Looser Multiclassing for Casters

[MrStabby]

OK, I like multiclassing. When I DM I like my players to have multiclass characters - they tend to be more interesting and distinct than "yet another vengeance paladin that tries to behave like Batman" or "pyromaniac sorcerer".

In 5th edition martial classes do multiclass pretty well, even casters and martial classes can be very solid (in some cases). Caster+Caster tends to be poor - with a couple of exceptions.

I will be running a one shot some time in Feb - probably a single 12 hour session with some food breaks. I was wanting to use some slightly friendlier rules for multiclassing casters.

The idea is that there is magic in the world and different caster types are just different ways of accessing that same magic, but they are not exclusive to each other. You can supplement the power you get from your bloodline with study. So far so much like spell slots in multiclassing.

The boost I want to give is to enable a character to know a spell if it would be known to a single class character (of a class that would access that spell) of a level equal to the combined levels of all of the characters classes that could know that spell (counting half-casters as half level and 1/3rd casters as 1/3rd level).

For example fireball is on the sorcerer and wizard spells list so a sorcerer 1 wizard 4 would be able to know this spell (taken in the form dictated by the class they leveled up in when they selected it).


Domain/similar mechanic spells will count as being on the spell list of the main class from the point at which the domain is selected.

Whilst a fiend warlock 2 sorcerer 3 couldn't cast fireball as they wouldn't have the spell slots needed, a fiend warlock 2, sorcerer 3, bard 2 could cast fireball.

At a first pass I don't see issues with this (but issues can be overlooked which is why I am posting it here). The more powerful combinations of casters (dipping warlock) don't get a boost as the spell slots are not there to support any of the higher level spells known (ignoring any cheese over buying higher level spells through sorcery points). Wizard, which has a massive number of spells on offer and some great low level abilities (divination is good, necromancy looks a lot better on a multiclass) requires int - a common dump-stat for most other casters.

Generally on-stat casters have less to gain: warlock doesn't stack with spell slots and sorcerer and bard have a pretty narrow overlap - you will only be getting access to a few spells this way.

Cleric and druid also don't have that much to offer each-other although some domains do stack with druid spells or druid terrains there is no great synergy.

The half casters might need some thought. Sorcerer paladins are pretty solid as it is - giving them banishment and dispel magic early is a nice bonus.

Ranger gains more, but is still in the power envelope I think is ok. Ranger would be able to add druid for quicker access to conjure animals, plant growth, water walk and a few other spells. A 5th level ranger/3rd level druid being able to cast conjure animals doesn't seem inappropriate to me.

Using just the spells in the PHB and EE, is there any character you could build using these rules that would be much more powerful than a single classed character using a single casting stat (we will be using point buy so MADness is an issue) gaining access to all the spells of the level for which they have spell slots? What are the power builds I should worry about?

[xyianth]

This will not balance casters with martials, as casters already win that particular comparison. The rule that prevents casters from learning higher tier magic due to multiclassing is intentionally designed to give multiclassing a caster a downside. With your rule change, the very concept of spell lists is meaningless: every caster just multiclasses 1-3 levels in every caster class and has a spell list of all the spells.

5e specifically designed classes to get their iconic abilities at low levels, so multiclassing has to have costs associated with it or it becomes the only viable option. For martials, that cost is delayed extra attack and ASI/feat progression. For casters, that cost is delayed spell and ASI/feat progression. You would need to significantly buff martial characters to 'balance' your proposed rule change. Something like: gaining a level as ranger, barbarian, paladin, rogue, or monk also grants you all class features that you would gain as if you had also gained a level in fighter. You do not gain extra hp, HD, or proficiency bonus progression from this. This would effectively turn martial characters into gestalt X/fighters.

Personally, I don't think it is a good idea; but I don't believe in BadWrongFun so as long as you balance the campaign around it, feel free.

[MrStabby]

This will not balance casters with martials, as casters already win that particular comparison. The rule that prevents casters from learning higher tier magic due to multiclassing is intentionally designed to give multiclassing a caster a downside. With your rule change, the very concept of spell lists is meaningless: every caster just multiclasses 1-3 levels in every caster class and has a spell list of all the spells.

OK, not sure I explained the idea right. You raise a couple of points:

1) Casters vs martials
I am not worried about this so much as long as the multiclass is no more powerful than a single class caster. Giving players options to play something less powerful than the most powerful thing they would be allowed to play anyway doesn't really break any balance.

2) The ability to bundle a whole load of classes together to get every spell
By my plans this wouldn't work - you only add the class levels for classes that have the spell. For example bard doesn't have the fireball spell on their list so a bard 4, Wizard 4 would still not be able to cast the spell. Bard 3, Wizard 3, Cleric (non light) 3, Druid 3 in one character could not cast fireball. Animate dead, on the other hand, they could cast fine as they have 6 levels in classes that have this spell on their list.

The other issue is that it doesn't change multiclassing requirements not the ability score used to cast a spell. An character picking all the casters would still need 13s in all mental scores and higher in any that they wanted people to make a save from.




5e specifically designed classes to get their iconic abilities at low levels, so multiclassing has to have costs associated with it or it becomes the only viable option. For martials, that cost is delayed extra attack and ASI/feat progression. For casters, that cost is delayed spell and ASI/feat progression. You would need to significantly buff martial characters to 'balance' your proposed rule change. Something like: gaining a level as ranger, barbarian, paladin, rogue, or monk also grants you all class features that you would gain as if you had also gained a level in fighter. You do not gain extra hp, HD, or proficiency bonus progression from this. This would effectively turn martial characters into gestalt X/fighters.

Personally, I don't think it is a good idea; but I don't believe in BadWrongFun so as long as you balance the campaign around it, feel free.

I think I substantially agree with you in principle. Multiclassing should have costs. It should be powerful enough that it is balanced with single class characters but not powerful enough to overshadow them. It should be a viable option but not mandatory and should work well alongside other classes.

I think where we disagree is in how steep these costs need to be to balance these options.
At the moment I never see any cleric-wizards or druid-sorcerers or any other caster multiclass (other than warlock which doesn't really benefit from this change). To me this suggests that these multiclass options are weaker than the single class variants.

You miss out on ASIs unless you are careful, as you said, and you miss out on high level abilities.

You miss out on high level spells - which you will also do under my suggestion. The difference is that unaltered the rules make you miss all high level spells, whereas under this suggestion you miss out on almost all high level spells - keeping only those spells where there is overlap between the spell lists.

I am not saying that this is right as a rule set - I am happy to have pointed out to me a build that is overpowered or some unintended consequences. I tried to break it but didn't come up with anything extraordinary myself.

For half casters there are more opportunities than full casters - but even then the options don't seem more powerful than a single classed Wizard.

[MBControl]

I understand and respect your reasoning for multi-classing, though it seems the problem is more in character creation and originality.

For changes like these, I like to stay with RAW, as they have been balanced the way they are for a reason. Overall power has to be sacrificed for variety. If everybody was great at everything, your party would be OP. That being said, there are ways to adjust things in game to "smooth some edges". If it's an expanded spell list you would like to provide, work into a story. Have them find and clear an abandoned arcane library. They find a rack of spell scrolls, or a boon of some sort that allows them to add a spell or cantrip.

How is this different? It's more satisfying as a player to earn things. I would much rather feel that I improved my character with good play, than be given something just because. Secondly, you have more control. If you do try something new, and it's not panning out, you as the DM can "fix it" in game. A boon can wear off, the spell scroll was cursed, and after it's been used too many times, your fireball spell just shoots chickens (arguably better).

If I can use any mechanical change as a plot device, a surprise, or reward in game, I do. As DM's we're always trying to add hooks and cool stuff for the players. This is a gimmie.

[Biggstick]

1) Casters vs martials
I am not worried about this so much as long as the multiclass is no more powerful than a single class caster. Giving players options to play something less powerful than the most powerful thing they would be allowed to play anyway doesn't really break any balance.

But it does. Maybe in your mind you're giving the players a less powerful option, but small dips to gain something like a Diviner's level two ability, or three levels for Metamagic, is extremely powerful.


2) The ability to bundle a whole load of classes together to get every spell
By my plans this wouldn't work - you only add the class levels for classes that have the spell. For example bard doesn't have the fireball spell on their list so a bard 4, Wizard 4 would still not be able to cast the spell. Bard 3, Wizard 3, Cleric (non light) 3, Druid 3 in one character could not cast fireball. Animate dead, on the other hand, they could cast fine as they have 6 levels in classes that have this spell on their list.

The other problem you're running into here is you're amping up the power even more so on classes like Sorcadin. An example.

Level 6 Vengeance Paladin (Has Haste on their Oath specific spell list)
Level 2 Draconic Sorcerer (Has Haste on standard spell list)

With this example, and your rulings, this character would be able to add Haste to their spell list. This is just one example of it, but if you can't see the abuse of spell access here, I don't know what to say.


I think I substantially agree with you in principle. Multiclassing should have costs. It should be powerful enough that it is balanced with single class characters but not powerful enough to overshadow them. It should be a viable option but not mandatory and should work well alongside other classes.

I think where we disagree is in how steep these costs need to be to balance these options.
At the moment I never see any cleric-wizards or druid-sorcerers or any other caster multiclass (other than warlock which doesn't really benefit from this change). To me this suggests that these multiclass options are weaker than the single class variants..

Cleric-Wizard is something that is extremely common in my played games. Knowledge Cleric 1-2 // Wizard xx is an extremely useful dip for the Medium armor/shield, Bless, Guidance, couple extra languages, and Expertise in two knowledge skills. The players going that route tend to dump Strength and Charisma, put a 14 in Dex, 13 in Wis, 12-14 in Con, and then max out Int.


You miss out on ASIs unless you are careful, as you said, and you miss out on high level abilities.

You miss out on high level spells - which you will also do under my suggestion. The difference is that unaltered the rules make you miss all high level spells, whereas under this suggestion you miss out on almost all high level spells - keeping only those spells where there is overlap between the spell lists.

I am not saying that this is right as a rule set - I am happy to have pointed out to me a build that is overpowered or some unintended consequences. I tried to break it but didn't come up with anything extraordinary myself.

For half casters there are more opportunities than full casters - but even then the options don't seem more powerful than a single classed Wizard.

I think you have good intentions, but this is most definitely something that's imbalanced in favor of casters. This idea practically ensures you won't see a single classed caster, as the player just needs to look at end game spells (8th and 9th level), confer between the two spell caster lists, check for matches, and decide they want to do it. Every spell caster in your game will have 2 or so early spell caster features available to them without much of a negative. As long as you're fine with handing even more power to spell casters then they already have, go for it.

[MrStabby]

I understand and respect your reasoning for multi-classing, though it seems the problem is more in character creation and originality.

For changes like these, I like to stay with RAW, as they have been balanced the way they are for a reason. Overall power has to be sacrificed for variety. If everybody was great at everything, your party would be OP. That being said, there are ways to adjust things in game to "smooth some edges". If it's an expanded spell list you would like to provide, work into a story. Have them find and clear an abandoned arcane library. They find a rack of spell scrolls, or a boon of some sort that allows them to add a spell or cantrip.

How is this different? It's more satisfying as a player to earn things. I would much rather feel that I improved my character with good play, than be given something just because. Secondly, you have more control. If you do try something new, and it's not panning out, you as the DM can "fix it" in game. A boon can wear off, the spell scroll was cursed, and after it's been used too many times, your fireball spell just shoots chickens (arguably better).

If I can use any mechanical change as a plot device, a surprise, or reward in game, I do. As DM's we're always trying to add hooks and cool stuff for the players. This is a gimmie.

This is closer to what I do already, but it does make it difficult for the players to decide to do something they think is cool. If someone wants to play a divine necromancer with a death cleric/necromancer wizard it would be nice if they can plan that and understand what they can do and what abilities will match their character concept best rather than either me agreeing they will happen to come across appropriate lore that lets them do it in game or them just hoping I can guess what they want and give it to them. The worry here is that there is the "this is cool but I don't know if the DM will let it work" type question. It is also a little more challenging as it is a 1-shot. So unless it is the first room the characters go into they will be playing much of the game without cool abilities they anticipated getting.

You have been somewhat convincing so I might see if I can get some kind of compromise between the two systems.



But it does. Maybe in your mind you're giving the players a less powerful option, but small dips to gain something like a Diviner's level two ability, or three levels for Metamagic, is extremely powerful.
So I am guessing that we are agreed that there isn't an issue if the multiclass option is no more powerful than the single class option? The question just being whether the multiclass option is actually stronger?




The other problem you're running into here is you're amping up the power even more so on classes like Sorcadin. An example.

Level 6 Vengeance Paladin (Has Haste on their Oath specific spell list)
Level 2 Draconic Sorcerer (Has Haste on standard spell list)

With this example, and your rulings, this character would be able to add Haste to their spell list. This is just one example of it, but if you can't see the abuse of spell access here, I don't know what to say.
But I can see it... this would be why I called out the half casters+full casters getting more from this. In fact I specifically mentioned the sorcerer/paladin. Not quite sure what you are suggesting.

Having said this I do question if it is abusive. Is a level 6 paladin/level 2 sorcerer more powerful with this than a level 8 wizard would be? And even if so is this an isolated point and through an adventure would it even out? I would personally say that a wizard 7 would be better than paladin 5/sorcerer 2, even with haste and likewise a wizard 9 would be more powerful than a paladin 7 sorcerer 2. Yes is is a boost to the paladin but is it actually going to take is past a pure caster?




Cleric-Wizard is something that is extremely common in my played games. Knowledge Cleric 1-2 // Wizard xx is an extremely useful dip for the Medium armor/shield, Bless, Guidance, couple extra languages, and Expertise in two knowledge skills. The players going that route tend to dump Strength and Charisma, put a 14 in Dex, 13 in Wis, 12-14 in Con, and then max out Int.

Ok, this is probably a better example. You get a good amount of the cleric already and wisdom is a good enough stat that it doesn't hurt so much bumping it to take the cleric level. Only half the time are you a spell level behind. On the other hand, what are the problem spells it gains? Banish at level 7, one level earlier than it otherwise would wait for it. The domain spells come unhindered. The 1 shot will probably be level 9, is a level 8 wizard+cleric better than a level 9 wizard? maybe. Is there a particular spell that you feel this multiclass shouldn't have? Or is a general utility thing?




I think you have good intentions, but this is most definitely something that's imbalanced in favor of casters. This idea practically ensures you won't see a single classed caster, as the player just needs to look at end game spells (8th and 9th level), confer between the two spell caster lists, check for matches, and decide they want to do it. Every spell caster in your game will have 2 or so early spell caster features available to them without much of a negative. As long as you're fine with handing even more power to spell casters then they already have, go for it.

Well the high level spell thing assumes that the adventure path won't be completed before then and it assumes the classes provide as much fun leveling up to that point as is needed to justify the split.

If the knowledge cleric/wizard build is the biggest worry then I am pretty cool with that. If it becomes problematic then I can adjust the loot they find.

I am also working on the martial side:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?509027-Spicing-up-Combat-in-5th

Including both may re-balance things a little (though the martial side has a few broken things in that need fixing as well).

[bid]

Cleric 19 / wizard 1 can cast wish...

[MBControl]

For a one shot, yeah, it doesn't really work.

I mean do what you want for a one-shot. Just make sure you scale the encounters to be challenging.

As far as player "plans". Life isn't fair. By that I mean, your RP'ing the life of the PC's. Sometimes, or should I say most of the time in life, things don't go perfectly to plan, and that should reflect in game as well. If they have to adapt, that's great. That's natural character development.

If a player has specific goal, and you as the DM see it as not overpowered, or against the story line, then it is your choice to provide that experience in a reasonable way. It may take some time, but again make them earn it. Not for the one shots of course.

[MrStabby]

Cleric 19 / wizard 1 can cast wish...

No... they have a total of one level in a class that can cast wish




For a one shot, yeah, it doesn't really work.

I mean do what you want for a one-shot. Just make sure you scale the encounters to be challenging.

As far as player "plans". Life isn't fair. By that I mean, your RP'ing the life of the PC's. Sometimes, or should I say most of the time in life, things don't go perfectly to plan, and that should reflect in game as well. If they have to adapt, that's great. That's natural character development.

If a player has specific goal, and you as the DM see it as not overpowered, or against the story line, then it is your choice to provide that experience in a reasonable way. It may take some time, but again make them earn it. Not for the one shots of course.

Yeah. I do like rewards like this although currently I tend to tie it to the characters backstory pre game or their evolved relationships within it.

[Biggstick]

Cleric 19 / wizard 1 can cast wish...

Arcana Cleric at 17 can cast Wish if they choose it as their 9th level Wizard spell.

But like Stabby said, Wish is not naturally on the Cleric spell list.

[bid]

No... they have a total of one level in a class that can cast wish
Oh, a cleric 10 / wizard 10 can cast gate, because it's on both spell lists. I get it now.

[MrStabby]

Oh, a cleric 10 / wizard 10 can cast gate, because it's on both spell lists. I get it now.

Bingo. You got it.

[SharkForce]

wizard X/sorcerer 3 would become ridiculous.

[ChildofLuthic]

I feel like this could be okay depending on the players. If you've got a bunch of minmaxers, this could get silly, but if your players are the type to be more RP focused, it could allow them to do "bad" combos without messing themselves up.

So my answer is "it's not going to break the game unless someone tries to break the game with it."

[Gignere]

wizard X/sorcerer 3 would become ridiculous.

It's actually the other way around that is more ridiculous. Level 2 wizard/ x sorcerer. Get all the overlap high level spells overcoming a fundamental weakness of the sorcerer, spell known, and get the wizard level 2 ability as a bonus. With just two wizard levels you can prepare all the high level spells that overlap with sorcerer which is practically everyone.

[MrStabby]

wizard X/sorcerer 3 would become ridiculous.

Well metamagic is good, no doubt. You would need to raise Cha to 13 though - which would be equivalent to 2 ASIs (roughly) and then you are pretty much 1 ASI down for the 3 sorc levels.

On top of that arcane recovery is reduced by 3 wizard levels, you get fewer prepared spells known each day, get slower access to your high level abilities and your highest level spells are only chosen from the sorcerer list not the wizard list. Plus of course you can only have 3 sorcery points at once, not a huge game breaker but no chance of twinning higher level spells to break the wizard's spell list.

I am a big fan of metamagic but you sure do end up giving up a lot for it. I think the best part might be that you have more options for careful spell. It isn't bad but how often are you going to do something a pure wizard couldn't?

Wizard 2 or 3 sorcerer X would seem more concerning. It overcomes the low number of spells the sorcerer knows, provides some good rituals, good utility spells and lets the sorcerer do the heavy lifting from higher spell slots. You get more sorcery points and can do more with them.

[Ovarwa]

Sorcerer1/WizardX

Choose Favored Soul or Dragon for Sorcerer. Get innate or light/medium armor, Con proficiency and other benefits. Choose Abjurer or Bladesinger for Wizard. You are now far more durable, but sacrifice little.

Favored6/AbjurerX An Abjurer with Second Attack
Dragon6/WizardX. Innate armor, +Cha to one element. Evocation? Abjuration? Bladesinger? Evoker+Dragon double bonus is intriguing. A touch of Undying Light too?

Or, adding a touch of Wizard to anything allows you to add any common spell you missed to your spellbook. Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters like this a lot, since it completely removes the school restriction and grants prep-free rituals, but Sorcerers and Bards are also happy.

As is so often the case, Warlocks suffer by comparison.

Anyway,

Ken

[MrStabby]

Sorcerer1/WizardX

Choose Favored Soul or Dragon for Sorcerer. Get innate or light/medium armor, Con proficiency and other benefits. Choose Abjurer or Bladesinger for Wizard. You are now far more durable, but sacrifice little.

Favored6/AbjurerX An Abjurer with Second Attack
Dragon6/WizardX. Innate armor, +Cha to one element. Evocation? Abjuration? Bladesinger? Evoker+Dragon double bonus is intriguing. A touch of Undying Light too?

Or, adding a touch of Wizard to anything allows you to add any common spell you missed to your spellbook. Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters like this a lot, since it completely removes the school restriction and grants prep-free rituals, but Sorcerers and Bards are also happy.

As is so often the case, Warlocks suffer by comparison.

Anyway,

Ken

Well the base material is PHB+EE so I am not too worried by a lot of this. Dragon6, Wizard x is potentially scary. Being half a spell level down isn't too big a deal so a 1 level dip in sorcerer doesn't gain that much from the rules change but 6 levels is a bigger deal. If it were a nasty combination then it would be attractive for people anyway (who rolled well for stats).

Dragon sorc 6 gives you a useful pool of metamagic and can boost damage quite a bit and I would say that the abilities/flexability a wizard gives is probably good enough compensation for what you miss from higher sorc levels. You still are down a few ASIs given that you will want to be pumping 2 casting stats (or at least if you want Evoker as well). This probably means forgoing warcaster and elemental adept - popular feats for sorcerers. Whilst I am not certain it is more powerful when you factor in the ability score requirements it is certainly one to watch. At level 9 it is enough to get you a lot of extra versatility without losing too much from the the sorcerer class - your stats will be shocking though - 1 ASI, in 9 levels and min 13 in Int. At least it brings the Tiefling into play as a good race.

[Captain Morgan]

I think the problem is you are looking at class features as something with universal parity, when that's really not the case. Divination wizards get their most powerful feature at level 2. By level 6 a draconic sorcerer doesn't really have much to look forward to for class features until level 14, and frankly while wings are cool Fly has been a thing since level 5, or level 1 if you're a variant tiefling. Cleric domain abilities are kinda randomly assigned for levels and use. Paladins are chalk full of great points to bail and multiclass.

The only full Caster with compelling features at most levels, IMO, is the Bard. Which has so much spell list versatility I don't see why most other classes wouldn't dip under your rules.

Less spells prepared isn't really a loss if you've got spontaneous spells known to round it out, too.

Most of the caster classes get less class features than martials because their spells are supposed to be their primary feature. If their spell access isn't delayed there isn't much reason not to dip beyond MAD.

[Ovarwa]

Here's another good trick, using this system: Shove a level of Druid into your Cleric progression if you don't care too much about armor. This gives you an extra +Wisdom+1 spells you can prepare each day. Oh, and Shillelagh and Goodberry, both fan favorites. A second level of Druid probably doesn't hurt either. Starting Moon2 and then going Cleric lets you start with superior wildshape (great @2 but tapers off) and end with superior spells. Trickster, with animal shape goodness? Arcane, with Wish@19 iirc? Many good choices. Not Nature though.

[Squiddish]

I'm just going to leave this here:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?506972-Multiclass-Archetypes-PEACH

[SharkForce]

It's actually the other way around that is more ridiculous. Level 2 wizard/ x sorcerer. Get all the overlap high level spells overcoming a fundamental weakness of the sorcerer, spell known, and get the wizard level 2 ability as a bonus. With just two wizard levels you can prepare all the high level spells that overlap with sorcerer which is practically everyone.


Well metamagic is good, no doubt. You would need to raise Cha to 13 though - which would be equivalent to 2 ASIs (roughly) and then you are pretty much 1 ASI down for the 3 sorc levels.

On top of that arcane recovery is reduced by 3 wizard levels, you get fewer prepared spells known each day, get slower access to your high level abilities and your highest level spells are only chosen from the sorcerer list not the wizard list. Plus of course you can only have 3 sorcery points at once, not a huge game breaker but no chance of twinning higher level spells to break the wizard's spell list.

I am a big fan of metamagic but you sure do end up giving up a lot for it. I think the best part might be that you have more options for careful spell. It isn't bad but how often are you going to do something a pure wizard couldn't?

Wizard 2 or 3 sorcerer X would seem more concerning. It overcomes the low number of spells the sorcerer knows, provides some good rituals, good utility spells and lets the sorcerer do the heavy lifting from higher spell slots. You get more sorcery points and can do more with them.

getting a bunch of extra low level spells known (thus freeing up spells known of sorcerer for higher level stuff) would indeed be nice.

and yes, 3 SP at a time is certainly a limitation.

not sure i'm sold on 13 cha being a major barrier though. for one thing, i don't think it's genuinely as big a deal as 2 ASIs (you might need to start with your secondary or tertiary stat a bit lower, but probably not 4 points lower). especially for classes that typically don't have a desperate need for multiple extremely high attributes or a large number of feats.

and you're still getting a huge part of the sorcerer's bag of tricks and keeping the great majority of the wizard's bag of tricks (just delaying some of it by a few levels). getting to level 9 and knowing that wall of force and bigby's hand are 3 levels away still isn't great, but you're still going to get them eventually. but now you have access to, say, subtle spell for your illusionist or enchanter. or heighten to stack on to your diviner's portent. or careful if you like AoE crowd control, empower if you like better fireballs, etc. and someday you'll get tricks like careful magic jar, or extended maze, if that's what you picked into.

i might be inclined to delay the sorcerer levels until a fair bit later in my wizard career, say, after getting level 5 or 6 spells, but as i've said before, metamagic is an amazing class feature for any spellcaster, the only problem is how much it costs the sorcerer to get it. give metamagic to other classes, and there is soon very little (mechanical) reason to play a sorcerer). but if you play it from the perspective of making a sorcerer and then progressing as a wizard, you're not losing a huge amount (you were already going to be limited to sorcerer spells known if you stayed single class, only now you're getting a whole lot more of them in a spellbook, can ritual cast some of them, and get to exchange spells known after a long rest instead of after gaining a level... you're losing another 2 metamagic options a long ways down the road, but you get a heck of a lot for it).