D&D 5E Eldritch Blast Mulitclass Clarification

[Ovinomancer]

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.

Sorry, what? Can you find where I said anything remotely close to 'I dislike multiclassing?' Dollars to donuts you can't, because I like multiclassing just fine. Also pretty sure I've said more than once that I'd prefer to use the caster level multiclassing rules to govern how cantrips work rather than straight level, so I even further contest your statement.

You're correct that this can't be won with logic, because, as I've said, it's an opinion of mine that I'm following - that I dislike cantrips tied to character level because it introduces a sub-class of magical ability that doesn't work like the rest of magical abilities. Only cantrips tie to character level, and that's weird to me. My reasons have been clearly stated more than once; I have no idea why you'd feel the need to invent new ones for me.

 

[Caliban]

Why is this still an argument? Ovinomancer hasn't said "This is how it works". They said "I don't like how it works, so it works differently in my game." If they're the DM, they have every right to do that. It sounds like people are trying to tell Ovinomancer how they should run their own home game.

 

[seebs]

Okay, the only actual dispute here seems to be whether the flavor of letting cantrips scale with character level even if most of your levels are non-caster levels is Problematic.

But thinking about it... I don't actually think that's a good example of a thing scaling differently between cantrips and spells, because basically nothing scales with "caster level" per se anymore. Some things scale with slot level. Cantrips scale up with character level, probably in part to make magic initiate work better.

Actually, that'd be an interesting test case: Imagine someone who takes a one-level warlock dip, and also takes magic initiate (wizard), but is otherwise a straight fighter. Should their wizard cantrips scale differently from the warlock cantrips?

 

[Ovinomancer]

Okay, the only actual dispute here seems to be whether the flavor of letting cantrips scale with character level even if most of your levels are non-caster levels is Problematic.

But thinking about it... I don't actually think that's a good example of a thing scaling differently between cantrips and spells, because basically nothing scales with "caster level" per se anymore. Some things scale with slot level. Cantrips scale up with character level, probably in part to make magic initiate work better.

Yes, I was imprecise, I meant that you get more and higher slots with caster level, not the caster level directly affects slotted spells. I would have combined caster level stand in for level in cantrips, though. Otherwise, cantrips just get better for no clear reason, while everything else requires you to become a better caster to have more effect.

Actually, that'd be an interesting test case: Imagine someone who takes a one-level warlock dip, and also takes magic initiate (wizard), but is otherwise a straight fighter. Should their wizard cantrips scale differently from the warlock cantrips?

They'd be exactly the same, whether by the RAI or by my houserule.

 

[dmnqwk]

Otherwise, cantrips just get better for no clear reason, while everything else requires you to become a better caster to have more effect.

The mistake you are making is believing that the strength of a caster is tied to their studies, as opposed to their inherent experiences.
One way you could choose to view it is "As my character gains experience and levels up, I can use my levels in fighter to enhance my magical power. Sure, I haven't learned any new powers which is why I'm pretty much stuck using the cantrip, but I know exactly how to cast it now to really drive home the power, even forking it into multiple beams"

If you believe a character only increases power levels by upping their knowledge in the class, it means a character is limited by their knowledge, not their experiences. Or for a real world term imagine you were a Soldier for 4 years, then left and became a Cop. As you advance in levels as a Cop (maybe make Detective) your soldier training might be enhanced by your Cop observational skills training, meaning you don't know more about being a Soldier, but in a Fire fight your Cop training now enhances your Soldier abilities. Of course you might argue that Fighter 10 Warlock 1 is a bit out of whack, but the Fighter discipline you learn could inherently allow you to focus your dark magics more efficiently, getting that extra beam by using your shield to refract the power!

 

[Ovinomancer]

The mistake you are making is believing that the strength of a caster is tied to their studies, as opposed to their inherent experiences.

Huh? Strength of a caster is directly tied to their experience as a caster. I think I've said that, hence why my houserule is to tie it to their experience as a caster, not a noncaster.

One way you could choose to view it is "As my character gains experience and levels up, I can use my levels in fighter to enhance my magical power. Sure, I haven't learned any new powers which is why I'm pretty much stuck using the cantrip, but I know exactly how to cast it now to really drive home the power, even forking it into multiple beams"

No, if you want to enhance your magical power, you don't take a level in fighter, you take a level in a class that has magical power.

If you believe a character only increases power levels by upping their knowledge in the class, it means a character is limited by their knowledge, not their experiences. Or for a real world term imagine you were a Soldier for 4 years, then left and became a Cop. As you advance in levels as a Cop (maybe make Detective) your soldier training might be enhanced by your Cop observational skills training, meaning you don't know more about being a Soldier, but in a Fire fight your Cop training now enhances your Soldier abilities. Of course you might argue that Fighter 10 Warlock 1 is a bit out of whack, but the Fighter discipline you learn could inherently allow you to focus your dark magics more efficiently, getting that extra beam by using your shield to refract the power!

Sure, and IRL, cop and soldier share a bunch of skills, so that makes sense. Just like, in D&D, if you take another casting class, they have some overlap, so experience in one improves your experience in the other. If, however, the IRL career split was solider for 4 years and then become a college professor of English, those skills don't overlap much, so getting better at being a professor won't improve your combat skills you learned as a solider. In D&D, that would be not getting free bumps in magical power because you gain experience in totally non-magical things.

Hence my houserule. If you wish to enhance your magical power, you make choices that enhance your magical power. You don't get 'enhance my non-magical magic power, and because cantrips are this 1 weird trick, they get better, too.'

 

[Prism]

It certainly seems odd that a 16th level barbarian that then takes a level in warlock can cast eldritch blast better than a 10th level warlock. Or a 19th level fighter can take a feat and be able to cast a 4d10 firebolt whereas an 8th level fighter only get 2d10. Its balanced but still seems wrong somehow

 

[Caliban]

It certainly seems odd that a 16th level barbarian that then takes a level in warlock can cast eldritch blast better than a 10th level warlock. Or a 19th level fighter can take a feat and be able to cast a 4d10 firebolt whereas an 8th level fighter only get 2d10. Its balanced but still seems wrong somehow

I think the balance is vs. the level of challenge you are facing, not vs. lvls in other classes. At those levels you are facing opponents with hundreds of HP, and all their basic attacks do that much damage or more.

The cantrips are balanced against the level of the campaign, not the level of the class.

 

[seebs]

Yes, I was imprecise, I meant that you get more and higher slots with caster level, not the caster level directly affects slotted spells. I would have combined caster level stand in for level in cantrips, though. Otherwise, cantrips just get better for no clear reason, while everything else requires you to become a better caster to have more effect.


They'd be exactly the same, whether by the RAI or by my houserule.

I don't think I buy this analysis, because that's how everything else works. You don't have to keep practicing combat skills for your proficiency bonus to increase. Or any other skills. You get better at all the things you Can Do At All through levels. I mean, your first level spells may not increase in damage done, because you don't have higher level slots, but their save DCs go up anyway. Everything increases with proficiency. If you take a single level of barbarian, then spend the rest of your levels on wizard, it's still your barbarian con save that gets the +6 proficiency bonus at level 20.

So in general, 5e's model is that you don't get better at specific things because you're levelling in their class, but that class levels give you proficiencies or abilities, and then you improve at all of the things you're able to do as you level.

So I don't think cantrips getting better is any kind of exception; I think it's the general rule. A fighter 1/wizard 19 gets the same +6 to hit with a martial weapon that a fighter 20 gets. So I don't think it's unusual or contrary to how everything else works; I'd argue that if you want to keep cantrips from scaling for multiclassed characters (or people who took a feat), you should probably also do the same thing to things like save bonuses, applying proficiency bonus to particular skills or weapons, and so on. And I think the reason the system isn't like that is that that keeping track of that kind of thing was a lot of hassle. It was sort of justified in 3E because the intent was to have that broad a range... But bounded accuracy is a fix to the problem that resulted from that.

And if you accept bounded accuracy, the increase in cantrip effect with character level, rather than class level, turns out to be logically implied.

 

[Falling Icicle]

It certainly seems odd that a 16th level barbarian that then takes a level in warlock can cast eldritch blast better than a 10th level warlock. Or a 19th level fighter can take a feat and be able to cast a 4d10 firebolt whereas an 8th level fighter only get 2d10. Its balanced but still seems wrong somehow

It's no more odd than a 16th level character taking the Skilled feat and suddenly learning 3 new skills with a proficiency bonus of +5, and being better than a 10th level character that's been practicing those skills from the beginning.

One way of looking at it is that higher level characters have a stronger spiritual force. With all of the experience they've gained and the mighty deeds they've accomplished, their soul has grown in power, and it's the strength of their soul that determines the power of the cantrips they cast.