D&D (2024) How to fix multiclassing?

[Lojaan]

2) Backgrounds give more oomph, and 1st level class picks give less. Your training time as an apprentice mage is explained by your Sage background, not your wizard class. A 1st level Sage background wizard might know 4-5 spells and have proficiency in Arcana thanks to their background; a 1st level Charlatan wizard might only know 1 spell from their class, but has Stealth and Deception proficiency and some other roguish tricks.

For this how about a time requirement based on the new class you want to take a level in?

Say to mc into fighter takes a year full time training with a good instructor.
Mc into wizard takes 2 years.
Mc into warlock takes about 5min, a conversation, and a few poor life choices

 

[teitan]

Multiclassing isn’t in theory an optional rule. It is an optional rule. One way to fix it though is subclasses rather than the multiclassing system as is. What currently exists punishes PCs as they level up and making full casters out of classes that were originally partial casters like rangers, paladins, bards isn’t a good answer either. This is the one area where D&D has flailed since 3.x era because it has yet to be fully thought out. Moving away from “build mentality” would be a huge boon to correcting the issue.

 

[Amrûnril]

I never been a fan of al a carte multi-classing since its introduction in 3e. It is an example of D&D, as a class based system at its core, both wanting its cake and eating it too. More 'point by' type systems allow far more flexibility and mix and matching when building a character, but at the cost of some complexity and balance problems. I would say that most of the 'broken' or 'over-powered' builds/exploits I have seen have had some form of multi-classing as part of their issue.

I would like to have some combination of feats, sub-classes, paragon paths, epic destinies, etc. give us most of what multi-classing can do, but without the balance problems. It probably won't satisfy everyone, but I don't think anything will.

Current multi-classing gives us all of what current multi-classing can do. It can cover a much broader array of thematic concepts and create far more interesting character-building decisions than any of the proposed alternatives. I'd love to see balance improved, but the current "problem-cases" are really only marginally better than strong single class builds, and most of them involve abilities that are arguably imbalanced independent of multi-classing.

 

[mellored]

1-2 levels of warlock gives the paladin/sorcerer a 120ft range force damage charisma based attack that scales as the fighter extra attack.

fighter has +2 to hit, action surge, and sharpshooter, and extra asi. Hardly the same scaling.

In the case of paladin/hexblade it also likely allows them to use charisma for weapons so they can mostly dump strength & go cha/con/whatever.

i agree hexblade is a bit too strong. It should of always been 3rd level pact of the blade.

But if you dump Str, you lose your AC. Overall it's a little over powered, not game breaking (like moon druid at level 2, or twilight cleric).

That's not simply "a decent ranged attack". Likewise for the sorcerer it's not simply "a better cantrip" at the cost of a single spell level. If the game goes far enough into tier2 or into tier3+ the sorcerer gets that relabeled charisma based fighter extra attack with free knockback that converts royghly to an at will 4th or 5th level spell at the forgettable price of what is likely a single spell slot too.

Do you think a straight warlock is overpowered?
Because a straight warlock 17 with foresight is going to do more damage than your multiclass.

 

[tetrasodium]

fighter has +2 to hit, action surge, and sharpshooter, and extra asi. Hardly the same scaling.

i agree hexblade is a bit too strong. It should of always been 3rd level pact of the blade.

But if you dump Str, you lose your AC. Overall it's a little over powered, not game breaking (like moon druid at level 2, or twilight cleric).

Do you think a straight warlock is overpowered?
Because a straight warlock 17 with foresight is going to do more damage than your multiclass.

"fighter extra attack" shouldn't be confused with "a couple levels of fighter"

Spoiler: fighter extra attack PHB pg72

Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in this class and to four when you reach 20th level in this class.[/spoiler]

Spoiler: agonizing repelling EB

Agonizing Blast
Prerequisite: eldritch blast cantrip
When you cast eldritch blast, add your Charisma modifier to the damage it deals on a hit.
Repelling Blast
Prerequisite: eldritch blast cantrip
When you hit a creature with eldritch blast, you can push the creature up to 10 feet away from you in a straight line.
Eldritch Blast
Evocation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 120 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
A beam of crackling energy streaks toward a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, the target takes 1dlO force damage. The spell creates m ore than one beam w hen you reach higher levels: two beams at 5th level, three beam s at 11th level, and four beam s at 17th level. You can direct the beam s at the same target or at different ones. Make a separate attack roll for each beam.
Given that the 4th attack comes at 17 rather than 20 & it doesn't include "in this class" type wording it's better than fighter's extra attack in some ways relevant to multiclassing.

 

[mellored]

"fighter extra attack" shouldn't be confused with "a couple levels of fighter"

I'm not confusing them. Fighter does more damage, more accurately, and from further away.

And all contrips scale. So your spending 2 levels to up your minimum damage, but lose your maximum damage.

Again, do you think straight warlocks are overpowered?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

"fighter extra attack" shouldn't be confused with "a couple levels of fighter"

Spoiler: fighter extra attack PHB pg72

Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in this class and to four when you reach 20th level in this class.[/spoiler]

Spoiler: agonizing repelling EB

Agonizing Blast
Prerequisite: eldritch blast cantrip
When you cast eldritch blast, add your Charisma modifier to the damage it deals on a hit.
Repelling Blast
Prerequisite: eldritch blast cantrip
When you hit a creature with eldritch blast, you can push the creature up to 10 feet away from you in a straight line.
Eldritch Blast
Evocation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 120 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
A beam of crackling energy streaks toward a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, the target takes 1dlO force damage. The spell creates m ore than one beam w hen you reach higher levels: two beams at 5th level, three beam s at 11th level, and four beam s at 17th level. You can direct the beam s at the same target or at different ones. Make a separate attack roll for each beam.
Given that the 4th attack comes at 17 rather than 20 & it doesn't include "in this class" type wording it's better than fighter's extra attack in some ways relevant to multiclassing.

So instead of fixing the cause of the issue (eldritch blast), you want to fix something that works well in most other cases?

 

[tetrasodium]

So instead of fixing the cause of the issue (eldritch blast), you want to fix something that works well in most other cases?

I want them to fix both. Someone earlier noted that the 3.x style MC that 5e has is d&d wanting to have its cake & eat it too for the ease guidance of a class based system as well as the flexibility of a pointbuy system while just ignoring the problems it brings.

 

[Pauln6]

I'm not confusing them. Fighter does more damage, more accurately, and from further away.

And all contrips scale. So your spending 2 levels to up your minimum damage, but lose your maximum damage.

Again, do you think straight warlocks are overpowered?

I don't think the issue is that warlocks are overpowered but it's more that Eldritch Blast is often so good compared to the other things they can do, there is little point in doing anything else. So taking Eldritch Blast and slapping it onto other classes who have better alternate options just makes the multiclass that much more potent. I would prefer that Eldritch Blast did less and the other options did more.

 

[mellored]

I don't think the issue is that warlocks are overpowered but it's more that Eldritch Blast is often so good compared to the other things they can do, there is little point in doing anything else. So taking Eldritch Blast and slapping it onto other classes who have better alternate options just makes the multiclass that much more potent. I would prefer that Eldritch Blast did less and the other options did more.

I agree. But warlocks are boring is a different subject than multiclassing is bad.

IMO: Giving them an extra invocations (free agonizing blast), and letting them change it every long rest would help. Something they did with the ranger spells (free hunters mark, prepared spells) and that worked well.

Maybe have a few different Eldritch Blast shapes too. Eldritch Cone, Eldritch Burst, Eldritch Line... 3.5 had a big list.