Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7463437" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Ok so to you there is a line between spontaneous abilities which pop up without previous in game events foreshadowing them that are ok and some that aren't and you want that line to be codified in rules to match your subjective sub-sets. Great.I prefer them having a core rules to that is a little more flexible than that.As for your new rule, doing exactly what you describe in an AL official game would afaik break no rule. It does not break any phb rule to tell your gm ahead of time and to work your future multiclass options into the game.So, that rule is not needed to enable the gameplay style and choices you want. It's totally fine within the RAW to do that.So, what you seem to be after is a rule stopping others who have different preferences from playing by those within RAW.I prefer core roles allowing more flexibility to those playstyles to choose how those elements play out in game.Edit and AsideIn my current game... in addition to my character whose background and in-play performance sell both the potential multi-class choices I foresee the other expected MC is a rogue going fighter who also sold that idea to the GM at charger - so have them heads up. No rule was needed for this to be done and no rule was broken when it happened. So, not seeing a need to add a rule to enable it in your 5e games.Now, technically, my sorc has other mc options open such as rogue and fighter. With 3 other rogues in party plus certain background elements a rogue twist could easily be possible caused on developing story but it's not one I actively sought to include. Fighter I cannot see happening but it certainly could develop out of story with a shift to having sorc spells focus in on supporting a stealth fighter role.</blockquote>

Verification