Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ancalagon" data-source="post: 7203698" data-attributes="member: 23">Soin 2nd ed, multiclassing was quite different than it is today.  A fighter/mage was almost as powerfull as a mage or a fighter of that level.  This was "balanced out" via 2 ways.  First, this option was limited to only certain races (basically, not for humans) and was also level-capped.  I think we can all agree that this is a terrible idea.   Also, on average, they were one level behind (or 2 level behinds for triple class), although with the caveat that because different classes had different XP requirements this was not an absolute rule (so for example, in a party where the average single class member was level 8, the multi-class character would be level 7/7).  HP was averaged out between each class, so a level 7/7 fighter mage would have an average HP at the midpoint between a fighter and a mage at level 7. Because being one level behind wasn't "enough" to balance, *and* probably because "balancing" via race restriction/level cap was a terrible idea, 3e (and 5e) went in a completely different direction, an "additive" process where a level 8 character could be a level 8 fighter, a level 4/4 fighter/mage, 1/7 rogue/sorcerer etc etc...   This was a reasonable approach, but not everyone is 100% happy with it, and part of me misses those 2nd ed style multi-class characters... So I've been thinking.  First, In 5e, being one level behind matters more than it did in 2nd ed, because it's not just about getting those sweet sweet level 3 spells.  Almost every classes gets something at each level, and there are also the ASI and the proficiency bonuses to consider.  So being behind 1 level in 5e "hurts" more than in 2nd ed.   But I think it's not enough.  So what if you didn't have access to your subclass?  A fighter mage wouldn't be a "chamption/abjurer" - he would only get the benefits of being a plain fighter and a plain mage?   Would this be enough to "balance" a 2nd ed style multi class character in 5e?So to recap, my proposal is:A: a 2-class multiclass character would be one level behind (XP cost to reach level 5/5 is the same as reaching level 6)B:  HP would be averaged between the 2 class value, as per 2nd ed.  (edit: A level 5/5 character has 5 hitdice, *not* 10, ie the level 5/5 fighter mage does NOT have 5d10+5d6, rather 5D10+5d6/2)C:  Sub-class benefits would not be available. D:  Skill selection would be taken from the combined list of both class list of skills, but number of skills would not be doubled, but rather be the best of either (so if class A gives you 2 skills, and class B gives you 3 skills, pick 3 skills)E:  ASI would be based on the overall character level - so a level 4/4 fighter/mage has 1 ASI, not 2!edit:  Added, E, and also note that it's A and B and C, not A or B or C... Would this work?There are some caveats here1:  I don't think this works for triple class2:  Some class have more loaded in their subclasses than others3:  I have no clue what to do with the warlock, which effectively has a subclass made of 2 sub-sub classes4:  I don't think that arcane:arcane should be allowed, heck maybe limit it to a single spell-casting class5:  *Maybe* limit it to the 4 "core" classes (fighter rogue cleric wizard)? (edit: probably could add sorcerer to that list)6:  This may make some subclasses invalid.edit 2:  added clarification HP, caveat #6</blockquote>

Verification