D&D 5E Cross-classing Subclasses and Multiple subclasses

[DND_Reborn]

Partially inspired by other threads, and also by some ideas I've had, I would like some input (if you care to add your two cents) to a couple ideas:

1. Cross-classing Subclasses

Here is the idea. Certain subclasses "work" under any class to one degree or another. For example, Assassin. You could be playing a Fighter, for instance, and if you could take Assassin as a subclass, it works perfectly (even if you have to adjust when features are awarded) both in flavor and story. A Monk (Assassin) would work as well. And there are others.

Now, of course, most subclasses have to be within the main class because it grants improvements or enhancements to features of that class, so this is not universal by any means.

But, what are your thoughts on this type of cross-classing a subclass? Would you allow it? Does it create anything too good?

2. Multiple Subclasses

I've seen some people mention this and our table has discussed it briefly before. It is a pretty simple idea. When you reach a subclass award level, you take a subclass for your main class. For example, a Fighter begins with Battle Master at 3rd level. At 7th level, instead of learning the next feature of Battle Master, the Figher learns the first feature of Champion. In essence, you sort of track your progression in your subclasses. The same Fighter, at level 10, chooses to return to Battle Master, gaining the second feature. You can't "skip" features, so to say.

I know some people are using this, what has your results been? Is it too good, do players like it, did you abandon it? For people who've never done it, what are your thoughts?

As always, thanks for your time and thoughts.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Sounds a bit like a 4e Theme or 3e Prestige Class.

 

[Salthorae]

2. Multiple Subclasses

We do this, and I think I shared my original post on here about it. We call it Multi-pathing.

It works great. My players like the freedom it allows them to roll mold their character with the story. It's definitely not too good. If anything, like is often (though no always) the case with 5e multiclassing, the character ends up slightly behind the potential curve because they sacrifice higher level abilities to get what they want rather than what they're supposed to have.

We haven't abandoned it, it's on the table as an option for people who want to take it, and it gets used sometimes. Slightly less than multiclassing.

It never made sense to me why a "thief" could never learn how to assassinate someone or pick up some magic at higher levels just because they started their rogue career as a thief.

 

[Larnievc]

Partially inspired by other threads, and also by some ideas I've had, I would like some input (if you care to add your two cents) to a couple ideas:

1. Cross-classing Subclasses

Here is the idea. Certain subclasses "work" under any class to one degree or another. For example, Assassin. You could be playing a Fighter, for instance, and if you could take Assassin as a subclass, it works perfectly (even if you have to adjust when features are awarded) both in flavor and story. A Monk (Assassin) would work as well. And there are others.

Now, of course, most subclasses have to be within the main class because it grants improvements or enhancements to features of that class, so this is not universal by any means.

But, what are your thoughts on this type of cross-classing a subclass? Would you allow it? Does it create anything too good?

2. Multiple Subclasses

I've seen some people mention this and our table has discussed it briefly before. It is a pretty simple idea. When you reach a subclass award level, you take a subclass for your main class. For example, a Fighter begins with Battle Master at 3rd level. At 7th level, instead of learning the next feature of Battle Master, the Figher learns the first feature of Champion. In essence, you sort of track your progression in your subclasses. The same Fighter, at level 10, chooses to return to Battle Master, gaining the second feature. You can't "skip" features, so to say.

I know some people are using this, what has your results been? Is it too good, do players like it, did you abandon it? For people who've never done it, what are your thoughts?

As always, thanks for your time and thoughts.

This seems a bit like kits in 2nd ed.

 

[DND_Reborn]

We do this, and I think I shared my original post on here about it. We call it Multi-pathing.

It works great. My players like the freedom it allows them to roll mold their character with the story. It's definitely not too good. If anything, like is often (though no always) the case with 5e multiclassing, the character ends up slightly behind the potential curve because they sacrifice higher level abilities to get what they want rather than what they're supposed to have.

We haven't abandoned it, it's on the table as an option for people who want to take it, and it gets used sometimes. Slightly less than multiclassing.

It never made sense to me why a "thief" could never learn how to assassinate someone or pick up some magic at higher levels just because they started their rogue career as a thief.

Ah, yes, multi-pathing! I remember that now. I am glad to hear you've had good experiences with it. As I've looked at some subclasses, often times I would rather have the initial features of a new subclass than the second feature of my initial one.

A LOT of 5E never made any sense to me from a flavor/story perspective, so I can only get it was a balance decision or something at some point.

Sounds a bit like a 4e Theme or 3e Prestige Class.

This seems a bit like kits in 2nd ed.

"Kits" I think would be more similar to the idea than Prestige Classes. I don't know how close it mirrors Themes since I never played or looked at 4E.

Like I said, a lot of subclasses are dependent on class features for their benefits so this idea won't work. But, some subclasses could be universal.

 

[Tony Vargas]

"Kits" I think would be more similar to the idea than Prestige Classes. I don't know how close it mirrors Themes since I never played or looked at 4E.

Kits were class-specific, but some had close analogs across several classes.

Themes were like expanded backgrounds, they let you swap out class utilities for specific theme utilities, as you leveled, if you wanted. You couldn't do something that simple, in 5e, because progression is not consistent across classes.

PrCs, of course, replace one or more class levels.

So none of them are quite the same.

Starting with a custom Background might make sense, though.

 

[TwoSix]

I've toyed with the idea of allowing every PC to get 2 subclasses. Other than the bookkeeping hassle, I don't think it's a big deal. Letting them take a subclass from another class in an interesting idea, though...I'd have to think about that one more.

Designing generic classes that can also take multiple subclasses and fitting them into the progression is also a pretty interesting idea.

 

[GlassJaw]

I like this idea a LOT, and I've been working on something very similar myself.

However, my concern is that it will lead to cherry-picking. The subclasses are written with the three pillars in mind. Subglasses usually grant a combat ability first and a social/exploration ability after. If any subclass ability can be selected, you'll end up with every rogue taking Assassinate and every Battlemaster fighter taking Improved Critical.

I've been working on a more a system where subclass abilities are categorized or grouped into tiers. So a Battlemaster can take Improved Critical but he would have to take a social or exploration ability first. Might not necessary but my gut says you will see the same abilities rise to the top very quickly.

These design exercises illustrate how well 5E handles a la carte character customization. You could extrapolate this to the extreme and put most of the subclass abilities across all classes (within reason) into a big bucket and let players go nuts.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I like this idea a LOT, and I've been working on something very similar myself.

However, my concern is that it will lead to cherry-picking. The subclasses are written with the three pillars in mind. Subglasses usually grant a combat ability first and a social/exploration ability after. If any subclass ability can be selected, you'll end up with every rogue taking Assassinate and every Battlemaster fighter taking Improved Critical.

I've been working on a more a system where subclass abilities are categorized or grouped into tiers. So a Battlemaster can take Improved Critical but he would have to take a social or exploration ability first. Might not necessary but my gut says you will see the same abilities rise to the top very quickly.

These design exercises illustrate how well 5E handles a la carte character customization. You could extrapolate this to the extreme and put most of the subclass abilities across all classes (within reason) into a big bucket and let players go nuts.

The cherry-picking was also a concern of mine. But another issue is that many features for subclasses sort of suck IMO. For instance, I think "Know Your Enemy" (Battle Master feature #2) is just about useless. Now, you do get two more maneuvers at the same time, so I guess Know Your Enemy can't be too good... shrug

 

[GlassJaw]

The cherry-picking was also a concern of mine. But another issue is that many features for subclasses sort of suck IMO. For instance, I think "Know Your Enemy" (Battle Master feature #2) is just about useless. Now, you do get two more maneuvers at the same time, so I guess Know Your Enemy can't be too good... shrug

Agreed. Subclass abilities (like feats) are nowhere near made equal. That's the trick with introducing a la carte choice to 5E. 5E handles a la carte customization and modularity but the abilities themselves aren't designed and balanced against each other to support it cleanly.