The state of Multiclass-Dips in One D&D

[tetrasodium]

In one of the recent videos Crawford mentioned that they were moving the cleric subclass choice back because it was too rewarding as a dip & that they want to incentivize players to have a little more skin in a class than just 1-2 level dips that are so good players feel like they are harmed by not taking them*. With one version for four of twelve core classes & 4 of 48 total subclasses I think so far that goal is falling pretty far shy of the mark Crawford described to the point that people are even making videos about it.

Spoiler: the video

So here's what each class gives with a 1 level dip & how that expands beyond tier1.

Spoiler: Bard

• L1:armor training: Light Armor.
  • We don't yet have the new equipment details causing this to be a bit uncertain in value but we can make some assumptions. If someone is going to dip another class for armor proficiency light armor is probably not going to be the goal
• L1:One skill from the bard list & one musical instrument proficiency.
  • We don't yet know what (if any) changes will be made to skills
• Ltwo arcane cantrips [edit: they also get a level of spellcasting but that got left out initially by accident]
  • Currently we don't know if cantrips will continue to scale by character level or if there will be improvements like linking them to equipment. There are already a lot of ways to get cantrips though so this is probably just a garnish at best if we are thinking about the value with a dip
• L1: Bardic inspiration": This is only a d6 but you have proficiency bonus uses & can use it as a reaction for guidance-type boosts or a reaction heal.
  • This is starting to look enticing as a feature that will improve the next 19 nonbard levels but probably not yet good enough to feel forced into this dip
• L2: Songs of restoration: Healing word is always prepared & doesn't count against your prepared spells. Coupled with preparing three additional divination illusion enchantment or transmutation arcane spells you prepare without counting against your other 19 levels of caster prep & bardic inspiration this is starting to be a contender for a solid dip.
• L2: Expertise: Choose any two of your skills to have expertise in.
  • Currently expertise is double proficiency & bounded accuracy is already destroyed by scaling proficiency bonuses alone even without expertise. This is a problem but perhaps not specifically a multiclass problem since rogue & ranger gets this at first.

There are some questionably dipworthy abilities but barring interaction with abilities from classes we do not yet have bard is probably not a class that's going to make nonbards feel forced to dip. Bard probably meets the goal Crawford laid out.

Spoiler: Rogue

• L1:One skill from the rogue list & thieve's tool proficiency
  • Again we don't know what (if any) changes we can expect to skills
• armor training: Light Armor
  • We don't yet have the new equipment details causing this to be a bit uncertain in value but we can make some assumptions. If someone is going to dip another class for armor proficiency light armor is probably not going to be the goal
• L1:Expertise in two of your skills
  • Currently expertise is double proficiency & bounded accuracy is already destrpyed by scaling proficiency bonuses alone even without expertise. This is a problem but perhaps not specifically a multiclass problem.
• L1: Sneak attack: +1d6 on finesse & ranged weapon attacks1/round under some conditions.
  • The conditions are easy to meet. Even without knowing what weapons will look like sneak attack is probably not a prime reason to dip rogue1
• L2" Cunning action
  • Nice but barring any secondary class feature interactions dipping 2 levels of rogue for cunning action is probably not too much pressure. Rogue probably meets the goal Crawford laid out/

Expertise is a big problem if bounded accuracy is a thing wotc intends to keep. Rogue is probably meeting the goal Crawford laid out though.

Spoiler: Ruh-roh Ranger

• L1:armor training: light arnmor medium anmor & shields
  • It's hard to say how good this is but better than or equal to what 4 of the current 4 classes have
• L1: Martial weapon proficiencies & 1 rangerskill of your choice
  • We don't yet have the new weapons but this may or may not be incentive to dip ranger or feel disadvantaged for not doing so.
• L1:Expertise in two of your skills
  • Currently expertise is double proficiency & bounded accuracy is already destroyed by scaling proficiency bonuses alone even without expertise. It's also worth noting that this is expertise in two of your skills not two ranger skills since we are talking about excessive dip incentives. This is a problem but perhaps not specifically a multiclass problem.
• L1: two non-evocation primal cantrips & preparing two non-evocation 1st level primal spells without counting against the prep slots for your other 19 levels of non-ranger caster prep.
• L1:Favored enemy: You always have hunters mark prepared & can cast it without needing to maintain concentration...
  • Ruh-roh: It's entirely possible hunters mark will change in a way that solves this but I think that's a stretch. This is a pretty serious bit of dip candy for any classs that makes weapon attacks& the pressure grows the more attacks a PC makes each round. We don't know what the non-light weapons will ultimately look like but this is already starting to singlehandedly pull an already questionable dip in ways that are looking like it significantly misses the mark for that goal Crawford laid out.
• 2nd:a fighting style
  • It's hard to say how much more valuable this is & if this with 12/18 will be more valuable than 1/19 without knowing more classes & specifics. This is probably not a concern for dip overvalue, but ranger is already looking very sorlocky just from a one level dip.

We don't yet have enough details from the other weapon using classes to talk degrees or anything but the ranger almost certainly looking like it falls quite a bit short of the goal Crawford described

Spoiler: Cleric Red Alert

• 1st:Armor training: Light armor medium armor & shields
  • It's hard to say how good this is but better than or equal to what 4 of the current 4 classes have..
• 1st:No skills
  • Probably a good thing we should see more of.
• 1st:Channel Divinity: This is a heal or nuke that scales based with both proficiency bonus uses in addition to proficiency bonus number of dice
  • This is an anility that misses that goal by an extreme degree. Any wisdom based class is going to be feeling some pressure & it could be good enough that even non-wisdom based classes start feeling pressure
• 1st: three divine cantrips: Guidance, Resistance, 1 other...
  • these are extremely solid additions that a character can bring to the group on top of the already bad Channel Divinity pressure.
• 1st: Two forst level divine prep slots
  • Again very solid additions to any caster (divine or not)
• 2nd: Holy Order: Choice between A: Martial weapon proficiency & heavy armor proficiency, B: proficiency in two skills from arcana history nature persuasion & religion and you add your wisdom mod to it on top of whatever you normally add, C: an extra divine cantrip and you regain one of those proficiency bonus/long rest proficiency bonus(d8) channel divinity uses when you take a short rest....
  • A is pretty awesome on top of everything else. Even now it's common for characters to dip cleric just to get heavy armor proficiency
  • B is freaking amazing for a face character & further exposes how bad bounded accuracy is by making the best face character a bard X/cleric 2 leaps & bounds beyond anything else.
  • C is something that makes an already overly desirable dip pressuring ability even better and
• 3rd: subclass features. Currently this is disciple of life & domain spells
  • Those are very good but maybe not woirth going further as a dip yet. Other cleric subtypes could add very desirable things for some classes to take

cleric misses the goal Crawford described by miles to the point where it's reasonable to wonder just how much wotc is interested in meeting that goal.

There are definitely some serious problems with the goal that was described already & some of them need direct changes while others could be minimized by going back to 3.x style spell slots for different classes being separate rather than combining. Going to point by point or choose N skills from this class when awarded to be proficient with every so often while leveling with the number of times a skill is chosen times proficiency bonus being how much it adds to the d20**. Both of those & some form of dual classing with a 2.5-3x exp need multiplier (or even just the multiplier) would likewise help. [edit: going back to 3.5 style knowledge skills & divisions of them could help some areas too]


* I'm doing some paraphrasing from memory & treantmonk includes the direct quote snippet in his video so good enough.
** redo the target DCs to fit

 

[Xamnam]

Not that this in any way invalidates the bulk of, nor the value or interest of your post, but in light of this comment

cleric misses the goal Crawford described by miles to the point where it's reasonable to wonder just how much wotc is interested in meeting that goal.

I do think it's worth mentioning that in the Crawford video, it's specifically called out "I mentioned the most important one of the two issues is we're asking you to make this momentous decision before you even played the class before you even see what it's like to be just a vanilla member of the class." Multiclassing is a major concern, but they're also trying to adjust level one to grant the base class fantasy in a better way, so sometimes those goals will conflict.

Carry on.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There are definitely some serious problems with the goal that was described already & some of them need direct changes while others could be minimized by going back to 3.x style spell slots for different classes being separate rather than combining. Going to point by point or choose N skills from this class when awarded to be proficient with every so often while leveling with the number of times a skill is chosen times proficiency bonus being how much it adds to the d20**. Both of those & some form of dual classing with a 2.5-3x exp need multiplier (or even just the multiplier) would likewise help. [edit: going back to 3.5 style knowledge skills & divisions of them could help some areas too]

While treantmonks really makes good points, the ideas you present here are the worst ideas for OneDnD I have read in a while.

Edit:
I think someone mentioned, that you could just use prof bonus as printed int the class table to determine uses and power of class abilities when you multiclass.

A different solution could just be having a shared pool of pb uses per level for class based abilities.

Maybe even a combination of both. So you can only use 2 uses of pb times per day of class abilities until you reach lvl 5 in that class. And so on.

 

[tetrasodium]

Not that this in any way invalidates the bulk of, nor the value or interest of your post, but in light of this comment

I do think it's worth mentioning that in the Crawford video, it's specifically called out "I mentioned the most important one of the two issues is we're asking you to make this momentous decision before you even played the class before you even see what it's like to be just a vanilla member of the class." Multiclassing is a major concern, but they're also trying to adjust level one to grant the base class fantasy in a better way, so sometimes those goals will conflict.

Carry on.

That bold bit was not unnoticed but it certainly does not obliviate the other... Someone just walking into the game for the first time can be given a pregen & make a new character later when they are more experienced. As someone who mostly GMs the other one is quite a bit more irksome the longer a game goes on because a player can choose to MC at any time but the GM is expected to be fair with the spotlight across all players including the newbie once covered under that bold bit weeks months or even years ago.

While treantmonks really makes good points, the ideas you present here are the worst ideas for OneDnD I have read in a while.

Edit:
I think someone mentioned, that you could just use prof bonus as printed int the class table to determine uses and power of class abilities when you multiclass.

A different solution could just be having a shared pool of pb uses per level for class based abilities.

Maybe even a combination of both. So you can only use 2 uses of pb times per day of class abilities until you reach lvl 5 in that class. And so on.

Nah, 5e skill system is terrible & the way knowledge skills fit into it is especially awful. copying it into one d&d as the exclusive set of skills would be awful. The 3.x style multiclass but without 3.x style prerequisites of 5e likewise creates lots of issues that oned&d should absolutely make efforts to do better about.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Nah, 5e skill system is terrible & the way knowledge skills fit into it is especially awful. copying it into one d&d as the exclusive set of skills would be awful. The 3.x style multiclass but without 3.x style prerequisites of 5e likewise creates lots of issues that oned&d should absolutely make efforts to do better about.

Ok, you could improve the skill system a bit. But you are really suggesting to go back to not adding caster levels and track them seperately?
Sorry, but this was the best idea. I mentioned that i really despised pathfinder 1 for not fixing the issue, while the little known trailblazer just did it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Ok, you could improve the skill system a bit. But you are really suggesting to go back to not adding caster levels and track them seperately?
Sorry, but this was the best idea. I mentioned that i really despised pathfinder 1 for not fixing the issue, while the little known trailblazer just did it.

not so much just don't add them & track them separate as do that while updating dual classing to no longer be combo specific rules with some improvements taken from the good parts of MC. There's an interactive spreadsheet showing how such a thing could line up oon Alice's sheet across the table from Bob's single classed PC but it didn't get linked originally by accident.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

not so much just don't add them & track them separate as do that while updating dual classing to no longer be combo specific rules with some improvements taken from the good parts of MC. There's an interactive spreadsheet showing how such a thing could line up oon Alice's sheet across the table from Bob's single classed PC but it didn't get linked originally by accident.

I don't dislike the Idea as a whole. I thought, you wanted to have the spellcasting progressions seperate in the current system. As an alternate form of multiclassing, I'd support this Idea (like multiclassing and dual-classing without the species restrictions).
But I definitely don't want to get rid of the current system, which is more flexible and works well barring a few class specific cases. But I don't want that discussion again. So this is the last I say in this thread.

 

[Xamnam]

That bold bit was not unnoticed but it certainly does not obliviate the other...

Oh good, and certainly it does not. It just sounded like that video, given the creator, was focusing on one side to the neglect of the other, so I thought it worth making sure the context was present here.

It's thorny, because I definitely agree with you on the Cleric front. That Divine Spark is...not game-breaking, likelily, but increasingly attractive to give any class an emergency heal, especially given that it's ranged. The tricky spot for so much of this is anything that scales off of Proficiency Bonus, given that you never have to sacrifice that progression, and I doubt they're willing to add a separate number that's expressly used to modify multiclass PB skill usage.

 

[mellored]

I feel this is holdover fear from 3.5. Because I really hadn't seen any major issues with it in 5e. With the biggest issue being the moon druid at level 2.

Some minor issues, but it seems like they are addressing that.

 

[James Gasik]

At some point, most classes stop giving you new and interesting features. You can go multiple levels without anything remotely fun. Most of the fun features you get are in the first few levels. As long as this is true, the desire to multiclass will always exist.

And you don't want to push back fundamental features too much either, since there's this desire for players to want to feel like they're "actually playing their class".

Multiclassed individuals have existed in the fiction D&D has been based on from the very beginning- Conan is both warrior and thief. Elric of Melnibone is a warrior and a warlock. Fafhrd has a skill set much like Conan's, the Grey Mouser is a Dex Fighter/Rogue who dabbles in black magic. Where D&D is currently going wrong is that the game isn't balanced around ala carte multiclassing, because single-classed characters are not equal to properly built multiclassed characters (it's very easy to make a terrible multiclassed character).

There should be a single-classed character just as powerful as a Hexblade/Paladin. That there isn't any other way to do what this multiclass does is the reason why it's so popular.

Most games don't reach high levels, and the rewards for being a Tier 4 and up character don't always seem so exciting. "Huzzah, three levels later, and I got another use of Indomitable!".

And the current Cleric shows that they still don't get it. Ok, I can't take a one level dip for Domain and Heavy Armor. But I still get spell slots, medium armor, shields, and a powerful healing ability that scales with proficiency bonus. So tell me how a Wizard 20 is better than a Cleric 1/Wizard 19? Epic Boons? Sorry, try again.

 

[Kobold Stew]

So tell me how a Wizard 20 is better than a Cleric 1/Wizard 19? Epic Boons? Sorry, try again.

For most players, this is not a real question. Sure, at level 19 a one-level dip is helpful. This, though wold be solved if they altered the spell progression and gave a second level-9 slot at level 20. (That's just an example, but it shows that the problem is not nearly as dire as you present.)

For most players, the decision gets made at any given level as you progress, and for that the game does pretty well. It's almost never advantageous to multiclass before level 5 if you are playing for "power", because the level 5 benefits are significant. So I can tell you how a Wizard 5 is better than a Wiz 4/Cleric 1. I can also tell you how a Wiz 9 is better than a Wiz 8/Cleric1. Maybe some levels aren't as tempting -- sure -- but choosing to multiclass at 6 or 7 or 8 should be an interesting choice, and I don't think it's going to be obvious.

That is a much more interesting break point, I would suggest, to measure the value of multiclassing -- class levels 6-10.

 

[Lojaan]

They should swap holy orders and channel divinity around. The signature experience of playing a cleric is casting spells in armour, which they can do at level 1, not channel divinity, which is situational at best.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I'm not going to answer every one of your points, because it is clear form your post that your preliminary assumptions differ from mine substantially.

Particularly, the idea that you are "forced" into a one-level dip, frankly, makes no sense. I do not in the current game ever feel "forced" to multiclass, and there is nothing in the current playtest packs that makes multiclassing any more inevitable or "forced".

However, a few small notes:

So here's what each class gives with a 1 level dip & how that expands beyond tier1.
Bard

Is there a reason you don't list the two first-level spells that Bards get? That, um, seems a substantial part of the class. To get that, and to get a free (better than) Healing word proficiency times/long rest seems much more powerful than anything you are suggesting for Cleric.

• L1:Expertise in two of your skills
  • Currently expertise is double proficiency & bounded accuracy is already destrpyed by scaling proficiency bonuses alone even without expertise. This is a problem but perhaps not specifically a multiclass problem.

It is clear you really don't like expertise. Fine -- I don't like it because it erodes the nich I think rogues shoudl hold, and I think too many classes have it, and you can get it through feats etc. But, as you note, that's really separate from the multiclassing issue.

Ranger

• L1:Favored enemy: You always have hunters mark prepared & can cast it without needing to maintain concentration...
  • Ruh-roh: It's entirely possible hunters mark will change in a way that solves this but I think that's a stretch. This is a pretty serious bit of dip candy for any classs that makes weapon attacks& the pressure grows the more attacks a PC makes each round. We don't know what the non-light weapons will ultimately look like but this is already starting to singlehandedly pull an already questionable dip in ways that are looking like it significantly misses the mark for that goal Crawford laid out.

It's worth at least observing that you need to spend a spell slot to cast it.

Cleric Red Alert

• 1st:Channel Divinity: This is a heal or nuke that scales based with both proficiency bonus uses in addition to proficiency bonus number of dice
  • This is an anility that misses that goal by an extreme degree. Any wisdom based class is going to be feeling some pressure & it could be good enough that even non-wisdom based classes start feeling pressure

Can you explain why this causes you more anxiety that Bardic Inspiration?

Finally, I'll talk about your thoughts on Holy orders, which requires a 2-level dip, and as such becomes part of a build established over many sessions.

• 2nd: Holy Order: Choice between A: Martial weapon proficiency & heavy armor proficiency, B: proficiency in two skills from arcana history nature persuasion & religion and you add your wisdom mod to it on top of whatever you normally add, C: an extra divine cantrip and you regain one of those proficiency bonus/long rest proficiency bonus(d8) channel divinity uses when you take a short rest....
  • A is pretty awesome on top of everything else. Even now it's common for characters to dip cleric just to get heavy armor proficiency
  • B is freaking amazing for a face character & further exposes how bad bounded accuracy is by making the best face character a bard X/cleric 2 leaps & bounds beyond anything else.
  • C is something that makes an already overly desirable dip pressuring ability even better and

A. will almost certainly be possible from a 1-level dip in Fighter, so it does not seem overpowered. I would prefer characters invest in Wisdom and be rewarded for it.

B. feels overstated to me. Yes, the presence of Persuasion there makes it powerful, but I do not think there's anything wrong with giving Expertise-level bonuses on Intelligence skills, since Int is so often a dump stat in any case. Compare the Knowledge cleric in the current game -- how often do people complain how it is uber-powerful? In my feedbck, I am going to suggest the bonus only be for INT skills (and so investigation rather than persuasion), and that fixes it for my tastes.

C. Multiple levels of investment into cleric so that you can get Channel divinity features is actually what I want a cleric "dip" to give. This is good design, and if you see it as the obvious choice, then that's good design, doubling down on the core distinctive cleric mechanism.

I'm really not seeing a problem here.

There are definitely some serious problems

We're operating with different assumptions, clearly, but we're both playing the same game. Some of this reaction seems extreme to me, and I think with small tweaks it could be even better.

 

[tetrasodium]

At some point, most classes stop giving you new and interesting features. You can go multiple levels without anything remotely fun. Most of the fun features you get are in the first few levels. As long as this is true, the desire to multiclass will always exist.

And you don't want to push back fundamental features too much either, since there's this desire for players to want to feel like they're "actually playing their class".

Multiclassed individuals have existed in the fiction D&D has been based on from the very beginning- Conan is both warrior and thief. Elric of Melnibone is a warrior and a warlock. Fafhrd has a skill set much like Conan's, the Grey Mouser is a Dex Fighter/Rogue who dabbles in black magic. Where D&D is currently going wrong is that the game isn't balanced around ala carte multiclassing, because single-classed characters are not equal to properly built multiclassed characters (it's very easy to make a terrible multiclassed character).

There should be a single-classed character just as powerful as a Hexblade/Paladin. That there isn't any other way to do what this multiclass does is the reason why it's so popular.

Most games don't reach high levels, and the rewards for being a Tier 4 and up character don't always seem so exciting. "Huzzah, three levels later, and I got another use of Indomitable!".

And the current Cleric shows that they still don't get it. Ok, I can't take a one level dip for Domain and Heavy Armor. But I still get spell slots, medium armor, shields, and a powerful healing ability that scales with proficiency bonus. So tell me how a Wizard 20 is better than a Cleric 1/Wizard 19? Epic Boons? Sorry, try again.

The bold bits are the problem. There should be a cost that balances out the gains in actual play but the design of multiclassing has a cost that is almost purely academic. If Alice is playing a multiclass build for power made by combining the single classes being played by Bob & Dave at the same table she's probably the same level barring missed sessions or something & with that the same proficiency bonus. Because skills are tied to prof bonus she's probably just as skilled as both in important skills. She probably even has the important class defining abilities of both Bob & Dave.

Either classes need to be designed to avoid it or other aspects of the game need to change to avoid them being problematic even without the class design trying to avoid it

 

[James Gasik]

The bold bits are the problem. There should be a cost that balances out the gains in actual play but the design of multiclassing has a cost that is almost purely academic. If Alice is playing a multiclass build for power made by combining the single classes being played by Bob & Dave at the same table she's probably the same level barring missed sessions or something & with that the same proficiency bonus. Because skills are tied to prof bonus she's probably just as skilled as both in important skills. She probably even has the important class defining abilities of both Bob & Dave.

Either classes need to be designed to avoid it or other aspects of the game need to change to avoid them being problematic even without the class design trying to avoid it

You can go too far one way, like Pathfinder 1e, where the classes provide you neat benefits at just about every level, to the point you don't want to multiclass- and go further by making full classes that hybridize single classes so you might not even need to.

Or too far the other way, like the 2e era, where there were few reasons not to multiclass, if you could, since usually you'd end up a level to a level than a half lower, but have 2 classes of abilities to draw upon.

I like multiclassing, but I fully admit that 5e has made it very lackluster to not want to do it. My first character was a Battlemaster, and by level 7, I was pretty much done with being a Fighter. I switched to Rogue (figuring I could get the level 8 ASI later, if I needed it), and had way more fun as a result.

 

[tetrasodium]

I'm not going to answer every one of your points, because it is clear form your post that your preliminary assumptions differ from mine substantially.

Particularly, the idea that you are "forced" into a one-level dip, frankly, makes no sense. I do not in the current game ever feel "forced" to multiclass, and there is nothing in the current playtest packs that makes multiclassing any more inevitable or "forced".

Here's how it happens. Take Alice(her first paladin) Bob(his first warlock) Chuck(an experienced player who made a hexadin) & Dave(the DM).

• Dave tries to help Alice & bob get going & maybe gives them a pregen or holds their hand through creation. He maybe even calls on Dave to help in that & they do so to the best of their ability
• Alice & Bob are very happy & think they areas awesome as they can be
• Chuck is playing a dwarf with 8 strength 25ft speed platemail 20 cha huge con/wis/dex. He's basically immune to anything capable of not stomping all over Alice & Bob thanks to his ac saves & HP.... Chuck also has the ability to hit just as easily as Alice with the same greatsword she uses & can even smite more often than her.
• Dave (the GM) notices the problems with Alice & Bob feeling so much lesser than Chuck & it comes down to Dave having three options...
  • Option one: Demand Chuck make a new PC that is less optimized Nobody will be happy after this with even Alice & bob feeling guilty because they will eventually realize Chuck self nerfed by choice (or got forced to self nerf) because of them
  • Option two: try to talk to Alice & bob about rebuilding their characters to be more optimized . Again this is a problem because Alice & bob thought they were making an awesome character & are now frustrated because the people they thought were honestly trying to help them do so are trying to sell them on making changes to a character they liked
  • Option three: Give Alice & bob awesome stuff to bring them up a bit towards Chuck's level. As Ackbar said, "It's a trap!!..." in more than one way though. Firstly Alice & bob might not understand how to use it or why they really want to use this awesome bit of kit instead. Second Alice or bob might see exactly how & stick that awesome feather in their cap just before taking the same dip Chuck did to create an even bigger monster. Third & worst of all Alice & Bob might simply refuse the AwesomeThing & suggest Chuck can make the best use of the AwesomeThing intended to bring them up to his level not widen the gap.

However, a few small notes:


Is there a reason you don't list the two first-level spells that Bards get? That, um, seems a substantial part of the class. To get that, and to get a free (better than) Healing word proficiency times/long rest seems much more powerful than anything you are suggesting for Cleric.

Oversight. Charisma based casters (paladin & sorcerer) aren't likely to gain too much from the L1 bard spells though due to already having them or filling a somewhat different niche. It's certainly not impossible that we wind up with a future packet where level one DIET spells is a gigantic edition but we don't have much reason to suspect that given what we know is traditionally true about other casters

It is clear you really don't like expertise. Fine -- I don't like it because it erodes the nich I think rogues shoudl hold, and I think too many classes have it, and you can get it through feats etc. But, as you note, that's really separate from the multiclassing issue.

It is but arcana expertise for example can be the bit needed for an uncommon item to allow an int based caster with some dips to treat almost every spell of every level as simultaneously prepared. There is not yet anything in oned&d that gets borked by expertise but there could be in the future so it's worth noting. Noting the value of expertise for what it is doesn't just come from a dislike of expertise though, it directly subverts what seems to still be part of one d&d's design plans.

It's worth at least observing that you need to spend a spell slot to cast it.

It does give you some of those & I did note them

Can you explain why this causes you more anxiety that Bardic Inspiration?

I don't think it did. "enticing" looks to be the strongest term I used & the bard overall got "There are some questionably dipworthy abilities but barring interaction with abilities from classes we do not yet have bard is probably not a class that's going to make nonbards feel forced to dip. Bard probably meets the goal Crawford laid out." It's worth noting because we are missing 8 classes & 44 subclasses that could interact in noteworthy ways that turn it into something more than just being dipworthy.

Finally, I'll talk about your thoughts on Holy orders, which requires a 2-level dip, and as such becomes part of a build established over many sessions.

That second level following a multiple great first level abilities with one scaling by PB both for number of uses & number of dice involved when used. The second level is going to depend on the specific combo & build a player is going for but it already has some great options. A dip is the sum of its parts & the first two levels of cleric have some that seem overly good.

 

[Kobold Stew]

• Chuck is playing a dwarf with 8 strength 25ft speed platemail 20 cha huge con/wis/dex.

How is Chuck getting all this at level 1? How did he get platemail to start? Why is he not invested in Alice and Bob's introduction to the game?

• Dave (the GM) notices the problems with Alice & Bob feeling so much lesser than Chuck & it comes down to Dave having three options..

Is Dave not allowed to talk to the group?
Is Dave not having the bad guys target the biggest threat (Chuck's character) and letting Bob and Alice come in for the rescue? Is he not invested in Alice and Bob's introduction to the game either?

It may be that such hypotheticals aren't as useful as they might be.

As to your specifics:

Oversight. Charisma based casters (paladin & sorcerer) aren't likely to gain too much from the L1 bard spells though due to already having them or filling a somewhat different niche.

Full spellcasting seems a big oversight.

It's certainly not impossible that we wind up with a future packet where level one DIET spells is a gigantic edition but we don't have much reason to suspect that given what we know is traditionally true about other casters

I don't think imagining broken spells in the future is the best way to evaluate the playtest mechanics, but you do you.

I am pleased that you have taken on my DIET acronym -- cheers! I think that's the way of the future.

It is but arcana expertise for example can be the bit needed for an uncommon item to allow an int based caster with some dips to treat almost every spell of every level as simultaneously prepared. There is not yet anything in oned&d that gets borked by expertise but there could be in the future so it's worth noting.

Hypotheticals for future releases aside, I'm not particularly interested in a single broken magic item in a setting-specific book. That's where the problem is, though, not with multiclassing.

It does give you some of those & I did note them

Since you rank it "ruh-roh", this is not at all clear. You've listed it as a separate bullet point, and you overlooked the fact that Bards have full spellcasting. Hunter's Mark uses resources (bonus action and spell slot)., and is not nearly the sure-bet always-on ability you suggest. Is it better than it was? Sure. Still, no one is being "forced" into anything.

I don't think it did.

"Red alert" suggests some degree of anxiety. You also say the "cleric misses the goal ... by miles to the point where it's reasonable to wonder just how much wotc is interested in meeting that goal."

Can there be improvements? Sure. But things are not nearly as dire as you suggest (at least as I read your post).

 

[tetrasodium]

How is Chuck getting all this at level 1? How did he get platemail to start? Why is he not invested in Alice and Bob's introduction to the game?

Is Dave not allowed to talk to the group?
Is Dave not having the bad guys target the biggest threat (Chuck's character) and letting Bob and Alice come in for the rescue? Is he not invested in Alice and Bob's introduction to the game either?

It may be that such hypotheticals aren't as useful as they might be.

As to your specifics:

Full spellcasting seems a big oversight.


I don't think imagining broken spells in the future is the best way to evaluate the playtest mechanics, but you do you.

I am pleased that you have taken on my DIET acronym -- cheers! I think that's the way of the future.

Hypotheticals for future releases aside, I'm not particularly interested in a single broken magic item in a setting-specific book. That's where the problem is, though, not with multiclassing.


Since you rank it "ruh-roh", this is not at all clear. You've listed it as a separate bullet point, and you overlooked the fact that Bards have full spellcasting. Hunter's Mark uses resources (bonus action and spell slot)., and is not nearly the sure-bet always-on ability you suggest. Is it better than it was? Sure. Still, no one is being "forced" into anything.

"Red alert" suggests some degree of anxiety. You also say the "cleric misses the goal ... by miles to the point where it's reasonable to wonder just how much wotc is interested in meeting that goal."

Can there be improvements? Sure. But things are not nearly as dire as you suggest (at least as I read your post).

So your games not progress beyond level one? Also I don't think I've ever seen a multiclassed level one pc, I think you might be under some pretty serious misconceptions about the problem to be asking that.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So your games not progress beyond level one? Also I don't think I've ever seen a multiclassed level one pc, I think you might be under some pretty serious misconceptions about the problem to be asking that.

You sepcifically spoke about the 1 level dip.
The cleric just won't give you armor at level 1, no matter how much your first class progresses.
So you might have serious problems to convey what you actually mean.

 

[tetrasodium]

You sepcifically spoke about the 1 level dip.

Yes but a one or two level dip can be done at pretty much any level except first level because then it wouldn't be multiclassing simply because the character has only one level to their name. Questioning how a multiclassed character could get platemail at level 1 seems odd given the context of how post #17 raised it or the rest of the post #16 "/here's how it happens" example scenario it spun from.

The cleric just won't give you armor at level 1, no matter how much your first class progresses.
So you might have serious problems to convey what you actually mean.

Rather than accusing me of "serious problems" attempting to convey what I actually mean... Can you first explain how "How is Chuck getting all this at level 1?" is relevant to the scenario it was responding to? multiclass dips being too good are a problem because a player of any level can use them to gain huge benefits beyond what a single one or two levels should grant when taken in combination with levels in another class that makes up the bulk of a character's levels as the term "dip" generally implies.