D&D 5E How should multiclassing be handled in 5E?

[Stormonu]

How would you prefer to see multiclassing handled in 5E, if it is allowed at all?

The 1E/2E way? The 3E way? 4E hybrids or 4E feats? Another method altogether?

Personally, I'd like to see it be primarily like 1E/2E dual-classing with a bit of 1E/2E multiclassing. When you pick up a new class, you start as 1st level in it and need, say 1,000 XP - as if you were actually a 1st level character in that class. You don't add your levels together to figure out what you need to advance to the next level, you track the XP for your classes separately. When you get XP from an adventure, you can split it any way you want - dump it all on the lower level class or the higher level class or split it between the two in any proportion.

I'm on the fence about handling hit points - probably letting the player user the better at each level, but not combining them (Thus, if you were Fighter 5 and Wizard 7, you'd probably want the 5d10 from the fighter levels, and the remainder would be 2d4 for the extra wizard levels. Gain another Fighter level, and you could replace one of the 1d4's with a 1d10 of hit points).

In many ways, this would could mean that the likes of a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 might only be as powerful as an 11th level character, but we wouldn't have to go through all kinds of hoops to make sure that any one level of another class is as good as another level in the same class.

What would you prefer to do?

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Something very similar to what you said, but with a couple of penalties for subsequent classes. Something like:

1. There is a campaign-specific "entry" cost for each class to represent that a 1st level class has quite a bit of ability all ready. You have to pay this cost out of what you make adventuring before you even get to 1st level. In the most leveling schemes from D&D, I'd make the default around 5,000 XP, but encourage groups to move this up or down depending upon how much multiclassing they want, and also where they set the second option. (A character that started as a multiclass concept from the get go would have to pick one class as the first one, and the other starts at the -5000 XP but begins accumulating immediately. More advanced rules might let a character take a hybrid approach, but start each at -2500.)

2. You pay a modest percentage penalty for each class after the first, which increases as you add classes but only applies to the additional ones. So primary class gets 100%, secondary gets 90% (or 85% or 95%), tertiary gets a bit less, and so on. Generally, you can set the order anyway you want, but perhaps only allowed to change between adventures, only after leveling, when you roleplay the new focus, when the DM allows at key moments, or whatever the group decides. The idea here is that you can't just rock along forever at 50/50, which should help create some differences in characters and help with niche protection a bit. (This is after dividing the XP by number of classes, too. So in actual play, would probably use a table where a character with two classes gets 50% primary, 45% secondary, 5% waste, etc.)

In such a system, I'd just make hit points, attack bonus, etc. use the gestalt idea from 3.5, and pick only the best of each one from each class. That might mean you use the fighter's hit points even if lower, if his Nd10 works out better than the wizard's Nd6.

I'd expect many characters to multiclass eventually, because paying that 5,000 XP premium and dividing the XP with a mild penalty isn't so bad when you are up in the 20,000 XP range. But it would keep multiclassing as primarily a way to round out the concept, as opposed to almost unavoidable power-grab that it could turn into in some variations.

 

[MoonSong]

Well like I keep saying, players use multiclassing for wildy different goals:

• To round up a given character
• To accurately express a given character concept
• To create special snowflakes
• To basically play two or more characters in one
• To qualiffy for special things (paragon paths, prestige classes, magic items , feats)
• As an organic way to reflect the ongoing character evolution beyond a limited niche
• To play a cool character concept not available otherwise
• In order to optimize
• As a mean for power
• As a mean for munchkinism

I don't believe on putting artificial restrictions on it, no need to punish players for multiclassing, except for perhaps the last two, all reasons for multiclassing are pretty mild and harmless. I don't know where this general feeling of MCphobia came up from but there isn't absolutely anything wrong with it. Also I think that any effort to use XP in order to balance multiclass is doomed to fail, (I've just witnessed too much people who don't use XP at all, and I've been on many 2e games when the DM just said "start at x level" instead of "start at y XP"). Also I believe that any attempt to use one-size-fits-all will left many people unsatisfied, no single method will work for all purposes and goals. So since I cannot just await for WotC to magically learn and use my own method (which allows pretty good flexibility on all fronts, from multiclassing out of the gate, gainning a perk, combining classes to "I know I'm been a thief, a wariror and a street performer, but woke up and just wanted to be a priest today") I have to say "all of them"

• Some feats that give perks and tools of another class, just make sure they actually integrate with actual class features and scale propperly.
• A way to be multiclassed out of the gate with two or three classes (like hybrids or classic MC) or design some classes which are actual hybrid concepts
• A way to multiclass level by level that works. Again one which manages to integrate like abilities with like abilities.
• A way to allow characters to shift "jobs" between adventures
• A way to change classes over time

Finally put all of them into a dial that allows to account for taste and complexity, and allow them to coexist and integrate not only on the same setting or campaign but also on the same character.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Personally, I'd go:

1) 3.X as full on multiclassing
2) 4Ed Hybrids replacing Gestalts/1Ed/2Ed multiclassing
3) Feat-based multiclassing for handling dips, reflecting the absolute minimum of training one could have in campaign and still be considered a member of a given class

With 1 & 2 being mutually exclusive, and no PC being able to take a multiclassing feat for a class they already have.

 

[RangerWickett]

I'd like to be able to start with a character who survives by his wits and staying out of danger (rogue), who realizes he needs a little bit of swordsmanship to handle a nemesis of his (fighter), then decides to learn several different varieties of magic so he can heal his allies (cleric), teleport short distances (wizard), and speak to animals (druid).

 

[MoonSong]

Personally, I'd go:

1) 3.X as full on multiclassing
2) 4Ed Hybrids replacing Gestalts/1Ed/2Ed multiclassing
3) Feat-based multiclassing for handling dips, reflecting the absolute minimum of training one could have in campaign and still be considered a member of a given class

With 1 & 2 being mutually exclusive, and no PC being able to take a multiclassing feat for a class they already have.

If they are well done, there is no need for them to be mutually exclusive. MC feats could be used to enhance existing class features and if hybrids are done right so they are balanced with single classed characters there is o reason a fighter could gain a levle of Rogue/Wizard later on his career or if a druid-sorcerer couldn't gain a level or two of fighter

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One of the reasons for exclusivity is to avoid math quirks and other systemic anomalies. Even if each is well done, mixing hybrids & 3.X style multiclassing in a single PC could be nightmarish in implementation, complexity, and unintended synergies that could be problematic on both sides of the DM's screen.

 

[GX.Sigma]

The 3.x version is pretty iconic for me, and it allows cool character customization that none of the other systems do, so I'd go with that. Of course, the 4e feats way is still possible (and exists already in the playtest; it's just not called multiclassing - and for good reason, I think).

If they can make the 3.x version work, I'd love it. I believe they already said that AD&D multiclassing just can't work, mathematically.

 

[airwalkrr]

I always thought multiclassing should be a mix of 1e/2e dual-classing with 3e gestalt or 4e multiclassing. Leveling up a second class shouldn't improve your class-based saving throw bonuses, attack bonus, HD, and so on (instead use the higher of the two). XP should be split between all classes. You should be able to multiclass however much you want; XP splitting is the main limitation. So 3e cheese like a druid taking one level of monk just to add your Wisdom bonus to AC and boost all your saves by +2 or cherry picking wouldn't work very well as you'd be forced to level both classes. If someone decides they don't want to level up a second class anymore they begin to lose experience points in the second class until eventually they lose the class once their XP hits -1 in that class. Most races should be limited to two or three classes, except for humans and half-elves, which should have no limit on multiclassing. Those are my thoughts on the matter.

 

[GX.Sigma]

My character in 4e started as a Psion. He's a member of an innately magical race, but he grew up in isolation in the forest and taught himself psionic disciplines. Later he moved to a human city and began fighting crime as a batman-type guy. After a few adventures, he found his long lost father (who is a powerful wizard), and has been studying with him since.

I'd love to make this character a Psion 1 Rogue 1 Wizard 6.

But this is 4e, so he's a level 8 Psion who keeps getting better at Psion stuff, but can cast one wizard at-will once per encounter. That is not what I want in a multiclassing system. That is not even really a multiclassing system.