D&D 5E Multiclassing

[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.