# How should multiclassing be implemented for ODnD?



## Frozen_Heart (Sep 2, 2022)

So overall multiclassing in 5e is pretty full of issues, and overall feels like it was created in the last two hours on a Friday afternoon before the edition went to print. It messes up tiers of play, it messes up ability score progression, it doesn't function with martial extra attacks (but does with adding caster spell slots together?) Most multiclass options are poor at best, or actively character crippling at worst. And then there is the odd few which are powergamer heaven, and just result in munchkins rolling up palasorcerlocks every game.

So how do people think it should be implemented for this edition? Are you happy with how it works in 5e? Or something else like archtype feats in pathfinder 2e?

Or do you think that multiclassing needs to be removed completely?


----------



## Ath-kethin (Sep 2, 2022)

I never used the multiclassing rules in 5e, either in games I ran or as a player. That's partly to reduce dipping and partly because no matter how they try to swing it, I haven't been able to play a 1st level mage/thief since 3.0. 

I'm indifferent as to how the subject/concept is approached in future iterations of the game, since I doubt any approach will solve the issues I have with it. I don't push for its removal, because I know lots of people really like having the options. But ultimately it just doesn't do what I want it to.


----------



## roger semerad (Sep 2, 2022)

This kind of came up in another thread, I'll repost some of my thoughts.  I really liked how it worked in 4th, so adapting those concepts to 5th is a good place to start.

First how it works in 4e:

The first option is feat multi-classing. Using this method you pick a class as normal and then take some feats to get basic class features from another class, with additional feats to swap your some of your powers( spells and attack options ) with the other class. Using this method a fighter multi-classing a wizard is no less a fighter for doing so. With full access to fighter abillities and defender features. This fighter doesn't step on the wizard's niche because it's still a full defender. This method is also very newbie friendly, as it's impossible to make a gimped build with it. This method depicts a fighter that learns some wizard stuff at a later date, or one who just dabbles in magic. This option actually creates a character very similar to a 5th edition multi-class that dips only a few levels into another class, just with no trap options at all.

The second option is hybrid multi-classing. In this method each class is given a half-class write up and you pick any two and combine them. This option is a little more complex and could result in less powerful charaters if you're not carefull, but is still less trap laden than 3rd and 5th's style. Each half-class only gives you the most basic class features. Requiring you to take feats to gain the more in depth features from a class. The hybrid character then takes his powers from either class, but must have at least one power from each class. Niche protection comes from the fact that the class role abillities are limited. A defender can only mark one enemy at a time, strikers can only add extra damage to striker powers, leaders can only heal half as often, and controllers need to pick controller powers to effect the battlefield. How well you perform as each half is determined by your power selection and the feats you spend on class features. This method depicts the true equal 1-1 multi-class that 3rd and 5th's 10-10 even split method does so poorly. It actually creates a character more close to the 1st and 2nd edition's multiclass options. Although I personally think 4th's create a more balanced and useful character on average.

Both of these methods are feat heavy, so single class characters also have more tricks and versatillity in their own niche.

I wouldn't expect anything like this for the One D&D main books. The developers could adapt these concepts for latter books however, increasing the multi-class options in the future.

As for adapting it:

I was doing a little thinking on how these concepts could be adapted. The hybrid concept wouldn't be too difficult, just make some half-class write ups and figure when and how to dole out various class features. The feat multi-classing wouldn't work in 5th. There are just not enough feats going around to support it. One D&D might increase the overall feats some, but if they want any compatibility with legacy products it can't be much. There is one place with the necessary design space though, subclasses. This would be very similar to the hybrid model, but more stripped down. You'd make subclass versions of every class and when it's time to pick a subclass you could pick the multi-class subclass version instead. Just like with the feat version in 4th you wouldn't have to delay or give up on class features from your starting class. The only real problem to smooth over is class combinations that are very M.A.D.. Two attribute dependancy isn't a problem, but three or more would be. So they'd have to come up with some rules in these half-and-subclass versions to account for it. None of this would be a quick or easy thing to implement. They'd have to devote some real time to playtesting and balancing for it, but I think it would be worth it to expand the multi-classing options.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Sep 2, 2022)

I'd prefer hybrid multiclassing, because it would feel more like 2e multiclassing, though I definitely don't want to go back to the split XP progression. But I feel it's probably too hard for them to implement, yes I know they did it in 4e but that was just about exchanging powers in your main class for another class' powers. 

I'm not a fan of those ridiculous multi-classing for various level dips builds of characters.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 2, 2022)

Multiclassing in 5e is fun and fine. Maybe a bit of tuning. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Eldritch blast as class feature. Removal of  pact magic, voila.

Slower attribute increases/less feats is a feature, not a bug. I hope they won't kill multiclassing and just enhance it with some synergy feats.


----------



## Jack Daniel (Sep 2, 2022)

> ODnD




Stahp.


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 2, 2022)

A more robust version of 4e's multiclass feats would be cool.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Sep 2, 2022)

5E wasn't built with the same ...umm..._ precision _of class features as 4E, so feats just swapping features, or "half-class" lists really can't work the same way.

That said, I'm fine with 5E's approach. I think the addition of class-independent Proficiency Bonus was brilliant, and spell-casting slot stacking and cantrips scaling by character level and not class help prevent a lot of "trap" choices for players who want to mix things up.

I think there might be a little tweaking not to the multi-class mechanic itself, but to some classes and the way they interact with multi-classing.


----------



## TwoSix (Sep 2, 2022)

Getting rid of 5e multiclassing would break a lot of backwards compatibility, so I would leave it in.  They can still introduce other methods of multiclassing alongside it if they feel they have a compelling method.


----------



## Blue (Sep 2, 2022)

*OOC:*


@Frozen_Heart I was a bit confused coming here after reading the title and then starting on your post.  OD&D is a long and well established for Original D&D.  1D&D is what I usually see as the acronym for the playtest for the 2024 Anniversary Edition.


----------



## Lanefan (Sep 2, 2022)

Kobold Avenger said:


> I'd prefer hybrid multiclassing, because it would feel more like 2e multiclassing, though I definitely don't want to go back to the split XP progression.



The split xp progression is exactly what I'd want, as it then allows players to determine how much emphasis is to be put on each class by varying the % of xp that goes to each one.  I'd also like to do away with additive levels and have the two classes function independently as per attack bonus, saving throws, etc., such that a Cleric-5/Fighter-3 fights like a 3rd and casts like a 5th and saves as whichever of those classes gives the better save in that situation and is in no way an 8th at anything.

There's a big difference between a character who puts 75% of xp into Fighter and 25% into Rogue and a character who puts 75% into Rogue and just 25% into Fighter.  The first is mostly a warrior who wants to do some sneaking and trapfinding on the side, the other is mostly a sneak who wants to augment her fighting skills.  The expectation is that a character is played roughly in line with its xp division.  The xp division can only be changed between adventures and is otherwise locked in.

In no case, however, should a multiclass character ever be more powerful than a single-class character of the same (highest) level.

And yeah, as none of this is even remotely backwards-compatible I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen. 


Kobold Avenger said:


> I'm not a fan of those ridiculous multi-classing for various level dips builds of characters.



One way to put a hard stop to a lot of this is to allow any character to only ever have two classes, tops.

@roger semerad - the biggest problem with feat-based multiclassing is that it even further bakes feats (which are/were in theory just an option) into the game; hardly a solution for those who don't want them.


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 2, 2022)

Lanefan said:


> The split xp progression is exactly what I'd want, as it then allows players to determine how much emphasis is to be put on each class by varying the % of xp that goes to each one.  I'd also like to do away with additive levels and have the two classes function independently as per attack bonus, saving throws, etc., such that a Cleric-5/Fighter-3 fights like a 3rd and casts like a 5th and saves as whichever of those classes gives the better save in that situation and is in no way an 8th at anything.
> 
> There's a big difference between a character who puts 75% of xp into Fighter and 25% into Rogue and a character who puts 75% into Rogue and just 25% into Fighter.  The first is mostly a warrior who wants to do some sneaking and trapfinding on the side, the other is mostly a sneak who wants to augment her fighting skills.  The expectation is that a character is played roughly in line with its xp division.  The xp division can only be changed between adventures and is otherwise locked in.
> 
> ...



Feats have only ever been optional in theory. They're used at most tables and they're going core in 1DD.

If you don't want them you're going to be squarely in house rule territory going forward.


----------



## Vael (Sep 2, 2022)

I strongly dislike 3.5 and 5e style level-based multiclassing, so a 4e-esque approach of a combination of feats and hybrid classes sounds like a better option, but I'm well aware of how fiddly hybrid classes were.


----------



## the Jester (Sep 3, 2022)

Frozen_Heart said:


> So overall multiclassing in 5e is pretty full of issues, and overall feels like it was created in the last two hours on a Friday afternoon before the edition went to print. It messes up tiers of play, it messes up ability score progression, it doesn't function with martial extra attacks (but does with adding caster spell slots together?) Most multiclass options are poor at best, or actively character crippling at worst. And then there is the odd few which are powergamer heaven, and just result in munchkins rolling up palasorcerlocks every game.



Hard disagree on every level. I think it works pretty darn well, and have both run and played multiclassed pcs at all levels up to the mid-teens.

Also, backwards compatibility is very important. 

I have no problem with adding more 'multiclass lite' feats that give access to limited class abilities.


----------



## Krachek (Sep 3, 2022)

As it is now, a variant rule.
I prefer much more the various feat that give multi class flavor.


----------



## jasper (Sep 3, 2022)

I like multiclassing as is.


----------



## roger semerad (Sep 3, 2022)

Sir Brennen said:


> *5E wasn't built with the same ...umm... precision of class features as 4E, so feats just swapping features, or "half-class" lists really can't work the same way.*
> 
> That said, I'm fine with 5E's approach. I think the addition of class-independent Proficiency Bonus was brilliant, and spell-casting slot stacking and cantrips scaling by character level and not class help prevent a lot of "trap" choices for players who want to mix things up.
> 
> I think there might be a little tweaking not to the multi-class mechanic itself, but to some classes and the way they interact with multi-classing.




It would definitely not be an *easy* task, but the concept of a half-class is pretty straight forward.  Like I said it would just need a decent amount of playtesting to get it right.  You'd have to go through each class abilities one by one and figure out if they need to be delayed, limited, nerfed, removed, or maybe even given out at the same level.  Action Surge for the Fighter would be one ability I personally think is too powerful for a half-class.  So I'd remove it from the half-class entry, or maybe delay it until 20th level to act as a capstone for it.  Meanwhile I'd probably keep the first extra attack at 5th level and delay the third and fourth a couple of levels.  For a full spellcaster I'd start playtesting it with about 3/4 of a full caster for spell slot devolopement, but halve spell slots per day( round down with the minimum of one ).  Your caster level will be your character level.  A 20th level fighter/wizard would have the following spell slots - 2 cantrips, 2 lv.1, 1 lv.2-8.  While a 20th cleric/wizard would have - 5 cantrips, 4 lv.1, 3 lv.2-4, 2 lv. 5, 1 lv. 6-8.  Half-classes also don't get any subclass features, those would be reserved for full classes.

These ideas are just where to *start* the playtesting with, some class abilities might need a heavier or lighter hand.  No way to really know without playtesting.



Lanefan said:


> The split xp progression is exactly what I'd want, as it then allows players to determine how much emphasis is to be put on each class by varying the % of xp that goes to each one.  I'd also like to do away with additive levels and have the two classes function independently as per attack bonus, saving throws, etc., such that a Cleric-5/Fighter-3 fights like a 3rd and casts like a 5th and saves as whichever of those classes gives the better save in that situation and is in no way an 8th at anything.
> 
> There's a big difference between a character who puts 75% of xp into Fighter and 25% into Rogue and a character who puts 75% into Rogue and just 25% into Fighter.  The first is mostly a warrior who wants to do some sneaking and trapfinding on the side, the other is mostly a sneak who wants to augment her fighting skills.  The expectation is that a character is played roughly in line with its xp division.  The xp division can only be changed between adventures and is otherwise locked in.
> 
> ...




One big problem with the experience point based ideas is that a growing number of tables no longer use them.  That makes them a bit of a non starter I think.

About the feats, I don't think they'd work in 5th.  I did say so in my first post.  My way of using the feat concept was to have the multi-class replace the subclass choice for a character.  Basically use the half-class concept but cut them down even further to be roughly equal to a subclass in power.  Then when a Fighter gets to level 3 he could chose champion, eldritch knight, or multi-class as a wizard.  In this specific example the Fighter/sub-class Wizard would be very similar to the Eldritch Knight, but still different.  The Eldritch Knight focuses on combining spells and attacks in a single action, while the Fighter/sub-class Wizard has better spell selection.  The sub-class Wizard would also be generic and could be chosen by any class that doesn't already have a similar sub-class.  This accomplishes the same basic idea of the feat based multi in 4th.  A way to multi-class without giving up any of your main class abilities.

To be clear, both of these ideas aren't something I'd expect in the One D&D main books.  One D&D has made it clear that there would be no massive changes coming.  These are the kind of options I'd like to see worked on a couple of years into the One launch.


----------



## Raith5 (Sep 3, 2022)

The only changes Id like to see is to make multi class martials levels stack for the extra attack and to make feats/ASI available at character level rather than class level.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 3, 2022)

Dual classing.


you can only have 2 classes.

classes must be within one level of each other, that is, 3rd level is your last chance to take a level in 2nd class.
multiclass rules for proficiency as normal.

at levels 5,8,11,14,17 and 20 you get class features of both classes, but HPs and HDs of only one class.
at levels 5,11,17 you get lower HP and higher HD and at levels 8,14 and 20 you get higher HPs and lower HD.

I.E. Fighter/wizard 5 would have class levels of 3rd level fighter and 3rd level wizard.
if fighter was 1st level class, then HPs would be 10+6(for two levels of fighter) and 4+4+4(for 3 levels of wizard) and character would have 3d10 HDs and 2d6 HDs.

at 8th level character would be 5/5 split with HPs of 4th level fighter and 4th level wizard with 4d10 and 4d6 HDs

...

up to 20th level where character would be 13/13 split with HPs of 10th level fighter and 10th level wizard with 10d10 and 10d6 HDs.


----------



## Shiroiken (Sep 3, 2022)

Trying to shoehorn in a system from a prior edition just isn't going to work. The gestalt system of AD&D, custom leveling of 3E, and feat system of 4E just aren't going to provide the right feel in a game outside of their original systems.
I've always felt the best way to "multiclass" in 5E is via the subclass system. For example, a Fighter/Rogue would be either a scout subclass of fighter or a thug subclass of rogue, giving a bit of the other class to the main class.


----------



## CreamCloud0 (Sep 3, 2022)

I like the ‘half classes’ approach with supplementary feats

Your basic power budget has four ‘slots’ but each full class is only worth 3/4 of that and is divided up into distinct thirds, so to fill out that last chunk of power budget you can either take chunks from another class or a prestige class which is designed to fit in that last 1/4 class power budget but is a distinct whole thematic package.

Class dipping (wizard 3/3, cleric 1/3)
Balance multiclass (wizard 2/3, cleric 2/3)
Or Prestige class (wizard 3/3, archmage 1/1)


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 3, 2022)

CreamCloud0 said:


> I like the ‘half classes’ approach with supplementary feats
> 
> Your basic power budget has four ‘slots’ but each full class is only worth 3/4 of that and is divided up into distinct thirds, so to fill out that last chunk of power budget you can either take chunks from another class or a prestige class which is designed to fit in that last 1/4 class power budget but is a distinct whole thematic package.
> 
> ...




All those solutions are a bit too complicated to implement. 
As an alternate to 3.x style multiclass I would have liked to forfeit subclasses in favour of adding the base of a different class at slower rate.
And then being able to use feats to either enhance the first class, enhance the second or even add a 3rd.


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 3, 2022)

In Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition, multiclassing is dealt with in much the same way as 5e. But unlike 5e, it tries to encourage multiclassing by providing an unique trio of feats called Synergy Feats. These feats come only into play when someone multiclasses.  

Currently A5e has Synergy Feats for these multiclass combos:

1. BLADECHANTER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in fighter, 3 levels in wizard, Fighting Style (Two-Weapon Fighting)

2. ELDRITCH ARCHER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in fighter, 3 levels in wizard, Fighting Style (Archery)

3. MYSTIC ARCANIST​Prerequisites: 3 levels in cleric, 3 levels in sorcerer

4. NIGHTSTALKER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in adept, 3 levels in rogue

5. PROCLAIMER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in bard, 3 levels in herald

6. SHADOWDANCER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in rogue, 3 levels in warlock

7. UNTAMED​Prerequisites: 3 levels in berserker, 3 levels in druid (Skinchanger archetype)

8. VIGILANTE​Prerequisites: 3 levels in adept, 3 levels in ranger

These are the first of the three synergy feats for each multiclass combo presented here. Feats in A5e like 5e are optional, you have to select them in place of an ASI. So the earliest you can take the starter feat is about 7th-level when one of the two classes in the multiclass combo reaches 7th level. When the other class in the multiclass combo reaches it's 4th-level (8th-level overall), you can then get the second synergy feat. The third and final feat can be acquired when one of the classes in the combo reaches 12th or 13th level. 

The synergy feats are interesting, but they run right into the same problem feats have in 5e. Choosing between an ASI or a Feat. And not every one likes feat trees. Lastly, you still have to pick which subclass you want for each class in the combo. 

Hopefully with feats in 1D&D no longer being optional and being more level-based, these synergy feats can really shine.


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 3, 2022)

Here is what one of the Synergy feat trees for A5e looks like:​​BLADECHANTER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in fighter, 3 levels in wizard, Fighting Style (Two-Weapon Fighting)

Bladechanting is the art of unifying and maintaining intense physical and intellectual strains, allowing movement and thought to become one as a beautiful and deadly dance of blades.

If you wield a melee weapon in each hand, you may use them to perform seen spell components and as a spellcasting focus for wizard spells. In addition, whenever you are concentrating on a spell while using melee weapons as a spellcasting focus in this way, you enter a special trance-like state called bladechanting. If you lose concentration on your spell while bladechanting, you also stop bladechanting. While bladechanting you gain the following benefits:


While you are wearing no armor, light armor, or medium armor,  you gain a bonus to your Armor Class equal to your Intelligence modifier.
Whenever you would need to make a concentration check to maintain a spell due to taking damage, you may spend 2 exertion to automatically succeed.
When you hit a target with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction and choose a spell of 1st-level or higher, casting it through your weapon. The spell must have a casting time of 1 action, and target a single creature or have a range of Touch. If a spell cast in this way requires an attack roll and targets the same target as the triggering melee weapon attack, it also hits as part of that attack. You may choose not to deal damage with a melee weapon attack used to cast a spell.
WHIRLING INCANTOR​Prerequisites: Bladechanter feat

You train to move by thought and incant with your body’s flowing motion, becoming nearly unassailable as you whirl and dance, escaping fatal blows and seamlessly blending the lines between mind and body. While bladechanting you gain the following additional benefits:


Your Speed increases by 10 feet.
You gain a bonus to Dexterity checks and saving throws equal to your Intelligence modifier.
You gain a bonus to Intelligence checks and saving throws equal to your Dexterity modifier.
When you are targeted by an attack but before the attack is rolled, you may expend a spell slot to attempt a whirling arcane evasion. If you do, make a Dexterity saving throw and add a +2 bonus for every spell slot level above 1st spent this way. If this Dexterity saving throw exceeds the triggering attack roll the attack becomes a miss, and you may immediately move up to 10 feet in any direction. This movement does not provoke opportunity attacks.
ELDRITCH WHIRLWIND MASTER​Prerequisites: Whirling Incantor feat

With a blade’s sweep you pull and spin the arcane power, surrounding yourself in a cyclone of arcane energy as your spell's power tries to match the speed of your sword.

Whenever you use your reaction to cast a spell through a melee weapon attack using bladechanting, you may choose up to a number of additional targets for that spell equal to the spell level of the spell slot used to cast it. These additional targets must all be within 10 feet of you and are each treated as if they were the spell’s original target.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 3, 2022)

Problem with synergy feats in A5E is that they are too specific.
For 5e, I'd rather have them more open, like 
prerequisisite: martial weapon proficiency and spellcasting ability.
The nice thing is that it can also be a feat to improve the eldritch knight (if it is still a thing in A*DnD).


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 3, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Problem with synergy feats in A5E is that they are too specific.
> For 5e, I'd rather have them more open, like
> prerequisisite: martial weapon proficiency and spellcasting ability.
> The nice thing is that it can also be a feat to improve the eldritch knight (if it is still a thing in A*DnD).



I have to agree with you here. The synergy feats in A5e are too specific when it comes to what classes act as prerequisites for them. 

You can use these A5e feats with the 5e subclasses such as the Eldritch Knight. It's just a matter of finding a Wizard subclass that works well with it and the synergy feats.


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 3, 2022)

I think fiddly stuff like feats and skills goes against the whole point of having a class system, but nothing is as bad as the current 3e-style dipping-flavored multiclassing...

Subclasses would be the cleanest way to handle wanting to veer outside your class. But you really should be able to pick one right away - the 3rd level limit is there just _because_ of the multiclassing.


----------



## gorice (Sep 3, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Subclasses would be the cleanest way to handle wanting to veer outside your class.



This is what gets me about multiclassing in 5e. When you already have various ways of being a sneaky person who does magic, or a fighty person who does magic, why do you need to create the option for a fighter/thief or a a fighter/wizard?

That's an honest question. I feel like these discussions about the changes people want in D&D are often driven by conflicting, or simply incommesurable, motivations. Is multiclassing needed because subclasses don't offer people the thematic flexibility they want? Or is it just a cool mechanical trick?


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 3, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Subclasses would be the cleanest way to handle wanting to veer outside your class. But you really should be able to pick one right away - the 3rd level limit is there just _because_ of the multiclassing.




I don't think this is right.
I think it was there to not overwhelm players with too many choices at level 1.


----------



## Laurefindel (Sep 3, 2022)

5e-style multiclassing is my favourite of all editions. Not as munchkin-y as 2e, less convoluted than 3e, and I’m not a fan of 4e or PF2 multiclassing by feat or swapped abilities; it goes against the principle of character classes in the first place.

In the present setup, multiclassing is a significant choice. It is neither necessary nor debilitating. It allows you do do things at the cost of having to wait for others. As it should IMO.

There are a handful of required fixes such as EB + AB, but they are relatively minor. Overall, I don’t thing it needs to change.


----------



## roger semerad (Sep 3, 2022)

gorice said:


> This is what gets me about multiclassing in 5e. When you already have various ways of being a sneaky person who does magic, or a fighty person who does magic, why do you need to create the option for a fighter/thief or a a fighter/wizard?
> 
> That's an honest question. I feel like these discussions about the changes people want in D&D are often driven by conflicting, or simply incommesurable, motivations. Is multiclassing needed because subclasses don't offer people the thematic flexibility they want? Or is it just a cool mechanical trick?




This comes down to the inherent strengths and weaknesses of class based systems vs. a classless one.  A classless system has unmatched ability to express the most character concepts, while the class based one makes it easier for new players by constraining choice down to the bare essentials and is easier to balance very flavorful and unique abilities for each class because there's a limited amount of ways for them to be combined.  If you character concept matches the class based options well it's a great way to make a character.  If your idea isn't really supported that's where multi-classing comes in.  It slightly pushes the class based system more towards the classless side, without completely crossing over.  For example the Eldritch Knight gives magical ability, but it's very focused on damage spells and combining them with melee strikes.  That's very emblematic of class system, give you a very flavorful class that can only be a narrow set of ideas.  If say you wanted to play a mercenary that has spent a lot of time in the Feywild and was a master of combining enchantment, illusion and swordplay, confusing and debuffing your enemies before dispatching them with your blade.  Then the Eldritch Knight just doesn't support that idea.  That's where multiclassing comes in.  The multiclass Fighter/Wizard allows something like this, at the cost of having no specifically flavored abilities tied to it.  It's more generic and combines the abilities less well than a fully fleshed out class or subclass would, but it at least is able to support the concept.  You could try to make classes and subclasses for every possible concept, but then you end up with 3.5's bloat of literally hundreds of classes and prestige classes.


----------



## Frozen_Heart (Sep 3, 2022)

gorice said:


> This is what gets me about multiclassing in 5e. When you already have various ways of being a sneaky person who does magic, or a fighty person who does magic, why do you need to create the option for a fighter/thief or a a fighter/wizard?
> 
> That's an honest question. I feel like these discussions about the changes people want in D&D are often driven by conflicting, or simply incommesurable, motivations. Is multiclassing needed because subclasses don't offer people the thematic flexibility they want? Or is it just a cool mechanical trick?



Honestly, I like there being multiple ways of making the same character. It means that if a player really dislikes playing as one method of building them, then there is an alternative.

Like maybe a player wants a divine warrior theme, but isn't interested in smites. But they still want an extra attack. They also want more support and healing spells. Both pure paladin and pure cleric don't suit there. But a fighter/cleric does do that nicely.

You can essentially make an identical themed character as either, but as their gameplay is very different, it can suit two different players.


----------



## Oldestmate (Sep 4, 2022)

I’d like subclasses to be robust and custom enough that you don’t need to multiclass.


----------



## Benjamin Olson (Sep 4, 2022)

I like 5e multiclassing. It steers people more towards dips than deep splits, but I think what people are going for with deep splits is better accomplished with subclasses or, dare I say it, even a new class or two. I really liked there just being the base 12 classes, but since we're already in the regime of the base 12 classes and that other guy we could probably stand to let in a couple more.

I do think there should be some multiclassing tweaks, like a set minimum multiclassed ASI progression (if by level 6 you don't have one you get one and miss your next one), and some sort of comparable method to make sure martials get an extra attack in a reasonable time frame. I'm not opposed to having to put off key features when multiclassing, but the current system makes precise timing of when you dip into other classes too important because of the general power-jump at level 5 which is built into class mechanics, and overly-penalizes going straight for a level of each of your classes so that you can round out the concept early.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Sep 4, 2022)

Removed or made more similar to Pathfinder 2e is my opinion.


----------



## aco175 (Sep 4, 2022)

I could see new classes made from the core classes.  Make a new class that is part fighter and part cleric.  maybe you get your 2nd attack at 6th level or be only a 2/3 caster.  Heck give new powers that straight fighter or straight cleric cannot get.  

I would even get rid of the 3rd level paths when you take one of these.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 4, 2022)

If it is still being called optional I think we should have qusi multiclassing as feats like 4e, and 2 (or more) options you can add on. 3e/5e style and 1e/2e style (now called hybrid or gestalt) and a page or so of doing it either way.

Edit: I would add either prestige class or paragon paths... and either way epic destinies too.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 4, 2022)

Raith5 said:


> The only changes Id like to see is to make multi class martials levels stack for the extra attack and to make feats/ASI available at character level rather than class level.



yeah I don't get why a level 5 wizard level 6 cleric can get access to slots as if they were 11th level, but a level 5 ranger level 6 fighter can't have 3 attacks


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 4, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> yeah I don't get why a level 5 wizard level 6 cleric can get access to slots as if they were 11th level, but a level 5 ranger level 6 fighter can't have 3 attacks



Because casters rule and martials drool. As always.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 4, 2022)

I always laugh at Warlock dips...

"You know that you sold your _Soul_ for Eldritch Blast, right?"


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 4, 2022)

Ideally, races and classes are organized into feats and halffeats. Then pick a base race or class and swap out one feature to acquire an other feature from an other race or class.


----------



## gorice (Sep 4, 2022)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Removed or made more similar to Pathfinder 2e is my opinion.



Yeah, PF2e multiclassing and subclasses look great, though I haven't played them. One thing that struck me about them when I first saw them was how well the subclasses let you express different concepts or themes. And, if your concept doesn't work with the existing options (want an Artorias-like armoured fighter with a wolf companion?), you can pinch a feat from another class for a small cost.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 4, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Because casters rule and martials drool. As always.



Nope. This is just sad.
I think during playtest stacking extra attacks was a rule. But this also felt bad, because then taking single class fighter felt like a trap option.
I do think however that if it is balanced correctly, it can work.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 4, 2022)

3.x style multiclassing should not be removed:

Right now it is the only way to really customize your character beyond level 3.

Also if they removed it, this would invalidate many characters.

I think adding new options to multiclass would be terrific however.


----------



## payn (Sep 4, 2022)

gorice said:


> Yeah, PF2e multiclassing and subclasses look great, though I haven't played them. One thing that struck me about them when I first saw them was how well the subclasses let you express different concepts or themes. And, if your concept doesn't work with the existing options (want an Artorias-like armoured fighter with a wolf companion?), you can pinch a feat from another class for a small cost.



Yeah, but the cost is actually huge with dedication. I don't usually go for hybrid multi-classing, but its ok if you use the free archetype variant in PF2. Otherwise, its so tight and silo'd its hard to differentiate characters in the same class.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Sep 4, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> I always laugh at Warlock dips...
> 
> "You know that you sold your _Soul_ for Eldritch Blast, right?



I’m currently playing a sorlock, and I like to make sure the multi-classing game mechanics are supported by the story. 

I told the GM the broad strokes of what I wanted for my character journey. My PC would start as a Shadow sorcerer, who’s power came from a failed ritual where he was to be sacrificed as a young boy. In the process, the tip of a strange dagger was broken off in his chest, and he has a wound that won’t heal. While he develops a few useful magical tricks for his initial career as a gang member in the poorer part of town, he was never comfortable with his powers.

After a few levels, he would find a reason to take a fey patron and become a warlock (knowing the fey Courts are of significance in the campaign world). The goal was to eventually get a Book of Shadows, primarily to get a raven familiar to complete his Sandman aesthetic (this was a few years before the current Netflix adaptation).

Then, his patron would do something to betray him. My PC would turn his back on his patron, essentially stealing his Book of Shadows, and embrace his “natural” arcane ability. 

Long story short, the GM made all of this into a relevant part of the campaign, and eventually the party actually had to battle my former patron to banish him back to the fey realms. 

Did I take Eldritch Blast? Of course, as that’s the main weapon of most Warlocks. I did skip Agonizing Blast though in favor of Repelling Blast, which is way more fun. I also got my raven, so it all worked out.

So, yeah, I think one thing about the current multi-class system is it also opens up some interesting story telling options. My next character, which we’re talking about using the campaign to playtest the upcoming UAs, is going to start as a bard, part of a tavern’s house band, who eventually becomes a paladin of Vengeance. (The party will be based on the image below) I have no idea if there’s a “power build” for a … bardalin?… but it’s the story I want to tell with my character.


----------



## HammerMan (Sep 4, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> would add either prestige class or paragon paths... and either way epic destinies too.



Yes so much we need epic destiny back


----------



## HammerMan (Sep 4, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Nope. This is just sad.
> I think during playtest stacking extra attacks was a rule. But this also felt bad, because then taking single class fighter felt like a trap option.
> I do think however that if it is balanced correctly, it can work.



The solution is give more class features and options so fighters have reasons to stay in the vlass


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 4, 2022)

HammerMan said:


> The solution is give more class features and options so fighters have reasons to stay in the vlass



The A5e Fighter does this. Ditto for the other classes in A5e.


----------



## HammerMan (Sep 4, 2022)

Corinnguard said:


> The A5e Fighter does this. Ditto for the other classes in A5e.



I hope that 1dnd takes some lessons from it then


----------



## tetrasodium (Sep 4, 2022)

I'd like to see more like 3.x with real prerequisites & such that need to be met for the really interesting options rather than just "poof I'm a  sorlockadin now, back to my main class & archetype."

Seeing a minimum 3(or more) levels for a dip  would be nice & seems like a plausible thing for wotc to actually implement.

I'd _love_ to see  a " before or just after you first reach a level in your current class you must tell your GM that you want to take levels in a different class next level & get approval" ie bob reaches sorcerer 4 & wants to take a level of warlock so talks to the gm between games to explain & get approval for the desire to take warloock1 at level 5.


----------



## Osgood (Sep 4, 2022)

The thing is you’ll never come up with a solution that pleases everyone, and WotC is looking for what is simple and appeals to the broadest audience. I don’t foresee it happening, but ideally there would be a simple standard system in the PHB, and some more granular optional alternatives in the DMG for those who want something different (Hybrids, feat-based, etc.).


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 4, 2022)

Sir Brennen said:


> I’m currently playing a sorlock, and I like to make sure the multi-classing game mechanics are supported by the story.
> 
> I told the GM the broad strokes of what I wanted for my character journey. My PC would start as a Shadow sorcerer, who’s power came from a failed ritual where he was to be sacrificed as a young boy. In the process, the tip of a strange dagger was broken off in his chest, and he has a wound that won’t heal. While he develops a few useful magical tricks for his initial career as a gang member in the poorer part of town, he was never comfortable with his powers.
> 
> ...



That's great! It's true that I've met a couple of people who consider the story implications of their pact. I've also seen plenty of people take a level of Warlock for the mechanical power boost without giving a single thought to what it means for their character. (At least beyond acknowledging that they did the deal).

I'm glad that your multiclassing made it into the game in a way that made the overall story richer. That's a fine feature of D&D in general, IMO. Collaborative storytelling is awesome.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 4, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> I'd _love_ to see  a " before or just after you first reach a level in your current class you must tell your GM that you want to take levels in a different class next level & get approval" ie bob reaches sorcerer 4 & wants to take a level of warlock so talks to the gm between games to explain & get approval for the desire to take warloock1 at level 5.




Yes, it would be nice to work into the story some natural reason (and perhaps training, NPC "teachers", etc) for the class change.


----------



## jasper (Sep 4, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> All those solutions are a bit too complicated to implement.
> As an alternate to 3.x style multiclass I would have liked to forfeit subclasses in favour of adding the base of a different class at slower rate.
> And then being able to use feats to either enhance the first class, enhance the second or even add a 3rd.



A lot of the are forgetting that 5E is suppose to be EASY to play Easy to create PCs.


----------



## tetrasodium (Sep 4, 2022)

Osgood said:


> The thing is you’ll never come up with a solution that pleases everyone, and WotC is looking for what is simple and appeals to the broadest audience. I don’t foresee it happening, but ideally there would be a simple standard system in the PHB, and some more granular optional alternatives in the DMG for those who want something different (Hybrids, feat-based, etc.).



The trouble is that 5e took a feature that many many players very much do not consider to be an "_optional_" part of d&d character building & then put only one single set of  multiclassing rules that contain basically no limits or restrictions that a gm might be asked to rule on in a player facing book.  You wind up where the GM needs to overcome "wtf why are you nerfing us" in order to make any decision & just saying no has problems of its own

Placing a couple forms of  MC rules in the DMG & simply noting that _"the DMG contains rules that the GM can decide on which if any multiclassing rules that fit their game or your character"_ or similar would have added room for the GM to actually rule on them & have input on what's right for their table or bob's character


----------



## roger semerad (Sep 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Dual classing.
> 
> 
> you can only have 2 classes.
> ...




While I do have some criticisms for this idea, it does improve the even split multi without needing any additional design work.  So on a work vs. result basis, it's a solid idea.  My largest problem with the idea is that it wouldn't fix the big underlining issue with 5.0's multi-classing.  That being most class level combinations are very underpowered, while a select few are overpowered, with basically no in between.  I do think you pushed the level split about as far as you could, any farther and you'd start having more overpowered options than underpowered ones.  It also feels a little homebrewy, a little hacked together.  Not something I could see being in an official book.



CreamCloud0 said:


> I like the ‘half classes’ approach with supplementary feats
> 
> Your basic power budget has four ‘slots’ but each full class is only worth 3/4 of that and is divided up into distinct thirds, so to fill out that last chunk of power budget you can either take chunks from another class or a prestige class which is designed to fit in that last 1/4 class power budget but is a distinct whole thematic package.
> 
> ...




First off, a character made by rules like this would clearly be more powerful than a 5.0 equivalent.  That would break back compatibility and would be against the stated goals of the One revision.  

That out of the way, as a basis of a multi-class system for a future real edition, this is a bit inspired.  All the multi-class systems for D&D to date really are just subsystems bolted onto a pre-existing game.  Even 4th's initial feat based system still felt like the class design came first and the multi-class system was bolted on after the fact.  Really, the best way to do multi-classing is to bake the necessary power into the class design itself.  Have the system built from the ground up to account for it.  Having an option to take a powerful specialization or instead use that power budget to multi-class is how I'd want it.  I don't know how the system as you describe it would work level by level, but here is one idea from me.  First, the next edition has no 5e style multiclassing.  Everyone picks a single class and at level one you also get to pick a subclass.   These subclasses would be very similar to 5th's, maybe a little more powerful.  Alternatively, you could choose to multi-class and every class entry would have a sub-class variant.  Then somewhere around level 8-12 you get to choose another even more powerful specialization, like the Archmage you mention, or you could choose to improve your multi-class abilities further.

The real beauty of an approach like this is that you could keep the main books simple by not showing the multi-class options, and then release the multi rules in the DMG or even in a later supplement.  



Corinnguard said:


> Here is what one of the Synergy feat trees for A5e looks like:​​BLADECHANTER​Prerequisites: 3 levels in fighter, 3 levels in wizard, Fighting Style (Two-Weapon Fighting)
> 
> Bladechanting is the art of unifying and maintaining intense physical and intellectual strains, allowing movement and thought to become one as a beautiful and deadly dance of blades.
> 
> ...




Is that really all A5E does to improve multi-classing?  I've got to say I'm very unimpressed.  The feats really don't do anything to make multi-classing beyond a few level dips worthwhile, and on top of that burn through your very limited feat/ASI budget significantly.  They're nice flavorful effects in and of themselves, but feel like sacrificing character power for flavor.  In a multi-class system that is already underpowered for most combinations.  If that's it for changes, then I'm really not feeling this one.


----------



## Azzy (Sep 4, 2022)

I'd prefer a gestalt multiclassing similar to that in AD&D.


----------



## CreamCloud0 (Sep 4, 2022)

roger semerad said:


> First off, a character made by rules like this would clearly be more powerful than a 5.0 equivalent. That would break back compatibility and would be against the stated goals of the One revision.
> 
> That out of the way, as a basis of a multi-class system for a future real edition, this is a bit inspired. All the multi-class systems for D&D to date really are just subsystems bolted onto a pre-existing game. Even 4th's initial feat based system still felt like the class design came first and the multi-class system was bolted on after the fact. Really, the best way to do multi-classing is to bake the necessary power into the class design itself. Have the system built from the ground up to account for it. Having an option to take a powerful specialization or instead use that power budget to multi-class is how I'd want it. I don't know how the system as you describe it would work level by level, but here is one idea from me. First, the next edition has no 5e style multiclassing. Everyone picks a single class and at level one you also get to pick a subclass. These subclasses would be very similar to 5th's, maybe a little more powerful. Alternatively, you could choose to multi-class and every class entry would have a sub-class variant. Then somewhere around level 8-12 you get to choose another even more powerful specialization, like the Archmage you mention, or you could choose to improve your multi-class abilities further.
> 
> The real beauty of an approach like this is that you could keep the main books simple by not showing the multi-class options, and then release the multi rules in the DMG or even in a later supplement.



Oh yeah a system like this really wouldn’t be compatible with the existing system, I forgot to account for that and just made ‘my multiclass concept’

Functionally all the base classes progression would get built on a foundation of having things in 3s or 3+x format, a 1st level full 3/3 cleric can use cure wounds 3 times and a 1/3 cleric has 1 use, a 3/3 fighter knows 4(3+1) different manoeuvres, a 1/3 and a 3/3 bard both have 2 uses of inspiration but the 1/3 inspiration gives a +1 while the 3/3 gives a +3, so it’s more a matter of how much or how potent of a class resource you’re getting rather than which parts of it you get.

Subclasses function the same way  just being an extension of base classes, you still get all the features of your subclass if you go 1/3 or 3/3 it’ just a matter of the quantity/quality you’ll get of it.

Prestige classes would be exempt from this 3 based format due to only being able to be taken as a whole.

Considering this entire system is meant to account for multiclassing as integrated into the standard progression the closest thing to a ‘pure track non-multiclass’ character would be a single 3/3 with a thematically appropriate prestige class.


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 4, 2022)

I have a 1e-ish character who "died" becoming a werewolf.

In 5e, this character concept is playable. I can create a feat to add the werewolf mechanics.

The character was an elf magic-user/fighter/thief. Conceptually, he is a magic-user with some gishy capability. I plan on porting this character into 5e. The way I will do it is: high elf Bladesinger Wizard with solid Stealth skill proficiency, plus homebrew Werewolf feat.

Actually, this is how I would do any multiclass. Find the closest class archetype, and finesse other options, if necessary.


----------



## cbwjm (Sep 4, 2022)

gorice said:


> Yeah, PF2e multiclassing and subclasses look great, though I haven't played them. One thing that struck me about them when I first saw them was how well the subclasses let you express different concepts or themes. And, if your concept doesn't work with the existing options (want an Artorias-like armoured fighter with a wolf companion?), you can pinch a feat from another class for a small cost.



Another cool thing about the PF2e system, is that you can add archetypes right at the start to fit a theme. I was looking at an adventure (path?) outline where everyone has some mystic ability so they grant bonus feats to fit the theme. In this case everyone starts with either the druid or wizard archetype. You could do the same with something like the pirate archetype or maybe everyone is working as a watchmen solving crimes so they all get the Investigator achetype. It's a cool system. 

Since OneDnD needs to be backwards compatible, I doubt that there will be any major revision to multiclassing. Perhaps extra attack from the base class will stack like spell slots allowing for a FIghter 2/barbarian 3 to have extra attack. I'm not sure what else would work like that though.


----------



## Lojaan (Sep 4, 2022)

A selection of multiclass feats would be best. I hate the way a metagame one level dip into a class can get you so much more power than actually going up a level. Just encourages cheese.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 5, 2022)

roger semerad said:


> While I do have some criticisms for this idea, it does improve the even split multi without needing any additional design work.  So on a work vs. result basis, it's a solid idea.  My largest problem with the idea is that it wouldn't fix the big underlining issue with 5.0's multi-classing.  That being most class level combinations are very underpowered, while a select few are overpowered, with basically no in between.  I do think you pushed the level split about as far as you could, any farther and you'd start having more overpowered options than underpowered ones.  It also feels a little homebrewy, a little hacked together.  Not something I could see being in an official book.



Well, I wanted to have dual levels on levels 5,11,17 and 20. 
so you get power boost at new tier of play as single classes get, and also at level 20 instead of capstone ability. then, levels 8&14 just fell at halfway mark between 5 to 11 and 11 to 17 perfectly.

also if we use exp table and buy class levels for exp separately(even if we use 2nd class as one level higher as it would be very dumb to buy 1st level of a 2nd class for zero XP) we would get surplus of XP

3rd level 1st class: 900XP
3rd level 2nd class(with +1 level adjustment): 2700 XP
total: 3600XP
XP needed for 5th level of a single class: 6500XP


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Sep 6, 2022)

Frozen_Heart said:


> Or do you think that multiclassing needs to be removed completely?



Yep.  Bathwater and the baby too.  I've never found multiclassing mechanics very satisfactory in ANY edition.  If you want a new class - make a new class.  Stop trying to Frankenstein them together, like crashing two trains into each other hoping that the resulting catastrophe will actually create a nice 4-door luxury sedan, or an airplane.


----------



## Clint_L (Sep 6, 2022)

They aren't getting rid of multi-classing and everything has to be backwards compatible. So, within those parameters are there any improvements to suggest? I think the current system works pretty well, probably the best it ever has.


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 6, 2022)

Man in the Funny Hat said:


> Yep.  Bathwater and the baby too.  I've never found multiclassing mechanics very satisfactory in ANY edition.  If you want a new class - make a new class.  Stop trying to Frankenstein them together, like crashing two trains into each other hoping that the resulting catastrophe will actually create a nice 4-door luxury sedan, or an airplane.



It is a design choice that is a matter of taste, between lumpers and splitters. Lumpers need to have many classes, each one finetuned for a specific character concept. Splitters need to have many discrete options to use them like Lego bricks to construct different kinds of concepts.

5e is somewhere in the middle, where each base class is a lump, but the choice of archetype, skills, feats, and now backgrounds are splits that can customize different concepts.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 6, 2022)

Man in the Funny Hat said:


> Yep.  Bathwater and the baby too.  I've never found multiclassing mechanics very satisfactory in ANY edition.  If you want a new class - make a new class.  Stop trying to Frankenstein them together, like crashing two trains into each other hoping that the resulting catastrophe will actually create a nice 4-door luxury sedan, or an airplane.



to me best way would be that you can just pick spell level rate progression when creating a character, tied with HD.

d12, non caster. can gain sub-class that gives new spell levels every 5 class levels, 
1st level spells at level 2, 
2nd level spells at level 5,
3rd level spells at level 10,
4th level spells at level 15
5th level spells at level 20

d10, half-caster, new spell levels every 4 levels
1st level spells at level 2, 
2nd level spells at level 4,
3rd level spells at level 8,
4th level spells at level 12,
5th level spells at level 16,
6th level spells at level 20,

d8, 2/3 caster, new spell level every 3 levels
1st level spells at level 1, 
2nd level spells at level 3,
3rd level spells at level 6,
4th level spells at level 9,
5th level spells at level 12,
6th level spells at level 15,
7th level spells at level 18,

d6, full caster, new spell levels every 2 levels
1st level spells at level 1, 
2nd level spells at level 2,
3rd level spells at level 4,
4th level spells at level 6,
5th level spells at level 8,
6th level spells at level 10,
7th level spells at level 12,
8th level spells at level 14,
9th level spells at level 16,
10th level spells at level 18,


then just make all abilities at half feat and full feat power levels.

every level you gain a feat or two feats sometimes, you either take;
a feat, 
+2 to any ability(max 20)
+1 to two abilities 
+1 to ability and a half-feat
two half feats

make several classes in PHB with this rule as example or guide how to make a class.
or as default classes for new players to introduce them to the game.


----------

