D&D 5E Optimal Multiclassing

[Savage Wombat]

It seems to me that the DMG (or ENworlders if the DMG fails us) could make a package of simple "house rules" for encouraging multi-classing, as opposed to the current rules which seem to discourage it somewhat.

 

[Pickles JG]

And to this, I am reposting:


Does this mean that all the complaining is really only about Ranger 4/Barbarian 4 builds?

Would it really kill those concepts to focus on reaching five levels of one class first? A Rng2/Brb2 taking three levels as Ranger straight before returing to Barbarian?

If this is really there is to it, I definitely understand why that proviso from the playtest MC rules - that you need 5 levels of one class or 8 levels total to gain your second attack - was dropped. Way too complicated for such a tiny corner-case.

But there might be more to it...?

I think you have probably got it. It would be more of an issue for a 2/2/2/2 multiclass but if someone really wants to cherry pick 3-4 lots of level 1-2 abilities they can wait longer for the true power

 

[Talaeden_Denthiir]

These are excerpts taken from my posts on this thread over on the WotC Boards:

http://community.wizards.com/comment/51246041


Unfortunately, NOTHING is worth a, 2 level dip", in 5E, unless u want to give up an Ability Score increase or Feat. Since stat increases/feats are CLASS based and NOT Level based, u forfeit one if you don't at least multiclass for 4 levels. This not only gimps MCing mechanically but, RPing wise as well. So does what u gt for multiclassing and the unfairness of some classes needing two prereqs and others not.
Case in point, one of my players came up with an awesome idea to have a character that was orphaned and grew up on the streets of a major city. She resorted to thievery to survive and by level 2 Rog, was kicked out of the city into the wilderness. In the wilds, alone again and abandoned, a wise old grand master monk found her, took her in, and trained her in the ways of the monk (Rog2/Mnk18).
Unfortunately, the mechanics gimp and punish the RP. With two levels of Rog, instead of 4, she loses 1 stat bump/feat. Also, she needs not just Dex but Wis to MC into monk. RP wise though, it makes since for her to have a lower Wis, UNTIL she encounters the Grand Master to teach her Wis.
So, she's better off starting as a monk to not have MC stat restrictions, get better MC with taking Rogue at level 2 for extra skill and thieves tools, then 3 more levels of Rogue to get a total of 5 stat boosts/feats, then go back to Monk the rest of the way which makes absolutely NO RP sense at all!
And they say the last edition didn't support RP! This edition out right restricts it unless you like being punished for Good RP!
Too make matters worse, this player is my wife and was finally interesed in playing D&D again after a long hiatus and bam! "Sorry honey, although the RAW lets u start off as a Rog2 to multiclass into Monk the rest of the way, ur gonna be severely gimped if u do." It's like the RAW is prejudiced against' non pure single classed characters'.

p.s. - this msg was sent from my iPhone, so plz excuse any spelling/gramatical errors.
p.p.s. - in general I Love 5E.

Mellored Wrote:

Talaeden_Denthiir wrote:
Unfortunately, NOTHING is worth a, 2 level dip", in 5E, unless u want to give up an Ability Score increase or Feat.
You don't need 20 in a stat, and many features are better then feats.

Monks are an exception. They rely more on stats (paticularly Dex) then most other classes. Though only going in 2 levels still (eventially) leaves you with all your stat bumps.

Also, starting as rogue gives you more skills then MC into rogue.

I agree with u on the starting out as rogue gives more skillz. The issue is she needs at least a Wis 13 to multiclass into Monk. If all classes are relatively balanced, why is Ftr Str OR Dex, Mnk Dex AND Wis, Pal Str AND Cha, Rgr Dex AND Wis, and all other classes are just one Stat?
Ftr being 'either/or' implies it's easier to MC into.
Mnk, Pal, Rgr being 'and' implies it's harder to MC into those classes.

As to your 1st reply. I would argue that's stats are MORE important now. Especially with bounded accuracy. A +1 means a whole lot more. Heck, Mearls and company even said they wanted to go back to ability scores being more important again. Thus, saves being keyed to ability scores, etc.

I just feel that having ability score boosts being tied to level and giving the Ftr and Rog bonus boosts would've came to the same conclusion without gimping the MC rules.

I.E., if Fighters get bonus stat boosts at levels 6 and 14 and Rogues at level 10, give everyone based on level boosts at levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 19, then give Fighters class bonus boosts at levels 6 and 14 and Rogues at level 10.
And don't tell me it's a, "balance issue", cuz' spellcasters don't get nerfed. Heck, there is even a whole chart on page 165 of the PHB, to make sure they don't get nerfed.
The figters and rogues still get ability score bonuses and the MC'ers don't get nerfed. Win - Win!

 

[Kobold Stew]

Unfortunately, NOTHING is worth a, 2 level dip", in 5E, unless u want to give up an Ability Score increase or Feat.

I gather these aren't your words, but since you present them here, I'll speak to you.

EDIT: I see these are your words. I'll make some changes to be more respectful. You have my apologies.

This is poorly argued. Multiclassing is not worth it to you, but one example does not prove a case. Let's look at the one example:

Case in point, one of my players came up with an awesome idea to have a character that was orphaned and grew up on the streets of a major city. She resorted to thievery to survive and by level 2 Rog, was kicked out of the city into the wilderness. In the wilds, alone again and abandoned, a wise old grand master monk found her, took her in, and trained her in the ways of the monk (Rog2/Mnk18).
Unfortunately, the mechanics gimp and punish the RP. With two levels of Rog, instead of 4, she loses 1 stat bump/feat. Also, she needs not just Dex but Wis to MC into monk. RP wise though, it makes since for her to have a lower Wis, UNTIL she encounters the Grand Master to teach her Wis.

Let's assume that this is a real game. It seems you are apparently starting at level 20 and the concern is how to represent the character concept.

I believe you misunderstand how 5e builds characters. The backgrounds provide an ideal solution to allow this player to role-play the character they want, and that is with the urchin background, possibly tweaked slightly as the rules allow.

As a concept, out of the box, the rules support it. The two levels of rogue (why two, except for mechanical reasons?) have nothing to do with the concept, or with the story the player apparently wants, whether or not the character is starting at level 1 or level 20.

You are assuming that "character concept" involves the player defining every moment of the twenty-level career of the character, which does not mesh with any game I've played.

So, she's better off starting as a monk to not have MC stat restrictions, get better MC with taking Rogue at level 2 for extra skill and thieves tools, then 3 more levels of Rogue to get a total of 5 stat boosts/feats, then go back to Monk the rest of the way which makes absolutely NO RP sense at all!
And they say the last edition didn't support RP! This edition out right restricts it unless you like being punished for Good RP!

You have found a way to make it mechanically better for the player. That's an element of system mastery. It, however, has nothing to do with RP. I'll leave aside the edition pissing -- it's unnecessary to your case -- but since it looks like you are starting at level 20 (mention of 5 stat boost), which is an atypical game situation, perhaps we should expect to see the cracks in the multi classing system.

So it now comes down to the DM saying that the character's backstory from the perspective of level 20 "makes no RP sense" simply because you are unable to bend the sequence of level progression in a world where the natural story a returning player might want to tell can be told.

It seems that this is not the full story. A returning player, starting at level 20, with an unaccommodating DM, who....

Too make matters worse, this player is my wife and was finally interesed in playing D&D again after a long hiatus and bam! "Sorry honey, although the RAW lets u start off as a Rog2 to multiclass into Monk the rest of the way, ur gonna be severely gimped if u do." It's like the RAW is prejudiced against' non pure single classed characters'.

...is this player's spouse.

I'm sorry you or your DM is unwilling to let the character have the level progression that would make mechanical sense.

If the character were starting at level 1, there would be no problem.
If you used backgrounds to represent the background of the character before monk training, there would be no problem.

The problem exists only because you're starting at an advanced level.

As for the general poplin, however, one example of a level-20 character (who, based on what we have now is never going to level), does not prove "nothing is worth a two-level dip".

 

[sithramir]

I'm glad you broke it out above about the mechanics versus role playing. I really don' t see why 2 levels of Rogue are "needed" for role playing reasons. Period. That's what backgrounds are for and it's only mechanics now since you don't need to be "rogue" to use skills or tools, etc.

Perhaps no levels of rogue are taken and she had to learn to fight with her hands, etc? Monk doesn't have to be "trained by a grand master kung fu type". Role playing is the whole reason it's not needed. Mechanically it sounds like you'd prefer to use rogue which is great but not earth shatteringly weak.

And I don't get how ONE stat boost and/or feat is "nerfing" anything. I'd take cunning action over a stat boost or feat. It's pretty awesome. Plus getting more skills to start with, etc? All of this seems to me that someone is trying to actually make the character stronger NOT weaker with the MC.

If it's at level 20 they likely could have maxed important stats out still and probably missed out on a feat in reality? Well they've gained a few other abilities definitely worth a feat.

I'll give you the gripe about stat requirements and needed 2 for monk and others. That seems foolish to me to make it harder than other classes. I'm more surprised you wouldn't be complaining about missing out on the pinnacle 20th level powers!

The only issue I see with MC (and I think this edition did a much better job than 3.0) is that you can't hit pinnacle powers. But that was the point I believe to make sure the core classes weren't under powered when multi-classing or using prestige classes.

 

[drjones]

Look, it's not enough that the game allow my character concept to be created relatively easily in several different ways, it has to actively reward me such that what perfectly fits my RP idea also is perfectly Min/Maxed. I would also like the book to produce baked goods, but only gluten free that taste better than all other options. If I find out my scone would have been 5% better with gluten then I will throw it in the trash as inedible.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Case in point, one of my players came up with an awesome idea to have a character that was orphaned and grew up on the streets of a major city. She resorted to thievery to survive and by level 2 Rog, was kicked out of the city into the wilderness. In the wilds, alone again and abandoned, a wise old grand master monk found her, took her in, and trained her in the ways of the monk (Rog2/Mnk18).
Unfortunately, the mechanics gimp and punish the RP.

(Your wife likely already considered this but...) She could wrap all of the backstory (orphaned, thievery to survive, etc.) into the character's background--something like Criminal, Urchin, or a custom background. Then take only levels of Monk to demonstrate the time since the old grandmaster monk found and trained her. The character would be missing out on some of the mechanical aspects of the Rogue class (sneak attack, expertise, etc.) but the roleplaying narrative would be preserved.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Look, it's not enough that the game allow my character concept to be created relatively easily in several different ways, it has to actively reward me such that what perfectly fits my RP idea also is perfectly Min/Maxed. I would also like the book to produce baked goods, but only gluten free that taste better than all other options. If I find out my scone would have been 5% better with gluten then I will throw it in the trash as inedible.

If I didn't know better I'd swear you were being sarcastic here.

 

[Mistwell]

Unfortunately, NOTHING is worth a, 2 level dip", in 5E, unless u want to give up an Ability Score increase or Feat. Since stat increases/feats are CLASS based and NOT Level based, u forfeit one if you don't at least multiclass for 4 levels.

Only if you care about level 19. I've never, not in 37 years, had a character get to level 19. So I really don't care that I will miss out on a boost for levels 19 and 20.

 

[Andor]

Unfortunately, NOTHING is worth a, 2 level dip", in 5E, unless u want to give up an Ability Score increase or Feat. Since stat increases/feats are CLASS based and NOT Level based, u forfeit one if you don't at least multiclass for 4 levels. This not only gimps MCing mechanically but, RPing wise as well. So does what u gt for multiclassing and the unfairness of some classes needing two prereqs and others not.

Some thoughts occur here.

One, as has been pointed out multiple time, the background system allows this concept for level 1, let alone 20.

Two, why 2 levels in rogue? It seems like an example designed to disappoint, given that cunning action largely overlaps with Monk class features (although cheaper.) Why not 1 or 3?

Three, the only stat bump you miss is the 19th level one. Really? At 20th level that is what is killing your concept? What is your starting stat line and feat wish list that falls apart without that last bump?

Four, why bring that to a thread I started trying to find the sweet spots in the multiclassing system?

Five, good point about the 'and' prerequisites vs the 'or' prereqs. I hadn't noticed that, although....

Six, frankly it seems to me to strengthen the intended backstory. I would have said her unusually high wisdom was the hidden virtue that caused the monk to adopt her in the first place. "Hey kid, you've got natural wisdom. That's one in a million. Want to buy a book?"