Is there anyone who wouldn't benefit from Fighter 2?

[Specter]

The benefits:

Paladins and Rangers get a second Fighting Style, for versatility or +1AC. Martials without Fighting Styles (Barbarians, Bladelocks, Valor Bards) get one, so they finally excel at their attacks. Non-martials get good armor proficiencies along with +1AC, making them last much longer in battle.

Second Wind is also there, and can save you in an emergency.

And then there's Action Surge, which is great for everyone (I'd say especially for Sorcerers and Paladins). Every class can create nice combos with this.

The prerequisites are the easiest of any class, so everyone can have either STR or DEX at 13. Starting Fighter gets you CON save, the most important, and STR, the most common weak save. And d10 hit dice.

So, is there anyone who wouldn't do well multiclassing Fighter?

[RickAllison]

Nope. I think just about everyone has good reason to pick up Fighter levels. The real question for them becomes whether it is worth the loss of progression and power in their base class. Like a wizard loves the ability to wear heavy armor and shields and then drop two spells when they really need to, but it is often not worth the loss of the caster levels to get more powerful slots.

Monks don't gain that much, so they might be the exception. Then again, monks carrying around longbows or heavy crossbows with the Archery fighting style have the mobility to get where melee people can't reach them, the Dexterity to deal some serious damage, and the Deflect Missiles ability to turn the enemy's arrows against them.

[Belac93]

Everyone can benefit from 2 levels of fighter, it is true. However, spellcasters delay their spell slots, monks delay their ki points, and rogues delay their sneak attack.

Druids and Barbarians benefit the least from this in the long run, losing archdruid and primal champion respectively.

So yes, anyone can benefit from 2 levels of fighter. Does this mean it is a good idea for every character? Definitely not.

[Giant2005]

Anyone benefits from two levels of Fighter, just the same as anyone benefits from two levels of any class. The real question is whether or not two levels of Fighter is worth giving up two levels of your main class for.
It very rarely is. Certain builds can benefit greatly from a single level in Fighter, but delaying your main class is a pretty serious price and that second level rarely give you enough to be worth delaying even further.
If I were going to multi into Fighter for more than a single level, it would be for the EK's level 7 ability, or the Champion or Battlemaster's level 3 ability. I'd probably push all the way to level 4 on the latter two in order to get an ASI. I'd only ever consider doing that if my build didn't have much to gain from high level abilities and had a pretty steady progression.

[Corran]

As always, you need to compare how the trade works. Meaning that you have to compare what you are getting to what you are losing (delayed progression included). Ime, putting some corner cases aside, fighter 2 is mostly a trap option that leads to gimmicky and suboptimal (overall) builds.

[Ruslan]

Is there anyone who wouldn't benefit from Fighter 2?

Is there anyone who will be hindered by delaying all their class features by 2 levels?

I'm sure we can find a few.

[JellyPooga]

Full Spellcasters definitely chafe at delaying their higher level magic.

Rogue also see little benefit, as a rule; they can only get Sneak Attack 1/turn so Action Surge isn't a massive force multiplier for them and delaying their access to things like more Expertise, Evasion, Slippery Mind and UMD is debatable as to its worth.

I'd go so far as to say that a Fighter 2 dip is probably something any Class needs to consider carefully before grabbing at the shinies. It gives you short-term boons and improves your alpha-strike at the cost of delaying all else. In most cases, this reduces encounter endurance.

Not an auto-include for any Class, IMO.

[RickAllison]

Is there anyone who will be hindered by delaying all their class features by 2 levels?

I'm sure we can find a few.

Any spellcasters: that's an entire spell level! Still, battlemages appreciate Con saving throw proficiency, armor, more AC from fighting style, and even a little healing. Decent, but heavy cost.

Rogues: Fairly linear progression so not as bad. On the other hand, really doesn't gain much from this. Fighting style is big for a 1 level dip, while 2 is for Readying a second Sneak Attack.

Monk archers like the 1 level dip. Two gives a little, but probably not enough to justify it.

Barbarians aren't likely to want a 2-level dip (their preferred weapons have the weakest fighting style and they get little synergy out of Action Surge). Maybe a Dexbarian would like it. I suppose you could get another point of AC, but...

[JNAProductions]

Agreed with the general answers-any class would benefit, but a lot of the time, it ain't worth the trade.

[2D8HP]

If I ever go three levels w/o dipping into Fighter, I'll tell you how it went.
:smile:
One of the main benefits of early Fighter levels is that the class features are easy for me to understand, whereas some other classes confuse me.
:confused:

[Foxhound438]

Agreed with the general answers-any class would benefit, but a lot of the time, it ain't worth the trade.

Pretty much. Usually I pass on fighter 2 because I want to get some feature earlier on, and by that late on in the character's build there's something else neat in 2 more levels. Basically, for me, fighter 2 is just a lot more boring than the things other classes do on their own. Sure it's effective, but it's just not interesting.

Also if I were to take fighter 2, I might as well take fighter 3 for some neat tricks.

[MaxWilson]

New question:

Is there anyone who wouldn't benefit from Fighter 20?

Seriously, Fighters are awesome. It's too bad 5E doesn't have real, simultaneous multiclassing. I'd make all of my NPCs Fighters in addition to their normal class. :)

[RickAllison]

New question:

Is there anyone who wouldn't benefit from Fighter 20?

Seriously, Fighters are awesome. It's too bad 5E doesn't have real, simultaneous multiclassing. I'd make all of my NPCs Fighters in addition to their normal class. :)

I would love some good gestalt rules for 5e. I would probably play a Theurge (Knowledge)/Seeker Warlock, poring over all the information I can find while using its bounty to create an advanced paradise devoted to the further procurement of knowledge.

[Specter]

Perhaps I wasn't clear: I think Fighter is the only multiclass that can benefit all other classes, along with being the easiest to enter. If it's better than singleclassing, it depends, of course, but it's not bad for anyone. Rogue is the one that comes closest to it, but no cigar.


Anyone benefits from two levels of Fighter, just the same as anyone benefits from two levels of any class.

Not the point at all. If I'm a Wizard, I don't benefit from taking Barbarian levels, for instance, unless I'm willing to change my playstyle to accomodate barbaric stuff. And I would still need 13STR to do it. Paladin, for instance, is a good MC for, say, Rogues, but they would need 13 STR AND CHA, a steep cost. And that first level is simply bad.

Those taking Fighter levels can keep doing whatever it is they were doing, but with more survivability, damage and/or options.

[JNAProductions]

Perhaps I wasn't clear: I think Fighter is the only multiclass that can benefit all other classes, along with being the easiest to enter. If it's better than singleclassing, it depends, of course, but it's not bad for anyone. Rogue is the one that comes closest to it, but no cigar.



Not the point at all. If I'm a Wizard, I don't benefit from taking Barbarian levels, for instance, unless I'm willing to change my playstyle to accomodate barbaric stuff. And I would still need 13STR to do it. Paladin, for instance, is a good MC for, say, Rogues, but they would need 13 STR AND CHA, a steep cost. And that first level is simply bad.

Those taking Fighter levels can keep doing whatever it is they were doing, but with more survivability, damage and/or options.

You gain nearly twice as many Hit Points as you would from a Wizard level, unless you already have a good Con score. (But if you have a good Con score, you now have a much better AC.) In addition, you gain an emergency "Out of spell slots, need to not die" button.

And Paladin level one gets a nifty heal. That's far from useless.

I do agree, if you're following multiclass restrictions, some are bad ideas. But then again, so is Fighter in a lot of cases.

[Asmotherion]

Well, the real question is, is there really a class that 2-3 levels dip is not awesome?

The fighter sure gets nice things, and the gods know how much the Warlock and Paladin 2-level dip option has been discused (as well as how good it actually is). Sorcerer 3 gets you metamagic (wich is optimisable with any caster, especially full casters) wile if you get dragon ancectry you have 13+dex modifiere AC permanently since 1st level. Wizard 1 makes you a ritual caster, and gets you a spellbook to store... well pretty much all lv1 arcane spells (eventually you'll get there); This already makes you more versalite than any other caster that lacks that (except the cleric/druid, but they do different things than you)... at wizard 2 you become a specialist and get an awesome (most of them are at least) action to remind that to your party.
Bard 2 gets you Jack of all trades... including to initiative, wich rather interesting
Barbarian/Monk 1 give you unarmored defance. Chose according to which you value better between con and wis, but both can get your AC sky-high, without looking like a tin can doing so (just kidding, I love full plate visual). As a barbarian you also get to rage once per day, or as a monk to hit harder with your bare hands and move faster than everyone (40 feet). Both are interesting options imo.
The Rogue gets cunning action, wich is better than action surge for casters, since (most) love to be at distance from the enemy.
As a Cleric/Druid you get an ever changing list of 1st level spells, which can always be altered to fit your needs. As a druid you also can turn into a beast and tank wile as a cleric you can heal a bit.
Finally, as a ranger you also get a fighting style, wile you get Hunters Mark to start dealing some massive dammage


It is essentially how 5e works: 2-3 levels in any class can give you the essentials to be called a member of that class, wile more levels give you more options, versality and power. It is however designes so that a 2 level dip is actually a multyclass.

If we think about it, the options offered as 2 level dips can summarise the theme of the class (and make you a decent member of it)

The warlock is a caster that spams his eldrich blast and Hex, wile still having some other tricks up his sleeve. The paladin in the guy that will hit you with a massive weapon and use divine smite+a smite spell, wile branding the symbol of his god and use his ability to heal.

The way I see it, at level 2 you get the essentials of each class, and then you either specialise or get to specialise in an other class

[RulesJD]

1. Monks absolutely do not. The armor and weapon proficiencies are useless. Action Surge and Fighting Styles (Defense doesn't add, and Dueling only adds +4 damage at best) are both largely useless especially when compared to more Stunning Strikes per short rest.

Plus, a 1 level dip into Cleric or Warlock is a MUCH better choice for Monks.

2. Clerics absolutely do not. The high impact Cleric spells/abilities don't really need Action Surge for two spells per round, given that Spirit Guardians is so damn good. Weapon and Armor proficiencies are useless (on most Cleric builds) and Second Wind is pointless on a class structured for healing.

3. Druids absolutely do not. None of the Fight styles make nearly enough impact to delay spell casting + Wild Shape form progression. Weapon and Armor proficiencies are useless. Action Surge for double spells is solid, but Barbarians are a MUCH better choice if you want to multiclass because of the Wild Shape + Raging synergy.

[JellyPooga]

Well, the real question is, is there really a class that 2-3 levels dip is not awesome?

Whilst arguably true, I think the point is rather that Fighter is one of the few that is of benefit to all classes. As has been mentioned, Barbarian 2 does little for any full-caster beyond a little extra durability; not much to shout about. Fighter, on the other hand, is the only Class with Action Surge; an ability that even full-casters can appreciate for its alpha-strike potential.

For me, however, the only Class that really is applicable to all others for that 2 level investment, is Rogue. Sure, some builds will have to suck up not using Sneak Attack, but Expertise and Cunning Action are useful additions to every Class and not only in terms of combat potential (which is all Fighter can offer).

Bard comes a close second, but meshes poorly with the Barbarian because Rage and Spellcasting don't mix too well and really wants a 3 level dip for Expertise and the College features. Song of Rest and Jack of All Trades, plus Bardic Inspiration and some low-level magic is a boon to anyone though; other full-casters still get to advance their spellslinging whilst improving their out-of-combat potential, skill-focused builds get a heap of extra proficiencies from Lore and combat-focused characters really like the extra bonus to Initiative and team-play.

[Gignere]

My divination wizard that excel in positioning and who has gone multiple gaming sessions without losing 1 hps will not benefit at all from a fighter dip.

Even when half the party was down and out my wizard was still untouched.

[Oramac]

It's been pointed out that the multiclass delays high-level progression, which is true, but one also needs to consider if they're even going to see those high levels.

If you take Fighter 2 / Whatever X, and your campaign is going to cap at 10th level, that will make a huge difference on whether to multiclass versus capping at 20th level.

Also, does 2 levels of fighter make sense in the Story of your character?

Both are things that can help determine if the MC is worth it for an individual character.

[Asmotherion]

Whilst arguably true, I think the point is rather that Fighter is one of the few that is of benefit to all classes. As has been mentioned, Barbarian 2 does little for any full-caster beyond a little extra durability; not much to shout about. Fighter, on the other hand, is the only Class with Action Surge; an ability that even full-casters can appreciate for its alpha-strike potential.

For me, however, the only Class that really is applicable to all others for that 2 level investment, is Rogue. Sure, some builds will have to suck up not using Sneak Attack, but Expertise and Cunning Action are useful additions to every Class and not only in terms of combat potential (which is all Fighter can offer).

Bard comes a close second, but meshes poorly with the Barbarian because Rage and Spellcasting don't mix too well and really wants a 3 level dip for Expertise and the College features. Song of Rest and Jack of All Trades, plus Bardic Inspiration and some low-level magic is a boon to anyone though; other full-casters still get to advance their spellslinging whilst improving their out-of-combat potential, skill-focused builds get a heap of extra proficiencies from Lore and combat-focused characters really like the extra bonus to Initiative and team-play.

Well action surge sure is not bad, but the fact it's only once per encounter makes me prefere the Sorcerer/warlock (when I want a caster that spams spells)

I always prefear something durable to something that can be used once.


However there can be some theorising about a fighter 2 warlock 12 paladin 2 sorcerer 4 build that can really nuke a lot in one turn, but that would be an end game thing... and I doubt it would be worth one's time...

[jas61292]

It's been pointed out that the multiclass delays high-level progression, which is true, but one also needs to consider if they're even going to see those high levels.

If you take Fighter 2 / Whatever X, and your campaign is going to cap at 10th level, that will make a huge difference on whether to multiclass versus capping at 20th level.

On the other hand, when you look at it like that, you could say its even less attractive to dip. People thinking with level 20 in mind are thinking that they will get some neat boosts now by sacrificing how fast you get features, but knowing that they will catch up in most features (especially spells) by the end. A lot of classes have mediocre capstones, and you really miss little if you are 18/2 rather than straight 20. However, if you are only getting to 10, you will never catch up like that. A Wizard 18/Fighter 2 has all the spell levels of a Wizard 20, but a Wizard 8/Fighter 2 will be missing out on 5th level spells, which the Wizard 10 can cast.

[Specter]

1. Monks absolutely do not. The armor and weapon proficiencies are useless. Action Surge and Fighting Styles (Defense doesn't add, and Dueling only adds +4 damage at best) are both largely useless especially when compared to more Stunning Strikes per short rest.

Plus, a 1 level dip into Cleric or Warlock is a MUCH better choice for Monks.

2. Clerics absolutely do not. The high impact Cleric spells/abilities don't really need Action Surge for two spells per round, given that Spirit Guardians is so damn good. Weapon and Armor proficiencies are useless (on most Cleric builds) and Second Wind is pointless on a class structured for healing.

3. Druids absolutely do not. None of the Fight styles make nearly enough impact to delay spell casting + Wild Shape form progression. Weapon and Armor proficiencies are useless. Action Surge for double spells is solid, but Barbarians are a MUCH better choice if you want to multiclass because of the Wild Shape + Raging synergy.

1) You mean getting 6 attacks in a given turn, or 4 attacks along with Dodge is not good? Hm. Can't agree. Also, Dueling/Archery and bonus healing. As for that Warlock dip, remember it involves turning that 8 CHA into 13, so that will interfere with your other stats.

2) Nobody needs Action Surge, but it's good for everybody. If you like Spirit Guardians, cast it and then blast dudes on the same turn, or heal people who are in need without wasting your entire turn. Light Clerics, feel free to drop two fireballs at once! Weapon domains all benefit from Fighting Style. And those who don't benefit from heavier armor.

3) Anyone who uses Shillelagh can benefit from Dueling. But agreed that Moon Druids are currently those who benefit from Fighter the least.


My divination wizard that excel in positioning and who has gone multiple gaming sessions without losing 1 hps will not benefit at all from a fighter dip.

Even when half the party was down and out my wizard was still untouched.

Then you're lucky. I mean, you're Portent. :smalltongue:

[MaxWilson]

I would love some good gestalt rules for 5e. I would probably play a Theurge (Knowledge)/Seeker Warlock, poring over all the information I can find while using its bounty to create an advanced paradise devoted to the further procurement of knowledge.

One option I've considered is to just make the XP advancement much harder: you keep track of XP for each class separately, but additionally it takes N times more experience for each class, where N is the number of multiclasses you have. So where a normal single-classed (or 5E-style-multiclassed) PC with 100,000 XP would be 12th level, a true multiclassed fighter/wizard with 100,000 XP would have 50,000 XP as a fighter and 50,000 XP as a wizard, putting him midway between 7th and 8th level in both classes.

Apply other rules for multiclassing as normal: you'd have the average of d6 and d10 hit dice (so effectively d8), you'd gain all the class features of all the classes you're in including armor proficiencies but also restrictions (druid metal armor aversion), multiclassed spellcasters would have two completely separate pools of spell points/slots, etc. You might want to only allow certain whitelisted multiclass combinations--you could even restrict it by race so that half-elves got more options than dwarves, and so that paladins cannot truly multiclass! ;-)

Just some thoughts.

[R.Shackleford]

Nope. I think just about everyone has good reason to pick up Fighter levels. The real question for them becomes whether it is worth the loss of progression and power in their base class. Like a wizard loves the ability to wear heavy armor and shields and then drop two spells when they really need to, but it is often not worth the loss of the caster levels to get more powerful slots.

Monks don't gain that much, so they might be the exception. Then again, monks carrying around longbows or heavy crossbows with the Archery fighting style have the mobility to get where melee people can't reach them, the Dexterity to deal some serious damage, and the Deflect Missiles ability to turn the enemy's arrows against them.

Because games don't typically last past level 8 you really aren't losing much.

So if you go Fighter 2/Caster Class 6 you have level 3 spells which are pretty nifty. You already picked up your second subclass feature most likely. You are missing out on 2 level 4 slots. Which level 4 is awesome but as a Fighter you gain Armor Prof (3 feats), Shield Prof, Fighting Style (probably worth more than a feat, +1 AC sounds nice), Action Surge (better on a caster than on a martial, definately worth more than a feat), and a small bit of short rest healing (feat -ish).

Being able to cast two spells in the same turn 1/short rest actuallycan be worth giving up 4th level spells.

[Oramac]

On the other hand, when you look at it like that, you could say its even less attractive to dip. People thinking with level 20 in mind are thinking that they will get some neat boosts now by sacrificing how fast you get features, but knowing that they will catch up in most features (especially spells) by the end. A lot of classes have mediocre capstones, and you really miss little if you are 18/2 rather than straight 20. However, if you are only getting to 10, you will never catch up like that. A Wizard 18/Fighter 2 has all the spell levels of a Wizard 20, but a Wizard 8/Fighter 2 will be missing out on 5th level spells, which the Wizard 10 can cast.

That's kinda my point. There's more to consider than just the straight "build". Game type, duration, party comp, and even "what do I enjoy playing" are all important questions that can change the answer to the question "To Fighter, or not to Fighter?"

[RickAllison]

Because games don't typically last past level 8 you really aren't losing much.

So if you go Fighter 2/Caster Class 6 you have level 3 spells which are pretty nifty. You already picked up your second subclass feature most likely. You are missing out on 2 level 4 slots. Which level 4 is awesome but as a Fighter you gain Armor Prof (3 feats), Shield Prof, Fighting Style (probably worth more than a feat, +1 AC sounds nice), Action Surge (better on a caster than on a martial, definately worth more than a feat), and a small bit of short rest healing (feat -ish).

Being able to cast two spells in the same turn 1/short rest actuallycan be worth giving up 4th level spells.

Another part of it is when you take those levels. If you take them at the beginning, you aren't even a wizard until level 3. When your other wizard is dropping level 2 spells, you are still mainly cantrips. By the time you get those level 2 spells, they are dropping Fireball.

Multiclassing is a fickle mistress. You gain some flat boosts at beginning levels that then often make early levels (up through 7)-levels far weaker, all while the end-build will be straight better. In the case of the low-level fighter-caster, he gains the ability to double cast at the cost of fewer slots to do it with. Level 9 will be a good sweet spot, a point where the caster has both the slots to use the ability and the ability itself.

[R.Shackleford]

Another part of it is when you take those levels. If you take them at the beginning, you aren't even a wizard until level 3. When your other wizard is dropping level 2 spells, you are still mainly cantrips. By the time you get those level 2 spells, they are dropping Fireball.

Multiclassing is a fickle mistress. You gain some flat boosts at beginning levels that then often make early levels (up through 7)-levels far weaker, all while the end-build will be straight better. In the case of the low-level fighter-caster, he gains the ability to double cast at the cost of fewer slots to do it with. Level 9 will be a good sweet spot, a point where the caster has both the slots to use the ability and the ability itself.

Level 1 and 2 are suuuuper short. The game really starts at level 3.

I believe the devs even talked about how if you played the game before then level 3 should be your starting point.

[RulesJD]

1) You mean getting 6 attacks in a given turn, or 4 attacks along with Dodge is not good? Hm. Can't agree. Also, Dueling/Archery and bonus healing. As for that Warlock dip, remember it involves turning that 8 CHA into 13, so that will interfere with your other stats.

2) Nobody needs Action Surge, but it's good for everybody. If you like Spirit Guardians, cast it and then blast dudes on the same turn, or heal people who are in need without wasting your entire turn. Light Clerics, feel free to drop two fireballs at once! Weapon domains all benefit from Fighting Style. And those who don't benefit from heavier armor.

3) Anyone who uses Shillelagh can benefit from Dueling. But agreed that Moon Druids are currently those who benefit from Fighter the least.



Then you're lucky. I mean, you're Portent. :smalltongue:

1. I'd take 2 more Stunning Strikes per short rest over 2 extra hits per short rest any day of the week.

I'll also take access to Hex or Divine Strike over 2 extra hit per short rest any day of the week. Extra strikes will do ~2d6+12 (Assuming Dueling). Hex will output more than that after just 2 rounds of strikes (2 first round, 4 second round = 6d6), Divine favor similar result. Add that into other critical things like Self Heal (Fiend) or defensive spells (Protect Evil Good, SoF, etc).

Archery on a Monk is 100% pointless given that it doesn't work with Darts and if you're using Short/Longbows you aren't being a Monk. Dueling is okay, but easily outpaced by alternate 1-2 level dips that offer even more.

2. Action Surge on a Cleric = 2 level spell casting levels. Clerics don't have the best spell list, but what they do have is higher slots to cast SG/Bless out of. An extra 1d8 damage period round for multiple encounters is way, way more than an extra blast spell per short rest.

Clerics benefit the most from upcasting. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't turn down Action Surge for free, but not on a Cleric at the cost of upcasting or better multiclass combos.

[R.Shackleford]

1. I'd take 2 more Stunning Strikes per short rest over 2 extra hits per short rest any day of the week.

I'll also take access to Hex or Divine Strike over 2 extra hit per short rest any day of the week. Extra strikes will do ~2d6+12 (Assuming Dueling). Hex will output more than that after just 2 rounds of strikes (2 first round, 4 second round = 6d6), Divine favor similar result. Add that into other critical things like Self Heal (Fiend) or defensive spells (Protect Evil Good, SoF, etc).

Archery on a Monk is 100% pointless given that it doesn't work with Darts and if you're using Short/Longbows you aren't being a Monk. Dueling is okay, but easily outpaced by alternate 1-2 level dips that offer even more.

2. Action Surge on a Cleric = 2 level spell casting levels. Clerics don't have the best spell list, but what they do have is higher slots to cast SG/Bless out of. An extra 1d8 damage period round for multiple encounters is way, way more than an extra blast spell per short rest.

Clerics benefit the most from upcasting. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't turn down Action Surge for free, but not on a Cleric at the cost of upcasting or better multiclass combos.

A cleric able to shoot off two domain spells in a round can be absolutely brutal.

The first suggestion didn't take? Here, try again...

Oh? Counter spelled my spell? Here, try again...

[MaxWilson]

Another part of it is when you take those levels. If you take them at the beginning, you aren't even a wizard until level 3. When your other wizard is dropping level 2 spells, you are still mainly cantrips. By the time you get those level 2 spells, they are dropping Fireball.

It's probably not worth taking the Action Surge until you have spells that are worth Action Surging, and enough spell slots to use them.

That being said, a Fighter 2/Wizard 3 is still a quite excellent gish, thanks to SCAG cantrips and the Blur spell. However, gishing is pretty conceptually different from wizarding.

[Specter]

1. I'd take 2 more Stunning Strikes per short rest over 2 extra hits per short rest any day of the week.

I'll also take access to Hex or Divine Strike over 2 extra hit per short rest any day of the week. Extra strikes will do ~2d6+12 (Assuming Dueling). Hex will output more than that after just 2 rounds of strikes (2 first round, 4 second round = 6d6), Divine favor similar result. Add that into other critical things like Self Heal (Fiend) or defensive spells (Protect Evil Good, SoF, etc).

Archery on a Monk is 100% pointless given that it doesn't work with Darts and if you're using Short/Longbows you aren't being a Monk. Dueling is okay, but easily outpaced by alternate 1-2 level dips that offer even more.

2. Action Surge on a Cleric = 2 level spell casting levels. Clerics don't have the best spell list, but what they do have is higher slots to cast SG/Bless out of. An extra 1d8 damage period round for multiple encounters is way, way more than an extra blast spell per short rest.

Clerics benefit the most from upcasting. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't turn down Action Surge for free, but not on a Cleric at the cost of upcasting or better multiclass combos.

1. What you're forgetting about the Warlock multiclass is the CHA. STR, INT and CHA can be dump stats for monks, so for optimization I can build ST8 DX15 CO15 IN8 WI15 CH8 if I so desire. But by putting 13 on CHA (at least), you're making your stat progression much slower, with something like 8 15 13 8 14 13. That will cost at the very least a feat, and in the case of CON, hit points/save point. So if you're making a calculation against Dueling, you need to factor that too.

Hex? Cool, but that's one bonus action you don't take. And watch out for that concentration, or it's another one.


A cleric able to shoot off two domain spells in a round can be absolutely brutal.

The first suggestion didn't take? Here, try again...

Oh? Counter spelled my spell? Here, try again...

This.

[fbelanger]

The benefits:

Paladins and Rangers get a second Fighting Style, for versatility or +1AC. Martials without Fighting Styles (Barbarians, Bladelocks, Valor Bards) get one, so they finally excel at their attacks. Non-martials get good armor proficiencies along with +1AC, making them last much longer in battle.

Second Wind is also there, and can save you in an emergency.

And then there's Action Surge, which is great for everyone (I'd say especially for Sorcerers and Paladins). Every class can create nice combos with this.

The prerequisites are the easiest of any class, so everyone can have either STR or DEX at 13. Starting Fighter gets you CON save, the most important, and STR, the most common weak save. And d10 hit dice.

So, is there anyone who wouldn't do well multiclassing Fighter?

Here the cons:
Miss a feat or ASI.
Wis and dex saving throw are important too!
If you start with 2 level of fighters:
Pal, monk and barbarian will have to wait until level 7 to have an extra attack. Optimize your character the way your want, extra attack is still the best option.
Full caster will always be a spell level. Behind. That piss.

[RulesJD]

1. What you're forgetting about the Warlock multiclass is the CHA. STR, INT and CHA can be dump stats for monks, so for optimization I can build ST8 DX15 CO15 IN8 WI15 CH8 if I so desire. But by putting 13 on CHA (at least), you're making your stat progression much slower, with something like 8 15 13 8 14 13. That will cost at the very least a feat, and in the case of CON, hit points/save point. So if you're making a calculation against Dueling, you need to factor that too.

Hex? Cool, but that's one bonus action you don't take. And watch out for that concentration, or it's another one.



This.

Didn't forget anything about it. I'm simply trading an ASI/Con for Cha, depending on what build you want to go with. Shadow Monk + Fiend Warlock is ridiculously good, far better than 2 Fighter levels. You'd almost think I played such a character to some pretty high levels or something.

Concentration is pretty easy when you have Stunning Strike + movement. Literally the only think Fighter 2 gives a Monk is 2d6/2d8+12/14 damage, and 1d10+2 on a short rest (also a bonus action as you like to point out).

That list of benefits is absolutely dominated by even just 1 level of Cleric, much less 2 levels. Same goes for Warlock, albeit the Warlock comes at more cost.

Cool, you get two spells per round. I get higher level spell list access + upcasting the only spell worthwhile on the Cleric list. Only argument for Fighter anything with a Cleric is if the Cleric subclass doesn't get heavy armor/martial weapon proficiency.

[R.Shackleford]

Didn't forget anything about it. I'm simply trading an ASI/Con for Cha, depending on what build you want to go with. Shadow Monk + Fiend Warlock is ridiculously good, far better than 2 Fighter levels. You'd almost think I played such a character to some pretty high levels or something.

Concentration is pretty easy when you have Stunning Strike + movement. Literally the only think Fighter 2 gives a Monk is 2d6/2d8+12/14 damage, and 1d10+2 on a short rest (also a bonus action as you like to point out).

That list of benefits is absolutely dominated by even just 1 level of Cleric, much less 2 levels. Same goes for Warlock, albeit the Warlock comes at more cost.

Cool, you get two spells per round. I get higher level spell list access + upcasting the only spell worthwhile on the Cleric list. Only argument for Fighter anything with a Cleric is if the Cleric subclass doesn't get heavy armor/martial weapon proficiency.

Higher level spells are nice, but being able to land really really good spells (such as suggestion) is absolutely brutal.

Or to be able to stop a counterspell when you really really need a spell to go off?

Action Surge on a caster is absolutely brutal and worth a 4th level slot or two. Especially when, for the most part, you won't be gaining other class features outside of 1 ASI/Feat. If you are going the cleric domain that doesn't give you heavy armor? That right there is a feat plus all the other stuff you get.

Action Surge is the most broken pre-high level feature you can have during an encounter if you have the right things to use it with. It really is wasted on the fighter.

[Bladeyeoman]

Higher level spells are nice, but being able to land really really good spells (such as suggestion) is absolutely brutal.

Or to be able to stop a counterspell when you really really need a spell to go off?

Action Surge on a caster is absolutely brutal and worth a 4th level slot or two. Especially when, for the most part, you won't be gaining other class features outside of 1 ASI/Feat. If you are going the cleric domain that doesn't give you heavy armor? That right there is a feat plus all the other stuff you get.

Action Surge is the most broken pre-high level feature you can have during an encounter if you have the right things to use it with. It really is wasted on the fighter.

This keeps coming up, and I feel like maybe I've been misunderstanding the rules. I thought you couldn't cast more than one non-cantrip per turn?

[R.Shackleford]

This keeps coming up, and I feel like maybe I've been misunderstanding the rules. I thought you couldn't cast more than one non-cantrip per turn?

When you cast a spell as a bonus action, yes, however Action Surge isn't a bonus action nor does it have anything to do with bonus actions.

[Rysto]

This keeps coming up, and I feel like maybe I've been misunderstanding the rules. I thought you couldn't cast more than one non-cantrip per turn?

The rule is that you cannot cast a spell with a bonus action if you cast a non-cantrip as an action. The rule says nothing about multiple actions in a turn.

[Bladeyeoman]

Huh. Okay. Good to know. So fighter 2 is actually super useful for casters who want to be able to nova hard.

[Specter]

Didn't forget anything about it. I'm simply trading an ASI/Con for Cha, depending on what build you want to go with. Shadow Monk + Fiend Warlock is ridiculously good, far better than 2 Fighter levels. You'd almost think I played such a character to some pretty high levels or something.

Concentration is pretty easy when you have Stunning Strike + movement. Literally the only think Fighter 2 gives a Monk is 2d6/2d8+12/14 damage, and 1d10+2 on a short rest (also a bonus action as you like to point out).

That list of benefits is absolutely dominated by even just 1 level of Cleric, much less 2 levels. Same goes for Warlock, albeit the Warlock comes at more cost.

Cool, you get two spells per round. I get higher level spell list access + upcasting the only spell worthwhile on the Cleric list. Only argument for Fighter anything with a Cleric is if the Cleric subclass doesn't get heavy armor/martial weapon proficiency.

To clarify, I'm not saying Fighter is better than any other subclass, I'm saying it's good for most, if not all classes. The only case I can see it as not so good is Moon Druid (Monk definitely benefits from it).

But saying Spirit Guardians is the only worthwhile Cleric spell doesn't even deserve an answer.

[2D8HP]

I'm not saying Fighter is better than any other subclass, I'm saying it's good for most, if not all classes.Folding Fighter 2 in with all my Rogue PC's has worked well.:smallsmile:
Also, three Ranger Avatars in a row!
:tongue:

[R.Shackleford]

Huh. Okay. Good to know. So fighter 2 is actually super useful for casters who want to be able to nova hard.

Super good.


To clarify, I'm not saying Fighter is better than any other subclass, I'm saying it's good for most, if not all classes. The only case I can see it as not so good is Moon Druid (Monk definitely benefits from it).

But saying Spirit Guardians is the only worthwhile Cleric spell doesn't even deserve an answer.

Monk benefits from Fighter more than it is punished for taking it. Hell, high level monk is disaapointing.

The Cleric is chalk full of win and awesome spells that I forget Spirit Guardians is a thing. (Kinda lol).

[Asmotherion]

Huh. Okay. Good to know. So fighter 2 is actually super useful for casters who want to be able to nova hard.

If by nova you mean "make a big bang and then shrink down to a smaller star size", then yeah, that's preciesly what this is about.

[Specter]

If by nova you mean "make a big bang and then shrink down to a smaller star size", then yeah, that's preciesly what this is about.

Isn't that what nova-oriented builds do?

[R.Shackleford]

If by nova you mean "make a big bang and then shrink down to a smaller star size", then yeah, that's preciesly what this is about.

Yeah, most casters can NOVA on their own in some way so really it just gives them another avenue to NOVA.

[MeeposFire]

Due to the loss or delay in ASIs characters that need a lot of stats (or potentially feats) may not like a fighter 2 (though adding levels o ffighter could fix that).

Actually action surge is great for a rogue just like haste is on a standard rogue (except even easier to use). Rogue uses action to attack for sneak attack and then uses action surge to ready an action to attack with an easy trigger. Trigger occurs on another turn and the rogue gets a second sneak attack in that was otherwise highly unlikely to happen. So action surge can give a rogue two sneaks attacks in a round. It is a good multiclass with a rogue however I would not say that it is one that you need to have early and honestly if you are going to do that you probably want to get extra attack in there to vastly increase your chances at hitting and therefor getting your sneak attack on your turn (or to get war magic so you can attack twice while using booming blade).

[R.Shackleford]

Due to the loss or delay in ASIs characters that need a lot of stats (or potentially feats) may not like a fighter 2 (though adding levels o ffighter could fix that).

Actually action surge is great for a rogue just like haste is on a standard rogue (except even easier to use). Rogue uses action to attack for sneak attack and then uses action surge to ready an action to attack with an easy trigger. Trigger occurs on another turn and the rogue gets a second sneak attack in that was otherwise highly unlikely to happen. So action surge can give a rogue two sneaks attacks in a round. It is a good multiclass with a rogue however I would not say that it is one that you need to have early and honestly if you are going to do that you probably want to get extra attack in there to vastly increase your chances at hitting and therefor getting your sneak attack on your turn (or to get war magic so you can attack twice while using booming blade).

Triggers aren't really able to be all that easy.

You are relying on the DM for you to be roguish, that is pretty meh in my book. Anytime you have to rely on an outside force for your character to be your character I find it to be very very meh.

[RickAllison]

Triggers aren't really able to be all that easy.

You are relying on the DM for you to be roguish, that is pretty meh in my book. Anytime you have to rely on an outside force for your character to be your character I find it to be very very meh.

"I Ready an attack to hit any enemy adjacent to me who budges."

So anyone who moves or takes an action triggers it. If a DM metagamed that... Well that's a bad DM. What kind of enemy would just decide to stand there without doing anything? Maybe a Sloth...

[R.Shackleford]

"I Ready an attack to hit any enemy adjacent to me who budges."

So anyone who moves or takes an action triggers it. If a DM metagamed that... Well that's a bad DM. What kind of enemy would just decide to stand there without doing anything? Maybe a Sloth...

See, no. There is no metagaming here. You are being needlessly antagonistic toward the DM.

If I see someone ready to stab me, I may wait and try to find a new approach. I may also take the dodge action to make sure I don't get hit by the attack.

I may even decide "you know what, no, that's going to hurt" *throws spear*.

[Shaofoo]

I can tell who wouldn't benefit from two levels of Fighter. Those who play in games where multiclassing is banned. I mean unless you pick Fighter but it'd be weird trying to come up with a reasoning why would it be a bad idea to level up your own class.

[RickAllison]

See, no. There is no metagaming here. You are being needlessly antagonistic toward the DM.

If I see someone ready to stab me, I may wait and try to find a new approach. I may also take the dodge action to make sure I don't get hit by the attack.

I may even decide "you know what, no, that's going to hurt" *throws spear*.

Presumably you would use it next to a target. You are right in the target's face (unless you are using ranged weapons, in which case open season). But let's dissect that:

"This person looks ready to stab me, what should I do?"

"I Dodge." Now this is a perfect example of how someone would react. It will still trigger the rogue, but the enemy is actually reacting to it.

"I throw a spear." The rogue attacks. Yay.

"I wait and see what he will do." What? In the middle of battle, when this guy looks like he is about to disembowel you, you decide to just stand there? This is really the only metagaming option. I don't see any reason why an enemy would decide that standing there and doing nothing while in the sights of a stab-happy enemy is a good idea.

[CantigThimble]

Based on my experience as a cleric action surge and a little extra durability would not have even been CLOSE to the power and flexibility of an additional spell level.

[MeeposFire]

Presumably you would use it next to a target. You are right in the target's face (unless you are using ranged weapons, in which case open season). But let's dissect that:

"This person looks ready to stab me, what should I do?"

"I Dodge." Now this is a perfect example of how someone would react. It will still trigger the rogue, but the enemy is actually reacting to it.

"I throw a spear." The rogue attacks. Yay.

"I wait and see what he will do." What? In the middle of battle, when this guy looks like he is about to disembowel you, you decide to just stand there? This is really the only metagaming option. I don't see any reason why an enemy would decide that standing there and doing nothing while in the sights of a stab-happy enemy is a good idea.

Besides if an enemy decides to do nothing due to your actions I think that counts as a win for you.

[jas61292]

"I Ready an attack to hit any enemy adjacent to me who budges."

So anyone who moves or takes an action triggers it. If a DM metagamed that... Well that's a bad DM. What kind of enemy would just decide to stand there without doing anything? Maybe a Sloth...

This is kinda DM/table dependent, to be honest. That may work in your games, but there is no way it would fly with my group. It is far more vague than any of the examples in the PHB. You are literally wording your ready trigger in such a way as to make it impossible not to happen. That is not what my group would call a ready trigger. We would call it an attempt to act out of turn, and it would not be allowed. If you wanted to ready, you would need to actually specify something more specific to react in response to for my table to accept it.

Regardless though, I think the bigger point is that this is a absolute waste of levels for the rogue. An extra chance to sneak attack sounds nice. But you are looking at 1 extra sneak attack per short rest. That's once ever other battle. And its not even a guaranteed sneak attack. It is a single extra opportunity, every other battle, to maybe get a sneak attack. Is that really worth 2 whole levels? If every combat lasts exactly three rounds, and you get a short rest every other combat, you would need to be level a level 13 character for that one extra sneak attack opportunity to make up for the damage lost from not having a more powerful sneak attack. The more combat you do, the worse this gets. If you have 10 rounds of combat between short rests, the single extra sneak attack never makes up for the damage lost from multiclassing. And that's of course not getting into the fact that you are losing out on your entire rouge progression. Sure, a Rogue/Fighter build can be a thing that works. But for someone just trying to be a plain old traditional Rogue, fighter levels only detract from your abilities.

[RickAllison]

This is kinda DM/table dependent, to be honest. That may work in your games, but there is no way it would fly with my group. It is far more vague than any of the examples in the PHB. You are literally wording your ready trigger in such a way as to make it impossible not to happen. That is not what my group would call a ready trigger. We would call it an attempt to act out of turn, and it would not be allowed. If you wanted to ready, you would need to actually specify something more specific to react in response to for my table to accept it.

Regardless though, I think the bigger point is that this is a absolute waste of levels for the rogue. An extra chance to sneak attack sounds nice. But you are looking at 1 extra sneak attack per short rest. That's once ever other battle. And its not even a guaranteed sneak attack. It is a single extra opportunity, every other battle, to maybe get a sneak attack. Is that really worth 2 whole levels? If every combat lasts exactly three rounds, and you get a short rest every other combat, you would need to be level a level 13 character for that one extra sneak attack opportunity to make up for the damage lost from not having a more powerful sneak attack. The more combat you do, the worse this gets. If you have 10 rounds of combat between short rests, the single extra sneak attack never makes up for the damage lost from multiclassing. And that's of course not getting into the fact that you are losing out on your entire rouge progression. Sure, a Rogue/Fighter build can be a thing that works. But for someone just trying to be a plain old traditional Rogue, fighter levels only detract from your abilities.

The only requirement for a trigger is that it is a "perceivable circumstance". Seeing the guys surrounding you try to move is probably perceivable. Unless someone drops Darkness or Fog Cloud on the rogue... Still, a rogue would be better off going up to Fighter 3 for either Riposte (more reliable off-turn Sneak Attack) or Improved Critical (rogues always want to attack with advantage anyway!).

[smcmike]

I hadn't thought of action surge for ready action. That's very good.

[R.Shackleford]

I hadn't thought of action surge for ready action. That's very good.

Even if the DM is very very nice to the player... you are doing it once every few combats.

Just have a familiar or ally use the help action or another spell that gives you advantage (love hiding bolt).


Action Surge is a waste to use it for an attack in such a way.

[RickAllison]

Even if the DM is very very nice to the player... you are doing it once every few combats.

Just have a familiar or ally use the help action or another spell that gives you advantage (love hiding bolt).


Action Surge is a waste to use it for an attack in such a way.

Hardly a waste, just... Come on Rogue X/Fighter 2, just get one more level and you get four reaction attacks per short rest via Riposte, or use them to turn misses into hits with Precision Attack. If you are going to go Fighter 2, just take the dang extra level...

[R.Shackleford]

Hardly a waste, just... Come on Rogue X/Fighter 2, just get one more level and you get four reaction attacks per short rest via Riposte, or use them to turn misses into hits with Precision Attack. If you are going to go Fighter 2, just take the dang extra level...

Action surge is a waste on the fighter and it is a waste on the rogue.

If you are using it to deal weapon damage it is a waste of a feature.

The full potential of action surge comes out when casting spells.

MC rogue and Fighter is a waste because 2 feats (which the rogue can afford more than the fighter funny enough) can make you a fighter (1 Feat if you are a mountain dwarf).

Out of all the classes, I would say rogue has the least incentive to go Fighter 2.

If you want off turn attacks then go fighter 3, sure, but fighter 2 isn't worth it.

Edit

Barbarian 2 on a Strogue is far better than Fighter 2.

[MaxWilson]

Hardly a waste, just... Come on Rogue X/Fighter 2, just get one more level and you get four reaction attacks per short rest via Riposte, or use them to turn misses into hits with Precision Attack. If you are going to go Fighter 2, just take the dang extra level...

Or even more. Battlemaster 5/Arcane Trickster 15 can still self-Haste and will be getting off-turn sneak 8d6 attacks pretty much every turn.

Fighter X/Rogue X is one of the few cases in 5E where it actually makes sense to do an even split instead of a dip. Swashbuckler 9/Eldritch Knight 11 is great, for example. I think Battlemaster would work great too but I haven't tried it.

[Tanarii]

This is kinda DM/table dependent, to be honest. That may work in your games, but there is no way it would fly with my group. It is far more vague than any of the examples in the PHB. You are literally wording your ready trigger in such a way as to make it impossible not to happen. That is not what my group would call a ready trigger. We would call it an attempt to act out of turn, and it would not be allowed. If you wanted to ready, you would need to actually specify something more specific to react in response to for my table to accept it.I thought the exact same thing when I read that. I've played with DMs that will allow 'garuanteed to go off' triggers, but they're very rare. Most DMs (including me) require stricter triggers for the Ready action.

That said, two popular choices are 'moves' (ie adjacent, away, laterally) or 'attacks'. You're fairly likely to get one of the two, you just have to figure which one is more likely.

[R.Shackleford]

I thought the exact same thing when I read that. I've played with DMs that will allow 'garuanteed to go off' triggers, but they're very rare. Most DMs (including me) require stricter triggers for the Ready action.

That said, two popular choices are 'moves' (ie adjacent, away, laterally) or 'attacks'. You're fairly likely to get one of the two, you just have to figure which one is more likely.

I'm in the same boat.

However I have people role play what their character is doing when they ready. The player writes down on a piece of paper what their ready is and I don't see it.

at least for my core groups.

[Specter]

So breaking it down: Fighter 2 with the other classes

Barbarian: Great Weapon Fighting increases the Barb's damage on many weak strikes, and Second Wind gives them another solid bonus action use other than rage. That bonus HP on Barbs lasts more than on anybody else. And Action Surge. The only scenario against this dip is if you know you'll reach level 20.
Bard: Valor Bards crave for Fighting Style, and Second Wind is good when inspirations run out. Lore Bards enjoy shields and medium armor because they don't tend to max DEX. Action Surge for both.
Cleric: If your domain doesn't give you heavy armor, start Fighter and get it. If your domain is weapon-focused, get a Fighting Style to go. Action Surge lets you heal in an emergency without spending your entire turn doing so, or straight up destroy the enemy with two spells.
Druid: Shillelagh pairs amazingly with Dueling. Moon Druid is currently the one who benefits less from Fighter levels, except for the ubiquitous AS.
Monk: +2 damage on your main attacks, bonus healing for the times without Ki (or before a long rest, always a possibility) and AS to dish out 6 attacks in a turn at level 7 (something Fighters would only get at level 11). Pretty nice.
Paladin: +1AC permanently? Yes. Bonus healing not related to Lay on Hands? Yes? Action Surge? Yes. Just casting Bless/Crusader's Mantle and attacking, or using Lay on Hands and attacking, or giving 4 smites in a turn makes it all worthwhile.
Ranger: Similarly to Paladin, instead of Bless you can cast, say, Silence or Conjure Animals, and instead of smiting you get 4 Hunter's Mark attacks. Nasty.
Rogue: If you missed a critical sneak, do over. If you're attacking from range, +2 to hit. If you're up close, +2 damage. If you want to beat Usain Bolt's record, look into move + Dash + Dash + Dash. Assassins really need a good reason not to take Fighter 2.
Sorcerer: Perhaps the class that benefits the most from Action Surge, due to Quickened and Twinned spells. Why cast one Fireball when you can cast two along with a Firebolt? And why Blind only one creature when you can Blind four in a turn? Are you seeing this, Wizards? And good AC, of course.
Warlock: Bladelocks benefit the same way Valor Bards do, except they now have medium armor and shields too. Warlocks in general get better AC and better spells/Eldritch Blast potential (8d10+40dmg at level 17, without expeding slots? Yes please.)
Wizard: Go for 13+DEX AC to 15+DEX+1+2 (shield) without needing mage Armor. Who's frail now? That and Action Surge for boom boom, of course.

[2D8HP]

MC rogue and Fighter is a waste because 2 feats (which the rogue can afford more than the fighter funny enough) can make you a fighter (1 Feat if you are a mountain dwarf).
@R.Shackleford,
I am genuinely interested, please explain further!
If your Rogue 1 than you need to have three more levels to get a Feat that allows Medium Armor and Shields proficiency (I'm not very experienced using Feats so please correct me), but you still lack proficiency in all weapons, you lack Fighting Style (Archery's +2 to attack rolls made with ranged weapons is useful and easy to remember, as is the +1 to AC Defense gives), and you still lack Second Wind (more hit points!), and yes more hit points, all of which one level of Fighter grants.
I love Rogue's skills (and Expertise!, sneak attack however has proven too conditional), I'm unconvinced that delaying Cunning Action isn't worth all that.
Two levels of Fighter delays Roguish Archetype in return for Action Surge, that's a tougher call for me to make, and I invite tutoring.
I'm confused by why you say a Rogue can afford to lose ASI's more than a Fighter, don't Fighters get more?
Not quite exactly the thread topic, but one level of Fighter seems well worth it.
What am I not understanding?

[Coffee_Dragon]

That is not what my group would call a ready trigger. We would call it an attempt to act out of turn, and it would not be allowed.

Agreed. Shifting an action out of your turn just because the system caps sneak attack at once per turn is pure metagaming, and at that point I'd just as well say you can get one sneak attack per turn and action and have people act normally within their turn unless they are genuinely watching for a specific trigger.


However I have people role play what their character is doing when they ready. The player writes down on a piece of paper what their ready is and I don't see it.

That's a good idea to stop the DM from metagaming (or rather, from second-guessing themselves trying to avoid metagaming) the trigger. Might get awkward if done very often though?

[RickAllison]

I'm in the same boat.

However I have people role play what their character is doing when they ready. The player writes down on a piece of paper what their ready is and I don't see it.

at least for my core groups.

Oh I do that with my DM all the time! Glyph of Warding, traps on my personal chest, Contingency, everything. I keep them in envelopes and give them to the DM with the trigger written on it. That way it remains a secret to the DM on the effect until it is triggered, but he can access it when he is trying to do things subtly so I don't get an OOC warning that my preparations have been activated. If my noisemaker trap goes off, the theif alerts the entire camp. If it doesn't, I don't get the temptation to "check in" on my chest of goodies...

[Tanarii]

However I have people role play what their character is doing when they ready. The player writes down on a piece of paper what their ready is and I don't see it.
That's a good idea to stop the DM from metagaming (or rather, from second-guessing themselves trying to avoid metagaming) the trigger. Might get awkward if done very often though?
Yeah I really like it too, for the same reason. I'm going to try it out, since I don't see Ready used very often. Or at least, what I would consider overly often.

[JakOfAllTirades]

If I'm playing a full caster, a 2-level dip in Fighter puts my casting progression behind an entire spell level. So when the other Sorcerers/Warlocks/Wizards are casting Fireball, I'm still using Scorching Ray. By the time I finally get Fireball, they've got Fire Shield and/or Wall of Fire.

You want to cast spells, be a caster. You want to fight, be a fighter.

[R.Shackleford]

@R.Shackleford,
I am genuinely interested, please explain further!
If your Rogue 1 than you need to have three more levels to get a Feat that allows Medium Armor and Shields proficiency (I'm not very experienced using Feats so please correct me), but you still lack proficiency in all weapons, you lack Fighting Style (Archery's +2 to attack rolls made with ranged weapons is useful and easy to remember, as is the +1 to AC Defense gives), and you still lack Second Wind (more hit points!), and yes more hit points, all of which one level of Fighter grants.
I love Rogue's skills (and Expertise!, sneak attack however has proven too conditional), I'm unconvinced that delaying Cunning Action isn't worth all that.
Two levels of Fighter delays Roguish Archetype in return for Action Surge, that's a tougher call for me to make, and I invite tutoring.
I'm confused by why you say a Rogue can afford to lose ASI's more than a Fighter, don't Fighters get more?
Not quite exactly the thread topic, but one level of Fighter seems well worth it.
What am I not understanding?

Vuman Rogue
Moderately armored
Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 8
Wis: 12
Cha: 12

(Int and Cha can be changed depending on your choice of subclass)

HP: 10
AC 18 (medium armor and shield)
Initiative: +2

Weapon: dagger or Rapier (I would go dagger and fluff it as a Rapier I can throw)

Skills: Athletics, Perception, Insight, Survival, Deception, Intimidation, Persuasion.

Expertise: Athletics, Persuasion (I'm going swashbuckler)

I'll be running around the battlefield doing good damage. I don't really lose on Athletics checks.

At level 2 I can disengage, dash, and hide (I don't hide but can try without it being an issue). If I need to get to an enemy it won't be a problem.

Level 3? Swashbuckler. +1 to cha. Sneak attack more creatures.

Level 4: Shield Master. Remember the expertise on Athletics? I'll almost always have advantage when I knock a creature prone. Bonus that their movement is hampered. Because of the Because of expertise and almost always advantage AND because my damage is based on sneak attack I don't really need to bring my 16 up anymore.

I stay competitive without bringing it up.

Is there monsters that I can't knock prone? Yup. This build nor any fighter build is full proof and that's fine.

Level 8? Sentinel, Resilient, Actor, Observant, Heavily Armored, Inspiring Leader, or whatever.

But I would hit up Alert or Sentinel and grab the other one at level 10 (people always forget that Rogue's get a ASI @ 10).

You don't need any levels of Fighter.

Now, if you have a particular race in mind then I would just go with Barbarian as it gives you everything you will use PLUS barbarian 2 is better than Fighter 2. Advantage is awesome on a Rogue. Ever see a critical hit with a sneak attack? Yeah.

Everything the Fighter can do with this build the rogue can too. Athletics? Fighter ain't got nothing on the rogue. Subclasses? Rogue subclasses are better than the Fighter ones (I think AT and EK are about equal with a slight edge for AT due to being able to dump the casting stat easier).

Is this, or any rogue, perfect? Nope. But it is far better than the fighter.

You can build the rogue like this OR build it as a Sniper (Daggers or bow).

You don't need to do the most damage to be useful and keep up with the game. Plus with all the other toys you get... Charm via Persuasion check (expertise lol) just makes the Rogue class more Adept at being a fighter.

Plus the rogue gets Uncanny Dodge and evasion, all depictions of using Shields in fantasy sync up very very well (oh yeah, shield master +2 Dex Saves is nice).

Cunning Action is one of the greatest features in the game. I would say that it is a better feature than anything the core fighter gets. I would take Cunning Action gives you mobility that is straight up brutal in a game where not many others can match it. Even the monk has to expend resources to dash.

[Specter]

If I'm playing a full caster, a 2-level dip in Fighter puts my casting progression behind an entire spell level. So when the other Sorcerers/Warlocks/Wizards are casting Fireball, I'm still using Scorching Ray. By the time I finally get Fireball, they've got Fire Shield and/or Wall of Fire.

You want to cast spells, be a caster. You want to fight, be a fighter.

The fact that you have much more AC than they do and can cast 2 Scorching Rays in a turn doesn't bother them?

[jas61292]

The fact that you have much more AC than they do and can cast 2 Scorching Rays in a turn doesn't bother them?

Nah. What bothers them is that you want to rest after one round of combat because you blew through all your highest level spells. And what also bothers him is that your amazing combo (which was totally worth that need to immediately rest) did, factoring in hit chance, about the same damage to one creature as his fireball does to everyone.

[Tanarii]

The fact that you have much more AC than they do and can cast 2 Scorching Rays in a turn doesn't bother them?1/day? Meanwhile, they get 3 more spells per day than you do, all at 3rd level instead of 2nd. (4/3 vs 4/3/3, counting Arcane Recovery.)

Not trying to say your counter point is without merit or anything. After all, EKs wouldn't exist as an option if the idea of a Warrior using magic to drop Cantrips and AoE/ranged Evocations wasn't appealing. But if you want to be a primary caster as opposed to a Martial/Caster mix, you're slowing down progressing rather dramatically in return for martial capabilities, plus some Nova capability.

[MaxWilson]

Sorcerer: Perhaps the class that benefits the most from Action Surge, due to Quickened and Twinned spells. Why cast one Fireball when you can cast two along with a Firebolt? And why Blind only one creature when you can Blind four in a turn? Are you seeing this, Wizards? And good AC, of course.

This is illegal unfortunately. If you cast a spell with your bonus action, any other spells have to be cantrips. You could Quicken a Fireball and then cast a Fire Bolt, or you could Action Surge two Fireballs, but you cannot Quicken a Fire Bolt and then Action Surge two Fireballs nor even cast a single Fireball.

Normally this is most likely to come into play in restricting what other metamagics can be applied (no Careful Web + Quickened Fire Bolt for you! If you want metamagic on your main spell, you have to give up the extra Fire Bolt damage) but in this case it also restricts how you can use Action Surge.

[Vogonjeltz]

Perhaps I wasn't clear: I think Fighter is the only multiclass that can benefit all other classes, along with being the easiest to enter. If it's better than singleclassing, it depends, of course, but it's not bad for anyone. Rogue is the one that comes closest to it, but no cigar.

Rogue 2 would also benefit every class, presumably. Even Barbarian can only claim not to benefit from Spellcasting classes during a rage. Otherwise, I think every class could potentially realize some kind of benefit from a 2 level dip into another class.

I agree with RickAllison's initial statement however, it's more about what is lost by picking up those two levels. The higher level benefits are probably always better.

[MaxWilson]

Rogue 2 would also benefit every class, presumably. Even Barbarian can only claim not to benefit from Spellcasting classes during a rage. Otherwise, I think every class could potentially realize some kind of benefit from a 2 level dip into another class.

I agree with RickAllison's initial statement however, it's more about what is lost by picking up those two levels. The higher level benefits are probably always better.

Speaking for myself, I am far more attracted to Rogue 2 dips than to Fighter 2. An at-will bonus action that can make you nigh-unkillable compared to a once-in-a-while improvement in your action economy? No contest. Rogue 2 wins hands-down, and I find myself putting Rogue dips in all kinds of builds, from Bladesinger to Paladin. For Fighter I never go beyond Fighter 1.

Yes, there's still an opportunity cost, and that's why no dip is universally useful. Sometimes single-class is best.

[RickAllison]

Speaking for myself, I am far more attracted to Rogue 2 dips than to Fighter 2. An at-will bonus action that can make you nigh-unkillable compared to a once-in-a-while improvement in your action economy? No contest. Rogue 2 wins hands-down, and I find myself putting Rogue dips in all kinds of builds, from Bladesinger to Paladin. For Fighter I never go beyond Fighter 1.

Yes, there's still an opportunity cost, and that's why no dip is universally useful. Sometimes single-class is best.

And the extra skill, thieves' tools proficiency, and Expertise don't hurt either. And for non-draconic sorcerers and wizards, that nice light armor proficiency to save a slot on Mage Armor...

[Tanarii]

When multi-classing is allowed and I'm thinking about one (mostly for AL games), I find myself more inclined to look at 5 / X or 6 / X builds than 1-2 level 'dips'. For Fighter, EK 7 is my preferred break point. For Pally it's 6. For Ranger it's 5, picking up 6 later on. For Rogue, AT 5, with an option to come back as far as 9 later on. For most casters it's 5 or 6 depending on how good the sub-class ability is at 6.

That gives a good solid base of whatever class I start as, then builds something else on top of that. OTOH, that means I tend to think in terms of Casting Martial --> Caster, or Caster --> Caster, for Multi-classing.

[Specter]

1/day? Meanwhile, they get 3 more spells per day than you do, all at 3rd level instead of 2nd. (4/3 vs 4/3/3, counting Arcane Recovery.)

Not trying to say your counter point is without merit or anything. After all, EKs wouldn't exist as an option if the idea of a Warrior using magic to drop Cantrips and AoE/ranged Evocations wasn't appealing. But if you want to be a primary caster as opposed to a Martial/Caster mix, you're slowing down progressing rather dramatically in return for martial capabilities, plus some Nova capability.

Once per short rest, actually. If Warlocks are viable, so are Action Surging casters.


Nah. What bothers them is that you want to rest after one round of combat because you blew through all your highest level spells. And what also bothers him is that your amazing combo (which was totally worth that need to immediately rest) did, factoring in hit chance, about the same damage to one creature as his fireball does to everyone.

Even considering you hit with half your Scorching Rays, that's 6d6 damage (half), while if you hit with a Fireball and they save it's 4d6. So, not true. That's doubly true for Evokers, who get to add +10 in the action surge round rather than +5.
And you are counting only one of them with access to 3rd-level spells, which are a pinnacle in damage. When both of them reach level 7, the first casts two Fireballs and the other casts what, one Vitriolic Sphere? There's your difference.

Also remember, without armor, you're spending 1 or 2 slots daily on Mage Armor, because no one will go out in the world with 11/12AC.

I'm not saying what's better, I'm saying both are viable. If I was building a Wizard for war (meaning avoiding hits and destroying everything), I'd definitely go Fighter 2.


This is illegal unfortunately. If you cast a spell with your bonus action, any other spells have to be cantrips. You could Quicken a Fireball and then cast a Fire Bolt, or you could Action Surge two Fireballs, but you cannot Quicken a Fire Bolt and then Action Surge two Fireballs nor even cast a single Fireball.

Normally this is most likely to come into play in restricting what other metamagics can be applied (no Careful Web + Quickened Fire Bolt for you! If you want metamagic on your main spell, you have to give up the extra Fire Bolt damage) but in this case it also restricts how you can use Action Surge.

Action Surge is an additional action, so I don't believe it interferes with that, but I'm AFB so I can't be too sure.

[R.Shackleford]

Once per short rest, actually. If Warlocks are viable, so are Action Surging casters.



Even considering you hit with half your Scorching Rays, that's 6d6 damage (half), while if you hit with a Fireball and they save it's 4d6. So, not true. That's doubly true for Evokers, who get to add +10 in the action surge round rather than +5.
And you are counting only one of them with access to 3rd-level spells, which are a pinnacle in damage. When both of them reach level 7, the first casts two Fireballs and the other casts what, one Vitriolic Sphere? There's your difference.

Also remember, without armor, you're spending 1 or 2 slots daily on Mage Armor, because no one will go out in the world with 11/12AC.

I'm not saying what's better, I'm saying both are viable. If I was building a Wizard for war (meaning avoiding hits and destroying everything), I'd definitely go Fighter 2.



Action Surge is an additional action, so I don't believe it interferes with that, but I'm AFB so I can't be too sure.

Action surge casters are super viable.

1/SR double cast? Yes and yes. Though the EK can't take full effect of it with their limited spells and not so stellar Int.

Action Surge isn't a bonus action, you could Fireball Fireball Quicken Firebolt.

[Tanarii]

Once per short rest, actually. If Warlocks are viable, so are Action Surging casters.1/day. You only have 3 level 2 slots per long rest as a Fighter 2 / Wizard 3. You can only cast Scorching Ray a total of 3 times, so 1/day Action Surge double-up Nova.

Not only that, you're limited to an average of just 1 spell (level 1 or level 2) per encounter in a standard recommended adventuring day. So you're blowing your next encounters spell's and this encounters spell's in a single round of a single fight. Admittedly, that's exactly the point of a Nova, but it's something that needs to be taken into consideration for comparing resources.

Meanwhile the Wizard 5 has 1.5 spell's per fight, and those .5 spell are all a level higher. Fireballs or Lightning bolts, instead of Scorching Rays. So he's got far more than 150% effective combat power in terms of total resources.

Of course, that's all at level 5. As you go up in levels and more spell slots become available, the ratio difference changes. "missing 2-3 top level spells" stops being missing 2/3 of the total resources, and the missing 1/3 being so dramatically more powerful than level 2 spells to level 3 spells.

[jas61292]

Even considering you hit with half your Scorching Rays, that's 6d6 damage (half), while if you hit with a Fireball and they save it's 4d6. So, not true. That's doubly true for Evokers, who get to add +10 in the action surge round rather than +5.
And you are counting only one of them with access to 3rd-level spells, which are a pinnacle in damage. When both of them reach level 7, the first casts two Fireballs and the other casts what, one Vitriolic Sphere?

First off, the original post you responded to about double Scorching Ray was talking about when your allies got 3rd level spells, and as such I was referring to level 5.

And looking at level 5, its not even close when it comes to damage. If you want to assume a 50% success rate for both, then Scorching Rays do a total of 12d6 x 1/2 = 21 damage. On the other hand Fireball does 8d6 x 1/2 + 8d6 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 21 damage. The exact same damage for both. Except that Fireball does it to as many enemies as there are, whereas double Scorching Ray does it once. Oh, and that's not even mentioning that the Wizard 5 could have higher intelligence than a Wizard 3 / Fighter 2 can, which can only make them more likely to do full damage.

Obviously this changes a bit when you get to higher level, but what doesn't ever change is that the Action Surging Wizard using more of their resources faster, while having fewer total resources.



Action Surge isn't a bonus action, you could Fireball Fireball Quicken Firebolt.

Except that Quickened Firebolt means you can't cast one Fireball, much less two.

[Specter]

First off, the original post you responded to about double Scorching Ray was talking about when your allies got 3rd level spells, and as such I was referring to level 5.

And looking at level 5, its not even close when it comes to damage. If you want to assume a 50% success rate for both, then Scorching Rays do a total of 12d6 x 1/2 = 21 damage. On the other hand Fireball does 8d6 x 1/2 + 8d6 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 21 damage. The exact same damage for both. Except that Fireball does it to as many enemies as there are, whereas double Scorching Ray does it once. Oh, and that's not even mentioning that the Wizard 5 could have higher intelligence than a Wizard 3 / Fighter 2 can, which can only make them more likely to do full damage.

Obviously this changes a bit when you get to higher level, but what doesn't ever change is that the Action Surging Wizard using more of their resources faster, while having fewer total resources.

Why are you doubling Fireball's damage without Action Surge? It's 8d6 x 1/2, 14 average, agaist the 21 of SR, period. The specifics of each spell don't matter, Scorching Ray can also hit enemies much farther and doesn't risk your allies' safety. All the points I raised still stand.

[jas61292]

Why are you doubling Fireball's damage without Action Surge? It's 8d6 x 1/2, 14 average, agaist the 21 of SR, period. The specifics of each spell don't matter, Scorching Ray can also hit enemies much farther and doesn't risk your allies' safety. All the points I raised still stand.

Except Fireball does half damage on a save, not no damage. So 50% of the time it is full damage (28) and 50% of the time it is half damage (14) for an average of (28+14)/2=21.

And again, Scorching Ray does damage once. Fireball does it many times. If there are two enemies, Fireball doubles the damage output of double Scorching Ray. If there are 4, it does quadruple damage. And it does all that using half of the 5th level Wizards highest level slots. The Scorching Rays are using all of the 3rd level Wizard's highest level slots.

[Specter]

Except Fireball does half damage on a save, not no damage. So 50% of the time it is full damage (28) and 50% of the time it is half damage (14) for an average of (28+14)/2=21.

And again, Scorching Ray does damage once. Fireball does it many times. If there are two enemies, Fireball doubles the damage output of double Scorching Ray. If there are 4, it does quadruple damage. And it does all that using half of the 5th level Wizards highest level slots. The Scorching Rays are using all of the 3rd level Wizard's highest level slots.

I'm assuming AT LEAST half the rays hit. But anyway, the fact that you're dwelling on specifics of damage and level just means the argument will drag on forever, while it's proven that both full caster and Fighter 2 approach work.

And it's a false perspective, anyway. Ran out of good slots? Then cast two Magic Missiles, or even two cantrips. Two Fire Bolts at 5th level will do what, 4d10? Works for me.

[Tanarii]

I'm assuming AT LEAST half the rays hit. But anyway, the fact that you're dwelling on specifics of damage and level just means the argument will drag on forever, while it's proven that both full caster and Fighter 2 approach work.You're right, specific DPR doesn't matter.

What matters is you're trading away 2-3 castings of your highest level spell per day. In return for trading away (at level 5) a more than 50% power gain total non-cantrip spell power, and a 50% expendable resource gain, you get a FS, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Medium (if selected after level 1) or Heavy (if selected at 1) armor. Of course, you won't have the Str to use the latter other than Ringmail. You also get Martial weapons, of which you can't really take massive of advantage of due to lack of Str.


And it's a false perspective, anyway. Ran out of good slots? Then cast two Magic Missiles, or even two cantrips. Two Fire Bolts at 5th level will do what, 4d10? Works for me.That's the point. Your total expendable resources are less, and you're resorting to at-will resources faster.

You get stuff in return. The question is, how much does that stuff benefit a pure caster compared to the cost?

[jas61292]

You get stuff in return. The question is, how much does that stuff benefit a pure caster compared to the cost?

This is the most important part. If you are trying to be a gish, sure, go ahead and take those levels. But this thread seems to be implying that Fighter 2 makes everyone better at whatever they want to be, and if what I want to be is a wizard who does wizardy things and doesn't care about using weapons and whatnot, then until I am level 20, taking 2 levels of fighter makes me less of a wizard, with fewer and less powerful wizard resources, in exchange for the ability to go through my fewer resources even faster.

[R.Shackleford]

You're right, specific DPR doesn't matter.

What matters is you're trading away 2-3 castings of your highest level spell per day. In return for trading away (at level 5) a more than 50% power gain total non-cantrip spell power, and a 50% expendable resource gain, you get a FS, Second Wind, Action Surge, and Medium (if selected after level 1) or Heavy (if selected at 1) armor. Of course, you won't have the Str to use the latter other than Ringmail. You also get Martial weapons, of which you can't really take massive of advantage of due to lack of Str.

That's the point. Your total expendable resources are less, and you're resorting to at-will resources faster.

You get stuff in return. The question is, how much does that stuff benefit a pure caster compared to the cost?

Everyone keeps focusing on damage dealing spells.

I would use Action Surge to compliment any damage dealing or control that I do.

As a cleric or sorceret.. I cast Blindness/Deafness (blind) on a creature and then cast Suggestion on another.

Now you got one creature running off to do whatever and the other can't see.

Or a blindness/deafness (blind) + scorching ray (all w/advantage).

Or a hold person + scorching ray (walk up to enemy). Plus all my friends get to hit for crits.

Action Surge is a complimentary piece so you can control + damage or super control (blindness + suggestion)


Edit

A quick way to get your party into a silenced area is to cast Deafness on everyone... tell them to not attempt to fight the effects... (many DMs would allow this I think).

[Ruslan]

A single-classed Wizard 5 has the ability to win an encounter with one powerful spell like Fireball several times per day (two 3rd level slots, and one more can be milked out with Arcane Recovery).
A single-classed Fighter 5 has great tanking abilities and good sustainable damage - with small bursts once in a while.

A Fighter 2/Wizard 3 is unfortunately neither here nor there. He has no sustainable damage (4d10 once per per Short Rest is not sustainable. Rest of the time he's stuck with 2d10, average 9, which about what the Fighter deals with one of his two attacks), and he has perhaps one good burst per day when he can shoot a couple of Scorching Rays (and even then it's questionable whether this is better than one Fireball).

[Tanarii]

Everyone keeps focusing on damage dealing spells.Which is why I said, in the post you quoted, specific DPR doesn't matter.

Removing the focus from DPR, you are trading away 1/3 of your daily resources (at level 5) and more than 1/3 of your total daily resources power (again, at level 5) as part of the trade.

That ratio goes down as you level up, but the absolute value goes UP. Instead of trading away 3 level 3 spells, its 3 level 4 spells, then 3 level 5 spells, and so on.

[R.Shackleford]

Which is why I said, in the post you quoted, specific DPR doesn't matter.

Removing the focus from DPR, you are trading away 1/3 of your daily resources (at level 5) and more than 1/3 of your total daily resources power (again, at level 5) as part of the trade.

That ratio goes down as you level up, but the absolute value goes UP. Instead of trading away 3 level 3 spells, its 3 level 4 spells, then 3 level 5 spells, and so on.

No it isnt.

You don't always need to cast your highest level spells to be super effective.

If you land Hold Person your Scorching Rays will crit. You don't need to cast 4th level SR when you can just drop a 2nd level one for 12d6 damage (and your allies get to crit too).

You make it seem like you have to action surge your highest slot, this just isn't necessary at all.

[RickAllison]

Everyone keeps focusing on damage dealing spells.

I would use Action Surge to compliment any damage dealing or control that I do.

As a cleric or sorceret.. I cast Blindness/Deafness (blind) on a creature and then cast Suggestion on another.

Now you got one creature running off to do whatever and the other can't see.

Or a blindness/deafness (blind) + scorching ray (all w/advantage).

Or a hold person + scorching ray (walk up to enemy). Plus all my friends get to hit for crits.

Action Surge is a complimentary piece so you can control + damage or super control (blindness + suggestion)

Indeed, and it is very good at that. However for most campaigns it comes at a heavy cost. Now a wizard 18 very likely should grab Fighter 2. Better armor, awesome casting, and the slots you gain are worth comparably less than when you are starting out. But let's look at why this sucks at early levels (and levels out towards the end of most campaigns):

Level: Spell slots (wizard X); Spell slots (Wizard X-2)
3: 6; 2
5: 9; 6
7: 11; 9
9: 14; 11

So what we see is that at level 3, when the game supposedly really starts, the multiclass has radically reduced longevity. However it balances out fairly well by level 7. Really seems to follow the golden rule of multiclassing, hit level 5 in your main class before straying. Between Extra Attack, spells like Fireball, and the evening out of the spell slots, it really is the golden time to try something new.

[Chronos Flame]

As to the argument that rogue doesn't benefit from fighter dip. If you are going to make a rogue build as lined out (a cool build mind you, I have considered something a lot like it) and you're taking moderately armored for a shield and med armor... well doesn't that mean that a single level of fighter (which you absolutely qualify for) is basically an extra ASI as it comes with moderately armored effectively as a rider?

[Tanarii]

No it isnt.

You don't always need to cast your highest level spells to be super effective.I'm sorry, are you claiming that as a general rule, lower level spells are more powerful than higher level spells? Because that's what it sounds like you just tried to claim.


You make it seem like you have to action surge your highest slot, this just isn't necessary at all.It doesn't matter what you Action Surge. You are still trading 2-3 castings of the highest level slots you would otherwise have had, and instead gaining Action Surge 1/SR.

Edit: To be clear, what I'm saying is your choices are:

A) Action Surge, Second Wind, Fighting Style, Medium or Heavy Armor, Martial Weapons.
vs
B) 2-3 castings of the highest level spell possible if you had stayed as a full caster. (ie 3x3rd at level 5, 3x4 at level 7, 3x5 at level 9)

A's power stays the same as you level up, with the exception of Action Surge. B goes up fairly drastically as you level up. So you're always loosing value on your trade-off as you gain levels in terms of A to B. For a full caster who doesn't care about martialing it up, that's a big loss to be able to nova one round per 2 encounters.

[Specter]

To simplify what Mr. Tanarii said:

A) At least +4AC without needing Mage armor slots, extra HP and Action Surge; or
B) 2-3 castings of the highest level spell possible.

I see it as a fair trade-off.

[Rummy]

I LOOOOVE casting fireball and then following it up with fireball.

[Tanarii]

To simplify what Mr. Tanarii said:

A) At least +4AC without needing Mage armor slots, extra HP and Action Surge; or
B) 2-3 castings of the highest level spell possible.

I see it as a fair trade-off.thats actually a pretty good simplified summary.

For combat: Assuming your DM uses the normal encounter guidelines, how fair that trade-off is depends on how he tends to structure his encounters, and the levels involved.

3x Deadly (with a SR between each one) could easily mean that 3 Action Surges are totally required to dump all your spell slots in each encounter as quickly as possible, past a certain level. At level 10, you have 15 slots, and at 8 you get 12. That's 5 per encounter vs 4 per encounter on avg. The first guy needs either 5 rounds of combat or lots of them to be reaction spells. The second guy can drop those 4 in 3 rounds every fight. And the highest level spells are less likely to trivialize Deadly encounters anyway.

6x Medium/Hard with the same spells is 2.5/encounter for the first guy, and 2/encounter with an action surge every other fight for the latter. The non-multiclassed guy effectively has a more powerful spell or an extra spell every fight before resorting to plinking away with cantrips, and those level-appropriate top tier spells are more likely to finish off the encounter rapidly. And while the mc guy can drop spells in one round every other fight, he's just going to cantrips after one round.

(Technically you can have up to 12 Easy encounters and the players can still hack it, but outside of heavy use of random encounters I don't think many DMs are likely to do that.)

Out of combat: you're lacking access to game changing spells until two levels later, for a combat-specific buff. Especially 'gating' spells (See AngryGM's http://theangrygm.com/welcome-to-the-megadungeon-the-plotty-half-of-the-master-plan/ (megadungeon) for a good example of them in use), and Divinations. Levitate/Spider Climb & Augury. Fly/Water Breathing & Clairvoyance. Dimension Door & Arcane Eye/Divination. Teleport &Commune/Contact Other Plane. Etc.

[Gignere]

To simplify what Mr. Tanarii said:

A) At least +4AC without needing Mage armor slots, extra HP and Action Surge; or
B) 2-3 castings of the highest level spell possible.

I see it as a fair trade-off.

If you are not gishing this is a failed trade off basically action surge for the spell slots and spells known. I am playing a straight wizard without Mage armor and have gone 5 sessions without losing a single hps. If you allow your DM to swing at you as a wizard you have failed.

[Tanarii]

If you are not gishing this is a failed trade off basically action surge for the spell slots and spells known. I am playing a straight wizard without Mage armor and have gone 5 sessions without losing a single hps. If you allow your DM to swing at you as a wizard you have failed.
You still get Action Surge 1/SR. And depending on how your DM structures his adventuring day, that's potentially (but not necessarily) an okay trade-off. See my comment above.

Also, in a low total number but high difficulty encounter day scenario, added AC and HPs are far more likely to come into play. Ditto for smaller parties vs larger parties.

[RickAllison]

If you are not gishing this is a failed trade off basically action surge for the spell slots and spells known. I am playing a straight wizard without Mage armor and have gone 5 sessions without losing a single hps. If you allow your DM to swing at you as a wizard you have failed.

My wizard takes offense to that, he is the tank!

[NNescio]

My wizard takes offense to that, he is the tank!

Let me guess, Mountain Dwarf Abjurer?

Or is he a Bladesinger blink tank?

(Granted, I've witnessed an Illusionist insisting on tanking with Mirror Image... on an AC of 11. Yeah, he didn't even put on Mage Armor, but he got consistently lucky.

And he tanked Shadows out of all things.)

[RickAllison]

Let me guess, Mountain Dwarf Abjurer?

Or is he a Bladesinger blink tank?

(Granted, I've witnessed an Illusionist insisting on tanking with Mirror Image... on an AC of 11. Yeah, he didn't even put on Mage Armor, but he got consistently lucky.

And he tanked Shadows out of all things.)

No, Minotaur Cleric/Artificer (soon to be Theurge) who just happened to roll abominably well on Con. He also happens to be in a party where the next closest tank is a Moon Druid. Really, a Giant Scorpion combos well with a 60' speed (DM gave him some Minotaur-shoes of Speed) and heavily armored wizard. Besides, who goes after the squishy rogue (the closest we have to DPR...) or monk when the guy who put down the paralysis spell is stabbing you in the face with his flaming horns?

[NNescio]

No, Minotaur Cleric/Artificer (soon to be Theurge) who just happened to roll abominably well on Con. He also happens to be in a party where the next closest tank is a Moon Druid. Really, a Giant Scorpion combos well with a 60' speed (DM gave him some Minotaur-shoes of Speed) and heavily armored wizard. Besides, who goes after the squishy rogue (the closest we have to DPR...) or monk when the guy who put down the paralysis spell is stabbing you in the face with his flaming horns?

That. Is. Awesome.

[RickAllison]

That. Is. Awesome.

Yes. Yes it is. It doesn't hurt that he is also a grappler and we use variant encumbrance (so when he Enlarges on top of a creature, they become heavily encumbered and suffer massive disadvantage. What do you expect when you have a minivan on your back?).

[Specter]

If you are not gishing this is a failed trade off basically action surge for the spell slots and spells known. I am playing a straight wizard without Mage armor and have gone 5 sessions without losing a single hps. If you allow your DM to swing at you as a wizard you have failed.

See, this kind of comment always comes from people playing with unchallenging DMs. Between surprise, hordes of enemies, ranged attackers, terrain hazards and terrain disposition, these "god" wizards never chill when I play.

Changing your quote, if your DM lets you feel like you're never gonna get swung at, he's failed as a DM.

[Dalebert]

It's been expressed many ways very well in the thread, but it comes down to opportunity cost. If your goal is to be very versatile and not be at all squishy, it works well to accomplish that and you have the perk of being able to cast an extra spell once a short rest or whatever. But at leveling time, you'll realize how many more spell slots you would have had and which higher level spells you would have access to or be 1d6 sneak attack behind or 2 ki points behind and you won't be able to get that shadow step teleport at-will for 2 more levels and so on. You'll feel the price you paid over and over again, every time you level. Those early two levels will drag at you. It's very easy to fall into the trap of thinking about your lvl 20 build and what you gave up and forget that you will spend a LONG time getting to that point. I know this from experience. I make a point to remind myself of the class features I've been benefiting from at times like these and I've mostly been happy with the trade-offs I've made in terms of level dips but these things will haunt you to some extent or another on a regular basis.

[Gignere]

See, this kind of comment always comes from people playing with unchallenging DMs. Between surprise, hordes of enemies, ranged attackers, terrain hazards and terrain disposition, these "god" wizards never chill when I play.

Changing your quote, if your DM lets you feel like you're never gonna get swung at, he's failed as a DM.

It's not for a lack of trying from my DM short of the DM pulling I am God and this Mob appears out of nowhere to swing at you I make all precautions to minimize surprise. Always scouting, positioning myself behind the tanks, I even waste actions/resources to make sure I have the perfect position. I am super defensive in play and you have to reward your players for good sensible play don't you?

For example he threw a bulette at us at level 2, I rolled knowledge roll and found out it had tremor sense out to 60 feet so I disengaged and spent my next movements getting the hell out of his tremor sense and dark vision range suddenly I am no longer a legal target. However since my other party members had a light source he was a legal target for me.

Half the party got slaughtered but I finally nailed it with a sleep spell and we killed it.

[ZanettonBR]

Monk doesn't.... a lot at least.
Putting action surge into perspective, its really unfair, there's not a single class that does not want a extra attack, so its very valuable.Its just plain dumb to consider this bad.
But monks dont need armor or weapon proficiencies that bad, they rely on ki points so action surge drains them really fast (not that it is not put to good use btw) and the fist are probably better then any other weapon , except if you multiclass with the rogue, then it becomes the dagger, but it still uses martial art damage.
Healing is also good,but not mandatory.

So,concluding my point of view: No, everyone loves it.But imo Monks love it the least.