D&D 5E Proposal: Fighter/mage/thief: quick and dirty concurrent multiclassing/gestalt rules

[Fanaelialae]

So try a hybrid paladin/sorcerer out. I think it would be overwhelming but maybe in practice it works. You do need to test it on the optimum cases though.

True, but I'm not going to ask my players to play something just so that I can test out a theory. I provide options, they make what they want to play, and if they make something broken using the hybrid system then I'll readjust the rules at that time (the broken character will be grandfathered in though; I don't like to mess up a character concept that's already in play and at worst it's for a single campaign). If someone were to run such a test, they should run the hybrid alongside a PHB-multiclassed paladin/sorcerer, since that is one of the better combinations. You want to compare an optimized character against an optimized character.

EDIT
It would also need to be over a range of levels, since one character being stronger than the other at a single moment in time isn't any different from the moon druid being at his strongest at level 2.

 

[Shiroiken]

If you are that interested in creating the AD&D Multi-class characters, you are probably better off taking something like this and simply making a new class altogether. For example, A Fighter/Rogue/Wizard would probably only have Medium Armor proficiency, 1d8 HD, have spellcasting progression similar to a half caster (which would probably be all that the Wizard provides, since it should be a 1/3 caster), and gain some abilities mutual to the Fighter and Rogue (plus maybe Wizard). Likely you won't have a sub-class, since you'll need those levels to garner class abilities, but it could be done.

The downside to this would obviously be that you'd have to make a class for each multi-class/hybrid option you want to create. If you do this I'd suggest limiting things to the AD&D multi-classes, allowing an option for both Wizard and Sorcerer for Magic-User/Mage.

 

[guachi]

I'd be tempted to say that multi-classing as two classes requires the XP advancement of three classes.

 

[dagger]

I love 1e/2e multi classing....so I am interested to see some options. We are on the verge of banning 5e multiclassing except for story roleplaying reasons during a campaign anyway, but that is more to keep roles distinct (which some of us like).

AD&D Multiclassing would throw THAT out of the water obviously, but that is a different issue. At least they would be far behind.

I have a question though:

What about certain races not being about to take certain classes? What do you think about that in the context of your houserules?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

It's more significant than the XP Tables show. Even at low levels the hybrid spends significant amounts of time lower level than the rest of the party. For example, for half of the adventure time that it takes normal character to go from 2nd to 3rd level, the hybrid is 1st level. He does intermittently catch up, but quickly falls behind again. 1000 xp after the dual class hybrid reaches 5th level and catches up to the party, the rest of the party hits level 6. From there on out the hybrid never catches up. Obviously, this is even more significant for the triple hybrid (who starts behind the party and never catches up).

I don't think it is. The only thing that you're losing is some HP, an ASI, and every few levels you're going to be one point of proficiency down compared to your single/dual-classed companions. A multiclassed Fighter/Cleric for example is going to be both a higher-level fighter and a higher-level cleric than her dual-classed Fighter/Cleric companion.

Taking your example of 6th/5th level, a 6th level pure-class caster or 3+3 dual-caster class has spell slots 4/3/3.
A multiclassed Sorceror/Bard for example is only 5th level, but is 5th level in both of her classes, giving spell slots of 8/6/4, with a wider selection of spells as well.
The dual-class Sorceror/Bard has access to the 3rd level class abilities of both classes. The multiclass has access to the 5th level class abilities of both classes.

They still only have one action economy and concentration slot, but have way more spells available to throw.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I don't think it is. The only thing that you're losing is some HP, an ASI, and every few levels you're going to be one point of proficiency down compared to your single/dual-classed companions. A multiclassed Fighter/Cleric for example is going to be both a higher-level fighter and a higher-level cleric than her dual-classed Fighter/Cleric companion.

Taking your example of 6th/5th level, a 6th level pure-class caster or 3+3 dual-caster class has spell slots 4/3/3.
A multiclassed Sorceror/Bard for example is only 5th level, but is 5th level in both of her classes, giving spell slots of 8/6/4, with a wider selection of spells as well.
The dual-class Sorceror/Bard has access to the 3rd level class abilities of both classes. The multiclass has access to the 5th level class abilities of both classes.

They still only have one action economy and concentration slot, but have way more spells available to throw.

Keep in mind that I am speaking from the point of view of my own variant (posted upthread) where you only get the spell slots as per the multiclassing rules in the PHB.

Now, I'll grant you that given two 20th level characters, an old-school-multi Fighter 15/Wizard 15 is superior to a PHB-multi Fighter 10/Wizard 10 in almost every way. However, Fighter 10/Wizard 10 isn't a great combo to begin with (IMO, it's comparing a standard powered character vs a subpar character). The question is whether it is better when compared to a Fighter 20 or a Wizard 20 or a Fighter 2/Wizard 18? I rather doubt it, though I'll admit that I have little more to go on than my gut.

The thing to remember with this old-school-multiclassing is that unlike PHB-multiclassing you can't opt out whenever you feel like it. You're in it for the long haul, no PHB-multiclassing allowed. As such, it's actually a bit harder to make an optimized build because you can't just cherry pick what you want. You have to take the good with the bad, and a part of that bad is having to wait longer to get to the really good features.

 

[Blue]

What is you goal with this? What issues are you trying to address with it?

I have an example of classes and multic..."dual-classing" that I've used before. Sprinkle coins on an index card. The area under them are concepts you can build with the existing classes. Sometimes they overlap, showing more than one class can do it, like an archer. Some areas aren't under a coin, which means that they are not easy to represent with the classes.

Of the areas not under a coin, there's the parts between a coin and the edge. 5e doesn't really have a class mechanic to address these, hope there's a feat, background, or other non-class mechanic to help you if that's your concept.

The area between coins are the concepts that dual-classing can help realize mechanically. For me, that's my first goal: be able to address concepts that don't fall mechanically into a class.

This seems to also address that, but only half way between coins (or the center of a triangle for triple classing). If you have two coins not particularly close, there can be concepts missed that only going to the midpoint won't address.

My second goal for dual-classing is to allow ongoing story to affect mechanics. The rogue brought back to life who devotes himself to becoming a holy warrior can be done by taking levels in paladin or cleric. The proposed multiclassing seems to take that option away.

So compared to 5e dual-classing, this partially/mostly meets one goals and misses another. But that's just what I'm looking for. What are you looking for so I can evaluate this through that lens?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Rules

OK, so let me get this straight:

A level 1 Fighter/Mage in your system would have literally all the features of a 1st-level Fighter (including hit points, proficiencies, and class features) and all the spellcasting abilities of a 1st-level Wizard? Compared to, say, a 1st-level Fighter, who will just have the fighter abilities? I'm not a fan of excessive intraparty balance, but that seems grossly unfair. That's almost identical to a Ftr1/Wiz1 using the core multiclassing rules--a 2nd level character.

So, 300 XP later. The 1st-level Fighter becomes a 2nd-level Fighter while the Fighter/Mage stays the same, so they're kinda even. Great. Then, 300 XP later still, the hybrid character advances in both classes, gaining the exact same features that the solo Fighter just got, plus a whole bunch of new Wizard features. So once again, the hybrid character is way ahead.

Am I correct?

 

[TwoSix]

OK, so let me get this straight:

A level 1 Fighter/Mage in your system would have literally all the features of a 1st-level Fighter (including hit points, proficiencies, and class features) and all the spellcasting abilities of a 1st-level Wizard? Compared to, say, a 1st-level Fighter, who will just have the fighter abilities? I'm not a fan of excessive intraparty balance, but that seems grossly unfair. That's almost identical to a Ftr1/Wiz1 using the core multiclassing rules--a 2nd level character.

So, 300 XP later. The 1st-level Fighter becomes a 2nd-level Fighter while the Fighter/Mage stays the same, so they're kinda even. Great. Then, 300 XP later still, the hybrid character advances in both classes, gaining the exact same features that the solo Fighter just got, plus a whole bunch of new Wizard features. So once again, the hybrid character is way ahead.

Am I correct?

Not the OP, but that's my reading of the proposed rules, yes.

Since the rules mimic 1e/2e multiclassing, which was "balanced" around the same points, it's obviously intentional.

 

[cbwjm]

Unless set on rolling hit dice, you could take the average hit points of each class and add them together. A fighter/mage 1 would start with (10+6)/2=8 hit points at first level and gain (6+4)/2=5 hit points each level up.

If set on rolling, I would take the average and round down to the nearest die size. The fighter mage would have a d8 hit die. A fighter/barbarian would have a d10, a fighter/cleric/mage would have a d8.

The old 2e multiclass rules is something I've missed since 3e came out and I might be interested in trying out these rules. The hybrid rules in 4e captured a little bit of that old multiclass feeling that I loved back in the day and Castles and Crusades has what looks like a good system for multiclassing which might be adaptable to 5e.