OneDnD Subclasses at first level and multiclassing

[mellored]

Lots of people are talking about subclasses at 1st or at 1st & 2nd. No one is talking about the other half I laid out needed for that - a different multiclassing schema that doens't allow cherry picking. What would you suggest for that which would feel like a good 5e-esqe style fit?

Cherry picking is exactly the reason to multiclass.

You want to play an unarmored rogue who use their fists. You need to "cherry pick" a level of monk.
Want to make a fighter who is charismatic who encourages allies, take a level of bard.
Etc...

That said. I see no reason why you couldn't also have bardic inspiration as a feat.

 

[Horwath]

In this sort of thing you aren't planning for any one particular player, you are looking for the lowest common demoninator among all of the players. If everyone who wants to play can, but a bright player exceeds the bar and plays more advanced characters from the start that's not a bad thing. That's not what we're measuring against.

maybe we should plan little above lowest common denominator?

I mentioned fighter(champion) as a half-joke, but it's really is a good way to have a character for people that do not want to invest too much time into optimization and rules, and still have a decent character.

Fighter(champion), Barbarian(bear totem), Rogue(scout) are all simple and viable options. Sorcerer(draconic) can be an option for a simple caster introduction character.

champion and draconic sorcerer need a little buff, but that is another topic

 

[Horwath]

Lots of people are talking about subclasses at 1st or at 1st & 2nd. No one is talking about the other half I laid out needed for that - a different multiclassing schema that doens't allow cherry picking. What would you suggest for that which would feel like a good 5e-esqe style fit?

one solution could be:

you cannot multiclass before having 4 levels in your primary class.
you cannot multiclass out of your new class before getting 4 levels in a new class.

 

[tetrasodium]

Lots of people are talking about subclasses at 1st or at 1st & 2nd. No one is talking about the other half I laid out needed for that - a different multiclassing schema that doens't allow cherry picking. What would you suggest for that which would feel like a good 5e-esqe style fit?

the 2e rules for it had a lot of one off & hard coded stuff for individual combos making it a good place for inspiration but needing work to convery into a formulaic framework I put together this little setup for accomplishing that while sanding down issues that were present in 2e dual/multiclassing a while back & it seems to work well

Spoiler: rules

I'm going to get technical for simplicity & clarity of explanation without examples

• The terms class1 & class2 are used for simplicity un description. Class1 is whichever class higher or equal in level to class2 (the lower or equal level one)
• class1 & class2 have their own parallel to the single class exp tracks starting at 0->300->900->etc ones but are subject to a 2.5x multiplier (0->750->2,250->etc) REMEMBER: experience needed for each level increases at a nonlinear pace so there will be some slowdown in progression but not cripplingly so
• You can dual class at any time (including level 1 with zero exp) but both classes are subject to the 2.5x multiplier & you must makeup the 2.5x gap if not starting at character creation.
  • If bob is level two with 300xp he can immediately pick up level 1 in a second class If bob wants to reach level 3/1 first he needs to fill the 150exp deficit he just created & continue till he advances to 2,250 in class1. If bob wants to first aim for 2/2 I'm not sure if class2 should need 450exp for level 2 or 600(450+the 150exp deficit class1 started with). There are merits for either method. Forcing the deficit to be filled is probably good just to avoid "I don't plan to advance class1 beyond this level" type cheese
• hitpoints from each class are divided by 2 & added together.
• Dual classing impacts proficiency bonus (immediately). Take the proficiency bonus for class1 & subtract the difference between class1 & class2 proficiency bonus values.
  • If bob is level 10/2 he has class1 proficiency of +4 & class2 proficiency of +2 making his final proficiency bonus +2. If he advances to 10/5 that will increase to +3 because 4-(4-3)=3
  • There might be a way for someone who knows the math terms involved better than I do to more concisely write that.
• level one for both classes uses max for the hit die+con or whatever is being used by the game normally for single class characters Both are divided by 2 & added together though.
• Casters can dual class but track spells & slots separate (3.x style) rather than having them stack 5e style
• You get all abilities from each class at each level but only if they can combine under other circumstances so sneak attack & extra attack combine but extra attack & extra attack do not.
• Giving both sets of saves might be ok because of the hit to proficiency bonus & somewhat lagging progression. I'm not sure about skills since there are so few skills in 5e

It discourages cherry picking because of the proficiency bonus hit under those circumstances & hp/prof bonus pressures to take advantage of the ability to snag a bunch of levels in class2 for less than or similar to the cost of one more level in class1 as soon as they start diverging . A dual class can be competent at both sides of their split but will almost always lag behind a straight class of either in levels hp & sometimes proficiency bonus to (hopefully) make it a tough choice either way rather thana no brainer they feel pressured into

 

[Clint_L]

There's an active thread at the top of the page on multi-classing.

 

[Clint_L]

maybe we should plan little above lowest common denominator?

There are lots of new players who have never played anything like an RPG before. That is the reality. I work with tons of them. A lot of them are trying D&D because they've heard about it, and a significant number are looking at it as a way to meet people and make friends. Some of them have learning challenges of various sorts. There's a lot going on and each kid has a unique story. This is not about "intelligence" and I really wish you'd stop trying to make it like kids who can't immediately suss out which sub-class they'd like from the first moment they play D&D are dumb.

For the first game, you don't want to spend hours just explaining basic rules and class/subclass options (and you don't have hours for an after school club). You want to get them playing so they pick up rules as they going along. A brand new kid to the game is still trying to wrap their head around all the race and class options without adding in 48 or so sub-classes to the mix.

So yeah, you want to keep it simple to start. If there are kids who have some experience and are picking things up fast then there are options like cleric, druid, wizard, bard at Level 1 that are plenty complicated without a sub-class. Keeping sub-classes at 3rd level give a little breathing room and costs the game almost nothing - it's very easy for those veterans who want to jump right into a sub-class to skip over those first 3 sessions and start at level 3. Or, heaven forbid, play 3 games before choosing the sub-class.

 

[Horwath]

There are lots of new players who have never played anything like an RPG before. That is the reality. I work with tons of them. A lot of them are trying D&D because they've heard about it, and a significant number are looking at it as a way to meet people and make friends. Some of them have learning challenges of various sorts. There's a lot going on and each kid has a unique story. This is not about "intelligence" and I really wish you'd stop trying to make it like kids who can't immediately suss out which sub-class they'd like from the first moment they play D&D are dumb.

For the first game, you don't want to spend hours just explaining basic rules and class/subclass options (and you don't have hours for an after school club). You want to get them playing so they pick up rules as they going along. A brand new kid to the game is still trying to wrap their head around all the race and class options without adding in 48 or so sub-classes to the mix.

So yeah, you want to keep it simple to start. If there are kids who have some experience and are picking things up fast then there are options like cleric, druid, wizard, bard at Level 1 that are plenty complicated without a sub-class. Keeping sub-classes at 3rd level give a little breathing room and costs the game almost nothing - it's very easy for those veterans who want to jump right into a sub-class to skip over those first 3 sessions and start at level 3. Or, heaven forbid, play 3 games before choosing the sub-class.

Excuse me, but if you read my post before, I said that lots of people underestimate new players intelligence and willingness to learn, but not me.

And with most of new players that was my experience, with few only not wanting to put time into learning the game and being there just "for the lulz" and because their friends are playing it.

my good friend was that in one campaign, he is very intelligent guy, but he simply didn't put much effort in playing the game or learning it.
From 3rd to 6th level(9 or 10 sessions) he was "just there".

Lowest common denominator are people not willing to learn the game for real. Met few of them, luckily in minority.

All the new players that like the game will learn it. Yes, first session or two they will suck at it, but that is the process of learning, you need to suck at something first before you can be good at it.
Give them option to swap spells/feats/skills/subclasses after every session if needed, it's even better way to learn.
Even if they want to make completely new character after two sessions, it's ok to let them.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

one solution could be:

you cannot multiclass before having 4 levels in your primary class.
you cannot multiclass out of your new class before getting 4 levels in a new class.

A solution to no (general) problem.
Add it as an option:

No multiclass. (Old)
Limited multiclass. (your proposal*).
Free multiclass. (Old)

*Maybe I would add that you need to take a certain 4th level feat to enable multiclass in a different class.
Maybe the bard feat adds bardic inspiration 1/day, gives a skill point and increases charisma by +1.
The fighter feat might give +1 str or dex and give access to 2 martial weapons and light armor and so on.

 

[Clint_L]

Excuse me, but if you read my post before, I said that lots of people underestimate new players intelligence and willingness to learn, but not me.

That is exactly what you are doing, because you keep explicitly linking one particular task, picking a sub-class at your first game of D&D, to "intelligence and willingness to learn." Those aren't even particularly meaningful concepts to a teacher. We focus on meeting each student where they are at and recognize that every student has different attitudes, aptitudes, and motivations. Each kid will have some things that they are great at, and others where they struggle. Each kid will have some things that they are highly motivated to learn, and other things that they are not. Context is everything, and it differs for every human being.

That is why, when you are introducing complicated material, you keep it relatively simple so you can gauge where each kid is at. Some kids take to it like water, and you feed them more. Others have difficulty wrapping their head around things that you might think are obvious, so you try to figure out why and help them along. A concept as basic as "hit points" is actually quite abstract and there are students who sometimes need help with it.

Contrary to popular myth, the best way to teach someone is not to "throw them in the deep end." That might work for a few students, but for most human beings it's a good way to make them feel stupid and hate the experience.

 

[Blue]

Cherry picking is exactly the reason to multiclass.

Going back to the original post - I'm a fan of 3rd level subclasses. But some people want subclass 1st elvel, and for me that would need to go hand-in-hand with a multiclassing solution that prevents cherry-picking from being overpowered at any level (low and high).

So, for the purposes of this thread, can we discuss how to either prevent cherrypicking or to ensure that multiclassing a 1st or 2nd level of a class does not provide more power than advancing a class you already have while still granting subclass at 1st.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I commented this in the other multiclass thread but on the off chance that different people are looking at this thread I’ll post it here too.

IMO I’d make a character require a prerequisite feat in order to multiclass to any given class, it would provide all the proficiencies granted by multiclassing regularly (I think multiclassing in general/this feat should also provide one additional skill proficiency from the chosen class) as a ‘level 0’ bonus.

This level of investment would cut down on dipping or at least make a player consider the decision a bit more ahead of time, weighing it against another feat or ASI and with level 1 feats your ability to multiclass wouldn’t even be restricted to after 4th level.

 

[Clint_L]

That seems like a pretty hypothetical discussion to have in the OneD&D sub-forum, because granting a sub-class at 1st level has not been proposed for OneD&D, and does not seem to be in the cards. In the test materials released, sub-classing was still at 3rd level, and WotC has emphasized that they aren't making substantial changes to the 5e chassis.

 

[mellored]

Going back to the original post - I'm a fan of 3rd level subclasses. But some people want subclass 1st elvel, and for me that would need to go hand-in-hand with a multiclassing solution that prevents cherry-picking from being overpowered at any level (low and high).

So, for the purposes of this thread, can we discuss how to either prevent cherrypicking or to ensure that multiclassing a 1st or 2nd level of a class does not provide more power than advancing a class you already have while still granting subclass at 1st.

As long as levels 5/11/17 are more powerful than level 1, it will be very difficult to have multiclassing be more powerful than a base class.

Also, as long as the power difference isn't huge. I really have no problem with multiclassing being a little better.

If some combination of classes deals 5% more damage, then that's a little reward for those who get into the game more.

If some combination of classes deals 50% more damage, then that's bad for the game.

As far a limiting choices at 1 to help new players. I like more choices and I like new players....

I would probably have to lean on the side of new players. Including having casters start with a pre-selected set of spells, pre-selected equipment, spell preparation at level 2, and then subclass at level 3.

Lets move the complexity to higher levels and encourage more experience gamers to start at higher levels.

A first subclass at 3, 6, 9. And the a second subclass at level 13, 16, 19 would be cool. Including taking a second on in your class as well as some multiclass - sub classes.

So you could have a rogue that takes arcane trickster at 3, 6, 9 and then assassin at 13, 16, 19.
Or a rogue that takes ranger at 3, 6, 9 and bard at 13, 16, 19.

 

[Maxperson]

No subclass at level 1 please. Keep levels 1 & 2 with minimal decision points to make them newbie friendly. Level 3 is then a great reward as players really see their characters develop.

The DMs Toolbox would be a great place to put how to merge the abilities into level 1 for those who want to start that way. It's pretty easy to let everyone have what they want with this.

 

[tetrasodium]

I commented this in the other multiclass thread but on the off chance that different people are looking at this thread I’ll post it here too.

IMO I’d make a character require a prerequisite feat in order to multiclass to any given class, it would provide all the proficiencies granted by multiclassing regularly (I think multiclassing in general/this feat should also provide one additional skill proficiency from the chosen class) as a ‘level 0’ bonus.

This level of investment would cut down on dipping or at least make a player consider the decision a bit more ahead of time, weighing it against another feat or ASI and with level 1 feats your ability to multiclass wouldn’t even be restricted to after 4th level.

I'm mobile for the holidays so can't check specifics but a feat alone will just be a "turn key to unlock" that sets a floor on how good a Mc combo must be. That encourages powerful combos or requires nothing but mediocre ones & neither is healthy.

The Pf2 style multiclass feats work because you have more feats and need to send a good number at level specific points. Here's a phrase I pulled from a guide for one I remember "Monks’ Flurry gets you access to Flurry of Blows, but remember that it’s a Flourish so you can’t combine it with things like Double Shot or Two-Weapon Flurry. There’s a lot to capitalize on here."

5e does not have the feat budget or system depth for that kind of nuance so it's left with more" take the whole basket" & carrying that basket should come with a cost that fits carrying both on one pc. If it can put pressure on the PC to go full bore on both rather than single class plus dip for the big stuff even better

 

[Knight_Marshal]

Most people are not born stupid. It is the world's desire to make things overly simple so that people do not have to think is what is making them that way.

 

[mellored]

Most people are not born stupid. It is the world's desire to make things overly simple so that people do not have to think is what is making them that way.

IMO, it's less about "stupid" and more about "busy". If everyone had time, then add all the options you want.

But if you have 2 hours to play, would you rather spend 60 minutes looking over all the options and 60 playing.
Or do you want to spend 10 minutes making a character and 110 minutes playing?

Then next level, you can spend another 10 minutes looking over more options.

 

[Lojaan]

The DMs Toolbox would be a great place to put how to merge the abilities into level 1 for those who want to start that way. It's pretty easy to let everyone have what they want with this.

Exactly! However you need to make it so that the default is level 3 otherwise players will complain that you are "punishing" them if you don't let them do it

 

[mellored]

Exactly! However you need to make it so that the default is level 3 otherwise players will complain that you are "punishing" them if you don't let them do it

I would make it level 5.

Most campaigns don't do more than 10 levels. So making level 5 the default start would allow for a nice middle section of levels.

If we get it to 20 minutes to make a character + 10 minutes per level..

Beginners/simple: 1-10, 20 minutes
Moderate/intermediate: 5-15, 60 minutes
Expert/complex: 11-20, 120 minutes

Now we just need to give weapon characters enough options to match people picking spells.

 

[Maxperson]

Exactly! However you need to make it so that the default is level 3 otherwise players will complain that you are "punishing" them if you don't let them do it

I don't think the default starting level should be level 3. You start counting from one, so that doesn't make a lot of sense. Merging the abilities/subclass to level 1 AND starting at level 3+ should be optional rules in the DMG. Let the groups decide where they start and with what.