Multiclass spell slot progression question. RAI

[aoineko13]

While looking into multiclassing (casters specifically) I noticed that paladin/ranger provide half their class level towards spell slots available (and arcane trickster/eldritch knight 1/3rd), however, they gain access to new spell slots at a faster rate than this if they do not multiclass.

paladin/ranger single class spell slots are gained at levels: 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19
paladin/ranger multiclass spell slots are gained at levels: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20

arcane trickster/edlritch knight single class spell slots gained: 3, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19
arcane trickster/edlritch knight multiclass spell slots gained: 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21

This seems to me that by multiclassing you are not gaining all of the features of that level of your class. And I suspect that it was done to simplify multiclassing, rather than intending to reduce what you gain from leveling to x level in the class.

Is the RAI for multiclassing in ranger/paladin/arcane trickster/eldritch knight to slow your spell slot progression? Or is it more of an oversimplification to rules with an unintended handicap?

[Chronos]

It's approximately equal, and in fact it's exactly equal for any level where the division gives you an integer. The only reason it's less for a multiclass character is because of the rounding down.

[aoineko13]

Then why don't the rules say round up when they say round down?

[burninatortrog]

Fighter, paladin, ranger, and rogue are all quite heavily front-loaded with proficiencies and low-level class features, so multiclassing with those classes is not unattractive by the RAW.

Certainly, nothing about the RAW is "unintended."

You could probably implement the changes you've suggested without breaking the game. It will make multiclassing with the aforementioned classes a bit more mechanically attractive, that's all.

[TheOOB]

The problem you are addressing literally does not exist. You'll never be a multiclass ranger/paladin and be able to cast spells at a higher level then you have spell slots for. If you throw one level of ranger in your paladin you are getting your slots one level later, but your also learning your higher level spells one level later.

[squab]

Where in the book does it mention anything about learning spells as a paladin? I could've missed it, but a brief skim suggests to me that paladins can prepare all spells on their spell list that they have spell slots for.

I think honestly it's just for simplicity. Rounding up would probably do silly things (eldritch knight1/wizardX doesn't lose any spell slots) and telling people to use standard rounding rules requires explaining standard rounding rules and honestly is just gonna cause more confusion then it's worth. Math confuses a lot more people then a lot of (other) people realize. Especially since 5th has a focus on "rulings not rules" so imo any reasonable DM will let you pick* whatever gives you the highest spell progression.

Or more likely, no one at the table will even realize that the paladin5/barbarian1 is supposed to have less spells per day then the paladin 5.

*Out of your class spells per day vs multiclass spells per day.

[Strill]

Basically the Eldritch Knight spell slot progression rounds up, while the multiclass progression rounds down. It's probably an intentional nerf to multiclassing, since the devs don't want multiclass combos becoming the default.

[burninatortrog]

Or more likely, no one at the table will even realize that the paladin5/barbarian1 is supposed to have less spells per day then the paladin 5.

Most likely they won't "realize" this because the multiclass spellcasting progression only comes into play if a character gains the Spellcasting class feature from two different classes. :P

[Chronos]

And rounding up would also disagree with the base class tables; it'd just disagree in the other direction. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters spend 18 levels on getting spells no higher than 4th, while full casters only spend 8 levels on that same range. In order to make the tables match, the multiclass spell table would have to be three times as long.

[coredump]

The only change I would make is to add everything before rounding.

Rang/2 + Pal/2 + EK/3 + AT/3 = Then round

Currently Ranger4 + EK/3 = 2 + 1 = lvl 3
Ranger5 + EK5 = 2.5 + 1.66 = 2+1= lvl 3
I would do:
Ranger5 + EK5 = 2.5 + 1.66 = 4.16 = lvl 4