladin would get spellcasting...

 

[jadrax]

Provided you don't add anything for Paladin level 1, Ranger level 1, EK levels 1-2 or AT levels 1-2.

Otherwise using the above a level 1 Paladin would get spellcasting...

He would get spell slots... what he would not get is any spells.

 

[TwoSix]

Provided you don't add anything for Paladin level 1, Ranger level 1, EK levels 1-2 or AT levels 1-2.

Otherwise using the above a level 1 Paladin would get spellcasting...

There is no such thing as EK levels 1-2 or AT levels 1-2, because the class is not defined in those terms until level 3. Fighter 1-2 and Rogue 1-2 are not spellcasters, and are thus unaffected by the multiclass spellcaster rules.

Likewise for Paladin 1. The multiclass spellcaster rule does not apply because the character isn't multiclassed yet. Also, since they do not have the spellcasting feature yet, Paladin 1 and Ranger 1 count as 0 for all multiclassing calculations.

Now, one could make the argument that a Paladin 1/Ranger 1 should count as a first level caster, but that's a fairly degenerate case I'm comfortable saying shouldn't happen. YMMV if you want to put an exception in.

 

[NerfedWizard]

He would get spell slots... what he would not get is any spells.

What if he were Ranger 1, Paladin 1, Wizard 18... should he have 19th level spell slots?

Anyhow the specific bit of the rules where it actually says how a paladin's known spells are worked out says something like half level (rounded down) plus ability mod, min. 1. Min. 1! I think it's ambiguous whether you strictly have to be a level 2 paladin to have spells known as paladin, though obviously if you are single-classed you have no slots at paladin level 1. I am however currently bookless and going off memory.

Also, since they do not have the spellcasting feature yet, Paladin 1 and Ranger 1 count as 0 for all multiclassing calculations.

Are you sure? I'm currently bookless, but I think the rules if I recall them correctly are somewhat ambiguous on that front.