D&D General Multiclassing Shouldn't be Treated as the Default

[Older Beholder]

Tell me you've never played BX without telling me you never played BX.

C'mon, you're 2 for 2 with the bad takes. Gives us one more for the thread

If you can go up levels, cast spells, kill monsters, it's a power fantasy.

 

[Older Beholder]

A relatively minor complaint I have about 5th edition is having to wait until third level to get my subslcass. In a few of the D&D campaigns I've run, players have wanted to skip to level three because "that's when it gets fun." One of the reasons we wait until third level to get our subclass is to avoid encouraging players to multiclass by dipping their toes into various classes to get those abilities at level one.

But multiclassing is an optional rule. Why build character generation and progression around an optional rule? Let's just have our subclass at first level and if that makes multiclassing too powerful then don't allow that as an option.

Personally I like multiclassing as an option, in that it can inform/reflect the roleplay.
There can be story based reasons why a character might change career during their adventuring life, so it's nice to have a way to express/represent this mechanically.

 

[MGibster]

Personally I like multiclassing as an option, in that it can inform/reflect the roleplay.

It's not multiclassing I really have a problem with. It's the fact that this "optional" rule has an outsized influence on how classes are designed in the first place. At this point just bake it into the standard rules. I imagine if I said no to this optional rule I'd have a revolt at my table. Has anyone here actually banned multiclassing at their table for 5th edition?

 

[CleverNickName]

Has anyone here actually banned multiclassing at their table for 5th edition?

(raises hand) It's an optional rule, so I opt out of it. It's not that big of a deal.

 

[FrozenNorth]

It's not multiclassing I really have a problem with. It's the fact that this "optional" rule has an outsized influence on how classes are designed in the first place. At this point just bake it into the standard rules. I imagine if I said no to this optional rule I'd have a revolt at my table. Has anyone here actually banned multiclassing at their table for 5th edition?

I don’t allow 2014 multiclassing at my table as it is pretty obvious that it was added as an afterthought and not meaningfully playtested for balance.

 

[ezo]

Has anyone here actually banned multiclassing at their table for 5th edition?

I do it from group to group. My last two games I have not allowed it and no one cares.

Most classes offer enough up to 8th level or so that it really isn't necessary. The only time I really encourage multiclassing is the 1:1 ratio. A game I play in allows it, and one player has a character which is a cleric/warlock and playing them mostly 1:1 in level advancement.

 

[Theory of Games]

If you can go up levels, cast spells, kill monsters, it's a power fantasy.

I'll had and seen enough characters die to know BECMI 'aint power-fantasy. Now 5th edition? Unquestionable Power-Fantasy as the PCs are nearly unstoppable (which is the definition of 'Power-Fantasy').

 

[ezo]

I'll had and seen enough characters die to know BECMI 'aint power-fantasy. Now 5th edition? Unquestionable Power-Fantasy as the PCs are nearly unstoppable (which is the definition of 'Power-Fantasy').

To be fair, I would agree in Tier 2 and higher. Tier 1 you can see PCs dying often enough to remove the Power-Fantasy label at that point IMO.

 

[Older Beholder]

It's not multiclassing I really have a problem with. It's the fact that this "optional" rule has an outsized influence on how classes are designed in the first place. At this point just bake it into the standard rules. I imagine if I said no to this optional rule I'd have a revolt at my table. Has anyone here actually banned multiclassing at their table for 5th edition?

That's fair, I'm just not sure how much multiclassing had to do with the decision to make sub-classes at level 3 the standard.

 

[Older Beholder]

I'll had and seen enough characters die to know BECMI 'aint power-fantasy. Now 5th edition? Unquestionable Power-Fantasy as the PCs are nearly unstoppable (which is the definition of 'Power-Fantasy').

To me 'Unstoppable' is a specific type of power fantasy, but I wouldn't say it's the definition.