For the argument that multi-classing always makes you weaker:
Imagine a tier 3 Wizard with Alert and secondary dex giving them a very high bonus to initiative. Then getting two levels in fighter for Action surge. This allows you to, in most cases, go first and cast 2 full action spells in encounters.
I'm thinking that's probably stronger than a wizard whois 2 levels higher? You do miss out on getting certain high level spells as quickly but you can still reach every level of spell.
I thought you could only do one spell per turn.
With the fighters action surge you could do two. Your thinking of the bonus action spell -> cantrip is all you can cast.
This thread has brought up some excellent points to consider when multiclassing. I see that I was doing it to try and fulfill some part of a backstory which is fine if you are introducing a higher level character but doesn’t make much sense starting from level 1. I was too preoccupied with trying to create a character I ignored what was happening in game. The renewed focus on weapons training both out of habit and thinking it’s what a Deity of War would expect and spending most of my off time with the city guard. Perhaps upon becoming more skilled with weapons of war a deeper connection with the cleric's deity can be formed.
I’ll have to remain on guard when developing a backstory for a level 1 character in the future to try to make sure it makes as much sense for the character’s level as who they are.
A deity of war might not necessary require its minions, servants or allies to focus on weapons training. The deity would definitely want them to be useful or to have some kind of agreement with philosophical or practical alignment or skill. A wizard who works for a war deity, might be expected to master the spells and strategy of Battle Magic, but another wizard might be required to develop skills in fighting and the Arts of War (Bard for Intelligence Gathering, Druid or Ranger for Scouting, Monk for discipline). But obviously not all deities are the same, so one war deity will expect all its associates to be attached and trained with a sword or hammer or dagger or whip etc, whereas another might just want their associates to be the best at what they do.
The level 1 character may not necessarily know their Class/Career goals, or they may know them but lack aptitude. I had a character who was born to a powerful Rashemi Witch, the character was meant to have powerful magic and a potent destiny. Yet the characters backstory, was that she was born with zero magical ability, her mother had to promise favors just to enable her daughter to join the New Rashemi Secret Service (Background-Spy). The Character took the Warlock class, because it was thematically right. She later took levels as a Bard, by necessity to help the party. She was the only magical practitioner and also covered as we lacked a rogue. The Bard enhanced her skill set, gave her access to some healing magic and made the character more diversity and expertise in Persuasion and Deception. This character Erizel the Librarian is really fun to play.
I am sure your characters will be fun if they remain focused within one class or if you take other classes for added detail and options.Three Fighters, brothers from the human noble Armiger family. One remains dedicated to the sword and becomes a Champion Fighter. Both the other brothers loved the arts martial but were also fascinated by the arcane. One developed magical abilities pretty easily,(he must have been some kind of Magic Initiate) the other just didn't seem to get the knack, but was very Lucky. The Lucky one that was struggling finally manifested magical abilities and became an Eldritch Knight, he chose then to expand his magical skills by studying Wizardry. Its the choices we make that fit our character that fits the story which matter.
Oddly Thaddeus, I haven't found that to be the case. It seems everyone starts Paladin and then goes Warlock. I'd say if you started Warlock and then sought redemption and became a Paladin that would be an interesting concept. Its something I'd want to have seen actually played out in the campaign, not just oh during leveling up I sought redemption and now.... But actually roleplaying it over the last level would be for an amazing gaming experience.
Also technically when you multiclass it represents what your PC has learned in the previous encounters, not what he knew 30 years ago that he somehow forgot how to do until he reached a certain level. So multiclassing for background reasons is more for the abilities than what makes rp sense.
Essentially I'm okay with Multiclassing if done from a rp perspective. In some cases I would rather people just admit they are doing it for the abilities and not for an rp reason.
One of my characters is an ex-mercenary who developed mystic abilities in response to being unarmed and outnumbered, in the ambush that took out her Company, before the game starts. Obviously I have to take at least one level of mystic (Soul Knife of course), but it doesn't make sense to not be a fighter. The campaign starts at 1st level. What do I do? I decided to start as a mystic and multiclass into fighter the first chance I got, because I didn't want to rewrite the backstory and nothing else made sense.
(I admit, I do want the low-level fighter abilities, but that's not why I wrote her backstory that way. It just felt right.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I very rarely do not multiclass in 5e, since there are hardly any setbacks for doing so. It opens up so many possibilities for earlier level game play, which is about as far as I often get.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Back in my 2e days when I actually had a chance to be a player, I'd occasionally multi - class if the party was small and we needed multiple roles. Usually a fighter/ wizard or fighter/ cleric. With larger parties I'd play it straight and try out a class I hadn't had a chance to play yet.
I must say I have no problem with multiclassing as long there is a story related reason for it. For example you could have a sorcerer who realised she was starting to become arrogant and abuse her power and so she decided to live as a monk for 10 years to find herself again. Now you have a Sorcerer/Monk...
Still something I am trying to come to grips with is how far to take a multiclass once you have decided it's going to be a good fit (for whatever your reasons).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I enjoy using multi-classing to make the character work, but sometimes you don't actually have to multi-class.
My new level 1 Character is a Human (Variant) Fighter with an Urchin Background ( Criminal Background is great here as well), for my feat I took Magic Initiate (Wizard) and at 1st level, I have a Fighter/Thief/Mage. My long term goals with this character is to remain a single class and advance as a Battle Master.
This character currently adventures with a Barbarian, a Wizard and a Bard. With the odd appearance of a Rogue, who is only able to play during holidays.
Still something I am trying to come to grips with is how far to take a multiclass once you have decided it's going to be a good fit (for whatever your reasons).
Keep in mind that the game happens while you are playing it and most don't get all the way to lvl 20, so don't plan out a multiclass build that is amazing at lvl 20, but sucks until 20. This is also why single classing is usually much better in most campaigns. Most groups don't make it to the point that your multiclassed character will be far better than a single-classed character.
Still something I am trying to come to grips with is how far to take a multiclass once you have decided it's going to be a good fit (for whatever your reasons).
Keep in mind that the game happens while you are playing it and most don't get all the way to lvl 20, so don't plan out a multiclass build that is amazing at lvl 20, but sucks until 20. This is also why single classing is usually much better in most campaigns. Most groups don't make it to the point that your multiclassed character will be far better than a single-classed character.
Howard Johnson is RIGHT!
But even at lower levels its a question of how much am i willing to delay certain core class abilities (like stats boosts) for either my RP flava or my OP min/max setup.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I see a lot of "I allow multiclassing, but the player has to explain it with a RP backstory that makes sense". I wonder, do you also require players who want to play a Battlemaster Fighter with a Soldier background, or a Divination Wizard with a Sage background, to have a "RP backstory that makes sense"?
If not, why? Why require multi-classers to have solid, coherent backstories, but not single-classers? Because it's easier, as a DM, to imagine what a solid, coherent backstory would be for "obvious" combinations? But more odd ones are harder to imagine, so you require the player to go through the trouble? That would seem more like laziness or lack of imagination, I think.
If you do (require single-classers to come up with coherent backstories that explain their choice of class/background), then why would you specify you allow multi-classers only if they come up with a valid RP reason for it? That'd be like saying "yes, I allow Rogues in my game, but only if they roll their stats" in a game where you require everybody to roll their stats.
Also, the min/max vs RP argument... why not both? I guess many people assume you think of a character story, then go into the rules to see what matches, and pick that, even if it is suboptimal. But sometimes you think of a game-mechanics concept, and build a story around that. Or maybe your character story is that the guy is the best of the best, always looking to maximize his potential. Nothing wrong with that. Better than having a frustrated player who feels like he's being "carried" by his teammates!
Maybe i missed in the conversation where it was stated people not worrying about the backstory for single class and their background choices. That is half of the fun of making a character is integrating where they came from with where the player is planning to go. I don't believe I have ever played with someone who didn't at least have some basic plot for their background and class that generally wasn't outlandish and out of the question.
Just perusing the backgrounds and thinking of likely ways they could be used for each of the classes i find them so flexible you can work them into literally any class. Maybe I am getting too into small parts of what you were saying and not the whole of your idea. But everything about DnD is about some level of personal preference. The anti-multiclassers are more often than not the ones who were playing during 3 or 3.5 the era and got to experience first hand how broken and weird multiclassing ended up. Seeing the character with 5 level 1 classes just becomes absurd (above and beyond the normal absurdities inherent in DnD) and tend to detract from other aspects.
Personally for my next game I am going to DM I plan to tell them none can multiclass till after they reach their first stat boost (lvl4) to avoid the newer players from unintentionally stifling their growth.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Oh I wasn't implying anybody had claimed not to worry about single-class backstory choices. I was exploring the whole set of options, starting with "I allow multi-classing, but only with a backstory that explains it". Hence: either you do NOT require a backstory for single-classers, or you DO. In the former case: why not? why do multi-classers require a backstory when single-classers don't? In the latter case: why mention multi-classers require backstories, when *everybody* does?
I was trying to point out the logical holes in the statement "I allow multi-classing, but only with a backstory to explain it": either the statement is useless and conveys no information (if you require everybody to have a backstory), or it's unfairly discriminatory and seemingly contrary to the stated goal (if you ONLY require multi-classers to have a backstory).
To make an analogous, hopefully clearer, situation:
Consider a player asking the DM: "Can I play a Rogue?", and the DM answering: "yes, if you roll your stats, because it's more realistic that way". Now, either the DM requires everyone to roll their stats, instead of using the standard array, or point-buy, in which case why would he answer the player like that? Or the DM allows any stat-generating method, in which case why discriminate against Rogues that way, and why allow non-Rogues to pick the standard array, or point-buy, when it's less realistic? [Assume the DM believes stat-rolling is, in fact, more realistic than std-array or point-buy... whether it is or not is not the point. =)]
How does the spell slot when multiclassing work? I've read it so many times and ask every DM and party member about it. but they all say the same different thing. (either follow the multiclass chart or the ranger chart) I'm currently an arcane archer fighter and a horizon walker ranger at level 13 (8 in fighter and 5 in ranger). Which spell slot chart do I use? I'm very confused and need better understanding.
How does the spell slot when multiclassing work? I've read it so many times and ask every DM and party member about it. but they all say the same different thing. (either follow the multiclass chart or the ranger chart) I'm currently an arcane archer fighter and a horizon walker ranger at level 13 (8 in fighter and 5 in ranger). Which spell slot chart do I use? I'm very confused and need better understanding.
ok for this example you get 1/3 of your fighter levels, and 1/2 your ranger levels, I will call it 3 and 2 for a total 5. This would be 4 lvl 1 spell slots, 3 lvl 2 spell slots, and 2 lvl 3 spell slots.
The calculation (and appropriate table) is in Chapter 6 Customization options, subsection Multiclassing -->Spellcasting
The spells you can learn to cast however are still tied to the individual classes level. For example you can use second level eldritch knight spells and know 6 spells total from eldritch knight spell list (and two cantrips), while your ranger side can cast up to second level spells as well and you know 4 spells total from the ranger spell list.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Multiclassing spellcasters has always been a big pain in the butt. One thing I'll always praise this website for is having a tracker for available spellslots for multiclassing, because keeping up with it manually has been something me and my players always struggled with. Sadly, I almost always veer towards Multiclassed spellcasters.
As a player, I love multi classing and I try my best to help it make sense in the context of the other players, what the DM wants, and the campaign setting itself. As a player, I find myself in a mix of Adventurer's League, Homebrew, and purists. When in Rome, do as the Romans do -- as they say!
As a DM, I can't help but separate my games into two categories:
1) Hero-driven with DM-assigned characters where even leveling up is DM-controlled (all decisions made by DM). Then I can decide when to inject a multiclass character (PC or NPC) or not. Usually I don't -- Full-Purist Mode lockdown. I like this sort of campaign because it sets the standard for my other campaigns. These are Hardcover (HC) campaigns.
2) Player-driven with player-controlled everything and lots of options (but not Homebrew options). Usually this would match with AL-Legal or as close as possible. In other words, Factions would be utilized heavily and the Faction leaders would be selected from the above DM-assigned characters playing in the formal HC module. These would be AL (Adventurer's League) and DM's Guild Adept (GA) content.
In other words, multiclassed characters only appear in #2 and only when players decide to do so -- giving them free-reign and creative control. However, they are also weaker, based on Point-Buy or Standard Array Ability Score selections. In #1, I often beef up the characters' Ability Scores significantly, usually with 2 12's as the lowest scores and 1 18 (or 1 17 and a 16) as the highest-starting Ability Scores (not including racial adjustments, so it is common for one hero to start with a 20 Dexterity -- and another to start with a 19 Wisdom and 18 Constitution).
With #1, the DM also controls the Race and Subrace selections. In #2, there are 45 or so selections available, but I am designing ways to reduce that (and/or ways to encourage players to select certain races -- such as Elves, Dwarves, and Gnomes -- more-often).
It wouldn't be D&D if players couldn't use their inner creativity to influence the process of character creation and improvement. However, so that things don't go off-the rails, we as DM's need to do something. This is what I came up with, and it's not perfect and could use some criticism. I prefer the Hardcover to tell the story as well as coldly (or boldly?) set the standards and guidelines -- while the mini modules / extra-additional content to explore the possibilities and bubble up to the Hardcover reality being asserted, yet not driving, the player-controlled decisions throughout.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This thread has brought up some excellent points to consider when multiclassing. I see that I was doing it to try and fulfill some part of a backstory which is fine if you are introducing a higher level character but doesn’t make much sense starting from level 1. I was too preoccupied with trying to create a character I ignored what was happening in game. The renewed focus on weapons training both out of habit and thinking it’s what a Deity of War would expect and spending most of my off time with the city guard. Perhaps upon becoming more skilled with weapons of war a deeper connection with the cleric's deity can be formed.
I’ll have to remain on guard when developing a backstory for a level 1 character in the future to try to make sure it makes as much sense for the character’s level as who they are.
A deity of war might not necessary require its minions, servants or allies to focus on weapons training. The deity would definitely want them to be useful or to have some kind of agreement with philosophical or practical alignment or skill. A wizard who works for a war deity, might be expected to master the spells and strategy of Battle Magic, but another wizard might be required to develop skills in fighting and the Arts of War (Bard for Intelligence Gathering, Druid or Ranger for Scouting, Monk for discipline). But obviously not all deities are the same, so one war deity will expect all its associates to be attached and trained with a sword or hammer or dagger or whip etc, whereas another might just want their associates to be the best at what they do.
The level 1 character may not necessarily know their Class/Career goals, or they may know them but lack aptitude. I had a character who was born to a powerful Rashemi Witch, the character was meant to have powerful magic and a potent destiny. Yet the characters backstory, was that she was born with zero magical ability, her mother had to promise favors just to enable her daughter to join the New Rashemi Secret Service (Background-Spy). The Character took the Warlock class, because it was thematically right. She later took levels as a Bard, by necessity to help the party. She was the only magical practitioner and also covered as we lacked a rogue. The Bard enhanced her skill set, gave her access to some healing magic and made the character more diversity and expertise in Persuasion and Deception. This character Erizel the Librarian is really fun to play.
I am sure your characters will be fun if they remain focused within one class or if you take other classes for added detail and options.Three Fighters, brothers from the human noble Armiger family. One remains dedicated to the sword and becomes a Champion Fighter. Both the other brothers loved the arts martial but were also fascinated by the arcane. One developed magical abilities pretty easily,(he must have been some kind of Magic Initiate) the other just didn't seem to get the knack, but was very Lucky. The Lucky one that was struggling finally manifested magical abilities and became an Eldritch Knight, he chose then to expand his magical skills by studying Wizardry. Its the choices we make that fit our character that fits the story which matter.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I very rarely do not multiclass in 5e, since there are hardly any setbacks for doing so. It opens up so many possibilities for earlier level game play, which is about as far as I often get.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
Back in my 2e days when I actually had a chance to be a player, I'd occasionally multi - class if the party was small and we needed multiple roles. Usually a fighter/ wizard or fighter/ cleric. With larger parties I'd play it straight and try out a class I hadn't had a chance to play yet.
Damn that's actually a really interesting process. I might start to think about that kind of thing...
I must say I have no problem with multiclassing as long there is a story related reason for it. For example you could have a sorcerer who realised she was starting to become arrogant and abuse her power and so she decided to live as a monk for 10 years to find herself again. Now you have a Sorcerer/Monk...
Still something I am trying to come to grips with is how far to take a multiclass once you have decided it's going to be a good fit (for whatever your reasons).
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I enjoy using multi-classing to make the character work, but sometimes you don't actually have to multi-class.
My new level 1 Character is a Human (Variant) Fighter with an Urchin Background ( Criminal Background is great here as well), for my feat I took Magic Initiate (Wizard) and at 1st level, I have a Fighter/Thief/Mage. My long term goals with this character is to remain a single class and advance as a Battle Master.
This character currently adventures with a Barbarian, a Wizard and a Bard. With the odd appearance of a Rogue, who is only able to play during holidays.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I see a lot of "I allow multiclassing, but the player has to explain it with a RP backstory that makes sense". I wonder, do you also require players who want to play a Battlemaster Fighter with a Soldier background, or a Divination Wizard with a Sage background, to have a "RP backstory that makes sense"?
If not, why? Why require multi-classers to have solid, coherent backstories, but not single-classers? Because it's easier, as a DM, to imagine what a solid, coherent backstory would be for "obvious" combinations? But more odd ones are harder to imagine, so you require the player to go through the trouble? That would seem more like laziness or lack of imagination, I think.
If you do (require single-classers to come up with coherent backstories that explain their choice of class/background), then why would you specify you allow multi-classers only if they come up with a valid RP reason for it? That'd be like saying "yes, I allow Rogues in my game, but only if they roll their stats" in a game where you require everybody to roll their stats.
Also, the min/max vs RP argument... why not both? I guess many people assume you think of a character story, then go into the rules to see what matches, and pick that, even if it is suboptimal. But sometimes you think of a game-mechanics concept, and build a story around that. Or maybe your character story is that the guy is the best of the best, always looking to maximize his potential. Nothing wrong with that. Better than having a frustrated player who feels like he's being "carried" by his teammates!
Maybe i missed in the conversation where it was stated people not worrying about the backstory for single class and their background choices. That is half of the fun of making a character is integrating where they came from with where the player is planning to go. I don't believe I have ever played with someone who didn't at least have some basic plot for their background and class that generally wasn't outlandish and out of the question.
Just perusing the backgrounds and thinking of likely ways they could be used for each of the classes i find them so flexible you can work them into literally any class. Maybe I am getting too into small parts of what you were saying and not the whole of your idea. But everything about DnD is about some level of personal preference. The anti-multiclassers are more often than not the ones who were playing during 3 or 3.5 the era and got to experience first hand how broken and weird multiclassing ended up. Seeing the character with 5 level 1 classes just becomes absurd (above and beyond the normal absurdities inherent in DnD) and tend to detract from other aspects.
Personally for my next game I am going to DM I plan to tell them none can multiclass till after they reach their first stat boost (lvl4) to avoid the newer players from unintentionally stifling their growth.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Oh I wasn't implying anybody had claimed not to worry about single-class backstory choices. I was exploring the whole set of options, starting with "I allow multi-classing, but only with a backstory that explains it". Hence: either you do NOT require a backstory for single-classers, or you DO. In the former case: why not? why do multi-classers require a backstory when single-classers don't? In the latter case: why mention multi-classers require backstories, when *everybody* does?
I was trying to point out the logical holes in the statement "I allow multi-classing, but only with a backstory to explain it": either the statement is useless and conveys no information (if you require everybody to have a backstory), or it's unfairly discriminatory and seemingly contrary to the stated goal (if you ONLY require multi-classers to have a backstory).
To make an analogous, hopefully clearer, situation:
Consider a player asking the DM: "Can I play a Rogue?", and the DM answering: "yes, if you roll your stats, because it's more realistic that way". Now, either the DM requires everyone to roll their stats, instead of using the standard array, or point-buy, in which case why would he answer the player like that? Or the DM allows any stat-generating method, in which case why discriminate against Rogues that way, and why allow non-Rogues to pick the standard array, or point-buy, when it's less realistic? [Assume the DM believes stat-rolling is, in fact, more realistic than std-array or point-buy... whether it is or not is not the point. =)]
How does the spell slot when multiclassing work? I've read it so many times and ask every DM and party member about it. but they all say the same different thing. (either follow the multiclass chart or the ranger chart) I'm currently an arcane archer fighter and a horizon walker ranger at level 13 (8 in fighter and 5 in ranger). Which spell slot chart do I use? I'm very confused and need better understanding.
Thank you
The calculation (and appropriate table) is in Chapter 6 Customization options, subsection Multiclassing -->Spellcasting
Multiclassing
The spells you can learn to cast however are still tied to the individual classes level. For example you can use second level eldritch knight spells and know 6 spells total from eldritch knight spell list (and two cantrips), while your ranger side can cast up to second level spells as well and you know 4 spells total from the ranger spell list.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Multiclassing spellcasters has always been a big pain in the butt. One thing I'll always praise this website for is having a tracker for available spellslots for multiclassing, because keeping up with it manually has been something me and my players always struggled with. Sadly, I almost always veer towards Multiclassed spellcasters.
As a player, I love multi classing and I try my best to help it make sense in the context of the other players, what the DM wants, and the campaign setting itself. As a player, I find myself in a mix of Adventurer's League, Homebrew, and purists. When in Rome, do as the Romans do -- as they say!
As a DM, I can't help but separate my games into two categories:
1) Hero-driven with DM-assigned characters where even leveling up is DM-controlled (all decisions made by DM). Then I can decide when to inject a multiclass character (PC or NPC) or not. Usually I don't -- Full-Purist Mode lockdown. I like this sort of campaign because it sets the standard for my other campaigns. These are Hardcover (HC) campaigns.
2) Player-driven with player-controlled everything and lots of options (but not Homebrew options). Usually this would match with AL-Legal or as close as possible. In other words, Factions would be utilized heavily and the Faction leaders would be selected from the above DM-assigned characters playing in the formal HC module. These would be AL (Adventurer's League) and DM's Guild Adept (GA) content.
In other words, multiclassed characters only appear in #2 and only when players decide to do so -- giving them free-reign and creative control. However, they are also weaker, based on Point-Buy or Standard Array Ability Score selections. In #1, I often beef up the characters' Ability Scores significantly, usually with 2 12's as the lowest scores and 1 18 (or 1 17 and a 16) as the highest-starting Ability Scores (not including racial adjustments, so it is common for one hero to start with a 20 Dexterity -- and another to start with a 19 Wisdom and 18 Constitution).
With #1, the DM also controls the Race and Subrace selections. In #2, there are 45 or so selections available, but I am designing ways to reduce that (and/or ways to encourage players to select certain races -- such as Elves, Dwarves, and Gnomes -- more-often).
It wouldn't be D&D if players couldn't use their inner creativity to influence the process of character creation and improvement. However, so that things don't go off-the rails, we as DM's need to do something. This is what I came up with, and it's not perfect and could use some criticism. I prefer the Hardcover to tell the story as well as coldly (or boldly?) set the standards and guidelines -- while the mini modules / extra-additional content to explore the possibilities and bubble up to the Hardcover reality being asserted, yet not driving, the player-controlled decisions throughout.