D&D 5E Multiclass House Rule

[KarinsDad]

I don't think it's a problem that you don't typically see evenly-split cleric/druids or wizard/clerics in 5E using the default multiclassing rules. It's not like wizard/cleric was ever a real fictional archetype--it was just an artifact of a previous game's rule system.

I suspect that a lot of players played similar leveled Wizard (Magic-user)/Cleric Elves in 1E and 2E. It's an iconic D&D archetype that is no long viable in 5E. It was not an artifact of the rules, it was intentional in the rules.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I suspect that a lot of players played similar leveled Wizard (Magic-user)/Cleric Elves in 1E and 2E. It's an iconic D&D archetype that is no long viable in 5E. It was not an artifact of the rules, it was intentional in the rules.

I don't even know what distinction you're trying to draw here.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I suspect that a lot of players played similar leveled Wizard (Magic-user)/Cleric Elves in 1E and 2E. It's an iconic D&D archetype that is no long viable in 5E. It was not an artifact of the rules, it was intentional in the rules.

In 1E it was only half-elves, IIRC, that got to MC as clerics, and their level limit was pretty low.

2e MCing went a little crazy, IMHO.


But, what's the archetype a half-elven magic-user/cleric is supposed to be modeling?
Elrond?

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't even know what distinction you're trying to draw here.

Basically the very reason for this thread. A lot of 1E and 2E players played builds like Elf Cleric 7 / Magic-user 6 instead of Elf Cleric 8 in 1E and 2E. The PC gave up a level of Cleric abilities/spells/hit points in order to gain casting similar level Magic-User spells.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Basically the very reason for this thread. A lot of 1E and 2E players played builds like Elf Cleric 7 / Magic-user 6 instead of Elf Cleric 8 in 1E and 2E. The PC gave up a level of Cleric abilities/spells/hit points in order to gain casting similar level Magic-User spells.

That still doesn't explain what distinction you were trying to draw between "rules artifact" and "intentional by the rules", but okay, whatever.

If you want to encourage such combinations, you can just allow AD&D-style multiclassing: http://bluishcertainty.blogspot.com/2017/01/5e-old-school-multiclassing-rules_29.html is one implementation.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't think Wizard 6/Cleric 6 or Cleric 6/Druid 6 is the problem with that house rule. The problem is something like Cleric 1/Druid 1/Sorcerer 1/Bard 1/Wizard 1 at level 5. It's very MAD (which may be enough to balance it!), but assuming a 14 in all 3 casting stats, you'd be able to prep 3 cleric, 3 druid, and 3 wizard spells, choosing the best from levels 1-3 of each list, as well as knowing 4 bard spells and 2 sorcerer spells (assuming you wait until level 3 and 4 to take them, so you can choose 2nd level spells.)

You know, even considering all that, I don't know if it's THAT bad. I think it depends on how much you value spell diversity. I would say a mid-level caster grabbing level 1 dips to expand their spell list broadly is the biggest possible breaking point. That and a Paladin 2/Sorcerer X getting to access the powerful mid-level paladin spells at the cost of 2 sorcerer points and 1 caster level.

A solution for the single level dipping might be:

PCs effectively get spell points based on level. So, a Cleric 11 / Wizard 1 would get 89% of total spell points for Cleric spells and 9% of spell points for Wizard spells. The rest of the spell prep / slot / cast are basically the same, but the PC could cast a few higher than first level Wizard spells per day.

For example, 12th level full casters have 47 "spell points" (i.e. multiply level of spell slots by number of each level slots and total, remainder goes to highest level class or whatever).

So, a level 6 Cleric / 6 Wizard would get:

1st 4 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 3 5th 2 6th 1: Cleric 24 SP, Wizard 23 SP (just like always, but there are these 2 additional spell point numbers on the character sheet that have to be kept track of)

The PC casts a 4th level Cleric spell:

1st 4 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 2 5th 2 6th 1: Cleric 20 SP, Wizard 23 SP

The PC casts a 5th level Cleric spell:

1st 4 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 2 5th 1 6th 1: Cleric 15 SP, Wizard 23 SP

The PC casts 3 3rd level Cleric spells:

1st 4 2nd 3 3rd 0 4th 2 5th 1 6th 1: Cleric 6 SP, Wizard 23 SP

The PC is running out of clerical spells he can now cast. If he casts the 6th level spell (or 3 second level spells) as a Clerical spell, all of the other spells cast must be Wizard spells.


So, a level 11 Cleric / 1 Wizard would get:

1st 4 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 3 5th 2 6th 1: Cleric 43 SP, Wizard 4 SP

This PC could cast a single 4th level Wizard spell (which he would have had to learn somehow), or a 1st and a 3rd, or 2 second or 4 first. He gains a little bit, but a single dip in Wizard does very little.


Although it is a little bit more bookkeeping, it does give a reason to single dip into a spell casting class (casting a single 4th level spell of a different class per day is nice), and it gives an incentive for someone to go Cleric 6 / Wizard 6 which the core multiclassing rules totally discourages. It still has MAD issues, ASI issues, and other limitations.


The spell points are easy to figure out from level to level. At level 13, the PC gains 1 7th level spell, so the Cleric 7 / Wizard 6 has 54 spell points, 29 and 25 respectively. The PC has ALL of these options of spells to cast, but is limited to about 54% Cleric spells and 46% Wizard spells (more or less).

The Cleric 6 / Wizard 6 PC is super versatile in encounter one, but in encounter four, things might start getting a bit tight and there is no way for him to cast two Fireballs per encounter for 4 straight encounters like he could if he were Wizard 12. He is limited to 6 Fireballs a day, whereas the level 12 Wizard could cast 9 Fireballs a day.


This forces a balance of spell casting between the two classes (even if one of them is a 1 level dip), effectively reducing the number of spells of each class that can be cast per day.


This could even result in a PC having only a 4th level slot available at the end of the day, but he has Cleric SP 2 and Wizard SP 2 available. That's one of the prices of multiclassing. You gain a lot, but there are also limitations and reasons why players would still want to play a full level Wizard (although Cleric 1 / Wizard 11 for AC would probably be more prevalent).

 

[KarinsDad]

That still doesn't explain what distinction you were trying to draw between "rules artifact" and "intentional by the rules", but okay, whatever.

There is nothing to indicate that it was "rules artifact". I suspect that it was "Let's gives some races the ability to gain levels in two classes" and the rules followed by that.

Usually, the reason for the rule occurs first and the rules that seem to work follow.

Rules artifact implies that the rules were there first and the PC archetype followed.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

A solution for the single level dipping might be:

PCs effectively get spell points based on level. So, a Cleric 11 / Wizard 1 would get 89% of total spell points for Cleric spells and 9% of spell points for Wizard spells. The rest of the spell prep / slot / cast are basically the same, but the PC could cast a few higher than first level Wizard spells per day.

That's still very abusable. A Cleric 1/Wizard 19 is already an attractive combination in 5E for heavy armor; but now you'd give them access to Revify and Death Ward as well (5% of 133 is 6 spell points, so 4th level spells). Now that wizard can Contingency: Revivify on himself ("whenever I die, Revivify me") as well as on any fellow PCs. Sure, he can only do it once per day, but you don't tend to need it frequently, and besides it's a lot more than the zero times per day he gets under PHB rules.

 

[KarinsDad]

But, what's the archetype a half-elven magic-user/cleric is supposed to be modeling?
Elrond?

Although Elrond might be a good model, he is no better than Gandalf is a model for a D&D wizard because the entire set of spells and abilities are very very different.

What's the archetype a half-elven magic-user/cleric supposed to be modeling in 1E or 2E for that matter? Answer: who cares? Nobody plays archetype fictional characters like Gandalf or Elrond in 1E, 2E, 3E, 4E, or 5E because the rules do not effectively model those archetypes. D&D Wizards are extremely different than the vast majority of fictional Wizards (unless it is a D&D novel).

The archetype is "multiclass D&D half elf cleric/wizard", something that no longer occurs in 5E D&D. In fact, a significant majority of 1E and 2E multiclass concepts are no longer really viable (or as viable), but it is a lot worse for spell casting concepts (although multiclass thieves got screwed over AC in 1E and 2E and have it better in some ways now).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Basically the very reason for this thread. A lot of 1E and 2E players played builds like Elf Cleric 7 / Magic-user 6 instead of Elf Cleric 8 in 1E and 2E. The PC gave up a level of Cleric abilities/spells/hit points in order to gain casting similar level Magic-User spells.

Of course, the Elf would still be a level behind in their Mage class after they had capped their Cleric level at 12; and after they hit Mage 15 (when their fellow Human Mage was level 16), they just couldn't advance any further. As far as I can tell, non-human characters were expected to multi-class heavily as a significant balancing factor against their inevitable level caps.