Multiclassing: What I'm hoping for

[Kynn]

In AD&D, when you were multiclass, you declared it at the beginning of your career, at the same time that single classed characters chose their single class.

I'd like to see that be the default in D&D Next, and I'd also like to see a limit of 2 on the number of classes you can have.

So when you build the character, you choose either a single class, or a pair of classes. If you start at first level, you start out with a level in one of those classes, and the "level 0" (non-level based) basics of the class (weapon/armor proficiencies, skill choices).

Then each level you gain, you choose which class to put that level in. Maybe there's a requirement that you have to stay within 2 or 3 levels, maybe there isn't.

But there should be none of this stuff from 3e where you could be a Fighter/Ranger/Rogue/Druid. Just two classes. And you make a commitment to those two, when you make the character, and you don't go around dipping into a class for a level or two.

That's the way things worked in the old days -- you chose to be multiclass at character creation -- and it would solve about 80% of the problems with 3e-style multiclassing.

 

[Kynn]

Woops, wrong forum. Crap.

 

[underfoot007ct]

Woops, wrong forum. Crap.

Wrong forum yes, great idea yes also. I so agree!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd also like to see a limit of 2 on the number of classes you can have.

I wouldn't. It would make it very difficult for me to run my AD&D style characters- 1Ed let non-humans have up to 3, and humans could have as many as they wanted through dual classing as long as they had a 17 in the class' primary stats.

 

[delericho]

In AD&D, when you were multiclass, you declared it at the beginning of your career, at the same time that single classed characters chose their single class.

I'd like to see that be the default in D&D Next, and I'd also like to see a limit of 2 on the number of classes you can have.

I don't like either of these. Characters grow and evolve over time, and the game should reflect that - Conan starts his career as a Rogue with a hint of Fighter, then gradually becomes a Fighter with a hint of Rogue, and then becomes more and more a Warlord as his career progresses. The Gray Mouser starts as a Wizard, before abandoning that path entirely to become a Rogue with hint of Fighter.

I think the game needs to recognise the limits of a class-based system, and therefore allow some method of gaining, changing and/or retraining classes as characters go.

I think the way I would do it would be to have characters declare one class, and allow them to choose a number of cross-class powers. They would be limited both in the total number of cross-class powers they can take, and also in the number they can take from a single class (other than their primary, of course).

However, the game should also allow a mechanism for the character to declare himself multiclassed to one (or indeed more than one) other class. Doing this would remove both the above restrictions on cross-class powers - a multiclass character could have as many powers from both his primary class and his multi-class(es) as he wishes. However, he remains first and foremost a member of his primary class.

But then, if the character ever reaches a point where he has as many or more powers from his multi-class than his primary, he becomes eligible to retrain - switching from being "a Fighter multiclassed to Rogue" to being "a Rogue multiclassed to Fighter".

I think this offers a decent amount of flexibility, while remaining principally a class-based system.

(Alternately, they could rule that there is no concept of multiclassing in the Core Rules, and provide a point-buy module for people who want much more flexibility in character creation later.)

So when you build the character, you choose either a single class, or a pair of classes. If you start at first level, you start out with a level in one of those classes, and the "level 0" (non-level based) basics of the class (weapon/armor proficiencies, skill choices).

Then each level you gain, you choose which class to put that level in. Maybe there's a requirement that you have to stay within 2 or 3 levels, maybe there isn't.

This would work, but it isn't flexible enough for my tastes. In particular, I would want characters to have the ability to pick up an entirely new class later in their careers.

But there should be none of this stuff from 3e where you could be a Fighter/Ranger/Rogue/Druid. Just two classes. And you make a commitment to those two, when you make the character, and you don't go around dipping into a class for a level or two.

That's the way things worked in the old days -- you chose to be multiclass at character creation -- and it would solve about 80% of the problems with 3e-style multiclassing.

The big problems with 3e multiclassing were two-fold: classes were front-loaded, so it was generally a good idea to go for a one or two level 'dip' into a class; and often players would take classes to 'cherry-pick' powers, rather than because they actually wanted to be a member of the class.

The way to fix the first is to reduce the front-loading. Or, alternately, to only give the full set of first level class features for free if it is also the character's first level.

But, also, the powers granted by classes should improve significantly with level - so, yes, the set of first level Ranger powers looks quite nice... but wouldn't you rather take the sixth level powers of the Rogue class instead?

As for the cherry-picking, I don't think this is really a huge problem. But what I would like to see is a mechanism for PCs to pick up the odd power here and there, without having to invest a whole level in a class just to get a single power.

 

[Ahnehnois]

That's the way things worked in the old days -- you chose to be multiclass at character creation -- and it would solve about 80% of the problems with 3e-style multiclassing.

It would also create about 90% of the problems with 2e-style multiclassing. The beauty of the 3e approach was the flexibility it gave you to try everything and make decisions after character creation. If you make your fundamental decisions about a character before you start playing it, there's not much to do while you're playing. Of course, the ugliness of the 3e approach was that the math didn't always work, but that's eminently fixable.

The big problems with 3e multiclassing were two-fold: classes were front-loaded, so it was generally a good idea to go for a one or two level 'dip' into a class; and often players would take classes to 'cherry-pick' powers, rather than because they actually wanted to be a member of the class.

The way to fix the first is to reduce the front-loading. Or, alternately, to only give the full set of first level class features for free if it is also the character's first level.

But, also, the powers granted by classes should improve significantly with level - so, yes, the set of first level Ranger powers looks quite nice... but wouldn't you rather take the sixth level powers of the Rogue class instead?

That is true; front-loaded classes are problematic, and more features should depnd on getting deep into the class.

As for the cherry-picking, I don't think this is really a huge problem. But what I would like to see is a mechanism for PCs to pick up the odd power here and there, without having to invest a whole level in a class just to get a single power.

Like feats?

 

[delericho]

Like feats?

Well, yes, but...

I have a big problem with the use of feats in both 3e and 4e - they try to have that one mechanism cover too much ground. I'm inclined to think that they need to silo them out into two categories: those that give numerical customisations to the character (which I tend to think of as feats), and those that either give new powers or modify existing powers (which I would generally roll into the more general 'powers' category).

So, yeah, if feats remain as they are, then it seems entirely reasonable that characters could invest a feat into picking up some lower-level feature of another class. But if, as I'd prefer, feats are silo'ed out, then the cost would be something else.

 

[Umbran]

I don't like either of these. Characters grow and evolve over time, and the game should reflect that....

I largely agree. While we can discuss a cap on the number of classes a character can have, I am not behind the idea that you must commit to a combination before so much as a single session of play. I prefer to make character growth be a response to game events.

 

[Li Shenron]

In AD&D, when you were multiclass, you declared it at the beginning of your career, at the same time that single classed characters chose their single class.

I'd like to see that be the default in D&D Next,

I would hate that. It would go against the idea that characters are also shaped by the story. If you are stuck with your choice, you lose a lot of interesting cases of character development.

and I'd also like to see a limit of 2 on the number of classes you can have.

I would like this as a default, with a note in the PHB saying that the DM can easily remove this limit if she wants.

IMXP the vast majority of 3ed multiclassed characters were not really solicited by concept (that is usually just an excuse) but by exploitation of combos, so I wouldn't mind to have a hard limit.

3ed default multiclassing penalties already make it hard to multiclass, but they are very unreasonably complicated (and if fact commonly ignored) and a hard limit would be so much simpler.

 

[FireLance]

I think what torpedoed the 3e multiclassing system was that it didn't really live up to the ideal that "a level is a level", due to issues of frontloading, "empty levels" and level synergy (especially for spellcasters).

4e's contribution was to make many aspects of a character's abilities dependent on character level rather than class level (but then again, in 4e, class level was character level). In particular, a multiclassed character could take a cross-class power of any level up to his character level.

If 5e does a better job of equalizing the contribution to character power from every level of every class (minimizing front-loading, empty levels and synergy), then a 3e-style multiclassing system might be able to work. One possible way to do this could be for most of a 5e character's abilities to be gained from pure level advancement (as opposed to advancement in any one class), so that the benefit from each class level can be made less significant and more discrete.