D&D 5E Multiclassing discussion

[Sadras]

For our example lets take the Wizard/Fighter
In our group we have a wizard(6)/fighter(1), who has not min-maxed his score, so he placed a 14 str but with that first level of fighter he gained proficiency in armour and most weapons. So he is able to wear scale mail, benefits from his dex by 2 and can carry a shield, selected the Defense Fighting Style and casts spells with his other hand. Pretty good armour class rating for a wizard - 19 AC

But in all fairness he did give himself 14 strength so conceptually his character can move comfortably in the armour. Is this ok? Would you do it different? Should we have a required strength for using certain heavier armours in combat? Should 1st level in fighter give a multi-class character proficiency in so many weapons and armour right from the get go? Basically what are you thoughts on this or what houserules would you implement if you were dissatisfied with the current rules?

 

[Li Shenron]

Is this ok? Would you do it different?

I think it's ok.

The only ambiguity IMHO is on the spells' somatic component... the rules are a bit generic at the moment, they say you need "one arm" to cast spells, but don't specify if the arm can carry something or can even use something (e.g. wield a weapon). It doesn't seem the hand really need to be free, since the game also uses implements such as wands to improve spellcasting, and it's quite reasonable that you'd cast a spell with the same hand you use to hold that implement.

That's just because I was wondering about the shield, can the Wizard cast spells while having a shield in one hand and a weapon in another? In 3e you couldn't, but in 5e perhaps you can. Maybe that's beyond your topic anyway...

Should we have a required strength for using certain heavier armours in combat?

We already have it, in the form of encumbrance rules, but since you are unencumbered if your total equipment weight is less than 10x Strength, pretty much every PC can wear any armor.

Should 1st level in fighter give a multi-class character proficiency in so many weapons and armour right from the get go?

I'd say no. It would feel more "reasonable" to get only some proficiencies, but it will unnecessarily complicate rules. Most of the times each PC sticks to 2-3 favored weapons all her life. Some change in the course of their career. Occasionally, a magic weapon randomly found in treasure may wish you had a proficiency you don't have. But in general it's a waste of time to try and cover all cases fairly. However, the weapon groups module they might release later on will be handy for your purpose.

Basically what are you thoughts on this or what houserules would you implement if you were dissatisfied with the current rules?

Banning multiclassing is often the simplest and most satisfying solution, but I guess this is not what you mean

 

[Minigiant]

Personally I find that multiclassing hurts a PC in the long run. the bonuses are short lived as it slows down or locks out the paragon or epic class features.

A wizard6/fighter1 lacks a second attack so his weapon attacks are bad since he likes a second attack nor a subclass. And he slowed down his spell casting by a level. All his got is a AC boost.

 

[Dausuul]

For our example lets take the Wizard/Fighter
In our group we have a wizard(6)/fighter(1), who has not min-maxed his score, so he placed a 14 str but with that first level of fighter he gained proficiency in armour and most weapons. So he is able to wear scale mail, benefits from his dex by 2 and can carry a shield, selected the Defense Fighting Style and casts spells with his other hand. Pretty good armour class rating for a wizard - 19 AC

But in all fairness he did give himself 14 strength so conceptually his character can move comfortably in the armour. Is this ok? Would you do it different? Should we have a required strength for using certain heavier armours in combat? Should 1st level in fighter give a multi-class character proficiency in so many weapons and armour right from the get go? Basically what are you thoughts on this or what houserules would you implement if you were dissatisfied with the current rules?

The burden of heavy armor is vastly overstated in D&D. In real life, full plate is no more burdensome than mail; the total weight is not a lot more, and it's much better distributed over the body. And you don't really need much practice to get "proficient" in it--the whole point of armor is that it stops enemy attacks without you having to do anything.

If D&D accurately simulated the reality of armor, most PCs would be in full plate from the mid-levels on*. At D&D's standard tech level (mid- to late medieval period, primitive or no firearms), full plate was far superior to other forms of armor. Its main drawback was that it was really time-consuming and expensive to make, so only the aristocracy could afford it. PCs with a few levels under their belts usually have plenty of money, so that's not an obstacle.

The rules on armor proficiency and penalties exist for one reason: So that if you, the player, want to have a PC who goes adventuring in leather or mail instead of plate, you can do it without feeling like a chump. As such, if a player wants to take a level in fighter and make an armored wizard, and you aren't seeing any balance issues as a result (it doesn't sound like you are), why not? Carry on.

[SIZE=-2]*Though I can think of one reason for not wearing full plate as a "realistic" D&D adventurer: Against big monsters, it wouldn't do much good. If a 100-foot dragon gets a solid chomp on you, the only thing armor will accomplish is to give the dragon that nasty feeling you get when you bite on tinfoil. You're better off lightening your load as much as possible so you can dodge faster. But in that case, you'd be wearing a leather jerkin or no armor at all. I can't think of any reason you'd ever wear chain or scale in preference to plate.[/SIZE]

 

[MoonSong]

I think that 1 level dips are still too frontloaded on proficiencies, and that ioss why they have such a steep cost, if they'd just removed prerrequisites altogether and made it so you got the proficiencies one by one over three/four levels I think things would be better over all.

Having said that, I feel that having 3.x multiclassing with such heavy prerrequisites (which aren't low enough for people planning from day one, but are too much for people who want organic character development) is the worse of two worlds.

 

[Cadence]

Should 1st level in fighter give a multi-class character proficiency in so many weapons and armour right from the get go?

I agree with @Li Shenron and @KaiiLurker that it seems front-loaded. Aren't the things you get going from totally untrained to 1st level gained from years of an apprenticeship (or equivalent life experience), and a lot more than you'd get going from 1st to 2nd level.

I've been mulling over how to deal with that in the Pathfinder-E6 context for a while. Currently I'm envisioning having a big bin with the class skills, the weapon and armor proficiencies, and the +2 save bonuses (if they don't overlap with one you already got). For each level in the new class you get to take a few of those (say 2-4 depending on the class).

For PF/P6 it also feels like the saves/BAB should use the actual fractions too. A cleric, rogue, wizard, and sorcerer get +0 at first level... but its actually a +0.5 or +0.75 with the character's total rounded down. The problem is even worse with the saves since it makes no sense to be able to get multiple +2 bonuses in the same save just because you switched classes.

 

[Wulfgar76]

There has been some speculation in my group that dipping 1 level in fighter to get proficient in all armor is a no-brainer for Wizards. Do you think this is a problem?

 

[Mistwell]

He needs a 15 strength to multiclass into fighter, which he does not have, so the build is not legal. That is, unless he started as a Fighter and then multiclassed into Mage, which does not appear to be the case from your description.

 

[Li Shenron]

There has been some speculation in my group that dipping 1 level in fighter to get proficient in all armor is a no-brainer for Wizards. Do you think this is a problem?

It might be.

Additional weapon proficiencies are not a problem, but armor proficiencies make a huge difference.

The Wizard X / Fighter 1 can cast spells in Plate Mail + Shield with a base AC of 20.

The Wizard X+1 can have a base AC of 13+Dex using Mage Armor.

Very roughly, the Fighter level gives you a very good AC bonus, it might free you from having to invest in Dex (but of course Dex has other usefulness beside AC), but you still have to give up that precious spellcasting level.

So all in all it's hard to say... which probably means it's not a no-brainer at least.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I'm kind of a fan of requiring you to meet the class pre-requisites of your current class in order to multiclass out of it. They might have to be adjusted a bit (to allow a fighter to pick Dex instead of Str for instance). So if you want to go from fighter to wizard, you'd have to have a 15 in both. The multiple attribute dependency it creates probably compensates for the 1st level class benefits for at least some of the combos.