D&D 5E Multiclass Subclasses

[Xeviat]

Hey everyone. Little idea here that I'm curious about exploring. How much desire would you have to see some simple "multiclass" subclasses made for all the class combos? These could go in 2 directions:

1) Subclasses that facilitate multiclassing (like how a Fighter/Wizard is supported by using Eldritch Knight and possibly Bladesingers as it's subclasses).
2) Subclasses that remove the need to use multiclassing (like how the Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger may be good enough for some players).

Sometimes, for me, subclasses feel weird when mixed with multiclassing. Perhaps it's my memory of 2E's no kits with multiclass characters in Baldur's Gate 2, or the feeling of Prestige Classes from 3E. Some Subclasses are really simple and basic, and they work, while some subclasses have a lot of flavor and kind of feel weird to use when multiclassing.

Just a little idea. What do you think?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Personally, I think it would be a bad idea for WotC (no reason for 3PP or homebrew not to do it though). The reason 5e is still selling well is its simplicity to learn, making it far more widely accessible. Increasing complexity could potentially hurt sales.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I think sub-classes like the EK that least vaguely suggest the specific multiclass combos available back in the day, are a fine idea.

EK does the classic elven fighter/magic-user.
AT, the less well-known, but still classic, gnome illusionist/thief.

Missing are things like the elf fighter/magic-user/thief, half-elf fighter/cleric/magic-user, dwarf or halfling fighter/thief, etc...

 

[Eubani]

Eldritch Knight can be taken further when you change the 2 schools the subclass allows. For example in one of my home games a player used a EK that utilized Conjuration and Necromancy which gave a Black Knight feel and played very differently.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Eldritch Knight can be taken further when you change the 2 schools the subclass allows. For example in one of my home games a player used a EK that utilized Conjuration and Necromancy which gave a Black Knight feel and played very differently.

EK can also be given another class spell list, like the cleric or Druid, and get even weirder. Especially if you’re gonna MC ranger or Paladin. I’d be reluctant to allow using the ranger or Paladin lists though. Fighters don’t need Smite spells to excel.

In general I wouldn’t even restrict the schools for either EK or AT, and I’d allow swapping list and stat to any other full caster class.

 

[Tallifer]

I would like to see an effective staff-wielding, cloth-wearing, praying and healing Cleric/Monk (which I would call a Friar in homage to Dark Age of Camelot),

As well as a psionic monk, a sort of Sorcerer/Monk/Cleric, (which I would model after a Bene Gesserit like Alia of the Knife)

 

[DND_Reborn]

Hey everyone. Little idea here that I'm curious about exploring. How much desire would you have to see some simple "multiclass" subclasses made for all the class combos? These could go in 2 directions:

1) Subclasses that facilitate multiclassing (like how a Fighter/Wizard is supported by using Eldritch Knight and possibly Bladesingers as it's subclasses).
2) Subclasses that remove the need to use multiclassing (like how the Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger may be good enough for some players).

Sometimes, for me, subclasses feel weird when mixed with multiclassing. Perhaps it's my memory of 2E's no kits with multiclass characters in Baldur's Gate 2, or the feeling of Prestige Classes from 3E. Some Subclasses are really simple and basic, and they work, while some subclasses have a lot of flavor and kind of feel weird to use when multiclassing.

Just a little idea. What do you think?

I posted on this months ago, but I guess you never read the thread?

D&D 5E - Archetype-Multiclass option initial concept

So, I got this idea after being inspired by another thread. If we think of archetypes like Arcane Trickster as a pseudo-multiclass character, how about a simple multiclass-theme archetype to replace multiclassing (or offer another option)? My idea is this: you take the features for each class...

www.enworld.org

At each subclass level, you gain 1-2 level features worth of the core features from the other classes.
It breaks some things because certain classes need their subclass to define them (particularly domains, sorcerous origins, and warlock patrons).

It works pretty well if you want to adopt it.

 

[Xeviat]

I posted on this months ago, but I guess you never read the thread?

D&D 5E - Archetype-Multiclass option initial concept

So, I got this idea after being inspired by another thread. If we think of archetypes like Arcane Trickster as a pseudo-multiclass character, how about a simple multiclass-theme archetype to replace multiclassing (or offer another option)? My idea is this: you take the features for each class...

www.enworld.org

At each subclass level, you gain 1-2 level features worth of the core features from the other classes.
It breaks some things because certain classes need their subclass to define them (particularly domains, sorcerous origins, and warlock patrons).

It works pretty well if you want to adopt it.

I didn't! I haven't been around as much as I used to be. Glad to see someone else is thinking on the same angle. It would be an interesting thing to explore if the classes had been built on more universal skeletons.

I think Pathfinder 2 and 4E's multiclass feats was making me think about it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I didn't! I haven't been around as much as I used to be. Glad to see someone else is thinking on the same angle. It would be an interesting thing to explore if the classes had been built on more universal skeletons.

I think Pathfinder 2 and 4E's multiclass feats was making me think about it.

Well, I am glad you got a chance to now!

If you want more details, let me know.

 

[Li Shenron]

How much desire would you have to see some simple "multiclass" subclasses made for all the class combos?

Very little. I am not a fan of hybrid characters, and generally don't like multiclassing. Having more subclasses like the Eldritch Knight and the Arcane Trickster would reduce the interest in using the multiclassing rules but would still mean to have hybrid characters around. I certainly would not want WotC to release official subclasses that try to represent every class combos, they would be a lot. I don't really like the idea of things like a Cleric/Wizard or a Druid/Fighter or a Paladin/Rogue and so on... I prefer subclasses to take characters farther from others rather than closer. Otherwise, for more practical needs (the proverbial "we don't have a trapfinder in the party!" problem) I prefer using smaller character building options such as feats or backgrounds.

Sometimes, for me, subclasses feel weird when mixed with multiclassing. Perhaps it's my memory of 2E's no kits with multiclass characters in Baldur's Gate 2, or the feeling of Prestige Classes from 3E. Some Subclasses are really simple and basic, and they work, while some subclasses have a lot of flavor and kind of feel weird to use when multiclassing.

That's true. Subclasses actually serve multiple unrelated purposes within the game, not just character concept but also to provide high/low complexity versions of the same class. It's a shame they didn't really provide a low-complexity "generalist" Wizard subclass in the PHB, that would have allowed to play essentially a "no kits" game with the four iconic classes at least.