D&D 5E Full classes and Half classes

[Minigiant]

At one point, Mike Mearls said there is an idea to make a list of separate class of classes made for muticlassing.

I was wondering if that is possible.

Let's look at the Rogue. What if you halve the sneak attack to 1d6 and push Rogue Scheme and Skill mastery back to level 2. Knack and the first scheme benefit go to level 3.

Then the Half Fighter starts with only one maneuver. Maybe start with a lower expertise die of 1d4.

Then you can have a full Fighter5 with 2d8 CS dice, a full Rogue5 with 6d6, a full Fighter4 and half Rogue1 with 1d8 CS and 1d6 sneak attack, and a half Fighter5 and half Rogue5 with 1d6 CS and 3d6 sneak attack.

Do you think this could work?

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Well, to be honest, no, it's a mess, but I think Mike's proposal will result in a mess anyway.

 

[Mattachine]

The "half-class" idea has been done: 4e hybrids.

 

[triqui]

Well, to be honest, no, it's a mess, but I think Mike's proposal will result in a mess anyway.

Multiclassing is a mess anyways in every edition. It's either overpowered, underpowered, or both at same time, depending the edition and the classes. A third edition Ranger/Barbarian/Fighter might work, but try a Druid/cleric of nature/wizard enchanter. It blows. Hard.

I'd just forget about it, and made a full class for hibrids (like Spellblade for fighter/wizard, or Theurge for Wizard/cleric, or whatever). But let's see what does Mike Mearls invent. Maybe he is lucky and hit with the philosopher stone formulae.

 

[Umbran]

Do you think this could work?

Whether it works or not, people won't like it, and will call it a half-classed attempt...

 

[tuxgeo]

Whether it works or not, people won't like it, and will say the class is half full.

 

[Tony Vargas]

At one point, Mike Mearls said there is an idea to make a list of separate class of classes made for muticlassing.

I was wondering if that is possible.

Of course it's possible. 4e did it with Hybrids and classic-D&D multi-classing effectively did the same thing, by splitting (averaging) what you got from each class, and bringing levels nearly equal with its rapidly scaling exp charts.

Possible and 'good idea' may not be the same thing, though.

The 3e-style multi-classing that 5e is seeking to emulate was a fantastic idea, but it was predicated on the assumption that class-levels were fungible. That is, that the 1st level Theif and the 5th level fighter and 17the level of Cleric were all equally good. They weren't. Classes were front-loaded, and upper-level caster classes were vastly more potent than lower-level.

3e got one thing right in the way it handled 1st-level skill ranks and hit point. 5e is going to have to make that sort of adjustment accross the board to every level of every class. Even though each class that has it's own unique mechanics and progression. That's a tall order.

 

[Jester David]

Given the very 4e design of classes (front loaded with class features that just get better as you gain levels) it is hard to multiclass without it being a taste of another class (like 4e's feats) or only gaining partial benefits. The first level is the most powerful level, essentially making every class a front-loaded class in 3e terms.
A partial level is the best solution, spelling out the benefits for a level. It's tricky to balance, but good thing they have 85,000 ready to test.

 

[Mattachine]

Many folks won't like it, because it is straight from 4e.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I would like "adept" levels. Levels that are not only written for multiclassing, but levels that break up level one into pieces.
That way, you could stop worrying about alienating old schoolers, because of to many hp at level 1, or alienating 4e players, because level 1 has not enough hp and is too swingy.

In those adept levels (lets say 2 or 3) yu build up your level 1 character. Lets take the wizard, he has 3 spells at level 1. So in those adept levels, he could just get 1 spell slot and 1d4 hp. The 1 spell slot could be of level 1, or maybe even of 1/3 of his maximum level.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Whether it works or not, people won't like it, and will call it a half-classed attempt...

Ha, exactly, when I first saw this thread title I almost read Full asses and Half asses, classic.

I like the proposal, a nifty little multiclass table, and it sounds like PrCs will work in a similar way.

 

[Minigiant]

Ha, exactly, when I first saw this thread title I almost read Full asses and Half asses, classic.

I like the proposal, a nifty little multiclass table, and it sounds like PrCs will work in a similar way.

Yeah. Essentially multi classing would be take a "weaker" Prc version of base class.

Many folks won't like it, because it is straight from 4e.

Yup. Doomed from the start. /sarcasm

 

[keterys]

Weirdly, I think it would be possible to use 3e's multiclassing mechanic safely as long as you changed classes so that levels gave you about the same amount every level and were all linear.

One benefit there is you would be reducing what you get with a level by a lot, so early levels would have you be pretty ineffective; way easier to play your farmers forced into heroism, caravan guards stepping up from earning their paycheck, barmaids with a sturdy iron, etc.

One downside there is that, well, early levels being effective makes people think they suck. As easy as it is to start higher level, people are bad at it. It does work in systems like Mutants and Masterminds, though. If you tell people "Heroes start at level 6, so that's where we expect default games to start. Commoners start at level 1, so that's a good spot for grittier games or for learning the system. If just learning the system, consider leveling up very rapidly."

They're definitely not doing that though - see quadratic casters, frontloaded classes... and I can't imagine them coming close to doing that, so... I'm a little baffled about what the plan is here, but hey. The road is interesting.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I think that a more nuanced multiclass version of a class could work very well, but it does feel more complicated. But, with bounded accuracy in play and feats and skills mostly divorced from classes, the multi-class version are really about grabbing class features, so will likely be fairly simple.

All that said, I still kind of like the idea of having a level 0 for each class that has to be taken with multi-classing.

 

[Minigiant]

How about this as a multi/dualclass/hybrid class

[B]Level | HD | Weapon Attack | CS Dice | Class Features[/B]
 -1 | 1d8 | +1 | None |  
 0 | 1d10 | +2 | 1d4 |  Combat Expertise, Deadly Strike  
 1 | 1d10 | +2 | 1d4 | Parry
 2 | 2d10 | +3 | 1d6 | 
 3 | 3d10 | +3 | 1d6 | Fighting style 
 4 | 4d10 | +4 | 1d8 | Fighting style 
 5 | 5d10 | +4 | 2d8 | Fighting style

This way it take 4 level levels to be a full fighter package of the same level normal fighter.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Assume that this idea can be made to work cleanly. Now double the number of class levels in each class chart, making the "half" levels the odd ones and the "full" levels the even ones. Start all single-class characters at level 2. How is this different, functionally, than the original idea, except for abandoning fractional class levels?