D&D 5E Class bloat without multiclassing?

[FrogReaver]

Interesting. Are there any necessary abstractions?

If you want to understand this, then you need to accept that the rules of the game reflect the reality of the game world. You need to reject the unnecessary abstractions, like saying that the less-skilled fighter is attacking just as quickly, even though observation shows us that there is a definite line of experience where they go from never landing two blows in six second to often landing two blows in six seconds. That was an abstraction which was useful in the days of minute-long rounds, but it detracts from the game as a statistical model. Think of it in terms of firing arrows, if it helps, since we know for a fact that each attack roll corresponds to exactly one arrow in flight.

If you accept the basic premise, that the rules of the game reflect the reality of the game world, then it is a true fact of their reality that competent warriors can fire arrows twice as quickly as less-skilled warriors, and even more-skilled warriors can fire three or (theoretically) four times as quickly. (It's also true that sometimes, very briefly, trained warriors can act even more quickly than they typically do; but it's not something anyone can keep up for very long, so they need to rest before they can do it again.) We know that this is true, because any test that we run can confirm it; if you put a reasonably-experienced archer against a novice, in a contest of hitting twenty bullseyes or killing twenty kobolds, the experienced archer will reach their goal in about half the time. And given that it is empirically true that their world works that way, then it stands to reason that the characters would know this; after all, they actually live in that world, and we only visit there for a couple of hours per week.

If you instead reject the premise, and say that the rules of the game don't reflect the reality of the game world, then you need to come up with some explanation for why every test we conduct conforms to the rules but not to the reality. In fact, if the rules don't reflect the reality, then we have no clue to what that reality even is. If we don't say that one attack roll corresponds to one meaningful swing of the sword, and that a successful hit for damage means you actually hit and caused damage (because you want to use super-abstract HP for some reason), then we have no idea how many swings you actually made or whether you actually hit or caused damage.

Which goes to the underlying point: If the mechanics of the game don't tell us what's actually happening within the game world, then what good are they to us? If the DM has to make something up anyway, because the rules don't tell us what happens, then why do we need rules at all? Why does it matter what you decide to do, from an RP perspective, if none of your choices correspond to the reality that your character observes? If we want our choices to matter, and for them to be the same choices that our characters face - if we want to actually role-play at all - then we need the rules to reflect the reality.

 

[FrogReaver]

Maybe not at all, actually. Because, heck, they probably made sure they had a 13+ intelligence *specifically* so they could MC into wizard. I'd say MCing to wizard might even be the *most* common choice for your identified subset of fighter.

But I was asking about doing it after exactly 4 levels of fighter. Any comment on that part?

 

[Corwin]

But I was asking about doing it after exactly 4 levels of fighter. Any comment on that part?

Why would it be any less likely than after 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level fighter? You still haven't explained the reasoning for why 4th is so pivotal to your point. They all result in getting Extra Attack at 6th level instead of 5th. All of them. Equally.

But anyhoo, how's this reason for waiting til 4th (and one your min-max brain might even dig--I know *mine* does): "I've held off MCing until fighter 4 because I really wanted to get my ASI. But now that I have that, I desperately need to start being able to cast shield. So I'm going to take wizard 1 now. Awesome! Now I'm even *more* tankier than before with just my parry superiority dice!"

 

[FrogReaver]

Why would it be any less likely than after 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level fighter? You still haven't explained the reasoning for why 4th is so pivotal to your point. They all result in getting Extra Attack at 6th level instead of 5th. All of them. Equally.

But anyhoo, how's this reason for waiting til 4th (and one your min-max brain might even dig--I know *mine* does): "I've held off MCing until fighter 4 because I really wanted to get my ASI. But now that I have that, I desperately need to start being able to cast shield. So I'm going to take wizard 1 now. Awesome! Now I'm even *more* tankier than before with just my parry superiority dice!"

So you don't believe it's less likely to see a fighter 4 /wizard 1 than a fighter 5 / wizard 1?

 

[Corwin]

So you don't believe it's less likely to see a fighter 4 /wizard 1 than a fighter 5 / wizard 1?

I think, given the parameters you set, of a fighter with a 13+ intelligence and penchant to want to MC into wizard, that you are *less* likely to see the player wait until 5th. That's a long time to wait for something they are interested in.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think, given the parameters you set, of a fighter with a 13+ intelligence and penchant to want to MC into wizard, that you are *less* likely to see the player wait until 5th. That's a long time to wait for something they are interested in.

So you believe that a fighter 4 then taking wizard 1 is more likely than a fighter 5 then taking wizard 1?

 

[Corwin]

So you believe that a fighter 4 then taking wizard 1 is more likely than a fighter 5 then taking wizard 1?

I'm almost positive I already answered 'yes' to that exact question, given the specific parameters you keep insisting on. I'm starting to get the impression I'm not being listened to. Time to have another adult beverage and find something fun to watch on the ol' idiot box.

 

[corwyn77]

irrelevant post

 

[Tony Vargas]

Did I miss a reason this hypothetical all-organic fighter didn't just go EK at 3rd?

 

[Barolo]

(...)

... whether *anyone* *ever* multiclasses for in-story, organic reasons. (...)

Just to add on that, I think this hard distinction between multiclassing for "in-story, organic reasons" or multiclassing for mechanical reasons can be blurred. As an anecdote:

One of my players had this history that he was a member of a merchant family with shadowy affairs, and he was directly involved on smuggling and handling unpleasant figures on behalf on his family. He started thus as a rogue, quite suitable for the background provided. Because of his family dealings, he also got hand on valuable and exotic merchandise, some of which, he noticed, had mysterious properties. One of such items was a figurine in the form of a man with one goat-leg, that he decided to keep for himself, as he felt like the figure looked after him as a kind of protection token.

Eventually, his family got involved in business with a more shadowy partner, that "played on another league", who eventually betrayed and killed all his kin, setting fire to their headquarters while blocking the exits. He barely managed to survive and escape, got all scarred by the flames, and became a hunted man. At this moment, the figurine reached for him. It promised him protection against persecution, and also power to carry out his vengeance, in exchange for his soul. He went for it.

By multiclassing into warlock, the player was clearly looking for game-mechanical benefits. Mask of many faces, devil sight, access to the spell darkness. But the "in-story character" was looking for pretty much the same "in-story benefits". He was hunted, a known face by his persecutors, and even a fairly distinguishable individual by the scars, had his nemesis decided to employ bounty hunters, so in dire need of the disguise offered by the figurine. He was driven by vengeance, and wanted power to exact it, which the figurine was eager to provide. Heck, when I think about it, aren't most choices (not just multiclassing) done at character development a mix of in-story and game-mechanic reasons? Not hard to guess he chose to become an assassin as his rogue archetype, again for reasons on both sides.