Bae'zel
Adventurer
Fair enough, I don't frequently play with more experienced players.This might work for players who don't have a lot of experience, but as someone who has played a lot I feel like I can figure out what I want for my character better than the DM.
It is not always about optimization though. I play Rangers more than anything else, and the only Ranger subclass I play is a Fey Wanderer. It would be pretty darn hard to build the kind of Fey Wanderer I typically want without the ability to dip into an Arcane Class (typically Warlock, Bard or Sorcerer) or Rogue.
I know that this is a game, and that for some, multiclassing makes character building more fun.
To me, personally, something bothers me about multiclassing, especially "dips". Maybe because I tie Class into character concept and story; the class IS their character and "dipping" takes me out of the emergent story unless it is woven into it somehow.
Like, say, the Fighter who has a spiritual moment in nature, has an encounter that changes their core beliefs, and then decides to become a Druid or Ranger. I can work with that, mentally and story-wise. But to have a player tell me that they insist on taking one or more other classes for specific build requirements or needs, without any in-game world reason? I can't explain why it bothers me so much.
Different playstyles for different tables. Knowing better, I'll make sure to inform potential players during the campaign pitch that multiclassing has to have an in-game reason, not just for "builds" nor for mechanical efficiency. So that they know to bow out before it becomes a bother.
Last edited: