Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why?
For example, you might change a spellcasters main casting stat between Int, Wis, or Cha, or you might change how a Barbarian's Rage feature works or how Paladins are able to apply Divine Smite
It's not a big thing, but could Barbarians get a Fighting Style early on? Do it like with non-Fighter classes that get one and just give them a limited list of options. Great Weapon Fighting, Interception, Unarmed Combat, maybe Two Weapon Fighting and Blind Fighting?
Secondary question for today, if you could change one fundamental mechanic for a class in the game as part of the conversion from 5e->OneD&D, what would it be and why
Warlocks spell slots tied to proficiency bonus. I'm absolutely fine with them having fewer spell slots, but the current progression is ridiculous for anything about 4th or 5th level.
That would only make Warlock dips even worse. It could scale at the same rate as PB, but not tied directly to PB.
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
It's wierd that you can multiclass, but not multisubclass. Like being a Fighter/Wizard, with totally different skill sets & primary stats is all good, but being a Evoker/Illusionist is out of the question? Really? REALLY???
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
It's wierd that you can multiclass, but not multisubclass. Like being a Fighter/Wizard, with totally different skill sets & primary stats is all good, but being a Evoker/Illusionist is out of the question? Really? REALLY???
I'm fine with MC in general, as long as it fits the RP. The fix for that particular reason to MC is lower levels of Robe of the Archmagi or other AC enhancing items with a caster twist.
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
I think as long as the game is fun for everyone and the player comes up with a significant way to roleplay it, it’s fine. I play in a game with a cleric 1 wizard, and it’s really great because of the story the player told about the character. As a player, I’m fine with others being high in power as long as they don’t step on my toes too much (doing everything my character does but better). As a DM, it can be a little bit hard to manage mechanically at times, but for player conflict issues, I am lucky enough to have a group that takes enjoyment in the success of any player. If it wasn’t fun for someone or it was taken to the extreme, I’d reevaluate, but for now, when I see that kind of minmaxing in my games, it’s a player’s way of showing investment in the game and group success.
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
Yeah, I don't like that stuff. I'm of the opinion that multiclassing should be used way more sparingly than it often is.
The purely mechanical benefits thing is, in my opinion, a disregard for the rules of multiclassing. You're supposed to have a solid reason. You shouldn't be able to make up your own reason out of nowhere and just say "I've decided to be a mostly-atheist (but I still get my god's cool stuff) and now I go to Hogwarts."
For those who are familiar, look at Campaign 2 of Critical Role (Spoiler Alert! [but you should already know that because of the spoiler thing])
Fjord became a Hexadin. What he did not do, however, was say, "I hereby vow to do good things and whatnot on account of literally nothing happening." Nor did he say, "I have located, conversed with, and made a deal with an eldritch entity. When, you ask? Oh, y'know."
What he DID do was rebuke his former patron, go completely without magic for a pretty damned long time (hats off to the player for that), and decide to turn to his Cleric friend's god after having long chats about the subject (and they were henceforth known as the Wildbrothers). Plus, although this is a minor thing, instead of going with an optimal Paladin subclass he made his own, and it completely sucks ass. Mercer is a great DM, but his homebrew is honestly pretty bad.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
Min-Max Play: I know a few Dms who will help set things up for players to totally dive into min-maxing, but in my experience, most folks think of Min-maxing as a scourge that ruins the game and wrecks play. My experience is not universal, however, as evidenced by the large number of players desperate to make the ultimate unstoppable character. Spoiler: as a DM, there is no such thing as an unstoppable, overpowered character, unless it is an NPC.
They get angry when they learn that.
Since multi-classing is optional (and as folks have pointed out, you can't multi-subclass in a game where there are no longer "classes", just subclasses, it absolutely should be possible), and I am an old wicked gal, I enforce some basic rules:
1 - you cannot cross a kind of magic. Each person can only do one kind of magic. For mainline it is Arcane, Divine, and Primal. I tend to think in terms of adding in Eldritch and Mystical, as well, but meh. You can't cross -- in the example, Divine is Cleric and Arcane is izard. You could cross Cleric and Paladin, you could cross Wizard and and some other arcane caster, but you cannot cross those lines between the forms of magic.
2 - No one starts out multiclass, and to do so, you must do it *within the context and during game play* -- that is, during sessions and justified by the sessions and what has happened. and no, "but the monster beat me up and it was trauma" doesn't count.. At least as a basis -- it does count as the spark, but now you have to show the motivation and develop the stuff during the sessions -- and yes, that includes those training montages while your friends run off to delve deeper.
3 - Once you change classes, while you can still access stuff, you can never get better at it. This is especially true for those who are bound to others -- so oaths, patrons, Gods -- they all take such a betrayal as a really serious breach of etiquette and are likely to strip magic away from you.
As for the wizard bit, well -- wearing armor gets in the way of casting spells -- and in my case, in straight 5e, that would mean adding penalties to everything you try to do, not merely saying "oh, you can't cast magic with it on." Nah, I would do a disadvantage and a penalty of 1 on everything. For the most simple of padded armor. Get heavier, and the penalty goes up.
And for those who say it isn't in the rules, I smile and say "you should read them better."
I confess I might have some problems when I start the open game, lol, but I haven't had this stuff in my main game except for once in a great while from the younger folks. The general feel is "if you pick it, that's what you do. if you don't like it, let them die and start a new one."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I had another idea for a fundamental thing to change. Magic items. Current game math assumes no magic items, but let’s be real, people are going to get them. I don’t necessarily want to go back to 4e with its required items of a certain + by a certain level. But at least that system kept things clear. I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I think that’s a part of the reason characters consistently are reported to roll over encounters that should be harder for them. If you’re using a +2 sword, you’re hitting as reliably as someone several levels higher than you are. I like bounded accuracy, but the downside is those extra +1’s really mean a lot.
I had another idea for a fundamental thing to change. Magic items. Current game math assumes no magic items, but let’s be real, people are going to get them. I don’t necessarily want to go back to 4e with its required items of a certain + by a certain level. But at least that system kept things clear. I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I think that’s a part of the reason characters consistently are reported to roll over encounters that should be harder for them. If you’re using a +2 sword, you’re hitting as reliably as someone several levels higher than you are. I like bounded accuracy, but the downside is those extra +1’s really mean a lot.
And if you don't, it makes casters, and those with "counts as magical" attacks, even better than other martials, as resistance to non-magical attacks becomes more & more common. I can't imagine it being fun to play a weapon based character with no magic weapon in T3 or higher.
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
It's not a style of play I have any real interest in
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I dunno. I homebrew a lot of magic items, and plenty of the weapons and armor and such don't actually have a plus at all, just offer other benefits. I don't think some sort of "you will have +1 gear by T2" guidance is needed at all
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
I have no issue with Multiclassing, dipping, or even min-maxing in general, it’s when people do it without any regard to roleplay, or worse yet in spite of proper roleplay that I take exception to it. I have more respect for someone who makes a fun character without min-maxing, but if you can do both then more power to ya.
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
I think multi-classing is an incredibly important part of 5e - often it is the only real choice a character gets after they choose their subclass given the linear nature of progression in 5e.
As for it being used for min maxing, that doesn’t super bother me - as DM, I’ll craft a roleplay reason for the change to occur, even if the decision was for purely min-max reasons, so the story will progress. Granted, I also have a strong compulsion to min-max myself so I am pretty forgiving of that (though I learned long ago min-maxing damage makes everyone else at the table frustrated, so I like to min-max some kind of support role like tanking, being a face, etc.—allows me to feed my compulsion while also making other players feel empowered by my support role).
I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I dunno. I homebrew a lot of magic items, and plenty of the weapons and armor and such don't actually have a plus at all, just offer other benefits. I don't think some sort of "you will have +1 gear by T2" guidance is needed at all
The thing is, lots of folks don’t homebrew items. And the ones that do probably don’t have as much problems balancing their encounters. But when the math assumes no magic, and players have some, it really can throw things off. I guess, I’m conflicted because I really don’t want to go back to the 4e model, I just think the designers should recognize that people will have magic and adjust monster ACs accordingly.
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
I don't really have a problem with multiclassing, as long as it is done without disregard to roleplay. If a wizard wants to have armor and multiclasses into a cleric in order to get that armor, they have to weight longer to get more powerful spells and it seems like a fair trade to me, especially when you realize they could have made a character with good AC using shield and mage armor. If characters multiclass between different spell casters, they might get access to more spells, but they will be sacrificing higher level spells to do so and it seems like a fair trade to me. I would prefer and maybe require that a character multiclasses with roleplay purposes in mind, because otherwise it will get annoying. I had a monk who was blessed by Auril at birth, and was killed and resurrected by Lathander, and he had interacted with Cubby Bear and Tebo who were both deities in that campaign. I realized that he had been influenced by so much divine magic that he would have surely been affected by it in some way, so I mulitclassed that monk one level into divine soul sorcerer. It was a terrible move strategically, and it made it so that I couldn't get a monk ability I really wanted, but it was for story purposes and was fun. I would encourage a player who wants to multiclass in a way that is purely for story purposes and tolerate a player who is doing it to make a strong character, but I would require that character to find some reason to do it.
I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I dunno. I homebrew a lot of magic items, and plenty of the weapons and armor and such don't actually have a plus at all, just offer other benefits. I don't think some sort of "you will have +1 gear by T2" guidance is needed at all
The thing is, lots of folks don’t homebrew items. And the ones that do probably don’t have as much problems balancing their encounters. But when the math assumes no magic, and players have some, it really can throw things off. I guess, I’m conflicted because I really don’t want to go back to the 4e model, I just think the designers should recognize that people will have magic and adjust monster ACs accordingly.
That's extremely campaign dependent though. If you're playing CoS, for instance, magic weapons can be very rare
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
I don't have a problem with multi-classing, but it has to fit the narrative for your character. I tend to look at DnD as a shared narrative experience rather than a pure math exercise, so just MC-ing to math out optimal paths just feels very off to me.
Again, using the campaign I'm currently in, one of our characters is a sorceror. When he started psychically speaking to a major NPC early on (which the rest of us weren't aware of for quite some time), he basically devoted himself to her and rebuilding a previous belief system that was built partly around her. Once that became public knowledge, he switched subclasses to Divine Soul but also took some Cleric as she was now basically his god of worship. for my Barbarian, one of the other NPCs we've encountered is someone who rose to prominence in Marakuran society after starting as a pit fighter. If I choose to, I can multiclass into fighter with her basically acting as my trainer in the finer arts of fighting beyond I AM REALLY ANGRY.
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing?Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
I really like multi-classing, and see no issue with it in my game. Yes, it does allow for a bit more min-maxing. That being said, it makes everything cooler and allows for more creative build options, and optimization can be fun for some groups.
So I personally love multi-classing and allow min-maxing in my games.
It's not a big thing, but could Barbarians get a Fighting Style early on? Do it like with non-Fighter classes that get one and just give them a limited list of options. Great Weapon Fighting, Interception, Unarmed Combat, maybe Two Weapon Fighting and Blind Fighting?
You're right. My naivete and biases were showing again. I really dislike optimizing/min-maxing and didn't take that style of play into consideration.
This makes me wonder -
What do folks thing of Multi-Classing? Especially when people do it to specifically min-max?
Like first level cleric, the rest wizard, for the benefit of being able to wear solid armor? (This is the most common one I've experienced in the games I've either run or been in)
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
It's wierd that you can multiclass, but not multisubclass. Like being a Fighter/Wizard, with totally different skill sets & primary stats is all good, but being a Evoker/Illusionist is out of the question? Really? REALLY???
It's wierd that you can multiclass, but not multisubclass. Like being a Fighter/Wizard, with totally different skill sets & primary stats is all good, but being a Evoker/Illusionist is out of the question? Really? REALLY???
I'm fine with MC in general, as long as it fits the RP. The fix for that particular reason to MC is lower levels of Robe of the Archmagi or other AC enhancing items with a caster twist.
I think as long as the game is fun for everyone and the player comes up with a significant way to roleplay it, it’s fine. I play in a game with a cleric 1 wizard, and it’s really great because of the story the player told about the character. As a player, I’m fine with others being high in power as long as they don’t step on my toes too much (doing everything my character does but better). As a DM, it can be a little bit hard to manage mechanically at times, but for player conflict issues, I am lucky enough to have a group that takes enjoyment in the success of any player. If it wasn’t fun for someone or it was taken to the extreme, I’d reevaluate, but for now, when I see that kind of minmaxing in my games, it’s a player’s way of showing investment in the game and group success.
Only spilt the party if you see something shiny.
Ariendela Sneakerson, Half-elf Rogue (8); Harmony Wolfsbane, Tiefling Bard (10); Agnomally, Gnomish Sorcerer (3); Breeze, Tabaxi Monk (8); Grace, Dragonborn Barbarian (7); DM, Homebrew- The Sequestered Lands/Underwater Explorers; Candlekeep
Yeah, I don't like that stuff. I'm of the opinion that multiclassing should be used way more sparingly than it often is.
The purely mechanical benefits thing is, in my opinion, a disregard for the rules of multiclassing. You're supposed to have a solid reason. You shouldn't be able to make up your own reason out of nowhere and just say "I've decided to be a mostly-atheist (but I still get my god's cool stuff) and now I go to Hogwarts."
For those who are familiar, look at Campaign 2 of Critical Role (Spoiler Alert! [but you should already know that because of the spoiler thing])
Fjord became a Hexadin. What he did not do, however, was say, "I hereby vow to do good things and whatnot on account of literally nothing happening." Nor did he say, "I have located, conversed with, and made a deal with an eldritch entity. When, you ask? Oh, y'know."
What he DID do was rebuke his former patron, go completely without magic for a pretty damned long time (hats off to the player for that), and decide to turn to his Cleric friend's god after having long chats about the subject (and they were henceforth known as the Wildbrothers). Plus, although this is a minor thing, instead of going with an optimal Paladin subclass he made his own, and it completely sucks ass. Mercer is a great DM, but his homebrew is honestly pretty bad.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Min-Max Play: I know a few Dms who will help set things up for players to totally dive into min-maxing, but in my experience, most folks think of Min-maxing as a scourge that ruins the game and wrecks play. My experience is not universal, however, as evidenced by the large number of players desperate to make the ultimate unstoppable character. Spoiler: as a DM, there is no such thing as an unstoppable, overpowered character, unless it is an NPC.
They get angry when they learn that.
Since multi-classing is optional (and as folks have pointed out, you can't multi-subclass in a game where there are no longer "classes", just subclasses, it absolutely should be possible), and I am an old wicked gal, I enforce some basic rules:
1 - you cannot cross a kind of magic. Each person can only do one kind of magic. For mainline it is Arcane, Divine, and Primal. I tend to think in terms of adding in Eldritch and Mystical, as well, but meh. You can't cross -- in the example, Divine is Cleric and Arcane is izard. You could cross Cleric and Paladin, you could cross Wizard and and some other arcane caster, but you cannot cross those lines between the forms of magic.
2 - No one starts out multiclass, and to do so, you must do it *within the context and during game play* -- that is, during sessions and justified by the sessions and what has happened. and no, "but the monster beat me up and it was trauma" doesn't count.. At least as a basis -- it does count as the spark, but now you have to show the motivation and develop the stuff during the sessions -- and yes, that includes those training montages while your friends run off to delve deeper.
3 - Once you change classes, while you can still access stuff, you can never get better at it. This is especially true for those who are bound to others -- so oaths, patrons, Gods -- they all take such a betrayal as a really serious breach of etiquette and are likely to strip magic away from you.
As for the wizard bit, well -- wearing armor gets in the way of casting spells -- and in my case, in straight 5e, that would mean adding penalties to everything you try to do, not merely saying "oh, you can't cast magic with it on." Nah, I would do a disadvantage and a penalty of 1 on everything. For the most simple of padded armor. Get heavier, and the penalty goes up.
And for those who say it isn't in the rules, I smile and say "you should read them better."
I confess I might have some problems when I start the open game, lol, but I haven't had this stuff in my main game except for once in a great while from the younger folks. The general feel is "if you pick it, that's what you do. if you don't like it, let them die and start a new one."
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I had another idea for a fundamental thing to change. Magic items. Current game math assumes no magic items, but let’s be real, people are going to get them. I don’t necessarily want to go back to 4e with its required items of a certain + by a certain level. But at least that system kept things clear. I think items should be built in to some extent, and explained clearly to DMs that players will have, for example +1 when they’re in T2.
I think that’s a part of the reason characters consistently are reported to roll over encounters that should be harder for them. If you’re using a +2 sword, you’re hitting as reliably as someone several levels higher than you are. I like bounded accuracy, but the downside is those extra +1’s really mean a lot.
And if you don't, it makes casters, and those with "counts as magical" attacks, even better than other martials, as resistance to non-magical attacks becomes more & more common. I can't imagine it being fun to play a weapon based character with no magic weapon in T3 or higher.
It's not a style of play I have any real interest in
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I dunno. I homebrew a lot of magic items, and plenty of the weapons and armor and such don't actually have a plus at all, just offer other benefits. I don't think some sort of "you will have +1 gear by T2" guidance is needed at all
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I have no issue with Multiclassing, dipping, or even min-maxing in general, it’s when people do it without any regard to roleplay, or worse yet in spite of proper roleplay that I take exception to it. I have more respect for someone who makes a fun character without min-maxing, but if you can do both then more power to ya.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think multi-classing is an incredibly important part of 5e - often it is the only real choice a character gets after they choose their subclass given the linear nature of progression in 5e.
As for it being used for min maxing, that doesn’t super bother me - as DM, I’ll craft a roleplay reason for the change to occur, even if the decision was for purely min-max reasons, so the story will progress. Granted, I also have a strong compulsion to min-max myself so I am pretty forgiving of that (though I learned long ago min-maxing damage makes everyone else at the table frustrated, so I like to min-max some kind of support role like tanking, being a face, etc.—allows me to feed my compulsion while also making other players feel empowered by my support role).
The thing is, lots of folks don’t homebrew items. And the ones that do probably don’t have as much problems balancing their encounters. But when the math assumes no magic, and players have some, it really can throw things off. I guess, I’m conflicted because I really don’t want to go back to the 4e model, I just think the designers should recognize that people will have magic and adjust monster ACs accordingly.
I don't really have a problem with multiclassing, as long as it is done without disregard to roleplay. If a wizard wants to have armor and multiclasses into a cleric in order to get that armor, they have to weight longer to get more powerful spells and it seems like a fair trade to me, especially when you realize they could have made a character with good AC using shield and mage armor. If characters multiclass between different spell casters, they might get access to more spells, but they will be sacrificing higher level spells to do so and it seems like a fair trade to me. I would prefer and maybe require that a character multiclasses with roleplay purposes in mind, because otherwise it will get annoying. I had a monk who was blessed by Auril at birth, and was killed and resurrected by Lathander, and he had interacted with Cubby Bear and Tebo who were both deities in that campaign. I realized that he had been influenced by so much divine magic that he would have surely been affected by it in some way, so I mulitclassed that monk one level into divine soul sorcerer. It was a terrible move strategically, and it made it so that I couldn't get a monk ability I really wanted, but it was for story purposes and was fun. I would encourage a player who wants to multiclass in a way that is purely for story purposes and tolerate a player who is doing it to make a strong character, but I would require that character to find some reason to do it.
That's extremely campaign dependent though. If you're playing CoS, for instance, magic weapons can be very rare
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I don't have a problem with multi-classing, but it has to fit the narrative for your character. I tend to look at DnD as a shared narrative experience rather than a pure math exercise, so just MC-ing to math out optimal paths just feels very off to me.
Again, using the campaign I'm currently in, one of our characters is a sorceror. When he started psychically speaking to a major NPC early on (which the rest of us weren't aware of for quite some time), he basically devoted himself to her and rebuilding a previous belief system that was built partly around her. Once that became public knowledge, he switched subclasses to Divine Soul but also took some Cleric as she was now basically his god of worship. for my Barbarian, one of the other NPCs we've encountered is someone who rose to prominence in Marakuran society after starting as a pit fighter. If I choose to, I can multiclass into fighter with her basically acting as my trainer in the finer arts of fighting beyond I AM REALLY ANGRY.
They are =)
Picking up a dropped weapon having no cost and getting up from prone having negligible cost.
In my games picking up a dropped weapon costs an action, and getting up from prone costs your action or all of your movement.
Barbarian rage requiring an attack to maintain can be a bummer. The bad guys just need to kite the barb out of his rage.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I really like multi-classing, and see no issue with it in my game. Yes, it does allow for a bit more min-maxing. That being said, it makes everything cooler and allows for more creative build options, and optimization can be fun for some groups.
So I personally love multi-classing and allow min-maxing in my games.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.