D&D 5E Eldritch Blast Mulitclass Clarification

[Ovinomancer]

Im stuggling to see a need for a houserule.

If a PC wants to delay access to higher level abilities (and feats) for a decent ranged attack, Its not breaking anything.

I cant see any players rushing into a 2 level dip of Warlock just to spam eldritch blast.

Then allow me to point to Post #25, so that you may struggle no more.

If you still disagree, I'll see you at the table on Sunday and we can discuss it in person. You are in my game, right?

 

[Flamestrike]

Then allow me to point to Post #25, so that you may struggle no more.

Yeah I get that. Im disagreeing with the premise of your argument.

You posted it on an internet forum, so I can only assume you were seeking public discussion of your views?

If you still disagree, I'll see you at the table on Sunday and we can discuss it in person. You are in my game, right?

Not unless you live in Perth, Western Australia. If you do, Im always on the look-out for games.

Of course, you are probably just trying to shut down discussion on the topic now that its become obvious that everyone disagrees with you, which (to my mind) defeats the purpose of posting it on an internet forum for discussion in the first place, but hey.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Yeah I get that. Im disagreeing with the premise of your argument.

You posted it on an internet forum, so I can only assume you were seeking public discussion of your views?



Not unless you live in Perth, Western Australia. If you do, Im always on the look-out for games.

Of course, you are probably just trying to shut down discussion on the topic now that its become obvious that everyone disagrees with you, which (to my mind) defeats the purpose of posting it on an internet forum for discussion in the first place, but hey.

No, because I don't disagree with you. It's a suboptimal choice. That's not the basis for my decision. The basis for my decision is that I don't like the flavor of a toe-dip getting the same thing as a straight caster, optimizing or not. So, unless you'd like to discuss the flavor instead of the math, you're not saying anything about my argument. If you feel that's shutting down discussion because I think everyone disagrees with me, that's your call, but you'll be wrong. I'm just not terribly interested in another person showing me how the math isn't that bad when the math isn't my problem.

If that means I'm not playing the game they way you want me to, either 5e or Messageboards: the Arguing, I'm okay with that.

 

[Flamestrike]

The basis for my decision is that I don't like the flavor of a toe-dip getting the same thing as a straight caster, optimizing or not.

But you dont get the same thing as a straight caster.

Compare a Warlock 9 vs a Fighter 7/ Warlock 2

Are they the same in anything other than cantrip damage? Do they have anwhere near the same (as you call it) flavor? Also, I hardly call a 2 level investment a 'toe-dip' into a class.

Is this ruling consistent? If I go a Cleric 1/ Wizard 16, do you limit my cleric spells to only be cast out of 1st level slots becuase 'its unfair that my cure wounds spell is as potent as a 17th level clerics is'

If that means I'm not playing the game they way you want me to, either 5e or Messageboards: the Arguing, I'm okay with that.

Im not telling you how to run your game, and If I did you're not required to listen to me anyways man.

Im just suggesting that there really isnt a mechanical (or compelleing fluff) reason to do it.

 

[Ovinomancer]

But you dont get the same thing as a straight caster.

Yes, you do, you even point out in your example that the cantrips for both are the same. Considering I've restricted my statement to the topic in the OP, which is cantrips, it's hard to see how you're disagreeing with me.

As for the Cleric/Wizard, I looked, and I couldn't see where I said anything about anything but cantrips. Nor can I recall any such argument falling from my fingers. I did find where I said that I would use the normal multiclassing rules for combining caster class levels for cantrips, which would imply that I would also use those rules for their normal use, like with the cleric/wizard. I didn't say it explicitly, sure, but come on, you don't need to invent arguments I haven't made to show my I'm wrong about those invented arguments.

Im not telling you how to run your game, and If I did you're not required to listen to me anyways man.

Im just suggesting that there really isnt a mechanical (or compelleing fluff) reason to do it.

Well, gosh, I guess it's a good thing that I've already agreed, multiple times, that there isn't a mechanical reason, then, isn't it? I'd hate for someone to think that they need to show me that there's no mechanical reason when I've already agreed there's no mechanical reason. That would be a complete waste of time, don't you think?

...(or compelleing fluff) reason to do it.

My favorite color is dark green. There's no compelling reason for that, either.

 

[mellored]

Then allow me to point to Post #25, so that you may struggle no more.

If you still disagree, I'll see you at the table on Sunday and we can discuss it in person. You are in my game, right?

damage type is pretty rare in general.
an they are further divide up into 10? or so type.

so yes, force is a good damage type, but it's a pretty small benifit

 

[mellored]

just out of curiosity, would you also require a wizard who dips fighter to use a longbow with full proficency?

 

[Ovinomancer]

just out of curiosity, would you also require a wizard who dips fighter to use a longbow with full proficency?

Since I'd allow the fighter who dips wizard to use his cantrips with full proficiency, yes.

 

[Ovinomancer]

damage type is pretty rare in general.
an they are further divide up into 10? or so type.

so yes, force is a good damage type, but it's a pretty small benifit

You're commenting on the tail of a conversation that had already gone down the rabbit hole. That was my final clarification that the small benefit I was talking about in a previous response was, indeed, about damage type and not damage totals. So, we agree.

 

[Psychometrika]

Guys, you aren't going to win this one with logic. It's fairly obvious the sheepish one dislikes multiclassing, and this is a way to make it unappealing without out right banning it.