D&D 5E New legends and lore.....multiclassing sneak peak

[Falling Icicle]

Am I the only one thinking this would all work sooooo much better with spell points? Just add the spell points from all of your classes together. There. So easy. So simple. The way they're allowing augmentable spells now, I don't see any reason to stick with spells per day anymore.

 

[Li Shenron]

But then multiclassing could delay your acquisition of feats. I don't think a multiclass character should get fewer feats, or have to wait longer to get them, than single class characters.

Well this is true... it's not so important IMO for stat increases, but if a player is looking for feats then multiclassing will get in the way. It is OTOH also true that multiclassing probably increase complexity, so it might end up that players will not be very eager to take too many feats when multiclassing.

It's hard for me to think of an official solution for this, but as a House Rule the player could negotiate with the DM about swapping a class feature with a feat.

 

[MerricB]

Am I the only one thinking this would all work sooooo much better with spell points? Just add the spell points from all of your classes together. There. So easy. So simple. The way they're allowing augmentable spells now, I don't see any reason to stick with spells per day anymore.

There is still a key difference, and that is in a limit on both number of spells that can be cast and on the number of high level spells that can be cast.

It is actually quite significant. I do not support a spell point system at all. The slot system works a lot better.

Cheers!

 

[Sage Genesis]

I can't for the life of me figure out how multiclassing spellcasters work.

So, a 3rd-level mage/3rd-level cleric...
* casts spells per day as a 6th-level character
* can prepare spells available to a 3rd-level wizard or to a 3rd-level cleric


As to the first, there is no such thing as casting as a 6th level character. There's a 6th level Mage. There's also a 6th level Cleric. But there's no "6th level character" casting progression. So does this person use the spells per day table of the Mage, the Cleric, or does he use both and get to nearly double his spells per day?

As to the second, is the word "or" intented as a mutual exclusive, or is it intended as a meaningless grammatical particle in a summation? Does the "prepare spells available to a 3rd level Mage" indicate a limitation on the maximum spell level (in this case, 2nd level spells), or does it also also determine the amount of spells (in this case, 1 + 3 = 4 spells prepared)?


Why is there a special subclass to "glue" a caster and a non-caster for the Ranger/Druid combination? Those are both spellcasting classes.

If I make a Fighter 9/Cleric 1, does this mean I get to prepare 2 Cleric spells per day (Cleric level + 1 = 2), but I do get the spell slots per day as a 10th level Cleric? So I can cast tons of Blesses and Cure Wounds with heightened spell slots per day, all for the steep, steep cost of a 1-level delay in obtaining Fighter class features? Because if that's the case I have some unfortunate news about that whole "prevent 1-level dip abuses" plan you had...

No really, how does this work? I know it's not the rules text and just a summarized preview but this is way too vague to make sense of.


Edit:

It just occurred to me that this system would make about a hundred times more sense if it was the opposite of what the article says. So instead of this:
* casts spells per day as a 6th-level character
* can prepare spells available to a 3rd-level wizard or to a 3rd-level cleric

It ought to be this:
* casts spells per day as a 3rd-level wizard and a 3rd-level cleric
* can prepare spells available to a 6th-level character

So this hypothetical character could prepare 7 spells in total (spellcasting levels + 1), but he'd have the 4/2 slots of a Mage as well as the 3/1 slots of a Cleric. Compared to the slots a pure 6th level Mage would have (4/3/3), this compares fairly nicely. No 3rd level spells, but in exchange he does get more 1st level spells, greater flexibility in choosing which spells he can choose, and the class features of both (more lores, Channel Divinity, both an attack bonus and a spellcasting bonus, etc.)

 

[the Jester]

Am I the only one thinking this would all work sooooo much better with spell points? Just add the spell points from all of your classes together. There. So easy. So simple. The way they're allowing augmentable spells now, I don't see any reason to stick with spells per day anymore.

Making changes for the sake of making changes is not going to bring lapsed D&D players back to the game, and spell point systems are generally pretty problematic.

 

[Iosue]

So this hypothetical character could prepare 7 spells in total (spellcasting levels + 1), but he'd have the 4/2 slots of a Mage as well as the 3/1 slots of a Cleric. Compared to the slots a pure 6th level Mage would have (4/3/3), this compares fairly nicely. No 3rd level spells, but in exchange he does get more 1st level spells, greater flexibility in choosing which spells he can choose, and the class features of both (more lores, Channel Divinity, both an attack bonus and a spellcasting bonus, etc.)

Um, actually that's what Mearls wrote.

 

[gyor]

I'd like to point out that for full aka 9th level spells classes they're likely to stream line the basic spell progression between them. Features that grant say an extra spell at level one or what ever will likely work as they do know more or less.

When mixing partial spelling classing classes with full spellcasting classes the solution they will use is the same as mixing full spellcasting with non spellcasting class.

Hence the Warden subclass that mixes the partial spell casting Ranger with the full spellcasting druid.

So this should answer that. For anything more specific you'll have to wait for the next packet. Which will also have the Bard.

And Mike said almost done, not done, and they are. And people are taking that too literally, they've got the basic outline direction almost right. None of the problems are major, and can be fixed in a packet or two. And this obviously doesn't include subclasses which he will no doubt continue to add, as well as subraces and newer mechanics and so on.

Also take into account he has alot more internal playtest packets going and so maybe closer then they appear.

 

[Sage Genesis]

Um, actually that's what Mearls wrote.

Sorry to say, but I disagree. He clearly states that: "Your overall levels in classes that cast spells determines how many spells you can cast."

So as a Mage3/Cleric3, that means he'd be treated as a 6th level character in terms of how many spells he can cast. My hypothetical reversal makes it so that he's treated as a 6th level character in terms of how many spells he can prepare, with the amount of spells he can cast based on individual class levels.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Sorry to say, but I disagree. He clearly states that: "Your overall levels in classes that cast spells determines how many spells you can cast."

So as a Mage3/Cleric3, that means he'd be treated as a 6th level character in terms of how many spells he can cast. My hypothetical reversal makes it so that he's treated as a 6th level character in terms of how many spells he can prepare, with the amount of spells he can cast based on individual class levels.

And I think he means that the Mage3/Cleric3 is limited in choosing up to 2nd level spells from the spell list, though they do get 3rd level spell slots which they can use to cast 1st or 2nd level spells as 3rd level spells.

Which is fine at low levels, but I think a Mage10/Cleric10 is going to lack in versatility a 20th level level Mage/Cleric in 2e got where they could potentially cast spells from the 8th level list. Even in 3e a Wiz5/Cler5/Mystic Theurge 10 could cast 8th level spells from both lists. So I think they're going to need to do something that allows a 5e Mage/Cleric to do the same.

 

[Sage Genesis]

And I think he means that the Mage3/Cleric3 is limited in choosing up to 2nd level spells from the spell list, though they do get 3rd level spell slots which they can use to cast 1st or 2nd level spells as 3rd level spells.

I don't disagree with that, but we're not talking about that either. We're talking about how many spells he can prepare. The L&L article states on that subject: "Your levels in those individual classes determine which spells you can prepare." That suggests to me that the character in question could prepare 4 Mage spells and 4 Cleric spells (level +1). The hypothetical reversal would change that to 7 total, in any combination. Because the total level is only used for "how many spells you can cast", which in Next is not the same thing as the amount of spells you can prepare. (Just to double-check: you guys all do know that right? That the amount of spells prepared and the amount of spells you can cast are completely different things?)

Anyway, if anything can be learned from this it's that the L&L article is very vague on this matter.