Heya! I play a paladin and my party just leveled up from 5 to 6. The barbarian AND wizard both took a level in fighter (ranger and and I took our respective 6th levels.)
Ranger is now getting keen on taking a level in rouge and I've been toying with crossing my gnome paladin w a level in bard or forge cleric buuut I may just stick straight ahead w pally.
Do you have any multiclassing regrets or multiclassing stories in general you'd like to share??
I mean, level 7 is when you'll get you Oath specific aura, which may be pretty impactful. Also you'll get another spell slot for smiting. You'd really have to decide if any benefits you get from an multiclass at that point would outweigh those bonuses.
Personally, I find the majority of times I've considered multiclassing it will hurt the build rather than helping. There have been times where I found if I just hold out, I can take a feat or something that helps me get what I'd really be looking for out the multiclass, without effecting the progression.
Aura of Protection and the 7th level subclass feature are both really good. Honestly, Paladin is one class where I feel it gets extremely good stuff every time it levels up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Aura of Protection and the 7th level subclass feature are both really good. Honestly, Paladin is one class where I feel it gets extremely good stuff every time it levels up.
The Fedrat is correct. Paladin is rather nice to just level and not worry about multi-classing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I have played a Multi-Class once in a One-Shot and have also played in sessions with others that were playing Multi-Class Characters, and both playing and observing, I noticed the same thing.
The Multi-Class Player is left behind a bit, and I'll explain what I mean by that.
Each time the DM told the group they could level up, each player add the level and discuss the new abilities they gained. But as each player gained new abilities, the Multi-Class character would not gain them at the same time as their levels are divided up. So at level 4 when each player was happy to pick their first Feat, the Multi- Class player was a few levels away from being able to do so. As casters gained access to new level spells, the Multi-Class character was a few levels behind again.
Now, as the characters leveled, the Multi-Class would ALWAYS be behind in level and power of spells.
This of course was offset by the ability to do other things that the 2nd class brought to the table, but that 2nd class is behind everyone else as well.
I have not played a maxed out Multi-Class character, but know that depending on how the player divided up their levels they will not gain their final abilities as they can never get the character to the level requirement.
With all of that said, I think playing a Multi-Class character in one-shots gives you the ability to experiment with different combos without having to invest in a character that you might regret creating in a longer campaign that you are locked into.
Cheers!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty. Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers; Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas. Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
I have found that unless a build is designed from level one to multiclass (and in those scenarios multiclassing can be very broken), it usually doesn’t work as well when you multiclass. I’ve played a good number of characters and those that multiclassed were always under the power threshold for that level and fell behind other characters. Paladin is a great class to multiclass into, but unless you plan to totally switch focus and ignore paladin, I don’t recommend multiclassing out of it.
My DM doesn’t allow multiclassing so for me I have no choice. But I would MC in some situations if I could.
In your situation it depends on what you would find more fun. Is there a concept or idea you are shooting for with the MC? Or is it just because the other players are doing it? Do you play at an optimized table where a misstep in MC may really hurt? Then I probably wouldn’t.
And I agree with some others that levels 6 and 7 in Paladin is very good so that may hurt delaying those. And depending on how far your campaign goes, and how far you MC, you may never see them.
I agree with the sentiment that you should decide based on which seems more fun to you. It's not like bard is a bad combo with paladin - you will get spell slots at an accelerated rate, you can get some very handy ranged/utility spells that fill some holes in what straight paladins can do, and you can inspire your allies. I wouldn't be worried about falling behind your allies if your wizard is dipping into fighter.
When you play a character from level 1, it can start to feel stale after 5-6 levels. An MC can really shake things up and give you some new options both inside and outside of combat. If you think this would make your character more fun or interesting to play, then you should do it. If you're just considering it because everyone else is doing it, I'd probably just stay paladin.
It also depends if the multi-class is a dip or changing to a new class going forward. Your wizard friend is unlikely to pick up a sword and start slicing monsters rather than using firebolt (Blade Dancer not withstanding). But a dip for Medium Armour, shields and a bonus action heal per short rest would make sense. However we do know it will be two levels for Action Surge. It would be unlikely that the wizard would take a third level for a subcass as this would put them to far behind in the power level of their wizard relative to non multi-class characters.
We did start from lvl1 and my character is a rock gnome paladin so min/maxing isn't our table's focus. (His pic is my profile pic). He's an LG Oath of Glory who believes whole heartedly that the rest of his very Neutral party are destined for glorious deeds of heroism.
After taking this all in I feel it's best to just chill and stay Pally through and though.
Late to the party but adding my 3 cents anyway. I like multiclassing but the others are correct - multiclassing without a solid reason and plan is always a mistake. Then there are two common reasons folks multiclass. 1) the 1 or two level dip to get things like action surge or cantrips and a L1 spell or three. Action surge lets the casters cast leveled spells twice in a round (once) and the fighter dip grants armor use as well which is also nice. Rangers etc don’t get cantrips so a dip into something like sorceror or warlock to get a suite of cantrips and access to some vocation magic can be usefull. Given that few campaigns actually reach L20 ( or even go past L12) worrying about staying true to your class to get those high level benefits doesn’t really make sense and getting the benefits of a dip can when done right. 2) role plays character ideas - like ninjas- can call for a multiclass in order to get access to everything you think the idea should have (ninja=ranger/rogue/monk hybrid). Here you have to do very careful planning in order to actually get the feel correct. Doing this is generally harder than min maxing a single class.
Well, power benefits aside, ;-) does the second class make sense from a roleplaying aspect? How and why did that Paladin learn/train to become a bard?
This, MC is 90% meta gaming and drives me nutz. When my players want to MC, give me a reason, tell me the story of your chr and why they are a wiz/rog/fighter/bard/warlock and it better not start with "I want hex".
Orphan growing up on the streets who was discovered by a Mage and taught to be a brilliant spell caster? Ok Wiz/rog I can buy that. Fighter who has seen war over and over wants to serve a higher cause and heal not always take life? Ok fighter/cleric have at it.
You want to watch the practice of MC'ing drop off cliff? Have all Subclasses, for all classes, not kick in until 3rd level (6e might be doing this). Also, impose a house rule that there can never be more than a 1 level gap between the 2 (or more) classes, unless the 2nd class was picked up after the PC had gained 3rd or higher level in a class. In that case, the PC MUST train subsequent levels in the new class until the classes are equal in level.
You want to watch multiclassing drop off a cliff? Don't allow it. If you're going to make it difficult enough that nobody wants to do it, just... don't allow it.
There's two reasons people multiclass:
Because it fits their character concept, either initial or as developed in-play
Because they think it makes their character more effective
A combination of the two
Despite internet discussion, #1 is way more common than #2, and #3 is likely more common than pure #2.
Of course, in actual play, "more effective" is subjective. I have one (1) person multiclassing in my current game, and it was done to be "more effective", and it's the infamous hexblade warlock dip. (By "more effective" I mean "they wanted better weapon and armor options".)
And... it's just not that big a deal. I'm not actually sure why they did it, but it works thematically in the game, and gives a character with complex supernatural entanglements even more of them, so I don't care.
Of course, the wise Gygax forsaw that problem of OP PC's doing class dips decades ago, and stated that the primary stat in the new class had to be at least a 17. The wise one also stated that if a PC used ANY of the abilities of the original class before the new class had the same levels of experience as the original class, no experience was gained in the new class for that session. It is an elegant solution.
We shall ignore for the moment the weird Gygax veneration.
The concerns of AD&D multiclassing are completely different from those in 5e, because leveling in AD&D was unbounded. You paid for you other class levels only in time. In 5e, each multiclass level is a level you will never get in your original class.
And, from a game design perspective, AD&D multiclassing isn't elegant. It's so far from elegant that you can't even see "somewhat aesthetically pleasing" from where it is.
Multiclassing at all breaks the class system's paradigm. If the class system's too restrictive, revise the class system; don't stick a patch on it.
It's not even one system. It's two separate systems, which sort-of-but-not-really solve two separate problems (high-level characters' drop-off in power scaling, and non-humans' running out of steam because of level caps)
Stat-gating a mechanic that increases character power in a randomly-generated stat system is actively bad design. It makes the rich get richer.
Now, I'm willing to give the people who made D&D a fair amount of slack; they were inventing a new genre of game from scratch.
But I'm not going to say their bad design choices were good.
Well, power benefits aside, ;-) does the second class make sense from a roleplaying aspect? How and why did that Paladin learn/train to become a bard?
This, MC is 90% meta gaming and drives me nutz. When my players want to MC, give me a reason, tell me the story of your chr and why they are a wiz/rog/fighter/bard/warlock and it better not start with "I want hex".
Orphan growing up on the streets who was discovered by a Mage and taught to be a brilliant spell caster? Ok Wiz/rog I can buy that. Fighter who has seen war over and over wants to serve a higher cause and heal not always take life? Ok fighter/cleric have at it.
You want to watch the practice of MC'ing drop off cliff? Have all Subclasses, for all classes, not kick in until 3rd level (6e might be doing this). Also, impose a house rule that there can never be more than a 1 level gap between the 2 (or more) classes, unless the 2nd class was picked up after the PC had gained 3rd or higher level in a class. In that case, the PC MUST train subsequent levels in the new class until the classes are equal in level.
Of course, the wise Gygax forsaw that problem of OP PC's doing class dips decades ago, and stated that the primary stat in the new class had to be at least a 17. The wise one also stated that if a PC used ANY of the abilities of the original class before the new class had the same levels of experience as the original class, no experience was gained in the new class for that session. It is an elegant solution.
You talking multiclassing? I don’t recall any such rule in1e AD&D. Sounds more like you mean Dual classing (you left the initial class behind and only were the new class until levels were equal then you could use both classes, from what I remember) that humans could do as they were not allowed to multiclass. Only Demi-humans could MC and they were restricted by level caps. An Elven Fighter/Magic-User took XP gained and divided it equally between the two classes. Since Fighters and MU leveling tables were different you could have a Fighter 4/Magic-User 2 because MU leveled much slower (numbers just an example, may be off). So by their very nature the levels didn’t match up.
Well, power benefits aside, ;-) does the second class make sense from a roleplaying aspect? How and why did that Paladin learn/train to become a bard?
This, MC is 90% meta gaming and drives me nutz. When my players want to MC, give me a reason, tell me the story of your chr and why they are a wiz/rog/fighter/bard/warlock and it better not start with "I want hex".
Orphan growing up on the streets who was discovered by a Mage and taught to be a brilliant spell caster? Ok Wiz/rog I can buy that. Fighter who has seen war over and over wants to serve a higher cause and heal not always take life? Ok fighter/cleric have at it.
You want to watch the practice of MC'ing drop off cliff? Have all Subclasses, for all classes, not kick in until 3rd level (6e might be doing this). Also, impose a house rule that there can never be more than a 1 level gap between the 2 (or more) classes, unless the 2nd class was picked up after the PC had gained 3rd or higher level in a class. In that case, the PC MUST train subsequent levels in the new class until the classes are equal in level.
Of course, the wise Gygax forsaw that problem of OP PC's doing class dips decades ago, and stated that the primary stat in the new class had to be at least a 17. The wise one also stated that if a PC used ANY of the abilities of the original class before the new class had the same levels of experience as the original class, no experience was gained in the new class for that session. It is an elegant solution.
You talking multiclassing? I don’t recall any such rule in1e AD&D. Sounds more like you mean Dual classing (you left the initial class behind and only were the new class until levels were equal then you could use both classes, from what I remember) that humans could do as they were not allowed to multiclass. Only Demi-humans could MC and they were restricted by level caps. An Elven Fighter/Magic-User took XP gained and divided it equally between the two classes. Since Fighters and MU leveling tables were different you could have a Fighter 4/Magic-User 2 because MU leveled much slower (numbers just an example, may be off). So by their very nature the levels didn’t match up.
I am indeed talking Dual Classing. MC'ing as it exists in 5e simply did not exist in the initial iterations of D&D, and for good reason. MC'ing in the early editions of D&D were as you said limited to demi-humans (the term in the books) because those species had serious advantages over humans, and giving a human PC the ability to MC like a demi-human would make for impossibly OP PC's. 5e could learn a lot from the early editions of D&D.
Personally I prefer 5E’s MC approach to AD&D’s. I was very glad when 3E removed all the multiclass racial restrictions, not only level caps but class restrictions as well. And 3E did have a penalty if there was a big difference from your favored class and your other class(es) if I’m remembering it right. I didn’t get to play 3E much.
It does seem the 2024 update will keep all subclasses starting at 3rd level like in the playtest.
Personally I prefer 5E’s MC approach to AD&D’s. I was very glad when 3E removed all the multiclass racial restrictions, not only level caps but class restrictions as well. And 3E did have a penalty if there was a big difference from your favored class and your other class(es) if I’m remembering it right. I didn’t get to play 3E much.
It does seem the 2024 update will keep all subclasses starting at 3rd level like in the playtest.
There was an XP penalty applied to a character if they were multiclassed and their classes were more than two levels difference (like fighter 5 and wizard 9, for example) but the character's Favored Class as well as any prestige classes they might have didn't count. The rule wasn't that popular, IIRC, and most of the groups I was in completely ignored its existence.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Don't the that guy who just multiclasses because everyone else is. Or the guy who dips into another class that is frontloaded (e.g., Warlock) just to get the frontloaded benefits.
Don't the that guy who just multiclasses because everyone else is. Or the guy who dips into another class that is frontloaded (e.g., Warlock) just to get the frontloaded benefits.
Multiclass if it seems like fun. Do that warlock dip if you wanna. If it makes sense for your character, in the game you're in, go for it.
Don't listen to the people who are telling you you're a munchkin if you do, and don't listen to the ones who tell you you're ineffective if you don't.
Don't the that guy who just multiclasses because everyone else is. Or the guy who dips into another class that is frontloaded (e.g., Warlock) just to get the frontloaded benefits.
Multiclass if it seems like fun. Do that warlock dip if you wanna. If it makes sense for your character, in the game you're in, go for it.
Don't listen to the people who are telling you you're a munchkin if you do, and don't listen to the ones who tell you you're ineffective if you don't.
"Fun" for whom, exactly? Certainly not the DM who has to contend with OP chars. And probably not the other players out there that also have to deal with OP chars that dominate gameplay. If MC'ing did not create more powerful PC's within the 5e mechanic, so many people would would not be doing it. Even wotc seems to be acknowledging the problem by pushing back all subclass choices to 3rd level in 6e.
It's actually hard to get so overpowered that you distort your game. Balance in D&D is vague at best, illusory in most cases. Domination of play is usually more about assertive personalities than anything mechanical.
People multiclass for character reasons. Almost always. They dip hexblade because it's the easiest way to get better melee capability.
In actual play, the optimized builds aren't necessarily all that. Multiclassing delays your main-class features now, even if it'll be awesome later.
A DM can counter The Amazing Murder Machine by putting in more things to fight.
Yeah, the people on the internet are always talking about their hypothetical optimized builds, but that's because seeing how far you can push a system is fun for some people. It's kind of like speedrunning video games. Do they use the builds in play? Maybe. Sometimes. I dunno. I'm not the game police. If I had a player who was actually doing that sort of thing, and it was creating a problem, the correct reaction is to say "hey, could you not?"
Pushing back subclass choices is likely more about not front-loading major build decisions for new players.
You think wither and bloom is grossly overpowered, so people should perhaps take your ideas on power level with a grain of salt.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Heya! I play a paladin and my party just leveled up from 5 to 6. The barbarian AND wizard both took a level in fighter (ranger and and I took our respective 6th levels.)
Ranger is now getting keen on taking a level in rouge and I've been toying with crossing my gnome paladin w a level in bard or forge cleric buuut I may just stick straight ahead w pally.
Do you have any multiclassing regrets or multiclassing stories in general you'd like to share??
I mean, level 7 is when you'll get you Oath specific aura, which may be pretty impactful. Also you'll get another spell slot for smiting. You'd really have to decide if any benefits you get from an multiclass at that point would outweigh those bonuses.
Personally, I find the majority of times I've considered multiclassing it will hurt the build rather than helping. There have been times where I found if I just hold out, I can take a feat or something that helps me get what I'd really be looking for out the multiclass, without effecting the progression.
Aura of Protection and the 7th level subclass feature are both really good. Honestly, Paladin is one class where I feel it gets extremely good stuff every time it levels up.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The Fedrat is correct. Paladin is rather nice to just level and not worry about multi-classing.
Greetings Cementario,
I have played a Multi-Class once in a One-Shot and have also played in sessions with others that were playing Multi-Class Characters, and both playing and observing, I noticed the same thing.
The Multi-Class Player is left behind a bit, and I'll explain what I mean by that.
Each time the DM told the group they could level up, each player add the level and discuss the new abilities they gained.
But as each player gained new abilities, the Multi-Class character would not gain them at the same time as their levels are divided up.
So at level 4 when each player was happy to pick their first Feat, the Multi- Class player was a few levels away from being able to do so.
As casters gained access to new level spells, the Multi-Class character was a few levels behind again.
Now, as the characters leveled, the Multi-Class would ALWAYS be behind in level and power of spells.
This of course was offset by the ability to do other things that the 2nd class brought to the table, but that 2nd class is behind everyone else as well.
I have not played a maxed out Multi-Class character, but know that depending on how the player divided up their levels they will not gain their final abilities as they can never get the character to the level requirement.
With all of that said, I think playing a Multi-Class character in one-shots gives you the ability to experiment with different combos without having to invest in a character that you might regret creating in a longer campaign that you are locked into.
Cheers!
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty.
Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers;
Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas.
Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
I have found that unless a build is designed from level one to multiclass (and in those scenarios multiclassing can be very broken), it usually doesn’t work as well when you multiclass. I’ve played a good number of characters and those that multiclassed were always under the power threshold for that level and fell behind other characters. Paladin is a great class to multiclass into, but unless you plan to totally switch focus and ignore paladin, I don’t recommend multiclassing out of it.
My DM doesn’t allow multiclassing so for me I have no choice. But I would MC in some situations if I could.
In your situation it depends on what you would find more fun. Is there a concept or idea you are shooting for with the MC? Or is it just because the other players are doing it? Do you play at an optimized table where a misstep in MC may really hurt? Then I probably wouldn’t.
And I agree with some others that levels 6 and 7 in Paladin is very good so that may hurt delaying those. And depending on how far your campaign goes, and how far you MC, you may never see them.
Donwhat you think you will have the most fun.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Well, power benefits aside, ;-) does the second class make sense from a roleplaying aspect? How and why did that Paladin learn/train to become a bard?
I agree with the sentiment that you should decide based on which seems more fun to you. It's not like bard is a bad combo with paladin - you will get spell slots at an accelerated rate, you can get some very handy ranged/utility spells that fill some holes in what straight paladins can do, and you can inspire your allies. I wouldn't be worried about falling behind your allies if your wizard is dipping into fighter.
When you play a character from level 1, it can start to feel stale after 5-6 levels. An MC can really shake things up and give you some new options both inside and outside of combat. If you think this would make your character more fun or interesting to play, then you should do it. If you're just considering it because everyone else is doing it, I'd probably just stay paladin.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
It also depends if the multi-class is a dip or changing to a new class going forward. Your wizard friend is unlikely to pick up a sword and start slicing monsters rather than using firebolt (Blade Dancer not withstanding). But a dip for Medium Armour, shields and a bonus action heal per short rest would make sense. However we do know it will be two levels for Action Surge. It would be unlikely that the wizard would take a third level for a subcass as this would put them to far behind in the power level of their wizard relative to non multi-class characters.
Thanks everyone!
We did start from lvl1 and my character is a rock gnome paladin so min/maxing isn't our table's focus. (His pic is my profile pic). He's an LG Oath of Glory who believes whole heartedly that the rest of his very Neutral party are destined for glorious deeds of heroism.
After taking this all in I feel it's best to just chill and stay Pally through and though.
THANKS!
Late to the party but adding my 3 cents anyway. I like multiclassing but the others are correct - multiclassing without a solid reason and plan is always a mistake. Then there are two common reasons folks multiclass.
1) the 1 or two level dip to get things like action surge or cantrips and a L1 spell or three. Action surge lets the casters cast leveled spells twice in a round (once) and the fighter dip grants armor use as well which is also nice. Rangers etc don’t get cantrips so a dip into something like sorceror or warlock to get a suite of cantrips and access to some vocation magic can be usefull. Given that few campaigns actually reach L20 ( or even go past L12) worrying about staying true to your class to get those high level benefits doesn’t really make sense and getting the benefits of a dip can when done right.
2) role plays character ideas - like ninjas- can call for a multiclass in order to get access to everything you think the idea should have (ninja=ranger/rogue/monk hybrid). Here you have to do very careful planning in order to actually get the feel correct. Doing this is generally harder than min maxing a single class.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
This, MC is 90% meta gaming and drives me nutz. When my players want to MC, give me a reason, tell me the story of your chr and why they are a wiz/rog/fighter/bard/warlock and it better not start with "I want hex".
Orphan growing up on the streets who was discovered by a Mage and taught to be a brilliant spell caster? Ok Wiz/rog I can buy that. Fighter who has seen war over and over wants to serve a higher cause and heal not always take life? Ok fighter/cleric have at it.
You want to watch multiclassing drop off a cliff? Don't allow it. If you're going to make it difficult enough that nobody wants to do it, just... don't allow it.
There's two reasons people multiclass:
Despite internet discussion, #1 is way more common than #2, and #3 is likely more common than pure #2.
Of course, in actual play, "more effective" is subjective. I have one (1) person multiclassing in my current game, and it was done to be "more effective", and it's the infamous hexblade warlock dip. (By "more effective" I mean "they wanted better weapon and armor options".)
And... it's just not that big a deal. I'm not actually sure why they did it, but it works thematically in the game, and gives a character with complex supernatural entanglements even more of them, so I don't care.
We shall ignore for the moment the weird Gygax veneration.
The concerns of AD&D multiclassing are completely different from those in 5e, because leveling in AD&D was unbounded. You paid for you other class levels only in time. In 5e, each multiclass level is a level you will never get in your original class.
And, from a game design perspective, AD&D multiclassing isn't elegant. It's so far from elegant that you can't even see "somewhat aesthetically pleasing" from where it is.
Now, I'm willing to give the people who made D&D a fair amount of slack; they were inventing a new genre of game from scratch.
But I'm not going to say their bad design choices were good.
You talking multiclassing? I don’t recall any such rule in1e AD&D. Sounds more like you mean Dual classing (you left the initial class behind and only were the new class until levels were equal then you could use both classes, from what I remember) that humans could do as they were not allowed to multiclass. Only Demi-humans could MC and they were restricted by level caps. An Elven Fighter/Magic-User took XP gained and divided it equally between the two classes. Since Fighters and MU leveling tables were different you could have a Fighter 4/Magic-User 2 because MU leveled much slower (numbers just an example, may be off). So by their very nature the levels didn’t match up.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Personally I prefer 5E’s MC approach to AD&D’s. I was very glad when 3E removed all the multiclass racial restrictions, not only level caps but class restrictions as well. And 3E did have a penalty if there was a big difference from your favored class and your other class(es) if I’m remembering it right. I didn’t get to play 3E much.
It does seem the 2024 update will keep all subclasses starting at 3rd level like in the playtest.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
There was an XP penalty applied to a character if they were multiclassed and their classes were more than two levels difference (like fighter 5 and wizard 9, for example) but the character's Favored Class as well as any prestige classes they might have didn't count. The rule wasn't that popular, IIRC, and most of the groups I was in completely ignored its existence.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Don't the that guy who just multiclasses because everyone else is. Or the guy who dips into another class that is frontloaded (e.g., Warlock) just to get the frontloaded benefits.
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023
Multiclass if it seems like fun. Do that warlock dip if you wanna. If it makes sense for your character, in the game you're in, go for it.
Don't listen to the people who are telling you you're a munchkin if you do, and don't listen to the ones who tell you you're ineffective if you don't.