D&D General Should you Multiclass?

[EzekielRaiden]

This is the thing that makes me hate multiclassing as it currently exists in 5e.

It is a tool for people who have system mastery to "generally be better in terms of power," while people who are just noodling with the system or trying to realize a character concept usually fall into the "detriment" trap because they're not actively looking for synergies and trying to maximize their power.

I don't love D&D as a game of finding CharOp cheese, of seeking synergies, of tactical character building. Some folx absolutely play for that, and I'm glad the option is there for those folks, but I find that the existence of multiclassing really distorts the design environment. New material must be designed very carefully to avoid giving people who multiclass a remarkable edge. Whenever someone in my games wants to realize a unique character concept, I would MUCH RATHER they bring me a 3rd party subclass or work with me to make a new one than try and cobble together Frankenstein's Multiclass. Either they know the system really well and will end up generally more effective, or they don't know the system very well and will end up generally less effective, and either way, it impacts the group dynamics ("Why is your warlock/fighter more effective in melee in this moment than my character who is Just A Barbarian?")

At least in my experience, that stance is.....highly unusual. Not the opposition to MC, though, rather the willingness to consider 3PP/homebrew content to replace it. The hostility to 3PP/homebrew content I've seen from the 5e GM community is pretty much the strongest I've ever seen. Of course, hostility to multiclassing is almost as high, so...yeah.

 

[TwoSix]

At least in my experience, that stance is.....highly unusual. Not the opposition to MC, though, rather the willingness to consider 3PP/homebrew content to replace it. The hostility to 3PP/homebrew content I've seen from the 5e GM community is pretty much the strongest I've ever seen. Of course, hostility to multiclassing is almost as high, so...yeah.

This is a total tangent (apologies in advance), but this is actually a setting element in my 5e games.

Gaining levels in a single class becomes harder and harder as a character advances in tier, to the point where breaking through to level 17 (Tier 4) is something that only happens to less than one in a million characters. (PCs are generally the one in a million.) Multiclassing is the easiest way to reach high levels, but characters who do so are slightly looked down upon by the adventuring elite.

A lot of characters will undergo high-level rituals or quests in an attempt to "fuse" their multiclass levels into a single class, and the result is usually some kind of custom or homebrew class. As an example, I had a PC who had levels in both necromancer wizard and spore druid, and he undertook a long quest to combine his abilities into a 3pp necromancer class that was at the sum of the other two class levels. (WIzard8/Druid 6 became a Necromancer 14).

 

[Maxperson]

But that exists whether or not you multiclass. Multiclassing just puts more options on the table.

Also though if you notice I said "with planning" it can be "generally better in terms of power." Without planning it won't be generally better and will often be much worse.

That shouldn't be the case. I don't care if you want to cheese the system for every extra point of DPR, but someone casual who wants to multiclass for a character concept shouldn't end up with "will often be worse."

 

[Tessarael]

[..] someone casual who wants to multiclass for a character concept shouldn't end up with "will often be worse."

Given the variety of classes, their different powers and ability dependencies, many of the combinations do not pair particularly well together and the trade-off can be subtle. For example, it is not that obvious to a newbie to D&D that taking a level of Fighter is quite detrimental to a spell caster's damage progression.

Casual players should in many cases be encouraged by their DM to stick with a simpler single-classed build, or at least follow one of the many build guides if they do want to multi-class.

What multi-classing does almost always provide is increased versatility. This is not necessarily a good thing, as it can be overwhelming to a new player, cause indecision and slower play, simply forgetting some powers, etc. So again, for casual players, often best to stick to single-classed characters. As an example from a V5 Vampire the Masquerade campaign that I ran, I was advising less mechanically minded players what their characters could do, due to their lack of familiar with the system. By the same token, some of those less mech oriented players roleplayed very well and engaged more socially (highly beneficial in a VtM game). So, it is doable with help from a DM who knows the system well.

 

[FrogReaver]

That shouldn't be the case. I don't care if you want to cheese the system for every extra point of DPR, but someone casual who wants to multiclass for a character concept shouldn't end up with "will often be worse."

I wish it weren’t the case either but I think it’s inevitable. More choices in reality tends to yield greater optimization potential because the potential gains are cumulative across all choices.