D&D 5E Explainable multiclassing

[Minsc]

Do the DMs here make characters explain their multiclass choices, or do you just let them go with it?

Does a new class take years to train in?


Some multiclassing just makes sense to me. The Barbarian, exposed to a more disciplined lifestyle picks up Fighter levels. I can see any character striking any of the pacts to start Warlock levels (why you'd strike the pact would need to be written into the story though). I can see a late bloomer with sorcerous bloodlines, and I can see a deity choosing a Paladin.

IMHO, it takes years to study the ways of wizardry, as well as becoming a Cleric, Bard, Druid, Monk, or Ranger.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Although I'm not really a DM, if I were to DM, my answers would be:

1. I prefer a degree of explanation, but it's fine if we have to hash it out together. E.g. a Fighter who takes some Wizard levels should have found, or experienced, something to have that happen, but I'm open to a wide variety of interpretations.

2. No. Because that's a lame copout answer. "Oh sure you can become new things...by abandoning the character for this campaign!" Since I'm not saying "no" to multiclassing in the first place, making it take "years" to train in a new class would be just plain rude, a bait-and-switch if ever there was one.

3. Some classes require more explanation than others, I'll grant you that, but I don't think any class should be off-limits if à la carte multiclassing is supposed to be a thing. Druid: the primal spirits of the world call out to me in my dreams, but I never understood them until I started adventuring through the wilds. Cleric can be justified just as easily as Paladin, especially since 5e Paladins are more about Oaths now than about specifically serving a deity (I presume the new Oath of the Crown is a good example there--an oath to a monarch/y, which doesn't have to be religious at all). Ranger can take a bit from the Druid explanation, or it can be an outgrowth of having had to rough it through the wilds during prior adventures; you pick up a thing or two if you're really paying attention.

Bard is even easier, since it's literally explained as tapping into "words of power" type magic--clearly, the character has discovered or figured out one of these words of power, and in so doing accessed something special. If notified in advance, a good DM could easily pave the way for such a thing to happen a few sessions ahead of the actual level-up.

Monk...I'll admit this one I'm having a bit more trouble than the rest, in part because I am fantastically tired. However, surely a class so thoroughly tied to achieving "enlightenment" could be justified by a transcendent experience of some kind? The opening of the way: but after that moment of oneness, it takes much effort to make such a shining moment extend into every waking moment.

So yeah. I don't see any problem with any particular picked-up class, even if there is no trainer/mentor available. These magics and forces permeate the world; as likely as not, they'll find you before you find them.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I allow my characters to advance in any way they want. For me their backgrounds and personality are not connected to their classes.

 

[MG.0]

As a DM I don't forbid multiclassing, but I discourage it.
As a player, I never do it.

I am not a fan of multiclassing in D&D. Going all the way back to 1st edition, dual and multiclassing has always been "half-baked", for lack of a better term. It also tend to be too meta-gamey for my taste.

Some multiclass options don't even make any sense, since not all classes even represent the same thing. For instance, wizard, cleric, fighter and rogue (the original archetypes) are in many ways simply professions, while some of the newer classes (barbarian, sorcerer) are not. I cannot see a 15th level wizard for example, suddenly deciding to also be a 1st level barbarian. It's just stupid.

 

[Redthistle]

Monk...I'll admit this one I'm having a bit more trouble than the rest, in part because I am fantastically tired. However, surely a class so thoroughly tied to achieving "enlightenment" could be justified by a transcendent experience of some kind? The opening of the way: but after that moment of oneness, it takes much effort to make such a shining moment extend into every waking moment.

I have a multi-classing player whose PC started with 2 levels of rogue, then gained the next 2 levels as a monk, having been imprisoned for an extended period. Her reasoning, which I accepted, was that during the years behind bars, the PC had to learn how to protect herself without weapons (martial arts) and also developed a stoic self-discipline to endure the physical dangers and psychological stresses of surviving there.

She pointed out that every martial arts regime that exists had to begin somewhere; why not in a prison environment among a small coterie of allies?

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I cannot see a 15th level wizard for example, suddenly deciding to also be a 1st level barbarian.

Most wizards, probably not. I think the fact that it's a sub-optimal decision for characters who typically dump Strength and avoid front lines like the plague is sufficient to make this a rare development. It doesn't need special rules or DM discouragement.

But a character is an individual. His choices are not defined by the fact that he's a 15th-level wizard. If a wizard spends some time among the tribes and goes a bit Dances With Wolves, I can see this happening. It's not "stupid". It's just unusual.

 

[GMMichael]

I'm agreeing with Rya. Class is meta, people. Your character class can be wizard, while your character is a street brawler. It follows that multiclassing needs no explanation in terms of class. In terms of abilities, it might be nice for the party rogue to be able to explain where he learned the hundred-hand-slap.

 

[MG.0]

Most wizards, probably not. I think the fact that it's a sub-optimal decision for characters who typically dump Strength and avoid front lines like the plague is sufficient to make this a rare development. It doesn't need special rules or DM discouragement.

I don't consider this important at all. I encourage players to play characters, not balls of stats. Only being interested in mathematically optimal characters is to miss a lot of cool opportunities for roleplaying.

But a character is an individual. His choices are not defined by the fact that he's a 15th-level wizard. If a wizard spends some time among the tribes and goes a bit Dances With Wolves, I can see this happening. It's not "stupid". It's just unusual.

If you consider wizards to be incredibly rare and 15th level ones even more so, along with the lifetime of discipline and study it takes to achieve that, then yes, having him decide to hulk-out one random day seems stupid. Like I said, I probably wouldn't forbid it, but I'd want a really good explanation.

Despite some saying class has nothing to do with your personality/background, I strongly disagree. Classes were created as archetypes to have a huge impact on what your character is. To treat them like merely a piece of equipment is to ignore that.

My biggest problem with multiclassing (other than the system is still half-baked) is that there seem to be two different types of class. Most classes are similar to professions, requiring dedicated study and training. But the barbarian and sorcerer especially don't fit into this mold. They are more tightly bound to the character's identity and origins.

I would prefer to see a change in the system that breaks those types of origins into a separate character creation step, separate from class entirely.

 

[SailorNash]

Put me in the "some more than others" camp. One does not enter Warlock lightly or without consequence, but any Paladin or Ranger or such could dip a little fighter to shift their half-caster status a little more martial.

 

[trentonjoe]

I'm pretty easy when it comes to multiclassing, kind of an anything goes kind of deal so any wizard player who wants to pick up a level of barbarian can go for it. If we want to come up with some sort of rationale then we can but otherwise whatever, if we are having fun then it's all good.

I am the same way, if my 5th level thief decides he wants to take a level in sorcerer then guess what, go for it! Want to cast the shield spell? Well then she's a little more dodgey for one round. Want to cast sleep? Well then she figures out how to make a sleep gas pellet. They follow the "rules" for magic but can be reskinned any one of a number of ways.

The mechanics are just tools to tell the story in my games.