Multi-classing: as good as it seems?

Blue said:

The main thing is hitpoints ... and subclasses. And spells known of higher levels. And advancement of things like rages, spell points, combat wildshape, action surge, ki, divine smite, sneak attack damage, invocations, and other features that support the first class. Oh, and your first ASI/feat.

Sorry, let's replace that with "levels 2-4 give a huge amount to making a character work, to the degree that a single class is generally much more powerful than a multiclassed character at those levels.".

Click to expand...

I strongly disagree. Second level spells aren't significantly better than first level spells, and +1 to hit/damage does not matter much during those few levels which are designed to pass quickly. The initial benefit of a subclass is rarely overwhelming. Most of the minor class features gained during those levels are comparable to what you would gain from taking one level in a new class.

I stand by my original statement.

Oofta said:

Two thoughts (well, at least according to the book your campaign may differ).

First, paladins get their power from their conviction to their oaths, not their deity. They don't have to have a patron deity even if most will. "A paladin swears to uphold justice and righteousness, to stand with the good things of the world against the encroaching darkness, and to hunt the forces of evil wherever they lurk. Different paladins focus on various aspects of the cause of righteousness, but all are bound by the oaths that grant them power to do their sacred work. Although many paladins are devoted to gods of good, a paladin’s power comes as much from a commitment to justice itself as it does from a god."

Second, warlocks specifically have a patron that is an otherworldly being. "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being."

So some combinations may make sense, an Oath of the Ancients paladin that has a Arch Fey patron for example. For me though, it's more of a personal and rules-based objection. In cases where people did this, it was just to get a mechanical benefit and had nothing to do with the character which kind of biased me. That, and recovering spells during a short rest can be a pretty huge power bump in my campaigns, albeit one that matters less at higher levels.

As a house rule in my campaign if a PC is dedicated to a deity, I don't allow them to multi-class to warlock. You can't serve two masters. Gods can't be both deity and patron, and if the patron is just a lackey of the deity then they are powered by the deity. No shell-companies allowed, the power comes from either a deity or an other-worldly patron.

Click to expand...

Ok so in your game you simply had setting installed to stop warlock and paladin or cleric multiclassing but leave the rest fine - OK.

Not an approach i would take but hey, a Gm can always pick and choiose which classes and combos are allowed in their game. You do not want rogues and gnomes to be the same character - just add the necessary setting and poof - that combo like any other is gone and you do not have to worry with it.

paladins have ties to oaths and the divine is rife throughout their description as well so it leaves a lot open to the Gm to work into his campaign as they like it.

"otherwordly being" that specifically includes fiends, celestials, fey, shadow etc... i see that as wide open as to the types of creatures that can be involved and saw no reason to say the celestial that you patronize has to be an atheist or agnositc with no ties to a deity (for instance). Not that its bad for your campaign, i am sure that makes sense there.

As for serving two masters, it happens all the time - even for religious types - who have their deity but also a lot of people (entities) between them. A church for instance has teirs of order and so on. The high priest may give the lower priest or acolyte an order and the junior go do it. that does not mean they junior is now no longer following or worshipping his deity, right? just that the sanctified church and its hierarchy is being applied.

One would almost think with churches and with some of them being organized there might be deities of saw a lawful bent who liked heirarchy and order - somewhere in the cosmos - who like using intermediaries.

But hey, again, not for every campaign.

So, yeah, like i said, in my games a warlock and paladin or warlock and cleric or even warlock and druid are just as explainable as a warlocxk and fighter or a warlock and rogue and a warlock and sorcerer... just like the others it all has to fit into a character concept - but no one pair requires so much difference as to be exclusive if it makes sense.

i actually found the idea of the paladin-warlock as a more "caster centered" warrior to make a lot of sense as a design - similar to the fighter-warlock in concept but with added zest.

thats why they have 51 flavors... or maybe in your case 49?

Blue said:

I have to disagree. Sure, I can build a character that "at level X only" may be better, not having to worry about getting there or advancing past that point.

But when making a character I am playing over the course of a campaign I don't think that the general statement of "the same multiclass character will be better then a single classed character at levels as they advance through levels at every level of their advancement except for levels 1, 5 and 11".

So I agree with what you specifically said, but think that's applicable to a one-shot and not applicable to a campaign.

Click to expand...

i will give you and example for my case. maybe it applies to your example, maybe not.

Gm limited me to PHb only.

Character is a sorc and worked her way into being an entertainer as the concept of the person evolved in chargen and fiddling. So a young halfling who focused on perform, deception, persuasion and acrobatics and who sings her spells and "dreams with dragons" etc kind of carved her way into my existance from the early embittered senior urchin con man she started as.

Looking at the development, sorc thru 5 seems obvious. Get her to the second tier and early major unlocking.

But i wanted to do more, to bring some of her other aspects (singing or dreaming) into the mix after she hit that power, new power level.

So one thought was multi-class into warlock - chocing fey to match the wild magic. that would have been a two level dip at least to get to invocations and two slots for short rest.

but another idea which really seems to be the lead is bard for one level.

Delays a sorcery point.
Keeps the spell slots advancing but with a 1 level dip in new spells (gain new ranks spell at even not odd, but get slots at odds.)
Also gain a couple more cantrips, four more known spells (1st) giving her a good variety of the first levsl to cover more utility than just core focus - and a skill and light armor and an extra hp and a new (second) instrument.

trading off one sorcery point at 6th and delaying the arrival of spells at higher levels (but not slots) by one level does not seem to me to be a bad trade at all.

i doubt by levels 9-15 i will be noticing the one sorcery point much at all. My bet is i will see benefit from the inspiration dice, the armor Ac boost and the extra utility spells and cantrips much more.

i dont see this as a problem game-wise, it seems like a good use of multi-classing to chose to wed a little bit of a broad class with a lot of a more narrow focus class to get something between the two that fits the overall concept.

Even have another bard to work with in the group as we develop to sort of "share songs" between now and then and since she is going sword bard (ie likely spending her inspiration dice for personal damage gains) i wont even be stepping on her toes with my PHB sorcer-bard.

Blue said:

I have to disagree. Sure, I can build a character that "at level X only" may be better, not having to worry about getting there or advancing past that point.

Click to expand...

Foul! You can't say you disagree and then change the rules. You don't see to disagree that at any given one levela multiclass will be better at a given role that a single class character outside levels 1,5 and 11... unless we're talking pure spellcaster.

But when making a character I am playing over the course of a campaign I don't think that the general statement of "the same multiclass character will be better then a single classed character at levels as they advance through levels at every level of their advancement except for levels 1, 5 and 11".

Click to expand...

Again, not what I said... but it is still very often true. There are many builds that are more powerful once they diverge into mutliclass for every level forward copared to a monoclass trying to fill the same role.

So I agree with what you specifically said, but think that's applicable to a one-shot and not applicable to a campaign.

Click to expand...

Let's try it another way: Pick a class and tell me what role they are trying to fill in the party (other than a Godwizard or other pure spellcaster). Then let's see what mutliclass options can do better than it at that role from every level after they multiclass, assuming they multiclass at a place that makes sense.

Saelorn said:

I strongly disagree. Second level spells aren't significantly better than first level spells, and +1 to hit/damage does not matter much during those few levels which are designed to pass quickly. The initial benefit of a subclass is rarely overwhelming. Most of the minor class features gained during those levels are comparable to what you would gain from taking one level in a new class.

I stand by my original statement.

Click to expand...

Spells: There are some quite good 2nd level spells. And, of course if you are mixing caster and non-caster you're also losing spell slots known - something I hadn't mentioned the first time around but there's a big difference between 2 first level slots and 4 first level plus 3 second level slots.

+1 hit/damage I assume is your assumption for the ASI. That and +1 DC is a common ASI at 4th - both affecting more and doing more damage when you do. The other choice being a feat. If you'd like to say that a feat and no feat are about the same in power, I will have to disagree.

Initial benefit of a subclass varies, but some are quite overwhelming. Do you feel like these are of no import?

• Bear Totem barbarian's expansion of Resistance to all damage but psychic?
• Moon druid's Combat Form?
• Battlemaster's Superiority dice?
• Paladin's oath with oath spells and channel divinity
• Warlock pact?
• Wizard's arcane traditions, like Arcane Ward from Abjuration or Portent for Divination?

And that leaves off all the other features I listed that were not addressed: # of rages, spell points, action surge, ki, divine smite, sneak attack damage, and invocations.

I can respect that you stand by your original statement. I'll leave my numeration of the benefits of levels 2-4 here so that others can make up their own minds.

Blue said:

Spells: There are some quite good 2nd level spells. And, of course if you are mixing caster and non-caster you're also losing spell slots known - something I hadn't mentioned the first time around but there's a big difference between 2 first level slots and 4 first level plus 3 second level slots.

+1 hit/damage I assume is your assumption for the ASI. That and +1 DC is a common ASI at 4th - both affecting more and doing more damage when you do. The other choice being a feat. If you'd like to say that a feat and no feat are about the same in power, I will have to disagree.

Initial benefit of a subclass varies, but some are quite overwhelming. Do you feel like these are of no import?

• Bear Totem barbarian's expansion of Resistance to all damage but psychic?
• Moon druid's Combat Form?
• Battlemaster's Superiority dice?
• Paladin's oath with oath spells and channel divinity
• Warlock pact?
• Wizard's arcane traditions, like Arcane Ward from Abjuration or Portent for Divination?

And that leaves off all the other features I listed that were not addressed: # of rages, spell points, action surge, ki, divine smite, sneak attack damage, and invocations.

I can respect that you stand by your original statement. I'll leave my numeration of the benefits of levels 2-4 here so that others can make up their own minds.

Click to expand...

I feel [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION] is somewhat understanding the importance of the 2-4 features, and you're somewhat overstating it. Level 2-4 features are quite useful, but so are plenty of level 1 features! Better armor, Con save proficiency for a caster, fighting style, more cantrips and low level spells known are all good things to have.

And really, even in the worst case the delta between an optimized character and an unoptimized character at level 4 just isn't that large. The real pain point for a multiclass character is usually 5th-8th, when you're down a feat/ASI and missing the Extra Attack/3rd level spell boost. And even that can be mitigated if you're doing a part rogue build or cantrip build.

Warpiglet said:

It is funny you say this...totally agree on the issue with pacts.

I like warlocking for flavor. I have had several, all lower level frankly. Would like to really advance one! I have never subscribed to the idea of pact as written just because I don't like the idea of someone being granted the spells. Rather, I like the idea of s being sharing knowledge (perhaps some that should be forgotten). As a result, if you stop doing what the patron wants, you stall in levels. I have no problem with a few levels for flavor.

As a side note, while I HAVE taken repelling blast (shoving someone off a cliff is epic) I have never craved quickened agonizing blast. Why do I mention this? Often when someone objects to a "dip" of warlock it is because they leave all of the them behind for some numeric advantage.

Hey if you want to do that, fine. However, people should not assume all level dipping is evil and story avoidant. I want a guy with creepy eyes that has consorted with other beings, researched magic in tome etc. and has a weird connection with outsider influences.

I plan to take (as discussed with you!) a warlock who not only had some contact with a creature from the shadowfell and has been influenced but also is learning to control some latent powers maybe awakened by the same...Thematically it is good to multiclass/dip but honestly for raw power I would fare better as a single class?

Dunno. I just want to play a spell caster that fights in melee a lot but is not a cleric or paladin. I want the arcane and creepy. I want more magic than a eldritch knight. I think some armor and weapons via warlock would mesh well for the concept


(An aside....I almost am convinced eldritch knight would be the way to go...its a fun thought...wish I could play it out both ways but then I hardly get to play as it is!)

Click to expand...

It seems to me your entire answer is “Power Gaming and how to justify it.”

jgsugden said:

Let's try it another way: Pick a class and tell me what role they are trying to fill in the party (other than a Godwizard or other pure spellcaster). Then let's see what mutliclass options can do better than it at that role from every level after they multiclass, assuming they multiclass at a place that makes sense.

Click to expand...

If I'm picking a single classed character, but it's against the rules to pick any full caster - well, that right there shows that fully 6 of the 12 classes (the full casters, including warlock) can't be done better with multiclassing.

Okay, so let me pick among the remaining classes. Let's go simple: A front line melee tank/striker/support - the Oath of Ancients Paladin. Features I'm looking at:

High survivability in terms of high AC and high HPs, with high saves and resistance to all magic damage coming in at character level 6 and 7 so available for most of their adventuring career. Without using concentration.
Good melee damage. Extra attack (though BB/GWB would be fine) plus some other melee boosters (divine smite, improved divine smite, some spells to either smite or improve weapons, feats like polearm mastery)
And support - off healing including poison and disease. Gives out the auras of +CHR to saves and resistance to magic in a radius - while I'm not looking for these to match, I am looking for something of similar power without concentration like Lore Bard's cutting words. Limited spell list (only half caster) but with plenty of good spells - bless, prot good/evil, shield of faith, find steed, aura of vitality (great out-of-combat healing), find greater steed and holy weapon from XGtE.

This should be easy. Pal/sorc is a very commonly talked about multiclass, and even if you want something different CHR makes bard and warlock both easy to take. Cherry-picking hexblade from Warlock 1 will help with STR needs, though you still need a 13 for multiclassing paladin and a 15 if you want the best heavy armors. And it would limit weapon choices unless you go up to 3 for pact of the blade.

Paladin is fairly MAD, so if you keep it as part of the build try not to fall too far behind in ASIs, and hopefully we don't need another ability besides STR and CHR at 13 for multiclassing, since that has an opportunity cost as well. If you don't have any paladin ignore this paragraph.

smbakeresq said:

It seems to me your entire answer is “Power Gaming and how to justify it.”

Click to expand...

It seems to me your entire answer is snark with some failed attempt at wit. What did you add? Haha oh well, internet.

The point to this post is people dipping Warlock and then claiming “I didn’t do it to min/max I just have a neat idea.” You see the defenders, and the RPers.

One sees the role play concept and goes forward, the power gamers work backwards from a plateau.