Abilities: You'd have about a billion things to manage but:
Barbarian: Rage (resistance to all but psychic damage), reckless if you need advantage, and extra attack
Monk: Stunning strike, deflect missiles
Fighter: Action surge, great weapon fighting, mostly defensive manuevers
Ranger: Collosus slayer (1d8 extra damage per turn)
Strategy: Frontline fighter with lots of bonus abilities and can retreat if need be (with step of the wind), lots of one time abilities here, is it good at fighting BBEGS?
What do you think of this build?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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 & explainHERE.
First thing I see is that you only have 3 ASIs. All other classes except Fighter and Rogue get 5. Secondly, in order to increase the DC for your stunning strikes you need Wisdom in addition to your Strength and Constitution to frontline.
I would actually take only Barb 3 and put the rest into Fighter for 6 which would net you an extra ASI and you still get extra attack.
It really depends. Are you making a character for a level 20 one shot, or is this a road map for a character you intend to play in a regular campaign?
If the latter, I would focus on two of the class options you want to combine and get what you want out of those, as regular campaigns rarely make it all the way to 20. If you do manage to get all the levels in those two that you want, then sure, tack whatever else onto it as you go.
Luckily a lot of the abilities you're focusing on getting are fairly base level-- i think stunning strike at monk level 5 is the highest level ability you're shopping around for, but that said, even if you took the minimum class requirements to get all those abilities from each class, you wouldn't see the build come online until around level 13, and then you might feel the lack of the high level abilities you're missing out on with levels 1-3/5 in four different classes. So again, it really depends if you're playing at level 20 or building to it traditionally.
I think the higher level features mean it is rarely a good idea to take more than a dip in a class and with this build you could get most of what you want with just monk (arguably the weakest class)
Empty Body gives you resistance to all damage except force (matching bear totem barbarian) as well as giving you invisability (for advantage on attacks, disadvantage on attacks against you and not being able ot be target on most spells unless the enermy has true sight or similar) Yes it costs 4 ki but going 18+ levels of monk gives you far more ki than the 7 from your MC build.
Colossus slayer gives you an extra 1d8 damage per turn but your unarmed attacks will only be doing 1d6+dex damage instead of 1d10+dex if you have at least 17 levels of monk, whe nusing flurry of blows these cancel out.
On top of that your mobilty will be greatly reduced (15ft less movement speed) and you will miss out on features like diamond soul purity of body that are REALLY good in high level encounters.
The same applies if you choose any of the other subclasses you have chose. For example fighter: Action surge on a high level fighter produces 4 extra attacks and can be done twice per short rest so is far better than on a dip where it is two extra attacks once per short rest (though a dip on a full caster so they can Action surge 2 spells in a turn can be really powerful). You will also miss out on indomitable completely, at high levels you really need some eway to help you make saving throws, indomitable is the fighters equivalent to diamond soul (though not as good) you will have nothing.
Why have you chosed ascendant dragon for your monk subclass? You are unlikely to be the face so will rare be making persuasion or charisma checks, Draconic strike is nice for monk level 3-5 but once your attacks are magical it will rarelycome up (creatures vulnerable to a eemental damage are rare and creatures resistant to magical weapons are almost non-existant). Breath of the dragon again is a useful feature for at lower levels, a high levels it gives a single class monk an AoE doing 3d10 (half for save) which is OK but you will only be doing 2d6. Flight is good but again by the time to get to high levels there are plenty of other ways to get it (normally a magic item).
I have never seen a multi-class that does not max out at least 16th level in it's main class that is not significantly weaker than a pure class build. Often just a single level dip is best. Unless of course your DM house-rules significantly to break RAW.
Higher level class abilities are significantly more powerful than lower level abilities. Throw in the loss of ASI, special abilities like extra attacks not stacking and the restriction to lower level spells and you get a less powerful build.
I’d think about dropping monk entirely and maybe choose to be one of the new Dragonborn.
1 level from the ranger to fighter. Switch subclass to swarmkeeper. Slightly less damage on a hit, but can swap the damage for movement or a push.
7 levels from the monk to fighter.
3 levels shaved off barbarian for fighter. Same number of rages, same rage bonus.
no extra attack overlap. You have dragon breath that works with extra attacks. You have more superiority die, and larger die, and more maneuvers. 5 fASI/eats available because fighter. 3 attacks per attack action with your weapon.
It really is worse than any of those classes at level 20. So no, it's not a good build. You are losing much more than you are gaining (hight level features and ASIS). In general, most builds are better as a single class than a multiclass. However, some multiclasses can work very well. But never more than a few levels of the secondary class (a single secondary class). Generally one or two levels in the secondary class is enough. In rarer cases a third level may be worthwhile (to access a subclass, for example).
Abilities: You'd have about a billion things to manage but:
Barbarian: Rage (resistance to all but psychic damage), reckless if you need advantage, and extra attack
Monk: Stunning strike, deflect missiles
Fighter: Action surge, great weapon fighting, mostly defensive manuevers
Ranger: Collosus slayer (1d8 extra damage per turn)
Strategy: Frontline fighter with lots of bonus abilities and can retreat if need be (with step of the wind), lots of one time abilities here, is it good at fighting BBEGS?
What do you think of this build?
Very bad - incredibly MAD (you need DEX, WIS, and STR to legally build it, and without CON many of its abilities suffer) with very few ASIs to patch the MADness. If you wanted something remotely along these lines, you'd be a lot better off dropping Barbarian to remove the STR requirement and (assuming quadruple-classing is mandatory) grabbing Cleric, Druid, or Rogue. For example, this build is actually functional:
Half-Elf (Dex 17 Con 16 Wis 16)
Battle Master 11
Assassin 3
Gloom Stalker 5
Peace Cleric 1
ASIs x4 (not in specific order): Elven Accuracy, Crossbow Master, +2 Dex, Sharpshooter
That's taking Fighter and Ranger as mandatory and assuming you need 4 classes.
As a general rule, MADness is best solved as follows:
You need an AC solution if you're going to dump DEX; this can be Medium Armor + DEX 14, Heavy Armor + (STR 13-15 or Dwarf or Armorer Artificer or have a base walking speed of 35 - you want to ensure a walking speed of at least 25), being a Tortle, or being a Moon Druid (so you use another creature's DEX). Races that can be speed 25' in Heavy Armor without sufficient STR (generally only useful on the Cleric subclasses that grant Heavy Armor Proficiency, so you don't need STR to legally multiclass and can keep up with the slowest party members):
Centaur
Dhampir
Wood Elf
Half-Wood Elf
Air Genasi
Mark of Passage Human
Leonin
Satyr
Dwarves:
Hill
Mountain
Mark of Warding
MTF Duergar (MMM Duergar aren't Dwarves - they're speed 30 and reduce normally in Heavy Armor)
The best races for fixing MADness in general (where you simply need a higher statline) are Tasha's Custom Lineage, Variant Human (this is TCL but worse), Half-Elf (any except Mark of Detection or Mark of Storm), and Mountain Dwarf (the playable races that effectively get 4 ability points rather than 3).
Finally, as a general rule (I've outlined some ways above to get around the problem), pick STR or DEX for your AC solution and any non-CON ability for your attack solution, and build around those constraints. That means without exotic solutions from above, you should be choosing from this list:
Exotic Solution 3: Moon Druid who dumps CON (you'll desperately want to ensure you're always Wild Shaped, so don't forget one of the benefits of more druid levels is more hours on your duration): while this legalizes an awful lot, you'll want an AC solution while shaped and you can't assume your DM will allow you access to non-metal Half Plate Barding, and you can't cast spells at all while wild shaped , so your interest in caster levels is reduced until Druid 18. This legalizes a lot, especially if you double-up on exotic solutions: a tortle moon druid needs no AC solution at all and uses their new form for STR/DEX/Con anyway.
It really is worse than any of those classes at level 20. So no, it's not a good build. You are losing much more than you are gaining (hight level features and ASIS). In general, most builds are better as a single class than a multiclass. However, some multiclasses can work very well. But never more than a few levels of the secondary class (a single secondary class). Generally one or two levels in the secondary class is enough. In rarer cases a third level may be worthwhile (to access a subclass, for example).
Almost all builds are better as multiclasses if you're specifically building to level 20, because it is quite rare to see a monoclass build that isn't better as 17-19 levels with 1-3 levels in other classes. What's best for any given level can vary quite a lot, as it varies tremendously where a given class's dead levels are (especially with multiclassing, where Extra Attack becomes dead so easily).
Quindraco, I disagree about max 20 monoclasses. While Bard, Druid, Monk, and Wizard rarely make full use of their level 20 abilities, the other classes can really get a lot. Sorcerors and Warlocks are arguable, but lets talk about the rest that get really GOOD stuff.
Artificer gets, what +6 to all saves?
Barbarian gets unlimited rages and +4 to both Strength and Con (max of 24).
Cleric gets an extra any cleric spell - including a 9th level. No one else gets that.
Fighter gets a 4th attack
Paladins get a final Subclass ability, which can be free Banishment when you hit a target and it fails a save.
Ranger gets a once per turn bonus to damage or to hit equal to their Wisdom bonus
Rogue gets a 1/short rest auto hit or auto save
I can't think of any class that gets more than these things at first level.
Almost all builds are better as multiclasses if you're specifically building to level 20, because it is quite rare to see a monoclass build that isn't better as 17-19 levels with 1-3 levels in other classes. What's best for any given level can vary quite a lot, as it varies tremendously where a given class's dead levels are (especially with multiclassing, where Extra Attack becomes dead so easily).
Quindraco, I disagree about max 20 monoclasses. While Bard, Druid, Monk, and Wizard rarely make full use of their level 20 abilities, the other classes can really get a lot. Sorcerors and Warlocks are arguable, but lets talk about the rest that get really GOOD stuff.
Artificer gets, what +6 to all saves?
Barbarian gets unlimited rages and +4 to both Strength and Con (max of 24).
Cleric gets an extra any cleric spell - including a 9th level. No one else gets that.
Fighter gets a 4th attack
Paladins get a final Subclass ability, which can be free Banishment when you hit a target and it fails a save.
Ranger gets a once per turn bonus to damage or to hit equal to their Wisdom bonus
Rogue gets a 1/short rest auto hit or auto save
I can't think of any class that gets more than these things at first level.
Almost all builds are better as multiclasses if you're specifically building to level 20, because it is quite rare to see a monoclass build that isn't better as 17-19 levels with 1-3 levels in other classes. What's best for any given level can vary quite a lot, as it varies tremendously where a given class's dead levels are (especially with multiclassing, where Extra Attack becomes dead so easily).
I agree with you in general but a 1 level dip into peace cleric would compete with many of them 6 creatures is usually the whole party plus one or two add ons (simulcrum, pet etc), and 10 minutes 6 times a day covers pretty well all the important moments. The 30ft from another party member is only a very small restriciotn and giving everyone 1d4 to one save, attack or ability check every turn (not every round) is huge. You can then cast bless of 3 of the party to double up the affect when required (for ability checks there should be somone able to cast guidance).
It really is worse than any of those classes at level 20. So no, it's not a good build. You are losing much more than you are gaining (hight level features and ASIS). In general, most builds are better as a single class than a multiclass. However, some multiclasses can work very well. But never more than a few levels of the secondary class (a single secondary class). Generally one or two levels in the secondary class is enough. In rarer cases a third level may be worthwhile (to access a subclass, for example).
Almost all builds are better as multiclasses if you're specifically building to level 20, because it is quite rare to see a monoclass build that isn't better as 17-19 levels with 1-3 levels in other classes. What's best for any given level can vary quite a lot, as it varies tremendously where a given class's dead levels are (especially with multiclassing, where Extra Attack becomes dead so easily).
Well, that's debatable. We are not going to analyze class by class either, but it is often said that this or that level 20 feature is bad. And there are cases where it is. However, in those cases, what usually happens is that it is bad for a level 20. That is, it is a feature that comes very late. On the other hand, it is also very different to design a character directly at level 20, than to play with that character until level 20. For example, if you design a Wizard at level 20, you can assess if any dip of level 1 is preferable to having 2 spells of level 3 "free" for short rest. But if you are playing with that character up to level 20, you not only have to assess that, but also how multiclassing affects your development. It is no that you are going to lose your level 20 feature, but that it slows down all your progress. This is why multiclassing is often a bad idea, even though it's a very popular option. In most cases it is preferable to play as a monoclass, unless what the dip gives you greatly improves the performance of your main class (as is the case with hexadin, which is the best multiclass in my opinion).
The OP gave no indication of progress so it is impossible to lok at how powerfull it will be before level 20. I think we have to assume this is either for a level 20 one shot or an entirely theoretical build.
There are quite a few classes with a weak level 20 ability, and those are often stronger with a dip into multiclass. I think usually with a "I'll multiclass because the level 20 feature is weak" build you usually want to multiclass very late.(Though from an RP point of view you may or may not want to concern yourself why for example a PC that has spent the whole campaign training as a monk suddently finds a diety bestowing them with the powers of a cleric)
At level 19 you get a feat, I decent option but sometimes a MC dip is better (if you do dip at 19 you then have to decide if the level 2 features are better than a feat, probably the case with a dip into fighter possibly not with a dip into peace cleric.
Pretty much everything has some late feature worthy of going for (e.g. Monks gets empty body at 18), and other than MC by design for the majority of the campaign special cases like hexblade and sorlock you probably want to single class at least to level 17.
Uhm, a monk becoming a Cleric seems to make a lot of sense. You do realize that monks in real life were very religious? Even asian monks tended to spend a lot of their time thinking about philosophy, if not religion.
But I do generally agree that dipping for 4 levels is usually too much. 3 is pretty much the max, leaving 17 levels in your main class.
There are a wide variety of monks and I agree that there are many for whom a diety might decide to make a cleric. There are also monks who show no interest in dieties at all until they suddenly decide that Emboldening bond, along with a couple of spells a day and an extra skill proficiency are far more useful than 4 extra ki if they have 0 ki at the start of a combat. The point I was trying to make was I believe there should be an ingame reason for any multiclass.
I was also suggesting if you are going for a dip it is often best to take it last. So If you want your Monk to finish Monk 18 / Cleric 2 you are probably better off getting ot Monk 18 first rather than for example Taking Monk to 11 then taking the cleric dip and then continuing woth Monk.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Barbarian 6 (totem warrior, bear then eagle)
Monk 7 (way of the ascendent dragon)
Fighter 3 (battlemaster, greatweapon fighter)
Ranger 4 (hunter conclave, collossus slayer)
Abilities: You'd have about a billion things to manage but:
Barbarian: Rage (resistance to all but psychic damage), reckless if you need advantage, and extra attack
Monk: Stunning strike, deflect missiles
Fighter: Action surge, great weapon fighting, mostly defensive manuevers
Ranger: Collosus slayer (1d8 extra damage per turn)
Strategy: Frontline fighter with lots of bonus abilities and can retreat if need be (with step of the wind), lots of one time abilities here, is it good at fighting BBEGS?
What do you think of this build?
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.First thing I see is that you only have 3 ASIs. All other classes except Fighter and Rogue get 5. Secondly, in order to increase the DC for your stunning strikes you need Wisdom in addition to your Strength and Constitution to frontline.
I would actually take only Barb 3 and put the rest into Fighter for 6 which would net you an extra ASI and you still get extra attack.
Keep your friends close, and enemies closer.
It really depends. Are you making a character for a level 20 one shot, or is this a road map for a character you intend to play in a regular campaign?
If the latter, I would focus on two of the class options you want to combine and get what you want out of those, as regular campaigns rarely make it all the way to 20. If you do manage to get all the levels in those two that you want, then sure, tack whatever else onto it as you go.
Luckily a lot of the abilities you're focusing on getting are fairly base level-- i think stunning strike at monk level 5 is the highest level ability you're shopping around for, but that said, even if you took the minimum class requirements to get all those abilities from each class, you wouldn't see the build come online until around level 13, and then you might feel the lack of the high level abilities you're missing out on with levels 1-3/5 in four different classes. So again, it really depends if you're playing at level 20 or building to it traditionally.
I think the higher level features mean it is rarely a good idea to take more than a dip in a class and with this build you could get most of what you want with just monk (arguably the weakest class)
Empty Body gives you resistance to all damage except force (matching bear totem barbarian) as well as giving you invisability (for advantage on attacks, disadvantage on attacks against you and not being able ot be target on most spells unless the enermy has true sight or similar) Yes it costs 4 ki but going 18+ levels of monk gives you far more ki than the 7 from your MC build.
Colossus slayer gives you an extra 1d8 damage per turn but your unarmed attacks will only be doing 1d6+dex damage instead of 1d10+dex if you have at least 17 levels of monk, whe nusing flurry of blows these cancel out.
On top of that your mobilty will be greatly reduced (15ft less movement speed) and you will miss out on features like diamond soul purity of body that are REALLY good in high level encounters.
The same applies if you choose any of the other subclasses you have chose. For example fighter: Action surge on a high level fighter produces 4 extra attacks and can be done twice per short rest so is far better than on a dip where it is two extra attacks once per short rest (though a dip on a full caster so they can Action surge 2 spells in a turn can be really powerful). You will also miss out on indomitable completely, at high levels you really need some eway to help you make saving throws, indomitable is the fighters equivalent to diamond soul (though not as good) you will have nothing.
Why have you chosed ascendant dragon for your monk subclass? You are unlikely to be the face so will rare be making persuasion or charisma checks, Draconic strike is nice for monk level 3-5 but once your attacks are magical it will rarelycome up (creatures vulnerable to a eemental damage are rare and creatures resistant to magical weapons are almost non-existant). Breath of the dragon again is a useful feature for at lower levels, a high levels it gives a single class monk an AoE doing 3d10 (half for save) which is OK but you will only be doing 2d6. Flight is good but again by the time to get to high levels there are plenty of other ways to get it (normally a magic item).
I have never seen a multi-class that does not max out at least 16th level in it's main class that is not significantly weaker than a pure class build. Often just a single level dip is best. Unless of course your DM house-rules significantly to break RAW.
Higher level class abilities are significantly more powerful than lower level abilities. Throw in the loss of ASI, special abilities like extra attacks not stacking and the restriction to lower level spells and you get a less powerful build.
I’d think about dropping monk entirely and maybe choose to be one of the new Dragonborn.
1 level from the ranger to fighter. Switch subclass to swarmkeeper. Slightly less damage on a hit, but can swap the damage for movement or a push.
7 levels from the monk to fighter.
3 levels shaved off barbarian for fighter. Same number of rages, same rage bonus.
no extra attack overlap. You have dragon breath that works with extra attacks. You have more superiority die, and larger die, and more maneuvers. 5 fASI/eats available because fighter. 3 attacks per attack action with your weapon.
It really is worse than any of those classes at level 20. So no, it's not a good build. You are losing much more than you are gaining (hight level features and ASIS).
In general, most builds are better as a single class than a multiclass. However, some multiclasses can work very well. But never more than a few levels of the secondary class (a single secondary class). Generally one or two levels in the secondary class is enough. In rarer cases a third level may be worthwhile (to access a subclass, for example).
Very bad - incredibly MAD (you need DEX, WIS, and STR to legally build it, and without CON many of its abilities suffer) with very few ASIs to patch the MADness. If you wanted something remotely along these lines, you'd be a lot better off dropping Barbarian to remove the STR requirement and (assuming quadruple-classing is mandatory) grabbing Cleric, Druid, or Rogue. For example, this build is actually functional:
That's taking Fighter and Ranger as mandatory and assuming you need 4 classes.
As a general rule, MADness is best solved as follows:
Almost all builds are better as multiclasses if you're specifically building to level 20, because it is quite rare to see a monoclass build that isn't better as 17-19 levels with 1-3 levels in other classes. What's best for any given level can vary quite a lot, as it varies tremendously where a given class's dead levels are (especially with multiclassing, where Extra Attack becomes dead so easily).
Quindraco, I disagree about max 20 monoclasses. While Bard, Druid, Monk, and Wizard rarely make full use of their level 20 abilities, the other classes can really get a lot. Sorcerors and Warlocks are arguable, but lets talk about the rest that get really GOOD stuff.
I can't think of any class that gets more than these things at first level.
I agree with you in general but a 1 level dip into peace cleric would compete with many of them 6 creatures is usually the whole party plus one or two add ons (simulcrum, pet etc), and 10 minutes 6 times a day covers pretty well all the important moments. The 30ft from another party member is only a very small restriciotn and giving everyone 1d4 to one save, attack or ability check every turn (not every round) is huge. You can then cast bless of 3 of the party to double up the affect when required (for ability checks there should be somone able to cast guidance).
Well, that's debatable. We are not going to analyze class by class either, but it is often said that this or that level 20 feature is bad. And there are cases where it is. However, in those cases, what usually happens is that it is bad for a level 20. That is, it is a feature that comes very late.
On the other hand, it is also very different to design a character directly at level 20, than to play with that character until level 20. For example, if you design a Wizard at level 20, you can assess if any dip of level 1 is preferable to having 2 spells of level 3 "free" for short rest. But if you are playing with that character up to level 20, you not only have to assess that, but also how multiclassing affects your development. It is no that you are going to lose your level 20 feature, but that it slows down all your progress. This is why multiclassing is often a bad idea, even though it's a very popular option. In most cases it is preferable to play as a monoclass, unless what the dip gives you greatly improves the performance of your main class (as is the case with hexadin, which is the best multiclass in my opinion).
The OP gave no indication of progress so it is impossible to lok at how powerfull it will be before level 20. I think we have to assume this is either for a level 20 one shot or an entirely theoretical build.
There are quite a few classes with a weak level 20 ability, and those are often stronger with a dip into multiclass. I think usually with a "I'll multiclass because the level 20 feature is weak" build you usually want to multiclass very late.(Though from an RP point of view you may or may not want to concern yourself why for example a PC that has spent the whole campaign training as a monk suddently finds a diety bestowing them with the powers of a cleric)
At level 19 you get a feat, I decent option but sometimes a MC dip is better (if you do dip at 19 you then have to decide if the level 2 features are better than a feat, probably the case with a dip into fighter possibly not with a dip into peace cleric.
Pretty much everything has some late feature worthy of going for (e.g. Monks gets empty body at 18), and other than MC by design for the majority of the campaign special cases like hexblade and sorlock you probably want to single class at least to level 17.
Uhm, a monk becoming a Cleric seems to make a lot of sense. You do realize that monks in real life were very religious? Even asian monks tended to spend a lot of their time thinking about philosophy, if not religion.
But I do generally agree that dipping for 4 levels is usually too much. 3 is pretty much the max, leaving 17 levels in your main class.
There are a wide variety of monks and I agree that there are many for whom a diety might decide to make a cleric. There are also monks who show no interest in dieties at all until they suddenly decide that Emboldening bond, along with a couple of spells a day and an extra skill proficiency are far more useful than 4 extra ki if they have 0 ki at the start of a combat. The point I was trying to make was I believe there should be an ingame reason for any multiclass.
I was also suggesting if you are going for a dip it is often best to take it last. So If you want your Monk to finish Monk 18 / Cleric 2 you are probably better off getting ot Monk 18 first rather than for example Taking Monk to 11 then taking the cleric dip and then continuing woth Monk.