So is the multiclassing rules a none-issue?

[CyberThread]

So tell me honestly, have you folks have had much trouble with the multiclassing rules? It doesn't feel that unintuitive as on paper they had seemed.

[Shadow]

I don't know whay anyone considered them confusing in the first place. They're extremely simplistic to me.

[pwykersotz]

I haven't had any troubles so far, and four of my players have multiclassed. None of the stuff we've talked about here has even popped up, my players have all intuitively done things the right way.

So yeah, so far, so good.

[CyberThread]

I don't know whay anyone considered them confusing in the first place. They're extremely simplistic to me.

Who said anything about hard to understand? I meant as far as creating characters.

[Shadow]

Who said anything about hard to understand? I meant as far as creating characters.

OK, now I just don't understand your question. If they weren't confusing to you, then what issues were you expecting to have creating a character?

[holywhippet]

One thing I saw and was a bit worried by was that, since you can cast in any armour you have proficiency, a wizard could take a single level dip as a cleric and get proficiency with medium armour and shields. They gain a few useful cleric spells as well and the only cost is the level 20 wizard class feature which I'm not overly bothered by. A high dexterity wizard could match that AC by using mage armour.

[Symphony]

One thing I saw and was a bit worried by was that, since you can cast in any armour you have proficiency, a wizard could take a single level dip as a cleric and get proficiency with medium armour and shields. They gain a few useful cleric spells as well and the only cost is the level 20 wizard class feature which I'm not overly bothered by. A high dexterity wizard could match that AC by using mage armour.

Even better, if they take the Life, War, or Tempest domain as a Cleric, they also get heavy armor (and possibly martial weapons). Amusingly, if they don't take their Cleric level first, taking the War domain will give them proficiency in Martial weapons, but they still won't be proficient in most simple weapons.

[ambartanen]

One thing I saw and was a bit worried by was that, since you can cast in any armour you have proficiency, a wizard could take a single level dip as a cleric and get proficiency with medium armour and shields. They gain a few useful cleric spells as well and the only cost is the level 20 wizard class feature which I'm not overly bothered by. A high dexterity wizard could match that AC by using mage armour.

They'd also be getting all their stat boost and new spell levels from their wizard list a level later for the whole campaign from first to twentieth level. Same for all their other class features of which now even the wizard has quite a few.

[Beige]

I don't see how anyone could find them unintuitive - I really like them, they're simple, clear, don't have the stupid exp penalty and mutliclassing should have a prerequisite, as it dosen't make sense the guy who can't read can become a wizard XD

[holywhippet]

They'd also be getting all their stat boost and new spell levels from their wizard list a level later for the whole campaign from first to twentieth level. Same for all their other class features of which now even the wizard has quite a few.

If I understand the rules correctly the spell levels aren't much of an issue. When you gain new spells known you gain them from any level you can cast. Since your spell slots are the same provided you multiclass as a full caster you just miss out on a couple of wizard spells. The class features do come a bit slower, but you get some cleric ones in their place and with higher AC you are more likely to survive to see the higher levels.

[ambartanen]

If I understand the rules correctly the spell levels aren't much of an issue. When you gain new spells known you gain them from any level you can cast. Since your spell slots are the same provided you multiclass as a full caster you just miss out on a couple of wizard spells. The class features do come a bit slower, but you get some cleric ones in their place and with higher AC you are more likely to survive to see the higher levels.

A cleric 1/wizard 2 cannot learn or prepare second level wizard spells hence the actual spells come a level later. A second level spell slot is available for that character but can only be used to cast prepared first level spells.

[Sidmen]

If I understand the rules correctly the spell levels aren't much of an issue. When you gain new spells known you gain them from any level you can cast. Since your spell slots are the same provided you multiclass as a full caster you just miss out on a couple of wizard spells. The class features do come a bit slower, but you get some cleric ones in their place and with higher AC you are more likely to survive to see the higher levels.

The spells that you can cast are determined by your level in the class that gives you those spells. The spell slots that you can use to cast them are determined by your total casting levels.

So, a Cleric 1/Wizard 2 would have 2nd level spell slots that he could use his 1st-level spells with.

[Beige]

If I understand the rules correctly the spell levels aren't much of an issue. When you gain new spells known you gain them from any level you can cast. Since your spell slots are the same provided you multiclass as a full caster you just miss out on a couple of wizard spells. The class features do come a bit slower, but you get some cleric ones in their place and with higher AC you are more likely to survive to see the higher levels.

you'll have the slots, but not the spells to fill them with. less of an issue with spell-scaling than it could be, but you are still delayed a level getting each spell level

[Person_Man]

The biggest issue I see is that multi-classing can lead to terrible builds at mid-high levels if you don't have a high level of rules mastery. A spellcaster who takes too many levels of a non-spellcaster class denies themselves access to high level slots. Extra Attack doesn't stack, and is therefore a dead level if you gain it twice. There's little synergy between most of the class combinations. MAD can easily happen, and is an issue that new players rarely think about.

This was an issue in every previous edition as well. It's just sad to see it replicated again.

[TheOOB]

The biggest issue I see is that multi-classing can lead to terrible builds at mid-high levels if you don't have a high level of rules mastery. A spellcaster who takes too many levels of a non-spellcaster class denies themselves access to high level slots. Extra Attack doesn't stack, and is therefore a dead level if you gain it twice. There's little synergy between most of the class combinations. MAD can easily happen, and is an issue that new players rarely think about.

This was an issue in every previous edition as well. It's just sad to see it replicated again.

I think the rules were designed assuming single classes, multiclassing is an optional rule after all. Honestly I think we'll eventually see most class types we'd like to play represented by archtypes eventually.

[Theodoxus]

I've been building characters with AL in mind, so Point Buy all the way. Multiclassing can be advantageous, but if you're trying to hit 20 in your primary stat, you're delaying it - or going wonky with your build.

The problem with the cleric 1/arcane x mix, is you'll be slowed in heavy armor - unless you're spending allocation points (or get really nice rolls if not using PB) for a useless stat. On top of that, a wizard (and really, cleric for the most part) isn't going to be using melee - ever. Otherwise you'd be going for a more martial gish build, not Cleric 1/wizard 19.

So far, for pure oomph while staying true to class abilities, I've found Warlock 4 -> Sorcerer 16 to be the most viable. Going Tome and Draconic, grabbing Agonizing Blast and swapping whatever other invocation to Book of the Ancients at 3rd level, you'll get a ton of cantrips, and probably more importantly, 2 additional slots at 2nd level - by 7th character level, you'll have 5 2nd level slots - 2 on a per rest recharge! Plus rituals for the utility - and you'll have your 20 Cha by 8th level still. Oh, and Sorcery Points... metamagic fun and additional spell slots? Heck yeah!


WotC did an amazing job at driving me crazy with their multiclassing (more, class level baked in goodness). I think 'I'll go Fighter 1/Wizard x' It's only sacrificing 1 level of casting... but then I want Action Surge - why not, it's only one more level... but if I do that, I might as well grab EK for a few more spells... and if I go with three levels, I won't get my first attribute bonus/feat for 7 levels... argh! 4th level fighter it is... wait, no no 9th level spell or 18th level ability... argh! I hate this game!!! LOL. Pretty much every incarnation of multiclassing has gone that way for me.

I want a hard hitting rogue, but need maneuvers... ahh! Too little sneak now! I want a tanking barbarian, but too many feats, my STR/CON/DEX will never be higher than 16 ARGH!!! Rogue 12, Fighter 8 = 7 feats! What?!? Wait, I'll never play a game that high....

And that's when I start to convulse. :)

I hate multiclassing. I mean, I love it - but I hate it. I want whomever DMs for me, to not allow it. Take the crack away from me, because I can't be trusted! Paralysis by Analysis. Truth.

[pwykersotz]

I've been building characters with AL in mind, so Point Buy all the way. Multiclassing can be advantageous, but if you're trying to hit 20 in your primary stat, you're delaying it - or going wonky with your build.

The problem with the cleric 1/arcane x mix, is you'll be slowed in heavy armor - unless you're spending allocation points (or get really nice rolls if not using PB) for a useless stat. On top of that, a wizard (and really, cleric for the most part) isn't going to be using melee - ever. Otherwise you'd be going for a more martial gish build, not Cleric 1/wizard 19.

So far, for pure oomph while staying true to class abilities, I've found Warlock 4 -> Sorcerer 16 to be the most viable. Going Tome and Draconic, grabbing Agonizing Blast and swapping whatever other invocation to Book of the Ancients at 3rd level, you'll get a ton of cantrips, and probably more importantly, 2 additional slots at 2nd level - by 7th character level, you'll have 5 2nd level slots - 2 on a per rest recharge! Plus rituals for the utility - and you'll have your 20 Cha by 8th level still. Oh, and Sorcery Points... metamagic fun and additional spell slots? Heck yeah!


WotC did an amazing job at driving me crazy with their multiclassing (more, class level baked in goodness). I think 'I'll go Fighter 1/Wizard x' It's only sacrificing 1 level of casting... but then I want Action Surge - why not, it's only one more level... but if I do that, I might as well grab EK for a few more spells... and if I go with three levels, I won't get my first attribute bonus/feat for 7 levels... argh! 4th level fighter it is... wait, no no 9th level spell or 18th level ability... argh! I hate this game!!! LOL. Pretty much every incarnation of multiclassing has gone that way for me.

I want a hard hitting rogue, but need maneuvers... ahh! Too little sneak now! I want a tanking barbarian, but too many feats, my STR/CON/DEX will never be higher than 16 ARGH!!! Rogue 12, Fighter 8 = 7 feats! What?!? Wait, I'll never play a game that high....

And that's when I start to convulse. :)

I hate multiclassing. I mean, I love it - but I hate it. I want whomever DMs for me, to not allow it. Take the crack away from me, because I can't be trusted! Paralysis by Analysis. Truth.

Hahaha, that means they did it right. :smalltongue:

[Person_Man]

I think the rules were designed assuming single classes, multiclassing is an optional rule after all. Honestly I think we'll eventually see most class types we'd like to play represented by archtypes eventually.

I agree with you. I just think that it's foolishly short sighted that they did it the way they did.

Multi-classing is a big tradition in D&D, that has existed since 1E, that has occurred in pretty much every D&D game I have ever played ever. Lots of players love it. So there's no reason to include a kludgey optional version of it when you could have designed a less broken version.

[Giant2005]

The only facet of multiclassing that isn't well defined is the amount of HP you get when leveling. The HP at first level entry (Which is the max possible HP value) could refer to a straight level 1 character or the first level of that class.

[DrLemniscate]

One thing I saw and was a bit worried by was that, since you can cast in any armour you have proficiency, a wizard could take a single level dip as a cleric and get proficiency with medium armour and shields. They gain a few useful cleric spells as well and the only cost is the level 20 wizard class feature which I'm not overly bothered by. A high dexterity wizard could match that AC by using mage armour.

The highest AC a Level 20 Fighter can get (without magic equipment) is 21 (18 Full Plate + 2 Shield + 1 Protection Fighting Style).

But by taking a singular level in Barbarian, they can get an AC of 22 (10 + 5 DEX mod + 5 STR mod + 2 Shield), as well as 2 Rages they can use for +2 damage or resistance to physical damage. All of this without requiring the Heavy Armor.

I don't find it too odd. The first scenario represents the traditional Knight in a sturdy tin can, with more flexibility in weapons and more attacks.

The second scenario represents more of a Swashbuckler with the high DEX. Limited to Finesse weapons and 3 attacks, but maybe getting more damage than the other Fighter with 4 attacks by having the Dueling fighting style, aiming for the weak spots.

Really, you can think about any multiclassing in the right way for it to make sense.

The Heavy Armor wearing Wizard could be ex-military, used to the forced march and needing to defend himself (Strength as a tertiary stat could help here). I'm just a sucker for the ex-military background. Even a low AC could be attributed to the Wizard being in one of the Artillery Cadres, used to being in the back and casting big spells.

A Wizard used to attaining the same AC with magic could be a bit of a snob, used to dismissing enemy attacks with a wave of their hand.

[MustacheFart]

My only issue hasn't been with the rules themselves but with my DM's acceptance and understanding of them.

[DrLemniscate]

My only issue hasn't been with the rules themselves but with my DM's acceptance and understanding of them.

If your DM doesn't accept something, either try to come up with a reasonable roleplaying explanation for it, or just try to work around it.

Just because the PHB lets you become proficient in every skill by level 7 doesn't mean your DM has to accept your character with levels in 4 different classes.

Heck, you could much more easily become a master of disguise with an insane minimum roll and bonus for any saving throws to keep someone from finding you out, and the DM wouldn't have to accept your infallible disguise (roll to trip and reveal it, don't know the answer to a question that the real person would).

[MustacheFart]

If your DM doesn't accept something, either try to come up with a reasonable roleplaying explanation for it, or just try to work around it.

Just because the PHB lets you become proficient in every skill by level 7 doesn't mean your DM has to accept your character with levels in 4 different classes.

Heck, you could much more easily become a master of disguise with an insane minimum roll and bonus for any saving throws to keep someone from finding you out, and the DM wouldn't have to accept your infallible disguise (roll to trip and reveal it, don't know the answer to a question that the real person would).

I meant more along the lines of...a monk can't be a barbarian and a barbarian can't be a monk.

[Rilak]

The only facet of multiclassing that isn't well defined is the amount of HP you get when leveling. The HP at first level entry (Which is the max possible HP value) could refer to a straight level 1 character or the first level of that class.

No it cannot...


You gain the hit points from your new class as described for levels after 1st.

The multi-class rules are really well specified. Only warlock invocations seem a bit ambiguous (can a 3-level dip really add +5 to all melee hits for a Paladin? In addition to +1d6 for Hex).

[Giant2005]

No it cannot...



The multi-class rules are really well specified. Only warlock invocations seem a bit ambiguous (can a 3-level dip really add +5 to all melee hits for a Paladin? In addition to +1d6 for Hex).

You are right! Serves me right for not checking and just assuming they would get it wrong.

[Seerow]

My only issue hasn't been with the rules themselves but with my DM's acceptance and understanding of them.

What you mean all DMs don't see things the same way as players, and shuffling the majority of the system off onto "Mother May I?" style play doesn't always work out perfectly?!

Certainly this is a stunning revelation that nobody could have predicted.

[Sidmen]

What you mean all DMs don't see things the same way as players, and shuffling the majority of the system off onto "Mother May I?" style play doesn't always work out perfectly?!

Certainly this is a stunning revelation that nobody could have predicted.
Meh, it's a GM call just as much as it's always been. I'd personally rather it tell the prospective player that your DM might not approve of your wilderness-loving ranger instantly and unexpectedly becoming a wizard without explanation, so ask him before you assume he's ok with it.

[MustacheFart]

What you mean all DMs don't see things the same way as players, and shuffling the majority of the system off onto "Mother May I?" style play doesn't always work out perfectly?!

Certainly this is a stunning revelation that nobody could have predicted.

I know right? Who would've thought that I could deliver such a revelation in a thread about multi-classing rules being an issue. Marvelous!

[MustacheFart]

Meh, it's a GM call just as much as it's always been. I'd personally rather it tell the prospective player that your DM might not approve of your wilderness-loving ranger instantly and unexpectedly becoming a wizard without explanation, so ask him before you assume he's ok with it.

Honestly, every time I have asked before hand with a DM it has bitten me in the ass. I try to be upfront because I hate being surprised when I DM. That said, I've watched other players in my group not be so forthcoming and pretty much get away with it as they wanted. Basically, a complete reinforcement of the old addage "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission." I feel like crap if I just try and pull that kind of thing on a DM. Unfortunately, that also means I don't get control over my character concept often.

[DrLemniscate]

I meant more along the lines of...a monk can't be a barbarian and a barbarian can't be a monk.

It's a roleplaying game, try to creatively pitch it to him.

A character might start as a barbarian, but strive to find an inner peace and quench his rage. He will still go in to a rage every so often, but not as much as he might of if he had continued on his path.

A character might start as a monk, all inner peace like, then might suffer some tragedy (such as his monastery being destroyed by a BBEG), causing him to go in some kind of rage for vengeance.

I think your DM just sees Barbarians and Monks as being sort of polar opposites, when they aren't. Barbarians can have an animalistic background, rather than just mindlessly raging, which is reflected by their Totem archetype.

You could even try to have a Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde, or The Hulk, story.

[Soular]

The highest AC a Level 20 Fighter can get (without magic equipment) is 21 (18 Full Plate + 2 Shield + 1 Protection Fighting Style).

But by taking a singular level in Barbarian, they can get an AC of 22 (10 + 5 DEX mod + 5 STR mod + 2 Shield), as well as 2 Rages they can use for +2 damage or resistance to physical damage. All of this without requiring the Heavy Armor.

I don't find it too odd. The first scenario represents the traditional Knight in a sturdy tin can, with more flexibility in weapons and more attacks.

The second scenario represents more of a Swashbuckler with the high DEX. Limited to Finesse weapons and 3 attacks, but maybe getting more damage than the other Fighter with 4 attacks by having the Dueling fighting style, aiming for the weak spots.

Really, you can think about any multiclassing in the right way for it to make sense.

The Heavy Armor wearing Wizard could be ex-military, used to the forced march and needing to defend himself (Strength as a tertiary stat could help here). I'm just a sucker for the ex-military background. Even a low AC could be attributed to the Wizard being in one of the Artillery Cadres, used to being in the back and casting big spells.

A Wizard used to attaining the same AC with magic could be a bit of a snob, used to dismissing enemy attacks with a wave of their hand.

I dunno if I am totally on board with multi-classing a Barbarian and Fighter in this manner. What are you really gaining compared to what you're sacrificing?

The Barbarian class has a lot of really cool options built into it, but I think that you are missing out on them for the purpose of your "build."

You are maxing out DEX and CON for one Barbarian ability, but why? Lets's assume you use point buy to have 15 in both DEX and CON. Then racial bonuses pushes one of them to 17, let's say dwarf. That puts Unarmored Defense at 15. At 4th level you can raise both stats by one, raising your AC to 17. You can raise your AC by one more point at level 6, and again at level 8 for a total of 19. In reality this would be character level 9.

In contrast, a 1st level Fighter starts the game at AC 16, and should be AC 18 by 5th level. Not a whole lot of difference, really. He just gets there faster.

Except that instead of spending all of those levels raising his abilities, the mono-tasked Fighter gets three feats (four if human). The fighter is also free to swap out any of his weapons for another depending on the situation (monster vulnerabilities, found a magic one). Not only that, he isn't in contention with any other class, weapon-wise, since he can use such a broad array of them.

I'm sorry, but I can not see how a multi-class Fighter/Barbarian is as powerful as a straight Barbarian, or as versatile as a straight Fighter. He ends up being worse than either of them.

[MustacheFart]

It's a roleplaying game, try to creatively pitch it to him.

A character might start as a barbarian, but strive to find an inner peace and quench his rage. He will still go in to a rage every so often, but not as much as he might of if he had continued on his path.

A character might start as a monk, all inner peace like, then might suffer some tragedy (such as his monastery being destroyed by a BBEG), causing him to go in some kind of rage for vengeance.

I think your DM just sees Barbarians and Monks as being sort of polar opposites, when they aren't. Barbarians can have an animalistic background, rather than just mindlessly raging, which is reflected by their Totem archetype.

You could even try to have a Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde, or The Hulk, story.

I made bold the two parts that hit the figurative nail on the head. I tried that very same thing with being a monk who suffered some tragedy. In fact, my backstory is that a dragon (we're playing HOTDQ) raided and destroyed my temple. I was the only survivor and as a result suffered great anger. In fact, I even picked Half Orc as my race--not because it is particularly good for a monk--but since they struggle with inner evil/anger/etc. This dragon attack was the tipping point.

However, since we're starting at level 1 my DM stated that would mean I would be going from Monk into barbarian which didn't make sense to him because "Monks are highly trained and would not leave to go practice at getting angry."

Your first option was what I was forced into by the DM if I wanted to at all play the character. Unfortunately, that largely gimped the build and hurt the party in a difficult module.

My DM does see Barbarians and Monks as polar opposites. He sees monks as highly trained individuals and barbarians as uncontrollable raving monsters with weapons. I'm not surprised by his opinion on the barbarian. It's an opinion of many DMs I've met over the years that I've failed to dissolve in any of them.

I tried to reference the animal aspect of the barbarian with their totem archtype. In fact, my barbarian is going bear totem which is purely defensive. Not something an uncontrollable raving monster (who somehow can tell friend from foe for being uncontrollable and raving) would care about. My guy wears a white polar bear skin and I created his own former tribe called the White Bear tribe under Uthgar (god of barbarians who is animalistic) under Tempus. However, I am still just the uncontrollable barbarian.

hell, I even tried pulling out history on him with assassins (a profession in which you HAVE to be highly trained) who used "hasheesh" (sp?) before battle. It was a psychotropic drug that they believed dulled pain (Barbarians resistance) and made them stronger in battle. No dice with the DM.

However, regardless I still don't "rage" with my character. He's very tribal and ritualistic so instead I sniff some good stuff first whenever I want to "rage".

[ambartanen]

I've had some experience with GMs putting random restrictions on players that kind of seriously mess with their characters for no good reason. It is never fun but it can be hard as a GM to know when you are in the right. Forcing your idea of what a class should be like on a player doesn't sound like a good reason to do it though.

[DrLemniscate]

I dunno if I am totally on board with multi-classing a Barbarian and Fighter in this manner. What are you really gaining compared to what you're sacrificing?

The Barbarian class has a lot of really cool options built into it, but I think that you are missing out on them for the purpose of your "build."

You are maxing out DEX and CON for one Barbarian ability, but why? Lets's assume you use point buy to have 15 in both DEX and CON. Then racial bonuses pushes one of them to 17, let's say dwarf. That puts Unarmored Defense at 15. At 4th level you can raise both stats by one, raising your AC to 17. You can raise your AC by one more point at level 6, and again at level 8 for a total of 19. In reality this would be character level 9.

In contrast, a 1st level Fighter starts the game at AC 16, and should be AC 18 by 5th level. Not a whole lot of difference, really. He just gets there faster.

Except that instead of spending all of those levels raising his abilities, the mono-tasked Fighter gets three feats (four if human). The fighter is also free to swap out any of his weapons for another depending on the situation (monster vulnerabilities, found a magic one). Not only that, he isn't in contention with any other class, weapon-wise, since he can use such a broad array of them.

I'm sorry, but I can not see how a multi-class Fighter/Barbarian is as powerful as a straight Barbarian, or as versatile as a straight Fighter. He ends up being worse than either of them.

It's really just me trying to min/max within my own preferences / self-imposed limitations.

I wanted to build a Tank. I didn't want a big dumb meat shield, and I wanted to provide utility to the group.

So just focusing on improving my own HP or AC was out. I also like to split my defenses between magical and physical, so focusing on CON and DEX worked for both Physical (Unarmored Defense) as well as Magical (HP Buffer, DEX Saving Throws). Either the Dueling or Protection Fighting Style works best. I find Protection to be a bit lackluster, and the damage from Dueling is pretty good (makes it better than TWF without the Dual Wielder feat).

Since my Strength wasn't going to be too high, I'll focus on Finesse weapons (but I can always carry spare weapons, whip out a sling, or use the Shield as an improvised Bludgeoning weapon).

I generally try to refine a character's background more and more to decide what routes to take, and at the same time working min/max decisions in to this background. It makes building characters more fun, and it makes it easier to slide things past the DM.

In this case, my Fighter is ex-Military; Infantry(maybe even a Sapper). Used to being on the front lines where you either fight dirty or die; Knights in their bulky armor and honor code have no place here. Not taking a hit is the first line of defense, hence the focus on Dexterity and lack of Heavy Armor. You also need a good toolkit; ranged weapons, combat maneuvers, and a bag full of tricks. His need for self-reliance on the battlefield stems from general experience and the loss of his squad, which reflects on his current lifestyle. Working as a "Sellshield", escorting merchant caravans.

I know I'll eventually build a full on 2-Hander wielding Fighter (maybe try to abuse Polearm and Great Weapon feats), and I know I'll eventually build a 24 AC Barbarian with a Bear Totem Spirit.

[Mikeavelli]

Monk to Barbarian

Is your DM an Anime fan? Get him sold on Rorouni Kenshin, because one of the best characters, Anji (http://kenshin.wikia.com/wiki/Y%C5%ABky%C5%ABzan_Anji) has this exact backstory, turning from a highly disciplined monk into a rage-filled psycho after his monastery is burned to the ground, and he wants revenge.

By the time the series rolls around, he's calmed down a bit, and is full on half-monk half-barbarian.

-------

Has anyone looked into the potential of a Rogue/Oath of Vengeance Paladin? The 3rd level specialization lets you just declare someone your enemy, and have advantage against them all the time. DM's who impose fluff might limit the number of people you can declare this against, but RAW allows you to use it pretty much infinitely, all the time, against anyone. Never miss getting sneak attack damage again!

[Shadow]

DM's who impose fluff might limit the number of people you can declare this against, but RAW allows you to use it pretty much infinitely, all the time, against anyone. Never miss getting sneak attack damage again!

Uh, no, RAW limits it to once per short rest. It's a channel divinity option.

[Mikeavelli]

Uh, no, RAW limits it to once per short rest. It's a channel divinity option.

Ah, I figured I was missing something.

Back to the TO drawing board...

[Soular]

It's really just me trying to min/max within my own preferences / self-imposed limitations.

I wanted to build a Tank. I didn't want a big dumb meat shield, and I wanted to provide utility to the group.

So just focusing on improving my own HP or AC was out. I also like to split my defenses between magical and physical, so focusing on CON and DEX worked for both Physical (Unarmored Defense) as well as Magical (HP Buffer, DEX Saving Throws). Either the Dueling or Protection Fighting Style works best. I find Protection to be a bit lackluster, and the damage from Dueling is pretty good (makes it better than TWF without the Dual Wielder feat).

Since my Strength wasn't going to be too high, I'll focus on Finesse weapons (but I can always carry spare weapons, whip out a sling, or use the Shield as an improvised Bludgeoning weapon).

I generally try to refine a character's background more and more to decide what routes to take, and at the same time working min/max decisions in to this background. It makes building characters more fun, and it makes it easier to slide things past the DM.

In this case, my Fighter is ex-Military; Infantry(maybe even a Sapper). Used to being on the front lines where you either fight dirty or die; Knights in their bulky armor and honor code have no place here. Not taking a hit is the first line of defense, hence the focus on Dexterity and lack of Heavy Armor. You also need a good toolkit; ranged weapons, combat maneuvers, and a bag full of tricks. His need for self-reliance on the battlefield stems from general experience and the loss of his squad, which reflects on his current lifestyle. Working as a "Sellshield", escorting merchant caravans.

I know I'll eventually build a full on 2-Hander wielding Fighter (maybe try to abuse Polearm and Great Weapon feats), and I know I'll eventually build a 24 AC Barbarian with a Bear Totem Spirit.

Thanks! This helps me understand where you were headed with the character.