How good should a multiclass character be?

[Juton]

Fighter/Wizards, Wizard/Clerics, Rogue/Fighters are pretty common multiclass combinations, in 3.5 that means that you'll find prestige classes to actually make them work, albeit poorly in the case of the Mystic Theurge. Straight multiclassing blows goats for casters in 3.5, a Wizard 10/Cleric 10 is not a real 20th level character. The other extreme is to let such a character cast as a 20th level Wizard and a 20th level Cleric (which is what Trailblazer does), why wouldn't you multiclass?

So the optimal balance is somewhere in the middle, if you have a multiclass character it should trail behind a single classed character by a few levels, but how many and by what rational?

[virgil]

I believe it's popular opinion that caster classes shouldn't fall behind by more than one level in exchange for essentially anything. In many ways multiclassing them is best served by reducing breadth of choices rather than depth of power; such as a 20th level Wizard/Cleric being able to cast at 20th level in both, but has only half the spells per day of each and increased restriction in spell choices, like multiple barred schools with each of the two or something. Even then, it's a crapshoot, and is better to instead make an entire other class that meets your flavour needs.

Multiclassing noncasters is a different issue. For standard 3.5 classes, none of their abilities scale with character level, so multiclassing won't hasten their obsolescence.

[Username17]

The short answer is "as good as any other character of their level." The long answer is "OMFG, that's really fucking complicated."

Here's the deal: Fighters suck. They suck hard. And Wizards have basically 100% of their contribution to the game based on the spells that they have. And while there are spells that are very level dependent, there are also spells whose primary contribution cares naught for Save DCs or caster levels. Those are real things.

The Rogue/Fighter multiclass actually works itself out. You take a level or maybe a couple of levels of Fighter in order to grab some weapon and armor proficiencies and possibly learn an extra fighting style and then you go back to Roguing. You end up a little behind on Sneak Attack and Special Rogue Abilities, and a little ahead on hit points, attack bonus, and weapon use. Depending upon what else you do with your life, it will be a modest net bonus or penalty. And in any case, is totally within the range of acceptably useful Rogue builds at virtually any level people actually play the game.

The Wizard/Anything multiclass does not. Part of this is that having a sword and armor really doesn't help a spellcaster in any way. But that's really a small part of it, and can be mostly undone by changing "Arcane Spell Failure" to "Non-Proficiency Spell Failure" (you should do this anyway if you even consider allowing people to play Warlocks or Shugenja). The real big deal though is that the ability of a Wizard to take level appropriate actions is entirely dependent upon their class' spells, and that those spells don't follow any kind of pattern as regards power growth.

And I do mean no pattern. 1st level spells like sleep and color spray are pretty similar in power at the level you get them to what weird and wail of the banshee are at when you get them. Area of effect, multiple target SoD that takes enemies right out of the battle. But both of those spells attenuate over time and it takes until 5th level spells like cloudkill and wall of stone that you really get anything of comparable crushing win.

What this in turn means is that for the first couple levels, having 1st level Wizard spells at all is a pretty big deal, and well worth giving up some fighteryness. But by the time you get to 9th and 10th level, not having 5th level spells is such a big crushing problem that it isn't worth getting any amount of Fighter skills.

-Username17

[TheWorid]

In an ideal world, all possible characters would be, when played effectively, equal to one another in power, and differ only in what they were good at.

[RobbyPants]

Virgil makes a good point. Ideally, multiclassing wouldn't give you any power, but rather new options at the expense of old options. As he said, this come down to just redefining what your character does.

It works okay so long as you don't have stupid, rigid paradigms for no reason, like "wizards can't heal". Otherwise, it becomes awesome (supposedly) for a wizard to multiclass into cleric and gain the ability to heal in exchange for Enchantment (or whatever). If you don't have weird limiters like that in your game, then this trade-some-options-for-others can work nicely.

One other thing to look out for is unforeseen synergies that make the character too powerful.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Some practical concerns of multiclassing:

Even though one of the big advertising points of 3rd Edition multiclassing is that you can take hundreds of classes in multiclassing combination, that amount of choice is just unnecessary to realize most peoples' character visions. Seriously, how many non-Mary Sue characters in fiction do you know that can't be described as being some combination of three or fewer base classes?

Secondly, I think that 3rd Edition's idea of having PrCs that would completely subsume every previous multiclass you took was brilliant. The problem is that PrCs were nothing like balanced and a person could have anywhere from 0 to like 17 different prestige classes.

4E's idea of making paragon paths mandatory and also limiting you to one was also really inspired; the problem is again that the paragon paths are not balanced (though errata is busily trying to make them all suck equally) and that they're not transformative enough. You're still wedded too much to your original idea.


So what would I do for 5E multiclassing? It's pretty simple.

Classes are divided into three divisions: A primary class, a subclass, and a minor class in that order. A primary class, for example, hands out the major class features and the majority of powers. Your subclass hands out specific subclass powers and class features. They are not supposed to be duplicates of existing class spoon like in 3E; the Fighter subclass specifically hands out unique powers that are balanced for it being a subclass--this way you avoid the 3E and 4E issue of not having powers that are level-appropriate or combo off of what you already have. The minor class hands out a tiny portion of powers and a couple of features mostly as flavor.

Here's the other thing; since subclasses hand out unique features from main classes, you are allowed for your subclass to take the same class name. You can totally be a Paladin/Paladin/Paladin (just called a paladin), a Paladin/Wizard/Paladin, or a Paladin/Paladin/Wizard (Called Paladin with a minor in wizarding). This avoids crap like a Fighter/Samurai being better than a Fighter or a Samurai.

For paragon paths and beyond, I'm of one of two minds about this. You can either have the paragon paths completely replace your old classes (and have a bunch of new writeups), or they can function like they did in 4E only less ass--they still keep the same classes, but since the new powers are up-tiered the feel and flavor is totally different. This also means straight-up telling people that at the paragon/epic/etc. tiers their new powers will look nothing like their old ones. You can ease in the growing pains by replacing just half of their lower-tier powers at the first level in and replacing the rest with upper-tier powers.

[Juton]

Finding something for Wizards to trade off for access to Cleric spells is actually pretty hard. Taxing HP and skill points doesn't matter in the long run, taxing feats is a bit better but a Wizard (or a Cleric) doesn't really need feats at all. The only thing that really matters to a Wizard is his spells, cutting down the schools he has available doesn't work because as long as he has conjuration, and to a lesser extent transmutation, he has retains the lion share of his power. Reducing his spells per day just cuts the 15-minute work day to a 10-minute work day.

Having to give up a few levels of Wizard casting for a bunch of levels of Cleric casting/turn undead seems like the only way to disincentivise multiclassing but not make it too weak to keep up. Can a Wizard 10//Cleric 10 keep up in the same games as a straight class Wizard 12 or Cleric 12? Not necessarily be exactly as powerful, but still function in the Wizard's balance point.

[sake]

There really isn't a huge advantage or difference to a wizard who can access cleric spells. I mean really all they gain out of the deal are cure spells (which you won't actually use because it's easier to have just crafted some CLW wands) a version of Tensor's Transformation that doesn't turn off your spellcasting and Raise Dead. None of these are amazing game breaking or worth more than, say, your bonus feats and familiar, at most. Particularly when you consider that a cleric or archivist can just cherry-pick a crap ton of wizard spells without losing any major class features or jumping through hoops to get them.


And the MT is just a very bad idea of multiclassing, both because it doesn't fucking work at all, and if it DID actually work it would be seven shades of broken.

[Psychic Robot]

Half as good as a normal character. A fighter/wizard should be half a fighter and half a wizard. One-half plus one-half equals one, so it'll even out in the end.

[Juton]

Half as good as a normal character. A fighter/wizard should be half a fighter and half a wizard. One-half plus one-half equals one, so it'll even out in the end.

I wish there was some smilie-free way to acknowledge and approve your sarcasm.

Thing is half as good as a normal fighter could mean having half of its to-hit bonus, or it could mean hitting half as often, which requires some maths. A character casting 5th level Wizard spells isn't half as good as one who can cast 9th, so where is the cut-off, is having 7th or 8th level spell access as good as 9th level spell access?

[Roy]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

[Juton]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

Are you talking about shape changing into a Planatar or planar binding said creature? Those are good late game strategies, but a lot of campaigns never get past level 15 (and if we are honest level 5) so they are not always viable.

[Username17]

A real problem with this is that new spell levels don't have consistent meaning with regards to power.

Level 1 is a huge deal when you get it, and as you face bigger monsters it gradually becomes worthless.

Level 2 is just fucking metal. Glitterust and Web are big deals.

Level 3 is frankly not that impressive. Stinking Cloud is awesome and all, but it's not much different from Web or Cloud of Bewilderment or Shaowspray, all of which are available at 2nd level. Hold Person is simply handed out as a 2nd level spell to Clerics and no one really cares that much, because undermining 3rd level spells is such an endemic thing already.

Level 4 is filled with crazy awesome again. Charm Fucking Monster. For the Win.

Level 5 is not only full of Awesome, but also presents whole new categories of options. Fabricate, Magic Jar, Wall of Stone, Lesser Planar Binding, and so forth.

Level 6 has some great stuff in it, but it isn't really categorically different from 5th level versions. Wall of Iron to Wall of Stone, Acid Fog to Freezing Fog, Planar Binding to Lesser Planar Binding, an so on.

Level 7 spells aren't very good. Seriously, if you show me a new Level 7 Spell and you wrote in "Level 5" I probably wouldn't know any better.

Level 8 spells bring in the crazy power again. Mass Charm, Greater Planar Binding, Polymorph Any Object, and so on. It's over the top.


Being behind a spell level at level 6 or level 14 doesn't even really matter. Being behind a spell level between 7th and 10th level is huge deal.

-Username17

[Roy]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

Are you talking about shape changing into a Planatar or planar binding said creature? Those are good late game strategies, but a lot of campaigns never get past level 15 (and if we are honest level 5) so they are not always viable.

Nope, it's available at any level.

See, dragons (multiple types) and two or three nagas can learn divine spells as arcane spells. And that's just the core monsters I remember offhand. Which means some of those dragons and nagas are going to have Scribe Scroll. Cue Arcane Scrolls of Divine Spells. Which you can explicitly inscribe into your spellbook.

Also, fuck you Sorcerers. You get nothing.

[Psychic Robot]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

This doesn't really happen.

[Roy]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

This doesn't really happen.

Ok PR, we get it. You're sarcastically pretending to be an idiot. Now stop it.

[Red_Rob]

Yeah, this is pretty much theoretical "oh look they didn't write the rules very well so technically you can..." level stuff.

Of course, if you can find a DM who will let you add all the cleric spells to the wizard spell list when you point this out then more power to you. Because most DM's are just itching to give Wizards a power up

On topic, in an ideal world a multiclass character would just trade some options for other options and come out equal. But that's not how D&D works.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I let wizards cast spells from the cleric list.

Very few people have taken it. I had someone play a monk/sorcerer that had healing spells, but that's it. People who want to cast Cleric spells want to do so with 3/4 BaB, heavy armor, D8 hit dice, and better saves.

Most cleric spells are crap compared to wizard spells of the same level.

[Juton]

I let wizards cast spells from the cleric list.

Very few people have taken it. I had someone play a monk/sorcerer that had healing spells, but that's it. People who want to cast Cleric spells want to do so with 3/4 BaB, heavy armor, D8 hit dice, and better saves.

Most cleric spells are crap compared to wizard spells of the same level.

Do they have to spend a feat or anything else to get those Cleric spells? Besides CLW and lesser vigor at lower levels (you'll probably have a wand of it) detect evil and resurgence are really worth having in a spell book, it's just surprising is all.

[RobbyPants]

Most cleric spells are crap compared to wizard spells of the same level.

Don't forget the ones the cleric gets at a lower level, or do you force the wizard to use the higher of the two spell levels?

[Psychic Robot]

A pure classed wizard already has access to all Cleric spells. What are you talking about?

This doesn't really happen.

Ok PR, we get it. You're sarcastically pretending to be an idiot. Now stop it.

Roy, don't be a moron. Wizards casting divine spells doesn't actually happen in games. I don't care if it technically can happen; it doesn't show up in games.

[Username17]

PR, don't be retarded. Of course Wizards don't cast divine spells. Any spell cast by a Wizard is by definition Arcane. Wizards do however, cast many spells that happen to be on the Cleric spell list. In addition to the many spells that are simply printed on both lists, Wizards have a number of means to add spells to their list from other lists. Those spells will be Arcane Spells at that point ("Wizard Spells" even), but if you for some reason care about casting Cure Light Wounds you can.

People do that. It's an option. It's not a particularly good option, but it is there.

-Username17

[Psychic Robot]

See, dragons (multiple types) and two or three nagas can learn divine spells as arcane spells. And that's just the core monsters I remember offhand. Which means some of those dragons and nagas are going to have Scribe Scroll. Cue Arcane Scrolls of Divine Spells. Which you can explicitly inscribe into your spellbook.

This isn't going to happen in an actual game.

[Username17]

See, dragons (multiple types) and two or three nagas can learn divine spells as arcane spells. And that's just the core monsters I remember offhand. Which means some of those dragons and nagas are going to have Scribe Scroll. Cue Arcane Scrolls of Divine Spells. Which you can explicitly inscribe into your spellbook.

This isn't going to happen in an actual game.

There are actual games where it actually has happened. Now kindly shut the fuck up.

We aren't talking about an obscure loophole or a game ending revelation here. We're talking about the worst class chassis in the entire fucking game replacing its good spells with some mediocre spells.

-Username17

[Juton]

See, dragons (multiple types) and two or three nagas can learn divine spells as arcane spells. And that's just the core monsters I remember offhand. Which means some of those dragons and nagas are going to have Scribe Scroll. Cue Arcane Scrolls of Divine Spells. Which you can explicitly inscribe into your spellbook.

This isn't going to happen in an actual game.

Something like this has actually happened in a game I've played in, in fact the DM encouraged it. I was playing an arcane generic caster, and one of its upsides is it can learn any Cleric/Druid/Wizard spell, but the Wizards in my party ended up getting all those spells so it was a bit of a rip-off.

The main thing is a Wizard can't learn any arcane spell, they can only learn spells on the Wizard/Sorcerer list. Otherwise then they could ransack the Bard/Wu Jen/whatever list for unique spells or lower level spells. They can research new spells, but that requires DM consent.