D&D 5E Multiclassing

[randrak]

I've never really allowed multiclassing...I view it as an excuse make ridiculously broke characters. However, my players always wanted multiclassing in our games (half of them are basically munchkins that just love making the strongest characters possible).

After so long, I was thinking of just giving them a Christmas present of allowing multiclassing.

Is it a good or a bad idea? What should I be on the lookout for? What should I be careful about? Tips?

Thank you

 

[Lanliss]

I've never really allowed multiclassing...I view it as an excuse make ridiculously broke characters. However, my players always wanted multiclassing in our games (half of them are basically munchkins that just love making the strongest characters possible).

After so long, I was thinking of just giving them a Christmas present of allowing multiclassing.

Is it a good or a bad idea? What should I be on the lookout for? What should I be careful about? Tips?

Thank you

Not an optimizer myself, but I have noticed a few general tips on here, to lower the number of broken characters.

Do not allow feats WITH multiclassing, or at least not the big contenders (Polearm master, GWM, Sharpshooter, Crossbow expert, I think are the usual suspects.)

Warlock and Fighter make insane dips, with Action surge and Short rest spells, plus the Eldritch blast cantrip.

Be careful about magic items. For example, say you allow the feats listed above, and have a Barbarian/Fighter with GWM. Do you really want him to have a magic Great sword, or battle axe?

That is all I have for now, you will need a real optimizer to get a list of dangerous class combos from.

EDIT: I forgot to mention the upside. You can powergame too. Throw some dangerous stuff at them. A Bugbear gets really scary with an Action surge, or sneak attack. Don't play so hard you invalidate their own work they put into powergaming, but let them feel the pressure every now and then, that they are still not the strongest thing around. Keep them on their toes, and have fun with it.

 

[Herobizkit]

Multi-classing will (at first) appear much stronger at lower levels.

Expect 1-level dips from Fighter and Cleric.

In most cases, two levels of any class makes any single-classed character better. In practically all cases, 2 levels of Warlock seem to make every class better; 2 levels of Fighter makes every caster a real threat (due to Action Surge).

Pay close attention to a Paladin/Sorcerer. It seems to be the most harmonious pairing for optimization.

Make sure the players keep track of their action economy. Despite multiple abilities, they still only get one action, one move, and can only use one of their multi-class option for their bonus action.

I echo the 'no feats' in a multi-class game - too much of a good thing to allow both.

 

[Horwath]

There is no problem in multiclassing.

There could be some cornerstone cases that some combo might be viewed as overpowered but those characters are one trick ponies anyway so problem there either.

Improtant thing to note is that any multiclassing delays your higher level features by few levels.
Also your feats/ASI are delayed also.

A fireball is great at 5th level, not so much at 8th. Even if you pull 2 of them per round once per day.

Do not think about multiclassing as; lets make 15th level character that is best doing "X".

Look at the character from 1st level and power curve towards 15th.

 

[Caliban]

Depends on how much fun you want your players to have. Generally, more options = more fun.

It also means more work for the DM, because the characters will be more versatile and possibly more powerful.

 

[Valetudo]

Multiclassing is fine especially if you start at first or second level. MCing works like waves, sometimes they are killers, and sometimes they are inbetween. There is no instant win switch combos like 3rd had. Although there are some classes that mesh really well together (basically all the CHA classes combo really good), they are not game breaking. Now rolling stats, montihaul magicitems, feats, and MCing will change how the game plays. But nothing like how 3rd breaks down.

 

[FarBeyondC]

Just allow multiclassing with no restrictions other than the ones already in the book.

If it really goes as bad as you fear it might, ban it or restrict it the next time using this time's failures as a reason.

 

[Oofta]

I'm considering home-ruling multiclassing for warlocks to limit the spell recovery to just warlock spells. Well, that and warlock/cleric always seemed odd to me from an RP perspective since the PC is basically serving two masters at that point.

Other than that, there's not a big issue, although taking a level or two of fighter is also pretty popular. Overall it doesn't break anything and unlike previous editions there's no horribly broken combos that I've run into yet.

 

[WarpedAcorn]

I've never really allowed multiclassing...I view it as an excuse make ridiculously broke characters. However, my players always wanted multiclassing in our games (half of them are basically munchkins that just love making the strongest characters possible).

After so long, I was thinking of just giving them a Christmas present of allowing multiclassing.

Is it a good or a bad idea? What should I be on the lookout for? What should I be careful about? Tips?

Thank you

The only issue I think you should look out for is players severely underpowering their characters. Multiclassing can give you great tools, but the build might not "come online" until much later. That means when when a single-classed character turns Level 5 and gets a big power bump, a Multi-Class might not get that bump until level 7 and by that point it might not be as significant.

Personally, I don't see a problem with Multi-Classing. Some people view Classes as "Jobs" and once you pick one you have to stick with it. I see Classes as a collection of skills and abilities that SHOULD be able to mixed and matched. I dislike that it has to be this way, and would much prefer a way to invest in different skills to create your individual "class". Right now, Multi-Classing is the best way to achieve that.

 

[hejtmane]

Multi-classing will (at first) appear much stronger at lower levels.

Expect 1-level dips from Fighter and Cleric.

In most cases, two levels of any class makes any single-classed character better. In practically all cases, 2 levels of Warlock seem to make every class better; 2 levels of Fighter makes every caster a real threat (due to Action Surge).

Pay close attention to a Paladin/Sorcerer. It seems to be the most harmonious pairing for optimization.

Make sure the players keep track of their action economy. Despite multiple abilities, they still only get one action, one move, and can only use one of their multi-class option for their bonus action.

I echo the 'no feats' in a multi-class game - too much of a good thing to allow both.

What people call broken builds in the game are usually straight fighters with feats. There are a few Multiclasses that can get close but in the 5e world you give up something when you multiclass. Delay asi's delay access to some spells or not even getting a spell later in the game. 5e is not the 3e of the world.

Funny everyone talks sorcerer and Pally but Bard and pally work two because they are both charisma based and if they go valor can get book of secrets with paladin but the reason most paldians go that route is to make your smite knight more effective by having more spell slots. They are still limited to once per turn they can just do it more often per long rest

 

[ad_hoc]

We don't use multiclassing in our group but it is more because we want to embrace the class based nature of D&D than a balance issue (there are plenty of classless games out there if that is what you want to do).

Multiclassing will make more complicated characters, but that doesn't mean they're better. Keep in mind that multiclassing is more powerful if you use 4d6-L rather than point buy.

The main concern I would have is ensuring spotlight protection for each character.

 

[iserith]

I have not noticed any gameplay issues with multiclassing as a DM or player. Most of my characters are multiclassed so that I can realize mechanically the concept I'm going for rather than just going for a straight power grab. My experience has been that players in my games do the same.

I would just put your concerns out there for your players, reiterate the goals of play (everyone having a good time and working together to create an exciting, memorable story), and trust them to make good decisions in the face of that.

 

[Satyrn]

However, my players always wanted multiclassing in our games

This is your answer.

 

[Satyrn]

ugh. that wasn't a good post. What I mean to say is since your players want it, give it a go. You won't really know how it will work for you and your group until you freely allow it.

It's totally worth just straight up trying it, no caveats, no hindrances.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

I've never really allowed multiclassing...I view it as an excuse make ridiculously broke characters. However, my players always wanted multiclassing in our games (half of them are basically munchkins that just love making the strongest characters possible).

After so long, I was thinking of just giving them a Christmas present of allowing multiclassing.

Is it a good or a bad idea? What should I be on the lookout for? What should I be careful about? Tips?

Thank you

Do you plan on runing a campaign runng over a wide span of levels ?

We always asume our campaigns might run a long time and go into high levels.
This resulted into our group having no multi class characters upto this point, the optimisers in our group seem to think they are a bit more powerfukll at lower levels, but even out at higer levels, then even fall a bit behind a high levels.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Personally, I don’t like multiclassing – give me a good single-classed character any day. I also detest the level-dip phenomenon.

But I allow all that in my group nonetheless. My advice would be to be sure to double-check rules interactions and not be afraid to say “no, that’s not how it works/how I rule it” or say “I’m going to have to double-check that and get back to you.” Like if someone tries to combine a rogue's sneak-attack with a barbarian’s reckless attack using a battleaxe.

 

[tglassy]

Multiclassing is one of my favorite things to do. Oftentimes, I can't get the character I want with just a single class, so I have to bring in a multiclass to do it. It creates variety.

It also creates someone who doesn't get higher level abilities. You may think taking two levels of fighter really helps your Bladelock be a better fighter, but that also means you're not getting your second attack until level 7. Also, you're not getting your level 3 spells until level 7. Everything is pushed back, just so you could have heavy armor and Action Surge, and a little more health. Is it that important? If the tradeoff is ok for the player, then let them go for it. They won't have level 3 spells or a second attack when everyone else does, but they'll have 2nd level spells and an action surge, and a few invocations, which other characters wouldn't.

It's a trade off, not a power gaming move. They have to look at the skills they're giving up, vs what they're gaining. I say let the player decide if that's important to them. If their Sorcerer absolutely has to wear heavy armor, and they don't have the patience to get three feats to make it happen (which I wouldn't blame them), then by all means, let them have a level of fighter or Cleric to do so.

 

[mellored]

Multiclassing makes you weaker, but more versatile. A wizard trading his highest spells for armor, or a fighter doing less damage to gain more skills. A sorcerer trading nova for drp.

There's certain some good combos, but none without trade-offs.

 

[Li Shenron]

I have yet to see a multiclass PC in play in 5e, but I would not worry too much.

The main reason of concern for me is the dilution of roles. Most of the times a player who is interested in multiclassing merely wants to cover more tactical roles, and that's ok only as long as it doesn't step on another PC's toes.

Secondarily, if you design your fantasy world with the idea that classes have a strong in-game meaning (e.g. Wizard's Schools, Bardic Colleges and Druid Circles are actual organizations), then multiclassing will cause narrative problems.

There is this general trend of thought in players who love multiclassing, that the more classes they grab the more awesome they are, such as "look, I am a Wizard AND a Fighter AND a Paladin AND a Druid...". In the real world if you are too many things, you're more probably a loser who is an amateur at each and every one.

 

[Istbor]

I allow for multiclassing in all of my campaigns. It is rarely taken, when it is though, my group has the understanding that there should be a narrative reason for this. How the fighter suddenly started learning spells and the like. Once something plausible is established, I have no problems, and the others in the group have more depth to their characters and the story as a whole.