Li Shenron
Legend
I think this is an interesting idea. It's not actually that different from the 3e approach... or is it?
D&D 5E Multiclass in 5E
I think this is an interesting idea. It's not actually that different from the 3e approach... or is it?
Hmmm. There are many options, and each has its flaws.
Here's a potential solution which hasn't been mentioned yet:
Mix certain AD&D dual class rules with 3E multi-class rules, as follows:
* You must have greater than X in a primary stat to gain levels in a new class
* Your XP is only awarded to one class at a time. (This could mean you assign XP from each combat to one class or the other, or it could mean that each time you level up, you choose which class will gain XP next.)
* You can alternate class each level, just dabble in one then stop, or have a complete change of heart. e.g. frfrfrfrfr, or ffffffrrfffff, or fffffffffrrrrrrrr
* You gain everything that class would normally give at that level, except HP which are only awarded to the class of the highest level.
This provides a lot more flexibility than AD&D multiclassing, without being as harsh as 3E multiclassing could be. It means that a fighter who picks up magic late can become a competent mage in a much more reasonable amount of time. i.e. spell caster classes mix better with non-spell casters than in 3E.
However, this method has problems too, particularly around front-loaded class abilities. I suggest including some implementation of Crazy Jerome's idea (5000XP to start multiclassing in the first place), to mitigate that problem. The more heavily front-loaded the class, the more XP you need to earn before you can pick up its first level. It would also result in low HP for evenly distributed classes, especially if they are higher level in their lower HD class.
Another alternative would be AD&D style multiclassing, but where you divide XP by one extra class.
Fighter/Mage divides XP by 3.
Fighter/Mage/Thief divides XP by 4.
This keeps them deliberately further behind the other characters to mitigate the high-level power issues, but does nothing to alleviate the low level power issues. HP would be divided by the number of classes (fighter wizard rolls both d10 and d4, adds con twice, then divides by 2)
Yet another option would be to simply create multiple XP tables and go with AD&D style multiclassing.
Single class = 1000, 3000, 6000, 10000, etc as per 3E
Two classes = 2000, 6600, 13200, 22000, etc (2200 * level)
Three classes = 3300, 9900, 19800, 33000, etc (3300 * level)
The point being that this works almost identically to AD&D where you divide xp evenly between your classes, but includes a bit of a penalty without being as drastic as my previous example. The exact numbers would obviously be tweaked with further thought and play testing. This set of numbers would result in a level 8 fighter, adventuring with a level 6/6 Cleric/Wizard, and a 5/5/5 Fighter/mage/thief.
A comparison for those not familiar; in AD&D 1E, an 8th level fighter would be with a Fgt6/M-U6 and a Clr6/M-U6/Thf6. So you can see that the 2200* and the 3300* has a similar or more significant impact than the exponential XP charts.
HP as per previous example (divide by number of classes).
All of these methods have a common flaw - you don't level up at the same time as the other players. Individual tastes will determine if that is a problem or not. For my games; it wouldn't matter in the slightest.
Another random thought; what if you skipped 1st level when picking up a new class? That way the 'front loading' of proficiencies etc can be ignored, while still allowing you to gain features from the new class. Hmmmm.
Here's a potential solution which hasn't been mentioned yet:
Mix certain AD&D dual class rules with 3E multi-class rules, as follows:
* You must have greater than X in a primary stat to gain levels in a new class
* Your XP is only awarded to one class at a time. (This could mean you assign XP from each combat to one class or the other, or it could mean that each time you level up, you choose which class will gain XP next.)
* You can alternate class each level, just dabble in one then stop, or have a complete change of heart. e.g. frfrfrfrfr, or ffffffrrfffff, or fffffffffrrrrrrrr
* You gain everything that class would normally give at that level, except HP which are only awarded to the class of the highest level.
This provides a lot more flexibility than AD&D multiclassing, without being as harsh as 3E multiclassing could be. It means that a fighter who picks up magic late can become a competent mage in a much more reasonable amount of time. i.e. spell caster classes mix better with non-spell casters than in 3E.
However, this method has problems too, particularly around front-loaded class abilities. I suggest including some implementation of Crazy Jerome's idea (5000XP to start multiclassing in the first place), to mitigate that problem. The more heavily front-loaded the class, the more XP you need to earn before you can pick up its first level. It would also result in low HP for evenly distributed classes, especially if they are higher level in their lower HD class.
Another alternative would be AD&D style multiclassing, but where you divide XP by one extra class.
Fighter/Mage divides XP by 3.
Fighter/Mage/Thief divides XP by 4.
This keeps them deliberately further behind the other characters to mitigate the high-level power issues, but does nothing to alleviate the low level power issues. HP would be divided by the number of classes (fighter wizard rolls both d10 and d4, adds con twice, then divides by 2)
Yet another option would be to simply create multiple XP tables and go with AD&D style multiclassing.
Single class = 1000, 3000, 6000, 10000, etc as per 3E
Two classes = 2000, 6600, 13200, 22000, etc (2200 * level)
Three classes = 3300, 9900, 19800, 33000, etc (3300 * level)
The point being that this works almost identically to AD&D where you divide xp evenly between your classes, but includes a bit of a penalty without being as drastic as my previous example. The exact numbers would obviously be tweaked with further thought and play testing. This set of numbers would result in a level 8 fighter, adventuring with a level 6/6 Cleric/Wizard, and a 5/5/5 Fighter/mage/thief.
A comparison for those not familiar; in AD&D 1E, an 8th level fighter would be with a Fgt6/M-U6 and a Clr6/M-U6/Thf6. So you can see that the 2200* and the 3300* has a similar or more significant impact than the exponential XP charts.
HP as per previous example (divide by number of classes).
All of these methods have a common flaw - you don't level up at the same time as the other players. Individual tastes will determine if that is a problem or not. For my games; it wouldn't matter in the slightest.
Another random thought; what if you skipped 1st level when picking up a new class? That way the 'front loading' of proficiencies etc can be ignored, while still allowing you to gain features from the new class. Hmmmm.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
that is moot, from what I can read on the class descriptions, you don't get any proficiencies from multiclassing. Skipping first level if anything makes classes more frontloaded
Crazy Jerome
First Post
It's the "progresses independently" part that makes it unlike 3E. So if a fighter pays the 5,000 premium to be able to start getting wizard XP, he can advance as fighter or wizard, each using the same chart, but not stacking the levels.
I didn't talk about it in the original, but I was also thinking that the players/table would have some leeway in how they split the points. Perhaps you must put at least 10%, 20%, 25% in each class every time you get points, but the remainder you can split or put all into one class, as you choose. How high you set this minimum percentage effectively caps how many classes you can take--and reduces your flexibility the more you take. Then the table can also adjust the 5,000 XP premium. By adjusting those two variables, you dictate a lot about how much multiclassing is worth it, and how far it can be pushed.
One of the nice things about 3E multiclassing is that every player gets to set the mix of classes how they want, but the 3E way isn't the only way to handle that. And like the 1E/2E way, the 3E way suffers in that it isn't easy to adjust, as each level in any class makes the next one harder. Using my proposed system, if you want to put a 50/50, 60/40, or 75/25 mix in two classes, you'll get results that about match what a casual player would expect.
BTW, the big disadvantage of my proposal for traditional D&D play is that once you get near the level cap, it becomes inordinately advantagous to spread out. This becomes especially true (and happens sooner), if there are a lot of levels to take. The more levels, the less the premium means at the upper end. Now, this doesn't bother me that much, because if some heretofore single-class Fighter, at level 15, decides it is worth it to knock out five levels of wizard, even with the premium, then I see that as more rounding out the character than adding raw power--especially since there is a limit on how many classes he can so take. But I must acknowledge that such a character growth dynamic is a bit off in traditional D&D, and more like what you would get with Hero or GURPS or Runequest or such. It's nothing that can't be house ruled around (e.g. force early multiclassing for any character that wants it), but the house rules are not very elegant.
Edit: Now reading Zustier's post above, I see he anticipates me. But I'll let my stuff stand as a different wording, slightly different take on some of the same concepts and issues.
Certainly I would treat stacking elements as gestalt--i.e. you get the hit points, weapon attack bonus, etc.--each of any single class you choose. It has to be that way in this system, because of how the levels progress. If taking levels in a wizard is knocking a bit off your fighter XP, and thus costing you a level or three in your best class for hit points, then the effect needs teeth. Otherwise, there is no cost. Not having exponential character advancement tables, a 50/50 character will fall further behind than 1 level versus a single class. In fact, this system works better in Next than it would in any previous D&D edition, because the bounded accuracy means that such a character might still only be penalized a point of attack bonus. The slow advancement of numbers means that you can let such level differences stand.
Last edited:
I will say that any multiclass system they create should not use XP.
5e is meant to be modular, and XP is a commonly altered or thrown away mechanic.
If you look at 3e, you technically had xp losses for multiclassing outside of favored classes, but I've never used or seen that restriction used in all the 3e games I played....but I'm sure other people did.
So there solution has to be more core to the game, XP won't do the job.
5e is meant to be modular, and XP is a commonly altered or thrown away mechanic.
If you look at 3e, you technically had xp losses for multiclassing outside of favored classes, but I've never used or seen that restriction used in all the 3e games I played....but I'm sure other people did.
So there solution has to be more core to the game, XP won't do the job.
Tovec
Explorer
Not that I disagree Stalker0 but the 3e XP penalty was relatively minor. I know some games that used it - those are the same games that used XP at all - but most didn't. BUT, at least with the [MENTION=1544]Zustiur[/MENTION] 's last suggestion the penalties are not minor. The normal way is 1000 * level, which more than doubles to 2200 * level and triples for 3300 * level. Something this extreme can be accounted for even when you don't use XP - delay the character advancement by that same rate.
(I'm going to round off the 100's) A 2 class character with 12000 has 3 levels, a single class character has 4. The problems with this of course is that it makes multiclassing too valuable. If you only a level behind* per extra class, that is a lot of extra power for the sacrifice. Not to mention this assumes the classes are both the same level, instead of off-set in any number of ways.
Either way I think if you want to multiclass with XP that is fine, it can even translate over to non-XP games, but the multiclassing has to be costly enough to avoid those two problems I just said.
* I realize that you're not necessarily only ever a level behind per class, I was just making an example - one that applies more readily at non-XP tables.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
Do you mean here avoiding varying XP by class, ala 1E/2E as does it? Or do you mean using XP at all to balance multiclassing, even if the XP chart is consistent? The latter is a tough requirement, and I wonder how one would even begin to approach it in an elegant manner.
Stacie GmrGrl
Adventurer
My preferred method would be to go classless but that will never happen with D&D... it would take care of the multiclassing challenge though.
To summarize it to a more fundamental level: Multiclass balance should not adjust the rate at which a character levels.
Similar Threads
