D&D 5E Dual classing; solution to multiclassing?

[TwoSix]

With 6-8 encounters per day, having 3-4 rounds of casting plus some bonus actions and reaction spells (thank you shieeld, counterspell, etc.) is completely reasonable. Lowballing 6 encounters of 3 actions plus a single reaction/bonus action spell is 24 spells/day right there. Not including any utility spells cast at other times.

Sure, but a lot of those actions are simply going to be replacing a casting of a cantrip with a 1st level spell. I'm not knocking the utility of having some extra shields and mirror images, but I don't think some extra shields and flaming spheres will make up for not having fireball and spirit guardians until level 8, or polymorph or banishment until 11.

Honestly, this kind of feels like the debates around Mystic Theurge in 3.5 days...it seemed way too powerful, right up until everyone realized that high level spells were simply more valuable than endurance of low level spells. Now, the 5e balance of spells has shifted, true...there are several low level spells that are useful right up until the end of the game. But have a 2-4 level lag in gaining higher level spells isn't nothing; there's a reason why casters rarely dip, despite the obvious benefits of Action Surge or Smite and armor proficiencies.

To my mind, a multiclass Cleric/Druid or Sorcerer/Warlock isn't a no-brainer choice under this system over a single-class, for 5e, that's all the balance I really require.

 

[Blue]

Sure, but a lot of those actions are simply going to be replacing a casting of a cantrip with a 1st level spell. I'm not knocking the utility of having some extra shields and mirror images, but I don't think some extra shields and flaming spheres will make up for not having fireball and spirit guardians until level 8, or polymorph or banishment until 11.

Honestly, this kind of feels like the debates around Mystic Theurge in 3.5 days...it seemed way too powerful, right up until everyone realized that high level spells were simply more valuable than endurance of low level spells. Now, the 5e balance of spells has shifted, true...there are several low level spells that are useful right up until the end of the game. But have a 2-4 level lag in gaining higher level spells isn't nothing; there's a reason why casters rarely dip, despite the obvious benefits of Action Surge or Smite and armor proficiencies.

To my mind, a multiclass Cleric/Druid or Sorcerer/Warlock isn't a no-brainer choice under this system over a single-class, for 5e, that's all the balance I really require.

I won't be able to convince you if you willfully ignore the numbers I put up, but I can warn others.

The bonus spells a single classed caster 20 has over the dual classed caster/caster 20 (each at 13th) is the one 8th and one 9th level spells. This is a big deal and I'm not trying to say it isn't.

However, they gain a HECK of a lot more than "replacing a cantrip with a 1st level slot", which is why I also reported all of the total spell levels. Sure the dual caster has twice as many 1st, but it also has twice as many 2nd, twice as many 3rd, twice as many 4th, and more 5th. Even after missing that 8th and 9th, it's still close to 20 spell levels worth of slots ahead.

So in honesty, the sentence is more like "replace a cantrip with a 3rd level spell" -- considering that there will be some both higher and lower. I think it's generally acceptable to assume extra fireballs, hastes, flys, counterspells, etc. can do more than a cantrip.

 

[TwoSix]

I won't be able to convince you if you willfully ignore the numbers I put up, but I can warn others.

I didn't ignore the numbers, I just didn't find them that compelling. But kudos for being willing to make a long post as a PSA.

Thought experiment...ignoring the houseruled multiclassing from the OP for a second. If a cleric 9/wizard 11 didn't use the normal multiclass spellcasting rules, but gained the slots of a wizard 11 and cleric 9, would that be unbalanced? That would be gaining 4/3/3/3/1 in exchange for 1 6th, 2 7th, 1 8th and 1 9th. (133 SP versus a combined 130, also). To me, that feels pretty balanced. If so, then the difference between 9/11 and 13/13 is finding the right balance point, not that the concept is essentially unworkable.

 

[Blue]

I didn't ignore the numbers, I just didn't find them that compelling. But kudos for being willing to make a long post as a PSA.

Thought experiment...ignoring the houseruled multiclassing from the OP for a second. If a cleric 9/wizard 11 didn't use the normal multiclass spellcasting rules, but gained the slots of a wizard 11 and cleric 9, would that be unbalanced? That would be gaining 4/3/3/3/1 in exchange for 1 6th, 2 7th, 1 8th and 1 9th. (133 SP versus a combined 130, also). To me, that feels pretty balanced. If so, then the difference between 9/11 and 13/13 is finding the right balance point, not that the concept is essentially unworkable.

First, you did ignore the numbers because you compared it to most of the time replacing a cantrip with a 1st level spell, which was not the case and clearly called out in the numbers. If The numbers - simple additions from the PHB tables - are true. To intentionally quote a wrong number because you don't find the truth "compelling" is actively lying.

Second, I will not fall into the trap of "oh, this whole other thing n one has evaluated I think will be balanced vs. the current single classed casters, so this first thing near it is also balanced". You are welcome to try, with numbers and facts, to try to convince us that it's balanced if you'd like.

 

[TwoSix]

First, you did ignore the numbers because you compared it to most of the time replacing a cantrip with a 1st level spell, which was not the case and clearly called out in the numbers. If The numbers - simple additions from the PHB tables - are true. To intentionally quote a wrong number because you don't find the truth "compelling" is actively lying.

Second, I will not fall into the trap of "oh, this whole other thing n one has evaluated I think will be balanced vs. the current single classed casters, so this first thing near it is also balanced". You are welcome to try, with numbers and facts, to try to convince us that it's balanced if you'd like.

Nah.

 

[Horwath]

I won't be able to convince you if you willfully ignore the numbers I put up, but I can warn others.

The bonus spells a single classed caster 20 has over the dual classed caster/caster 20 (each at 13th) is the one 8th and one 9th level spells. This is a big deal and I'm not trying to say it isn't.

However, they gain a HECK of a lot more than "replacing a cantrip with a 1st level slot", which is why I also reported all of the total spell levels. Sure the dual caster has twice as many 1st, but it also has twice as many 2nd, twice as many 3rd, twice as many 4th, and more 5th. Even after missing that 8th and 9th, it's still close to 20 spell levels worth of slots ahead.

So in honesty, the sentence is more like "replace a cantrip with a 3rd level spell" -- considering that there will be some both higher and lower. I think it's generally acceptable to assume extra fireballs, hastes, flys, counterspells, etc. can do more than a cantrip.

at 20th level as a caster you WANT 9th,8th and 7th level slots.

others are more or less waste of an action, unless the fight streches to 15-20 rounds.

many low level buff spells compete for "concetration slot" so many slots does not help much. But it is some comfort for losing highest level slots.

And if it spammable damage spells, most cantrips at lvl17 outperform lvl1 and lvl2 and some lvl3 damage spells.

Best use you get from is "reaction time spells" like shield.

 

[Fanaelialae]

at 20th level as a caster you WANT 9th,8th and 7th level slots.

others are more or less waste of an action, unless the fight streches to 15-20 rounds.

many low level buff spells compete for "concetration slot" so many slots does not help much. But it is some comfort for losing highest level slots.

And if it spammable damage spells, most cantrips at lvl17 outperform lvl1 and lvl2 and some lvl3 damage spells.

Best use you get from is "reaction time spells" like shield.

Having run a campaign that went to high levels (19th) and played in several that got to the mid-teens, I can tell you from experience that this is false.

(Not the part about wanting those slots; at 1st level you want those slots, you just can't have them.)

You have one of each slot at high levels (two 7th level slots at 20th). These are spells that you certainly want to have, but they're probably not going to end a challenging fight on their own at 20th. High level casters are designed to need to use lower level spell slots.

Having more castings of fireball and polymorph is not insignificant, even at 20th. (And that doesn't even take into account the utility uses of lower level slots, like rope trick, which you never truly outgrow.)

 

[Horwath]

Having run a campaign that went to high levels (19th) and played in several that got to the mid-teens, I can tell you from experience that this is false.

(Not the part about wanting those slots; at 1st level you want those slots, you just can't have them.)

You have one of each slot at high levels (two 7th level slots at 20th). These are spells that you certainly want to have, but they're probably not going to end a challenging fight on their own at 20th. High level casters are designed to need to use lower level spell slots.

Having more castings of fireball and polymorph is not insignificant, even at 20th. (And that doesn't even take into account the utility uses of lower level slots, like rope trick, which you never truly outgrow.)

that is the point of these suggestions, more utility vs power.

also if you are wizard20, you get spell mastery at 18th level, one 1st and one 2nd level spell at will.
and 20th level signature spell, two 3rd level spell once per short rest.

that alone trumps extra spell slots of 1st,2nd and 3rd level that you get from 13/13 dual class.

 

[akr71]

As a player, if I chose to stay single classed, I might resent the multiclass character who is effective level 10 while I am level 8 (or 14 at my 11, etc) from the OP original table.

I have never played or dm'd a campaign past level 11 in 5e yet, but I would be inclined to keep multiclassing as is and when the character hits level 20, allow them to still level up instead of handing out Epic Boons. Perhaps every 50000XP instead of 30000XP as the DMG suggests for Epic Boons. However, in all honesty, I don't think I would ever need to introduce it at our table - by level 10, we're all looking at finishing up and moving on to a new campaign, new characters, etc.

 

[Horwath]

As a player, if I chose to stay single classed, I might resent the multiclass character who is effective level 10 while I am level 8 (or 14 at my 11, etc) from the OP original table.

not quite lvl10 vs lvl8.

He/she would still have HPs of 8th level character and proficiency bonus of 8th level.