D&D 5E Multi-Multi-classing

[rgoodbb]

Hey folks.

I wouldn’t mind getting a take on people's experiences who have multi-classed their PC’s into at least three classes. I am looking at a build with three classes to fully capture a flavour but am mindful of
M.A.D., ASI issues and potentially feeling underpowered compared to other PC's.

What are people’s experiences with 3 or more classes in one? (especially M.A.D. builds) How did they feel to play?

Cheers, for your time and replies.

 

[Satyrn]

If it's fun, it won't matter.

But more in line with what you're actually wondering about, without knowing your intended combinationi t's hard to tell how this will cut into your effectiveness. Though there's some common advice I would give, like don't use spells that are save-to-avoid so you won't be concerned about pumping up your spellcasting stat.


Also, I haven't actually played a triple+classed character since my 3e monk/cleric/rogue/barbarian.

 

[Blue]

I've found that multiclassing early really put me behind the curve, especially missing ASIs and missing the power bumps at 5th and 11th.

As for triple classing, I'd suggest not adding in a third until you've already got your character firing on all cylinders. The exception to this is if you are cherry picking and only planning on taking a single level of a class, but that's got it's own weaknesses as well.

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

When it comes to triple-classing, it greatly behooves you to make sure that the classes have a good amount of overlap when it comes to ability scores. Also, I recommend figuring out which class fits each of the following three roles.

1. Primary class: the class that the bulk of your levels will go into
2. Major dip: the class that you'll be putting about 3-5 levels into over the course of your career
3. Minor dip: only taking 1-3 levels in this class, primarily for front-loaded class features; sometimes taken as 1st level class for starting proficiencies

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I was theoriecrafting a dual wielding human barbarian 2 fighter 2 rogue X. Str 16. Dex 14, Con 14 Int 8 Wis 12, Cha 10 and a nice feat at level 1. Thought advantage and sneak attack synergize well.

 

[Satyrn]

I was theoriecrafting a dual wielding human barbarian 2 fighter 2 rogue X. Str 16. Dex 14, Con 14 Int 8 Wis 12, Cha 10 and a nice feat at level 1. Thought advantage and sneak attack synergize well.

The thought of a rapier-wielding gnome barbarian went over well with my group (they were amused by my character idea) but I wound up never playing it because a barbarian just doesn't play nice with Dex based attacks. So I took battlemaster instead. I miss the chance to rage.

I also am constantly considering multiclassing into rogue for the sneak attack, but I haven't been willing to give up the fighter features. Maybe when I hit 6th level. I might tack on some wizard levels, instead. Or also.

 

[Storyteller Hero]

Where multi classed characters lack in power, they can compensate in their increased versatility. Trying to create synergies that work can be difficult for a lot of possible combinations. Feats are one possible solution to making unusual combos viable.

If you enjoy playing around with interesting builds, you might like this book of feats that add new abilities based on what classes a character is multiclassed in. For example, there's a feat that grants a rogue/knowledge cleric the ability to obtain information about a creature upon successfully applying Sneak Attack (reading their blood so to speak). http://www.dmsguild.com/product/202906/Multiclass-Feats-5th-Edition?filters=45469

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Full Disclosure! : I am quite against MC'ing in 5e (and 3.x/PF for that matter), because I think it's done horribly. (Not gonna get into it here, not the place). But I do have some ideas you may not have considered.

Alright, now then. What I would suggest as another avenue of choice is to really think about what you want your character to represent. Don't think in terms of "D&D choices as per the book". Instead, think of him/her in terms of what he/she could do in a story, novel, movie, etc., if he/she were in one.

Think of what base core class would give a good base feeling. I'm not talking about abilities, skills, etc, per se, I'm talking about "Fighter - tough, strong, action-oriented, weapons, armor, battles and wars, bloodied and battered after a battle, etc". The "essence" of what makes that class, well, 'feel' like that class and not another one.

Ok, take that and use it as your characters Class. Now, work with your DM to create your own Arch-Type that fits your idea, as well as your DM's campaign setting.

IMHO, MC'ing is useless (and badly done) in comparison to the potential of arch-types. Why do you think they keep coming out with Arch-Types in UA and not new classes, or multiclass combos? Because using an arch-type gives them total freedom to create exactly what they are thinking about without trying to shoe horn two or three classes, one particular race, and several particular choices in regards to skills, feats, items, etc. If they feel a concept need to be able to change the colour of skin of the arch-type in question, they just write it up and put it as a special ability gained at Level X. They don't have to force the DM to use Feats and force the character to take some particular Feat that allows him to cast some particular spell that can change the colour of the characters skin.

So...choose a base class, then work with your DM to make an arch-type (or modify one if one is close). Much better than trying to work three classes into a concept that only "mostly" fits your idea.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[rczarnec]

The thought of a rapier-wielding gnome barbarian went over well with my group (they were amused by my character idea) but I wound up never playing it because a barbarian just doesn't play nice with Dex based attacks. So I took battlemaster instead. I miss the chance to rage.

I also am constantly considering multiclassing into rogue for the sneak attack, but I haven't been willing to give up the fighter features. Maybe when I hit 6th level. I might tack on some wizard levels, instead. Or also.

That is why when I made my Gnome Barbarian I went strength based. He only started with a 14, but that isn't a major drawback. I am adding some Rogue for sneak attack and possibly some Fighter later.

 

[Satyrn]

I had already randomly placed my gnome's ability scores (with the Dex twice as high as Str) and randomly determindd his class as barbarian, and worked out the first bits of his personality - then discovered the barbarian is mechanically opposed to Dexterity attacks in pretty much every way.

So in determining which to switch - ability scores or class choice - I had to abandon the one that fit the emerging concept less. And using Dexterity to attack feels more swashbucklery than the barbarian's features - although reckless attack would be awesome.