I have differing opinions on the subject based on whether we are talking about the 5e D&D that we got, or in theory. In theory, I think that -- in a game where we have feats like Magic Initiate and Ritual Caster, and where we have archetypes like Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight and so forth, one shouldn't have to multiclass to achieve a character concept (except maybe for whichever combo has not yet been released, or the like). However, given the versions of such feats and archetypes we got, that's often not the case. Ritual Caster: cleric doesn't get you the core-concept abilities one might want like dealing with poisoned/cursed/diseased/dead conditions; Eldritch Knight doesn't fulfill most gish fantasies; and so forth.
Therefore I don't hate that MC exists. I do dislike how poorly it works for 1:1 thematic splits (an AD&D-esque 'fighter/cleric' or 'mage/thief' or whatever), and works so much better as 1-2 level dips for mechanical abilities. Cleric 1 on a wizard for defense. Hexblade dip for cha-combat (or warlock 2 dip in general to resolve bard/paladin's weakness in at-will ranged). I get it, those are mechanical bits that are reasonable to want. However, then the
'right' (IMO, and in theory) way to go about that is to have those options built into the wizard, paladin, or bard as build options (be that feats or archetypes or in-class selection knobs and levers). If people feel they need to dip for the mechanical widgets, rather than because it fits the thematic direction they are taking their character, IMO it is the mechanics which should be changed.
I have a distaste for multi-classing. In and of itself, no problem, but I find the most common reason for doing it is DPR, and that I really don't like.
It's often used by people who focus more on character build than character concept. People who view building a character aa akin to building a deck in magic the gathering lookingfor optimized synergies.
Yeah, exactly. I really am not a fan of system mastery as a part of gameplay. At least definitely if it means that the newbie or the person trying to stick to thematic character development feels like they are playing a wildly different game/don't feel like they could play in the same group as someone looking to play optimization-fu. There's always going to be best and least-best options in a game (at least if decisions matter at all), but I'd like them to be in a constrained spread (best build is no more than maybe 25-30% higher than regular reasonable choices, and certainly such that good decision-making in-game can wildly override optimization at character creation/level up).
I'm a 3E/PF1 guy, so naturally I love multi-classing. It's a little more manageable in 5E though. I dont get too bogged down in the details of why a multiclass character came about narratively. I view leveling pretty much under the hood.
I can see an appeal to that. At that point, though, I don't understand why one would stick with D&D at all in that case. Games like Hero System or SWADE let you build exactly what you want, nothing you don't want, so long as you stay within a build budget, and apply the thematic layer on top at the end.
