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

[jrowland]

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

In that case, I am not too bothered by paladin having slots (his class feature doesn't actually grant paladin spells to fill those slots at level 1). The point (if i am following correctly) is that the paladin and ranger 1 levels "boost" the total slots. So what? It doesn't stretch my imagination that knowing enough about magic as a wizard 18 knows would "boost" paladin and ranger to grant slots, or looking at it another way, that paladin and ranger levels degrade the 20th level characters spellcasting to 19 rather than 18 due to some modicum of spell training (not fully realized, but there).

I don't see it as an issue. What helps to Grok multi-class characters is to think of them as a melting pot, not a mixed salad. The Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Wizard 18 is actually a level 20 "Brokebuild Optimizer" whose class features include spell casting as a level 19 character.

 

[TwoSix]

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

Page 164, second column, first paragraph under the header "Spellcasting":

"Once you have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class, use the rules below".

A paladin 1/ranger 1 does not have the Spellcasting feature from more than one class. In fact, she doesn't have it from any. So that one's pretty cut and dried, I think.

My concern is the one you initially raised, wherein a paladin 3 then takes 2 levels in ranger, but doesn't see any increase in his spellcasting level, whereas a paladin 5 would have. While I'm sure it can be justified, it doesn't still well with me. I'd like to see single class progression match up with multiclass progression where at all possible. Thus, my house rule proposal to round fractional caster levels up, instead of down.

 

[jadrax]

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

I think so yes.

Spell Slots. You determine your available spell slots by adding together all your levels in the bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and w izard classes, half your levels (rounded down) in the paladin and ranger classes, and a third of your fighter or rogue levels (rounded down) if you have the Eldritch Knight or the Arcane Trickster feature. Use this total to determine your spell slots by
consulting the Multiclass Spellcaster table.

Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight do not exist below level 3, so you can safely ignore those. Paladin and Ranger both add Half their level (rounded down). I don't think your breaking anything by applying that rounding after adding them together.

Lets face it, its not a case that is likely to ever come up in real play.


edit: Although [MENTION=205]TwoSix[/MENTION] adds a good point, a Wizard 18, Paladin 1, ranger 1 doesn't use the Multiclass Table anyway. You would need to be something like a Wizard 17, Sorcerer 1, Paladin 1, Ranger 1 for this to come up.

 

[NerfedWizard]

I can see why they've done these spellcasting class features for AT, EK, paladin, ranger - to let you gish up without having to master the complexities of multiclassing.

But I can't help wondering whether it would have been better to make Paladin a sort of prestige class for people who've gone, say, Fighter 5+, Cleric 3+. And Eldritch Knight likewise for people who've gone, say, Fighter 5+, Wizard 3+. And Bard a prestige class for people who've gone, say, Ranger 3+, Druid 5+. Or Rogue 3+, Druid 5+. And Arcane Trickster, with a different name, for people who've gone Rogue 5+, Wizard 3+.

Prob'ly not in the end, but, I dunno, there are a lot of mixed messages in a system where you could be a Fighter (Champion) 7 Wizard 4, or a Fighter (Eldritch Knight) 11, and have the same spell slots.