I made a single-class character once, in AD&D; it was my very first Player Character
ever, and my Dungeon Master
graciously allowed me to overlook some of the finer points of the rules to create an Elf Monk.
I made a single-class character
once.
The biggest reason I skipped 4e was that it didn't have a "proper" multiclassing system until PHB3-- long after Pathfinder had proved a viable alternative-- and 5e's reversion to 3e's multiclassing rules is one of my biggest complaints about it. I'm not interested in trying to grind that axe right now, except to note that the problems
most people seem to have with multiclassing are problems with
that system and wouldn't apply to AD&D,
Orcs of Thar, Gestalt, 4e (feat) or 4e (hybrid) systems.
My players only occasionally multiclass. I have a house rule to the effect that, barring special exceptions, you cannot multiclass unless it is with a class you took your first 3 levels in.
I don't have anything useful to comment, except that
I like this. It's a meaningful restriction that ties class advancement to the original character concept-- unless, of course, that concept changes within the narrative.
From the responses so far, I am thinking if I allow multiclassing, I would only ban dual-full-caster combos unless you do it from the beginning and keep them equal as you advance.
I like the house rule that someone suggested earlier, that "all class levels must be within 1 level of each other." This forces characters to multiclass by 2nd level if they are going to, and prevents cherry-picking or level-dips. But it might be a bit too restrictive; I'd probably want a way to soften it a bit.
It's a lot more than
a bit too restrictive-- I'm not as familiar with 5e as I am with 3.X/PF, admittedly, but I cannot think of a single combination of two PHB classes and subclasses that would be viable past 6th level with these rules. (Except,
maybe, Paladin/Warlock, which everyone seems to agree is a bad thing.)
I mean, I think we can all agree that this is the primary kind of multiclassing that we want in our games, and that we want the rules to support-- but they really just don't work that way without extensive house-ruling.
That said, I think I've seen the idea of making PCs choose feats or multiclassing, and that appeals to me, as does an idea almost opposite of that, forcing PCs to take a specific feat before they could multiclass. I haven't done either of these, and if I do it'll be the next campaign I start (so as not to change the rules out from under players in an ongoing campaign).
I've long considered the possibility of a feat-based multiclassing system in 3.X-- like a hybrid between 3.X multiclassing (with an initial feat cost) and Pathfinder's Variant Multiclassing.
It isn't enough to restrict the kinds of multiclassing we don't want. If we want players to multiclass in "acceptable" fashion, we also have to make the acceptable kinds of multiclassing mechanically viable.
It is allowed, but with restrictions usually. No dips. If you add a new class, you have to stay that class for 3 levels before switching again.
This? This is
golden. The only thing I would suggest is that instead of the mininum being
3 levels, it is some reasonable fraction of your character level-- say 1/4 or 1/5-- so that multiclassing becomes an ongoing cost throughout the character's career.
Say... maybe it costs one (half-)feat to multiclass, with the above restriction, and then a second feat that provides a sort of "multige" benefit like the theurge classes from 3.5?
And sometimes no multi-classing as two casters of the same power type, meaning not being two different classes that are both divine magic or two that are both arcane, which is mainly for a homebrew setting.
Reminiscent of AD&D, where classes were grouped into categories-- Warrior, Rogue, Priest, Mage, and Psionicist-- and valid multiclass combinations couldn't include more than one class from the same category.
I think the biggest cause of drawing players to multiclassing is that most capstones are exponentially less useful than the first lv of another class.
Most games don't get to 20 but I think it would help.
It's racial level limits all over again. The capstones are
great if you're assuming the game's going to hit 20... but games rarely do and even if they do hit it eventually, it's a long way away for most of it.
SpyCraft handled this by giving each class a unique ability that was only granted to characters who took that class at first level.
