D&D 5E (2014) Multiclass vs. hybrid subclasses

[intently]

What are the pros and cons of using a hybrid class (e.g., EK or arcane trickster) compared to multiclassing?

Hybrid pros:
- don't lose any ASIs
- extra tricks not available in "pure" classes
- often less demanding attribute requirements

Multiclass pros:
- mix and match levels as you please, rather than preset ratios
- more options than hybrid classes

What else?

 

[FrogReaver]

If you are looking at melee/magical combinations then they tend to be pretty bad unless you start the multiclass after level 5 which is kind of rough.

For example a fighter 6 sorcerer 5 is a very strong class at level 11. The issue is that level 5 extra attack and spells like fireball, spirit guardians etc... are so strong that in general it's almost impossible to make up the difference if you start the multiclass before having 1. You will generally be much weaker from level 5 till whenever you get one of those abilities. 1-4 levels. Pre fireball or extra attack your likely not stronger either, but you are more versatile which is a form of strength in it's own right.

Basically most multiclasses with caster and non caster really don't hit any kind of stride until level 8+ and you likely won't even want to multiclass pre level 5. (at least from a strength perspective).

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

For example a fighter 6 sorcerer 5 is a very strong class at level 11. The issue is that level 5 extra attack and spells like fireball, spirit guardians etc... are so strong that in general it's almost impossible to make up the difference if you start the multiclass before having 1. You will generally be much weaker from level 5 till whenever you get one of those abilities. 1-4 levels. Pre fireball or extra attack your likely not stronger either, but you are more versatile which is a form of strength in it's own right.

Multiclassing early can be just fine due to cantrip scaling. E.g. Sorcerer 2/Warlock 2/Life Cleric 1[1] is down some HP and an ASI compared to a Fighter 5 but still competitive with fighters in terms of at-will damage (2x d10+d6+CHA) is competitive with Extra Attack, and 2d8+Str (+2d8 situational) via Booming Blade is fine too in melee.

Sure, you're not as good at spellcasting as a sorcerer 5, but you're still better off than a fighter, and you've got 4/2 (long rest) + 2 (short rest) spell slots.

By level 8 you'll be a Life Cleric 1/Warlock 2/Sorc 5 with heavy armor, Fireball/Hypnotic Pattern, and 4/3/3 (long) + 2 (short rest) spell slots. Not far behind a pure sorcerer (4/3/3/2) but with better at-will attacks, more spells known (Sanctuary, Cure Wounds), and way better AC.

[1] Start Sorc 1, then Life Cleric 1, then whatever order after that.

 

[FrogReaver]

Why is it that in any discussion of multiclassing in general that someone undoubtedly always brings up the single most well known exception to any general multiclassing premise being made (ie the Warlock)?

Just because the warlock exists and is an exception doesn't mean citing it as the single example to break the general rule has much relevance. What is it that they say? Exceptions make the rule

Multiclassing early can be just fine due to cantrip scaling. E.g. Sorcerer 2/Warlock 2/Life Cleric 1[1] is down some HP and an ASI compared to a Fighter 5 but still competitive with fighters in terms of at-will damage (2x d10+d6+CHA) is competitive with Extra Attack, and 2d8+Str (+2d8 situational) via Booming Blade is fine too in melee.

Sure, you're not as good at spellcasting as a sorcerer 5, but you're still better off than a fighter, and you've got 4/2 (long rest) + 2 (short rest) spell slots.

By level 8 you'll be a Life Cleric 1/Warlock 2/Sorc 5 with heavy armor, Fireball/Hypnotic Pattern, and 4/3/3 (long) + 2 (short rest) spell slots. Not far behind a pure sorcerer (4/3/3/2) but with better at-will attacks, more spells known (Sanctuary, Cure Wounds), and way better AC.

[1] Start Sorc 1, then Life Cleric 1, then whatever order after that.

 

[FrogReaver]

So getting back to the general. The EK and Arcane Trickster are Fighter's and Rogues with a slight magical splash. That's not enough to satisfy the magical fighter or thief itch for everyone but it's a start

In general multicalssing doesn't work well in 5e. It clunky. It makes you better than normal at a few levels and worse than normal at a few others. Most combinations you would think of will have a slight edge at a few levels and be very bad at a few others.

There's a few combinations that work as Hemlock pointed out above, but the vast majority are terrible. Generally if there's a level of cleric involved for any other caster class its manageable. Generally if there's warlock involved it's with any other caster class. The only melee multiclass that works pre level 5 is taking 1 level of barbarian to start with. The damage reduction of rage can actually make up for having extra attack at least for a level. Basically trading the ability to take half damage for the ability to deal double damage. Generally in 5e it's better to specialize than generalize. That's one of the reasons mutliclassing doesn't usually work as well pre level 5. Level 5 is basically a minimum required specialization level.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Even a non warlock can multiclass before level 5. A rogue for example does not need level 5 to be useful. Combine rogue and fighter and use two weapon fighting style to be a good damage dealer if that is what you want to be. 2 attacks with added dex or strength (I would maybe go with strength for extra protection and you deal more damage than the straight rogue.
Say: level 3 rogue(swashbuckler)/level 2 fighter.

But since we are speaking of martial/caster multiclass I would say rogue level 2 and then taking a full caster multiclass will still allow you to be useful at level 5.
You have 1d6 sneak attack and maybe two weapons or greenflame or booming blade. Cunning action and access to invisibility spell will allow you to fulfill your job. Hold person may also come in handy. You won't have fireball but that is only 2 times per day at that level and you get great benefits. If you are an elf you may become bladesinger.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Fighter and cleric also work well enough. Start fighter, have a good con save. Be a war cleric and wade into melee with no fear of your hold person or bless breaking due to losing concentration.

 

[Al2O3]

Rogues mix well with Arcane casters I think, but still agree that most classes have so much goodies that one would not want to multiclass before level 5. For the same kind of classes (full casters or not full casters) I believe it works better to multiclass earlier.

My Swashbuckler 5/Dragon sorcerer 1 was given those levels in that order due to concerns over survivability based on my experience from the adventure it is in. This as anecdotal example of even Rogue being attractive to single class for 5 levels.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using EN World mobile app

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Rogues mix well with Arcane casters I think, but still agree that most classes have so much goodies that one would not want to multiclass before level 5. For the same kind of classes (full casters or not full casters) I believe it works better to multiclass earlier.

My Swashbuckler 5/Dragon sorcerer 1 was given those levels in that order due to concerns over survivability based on my experience from the adventure it is in. This as anecdotal example of even Rogue being attractive to single class for 5 levels.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using EN World mobile app

I think the balance between multiclass and non multiclass for organically grown characters is nearly perfect. Every level it is a hard decision between linear or vertical improvement. And both are good enough.
And dragon sorcerer at level 4 or 5 would not have lowered your survivability. Resistance to damage, dragon scales that make up for not increasing dexterity, well chosen spells. So yes, a good balance.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Why is it that in any discussion of multiclassing in general that someone undoubtedly always brings up the single most well known exception to any general multiclassing premise being made (ie the Warlock)?

Just because the warlock exists and is an exception doesn't mean citing it as the single example to break the general rule has much relevance. What is it that they say? Exceptions make the rule

It's not warlocks--it's cantrip scaling. A Life Cleric 1/Illusionist 4 is also perfectly fine at 5th level, competitive with a melee Fighter for damage output, thanks to melee cantrips.

When people claim that you can't multiclass until after 5th level without suffering severe penalties, they're wrong. Don't be surprised if people point that out, with or without reference to warlocks. Your Fighter/Sorcerer can be a Fighter 1/Sorcerer 4 with no real regrets. He'll have a 2d10 Fire Bolt and a 2d8+Str+2d8 Booming Blade, which compares favorably to Extra Attack. His survivability is as good as the Fighter's too, maybe better, thanks to Shield.

The Fighter still has some tricks that are better than the Sorcerer's, e.g. Sharpshooter w/ Battlemaster superiority dice if you're into that kind of thing, but the Fighter 1/Sorcerer 4 has tricks of his own, and one level later he's got fireball just like the single-classed sorcerer. He's not falling behind, he's just different.