D&D 5E [D&D 5th Edition] Best 50/50 multiclass?

[CapnZapp]

I can't under stand your explanation on some of this but a Druids 10 / Cleric 10

PHB: p164

Spell Slots
"You determine your available spell slots by adding together all your levels in the bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and wizard classes."
Druids 10 + Cleric 10 = level 20 multi-class caster on the table
Spells slots of a level 20 multi-class are identical to a full Druid or Full Cleric at level 20 (There is no loss)

Known and Prepared Spells
"You determine what spells you know and can prepare for each class individually, as if you were a single-classed member of that class."
(Assume 20 wisdom at level 20)
Cleric lvl 20 Prepares 25 : When you do so, choose a number of cleric spells equal to your Wisdom modifier + your cleric level (minimum of one spell). The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Druid lvl 20 Prepares 25 :When you do so, choose a number of druid spells equal to your Wisdom modifier + your druid level (minimum of one spell). The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots.

Druid level 10 Prepares 15 + Cleric level 10 Prepares 15 = Total of 30, so you get 5 more than ether class at 20 but they have to have 15 on each side, which makes over lap is good for flexibility on key spells.

For "known spells" you have access to all Druid and Cleric spells since you have all the way up to a 9th level spell slot per how those to classes work. Because they "Know" all spell inherently.

All that said you are correct in that they do get access to every thing later. The even out at levels 8 and 16 and suffer the lose of the level 20 feat/ability score. However, human variant could help you get the feat back up front which means you get more use out of it. Then your just short capstone abilities in exchange for a huge amount of versatility. A Circle of the moon druid for example would suffer greatly however a Druid from the Circle of the Land would not lose much mechanically. You also open up some options like Good Berries on a Life cleric for 30 hit points of guaranteed out of combat healing from a 1st level spell slot per Sage Advice. ( http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/11/discipline-of-goodberry/ ) So if your want to be one of those healers that only uses heal word in battle and doesn't heal between this gives a cheep option to heal your team between battles if they start getting annoyed by always being left a deaths door. (Which I hate when I am not a healer. Also, if your going to do that take the healer feat so you can still patch player up a bit if you don't want to use your precious spell slots. Just Saying.)

I have not idea what you mean by this --> (and they lose out on the cool level X+1 to 2X abilities) if you could clarify, I would appreciate it.

A Cleric 10/Druid 10 will have high level spell slots, but not high level spells.

You can still use your 9th level slot, but only to upcast your 5th level spells (since that's all you have).

And this is seen as significantly less good - the power of upcasting in 5e is not nothing, so it's way better than 3E caster multiclassing... but it is considered significantly less powerful than the ability to cast "real" level 9 spells.

 

[CapnZapp]

I get what your saying but I can't find anything to support this with the exception of classes that have known spell restrictions instead of spell slot restrictions. So it would be true for Wizards but not for Clerics or Druids because they work differently.

Sorry, but let me show you that line of reasoning leads to clearly absurd results.

If you could gain level 9 Cleric spells with just a single level of Cleric (and the rest in other caster classes, reaching level 9 spell slots using the multiclass spell slot table) that would be outrageously broken.

And since that's exactly what you're saying with your Druid 10/Cleric 10 example, it is obvious the rules can't say that.

Why? Because there has never been a floodstorm of posters complaining about overpowered divine casters in this regard.

So even before we go into rules-lawyer mode, this argument is dead in the water.

---

The rules are simple, although possibly not as clearly explained as they could.

A Druid 10/Cleric 10 gets to select (know/prepare/memorize) spells as a Druid 10, and separately as a Cleric 10.

The character gets spell slots differently, however - see the multiclassing spell slot table for that. (Essentially, he gets spell slots much like a level 20 caster)

If you have slots of a level you have no spells for, you can still use those slots for upcasting the spells you do have.

The rules work exactly the same regardless which caster classes you combine. Spells per each class individually; slots combined per MC table.

 

[ClaytonCross]

If you could gain level 9 Cleric spells with just a single level of Cleric (and the rest in other caster classes, reaching level 9 spell slots using the multiclass spell slot table) that would be outrageously broken.

---

The rules are simple, ...

So I shortened your entry but the line about getting a all Cleric spells from 1 level in cleric makes since as to the "Why". It just was not how I was looking at it but I spoke with another player in my group today and he pointed out the same thing. Like Wise you could more abuse that with a 1 Cleric/1 Druid / 1 Bard / 17 Sorcerer. Which would be unbelievably broken. Where my 10 Druid / 10 Cleric would be flexible it would also lose all 11+ class/Domain/Circle abilities and a Feat adding to that my plan to alternate each level between the classes which puts the multi-class at a continually weaker level I did not see how that could be super broken.

As far as the rules go it is not really clear as written. All the needed to do to make it crystal was change:
"You determine what spells you know and can prepare for each class individually, as if you were a single-classed member of that class."
to
"You determine what spells you know and can prepare for each class individually, as if you were a single-classed member of that class using the classes caster chart to determine spell slot availability."

But I do concede the point. Basically, that means that all 50/50 casters will be gimp due to lack of end game content. The lose of spell slots 6 and higher is not even close to fixed by the ability to use more lower level spells or low level spells at higher slot level. Of course Mephista said it better than me;

Multi-class rules are designed for dipping. They make very crappy 50/50 characters, and I actually suggest avoiding it at all costs. Especially with spellcasters. Trailing behind one or two caster levels is doable, but several? The lack of high level spells known HURTS; the spell slots aren't enough. I speak from experience. Hybridizing casters is not very good; you're better off asking the GM for a custom subclass that gives you access to specific spells you want for your concept rather than attempting a hybrid multiclass.

With that in mind, I don't think I can make a caster work with out a 1-3 level only dip that my GM hates so much as being too "META". Having gone though a lot of posts I have to agree with Mephista again.

Others have mentioned warlock often, and that's because the main source of power for warlock is the cantrip Eldritch Blast. That's pretty much decoupled from the class level progression, so warlock mixes well with other things usually. Take your pick of what else you want for flavor.

Which makes the best caster combo ether 3 Warlock / 17 Sorcerer or 3 Warlock / 17 Bard. I would like the 3 Warlock / 17 Sorcerer but my GM originally complained to me when I was play a sorcerer and mentioned trying to multi-class with warlock for a few levels.

With that in mind I think if I am going 50/50 I need to stick with non-caster class and any casting should be a "secondary feature" not a class functionality requirement. I tried to read all the comment for melee in particular with that in mind.

looking at top 50/50 Melee suggestions

1st My idea for "Ninja" Rogue/Monk seems to have been play tested and approved functional by a few players.

2nd Gwarok's Barbarian/Rogue with "expertise to improve his Athletics, used his feats to give him Grappler and Tavern Brawler." That is interesting, I like the idea of being able to fight with nothing and still do damage.

3rd CTurbo's and Shiroiken'sPaladin/Warlock mostly because it made me laugh at the duality because I have not looked in detail how it would actually work. Though I would never deliberately play it with my GM because I am reasonably sure he would want me to explode from inner turmoil, lol. Honestly, I would not blame him if I picked the Fiend Patron.

Honorable mention: I would say Rogue/Fighter but its pretty common which doesn't make it bad but I like weird so it doesn't draw me in as much. Though making it an Archer as Blue said is interesting you then have to ask yourself, should I just play a Ranger?

 

[Mephista]

3rd CTurbo's and Shiroiken'sPaladin/Warlock mostly because it made me laugh at the duality because I have not looked in detail how it would actually work. Though I would never deliberately play it with my GM because I am reasonably sure he would want me to explode from inner turmoil, lol. Honestly, I would not blame him if I picked the Fiend Patron.

Actually, fiendish warlock and standard paladin mix was actually a fairly big thing back in 4e. There was even an entire tiefling story behind it - the Crimson Legions. The paladin part used to be devoted to Asmodeus in the past, but then the "modern" Crimson Legionairre relied on more goodly gods and used warlock magic to turn evil's power against itself.

There's plenty of other ways to run a similar thing. I once did a story where my warlock PC's Patron was actually a family of tiefling witches that specialized in this kind of thing. Warlock magic passed down from mother to daughter, invoking the Pact Infernal to claim a birthright of magic. The paladin part can easily come from just picking a regular god to worship of your choice. Back in 4e, there was an example of a high level warlock that turned against the Nine Hells, got good, and all that. But was captured by the Nine Hellsp; using Astral Projection, he/she contacted other potential warlocks and trained them. This Patron not only encourages fights against the Nine Hells, but is a non-evil Fiend patron. And official D&D lore.

And that's just a fiend warlock. Fey warlocks and fey paladins go together almost trivially from a story perspective. GOO warlocks can have their Patron be a sleeping being from another dimension that they have no control over, and the paladin half come from any Oath of your choice. Going paladin to hold onto your sanity and morals in face of that alien mind touching yours.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't know if you've ever tried this idea or if your DM has ever seen this idea done, but it might give both of you what you want.

The issue seems to be that your DM doesn't like the idea of a single class character suddenly gaining a level in some "new" class for absolutely no reason. Because he's seeing classes as confined packages of ability and story. When you take a level from a new class, you are taking on the entirety of that story all at once, seemingly out of nowhere. "You were this Cleric of Light when suddenly you "broke bad" by becoming a Rogue all of a sudden? Nuh uh! There needs to be an event and a training and a reason for that to be happening all at once!"

So what I think needs to happen is that your DM needs to see your character's class as ONE full story, with its own set of abilities and features. Probably with its own class name too. The difference of course being that the abilities and features of the class will come out of two different PHB classes. But you need to actually write up this new "class" with its own name and its own leveling chart, and quite possibly a solid story why this new class exists.

So for example, you could decide to create a "Skald" class. And you should write up this "Skald" class just as every other PHB class is written up, with all the proficiencies, the leveling chart, the class features all written out.

But where is this information coming from? Pulled directly from the Bard and Barbarian classes with each level taken based upon how you are splitting up the multiclassing. So let's say for your Skald, you see it as a 2 to 1 Barbarian/Bard split. So your 1st level of your Skald chart and features matches the 1st level of Barbarian. The 2nd level of the Skald matches the 2nd level of Barbarian. The 3rd level of Skald matches the 1st level of the Bard chart. The 4th level matches the 3rd level of Barbarian, the 5th to the 4th Barbarian, the 6th to the 2nd Bard, so on and so forth. So what you end up with is a Skald class that LOOK like its own thing with its own features and such, only if you were to take it apart you'd see things matching those two other classes.

Dragon Magazine did this exact thing during the 3E era, where they created a whole heap of "new" classes that were basically just multiclasses with the names stripped off and given to the new class identifier. While it might not solve all of your DMs problems in terms of whether they are too powerful or not powerful enough (and that's going to come on a case-by-case basis)... at least if you can package your multiclass at the beginning as its OWN class (and not looking like a multiclass)... he might be able to get past the "story" part of it that he has a problem with.

I mean after all... if this "barbarian skald" you were creating would get a random mechanical ability at 3rd level as part of its leveling process-- like the ability to 'Frenzy' (the Path of the Berserker feature), or the ability to gain additional feet on his long and high jump (the Path of the Tiger Totem feature)-- why is that any different than gaining a random mechanical ability to inspire his compatriots through the songs of their ancestors (Bardic inspiration)? They are ALL just random new abilities that are given to the class as part of the leveling chart because they theoretically "make sense"... so just create an entirely new chart for this new class where these abilities are spelled out in order so that they too just "make sense".

 

[Hillsy7]

Actually, fiendish warlock and standard paladin mix was actually a fairly big thing back in 4e. There was even an entire tiefling story behind it - the Crimson Legions. The paladin part used to be devoted to Asmodeus in the past, but then the "modern" Crimson Legionairre relied on more goodly gods and used warlock magic to turn evil's power against itself.

There's plenty of other ways to run a similar thing. I once did a story where my warlock PC's Patron was actually a family of tiefling witches that specialized in this kind of thing. Warlock magic passed down from mother to daughter, invoking the Pact Infernal to claim a birthright of magic. The paladin part can easily come from just picking a regular god to worship of your choice. Back in 4e, there was an example of a high level warlock that turned against the Nine Hells, got good, and all that. But was captured by the Nine Hellsp; using Astral Projection, he/she contacted other potential warlocks and trained them. This Patron not only encourages fights against the Nine Hells, but is a non-evil Fiend patron. And official D&D lore.

And that's just a fiend warlock. Fey warlocks and fey paladins go together almost trivially from a story perspective. GOO warlocks can have their Patron be a sleeping being from another dimension that they have no control over, and the paladin half come from any Oath of your choice. Going paladin to hold onto your sanity and morals in face of that alien mind touching yours.

Also Warlocks in general have banging storyline reasons for suddenly multiclassing......there you are, bumbling along as a level 5 Paladin, doing good, smiting stuff, and pi$$ing off half the D&D community's 3rd standard deviation.......wham! Through the course of the latest mission you have to do a deal with demon who now own's part of YOUR SOUL!!!!!!!

Throw that bone to your GM ("Hey - I wanna multiclass into warlock and set up some nasty internal conflict with my god and this fiend I've done a deal with"!) and ask him if he can bring the plotline into the game, thereby satisfying your MC needs, and his narrative needs

Or indeed the reverse....5 levels serving some fiendish patron, then a holy order breaks your ties and you must join to their order for regular rites to keep the connection supressed......problem is, there's still a debt owed to the fiend and he's pretty dead set on getting payment.....YOUR SOUL!!!!

 

[Hillsy7]

But where is this information coming from? Pulled directly from the Bard and Barbarian classes with each level taken based upon how you are splitting up the multiclassing.

Lionel, Bard-barian of the Duck Totem FTW!!!!

 

[merwins]

Warlock/Rogue (combat, exploration) or Warlock/Bard (exploration, social)
It isn't that they don't both cover all three pillars, but they're wicked powerful in the two I've listed. However, it does completely depend on related skills, feats, invocations and spells selected. and your GM, of course.

For example, at moderate levels, just say goodbye to most combat encounters with a Warlock/Rogue. For two battles every short rest, the character could potentially get unlimited sneak attacks against every opponent, and every opponent would be completely unable to target their person without a sufficiently high passive Perception or active search attempt.
(Darkness, Devil's Sight, bonus action Hide)

You can do something similar with Warlock/Bard and social encounters with Mask of Many Faces, Actor, and related CHA-based skills.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Clayton,

Did your DM by any chance start playing D&D before 3rd edition came out? His need for a story reason for multiclassing makes me think of us old timers who started back with 1st Edition. Back then, if you wanted to be a multiclass character, you chose your classes at 1st level and then leveled them up at the same time, because XP was split evenly between the classes, rather than choosing just one class to level up every time you leveled.

For those that needed a story reason for the changing or adding of a new class when leveling up, groups I have been in generally required you to say what class your next level would be so that you could, in character, be training and practicing for that class as you gained the XP. It also helps if there is another character in the adventuring party that is of the class you are planning on for your next level, as it can be that character who is helping train your character for the new level.

Also, ignore that Warlock/Warlock suggestion, as it is against the rules to multiclass twice in the same class.

Plus, be careful with any Warlock X/Caster X multiclasses, since they do not combine with other casters in the same way, unless they are Pact of the Tome, I think.

 

[CapnZapp]

Off topic: Don't you just hate it when a poster replies to your post but then promptly blocks you, so when I check my notifications, the quote leads nowhere...