Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jmartkdr2" data-source="post: 8267222" data-attributes="member: 7017304">Another point I'm seeing in this thread: 3dual/e/5e style multiclassing in particular being seen as a problem, rather than the broader idea of characters getting to break out of their class silos. Which is fair.Dual-classing and/or 3e/5e style multiclassing is really good at expressing career changes: the fighter gets religion, stops her weapon training and becomes a cleric. You stop adding fighter levels and start adding cleric levels. Perfect! (You'll sometimes also see this when the player of a mid-level martial realizes they've already gotten all the cool features of a class, so they start shopping around, but a ranger deciding to focus more on weapons isn't a huge narrative stretch.)But that's only one reason to multiclass, and it's not even a common one. Most MCing in my experience is either to make a hybrid character (a sword-mage, for example) or to snag a particular feature from another class (ie the dreaded hex-dip). Neither of these are bad motivations, but the existing 5e multiclass rules don't serve them well, which is a problem.For dips, the feat system would be a better system to lean on. Some of the recent UA's (and maybe Tasha's, I don't have that book yet) started leaning in this direction. I'm not totally cool with making Hex Warrior a feat, but it'd be better than every paladin and bard making a deal with a 'mysterious entity from the Shadowfell.'Hybrids, ultimately, need their own class or subclass. It's why we have paladins in the first place. The PHB Eldritch Knight falls short for a lot of people, but it didn't have to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jmartkdr2, post: 8267222, member: 7017304"] Another point I'm seeing in this thread: 3dual/e/5e style multiclassing in particular being seen as a problem, rather than the broader idea of characters getting to break out of their class silos. Which is fair. Dual-classing and/or 3e/5e style multiclassing is really good at expressing career changes: the fighter gets religion, stops her weapon training and becomes a cleric. You stop adding fighter levels and start adding cleric levels. Perfect! (You'll sometimes also see this when the player of a mid-level martial realizes they've already gotten all the cool features of a class, so they start shopping around, but a ranger deciding to focus more on weapons isn't a huge narrative stretch.) But that's only one reason to multiclass, and it's not even a common one. Most MCing in my experience is either to make a hybrid character (a sword-mage, for example) or to snag a particular feature from another class (ie the dreaded hex-dip). Neither of these are [I]bad motivations[/I], but the existing 5e multiclass rules don't serve them well, which is a problem. For dips, the feat system would be a better system to lean on. Some of the recent UA's (and maybe Tasha's, I don't have that book yet) started leaning in this direction. I'm not totally cool with making Hex Warrior a feat, but it'd be better than every paladin and bard making a deal with a 'mysterious entity from the Shadowfell.' Hybrids, ultimately, need their own class or subclass. It's why we have paladins in the first place. The PHB Eldritch Knight falls short for a lot of people, but it didn't have to. [/QUOTE]

Verification