Should multiclassing be restricted by race?

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I sense a strange consensus in the Force.

OBJECTION!

Yes, I think there should be racial limits on classes and multiclasses. Maybe not as restrictive as AD&D's, or as nonsensical and counterproductive as 3.X's, but non-human races should have things that they are better at or worse at than humans... and that should be reflected somehow in their class options. Some races should not be capable of some things at all.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Yeah, I have to go with No, also.

Let the DM and players do this, not the developers.

I would also like to see less reliance on ability scores in character choice, so as not to get min-maxed races for certain classes.

 

[Wormwood]

. Some races should not be capable of some things at all.

I love seeing Dwarf Wizards and Half-Orc Paladins. I wouldn't wish those characters shoved back in the closet.

 

[Elf Witch]

I don't think that is a good idea. Not for the core.

This is coming from someone whose campaign limits a lot of what the different races can do. For example in my world elves can't do arcane magic at all but some of them have psionics as powers and they are the only ones who can do that. The elves are also the only ones who can be monks.

It works for my world. It is easy enough for the DM to house rule these things if they want restrictions then to make it the default rule.

 

[enrious]

No, it was one of the more terribad things to come out of 1e/2e.

If anything, it should be a campaign option.

 

[KidSnide]

For the core rules, I'd go with: "Of course not. Why would you?"

That having been said, I think it would be nice if 5e included some packages of suggested combinations of races, classes, optional rules and arbitrary restrictions that made sense together. I think it would be fun to present Greyhawk or the old BECMI setting as a "super-traditional D&D fantasy world" with race/class restrictions, paladins that can't multi-class and PCs limited to humans/dwarves/elves/halflings.

-KS

 

[trancejeremy]

This is one of those things that was just wrong in AD&D, IMHO.

In Appendix N, one of the biggest influences on the game was listed as the Grey Mouser and Fafhrd (sp?) stuff.

But they were obviously multiclassed - so when they actually did come out with a Lankhmar setting for AD&D, they had throw the existing multiclass rules out.

 

[DonTadow]

You should be able to choose any of the 4 classes once, when youmake your character. HOwever, you should be able to pick abilities at a cost of 1 for your class abilities and 2 or 3 for abilities set within another class. I think some abilities should not be restricted by class. IE, maybe lower levels of spells.

 

[Minigiant]

No. No.

I could see certain races being better more likely to multiclass and be better at it (like humans and half elves in 4th) but no class restrictions by race as the default.

 

[Li Shenron]

I would like multiclassing rules to be as a whole an optional add-on, not available by default.

Then any DM who uses them, can choose if to use them freely or put some setting-based restriction.

Really all that it matters is that design effort is put so that no multiclass combinations is broken or useless. If this is achieved, then any gaming group should choose what is allowed or banned for purely stylistic reasons.

But still I'd prefer that the book reads "multiclassing is an option that the DM can allow" not the opposite ("multiclassing is in, unless the DM bans it"). Because this means that before a player is allowed a certain combo, the DM's attention is drawn to at least think about whether it should work or not. When it's allowed by default, everyone assumes it's going to work fine.