D&D 5E Multiclassing in Next

[Connorsrpg]

Why can't they just do it Saga-Style?

When you take the first level of another class you only get one of the benefits (your choice).

Also, not all adjustments stack - you just get the highest or average or something like that.

 

[Stormonu]

This sounds very much like it has the potential to be tangled mess. I'm having a hard time seeing how they will implement multiclassing without bloating the class content significantly and with little value.

Let's hope the find something elegant, because making it optional isn't going to fly if adventure NPCs and organized play games are going to be using the rules.

 

[Li Shenron]

Overall I like the path they are following.

I am not sure however if I'm going to like the idea that a mid-level Fighter after dedicating 100% of his time to master his class abilities, decides to learn some magic and jumps straights into teleportation, invisibility and fireballs, skipping all the hard work that presumably all Wizards have to go through.

It might be more balanced on a metagaming level, but I would have IC issues. One more blow to suspension of disbelief.

4E allowed multi-classing at 1st Level, either by feat or by hybrid. If 5E doesn't allow any multi-classing at 1st Level, the fanbase will be just that much less unified.
Is that a big deal? Probably not -- but it does seem to be the way they're going.

Well, 5e is already doing something like that: you can pick the 1st-level feat of the Magic-User specialty for example. It's not called "multiclassing" explicitly, but it's practically that (all you need then, is more feats for other classes).

 

[Frostmarrow]

Maybe I'm not reading this correctly but having an entire chapter devoted to multiclassing, rife with tables, seems awfully self-referential and redundant. I'm no fan of multi-classing in the first place. In a class based RPG multi-classing makes about as much sense as texting whilst driving.

However, if the levels of each class are designed to be self-contained then for example the Wizard's 7th Level could be available to anyone cleared to take a 7th level. That'd be cool.
It could look like this: Gain a 4th Level spell and 1d4 hit points.

 

[FireLance]

It's interesting that they decided to make an entire new class table for each multiclass just to get around the problem of frontloading. I guess it's all a little too vague right now to really make judgments, but it sounds pretty convoluted to me. I prefer to use the normal class levels for multiclassing, especially if all they are really worried about is what happens at level one.

I think 5e will have to walk a very careful tightrope because you don't want taking a level in a new class to give too much or too little. Unfortunately, it appears that simplicity (or alternately, rules elegance) will be the casualty.

I've always been of the view that one of the key reasons why spellcaster multiclassing was problematic in 3e was because gaining one spellcaster level led to gains in three or four dimensions:

1. An increase in the number and power of spell slots available (this can be further decomposed into the total number of slots and the power of each slot);
2. Access to more powerful spells, about every other level or so; and
3. An increase in the power of individual spells.

The 4e solution (at least for the AEDU classes) was to equalize the number, strength and access to powers for all classes (although you had to spend feats to swap powers), and tie the strength of individual powers to the level of the power instead of directly to the level of the character.

If 5e multiclassing is going to be largely based on the 3e approach, I think the following tweaks will need to be made to avoid revisiting the issues that some players encountered:

1. The power of a spellcaster's spell slots should be tied to character level. A 10th-level character, even if he has only one level of wizard, should still have access to 5th or, at the minimum, 4th level spell slots (although not necessarily 5th or 4th level spells - see below).

2. The number of spell slots a spellcaster has access to can depend on the number of levels he has in spellcasting classes. Together, this means that a 10th-level character with just one level of wizard might have access to just one spell, but it's a spell that is worth using.

3. Based on what we have seen so far, the effect of a spell will be fixed based on its level and not the level of the caster. What we have not seen is whether the effect of a spell can be increased by preparing it in a higher spell slot. This second point is quite important because, if implemented, it would go some way to allowing even basic spells to remain relevant at all levels of play.

4. If basic spells can remain relevant at all levels of play, then we can make access to higher-level spells dependant on spellcaster level instead of character level. So maybe the Fighter 5/Wizard 5 can't cast cone of cold like the Wizard 10 and has only half of the spellcasting endurance, but his fireball is nearly as good. The Fighter 9/Wizard 1 can only cast a single burning hands, but it packs a punch when he does.

 

[Minigiant]

I like.

I see it working like this:

1) Multiclassed version of classes will be either a level or two behind or with class features spread over more levels.

2) Multiclassed version of classes will allow the levels of their other classes count to their multiclass level. Like the magic rating variant.

 

[1of3]

I've always been of the view that one of the key reasons why spellcaster multiclassing was problematic in 3e was because gaining one spellcaster level led to gains in three or four dimensions:

1. An increase in the number and power of spell slots available (this can be further decomposed into the total number of slots and the power of each slot);
2. Access to more powerful spells, about every other level or so; and
3. An increase in the power of individual spells.

The 4e solution (at least for the AEDU classes) was to equalize the number, strength and access to powers for all classes (although you had to spend feats to swap powers), and tie the strength of individual powers to the level of the power instead of directly to the level of the character.
[...]

That is a fine analysis. I'd like to XP you, but can't.

Another way to alleviate the problem could be to pool all spell slots, then distribute them to classes in the morning. That would at least allow casters to multiclass better with casters.

 

[Revinor]

Me likey.

Particularly that a fighter who decides to learn a little magic at 10th level won't have to cast dinky magic missiles that will never be as useful as his longbow. Apparently he'll be able to do some more impressive magic.

Maybe allowing him to still cast only magic missiles, but as 10th level character. So 'basic' magic, with with proper punch (5 magic missiles instead of one). But this assumes exponential wizard scaling...

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe a Rogue 8/"Multiclass Wizard"2 casts like a 6th level "Multiclass Wizard" (MCWizard levels + 1/2 all other class levels) and has the Sneak Attack of a 9th level Rogue (Rogue level + 1/2 other levels)

Perhaps the is no Wizard to multiclass with. There is only a Mage class with is a slower progressing Wizard class. No Rogue/Wizards. Just Rogue/Mages.

 

[Bluenose]

Presumably the intention is to ensure that you can only play your character concept once you've got several levels behind you and picked up the relevant prestige class. That's one more tick in the "No Sale" column for me.

4E allowed multi-classing at 1st Level, either by feat or by hybrid. If 5E doesn't allow any multi-classing at 1st Level, the fanbase will be just that much less unified.
Is that a big deal? Probably not -- but it does seem to be the way they're going.

AD&D allowed multi-classing at 1st level too (BD&D didn't allow it at all, though an Elf was be definition a F/MU equivalent). So they've chosen to go with the aberrant system used in 3e, rather than the other ways of doing it.