D&D 5E Multiclass dabbling

[Olgar Shiverstone]

[MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION]'s post in another thread got me thinking:

About multiclassing: I'm a little surprised they didn't talk about how specialties were shaping up to help people who fit the "Fighter 19/Wizard 1" category. If I'm a 19th level fighter, why shouldn't I be able to take a feat to get Magic Missile? Feats like Arcane Dabbler and Find Familiar already can help that feel.

Why don't we use feats to allow more dabbling in spellcasting, in addition to full-blown multiclassing? After all a wizard or cleric can usually take feats that give some proficiency that another class gets (armor, weapons, skills).

For example, tweak Arcane Dabbler to something like "Pick a spell a wizard that a cleric or wizard of your level could cast. With this feat, you can cast that spell once per day as a wizard/cleric of your level without preparation." Each "Arcane Dabbler" feat is good for a single spell at the time of selection; to get another spell another "Arcane Dabbler" feat must be taken.

Now perhaps the frequency might need to be tweaked (to allow more than a 1/day ability), or individual feats would be built for specific individual spells rather than allowing access to the entire spell list. But would the concept be game-breaking? Characters don't typically get that many feats, so you can't make a spellcasting class completely redundant this way; even a spellcaster taking this sort of feat wouldn't overwhelm the game with the additional spells (at least to my thinking).

 

[Sunseeker]

If we want to talk frequency, use the same stat the Wizard does to determine bonuses. So 1/day+1 per Int mod.

It's not game breaking, it was common in 4e(though questionably successful). I support multiclassing without having to actually take levels in a new class.

 

[A'koss]

Offhand I can't say I'm opposed to the idea, but it would really have to be specific spell feats like we have for the spellcasters. You'll quickly run into balance problems if you don't.

 

[steeldragons]

So, am I parsing this right?

Your 19th level Fighter with this feat as you propose should be able to cast anything 1/day (or 1/day +Int. mod) a 19th level wizard or cleric could cast (which I daresay would be anything!)...as if they were a 19th level caster...without preparation?....That's the idea/suggestion?

Yes, the concept is completely broken.

I'll take a big ole "No thank you!" on this.
--SD

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think you could go very generic if you wanted a general rule. Something like a Spellcaster specialty, and each feat you take allows you to access a higher level of magic. So, like:

1st feat: get a cantrip.
2nd feat: Cast a 1st-level spell 1/day.
3rd feat: Cast a 2nd-level spell 1/day.
...etc.

I might make these a bit more thematic myself, something like:

War Wizard
1st feat - Mage Armor
2nd feat - Magic Missile
3rd feat - Fireball
4th feat - Ice Storm
...etc.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Usually, the mistakes in D&D when it comes to this kind of thing is doing rough rules of thumb that work in lower levels, and then applying them blindly. For example, if you want to let a fighter pick up a utility spell in the AD&D progression at low levels, you might be ok with a 5th level fighter getting a 1st, or possibly a second level spell. Is that 2 or 4 levels behind the wizard, half the fighter's level as wizard rounded down, or something else? Well, that depends on how levels expand in power, and how spell levels expand in power. For some things, -2 or -4 levels or half the fighter's level will work for awhile, and others it gets sticky fast.

Then you get a somewhat different answer in AD&D with the changes at "name" level versus 3E with a more even growth. (For example, the ranger/paladin spell selection in D&D might be a bit weak, but it isn't the near total irrelevance it is in 3E.)

But in general, I think that all major abilities (spells, class abilities, maneuvers, etc.) should be ranked in 3 to 5 tiers over the whole range of character growth, and then use those tiers for prerequisite rules--instead of a formula based on class level or spell level or whatnot. Having character levels in appropriate classes would be the most common way to unlock tiers. That is, the tiers become explicit categories for solving this very problem.

Say for example that you have 5 tiers, one every four levels--i.e. tier 1 is levels 1-4. So then you can have rules such as not allowing a fighter to take arcane abilities in his current tier (perhaps with more lenient exceptions for multiiclassing in tier 1). So a fighter of level 13-16 (tier 4 martial) can't take arcane or divine tier 4 abilities--no matter what a feat or special ability says. He may or may not have to stack feats/abilities to even get an option for tier 3, too, but at least he doesn't need one feat for spell level. And this preserves the most important aspect of niche protection, that the very best abilities of a given category are limited to the characters dedicated to that category. You simply never get tier 5 arcane abilities without being a dedicated arcane character. Multi-class heavily, and you might get tier 4 late in the 17-20 level range.

Presumably spell levels would get rolled into tiers based on when wizards and clerics have traditionally received them, with some judicious tweaking. So cantrips through 2nd level spells are tier 1, while you make sure to stick the 9th level spell into tier 5. (I say that based on the obvious and traditional spike in power for 3rd and 6th level spells, but this could of course change.)

That kind of scheme generally fits the somewhat exponential growth of D&D abilities as they have traditionally been. It's entirely possible that 3 or 4 tiers might work better in Next if the powers break differently. I can't see less than 3 working at all, and if you get much greater than 4, you might was well not bother, since you are back to the spell level problem all over again. (I really think 4 is the best number in isolation, but I'm not sure it breaks down smoothly in traditional D&D. You could cheat, and have 4 tiers that are not all the same length over 20 levels--perhaps character levels 1-4, 5-10, 11-16, 17-20--break points for 3rd, 6th, and 9th level spells on wizards and clerics.)

 

[Kobold Stew]

I think you could go very generic if you wanted a general rule. Something like a Spellcaster specialty, and each feat you take allows you to access a higher level of magic. So, like:

1st feat: get a cantrip.
2nd feat: Cast a 1st-level spell 1/day.
3rd feat: Cast a 2nd-level spell 1/day.
...etc.

I think the solution is just to make a prerequisite:

At level 1, you can learn two cantrips (that's in the rules already). At level three, you can take a feat that lets you cast any level 1 spell 1/day; at level 6, a level 2 spell; at level 9, a level 3 spell.

It would allow some specialty builds, and avoid the need for a feat tree. 1/day is not much, but it would allow some fun options.

 

[RangerWickett]

I would absolutely have no problem with a 20th level fighter spending a feat to be able to cast teleport once per day. Or disintegrate. Or insanity. Or earthquake. Or meteor swarm.

. . . Because if the designers have done their job right, a) a 20th level wizard will possess enough magical options that he won't begrudge another character casting a single big spell per day, and b) a 20th level fighter will possess enough martial prowess that the one spell won't eclipse everything else he can do.

 

[I'm A Banana]

And on the flip side, you might have a feat that lets your cleric dabble in rogue skills, or your wizard dabble in fighter maneuvers.

If the classes are designed well, they'll each still offer unique abilities that can't be cribbed, but there's likely enough room to have a wizard take a feat and get level-relevant rogue sneaking skills, forex.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Honestly, this is the route I would prefer to see for multiclassing.