Can one multiclass into the same class?

[snowman87]

It seems a little unfair if one can't train into the different archetypes of the same class. Are there rules for it? What if someone has an Assassin Rogue and wants to add some Swashbuckler features? What if a Fighter wants superioriety dice and spells? How would that be handled, if at all?

[Rusvul]

I'm almost entirely certain that, by RAW, you can't do that. It would open up all kinds of abuse- for one, the game isn't designed to have fighters with superiority dice and spells. And if you could gain class features twice, Warlocks could get lots of spell slots (and all three patrons.)

Character design is about trade offs, taking that away and letting someone choose 'all of the above' kind of defeats the purpose.

[psychopomp23]

It seems a little unfair if one can't train into the different archetypes of the same class. Are there rules for it? What if someone has an Assassin Rogue and wants to add some Swashbuckler features? What if a Fighter wants superioriety dice and spells? How would that be handled, if at all?

Depending on what you're looking for there are feats that lets you take maneuvers from the fighter's Battle master called Martial adept

[snowman87]

I'm almost entirely certain that, by RAW, you can't do that. It would open up all kinds of abuse- for one, the game isn't designed to have fighters with superiority dice and spells. And if you could gain class features twice, Warlocks could get lots of spell slots (and all three patrons.)

Character design is about trade offs, taking that away and letting someone choose 'all of the above' kind of defeats the purpose.

It just seems odd to me that one can branch out to learn an entirely different class but not learn new features within the class your character has trained in already. It would seem practical that it would be easier to do that.

[ThirdProgenitor]

It just seems odd to me that one can branch out to learn an entirely different class but not learn new features within the class you're character has trained in already. It would seem practical that it would be easier to do that.

Sure, it seems weird logically, but remember that the question isn't one of thematics, but rather balance. As the people above me said, it would lead to a lot of abusable things.
I suppose what you could do is deny them the class features they already have (they can't get improved versions of them and must stick with what they got) and only give them their archetype stuff then play test it for balance. Just saying, im pretty sure it wouldn't be.

[JellyPooga]

It seems a little unfair if one can't train into the different archetypes of the same class. Are there rules for it? What if someone has an Assassin Rogue and wants to add some Swashbuckler features? What if a Fighter wants superioriety dice and spells? How would that be handled, if at all?

I don't think it's necessary. There's a few examples where the archetypes ability is truly unique, but not a lot. Want a Battlemaster Fighter with some spellcasting? Multiclass Wizard or Bard. Want an Assassin Rogue with greater fighting ability or mobility? Multiclass Fighter or Monk. So on and so forth.

Multiclassing within a Class to cherry pick abilities breaks the balance of those abilities somewhat. To what degree depends on the Class and Archetypes/specialisations in question, but I'd think hard and long (as a GM) before allowing a player this kind of freedom, if ever I would (which is unlikely).

[Theodoxus]

I'm not seeing the balance issue, actually. You're still confined by that one thing every role playing game has: action economy.

So you're a fighter who has Superiority Dice and Spells? And? They don't blend well. There's a reason there's a not a lot of 'optimization' around BattleMasters and Wizards (or any other spell caster). A Bard 3/Bard 3 would have 6th level slots (as per the multiclassing rules), they'd only have 2nd level spells (lots of them, but no more than a Bard 3/Sorc 3) It's the ultimate breadth of knowledge, shallow pool thing. In fact, you're delaying all the great things about being a bard for little to no gain - if that's not "not OP", I don't know what else to call it.

The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes that outside of a very few niche builds (Barbarian 3/3 for Totem and Frenzy would be fun; Assassin and Thief, likewise fun) it's a definite downgrade in power. Even if you determined that core features were gained at character level (I would, no need to punished them for an interesting concept), the archetypical powers that come online would be delayed (and the highest never achieved) Some builds, that's ok - others, not so much...

A 14th level Ancients 7/ Devotion 7 paladin though... wow, nice buffs! (But everyone would be huddled around him, that 30' aura would never be obtained...

All depends on what you want ;)

[snowman87]

I'm not seeing the balance issue, actually. You're still confined by that one thing every role playing game has: action economy.

So you're a fighter who has Superiority Dice and Spells? And? They don't blend well. There's a reason there's a not a lot of 'optimization' around BattleMasters and Wizards (or any other spell caster). A Bard 3/Bard 3 would have 6th level slots (as per the multiclassing rules), they'd only have 2nd level spells (lots of them, but no more than a Bard 3/Sorc 3) It's the ultimate breadth of knowledge, shallow pool thing. In fact, you're delaying all the great things about being a bard for little to no gain - if that's not "not OP", I don't know what else to call it.

The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes that outside of a very few niche builds (Barbarian 3/3 for Totem and Frenzy would be fun; Assassin and Thief, likewise fun) it's a definite downgrade in power. Even if you determined that core features were gained at character level (I would, no need to punished them for an interesting concept), the archetypical powers that come online would be delayed (and the highest never achieved) Some builds, that's ok - others, not so much...

That's what I was thinking. Sure, getting both Fancy Footwork and Assassinate within a Rogue build would be killer (*pun*), but you'd be giving up all the extra Sneak Attack damage you'd get reaching a higher level within the single archetype, not to mention all of the normal class abilities like Uncanny Dodge and a second Expertise. All you'd get in the meantime is more HP and Hit Dice.

[Citan]

It seems a little unfair if one can't train into the different archetypes of the same class. Are there rules for it? What if someone has an Assassin Rogue and wants to add some Swashbuckler features? What if a Fighter wants superioriety dice and spells? How would that be handled, if at all?
It's totally not authorized by RAW, most certainly not by RAI. For practical as well as balance reasons.

1) Balance reasons
When I thought about this question long time ago, I saw several cases where this could be a problem.
Now, the only case I see without searching are...
- Monk: Monk Open Hand + either Shadow or Elemental could be very potent. Not game-breaking though (scoffers could even say it would be a great way to make Elemental Way good ^^).
- Sorcerer: just grab Draconic 1 for the extra armor, then Favored Soul / Wild Magic.
- Paladin: grab Devotion 3 then Vengeance all the way: +5 against all enemies (Devotion) and Haste (Vengeance).
- Warlock: stacking two Pacts may be very very potent (Chain > magic resistant familiar, to make your Bladelock THAT greater in going into melee and surviving).
- Wizard: take lvl2 Abjuration for a shield, lvl 2 Necromancy with a high level Evocation, and you have great chance to be immortal (Overchannel a high-level spell and enjoy, or just drop a Fireball on minions. :) Or swap a dip for lvl2 Divination and ensure that your Chain Lightning drops the BBEG.
- Paladin, Cleric, Sorcerer, Druid: stacking lvl 2/3 dips is a great way to have many prepared spells, far beyond the normal quantity.
- Cleric: grab Life 1 (bonus on healing), Nature (Shillelagh), Light (Warding Flare): you get best armor, max attack stat, and a reaction to potentially avoid attack. While still being unbeatable on healing.

In short, most of all of this can be achieved through multiclassing anyways.
So I don't think any of these should be considered "overpowered" per se.

With that said, in many cases, using the same class makes you lose lesser than traditional multiclass.
- no more stats requirement.
- no resources loss (Monk, Sorcerer).
- often easier to achieve.
It does not change the fact that, for a caster, you quickly lose high-level spells.
However, for many balanced builds ("half-caster in the sense of mixing spells and martials to fight), it can be a greater option.
Ex: Lore Bard 6 / Valor Bard X: you get nearly the same number of Magic Secret spells AND the greatness of Cutting Words.
A Draconic Sorcerer 1 dipping Favored Soul Sorcerer 1 would get much more spells available than a normal Sorcerer, without less Metamagic points.
Which brings us to the practical reason.

2) Practical reasons
Basically, many archetype features enhance class features, so you would have to make fine-tuning to make it work. To keep balance, spellcasters would probably require extra houserules to keep intramulticlassing balance with pure classes.

TL;DR: Could be made to work, but most concepts can be achieved with multiclassing already, so it would be probably too much hassle in most situations imo (might as well write an homebrew ^^).

[NNescio]

That's what I was thinking. Sure, getting both Fancy Footwork and Assassinate within a Rogue build would be killer (*pun*), but you'd be giving up all the extra Sneak Attack damage you'd get reaching a higher level within the single archetype, not to mention all of the normal class abilities like Uncanny Dodge and a second Expertise. All you'd get in the meantime is more HP and Hit Dice.

Actually, the SA dice would stack, because there's no specific language prohibiting that, unlike Channel Divinity and Extra Attack (because, well, RAW and RAI you're not allowed to multiclass into the same class anyway, so that kind of wording would be redundant... if not for your proposed houserule).

Heck it's even more flexible since you can get up to... five sources of SA with the Swordcoast splat book, and you can activate each one separately instead of all on a single attack, if you want to avoid overkilling. You'll also get more SA dice this way.

This houserule gets really broken once you consider Action Surge stacking.

[Citan]

Actually, the SA dice would stack, because there's no specific language prohibiting that, unlike Channel Divinity and Extra Attack (because, well, RAW and RAI you're not allowed to multiclass into the same class anyway, so that kind of wording would be redundant... if not for your proposed houserule).

Heck it's even more flexible since you can get up to... five sources of SA with the Swordcoast splat book, and you can activate each one separately instead of all on a single attack, if you want to avoid overkilling. You'll also get more SA dice this way.

This houserule gets really broken once you consider Action Surge stacking.
I was wondering about that.
If you were "self-multiclassing" without any thought, sure.

But, even as a houserule, wouldn't it be natural to treat archetype features and class features differently?
- class features are "calculated" by adding all archetype levels
- archetype features are independent.
Thus, a Thief 3 / Swash 4 would have a "normal lvl 7 Rogue" SA.

Otherwise, houseruling that multiclassing in the same class also brings "an additional instance" of class features would make it outright broken.

Such as Bard: would that mean you get 2*CHA mod Inspiration dice? That would make a "lvl1 dip" in the other archetype absolutely systematic...
Such as Warlock: you would get 6 invocations as lvl 3 Chain/lvl3 Pact/lvl3 Tome, and 6 short rest lvl 2 slots.

Seems overly OP to me, or overly complex to balance with houserules.

That's why for me in any case you would totally bypass class features when taking another archetype of the same class.

[EggKookoo]

I would heavily discourage it, but I'm not a big fan of multiclassing in general. I think I wouldn't allow it in my own game.

If you do it, I would at least enforce the ability score minimums just like you would for any other multiclassing.

[Citan]

I would heavily discourage it, but I'm not a big fan of multiclassing in general. I think I wouldn't allow it in my own game.

If you do it, I would at least enforce the ability score minimums just like you would for any other multiclassing.

Agreed. I'd prefer discuss with my player on how to achieve his/her concept by taking a normal class (or dual-class) and if necessary make small houserules to tweak it as needed.

However, if someone really wanted to multiclass in same class (and it's indeed the easiest way to go) I would enforce the following...

1. Stats requirement for multiclass are kept
Feels natural, and should not be a big deal apart from a few niche concepts.

2.Spell learning and spell progression is calculated by adding all levels from archetypes of the class, but is capped at lvl 17.
This houserule is arbitrary, and designed...
- To avoid low-level cheese (confer above example of Warlock and "always prepared" classes).
- To be simple to track (no hassle with spell learnt/prepared bookkeeping).
- To let players advance normally within the class (feels coherent, they are still studying the abilities of the class in all archetypes) while reflecting the fact that they dispersed themselves at higher level.

3. For class features that scale with class level, we same rule as before (add levels of all archetypes, capped at lvl 17).
Examples: Ki points, Sneak Attack, Invocations.
Again, avoid either cheesyness (low-level) or crappiness (higher levels), avoid complexity, but reflect the fact that they dispersed.

4. The other class features are earned with the same method, so that none can be gained several times
This is to prevent "one-shot" abilities cheesing (Fighting Style, Action Surge, Channel Divinity slot, Favored Enemy etc) while keeping the progression relevant.
I thought first about making progression completely separated, with forbiddance to get class feature more than once, but this would make this kind of multiclassing too lacklusting in terms of benefits.

5. ASI progression is calculated separately, by adding all archetype levels.
Seems necessary to me to compensate the fact that you don't get much with this multiclassing compared to usual multiclassing (since class features don't "stack").

6. Archetype features are earned as with normal multiclassing.

TL;DR: you progress normally in your class, you make separate progression only for archetype-related benefits and features. As a counterpart for this (to still "lose something" for the multiclass and make it a tough choice), you will never get class features beyond 17th level (except ASI and hit dice).

So, three examples:
Rogue Thief 3 / Rogue 5 AT: gets 8 hit dice, all archetype abilities, 4d6 SA and 2 ASI, and class features up to Evasion.

Sorcerer Draconic 1 / Favored Soul 6: 7 hit dice, 7 MMp, 1 ASI, lvl 7 spell progression, Draconic Resilience and Extra Attack.

Warlock Chain 3 / Blade 5 8 hit dice, lvl 8 character spell progression, benefits of both pacts, 4 invocations known.

Etc...
What do you think? :)

[Doof]

I'd allow it, since RAW they aren't gonna get anywhere any faster.

Illusionist 2/Necromancer 2 will, under the multiclass rule as normal, would only be able to cast 1st level spells, for example, and don't get ASI since both classes are at level 2.

[snowman87]

I'd allow it, since RAW they aren't gonna get anywhere any faster.

Illusionist 2/Necromancer 2 will, under the multiclass rule as normal, would only be able to cast 1st level spells, for example, and don't get ASI since both classes are at level 2.

Agreed. You wouldn't be getting any new skills or proficiencies and losing out on standard class features you would normally receive.

[CapnZapp]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?452358-Can-one-multiclass-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?486672-Multiclassing-in-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482358-Multiclassing-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?480138-multiclass-within-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?387596-Can-you-multiclass-within-the-same-class-for-different-archetypes

[Aett_Thorn]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?452358-Can-one-multiclass-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?486672-Multiclassing-in-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482358-Multiclassing-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?480138-multiclass-within-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?387596-Can-you-multiclass-within-the-same-class-for-different-archetypes

Why on earth did you thread necro for THAT?

[Hypersmith]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?452358-Can-one-multiclass-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?486672-Multiclassing-in-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482358-Multiclassing-into-the-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?480138-multiclass-within-same-class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?387596-Can-you-multiclass-within-the-same-class-for-different-archetypes

What? Why? I'm so confused

[Millstone85]

Why on earth did you thread necro for THAT?Necro'd all these threads too. :smalleek:

[Khrysaes]

Phone typing so errors.

What you could do is make each archetype level a selection. So at level 3 a rogue could pick assassinate, then at 9 they could get the disguise or fancy foot work or whatever thief has. Then at ... 13? If the picked fancy footwork or something instead of disguise, they could get disguise or the thief level 3 one or the sb level 9 one.
This would make it more versatile. You could require the previous tier of feature, and otherwise your core class features progress the same.
This will most likely allow a lot more breakable or powerful characters, and i probably wouldnt allow it to work with ek or at because spell progression.

[nvisibl]

Not only does this conflict with game mechanics, for many classes it makes no logical sense.
Take sorcerors for instance. They're power comes from within, either something they were born with or exposed to. How does one gain power from their dragon blood and from exposure to raw surges of magic gone wild.
How about warlocks, clerics, and divine paladins? These classes gain their power from serving or striking bargains with gods or other unimaginably powerful entities. How is that nearly omnipotent, and probably jealous and possessive, being going to react when the character decides to serve/bargain with another? I would think most deities would not only withdraw their power from the individual but exact some retribution upon them.
Wizards spend decades dedicating themselves to one school of magic. Outside of maybe elves or gnomes, there's probably no other race that lives long enough to master 2 schools of magic.
So for martial classes maybe this makes more sense, but you would be hindering yourself actually. By multiclassing rules, you would have to take the first 2-3 levels of the base class over again, you wouldn't get to start at the level you get to pick your archetype. IMO that just sets you back too much. Typically when you MC you gain diversity or synergy between 2 different classes. Re-leveling the same class over again doesn't do that for you.

[alchahest]

someone mentioned EK and battlemaster not jiving, but, I beg to differ - especially with SCAG cantrips. imagine casting booming blade or something, and adding another rider (knockdown or something) and another die to double if you crit? For that matter, champ3/battlemaster 17 is very potent too, since you get the increased crit range, and dice you can add after rolling to increase damage for your crits.

a Hexblade Warlock can have both a pact weapon and a book? that gives them access to all those scag cantrips, keying off of charisma.

there's all kinds of balance issues to be had.

[qube]

I would do it on a case-by-case basis.

While I get that powerplay combo's are possible, I also don't immediately see problems with a.

(consider there can't be outrage that a fighter/fighter would be able to pick two different fighting styles - as a fighter/paladin can do the same thing. A cleric/cleric gets extra uses for his channel divinity, but so does a paladin/cleric )

Heck, in the end, the more classes there are, it becomes inevitable: Perhaps Fighter/Fighter will be fobidden, but Fighter/new-class-that-looks-almost-the-same-as-fighter isn't ...

[Theodoxus]

someone mentioned EK and battlemaster not jiving, but, I beg to differ - especially with SCAG cantrips. imagine casting booming blade or something, and adding another rider (knockdown or something) and another die to double if you crit? For that matter, champ3/battlemaster 17 is very potent too, since you get the increased crit range, and dice you can add after rolling to increase damage for your crits.

a Hexblade Warlock can have both a pact weapon and a book? that gives them access to all those scag cantrips, keying off of charisma.

there's all kinds of balance issues to be had.

If you'll notice, it was from 2015, before SCAG was out - so, thanks for paying attention...

[Khrysaes]

If you'll notice, it was from 2015, before SCAG was out - so, thanks for paying attention...

Aw man.. I didnt even notice that the post with the links is the one that necroed the thread.

[alchahest]

If you'll notice, it was from 2015, before SCAG was out - so, thanks for paying attention...

lmao bud I'm not going to date check everyone's posts against release dates. What I said is applicable now, regardless of if it was, then. It wasn't a callout, I was just saying my piece.

[Finger6842]

8 Wizard schools of magic, 2 levels in each equals Archmage. I'd be happy to play test that for you. 14th level wizard would be 'magical' for sure since that's where all the big abilities are, no pun intended. Plus 4 more dip levels if you like. I love powerful characters but this guy really would unbalance a party and the campaign, no question about it.

[Theodoxus]

8 Wizard schools of magic, 2 levels in each equals Archmage. I'd be happy to play test that for you. 14th level wizard would be 'magical' for sure since that's where all the big abilities are, no pun intended. Plus 4 more dip levels if you like. I love powerful characters but this guy really would unbalance a party and the campaign, no question about it.

Really depends on how the MC rules for spell casting in the same class were determined. "RAW", 9 2nd level Wizard levels is a crapton of 1st level spells with 9th level slots, but still stuck with no ASIs or higher level spells... and I really wouldn't consider the 2nd level school abilities to be overly powerful, even if you got all of them...

[RSP]

8 Wizard schools of magic, 2 levels in each equals Archmage. I'd be happy to play test that for you. 14th level wizard would be 'magical' for sure since that's where all the big abilities are, no pun intended. Plus 4 more dip levels if you like. I love powerful characters but this guy really would unbalance a party and the campaign, no question about it.


Really depends on how the MC rules for spell casting in the same class were determined. "RAW", 9 2nd level Wizard levels is a crapton of 1st level spells with 9th level slots, but still stuck with no ASIs or higher level spells... and I really wouldn't consider the 2nd level school abilities to be overly powerful, even if you got all of them...

Yeah if you keep each instance of a class separate, there's really zero balance issues. If you let Wizard 2/Wizard 2/Wizard 2 also count as Wizard 6, then you may run into an issue, though that, to me, would be the same as letting Fighter 3/Rogue 3 also count as Fighter 6.

Likewise, keep Champion/Battlemaster combos as Fighter X/Fighter X, and not Fighter X+X, and you should be fine. Just don't let Extra Attack stack with the multiclass and there shouldn't be an issue.

[Mikal]

Yeah if you keep each instance of a class separate, there's really zero balance issues. If you let Wizard 2/Wizard 2/Wizard 2 also count as Wizard 6, then you may run into an issue, though that, to me, would be the same as letting Fighter 3/Rogue 3 also count as Fighter 6.

Likewise, keep Champion/Battlemaster combos as Fighter X/Fighter X, and not Fighter X+X, and you should be fine. Just don't let Extra Attack stack with the multiclass and there shouldn't be an issue.

Like I said in another necro thread, Wizard 2/Wizard 2/Wizard 2 either grouped together or separate create big balance headaches.

Grouped together- you essentially have two subclasses cherry picked without actual multi-class penalties. If you use this, you should allow Gestalt for those who choose not to double-dip multiclass, to balance it for others.

Kept separate- Too many dead levels. No way to really balance it. You're just going to be worse off than others.

So it skews widely from one or the other, and breaks the design intent of this edition, no matter which way you go with.

[RSP]

Like I said in another necro thread, Wizard 2/Wizard 2/Wizard 2 either grouped together or separate create big balance headaches.

Grouped together- you essentially have two subclasses cherry picked without actual multi-class penalties. If you use this, you should allow Gestalt for those who choose not to double-dip multiclass, to balance it for others.

Kept separate- Too many dead levels. No way to really balance it. You're just going to be worse off than others.

So it skews widely from one or the other, and breaks the design intent of this edition, no matter which way you go with.

I don't see the problem keeping them separate. A) it's the Players choice. B) 5e works fine with non-optimal, or even suboptimal builds, C) it's not really dead levels other than maybe getting two instances of Extra Attack (which can happen with RAW multiclass already).

If someone wants to take 2 instances of Fighter to 6/6 they lose out on an Extra Attack for say Champion crits, Battlemaster dice, and a total of 4 ASIs. The straight Fighter 12 has 4 ASIs, 3 attacks, Indomitable, and either Battlemaster dice or expanded crits.

I'm pretty sure that whole other attack every round and Indomitable is okay balance wise compared to either expanded crit or battlemaster dice.

Likewise a Wizard 6/6 is going to essentially be the same spell-wise as a Sorcerer/Bard and Sorcerer/Bard is still the better combo, I'd say.

[NinaWu]

I'd allow it! (So long as I wasn't the DM and it was my character).

[Citan]

Like I said in another necro thread, Wizard 2/Wizard 2/Wizard 2 either grouped together or separate create big balance headaches.

Grouped together- you essentially have two subclasses cherry picked without actual multi-class penalties. If you use this, you should allow Gestalt for those who choose not to double-dip multiclass, to balance it for others.

Kept separate- Too many dead levels. No way to really balance it. You're just going to be worse off than others.

So it skews widely from one or the other, and breaks the design intent of this edition, no matter which way you go with.
Not necessarily. Or rather not at all in fact.
Sure, a Wizard 2/2/2 would know only 1st level spells. Well, why the big frown? It's the same as an EK or AT although with more fuel but lesser defense. Sure you known only 1st level spells, which are far less useful than the 2nd or 3rd level ones (which would be lesser true for Clerics).

But you have many more known and prepped spells than a pure Wizard...

A level 6 Wizard would know (putting aside "loot" spells) 6+(2*5) spells: so 16 spells. He could have (presumably 18 INT) 10 prepped spells.

The 2/2/2 Wizard would know 3*(6+2) = 24 spells so more than half of 1st level spells.
He would also know twice as much cantrips, so he could get a cantrip for any situation, fighting or not. So he probably has the right spell for the right situation, whatever happens.
And as soon as he gets another level somewhere, he gains 2nd level spells, many of which are useful even at higher levels (Blindness, Hold Person, Levitage, Suggestion, Web).

And most of School's level 2 benefits are imo worth that sacrifice: while I'd stick with only a "dual-Wizard", if I had to take a tri-one, I'd go Abjurer, Bladesinger and either Evoker or Diviner, leveling the first one up to 14 at least. I'd end as a pretty tanky Wizard, with 21 AC stat (Mage Armor + Bladesong, 16 DEX, 20 INT), resistance to magic, Abjurer Ward and great concentration (Resilient: CON + INT).

Same could be said for Clerics, although worse since they get strong benefits as soon as level 1 (Tempest / Nature / Life / Arcana = yummy)

Whatever you look at it, "multiclassing in the same class" is either as good as normal multiclass, or opening the gates of overpoweredness hell.

[RSP]

Not necessarily. Or rather not at all in fact.
Sure, a Wizard 2/2/2 would know only 1st level spells. Well, why the big frown? It's the same as an EK or AT although with more fuel but lesser defense. Sure you known only 1st level spells, which are far less useful than the 2nd or 3rd level ones (which would be lesser true for Clerics).

But you have many more known and prepped spells than a pure Wizard...

A level 6 Wizard would know (putting aside "loot" spells) 6+(2*5) spells: so 16 spells. He could have (presumably 18 INT) 10 prepped spells.

The 2/2/2 Wizard would know 3*(6+2) = 24 spells so more than half of 1st level spells.
He would also know twice as much cantrips, so he could get a cantrip for any situation, fighting or not. So he probably has the right spell for the right situation, whatever happens.
And as soon as he gets another level somewhere, he gains 2nd level spells, many of which are useful even at higher levels (Blindness, Hold Person, Levitage, Suggestion, Web).

And most of School's level 2 benefits are imo worth that sacrifice: while I'd stick with only a "dual-Wizard", if I had to take a tri-one, I'd go Abjurer, Bladesinger and either Evoker or Diviner, leveling the first one up to 14 at least. I'd end as a pretty tanky Wizard, with 21 AC stat (Mage Armor + Bladesong, 16 DEX, 20 INT), resistance to magic, Abjurer Ward and great concentration (Resilient: CON + INT).

Same could be said for Clerics, although worse since they get strong benefits as soon as level 1 (Tempest / Nature / Life / Arcana = yummy)

Whatever you look at it, "multiclassing in the same class" is either as good as normal multiclass, or opening the gates of overpoweredness hell.

I'd imagine an abjurer is tankier and a Bladesinger is harder to hit though

I really don't see any over poweredness to a Wizard type HP character who has a level 2 Abjurer's shield and Bladesinger and can cast a level 3 burning hands.

[Finger6842]

Not necessarily. Or rather not at all in fact.
Sure, a Wizard 2/2/2 would know only 1st level spells. Well, why the big frown? It's the same as an EK or AT although with more fuel but lesser defense. Sure you known only 1st level spells, which are far less useful than the 2nd or 3rd level ones (which would be lesser true for Clerics).

But you have many more known and prepped spells than a pure Wizard...

A level 6 Wizard would know (putting aside "loot" spells) 6+(2*5) spells: so 16 spells. He could have (presumably 18 INT) 10 prepped spells.

The 2/2/2 Wizard would know 3*(6+2) = 24 spells so more than half of 1st level spells.
He would also know twice as much cantrips, so he could get a cantrip for any situation, fighting or not. So he probably has the right spell for the right situation, whatever happens.
And as soon as he gets another level somewhere, he gains 2nd level spells, many of which are useful even at higher levels (Blindness, Hold Person, Levitage, Suggestion, Web).

And most of School's level 2 benefits are imo worth that sacrifice: while I'd stick with only a "dual-Wizard", if I had to take a tri-one, I'd go Abjurer, Bladesinger and either Evoker or Diviner, leveling the first one up to 14 at least. I'd end as a pretty tanky Wizard, with 21 AC stat (Mage Armor + Bladesong, 16 DEX, 20 INT), resistance to magic, Abjurer Ward and great concentration (Resilient: CON + INT).

Same could be said for Clerics, although worse since they get strong benefits as soon as level 1 (Tempest / Nature / Life / Arcana = yummy)

Whatever you look at it, "multiclassing in the same class" is either as good as normal multiclass, or opening the gates of overpoweredness hell.

The issue is the RAW. For example, Evoker for level 14 states "Starting at 14th level, you can increase the power of your simpler Spells. When you cast a wizard spell of 1st through 5th level that deals damage, you can deal maximum damage with that spell." That's 14th level wizard, not 14th level Evoker. There is no other way to interpret the sentence and while I believe most DM's would not allow the shenanigans I can still imagine having the level 6,8, and 14 ability from every school by level 16. Then drive to level 20 in a single school and STILL qualify for signature spells of third level and STILL be a level 20 wizard with 9th level spells and assuming 18 intelligence would have access to every known wizard level 1 spell and all the cantrips. I know action economy would largely limit actual power but the flexibility would be stunning. I would love to try it in a solo campaign if only for the intellectual exercise.

[Citan]

I'd imagine an abjurer is tankier and a Bladesinger is harder to hit though

I really don't see any over poweredness to a Wizard type HP character who has a level 2 Abjurer's shield and Bladesinger and can cast a level 3 burning hands.
Well, as far as offensive spells go, you are right it's plain inferior. You don't have Shatter, you don't have Fireball etc.
And to be honest, comparatively to a Cleric, there are not many 1st level spells I find still useful at higher level. Now, just imagine taking a "3rd" level in any School. You can learn 2 spells now, find other 2nd level spells later to write into your book, and can prepare all those 2nd level spells and have them available to cast.
Except that you will be better at maintaining concentration on it, thanks to the cumul of Bladesong (+INT to AC and Concentration) and Arcane Ward.

Truthfully though, I think 2/2/2 is a bad idea. ;) I'd totally see a Bladesinger 2 / Abjurer 4 though. You are one "spell level" late compared to a pure Wizard, but you got an extremely good short-rest feature.

You could check with Clerics too: add a single level of Life Cleric to a Light Cleric and you instantly got heavy armor proficiency and great healing, both of which are usually the main reason to pick Life in the first place.
More generally, stacking several Domain may end to very powerful things. Like stacking Arcana Cleric 8 and Light Cleric 8, you'd add twice your WIS modifier to weapon cantrips. ;)
Or Nature Cleric 8 with Tempest Cleric 6 and Arcana Cleric 1: now you can cast Booming Blade, add some lightning damage to it, and trigger the Thunder Strike benefit.
Or Trickery Cleric 2 with Arcana Cleric 1: cast Shocking Grasp from a safe distance to help your friends moving away from creatures without exposing yourself (well, this one would be easy to achieve anyways if you multiclass with Wizard or Sorcerer as your main class).

Other classes may become extremely good too.
Like Paladin: stack Devotion Paladin 7 (immunity to fear, charm) and Ancients Paladin 7 (resistance to magic) and you would laugh in the face of most enemies (even if obviously Aura of Protection wouldn't stack). It's not "too good" because you are renouncing to 30 feet Aura which is much better for the party overall. But as far as personal defense is concerned you made yourself extremely hard to break.

Or Monk: stack Open Hand X with just Long Death 3 would help you much in keeping alive while you try to shove that enemy prone in the enemy's backline.

An Eldricht Knight with Battlemater's Precision manoeuver would have the potential of becoming the greatest single-target debuffer of the game barring Wild Magic Sorcerer.


The issue is the RAW. For example, Evoker for level 14 states "Starting at 14th level, you can increase the power of your simpler Spells. When you cast a wizard spell of 1st through 5th level that deals damage, you can deal maximum damage with that spell." That's 14th level wizard, not 14th level Evoker. There is no other way to interpret the sentence and while I believe most DM's would not allow the shenanigans I can still imagine having the level 6,8, and 14 ability from every school by level 16. Then drive to level 20 in a single school and STILL qualify for signature spells of third level and STILL be a level 20 wizard with 9th level spells and assuming 18 intelligence would have access to every known wizard level 1 spell and all the cantrips. I know action economy would largely limit actual power but the flexibility would be stunning. I would love to try it in a solo campaign if only for the intellectual exercise.
I don't think there is any problem if you consider each archetype as a separate class, which was I believe the favorite opinion here?
Because then, no matter how School benefits are written, you wouldn't get them unless you took the right levels in the right archetype.
To get your example, if I had an Abjurer 12 / Evoker 2, I would have neither the "SPell Resistance" nor the "Overchannel". And when I get Abjurer 14, I would only get "Spell Resistance".

Now if you were considering the multiclass as "combined", obviously all balance breaks down because of what you said. That's why I fail to see any other way than "separate" to make such a "multiclass in the same class" work.

[RSP]

Well, asTruthfully though, I think 2/2/2 is a bad idea. ;) I'd totally see a Bladesinger 2 / Abjurer 4 though. You are one "spell level" late compared to a pure Wizard, but you got an extremely good short-rest feature.

You could check with Clerics too: add a single level of Life Cleric to a Light Cleric and you instantly got heavy armor proficiency and great healing, both of which are usually the main reason to pick Life in the first place.
More generally, stacking several Domain may end to very powerful things. Like stacking Arcana Cleric 8 and Light Cleric 8, you'd add twice your WIS modifier to weapon cantrips. ;)
Or Nature Cleric 8 with Tempest Cleric 6 and Arcana Cleric 1: now you can cast Booming Blade, add some lightning damage to it, and trigger the Thunder Strike benefit.
Or Trickery Cleric 2 with Arcana Cleric 1: cast Shocking Grasp from a safe distance to help your friends moving away from creatures without exposing yourself (well, this one would be easy to achieve anyways if you multiclass with Wizard or Sorcerer as your main class).

Or Monk: stack Open Hand X with just Long Death 3 would help you much in keeping alive while you try to shove that enemy prone in the enemy's backline.

An Eldricht Knight with Battlemater's Precision manoeuver would have the potential of becoming the greatest single-target debuffer of the game barring Wild Magic Sorcerer.


I cut the quote to only keep the "multiclass" options.

Bladesinger 2 is okay as a feature but I still don't see it as OP. Personally, I think a Warlock 2 dip is better for an Abjurer for free Mage Armor castings.

For the Clerics, isn't the 1 level dip for heavy armor already a popular multiclass option for every other non heavy armored class? Not sure I'd be worried about Clerics being able to do that. A few more HPs per healing spell doesn't bother me either as healing isn't as powerful in 5e anyway.

The monk is the only one that might cause an issue with its Ki stacking, though, similar to the Wizard, you're kind of trading power for versatility in missing out on the higher level Monk abilities, which are all pretty good.

EK/BM really isn't a problem for me either as you don't have that many spell slots or BM dice to really abuse anything.

Basically, if keeping each instance of the class separate, you're dealing with the same issues any multiclassing brings: trading higher level abilities for a little versatility. I think the game does a decent enough job balancing power levels that it isn't that big of a deal.

You can limit the MAD incurred by stating in the same class, but the Sorcerer/Bard/Warlock have been doing that anyway, and I don't see it as game breaking.

[Citan]

I cut the quote to only keep the "multiclass" options.

Bladesinger 2 is okay as a feature but I still don't see it as OP. Personally, I think a Warlock 2 dip is better for an Abjurer for free Mage Armor castings.

For the Clerics, isn't the 1 level dip for heavy armor already a popular multiclass option for every other non heavy armored class? Not sure I'd be worried about Clerics being able to do that. A few more HPs per healing spell doesn't bother me either as healing isn't as powerful in 5e anyway.

The monk is the only one that might cause an issue with its Ki stacking, though, similar to the Wizard, you're kind of trading power for versatility in missing out on the higher level Monk abilities, which are all pretty good.

EK/BM really isn't a problem for me either as you don't have that many spell slots or BM dice to really abuse anything.

Basically, if keeping each instance of the class separate, you're dealing with the same issues any multiclassing brings: trading higher level abilities for a little versatility. I think the game does a decent enough job balancing power levels that it isn't that big of a deal.

You can limit the MAD incurred by stating in the same class, but the Sorcerer/Bard/Warlock have been doing that anyway, and I don't see it as game breaking.
I didn't say that those multiclasses were OP by themselves. It evens out in the end with other builds. It does provide a strong spike in one aspect though.

To react on the Bladesinger example, it's far far more better than Warlock dip until you are at the very least Abjurer 7 or 8. And even then it may be better. Because enemies hit with growing efficiency and damage, so having a fully rechargeable Ward is great, but used on a low AC.
I don't think there is any theorycrafting way to properly compare both though, because too many variables are involved. ;)
At least the Bladesinger part is easier to multiclass into because of same stat. ^^

For Cleric, the strong benefit is being a Light Cleric that still gets heavy armor and better healing without hampering spellcaster progression, and delaying Cleric spellcasting by only one level. Any other way would involve losing one full level of spellcasting (Fighter) with no additional benefit, unless you go the DEX way (but then there is investment in ASI) or the CHA way to get Sorcerer dip.
So the point is not that it would be "too strong", but that it makes "full Life Cleric" totally irrelevant as a choice except in campaigns where characters can reach very high level (capstone being one of the best).
Same could be said for Trickster Domain: one usually put aside because of level 8 and beyond are lesser than in other Domains. But a 3-level multiclass would heavily benefit most of other Clerics, by providing good exclusive spells and extended range for spells (especially Light or Tempest).

So indeed there is no OP when you consider higher levels because you are still making trade-offs, but it does strongly eats at some archetypes because the cost is lesser than usual for the added benefit. On the plus side, it also opens the way to unusual builds (like the aforementioned extra strong Tempest/Nature or Arcana/Light Cleric).

[RSP]

I didn't say that those multiclasses were OP by themselves. It evens out in the end with other builds. It does provide a strong spike in one aspect though.

To react on the Bladesinger example, it's far far more better than Warlock dip until you are at the very least Abjurer 7 or 8. And even then it may be better. Because enemies hit with growing efficiency and damage, so having a fully rechargeable Ward is great, but used on a low AC.
I don't think there is any theorycrafting way to properly compare both though, because too many variables are involved. ;)
At least the Bladesinger part is easier to multiclass into because of same stat. ^^

For Cleric, the strong benefit is being a Light Cleric that still gets heavy armor and better healing without hampering spellcaster progression, and delaying Cleric spellcasting by only one level. Any other way would involve losing one full level of spellcasting (Fighter) with no additional benefit, unless you go the DEX way (but then there is investment in ASI) or the CHA way to get Sorcerer dip.
So the point is not that it would be "too strong", but that it makes "full Life Cleric" totally irrelevant as a choice except in campaigns where characters can reach very high level (capstone being one of the best).
Same could be said for Trickster Domain: one usually put aside because of level 8 and beyond are lesser than in other Domains. But a 3-level multiclass would heavily benefit most of other Clerics, by providing good exclusive spells and extended range for spells (especially Light or Tempest).

So indeed there is no OP when you consider higher levels because you are still making trade-offs, but it does strongly eats at some archetypes because the cost is lesser than usual for the added benefit. On the plus side, it also opens the way to unusual builds (like the aforementioned extra strong Tempest/Nature or Arcana/Light Cleric).

But all these benefits are available to anyone (assuming stat requirements met) who wants to multiclass. So long as the cost to get them is the same (that is not advancing in your other class).

Yeah it benefits the MAD aspect, but again, that's already available with other multiclassing options. And, unlike those multiclassing options, you get limited by not gaining new base class features (though some, like spells known, still grant effects).

Paladin and Ranger double ups would get a slight delay in spell slot progression, vs a single instance of either class, per the multiclass spell slot rules rounding down. A 3/3 character would be a 2nd level caster, as opposed to counting as a 3rd level caster at level 5 if not multiclassing.

If you go 8/8 in two Cleric classes for a little added damage on your one attack a round, sacrificing the benefits of being a Cleric 16, im okay with that.

[Citan]

But all these benefits are available to anyone (assuming stat requirements met) who wants to multiclass. So long as the cost to get them is the same (that is not advancing in your other class).

Yeah it benefits the MAD aspect, but again, that's already available with other multiclassing options. And, unlike those multiclassing options, you get limited by not gaining new base class features (though some, like spells known, still grant effects).

Paladin and Ranger double ups would get a slight delay in spell slot progression, vs a single instance of either class, per the multiclass spell slot rules rounding down. A 3/3 character would be a 2nd level caster, as opposed to counting as a 3rd level caster at level 5 if not multiclassing.

If you go 8/8 in two Cleric classes for a little added damage on your one attack a round, sacrificing the benefits of being a Cleric 16, im okay with that.
It's true, but the MAD aspect is the important one here imo, along with stacking of powerful permanent features (thinking Paladin here in the first place, but I'm sure other classes would benefit).
There is probably no way to break balance, but I'm sure we can find some multiclasses that would create hard situations to resolve for the DM. ;)

Also, not gaining new base class features, I'd say it would require case by case ruling.
Like, Channel Divinity is easy, it's ruled directly in PHB. Same with Unarmored Defense.

But what about a Wild Magic / Draconic 3? I'd say it could be easily argued that you gained 2 and 2 metamagics, as long as you don't choose the same obviously (like Fighting Style). So very easy way for a Sorcerer to get more Metamagic instead of waiting a 10th level.

What about a Rogue? Even if technically Sneak Attack would be "dedoubled", a Swashbukcler 3 / Thief 3 would still get 4d6 Sneak Attack (so actually better than a pure Rogue). And would get double Expertise at the same level, as long as you don't get the same choice.
Technically, one could be as stupid as going Rogue 1/ Rogue 1 / Rogue 1 / Rogue 1 etc to become Expert in all skills and gain a tremendously high Sneak Attack.
Even if you require that one gets archetype before starting a "multiclass in same class", it would still end as far better than any pure Rogue (or Bard for that matter) for skills.

What about Fighter? You could get several Fighting Style by just "dipping back" into Fighter. You would get several Action Surges.

Basically, any class features that works as a limited resource could be either stacked, based on the fact this is a numbered resource, or unstackable, based on the fact it's a one/rest. Both are arguable.
Permanent features that involve a choice could also be stacked: spells, Fighting Styles, skill proficiencies and expertises.

This system ought to cause problems because the classes are all very front-loaded.

[RSP]

It's true, but the MAD aspect is the important one here imo, along with stacking of powerful permanent features (thinking Paladin here in the first place, but I'm sure other classes would benefit).
There is probably no way to break balance, but I'm sure we can find some multiclasses that would create hard situations to resolve for the DM. ;)

Also, not gaining new base class features, I'd say it would require case by case ruling.
Like, Channel Divinity is easy, it's ruled directly in PHB. Same with Unarmored Defense.

But what about a Wild Magic / Draconic 3? I'd say it could be easily argued that you gained 2 and 2 metamagics, as long as you don't choose the same obviously (like Fighting Style). So very easy way for a Sorcerer to get more Metamagic instead of waiting a 10th level.

What about a Rogue? Even if technically Sneak Attack would be "dedoubled", a Swashbukcler 3 / Thief 3 would still get 4d6 Sneak Attack (so actually better than a pure Rogue). And would get double Expertise at the same level, as long as you don't get the same choice.
Technically, one could be as stupid as going Rogue 1/ Rogue 1 / Rogue 1 / Rogue 1 etc to become Expert in all skills and gain a tremendously high Sneak Attack.
Even if you require that one gets archetype before starting a "multiclass in same class", it would still end as far better than any pure Rogue (or Bard for that matter) for skills.

What about Fighter? You could get several Fighting Style by just "dipping back" into Fighter. You would get several Action Surges.

Basically, any class features that works as a limited resource could be either stacked, based on the fact this is a numbered resource, or unstackable, based on the fact it's a one/rest. Both are arguable.
Permanent features that involve a choice could also be stacked: spells, Fighting Styles, skill proficiencies and expertises.

This system ought to cause problems because the classes are all very front-loaded.

Nice catch on the R1 multiplying. I'd not allow just retaking level 1 over again, though, as I'd imagine the multiclassing would be done in good faith to get the archetype and as such would expect the archetype to be selected, as you suggested.

Other than that, I'd just live with the small bump in SA damage. I'm not horribly worried about the Expertise stack as that's easier than ever to get now with the UA Feats (which may become RAW in XGtE).

Sorcerer isn't a big issue if you keep in mind the class limits on spell points: a 3/3 would have two instances of 3 sorcerery points. If you broke down a slot for more, you'd only be able to add points to one of those and still abide by the limits.

You could get more options of metamagic, but it's still just variety over power, in my opinion.

Fighter I'm not worried about stacking to get multiple Action Surges d/t you're getting a 1x/sr extra action at the cost of delaying extra attack. I'm pretty sure 95% of the time a Fighter is using AS to attack more. AS for EA is a less effective fighter in that sense.

Now at 5/3 you'd have gotten 1 extra AS per sr, at the cost of 2 ASIs. I'm okay with that. And again at 8/3 you're trading that extra AS for your 3rd attack.

[Arkhios]

Google-Fu isn't strong with these ones asking same questions over and over again.