D&D 5E What do you about dead levels in multiclassing?


log in or register to remove this ad


the Jester

Legend
Seeing how it was a feature stapled on with almost zero testing you kinda have to modify it for a given table regardless.
I have played a lot of 5e and never seen a table adjust multiclassing, except in cases where there was some confusion. It works fine straight out of the book. Is it perfectly balanced at all levels? No, but I don't think the individual classes are, either.
 


I've certainly never bother to as a dm, and never seen a player expect it. Maybe if someone really wanted a specific theme that 'required' bad multiclassing, but I can't really think of a good example of that. Especially since outside of Extra Attack I don't see a lot of features that would become dead levels due to multiclassing. If that came up and a pc was falling behind I might make a custom adjustment, but no blanket rule.

Maybe a ranger/rogue? But to play that I would suggest a Scout rogue or ranger with a feat or two for extra skills.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Extra Attack: Let players pick one of a set of combat styles. Since you can never get a "wasted" Extra Attack feature more than 3 times (e.g. Fighter 5/Barb 5/Paladin 5/Ranger 5), you only need to offer 3 fighting styles for it to guaranteed never be a "wasted" feature, while avoiding the risk of being overpowered because some crazy combat feat gets added later on or someone discovers One Weird Trick (Dungeon Masters Hate Them.)

Channel Divinity: If you get a new option for Channel Divinity, you can use that new option once per day without expending a use of Channel Divinity. A smaller benefit than the above, but then again, you are getting something out of the level, as opposed to the big fat nothing.

Are there any other such "wasted" features? I can't recall any.
 

I have played a lot of 5e and never seen a table adjust multiclassing, except in cases where there was some confusion. It works fine straight out of the book. Is it perfectly balanced at all levels? No, but I don't think the individual classes are, either.

It works fine because 5e is overall resilient to such factors not because it's well implemented. You can do some crazy stuff with the system and be fine hence why you have the champ fighter and infinite angle armies coexisting to a point. Including it at all is already in the "modify for the table category" because it's optional yet it has probably been one of the biggest factor in design changes since release. Unfritted multiclassing removes more content than it adds just by the nature on how tables rachet to the extremes of availability.
 


greg kaye

Explorer
It probably wouldn't break the game if you allowed martials to get extra attacks based on total character level (just like casters cantrips get upgraded,)....
That would certainly balance out the breakage - but why did that character gain extra arcane firebolts after more martial training?
 

Redwizard007

Adventurer
That would certainly balance out the breakage - but why did that character gain extra arcane firebolts after more martial training?
The same reason the ranger can suddenly sense dragons at level 3, or the barbarian gets better at crit hits at level 9. Because gaining new abilities is fun. Obviously, getting better at something makes you better at unrelated stuff. It's why all our cardiologists are so damn good at golf.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top