D&D 5E Multi-Multi-classing

rgoodbb

Adventurer
Hey folks.

I wouldn’t mind getting a take on people's experiences who have multi-classed their PC’s into at least three classes. I am looking at a build with three classes to fully capture a flavour but am mindful of
M.A.D., ASI issues and potentially feeling underpowered compared to other PC's.

What are people’s experiences with 3 or more classes in one? (especially M.A.D. builds) How did they feel to play?

Cheers, for your time and replies.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Satyrn

First Post
If it's fun, it won't matter. ;)

But more in line with what you're actually wondering about, without knowing your intended combinationi t's hard to tell how this will cut into your effectiveness. Though there's some common advice I would give, like don't use spells that are save-to-avoid so you won't be concerned about pumping up your spellcasting stat.


Also, I haven't actually played a triple+classed character since my 3e monk/cleric/rogue/barbarian.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I've found that multiclassing early really put me behind the curve, especially missing ASIs and missing the power bumps at 5th and 11th.

As for triple classing, I'd suggest not adding in a third until you've already got your character firing on all cylinders. The exception to this is if you are cherry picking and only planning on taking a single level of a class, but that's got it's own weaknesses as well.
 

When it comes to triple-classing, it greatly behooves you to make sure that the classes have a good amount of overlap when it comes to ability scores. Also, I recommend figuring out which class fits each of the following three roles.

1. Primary class: the class that the bulk of your levels will go into
2. Major dip: the class that you'll be putting about 3-5 levels into over the course of your career
3. Minor dip: only taking 1-3 levels in this class, primarily for front-loaded class features; sometimes taken as 1st level class for starting proficiencies
 

I was theoriecrafting a dual wielding human barbarian 2 fighter 2 rogue X. Str 16. Dex 14, Con 14 Int 8 Wis 12, Cha 10 and a nice feat at level 1. Thought advantage and sneak attack synergize well.
 

Satyrn

First Post
I was theoriecrafting a dual wielding human barbarian 2 fighter 2 rogue X. Str 16. Dex 14, Con 14 Int 8 Wis 12, Cha 10 and a nice feat at level 1. Thought advantage and sneak attack synergize well.

The thought of a rapier-wielding gnome barbarian went over well with my group (they were amused by my character idea) but I wound up never playing it because a barbarian just doesn't play nice with Dex based attacks. So I took battlemaster instead. I miss the chance to rage.

I also am constantly considering multiclassing into rogue for the sneak attack, but I haven't been willing to give up the fighter features. Maybe when I hit 6th level. I might tack on some wizard levels, instead. Or also.
 

Where multi classed characters lack in power, they can compensate in their increased versatility. Trying to create synergies that work can be difficult for a lot of possible combinations. Feats are one possible solution to making unusual combos viable.

If you enjoy playing around with interesting builds, you might like this book of feats that add new abilities based on what classes a character is multiclassed in. For example, there's a feat that grants a rogue/knowledge cleric the ability to obtain information about a creature upon successfully applying Sneak Attack (reading their blood so to speak). http://www.dmsguild.com/product/202906/Multiclass-Feats-5th-Edition?filters=45469
 

pming

Legend
Hiya!

Full Disclosure! : I am quite against MC'ing in 5e (and 3.x/PF for that matter), because I think it's done horribly. (Not gonna get into it here, not the place). But I do have some ideas you may not have considered.

Alright, now then. :) What I would suggest as another avenue of choice is to really think about what you want your character to represent. Don't think in terms of "D&D choices as per the book". Instead, think of him/her in terms of what he/she could do in a story, novel, movie, etc., if he/she were in one.

Think of what base core class would give a good base feeling. I'm not talking about abilities, skills, etc, per se, I'm talking about "Fighter - tough, strong, action-oriented, weapons, armor, battles and wars, bloodied and battered after a battle, etc". The "essence" of what makes that class, well, 'feel' like that class and not another one.

Ok, take that and use it as your characters Class. Now, work with your DM to create your own Arch-Type that fits your idea, as well as your DM's campaign setting.

IMHO, MC'ing is useless (and badly done) in comparison to the potential of arch-types. Why do you think they keep coming out with Arch-Types in UA and not new classes, or multiclass combos? Because using an arch-type gives them total freedom to create exactly what they are thinking about without trying to shoe horn two or three classes, one particular race, and several particular choices in regards to skills, feats, items, etc. If they feel a concept need to be able to change the colour of skin of the arch-type in question, they just write it up and put it as a special ability gained at Level X. They don't have to force the DM to use Feats and force the character to take some particular Feat that allows him to cast some particular spell that can change the colour of the characters skin.

So...choose a base class, then work with your DM to make an arch-type (or modify one if one is close). Much better than trying to work three classes into a concept that only "mostly" fits your idea.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

rczarnec

Explorer
The thought of a rapier-wielding gnome barbarian went over well with my group (they were amused by my character idea) but I wound up never playing it because a barbarian just doesn't play nice with Dex based attacks. So I took battlemaster instead. I miss the chance to rage.

I also am constantly considering multiclassing into rogue for the sneak attack, but I haven't been willing to give up the fighter features. Maybe when I hit 6th level. I might tack on some wizard levels, instead. Or also.

That is why when I made my Gnome Barbarian I went strength based. He only started with a 14, but that isn't a major drawback. I am adding some Rogue for sneak attack and possibly some Fighter later.
 

Satyrn

First Post
I had already randomly placed my gnome's ability scores (with the Dex twice as high as Str) and randomly determindd his class as barbarian, and worked out the first bits of his personality - then discovered the barbarian is mechanically opposed to Dexterity attacks in pretty much every way.

So in determining which to switch - ability scores or class choice - I had to abandon the one that fit the emerging concept less. And using Dexterity to attack feels more swashbucklery than the barbarian's features - although reckless attack would be awesome.
 

R P Davis

Explorer
Hiya!

Full Disclosure! : I am quite against MC'ing in 5e (and 3.x/PF for that matter), because I think it's done horribly. (Not gonna get into it here, not the place). But I do have some ideas you may not have considered.

Alright, now then. :) What I would suggest as another avenue of choice is to really think about what you want your character to represent. Don't think in terms of "D&D choices as per the book". Instead, think of him/her in terms of what he/she could do in a story, novel, movie, etc., if he/she were in one.

Think of what base core class would give a good base feeling. I'm not talking about abilities, skills, etc, per se, I'm talking about "Fighter - tough, strong, action-oriented, weapons, armor, battles and wars, bloodied and battered after a battle, etc". The "essence" of what makes that class, well, 'feel' like that class and not another one.

Ok, take that and use it as your characters Class. Now, work with your DM to create your own Arch-Type that fits your idea, as well as your DM's campaign setting.

IMHO, MC'ing is useless (and badly done) in comparison to the potential of arch-types. Why do you think they keep coming out with Arch-Types in UA and not new classes, or multiclass combos? Because using an arch-type gives them total freedom to create exactly what they are thinking about without trying to shoe horn two or three classes, one particular race, and several particular choices in regards to skills, feats, items, etc. If they feel a concept need to be able to change the colour of skin of the arch-type in question, they just write it up and put it as a special ability gained at Level X. They don't have to force the DM to use Feats and force the character to take some particular Feat that allows him to cast some particular spell that can change the colour of the characters skin.

So...choose a base class, then work with your DM to make an arch-type (or modify one if one is close). Much better than trying to work three classes into a concept that only "mostly" fits your idea.

Say it again for the people at the back.

:cool:

Cheers,

Bob
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I was theoriecrafting a dual wielding human barbarian 2 fighter 2 rogue X. Str 16. Dex 14, Con 14 Int 8 Wis 12, Cha 10 and a nice feat at level 1. Thought advantage and sneak attack synergize well.

At 5th level when PCs get a big bump in power and foes get tougher, you're at 1 attack, SA of a 1st level rogue, range enough for 1/3 to 1/4 of the battles per day, no ASI, no subclasses.

Basically, the character is not pulling it's weight with group at this point except as a bag of HPs. You need to be able to make the character fully contribute.

I'm not trying to be mean, but this is the point I wa bringing up earlier - multiclassing is really easy to fall behind the curve, and if you want to triple class make sure the build is on-par or near-par (is that a term?) with single class characters first because otherwise it'll fall even further behind.

Try varying the order the build gains levels, even if it means pushing some things back quite a bit. If it needs extra attack to keep up, 6th or 7th latest. Try not to be more then 2 levels behind on total ASIs. Make sure to get to the class power bumps at 3rd and 5th - but again not getting too far behind with ASIs.

I'm one of the people who like 5e multiclassing. My biggest problem with it (and I have no solution) is that it is much easier to accidentally gimp yourself then it is with a straight class character.

If a character can't pull it's weight, or at least the weight of someone 2 levels their junior, at every character level from 1 until campaign end, then there is a problem with the build. Don't get seduced by the nifty goodies it gets, compare.
 

At 5th level when PCs get a big bump in power and foes get tougher, you're at 1 attack, SA of a 1st level rogue, range enough for 1/3 to 1/4 of the battles per day, no ASI, no subclasses.

Basically, the character is not pulling it's weight with group at this point except as a bag of HPs. You need to be able to make the character fully contribute.

I'm not trying to be mean, but this is the point I wa bringing up earlier - multiclassing is really easy to fall behind the curve, and if you want to triple class make sure the build is on-par or near-par (is that a term?) with single class characters first because otherwise it'll fall even further behind.

Try varying the order the build gains levels, even if it means pushing some things back quite a bit. If it needs extra attack to keep up, 6th or 7th latest. Try not to be more then 2 levels behind on total ASIs. Make sure to get to the class power bumps at 3rd and 5th - but again not getting too far behind with ASIs.

I'm one of the people who like 5e multiclassing. My biggest problem with it (and I have no solution) is that it is much easier to accidentally gimp yourself then it is with a straight class character.

If a character can't pull it's weight, or at least the weight of someone 2 levels their junior, at every character level from 1 until campaign end, then there is a problem with the build. Don't get seduced by the nifty goodies it gets, compare.

Sorry to say that, but that character is not far behind a single class character if at all.
Dual wielding and sneak attack and fighting style make up for the level 5 ability.
IF you are willing to use two rapiers, you are looking at 2 attacks with advantage at 1d8+5 damage with 1d6 sneak attack on whatever attack hits.
You are looking at AC 17 and half damage vs weapon damage. At level 5 you probably are lvl 2 barb, lvl 1 fighter and lvl 2 rogue. So you have cunning action to get into and out of trouble easily and you have danger sense and rogue expertise on top.
If you compare that to a single class rogue you are really not far behind in raw damage and utility. You are not far behind a skngle class barbarian in damage actually, which is only looking at 2 attacks of 2d6+6.
Are you wors in raw damage? Of course. Are you dead weight? Nor at all and you have advantage over the straight class in other areas. If you compare it with a powergamed character in a powegamed group that is playing tactically all the time, you are indeed lagging behind more, but that is no character for such a group, but rather one that plays a different style...
I had already randomly placed my gnome's ability scores (with the Dex twice as high as Str) and randomly determindd his class as barbarian, and worked out the first bits of his personality - then discovered the barbarian is mechanically opposed to Dexterity attacks in pretty much every way.

So in determining which to switch - ability scores or class choice - I had to abandon the one that fit the emerging concept less. And using Dexterity to attack feels more swashbucklery than the barbarian's features - although reckless attack would be awesome.


Sent from my GT-I9506 using EN World mobile app
 

Satyrn

First Post
If you compare it with a powergamed character in a powegamed group that is playing tactically all the time, you are indeed lagging behind more, but that is no character for such a group, but rather one that plays a different style...
I can't quite figure out why you quoted me, except maybe to use me as an example of a group that plays that different style.

Am I right?
 



Lanliss

Explorer
Hey folks.

I wouldn’t mind getting a take on people's experiences who have multi-classed their PC’s into at least three classes. I am looking at a build with three classes to fully capture a flavour but am mindful of
M.A.D., ASI issues and potentially feeling underpowered compared to other PC's.

What are people’s experiences with 3 or more classes in one? (especially M.A.D. builds) How did they feel to play?

Cheers, for your time and replies.

Out of curiosity, and because it would be the best way to help you, what 3-class are you considering? What is the concept you are aiming for?

If you are just looking for general advice, I think general flexibility will keep your character up fine with others. As long as you have at least +2-3 in your important attributes, and three +2 scores isn't that hard to get, you should be fine when compared against average PCs. It is not until you are comparing against optimized PCs that you will run into real issue with lagging behind.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Sorry to say that, but that character is not far behind a single class character if at all.
Dual wielding and sneak attack and fighting style make up for the level 5 ability.

Sorry to say, but facts nor numbers support that statement.

IF you are willing to use two rapiers, you are looking at 2 attacks with advantage at 1d8+5 damage with 1d6 sneak attack on whatever attack hits.
A rogue 5 with the same feat has two more dice of sneak attack more then makes up for the fact that they don't get +dex to damage on the offhand, as well as getting a subclass, uncanny dodge, and having an ASI which means hitting more and doing more damage.
A barbarian 5 has +50% the number of rages so it's more encounters with the melee bonus and the resistance. They could have the same number of attacks but use a 2d6 or d12 weapon for them. And if they spent their feat on something like polearm mastery they could have more attacks, or GWM and do lots more damage with their oft-hitting reckless attack. Oh yeah, and subclass and ASI as above.
A fighter 5 only doing d8s for two attacks would likely have +2 AC from a shield and +2 damage from dueling. Or can do bigger weapons. Subclasses are even more important, such as battlemaster. Oh, and again an ASI. Plus while the feat spend could easily be polearm mastery or GWM as the barbarian, but could also be shield mastery, or defensive duelist, or whatever. Personally I like Actor.

You are looking at AC 17 and half damage vs weapon damage. At level 5 you probably are lvl 2 barb, lvl 1 fighter and lvl 2 rogue. So you have cunning action to get into and out of trouble easily and you have danger sense and rogue expertise on top.

Actually, you're only looking at half damage if (a) you sit out 2/3 to 3/4 of the combats per day since you only have two rages, and if (b) you only get attacked by non-magical B/P/S damage and never spells, since you just have the default rage bonus, not Bear totem's everything-but-psychic.

A straight fighter could have a higher AC. A barbarian would have more HPs.

If you compare that to a single class rogue you are really not far behind in raw damage and utility. You are not far behind a skngle class barbarian in damage actually, which is only looking at 2 attacks of 2d6+6.
Are you wors in raw damage? Of course. Are you dead weight? Nor at all and you have advantage over the straight class in other areas. If you compare it with a powergamed character in a powegamed group that is playing tactically all the time, you are indeed lagging behind more, but that is no character for such a group, but rather one that plays a different style...

Ooh, preliminarily spreading that a single classed character built is powergamed so you can dismiss it. Good tactical move. Okay, you picked human variant with a weapon feat and that's what I'm comparing it against. Apples-to-apples with your choice. So stop with the pre-emptive smear when people give the type of advice the original post asked for.
 

mellored

Hero
3

Charismatic support-tank.
Human Tome Warlock3/ancient paladin 7/lore bard 5 is a fun tanky build. Shilleghlah and booming blade from warlock let you smack things with Cha and encourange them to stay near. Paladin armor and aura's to keep you tanky, and smites fueled by warlock slots. Lore bard to add more protection for allies, as well as pick up some utility and support spells. Take inspiring leader as your feat to round out your support-y-ness, and then bump Cha to 20.

4 classes...

Half-elf Rogue 2/Warlock 2/Knowlage cleric 1/Lore Bard 3
ALL the skills and a bunch of expertise. Holds it's own in combat with armor and shield, eldritch blast for damage, and cunning action for mobility.

Blessed Aim.
Human Hunter Ranger 3/Sorcerer 3/Cleric 1/Battlemaster Fighter 5.
Start each battle with a quicken bless, then proceed to use sharpshooter. Precision strike when you miss.
 

Sorry to say, but facts nor numbers support that statement.


A rogue 5 with the same feat has two more dice of sneak attack more then makes up for the fact that they don't get +dex to damage on the offhand, as well as getting a subclass, uncanny dodge, and having an ASI which means hitting more and doing more damage.
A barbarian 5 has +50% the number of rages so it's more encounters with the melee bonus and the resistance. They could have the same number of attacks but use a 2d6 or d12 weapon for them. And if they spent their feat on something like polearm mastery they could have more attacks, or GWM and do lots more damage with their oft-hitting reckless attack. Oh yeah, and subclass and ASI as above.
A fighter 5 only doing d8s for two attacks would likely have +2 AC from a shield and +2 damage from dueling. Or can do bigger weapons. Subclasses are even more important, such as battlemaster. Oh, and again an ASI. Plus while the feat spend could easily be polearm mastery or GWM as the barbarian, but could also be shield mastery, or defensive duelist, or whatever. Personally I like Actor.



Actually, you're only looking at half damage if (a) you sit out 2/3 to 3/4 of the combats per day since you only have two rages, and if (b) you only get attacked by non-magical B/P/S damage and never spells, since you just have the default rage bonus, not Bear totem's everything-but-psychic.

A straight fighter could have a higher AC. A barbarian would have more HPs.



Ooh, preliminarily spreading that a single classed character built is powergamed so you can dismiss it. Good tactical move. Okay, you picked human variant with a weapon feat and that's what I'm comparing it against. Apples-to-apples with your choice. So stop with the pre-emptive smear when people give the type of advice the original post asked for.
Sorry to say that, but in a normal group, that character is ok. I never said you are equal to a non multiclassed character in damage, but you are close enough. And that character is only getting better after level 5. Even if you spread around your next levels and be a fighter 3 barb 3 rogue 3 you will have some sort of compensation for the straight power loss.
Don't get me wrong, But in my book, it is positive that as a multiclass character you are a little less powerful but more versatile.

Sent from my GT-I9506 using EN World mobile app
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top