Hey, I'm a new DM/GM to D&D. My players and myself are in a heated debate for which Multi-Classing Rules should be applied to our gaming sessions.
Long story short, our sessions usually meet up 2 to 3 times a week with a max of 5 players but on the regular I have 3 participating players. 1 of which is always on his phone being melancholy (smh).
The debate is whether or not a player should be allowed to receive separate leveling milestones for separate class trees while Multi-Classing. For example, a lvl. 6 Sorceress wants to Multi-Class Fighter. The Sorceress would attain level 1 in the FIGHTER tree by reaching level 7. She expends Lvl 7 Sorceress in order to become level 6 in SORCERESS and Lvl 1 in FIGHTER, that's the norm. But here's where the debate becomes heated. From then on any time the Sorceress gains experience points she can reach level 2 in the FIGHTER tree by using a LVL 2 milestone instead of a LVL 8 milestone for both classes combined.
Not to mention she gains the bonus health benefit for FIGHTER not to mention Proficiency Bonuses and skills as well. I inform her I will not tolerate this form of play.
In my case, it makes the team more flexible allowing them to defeat enemies, both weak and strong, too easily by using traits/skills available from both classes while smurfing the weaker class with exp. (I feel) it doesn't rightly deserve.
Also I'm not against players running through the campaign or dungeons with ease, more power to them. But the game becomes game-breaking when I have to sit there and adjust encounters pre-determined to their respective levels from pre-determined rulings. I've already reduced the level cap and made earned exp. more rewarding to feel fresh and fun when players play.
My players (The Sorceress in particular) are complaining about my strict ruling provided by the PHB. She obstinately demands I allow herself and other players to enjoy the flexibility this HOMEBREW leveling system will bring against my best wishes.
I'd like to hear from the Forum, from both Players and DM's alike both Rookie and Experienced to RPG's, Gaming and D&D alike. I don't want to ruin my players fun but I don't want them to feel as if the world isn't dangerous or their characters can't be destroyed.
Now that I reread my Thread I see there are ways for me to "adjust" mutli-classing where it is fair to both players and myself while allowing the game to become more Homebrew and FUN especially.
Thank you for any insight, experiences and wisdom you guys can give me. It's appreciated.
SInce you are new to DM'ing D&D, I'd strongly encourage you to stick to the official rules until you get some experience. Are your players also new to D&D or at least to 5e? Have they played another system that works this way? I'm puzzled by their insistence on a homebrew system that is so vastly different that the runes. As DM, you are arbiter of the rules, and well within your rights to insist on the official multi-class rules. If they don't find that acceptable, they can find another game/table.
I'm also concerned that this will only be first of many changes to the rules they insist on.
Yes we all are new to playing D&D, as players and myself as a DM. I happened to have played underneath an experienced DM during the summer months when time allowed. I'm at least 10 years older than my players and have 15 years of RPG experience over them. I understand where two of my players are coming from pertaining to our limited table meetings and why they want Multi-classing to be Homebrew. The two players compare D&D to online MMO's similar to WoW and constantly tell me the mechanics of multi-classing in that game.
In short, I informed them how multi-classing in such a Homebrew way breaks the mechanics of the game. It allows the players to attain HP akin to levels higher than themselves, it allows the players ridiculous amounts of flexibility in both combat and roleplaying while it nerfs other players and the environment directly.
My two trouble-makers, who'm I love, are very hard headed and threaten me with leaving the game since they find the rulings to be "stupid". I've been juggling around in my head how to accommodate them but it's very hard to. I don't wanna lose them but if I need to leave and go play with other groups then so be it.
I'm doubtful that they can be accommodated without wrecking the game, or at least playing something that isn't really DnD. What else are they going to want to change? How many more times are they going to threaten to leave if you don't give in?
I'd encourage you to calmly respond to their demands with statements like "This is not an MMO, this D&D, and it works differently." "This is D&D, not [insert name of cited MMO]." "If you want to play [MMO], you are welcome to do so on your own time, but that's not what I agreed to when we started. I agreed to play D&D." If they leave, they leave. Hopefully you can find enough other players to keep a table going, or find another group.
None of this means you don't love them; it's about setting and respecting boundaries, and about respecting that D&D is not these other games. Yes, homebrewing/house ruling D&D is common and even encouraged, but it's really best to give the official rules a good try first. Plus, your instincts (which I believe are right on) are telling you that what they want is game breaking. Pay attention to those.
If they want to have each class have its own xp, the. They will never gain feats/ability score improvements, or increase their proficiency. Yes they will gain hitpoints, and a bunch of first level abilities... but single class characters will outclass them.
My group... in all our games now, are just doing milestone levels... makes planning sessions way easier, and removes one bit of note keeping. If they protest doing that, just say it is how Critical Role does it, and they seem to be enjoying it.
D&D 5e is often stated to be a game of rulings over rules. About giving the DM the authority they need to make whatever decisions works for that DM's group, regardless of the rules.
As a new DM, I fully understand the desire to stick to the rules, and the rules do make sense regarding multiclassing. As a relatively new DM myself, having taken that role early this year, I've similarly stuck to predetermined adventures to get my feet under me. That said, highest priority is not following the rules but that everyone at the table has fun. I'd argue that the DM is not the arbiter of the rules but arbiter of the table, an important distinction when it's the rules getting in the way of enjoyment. Now, I don't admit to having a full grasp of your situation since the other side of this argument is not present, but the way I see it you have three options, with possible consequences for each:
1. Rule-Abiding
Stick to the rules, but take the time to better explain your position. Don't restate the same argument, try a different approach. For example, explain to the player that neither the sorceress or the fighter are leveling up, but the character is leveling up. Each time Jane Doe levels up, she can pick a Class level as her reward. If Jane Doe is at level 6, and picks 6 levels of Sorcerer, she's a 6th level character, with 6 levels in Sorcerer. When Jane Doe levels up to 7, she can instead pick a level in Fighter, becoming a 7th level character, with 6 levels in Sorcerer and 1 level in Fighter. Now, her Fighter is not leveling up or gaining experience, the character is. So the 7th level character must become an 8th level character for her to be able to take a 2nd level in Fighter. Experience increases your character level, not your class level. Perhaps it'd be better to think of class levels as labeled differently, such as a 7th level character having 6 ranks in Sorcerer and 1 rank in Fighter. That is how the rules as written works. They work well, they make sense, and they make sure everyone at the table is on a level playing field.
The consequence is that you may lose some players over it, which could domino effect the whole table away depending on your group's disposition or size. Worse still, in my opinion, bad feelings over a game may spill out into your relationships outside of that game. Hopefully that wouldn't happen, but hearing your argument and the description of the other players, it comes across to me as if both parties are high emotion and have personal stakes in their side. I'd definitely recommend that you try to divorce yourself from that, as an impartial, neutral stance will have a better chance of success.
2. Table-abiding
You give the players what they want, or whatever compromise both parties agree to. If you're using D&D Beyond tools, I'd recommend switching to Milestone, keep tabs on what experience they're accumulating and let them know when they've accumulated enough to gain a level in their lower-leveled class. As long as the rest of the table is in agreement that this is what they want, then it's ultimately a small change to the rules for the sake of enjoyment.
The consequence may be to your own enjoyment, as the DM. If your enjoyment is specifically that you want to stick to the rules, then I'd really recommend you take a deep look at that. In my experience, the 'rules lawyer' type burns out quickly, and can burn those around them too. Otherwise, you will also have to consider what encounters and the like that are set before the group, and adjust accordingly. There are ways to keep the game challenging but capable of being overcome by all the players, regardless of the fact that one will become over-powered. It might not be easy for a new DM, I'm not sure if I'd succeed at it myself right away, and that may detract from the overall table's enjoyment as well. Or maybe it won't, maybe they want it to be easy. Everybody comes into this game wanting something a little bit different than everyone else, and none of it is wrong, just perhaps not right for the overall group.
3. Something Else Entirely
Sidestep the issue, and switch to milestone leveling, if everyone at the table agrees with it. Each time the group achieves something noteworthy or overcomes a particular challenge, the entire group gains a level, wherever they choose to do so. No experience points whatsoever. Nobody gains a level faster or slower than anyone else, and every level up is tied to an accomplishment or success, hopefully lending to positive feedback.
The possible consequence is the same as the first option, if your players decide not to go along with it and so leave.
It's a tough call, and it's entirely up to you which you go with. You're more familiar with your group and what they'd be willing or unwilling to accept than any of us. What I would really recommend however, is that you approach this situation from an impartial viewpoint. You are not wrong about the rules, but you are not right either. There is no right or wrong when it comes to rules vs homebrew, there is only what works for the group. Unless these players are disruptive to the rest of the table or to your own enjoyment of the game, it's better to resolve the issue than to hold to your opposing views.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey, I'm a new DM/GM to D&D. My players and myself are in a heated debate for which Multi-Classing Rules should be applied to our gaming sessions.
Long story short, our sessions usually meet up 2 to 3 times a week with a max of 5 players but on the regular I have 3 participating players. 1 of which is always on his phone being melancholy (smh).
The debate is whether or not a player should be allowed to receive separate leveling milestones for separate class trees while Multi-Classing. For example, a lvl. 6 Sorceress wants to Multi-Class Fighter. The Sorceress would attain level 1 in the FIGHTER tree by reaching level 7. She expends Lvl 7 Sorceress in order to become level 6 in SORCERESS and Lvl 1 in FIGHTER, that's the norm. But here's where the debate becomes heated. From then on any time the Sorceress gains experience points she can reach level 2 in the FIGHTER tree by using a LVL 2 milestone instead of a LVL 8 milestone for both classes combined.
Not to mention she gains the bonus health benefit for FIGHTER not to mention Proficiency Bonuses and skills as well. I inform her I will not tolerate this form of play.
In my case, it makes the team more flexible allowing them to defeat enemies, both weak and strong, too easily by using traits/skills available from both classes while smurfing the weaker class with exp. (I feel) it doesn't rightly deserve.
Also I'm not against players running through the campaign or dungeons with ease, more power to them. But the game becomes game-breaking when I have to sit there and adjust encounters pre-determined to their respective levels from pre-determined rulings. I've already reduced the level cap and made earned exp. more rewarding to feel fresh and fun when players play.
My players (The Sorceress in particular) are complaining about my strict ruling provided by the PHB. She obstinately demands I allow herself and other players to enjoy the flexibility this HOMEBREW leveling system will bring against my best wishes.
I'd like to hear from the Forum, from both Players and DM's alike both Rookie and Experienced to RPG's, Gaming and D&D alike. I don't want to ruin my players fun but I don't want them to feel as if the world isn't dangerous or their characters can't be destroyed.
Now that I reread my Thread I see there are ways for me to "adjust" mutli-classing where it is fair to both players and myself while allowing the game to become more Homebrew and FUN especially.
Thank you for any insight, experiences and wisdom you guys can give me. It's appreciated.
SInce you are new to DM'ing D&D, I'd strongly encourage you to stick to the official rules until you get some experience. Are your players also new to D&D or at least to 5e? Have they played another system that works this way? I'm puzzled by their insistence on a homebrew system that is so vastly different that the runes. As DM, you are arbiter of the rules, and well within your rights to insist on the official multi-class rules. If they don't find that acceptable, they can find another game/table.
I'm also concerned that this will only be first of many changes to the rules they insist on.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Yes we all are new to playing D&D, as players and myself as a DM. I happened to have played underneath an experienced DM during the summer months when time allowed. I'm at least 10 years older than my players and have 15 years of RPG experience over them. I understand where two of my players are coming from pertaining to our limited table meetings and why they want Multi-classing to be Homebrew. The two players compare D&D to online MMO's similar to WoW and constantly tell me the mechanics of multi-classing in that game.
In short, I informed them how multi-classing in such a Homebrew way breaks the mechanics of the game. It allows the players to attain HP akin to levels higher than themselves, it allows the players ridiculous amounts of flexibility in both combat and roleplaying while it nerfs other players and the environment directly.
My two trouble-makers, who'm I love, are very hard headed and threaten me with leaving the game since they find the rulings to be "stupid". I've been juggling around in my head how to accommodate them but it's very hard to. I don't wanna lose them but if I need to leave and go play with other groups then so be it.
Thanks for your reply :)
I'm doubtful that they can be accommodated without wrecking the game, or at least playing something that isn't really DnD. What else are they going to want to change? How many more times are they going to threaten to leave if you don't give in?
I'd encourage you to calmly respond to their demands with statements like "This is not an MMO, this D&D, and it works differently." "This is D&D, not [insert name of cited MMO]." "If you want to play [MMO], you are welcome to do so on your own time, but that's not what I agreed to when we started. I agreed to play D&D." If they leave, they leave. Hopefully you can find enough other players to keep a table going, or find another group.
None of this means you don't love them; it's about setting and respecting boundaries, and about respecting that D&D is not these other games. Yes, homebrewing/house ruling D&D is common and even encouraged, but it's really best to give the official rules a good try first. Plus, your instincts (which I believe are right on) are telling you that what they want is game breaking. Pay attention to those.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
If they want to have each class have its own xp, the. They will never gain feats/ability score improvements, or increase their proficiency. Yes they will gain hitpoints, and a bunch of first level abilities... but single class characters will outclass them.
My group... in all our games now, are just doing milestone levels... makes planning sessions way easier, and removes one bit of note keeping. If they protest doing that, just say it is how Critical Role does it, and they seem to be enjoying it.
D&D 5e is often stated to be a game of rulings over rules. About giving the DM the authority they need to make whatever decisions works for that DM's group, regardless of the rules.
As a new DM, I fully understand the desire to stick to the rules, and the rules do make sense regarding multiclassing. As a relatively new DM myself, having taken that role early this year, I've similarly stuck to predetermined adventures to get my feet under me. That said, highest priority is not following the rules but that everyone at the table has fun. I'd argue that the DM is not the arbiter of the rules but arbiter of the table, an important distinction when it's the rules getting in the way of enjoyment. Now, I don't admit to having a full grasp of your situation since the other side of this argument is not present, but the way I see it you have three options, with possible consequences for each:
1. Rule-Abiding
Stick to the rules, but take the time to better explain your position. Don't restate the same argument, try a different approach. For example, explain to the player that neither the sorceress or the fighter are leveling up, but the character is leveling up. Each time Jane Doe levels up, she can pick a Class level as her reward. If Jane Doe is at level 6, and picks 6 levels of Sorcerer, she's a 6th level character, with 6 levels in Sorcerer. When Jane Doe levels up to 7, she can instead pick a level in Fighter, becoming a 7th level character, with 6 levels in Sorcerer and 1 level in Fighter. Now, her Fighter is not leveling up or gaining experience, the character is. So the 7th level character must become an 8th level character for her to be able to take a 2nd level in Fighter. Experience increases your character level, not your class level. Perhaps it'd be better to think of class levels as labeled differently, such as a 7th level character having 6 ranks in Sorcerer and 1 rank in Fighter. That is how the rules as written works. They work well, they make sense, and they make sure everyone at the table is on a level playing field.
The consequence is that you may lose some players over it, which could domino effect the whole table away depending on your group's disposition or size. Worse still, in my opinion, bad feelings over a game may spill out into your relationships outside of that game. Hopefully that wouldn't happen, but hearing your argument and the description of the other players, it comes across to me as if both parties are high emotion and have personal stakes in their side. I'd definitely recommend that you try to divorce yourself from that, as an impartial, neutral stance will have a better chance of success.
2. Table-abiding
You give the players what they want, or whatever compromise both parties agree to. If you're using D&D Beyond tools, I'd recommend switching to Milestone, keep tabs on what experience they're accumulating and let them know when they've accumulated enough to gain a level in their lower-leveled class. As long as the rest of the table is in agreement that this is what they want, then it's ultimately a small change to the rules for the sake of enjoyment.
The consequence may be to your own enjoyment, as the DM. If your enjoyment is specifically that you want to stick to the rules, then I'd really recommend you take a deep look at that. In my experience, the 'rules lawyer' type burns out quickly, and can burn those around them too. Otherwise, you will also have to consider what encounters and the like that are set before the group, and adjust accordingly. There are ways to keep the game challenging but capable of being overcome by all the players, regardless of the fact that one will become over-powered. It might not be easy for a new DM, I'm not sure if I'd succeed at it myself right away, and that may detract from the overall table's enjoyment as well. Or maybe it won't, maybe they want it to be easy. Everybody comes into this game wanting something a little bit different than everyone else, and none of it is wrong, just perhaps not right for the overall group.
3. Something Else Entirely
Sidestep the issue, and switch to milestone leveling, if everyone at the table agrees with it. Each time the group achieves something noteworthy or overcomes a particular challenge, the entire group gains a level, wherever they choose to do so. No experience points whatsoever. Nobody gains a level faster or slower than anyone else, and every level up is tied to an accomplishment or success, hopefully lending to positive feedback.
The possible consequence is the same as the first option, if your players decide not to go along with it and so leave.
It's a tough call, and it's entirely up to you which you go with. You're more familiar with your group and what they'd be willing or unwilling to accept than any of us. What I would really recommend however, is that you approach this situation from an impartial viewpoint. You are not wrong about the rules, but you are not right either. There is no right or wrong when it comes to rules vs homebrew, there is only what works for the group. Unless these players are disruptive to the rest of the table or to your own enjoyment of the game, it's better to resolve the issue than to hold to your opposing views.