Level Up (A5E) 1 level fighter dip too easy?

PauloR

Villager
Just throwing out there, but a multiclass progression table seems overly complicated. I know sprlcasting has one, but why make martials as complicated as spellcasters?
I like the solution of separate progression. You want high level maneuvers? Specialise in one class!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Faolyn

(she/her)
I think you’ve misunderstood. They wouldn’t all use the same table normally. They would get a separate table when multiclassing that different classes progress through at different rates. E.g. if you’re a 4 fighter / 3 rogue, you have the capacities of a 6 fighter because your rogue levels only count for 2/3 of a fighter level.
Ah, gotcha. I think, then, the problem is that even though maneuvers have "levels," there's nothing really requiring you to take higher level manevers. A sorcerer or bard still gains higher-level spell slots even if they never higher-level spells. And unlike spells, maneuvers can't be upcast. A 2nd-degree maneuver will always be a 2nd-degree maneuver, no matter how much exertion you pump into it.
 

Stalker0

Legend
This! The highest anyone I've met has played outside of one-shots is Level 7 or 8. Also, admittedly, by the time you get to those levels, the spellcasters are nearly gods, so an unbalanced martial is not so bad compared to an unbalanced spellcaster.
Yeah when I think of actual game balance, its pretty much from levels 3 - 8, maybe 9,10 if I'm pushing it. I have run higher than that, but this is really the bulk of gameplay.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
...what? i meant have every class reference the fighter table ala spellcasters with the multiclassing spellcaster table, not to have them all progress at the same rate. im not sure why you'd think that was what i was saying given the rest of the conversation.
Yeah, I misunderstood, but see my response in post #42.

extremely--this isn't like a build being really good at fighting a specific set of enemies, it's just level 16-20 play. you might as well just completely write off high level play if you think discussing builds at that level is silly. though you do have a point that it takes a while for it to come online.
It's not that I think that high-level examples should be written off completely. It's that I think that this one example is going to be so rare as to be unique.


...that's not how smites work in a5e. you just get a number equal to your proficiency per long rest, each one at the damage listed on the table. you can't get more with spell slots.
I stand corrected. Or rather, I was looking at the empowered smites at the time--which are limited to 1/day--and misinterpreted it, since I was being distracted.
 

xiphumor

Adventurer
Just throwing out there, but a multiclass progression table seems overly complicated. I know sprlcasting has one, but why make martials as complicated as spellcasters?
I like the solution of separate progression. You want high level maneuvers? Specialise in one class!
The problem is not that we want high-level maneuvers. The problem is that we don't want certain classes (especially Heralds) to get high-level maneuvers, and with a 1 level dip into fighter they suddenly can.
 


PauloR

Villager
The problem is not that we want high-level maneuvers. The problem is that we don't want certain classes (especially Heralds) to get high-level maneuvers, and with a 1 level dip into fighter they suddenly can.
Exactly! High level maneuvers should be something fighters and marshals get, not every martial class and certainly not heralds, who also have access to spells
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
why would it be? a 1 level dip in fighter for a herald isn't exactly difficult to justify.
A 1 level dip in fighter and 19 levels of anything else is not common.

It gets you proficiency in two traditions and three first-level maneuvers. That's a nice bonus, sure, but it's not necessarily groundbreaking because you're going to be missing out on maneuver specialization and reserves, which means you'll simply end up with more maneuvers vying for a smaller pool of exertion. If you want to play a herald who rarely casts spells or uses them on enhancing your smites, then that's fine, but that means you'll be missing some cool herald tricks.
 

xiphumor

Adventurer
A 1 level dip in fighter and 19 levels of anything else is not common.

It gets you proficiency in two traditions and three first-level maneuvers. That's a nice bonus, sure, but it's not necessarily groundbreaking because you're going to be missing out on maneuver specialization and reserves, which means you'll simply end up with more maneuvers vying for a smaller pool of exertion. If you want to play a herald who rarely casts spells or uses them on enhancing your smites, then that's fine, but that means you'll be missing some cool herald tricks.
But the pool isn’t smaller now. You have an exertion pool of 12 PLUS all your spell exertion.

You can also pull off some other interesting combos in other classes with a dip into fighter. Berserkers with Razor’s Edge anyone? Or an unarmed fighting style with an Adept to get that early d8 unarmed strike die?
 

W'rkncacnter

Adventurer
A 1 level dip in fighter and 19 levels of anything else is not common.

It gets you proficiency in two traditions and three first-level maneuvers. That's a nice bonus, sure, but it's not necessarily groundbreaking because you're going to be missing out on maneuver specialization and reserves, which means you'll simply end up with more maneuvers vying for a smaller pool of exertion. If you want to play a herald who rarely casts spells or uses them on enhancing your smites, then that's fine, but that means you'll be missing some cool herald tricks.
first off like xip said Heralds are the ONE class that actually gets more exertion from getting a level in another class that gets maneuvers, but second getting proficiency in two more traditions your normal class may not even have is a pretty big boon just due to the added versatility. and you're forgetting one thing this entire thread has been about - one level in fighter gets you the fighter's maneuver progression. i think you're DRASTICALLY underselling the value of fighter 1.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
But the pool isn’t smaller now. You have an exertion pool of 12 PLUS all your spell exertion.

You can also pull off some other interesting combos in other classes with a dip into fighter. Berserkers with Razor’s Edge anyone? Or an unarmed fighting style with an Adept to get that early d8 unarmed strike die?
Where are you getting 12 exertion again? Your exertion doesn't stack. And with Heralds, it specifies you get those four exertion only if your first levels are Herald?
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
first off like xip said Heralds are the ONE class that actually gets more exertion from getting a level in another class that gets maneuvers, but second getting proficiency in two more traditions your normal class may not even have is a pretty big boon just due to the added versatility. and you're forgetting one thing this entire thread has been about - one level in fighter gets you the fighter's maneuver progression. i think you're DRASTICALLY underselling the value of fighter 1.
No, they don't, actually. Heralds get a set number of exertion--the same amount as every other martial class--only if you multiclass and start with a Herald. So if you're, say, a Fighter 3/Herald 1, you have four exertion. Not four plus four plus spell exertion.
 

W'rkncacnter

Adventurer
No, they don't, actually. Heralds get a set number of exertion--the same amount as every other martial class--only if you multiclass and start with a Herald. So if you're, say, a Fighter 3/Herald 1, you have four exertion. Not four plus four plus spell exertion.
...yeah...because...heralds get spell exertion as part of their combat maneuvers feature. so a herald 2/fighter 3 is always going to have 6 exertion and spell slots they can convert into exertion regardless of which class they started in. that's...that's more exertion then a herald 2. and they don't need to keep leveling in fighter to increase that exertion pool, so that pool is gonna keep going up even if they leave their fighter levels at 3.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
...yeah...because...heralds get spell exertion as part of their combat maneuvers feature. so a herald 2/fighter 3 is always going to have 6 exertion and spell slots they can convert into exertion regardless of which class they started in. that's...that's more exertion then a herald 2. and they don't need to keep leveling in fighter to increase that exertion pool, so that pool is gonna keep going up even if they leave their fighter levels at 3.
No, they get 4 exertion and can then spend spell slots to gain more exertion--but they have to spend those slots first. They don't automatically have 6 points in their pool. Additionally, a herald's exertion are temporary, not part of their actual exertion pool, so they can't be replenished by spending HD, because their pool is 4, not 6 or higher.
 

xiphumor

Adventurer
4F739E2F-6DB9-486B-AC58-7329549E0303.jpeg

The relevant passage. Because Herald’s gain an exertion pool equal to twice their proficiency bonus, and because your proficiency bonus changes as you level, a 16 herald / 1 fighter has an exertion of 12.

Even if your first level is in fighter and then you go into Herald, it remains the same because the text only states that your exertion POOL doesn’t stack, and Heralds don’t gain an exertion pool anyway. You would still gain the ability to turn spell slots into exertion.

There’s nothing in the text that says they have to spend spell slots first or that you loose the ability to convert spell slots into exertion.
 
Last edited:

W'rkncacnter

Adventurer
No, they get 4 exertion and can then spend spell slots to gain more exertion--but they have to spend those slots first. They don't automatically have 6 points in their pool. Additionally, a herald's exertion are temporary, not part of their actual exertion pool, so they can't be replenished by spending HD, because their pool is 4, not 6 or higher.
a herald 2/fighter 3 has 6 exertion from the fighter exertion pool, which is twice their proficiency bonus, which at level 5 is +3. and sure, besides those 6 exertion they need to spend spell slots to get more exertion, but they can do so at the start of each of their turns without an action and there's no limit to how many spell slots they can convert at one time. a 20th level herald could theoretically convert all their spell slots into exertion at the start of their first turn in combat (for a total of 82 exertion - good lord) - and it does EXPLICTLY say you can spend MULTIPLE slots at the start of your turn ("[...]at the start of each of your turns you can expend spell slots of 1st-level or higher to gain exertion points[...]").

and who said anything about spending HD? that's not a problem with a herald/fighter multiclass. it's irrelevant.
 


Faolyn

(she/her)
a herald 2/fighter 3 has 6 exertion from the fighter exertion pool, which is twice their proficiency bonus, which at level 5 is +3. and sure, besides those 6 exertion they need to spend spell slots to get more exertion, but they can do so at the start of each of their turns without an action and there's no limit to how many spell slots they can convert at one time. a 20th level herald could theoretically convert all their spell slots into exertion at the start of their first turn in combat (for a total of 82 exertion - good lord) - and it does EXPLICTLY say you can spend MULTIPLE slots at the start of your turn ("[...]at the start of each of your turns you can expend spell slots of 1st-level or higher to gain exertion points[...]").

and who said anything about spending HD? that's not a problem with a herald/fighter multiclass. it's irrelevant.
All right, I apologize about the 6 exertion. But you're still assuming that a person is invariably spending those spell slots on exertion which is not a given. And quite frankly, I can see this as being a thing that is instantly houseruled the second it got abused in that fashion, to one spell/turn. So, maybe useful once.
 


xiphumor

Adventurer
Okay, I think we’re starting to come to a consensus. I would add that if something would be instantly house-ruled, it should just be RAW.

I think Murphy’s Law applies in this situation: if something can go wrong, it will. I.e. if someone can abuse the rules this way, they will. Heck, I’m even tempted to make such a character, and I’m here complaining about its possibility!
 

The Weather Outside Is Frightful!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top