D&D 5E Ability Score Requeriments for Multiclassing, yay or nay?

[MerricB]

I say keep the restrictions. Multiclass characters should be the exception, not the rule, and that means having exceptional ability scores. It's more like old-school D&D - not everyone gets to be a fighter-mage, for example. WotC seems to want an old-school feel to D&D Next. I imagine that's why the default method for determining ability scores is the dice rolling method, with point buy or array being optional.

Although I like the restrictions, the multiclass characters of AD&D were actually more likely to be characters with lower stats (as they made up for them with greater versatility) - it was the real specialist classes (e.g. paladin, ranger, monk) that had the most onerous stat restrictions. Human characters with two classes, on the other hand, were slightly hard to qualify for (and probably weren't worth it).

I do agree with those that note that a high-Str fighter isn't the only way the D&D Next fighter can be built...

 

[MerricB]

I like the requirements.

In addition, I want taking the first level of a new class to come with hefty opportunity cost in the downtime system. This will, on the margin, encourage multiclassing for story rather than optimization reasons.

I appreciate taking extra time to train, but one of the chief arguments against training has always been more time-related campaign arcs that require the gaining of levels with very little downtime. There have been more of a few of those in the history of the game!

I also have a particular problem when the character concept should be multiclassed from the start, but the game mechanics require them to only multiclass later in their career. We had a lot of elf fighter/magic-users in the day, but requiring them to take a month off (say) for training when they add "magic-user" to their first level "fighter" just seems somewhat wrong to me. Multiclassing is often a way of allowing a character concept that the basic classes don't allow, but would be a "core" class of the game world. Yes, the character has just gained spells - but they've been training in spell-casting for a lot of time, this is just the first time they are able to do it effectively.

Cheers!

 

[DonAdam]

I appreciate taking extra time to train, but one of the chief arguments against training has always been more time-related campaign arcs that require the gaining of levels with very little downtime. There have been more of a few of those in the history of the game!

I also have a particular problem when the character concept should be multiclassed from the start, but the game mechanics require them to only multiclass later in their career. We had a lot of elf fighter/magic-users in the day, but requiring them to take a month off (say) for training when they add "magic-user" to their first level "fighter" just seems somewhat wrong to me. Multiclassing is often a way of allowing a character concept that the basic classes don't allow, but would be a "core" class of the game world. Yes, the character has just gained spells - but they've been training in spell-casting for a lot of time, this is just the first time they are able to do it effectively.

Cheers!

I just don't see those as problems. If its legitimately part of the character's early concept then the level in the second class should happen early. Ideally, they would introduce rules for starting off multiclassed to support such characters.

I'm perfectly willing to accept story limitations on multiclassing; if you're in the middle of a mega-dungeon swinging a sword, you don't suddenly learn how to cast spells. Yes, there is cost here, but there are also costs to the dipping system.

 

[am181d]

Let's break it down. There are two reasons folks are in favor of restrictions on multi-classing:

1) balance
2) narrative justification

While pre-reqs MIGHT be a viable balancing mechanic, they're certainly not a NECESSARY balancing mechanic, and clearly the focus should be on how powers are distributed across levels and aggregated between classes.

And when it comes to narrative justification, I'd be MUUUUUUCH happier with a series of OPTIONAL GUIDELINES for DM's to impose narrative pre-requisites (i.e. training, special quests, etc). Individual DMs could then include or disclude based on what works best for their own campaign.

 

[tuxgeo]

< snip >
I would like to see increased requirements if one takes more than one multi-class choice (I cannot remember if you can, and am not willing to check.)

(I cannot give XP to Dice4Hire again this soon, alas.)

That's an excellent idea.

Perhaps one way to accomplish it would be to make the first multi-class free of stat prerequisites, then have average or slightly above average stat prerequisites for the second multi-classing (maybe a 12?), and save the higher prerequisites for third or fourth multi-classes. (However, that scheme is a bit fiddly, and it would increase the size and complexity of the rules book.)

 

[Henry]

I don't mind them - in fact, they remind me a bit of the old 1st edition dual-classing restrictions, and the requirement of someone having innate talent to overcome years of training makes sense, and explains why someone who has a few weeks of training can enter a class in which someone else took years to become a journeyman.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think it's a reasonable starting point. It isn't perfect, but I think the rationale behind it is sound. A character who wants to learn wizardry while adventuring ought to be highly intelligent.

As for the fighter, I think that's more of an issue with the "catch-all" nature of that class. Yes, you might be picking up a level of fighter to represent those lessons you had with that fencing master, but don't forget that you've suddenly also learned to proficiently swing a great sword and fight in plate mail.

I think there are two potential solutions.

They could put in a sidebar explaining that the DM is free to waive or impose different requirements depending on the circumstances. In the case of the aforementioned duelist, perhaps the DM decides that instead of a 15 Str the PC needs a 15 Dex.

Alternately, they could create level 1 multi-classing "entryways". For example, you'd have the Duelist entryway which requires a 15 Dex to take. This grants you your first level of fighter, but it only grants you proficiency with Finesse weapons and Light armor. Perhaps it also limits his choice of fighting style to either Defensive or Two Weapon. After that, he is free to advance in the fighter class as normal.

 

[Jester David]

I'm okay with stat restrictions.
Multiclassing has the potential for great abuse, and some limits prevent abuse. And there' style narrative justification that you need to be naturally talented to train in something outside your specialization.

And it's pretty easy to ignore the restrictions if it doesn't fit your campaign. It's always preferable to add restrictions individual DMs can ignore rather than open rules that the DM has to house rule restrictions onto. It's simply easier to grant permission than take it away.

 

[MoonSong]

I'm okay with stat restrictions.
Multiclassing has the potential for great abuse, and some limits prevent abuse. And there' style narrative justification that you need to be naturally talented to train in something outside your specialization.

Get Str 14 Dex14 Con 12 Int 9 Wis 14 Cha 12, pick human, start as mage or bard, you now qualify for all other eight classes. How is that preventing abuse?

And it's pretty easy to ignore the restrictions if it doesn't fit your campaign. It's always preferable to add restrictions individual DMs can ignore rather than open rules that the DM has to house rule restrictions onto. It's simply easier to grant permission than take it away.

I'm not against providing optional rules for multiclass restrictions, but they must be that, optional. And they rather be based on something other than ability scores -specially such a narrow minded approach to them, why do I need a str15 if I want to be an archer fighter?, why do I need uber intelligence if I want to multiclass Mage(sorcerer)?, why high Dex if I want to be a conman Rogue?- , point buy manipulation is one of the tools the DMs have for establishing the mood of a campaign, and having something as important as multiclassing pinned down on it reduces the ability of the DM to customize her campaign.

 

[GX.Sigma]

The real question is, how much should multiclassing be limited?

The real answer is, it depends on the DM and the campaign.

In light of this, I don't see any reason why there should be a default limitation at all. Just have the multiclassing rules, and have a little DM guidance saying "if you want to limit multiclassing for whatever reason, you can do it in these ways."