D&D General To multiclass or not to multiclass

[Indagare Nogitsune]

There's been much discussion on multiclassing over the years. I'm wondering if the current system allows people the freedom to really create the type of character they want (and if not, what folks might want to see done to make that better).

I gave a poll for those who happen to multiclass. The first two options are references:

1) Magus
A person wanting to do an Arcane Fighter might have the Magus but that's always a 3PP class option, not a main one. Ways to get close tend to be a Fighter (Eldritch Knight), Wizard (Bladesinger), Bard (College of Swords), or Warlock (Hexblade).

2) Rogue (Scout)/Ranger
The Rogue Scout Subclass pairs very well with Ranger and tends to be worth taking a few levels of Rogue to get. Realistically, most Rogue Subclasses tend to pair very well with a Ranger, though the opposite doesn't seem to be true.

*Edit: I apologize for the confusion. The second option is basically a purely mechanical reason (or nearly so) for multiclassing. Effectively the first is "I'm doing this because it's what I want my character to be" where the second is "I'm doing this because it will give me some mechanical advantage".

I recognize the two are not mutually exclusive, but I think that if folks don't have a clear concept for their character they'll lean to min-maxing.

 

[mellored]

I'm not sure what this difference in the poll is. Getting subclass is often part of the concept (i.e. a dark knight who is fighter and dips for shadow monk).

But 5.5 made multiclassing a lot more balanced with straight class, mainly with subclasses starting at 3.

 

[jgsugden]

I also am not sure how to answer here... usually, a multiclass is character driven. I occasionally have an initial plan that is likely to involve multiclassing, but usually it is organic. Where it the PC going? What are they doing? How is the campaign unfolding?

Here are my recent multiclassing characters:

Nightmare Druid: Warlock 1 (Undead) / Moon Druid 11 - The idea from the start was to have a Moon Druid that was corrupted and transforms into tainted creatures. Form of Dread, Enlarge, Fire Shield, on top of an animal form = fun. I designed the multiclass from level 3 (we started at 3) with Warlock 1 / druid 2.

Archer: Variant Tiefling Gloom Stalker 5, Cleric of Order 1, Divine Soul 7, Battlemaster 4, Assassin 3 - This PC started as a Ranger that believed that Asmodeus was a necessary evil and did everything necessary to fight the Blood War. This grew into being a preacher for Asmodeus (Cleric and Divine Sorcerer levels) which resulted in her becoming a holy assassin for the order (Battlemaster / Assassin). I had no plan for leveling up and just went with the storyline that made sense.

Soradin+: Dark Elf (Drow) Vengeance Paladin 8 / Zealot Barbarian 4 / Fighter 2 / Shadow Sorcerer 5 / Hexblade Warlock 1 - This PC again had no plan and just added levels as the story dictated. For example, I took a level of Hexblade after finding a powerful evil sentient weapon and negotiating with it repeatedly - the level itself granted me nearly no benefits (access to Hexblade's Curse and Armor of Agathys are the only ones that I think I ever used).

 

[CreamCloud0]

I'm not sure what this difference in the poll is.

i think it's multiclassing for achieving a thematic goal vs doing it for mechanical reasons.

 

[LordEntrails]

i think it's multiclassing for achieving a thematic goal vs doing it for mechanical reasons.

That's what I was expecting, but both options seem to be thematic.

 

[CreamCloud0]

That's what I was expecting, but both options seem to be thematic.

i disagree, the second option seems to me to be very much be leaning more into mechanical effectiveness reasons, like:

The Rogue Scout Subclass pairs very well with Ranger and tends to be worth taking a few levels of Rogue to get. Realistically, most Rogue Subclasses tend to pair very well with a Ranger, though the opposite doesn't seem to be true.

this isn't saying anything about themes or concept IMO, this feels like it's talking about mechanical synergy.

 

[ezo]

No multiclassing. Period. The longer I play 5E the more I realize it is more problematic than ever. There are just too many synergies out there that work for power-gaming, which I oppose.

If I ever continue with allowing multiclassing, it will be you have to keep all your classes' levels within 1 of each other.

 

[aco175]

In 5e, I see multiclassing more as trying to gain an advantage and min/maxing over trying to get a concept you want. There are so many subclasses now that one should not have to think MCing is the way to get a cool concept.

 

[Zardnaar]

Generally it's having two things that play nice togather or patch a class.

Rangers and Rogues fir example tend to fall off after 5 or so

I like powergaming up to a point. That's a factor as well I don't like powergaming to the point of being the most powerful at the table. For example o might powergame a healer. Might not be the best character at the table but it's going to be a pretty good healer.

Character concept also matters. I enjoy the theory crafting espicially with non obvious builds.

Basically it depends. Sometimes it might be something I've been wanting to see for a while. Eg Tashas had a variant potentially wisdom based ranger. No one ever tried to build it so I might do it in 5E or similar idea eg Eldritch Knight.

 

[Indagare Nogitsune]

i disagree, the second option seems to me to be very much be leaning more into mechanical effectiveness reasons, like:

this isn't saying anything about themes or concept IMO, this feels like it's talking about mechanical synergy.

Yeah. Sorry for the confusion, I was pretty tired when I wrote it. The second option is, indeed, the mechanical reasons rather than the idea. Min-maxing, effectively.