Forbidden Multi-Classes

[Master O'Laughs]

Hi all, about to have the ever important session 0 this Saturday and my DM just let me know he is hesitant to allow multi-classing at all now due to the potential of them breaking the game. Originally he had a more open approach to it but is thinking of changing his mind. I am looking to help determine is there even anything to worry about and if so, what to avoid.

Since the other players are less rules junkies like I am he is concerned my character may be too strong. I came here to find out what are some combos that are considered broken and to be avoided.

The initial 2 combos I was thinking of playing was either Paladin (2 or 6)/Sorcerer (18 or 14). The other was Warlock (2 to 6)/Sorcerer (18 to 14).

In my head, I was thinking Warlock2/Fighter2/Sorcerer16 is a little game breaking with how much damage you can dish out with eldritch blast come level 6 in one turn.

The last 5e campaign I was in it never came up.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I know the one balancing factor in all of this is the more you dip the less high level spells you get. If the majority of the game happens between lvl 6 to 14 what will overshadow others?

[Arkhios]

Paladin/Sorcerer up from the point when you get divine smite (paladin 2+) and font of magic (Sorcerer2+) is certainly one of the ridiculously strong options, because the further in sorcerer you go, the more frequently you can sow the destruction also known as divine smite, due to cycling sorcery points for more spell slots and vice versa. While Paladin is my favorite class, that doesn't mean I couldn't scorn Divine Smite being spammed just because you can.

Another pretty strong combo is Paladin 2+/Warlock X, due to the fact that pact magic gives you quite reliable and simultaneously hefty divine smites, depending on how frequently you get short rests.

Warlock and Sorcerer combination is at the strong end as well, primarily because of font of magic and pact magic shenanigans.

All of the above are as strong as their player wants them to be, however. If you can trust yourself to restrain from wanton abuse of the abilities, it shouldn't be a problem. But if you have even the slightest doubt whether you can, I'd advice against such a combination, if your DM is having doubts about allowing multiclassing because of game-breaking circumstances.

[JellyPooga]

If your GM is worried about multiclassing breaking his game, either your Pal/Sor or you War/Sor will probably have him locking MC away for good. They're both on the "this is insanely good" spectrum.

Here's some ground rules for "reasonable" multiclassing;

1) Don't dip. If you're dipping for one particular low-level feature, whether it's Expertise or Eldritch Blast, Assassinate or Metamagic, you're probably in "nope" territory.

2)...actually, (1) says it all really. Low level "power dips" are probably what's putting your GM off the notion of allowing MC. Those dips tend to give a big immediate return in lieu of late-game power and if the late-game never comes...well, multiclassing that way is OP for many games (not just "appears to be"...it kinda is).

[hymer]

In my opinion, none of the combinations you've mentioned are broken. They aren't even overpowered. They have strengths (burst capacity seems to be what you're going for)), but so do singleclass builds. If your DM is liable to let you have very short adventuring days, then I can see the problem. And as Arkhios points out, you don't burst by accident, so you can tone it down if it's getting to be a problem.

[JellyPooga]

In my opinion, none of the combinations you've mentioned are broken. They aren't even overpowered.

It's all about perceptions though; while you and I might see a balanced Class combination with high nova potential, but relatively low encounter stamina, the GM just sees the character that solo'd his BBEG in one round.

Bad GM who needs to learn to design encounters for his players and not the other way around? Perhaps. Does that help the OP? Not really. As you say, the OP has the choice to simply not play the nova game, but I suspect his GM might take one look at the character sheet and "nope" it (and all MC) regardless.

[Arkhios]

JellyPooga has a good point there: Dipping for the sake of immediate powerboost is bad. Multiclassing for a good reason, well, that might be another story (pun intended, as you can see below).

Storywise justification can be an excellent tool for bringing more depth into your character. If, and only if, you can justify the multiclass via roleplaying reasons instead of plain powergaming/metagaming reasons, your GM is likely more open with the idea of multiclassing. A simple way to restrict multiclassing is to require your character receive training from a character of the second class before you can multiclass into one. Even if you started as a paladin, and found out you have the sorcerous origin in your blood, it's reasonable to say that learning to control those bloodline powers can take time, and training. Likewise, a paladin warlock, as juicy as it may sound, is very fishy in regards to the roleplaying aspect.

If you are, say, a Paladin of Devotion who worships Bahamut, for example, it will be hard to explain why would you strike a bargain with a Fiend. However, a Paladin of the Ancients could be reasoned to make a pact with an archfey, if you already swore your oath to the good, if maybe capricious forces of nature.

[Master O'Laughs]

I think this is the DMs first or second time DMing so he is relatively new. It will be my first time playing with him running the show. He is a very creative player though so I look forward to what he is going to accomplish.

So (Pal/War 6)/Sor 14 is less overpowered then a 2 level dip because the costs of what you lose are higher?

How does a (Pal/War 2)/Sor 18 compare with a Divination Wizard 20 or Lore Bard 20 (From what I have read they are both some of the stronger single class options)?

Also, what UA is considered broken no matter what way you slice it? He is allowing it but from my first post, he will limit that which is no matter what broken.

I really like the undying light warlock is reason I ask (I know it seems strong) for a potential 6 levels to get that really cool sounding cancel death 1 time ability.

I am worried it is "too strong"

[Master O'Laughs]

JellyPooga has a good point there: Dipping for the sake of immediate powerboost is bad. Multiclassing for a good reason, well, that might be another story (pun intended, as you can see below).

Storywise justification can be an excellent tool for bringing more depth into your character. If, and only if, you can justify the multiclass via roleplaying reasons instead of plain powergaming/metagaming reasons, your GM is likely more open with the idea of multiclassing. A simple way to restrict multiclassing is to require your character receive training from a character of the second class before you can multiclass into one. Even if you started as a paladin, and found out you have the sorcerous origin in your blood, it's reasonable to say that learning to control those bloodline powers can take time, and training. Likewise, a paladin warlock, as juicy as it may sound, is very fishy in regards to the roleplaying aspect.

If you are, say, a Paladin of Devotion who worships Bahamut, for example, it will be hard to explain why would you strike a bargain with a Fiend. However, a Paladin of the Ancients could be reasoned to make a pact with an archfey, if you already swore your oath to the good, if maybe capricious forces of nature.

My Paladin idea was to have a half elf with red dragon blood (on his fathers side) which gave him a bad temper at times. He while not out right worshiping bahamut, he respects him (his mother later in life joins his temple). He would either become oath of the crown if he stays to his upbringing or oath of vengeance if he gives into his dragon blood.

EDIT (instead of another post): Mechanically I would get careful and quicken spell to make debuffs safe for allies and occasionally get a second GFB out. The third Metamagic would either be twin or heighten most likely.

On the sorlock I was thinking quicken and subtle while later acquiring either distant or heighten.

[Grod_The_Giant]

In terms of UA,

The Undying Light Warlock is gross, yeah. It's one of the few things I outright ban, not in the least because it gets Cha-to-damage way before anyone else.
Favored Soul Sorcerer gets called out a lot too because it gives the Sorcerer bonus spells known, which nothing else does; it's not that bad outside of that fact, so it might be okay if you can convince your DM to just add the domain spells to your class list. It makes for an acceptable Sorcadin substitute with less nova ability. (Draconic is a reasonable third choice, though you have to go Dex/GFB)
Theurgy Wizard isn't great due to some weirdness with adding spells and with getting domain features earlier than Clerics
The Mystic has some powers that are so open-ended as to be insane, and has a pretty strong smite ability as their sole useful offense.

[Master O'Laughs]

In terms of UA,

The Undying Light Warlock is gross, yeah. It's one of the few things I outright ban, not in the least because it gets Cha-to-damage way before anyone else.


I was afraid of that. I plan on sharing this thread with him so he can make a final decision. Hate to see it go.




Favored Soul Sorcerer gets called out a lot too because it gives the Sorcerer bonus spells known, which nothing else does; it's not that bad outside of that fact, so it might be okay if you can convince your DM to just add the domain spells to your class list. It makes for an acceptable Sorcadin substitute with less nova ability. (Draconic is a reasonable third choice, though you have to go Dex/GFB)


I was considering favored soul because of cool (and probably overly strong abilities). What is the first or second choice for sorcadins? You mention Favored Soul and Draconic. Is shadow considered best?

[EvilAnagram]

Shadow is pretty widely ignored, while Draconic is the most common choice.

Honestly, I typically ban multiclassing and UA unless the player can justify it through the story, and my players still manage to have a blast despite being optimizing fiends.

[Finieous]

Since the other players are less rules junkies like I am he is concerned my character may be too strong.

This is the problem, especially for a new DM. The DM can always challenge any character you build; it's trickier to balance an optimized character against non-optimized characters so that everyone is having fun.

If you're a more experienced, skilled player than the others, my advice would be to go the other way. Create a high-concept but non-optimal character and focus your skill and experience on playing the character effectively despite the mechanical disadvantages. As the DM and other players become more experienced, you should have more opportunities to cut loose with optimized character builds in future campaigns.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I was considering favored soul because of cool (and probably overly strong abilities). What is the first or second choice for sorcadins? You mention Favored Soul and Draconic. Is shadow considered best?
Paladin 2/Sorcerer 18 bring the first choice, with those single-class archetypes trailing behind.

[deathadder99]

I was afraid of that. I plan on sharing this thread with him so he can make a final decision. Hate to see it go.



I was considering favored soul because of cool (and probably overly strong abilities). What is the first or second choice for sorcadins? You mention Favored Soul and Draconic. Is shadow considered best?

FWIW, Favored soul is squishy. You only get medium armor and shields, and your hit dice is really not so great. There's the argument about the extra spells, but you get a whole bunch of combat abilities with the Favored Soul, and you don't even get anything great until 14th level. Extra attack is generally inferior to any of the SCAG cantrips. A paladin/favored soul already gets rid of a lot of the issues with the favored soul spells known because most of the spells are on the paladin list already. They get some better proficiencies but they then mean you don't get anything from favored soul and even multiattack only helps paladin 2/favored soul 18 (which is imo the best pala/sorc build in a vacuum).

Generally I find most classes are pretty balanced even with multiclassing, and there's a large opportunity cost for it. A moon druid/barbarian is very strong early. However, they miss out on perhaps the best capstones in the game - both the barb and moon druid capstones are very strong, particularly moon druid. Some classes have pretty crappy capstones, but even so the question of WHEN to multiclass is a hard one. If you want to go Lock 3/ Sorc X you have lower level spells than a pure sorceror for the majority of the game... You're essentially 3 levels behind in your casting progression. You could multiclass later, but you'd always be close to getting a higher level of spells or something.

There's no build IMO that is significantly better at 20th level than a pure class, while having a better time levelling, except perhaps a paladin/sorceror. And that's not even gamebreakingly broken because you're still behind say a pure wizard or bard in terms of spell slots.

On the subject of UA, I think the Undying Light Warlock is perhaps a tad too strong, but I don't think it's abusively broken. The biggest difference I find is how skilled your players are and how often they use their class to their fullest. If you're playing a vaguely optimised ANYTHING and you know it inside out, then you'll seem "OP". My strongest character was a single class paladin with Polearm Master, who put everyone to shame in combat. A single class divination wizard can trivialise any encounter. A bard will win any skill challenge and will be able to be insanely flexible and fill any role. A barbarian can be an unkillable tank.

[Dr.Samurai]

It seems like (intentionally or not) you're going for the stronger multiclass and UA options, so maybe your DM's concerns are justified. As a first time DM, he may be more skittish than you might feel is warranted though. I'd suggest keeping it simple just to keep yourself on a par with the rest of the group and give the DM one less thing to worry about.

[Master O'Laughs]

This is the problem, especially for a new DM. The DM can always challenge any character you build; it's trickier to balance an optimized character against non-optimized characters so that everyone is having fun.

If you're a more experienced, skilled player than the others, my advice would be to go the other way. Create a high-concept but non-optimal character and focus your skill and experience on playing the character effectively despite the mechanical disadvantages. As the DM and other players become more experienced, you should have more opportunities to cut loose with optimized character builds in future campaigns.

I would say I am more experienced than everyone but 1 other player, but not too experienced. I just love diving into the rules. The biggest issue right now as well is a MC sorcerer is what I want to play but I always take on the role of filling a gap. If a healer is needed I will probably roll a cleric. If theif is needed I have a build idea for a rogue/shadow monk.

This thread is to help figure out what is broken no matter what and what is broken if played a certain way. I know action economy is a big thing and is what makes the Sor16/War2/Fig2 so broken is 1/SR you can do 12D10+12D6+60 damage and as long as you have sorcery points left you can manage 8D10+8D6+40 damage (assuming everything hits)

[shuangwucanada]

It really depends on if your party starts at level 20. If it starts with low level, then multiclassing is pretty balanced.

Most multiclassing characters will have a hard time leveling up. We are talking about significant behind on both class features and resources during level 1-6, power boosts during level 7-10, catching up with single class at level 11-13, having payoff after level 14. 1-level dip is usually much less behind, but 2-level or more is an huge investment.

If you are starting with level 1, you will spend most of your time at level 5-10, before you get bored with this character, so you will spend most of your time (more than 100 hours maybe) in the phase that your character is behind and trying to catch up in both combat power and social power.

So, if you start with level 1, banning multiclassing sounds a little over reacting. Certain combination may be over powered (in my game party, monk dipping 1 level warlock or 1 level war cleric is banned), but most of the combinations are just fine.

If you just play straight level 20 games, I can see some multiclassing combination will overshadow single class characters, and banning may make sense.

[Master O'Laughs]

It seems like (intentionally or not) you're going for the stronger multiclass and UA options, so maybe your DM's concerns are justified. As a first time DM, he may be more skittish than you might feel is warranted though. I'd suggest keeping it simple just to keep yourself on a par with the rest of the group and give the DM one less thing to worry about.

The Sorcadin was thought of Oath of Crown and dragon sorc as the ideal to help buff the party saving throws and be a sticky tank. I did seem strong in my head but it was a help the group win mentality.

The sorcadin was crafted to do insane damage and yes, it seemed broken in my head. I was thinking of several paths for it, one being to optimize the damage of GFB for combat undying 2/drag sorc 6 +2xCHA to fire spells. I am scraping it though because it seems to blatantly go against his wishes.

I struggle not to optimize, I enjoy figuring out how to mechanically make my character the best at combat (because I like fighting). If needed, I can apply that elsewhere (like breaking and entering). I become very conscious of other players though and don't want to make them feel useless (part of the reason I dislike a group larger than 4 or 5 is because roles start to overlap and someone will feel inferior with their character if the DM does not seek to shine the spotlight on them).

[deathadder99]

I would say I am more experienced than everyone but 1 other player, but not too experienced. I just love diving into the rules. The biggest issue right now as well is a MC sorcerer is what I want to play but I always take on the role of filling a gap. If a healer is needed I will probably roll a cleric. If theif is needed I have a build idea for a rogue/shadow monk.

This thread is to help figure out what is broken no matter what and what is broken if played a certain way. I know action economy is a big thing and is what makes the Sor16/War2/Fig2 so broken is 1/SR you can do 12D10+12D6+60 damage and as long as you have sorcery points left you can manage 8D10+8D6+40 damage (assuming everything hits)

It's really not broken. You're looking at one round damage. OK fine, you can maybe kill the BBEG in one round. THIS IS WHY A GOOD DM WILL SPREAD OUT RESTS, and not allow fight -> long rest -> fight. DnD is a game of attrition. Ofc a nova class is OP if you go into every battle with all your abilities.

You lost 9th level spells for that. So you can once per short rest just completely blow someone up. A wizard is casting meteor storm, stop time, wish(which is actually a broken spell), true polymorphing himself into an Ancient Brass Dragon. A moon druid is essentially unkillable. A warlock 3/sorc17 is better than that, you get 9th level spells while still having access to the best cantrip in the game & hex - you're losing a few 9th level spell slots in exchange for getting better damage when all your slots are gone.

The most broken thing in the game is a Necromancer with a ton of minions, and Wish/Simulacrum, both of which can be done by a level 20 wizard.

[Master O'Laughs]

It really depends on if your party starts at level 20. If it starts with low level, then multiclassing is pretty balanced.

Most multiclassing characters will have a hard time leveling up. We are talking about significant behind on both class features and resources during level 1-6, power boosts during level 7-10, catching up with single class at level 11-13, having payoff after level 14. 1-level dip is usually much less behind, but 2-level or more is an huge investment.

If you are starting with level 1, you will spend most of your time at level 5-10, before you get bored with this character, so you will spend most of your time (more than 100 hours maybe) in the phase that your character is behind and trying to catch up in both combat power and social power.

So, if you start with level 1, banning multiclassing sounds a little over reacting. Certain combination may be over powered (in my game party, monk dipping 1 level warlock or 1 level war cleric is banned), but most of the combinations are just fine.

If you just play straight level 20 games, I can see some multiclassing combination will overshadow single class characters, and banning may make sense.

Yes we are starting at level 1. So except for some UA which is dumb (ex: undying light warlock), it shouldn't be a problem due to the catch up principle? Cool.

[deathadder99]

The sorcadin was crafted to do insane damage and yes, it seemed broken in my head. I was thinking of several paths for it, one being to optimize the damage of GFB for combat undying 2/drag sorc 6 +2xCHA to fire spells. I am scraping it though because it seems to blatantly go against his wishes.



RAW it's a bit hazy as to whether you can add charisma twice. Secondly, for GFB to outperform someone with multiple attacks, it needs to hit two targets, which isn't guaranteed. Thirdly, Fire is one of the most commonly resisted types in the game. It all sounds broken til you actually play it :).

[deathadder99]

(in my game party, monk dipping 1 level warlock or 1 level war cleric is banned)

Why is that? Hex & Flurry of Blows and the extra attack from war cleric? It seems quite strong early but not gamebreakingly so. The bonus action war cleric attack doesn't stack with martial arts, so you're gaining what, 2 damage average on a roll? Martial weapons don't even help the monk as it means you can't use the bigger monk dice.

[Dr.Samurai]

It's really not broken. You're looking at one round damage. OK fine, you can maybe kill the BBEG in one round. THIS IS WHY A GOOD DM WILL SPREAD OUT RESTS, and not allow fight -> long rest -> fight. DnD is a game of attrition. Ofc a nova class is OP if you go into every battle with all your abilities.
This is the DM's first time running a game. Seems... rude (to put it mildly) to annihilate his BBEG in one turn.

You lost 9th level spells for that. So you can once per short rest just completely blow someone up.
The first thing won't be relevant for probably the entirety of the game, while the second one will be relevant at some point and be a game changer.

Just keep in mind that if his DM is already worried, he probably doesn't see things as you do. Running him through the gauntlet with a nova-king character seems poor form in my opinion.

[Kobard]

If your GM is worried about multiclassing breaking his game, either your Pal/Sor or you War/Sor will probably have him locking MC away for good. They're both on the "this is insanely good" spectrum.

Here's some ground rules for "reasonable" multiclassing;

1) Don't dip. If you're dipping for one particular low-level feature, whether it's Expertise or Eldritch Blast, Assassinate or Metamagic, you're probably in "nope" territory.

2)...actually, (1) says it all really. Low level "power dips" are probably what's putting your GM off the notion of allowing MC. Those dips tend to give a big immediate return in lieu of late-game power and if the late-game never comes...well, multiclassing that way is OP for many games (not just "appears to be"...it kinda is).Yep. This. Especially when you read class guides suggesting that casters start a level or two into fighter for a little more HP, armor/weapon, fighting style, con saves, and action surge. Not all dips are unreasonable, but they should be justified by the character concept and not just the power of the "build."

[deathadder99]

This is the DM's first time running a game. Seems... rude (to put it mildly) to annihilate his BBEG in one turn.

The first thing won't be relevant for probably the entirety of the game, while the second one will be relevant at some point and be a game changer.

Just keep in mind that if his DM is already worried, he probably doesn't see things as you do. Running him through the gauntlet with a nova-king character seems poor form in my opinion.

The thing is, there are a lot of nova-king characters you can build without even multiclassing. A paladin, single classed, can use a 4th level spell slot to do 5d8 smite damage. With Great Weapon Master, and Polearm Master, improved divine smite, 20str, and divine favor, he can do 2d10 + 18d8 + 4d4 + 45.(edit: And this is possible way before level 20, I think level 12 with point buy and Vuman) I'm sure I'm missing some other things paladins can do because I'm away from book.

My point is simply that it's very hard to make a BBEG that will survive a PC with full resources, and you need to wear the party down. You can also do something like AngryDM's paragon monsters, where it's impossible to "one shot" the BBEG because they transform into something more dangerous when they die, much the same way a lot of particularly JRPGs have transforming bosses.

There are lots of ways of doing a ton of burst. A fighter with crossbow master, and sharpshooter can do absolute work. A wizard upcasting his best spell can do a lot of burst. Multiclassing is not really the problem, and an inexperienced DM will always have some creations just completely obliterated by a PC with a lot of conserved resources.

[JellyPooga]

The thing is, there are a lot of nova-king characters you can build without even multiclassing. A paladin, single classed, can use a 4th level spell slot to do 5d8 smite damage.

Caveat: At 14th level.

Pal 6/Sorc 4 can do this at level 10.

Pal 2/Sorc 6 can do it at level 8.

That's a significantly earlier entry for the low-low price of a few HP and some (largely uninspiring IMO) Paladin features.

[xyianth]

On the subject of OP UA options, the sharpshooter fighter archetype is disgustingly OP as well. Just FYI.

Honestly, I'd recommend that you not MC if your newish DM is afraid of it. There are plenty of good single class options for a fun game.

[MrStabby]

Multiclassing is fine. SCAG isn't.

If you don't use any options from the SCAG you should be OK, at least up to level 17.

[EvilAnagram]

Multiclassing is fine. SCAG isn't.

If you don't use any options from the SCAG you should be OK, at least up to level 17.

I'm going to heartily disagree with this. Never had any problems with SCAG.

[Dhuraal]

I am going to throw some cents out there, while not strictly answering your question (sorry), as I have not encountered any Multiclassing shenanigans at my table, and I am not the optimizer type, so I do not figure these things out myself anyway. But, a houserule I have at my games, that makes multiclassing a bigger decision and helps to prevent dips, is that in order to multiclass, you have to, in game and in character, take steps toward developing those skills or walking that path. So, for the Paladin/Warlock example given, if you were to start as a Paladin, you would have to actually go find a source to make your pact with in order to multiclass to a Warlock. A possible adventure in its own right, with inherent risks. Or the other way, you will have to actually train and work with a church at becoming a Paladin. It is not a strict ban on multiclassing, but no one is going through the effort for just a dip, only when it really matters to their character. It gets a bit wonky with someone wanting to multiclass to a sorcerer due to the nature of their powers, but no one has wanted to do that at my table, so we'll cross that bridge when we get to it, haha.

[Master O'Laughs]

I am going to throw some cents out there, while not strictly answering your question (sorry), as I have not encountered any Multiclassing shenanigans at my table, and I am not the optimizer type, so I do not figure these things out myself anyway. But, a houserule I have at my games, that makes multiclassing a bigger decision and helps to prevent dips, is that in order to multiclass, you have to, in game and in character, take steps toward developing those skills or walking that path. So, for the Paladin/Warlock example given, if you were to start as a Paladin, you would have to actually go find a source to make your pact with in order to multiclass to a Warlock. A possible adventure in its own right, with inherent risks. Or the other way, you will have to actually train and work with a church at becoming a Paladin. It is not a strict ban on multiclassing, but no one is going through the effort for just a dip, only when it really matters to their character. It gets a bit wonky with someone wanting to multiclass to a sorcerer due to the nature of their powers, but no one has wanted to do that at my table, so we'll cross that bridge when we get to it, haha.

Totally! While the DM in the early stages had thought about allowing multi-classing carte-blanche as long as you met the requirements, I am totally for having to role play it out in game. Part of the Sorcadin was to start paladin and over the course of a few levels gradually describing fire engulfing my weapon as I attack but to no effect. The idea being I am building up to sorcerer 1 and taking green-flame blade.

[Arcangel4774]

Life cleric + druid might be another one to be cautious about. Goodberry + desciple of life is a stupid amount of healing for a lvl 1 spell slot: 10 berries, each getting the bonus 10×(1+(2+1))=40

[StoicLeaf]

I'd not allow UA materials because those are all over the place and if he's new it's just a bunch more information to track and houserule back into normality.

Other than that, the DM has all the tools needed to **** over his players. That means combat can be adapted to any build. Bursty type heroes need to be engaged before they meet the BBEG to deprive them of resources. Or perhaps the BBEG is using an illusion spell. BOOM, your one trick pony has now blown his load and won't be able to dunk the boss. I can promise you (and your dm), if you're all new and starting at level 1 there will be plenty of time for all of you to find your footing without things becoming problematic. I'd be very surprised if you guys even make it to 14+, most games earlier than that.

Finally, (once again, depends on what sort of players you are), players need to be able to RP the stuff they want. Paladin/warlock sounds super lame to do without being all edgy and emo about it, I as a DM would want a compelling story behind it.

[JellyPooga]

Paladin/warlock sounds super lame to do without being all edgy and emo about it

Huh? :smallconfused: Paladin/Warlock from a roleplaying perspective is, like, the ultimate badass. Vengeance/Fiend: HellKnight baby! Flaming skulls, black-spiky armour, demon-sword, riding a Nightmare with Hellhounds scouring all before him, he IS the Lord of Hellfire and none shall stay his wrath. He's not "edgy", he's METAL and the only "emo" he has is :smallfurious:RAGE:smallfurious:!!!

Psh! "Lame"...:smallsigh:

[StoicLeaf]

Huh? :smallconfused: Paladin/Warlock from a roleplaying perspective is, like, the ultimate badass. Vengeance/Fiend: HellKnight baby! Flaming skulls, black-spiky armour, demon-sword, riding a Nightmare with Hellhounds scouring all before him, he IS the Lord of Hellfire and none shall stay his wrath. He's not "edgy", he's METAL and the only "emo" he has is :smallfurious:RAGE:smallfurious:!!!

Psh! "Lame"...:smallsigh:

YEAH and the fact that both Tyr and Asmodeus have chosen him as their champion fuels an inner fire that simply cannot be quenched and his life is pain and suffering and just look at me in my black armor with white face paint and don't judge me you don't understand what I'm going through can we go back to waterdeep so I can spend all my gold at Fiery Topic?

[JNAProductions]

I'm gonna second the guys saying don't multiclass, or if you do, don't use one of the real strong combos. Your DM is new-be gentle. They should open up to more options over time.

[Ovarwa]

Hi,

There *are* no overpowered multiclass shenanigans here, just a few multiclass combos that are good in different ways from single classes. Most MCs are just plain worse. A few make playable certain poor single class options that otherwise don't work.

That said, I'd advise you not to MC at all. It's hard to call a character optimized when the GM would prefer not to have it around....

Anyway,

Ken

[Kobard]

Life cleric + druid might be another one to be cautious about. Goodberry + desciple of life is a stupid amount of healing for a lvl 1 spell slot: 10 berries, each getting the bonus 10×(1+(2+1))=40Or bard and life cleric.

[Specter]

Any CHA-oriented class put together with another one of those is powerful.
But other than UA material, I don't think any multiclass breaks the game. Fighter goes well with Sorcerer, which goes well with Warlock to let you cast Eldritch Blast three times in a turn. But that's a six-level investment to do something very cool once, and something cool a few times.

[JellyPooga]

YEAH and the fact that both Tyr and Asmodeus have chosen him as their champion fuels an inner fire that simply cannot be quenched and his life is pain and suffering and just look at me in my black armor with white face paint and don't judge me you don't understand what I'm going through can we go back to waterdeep so I can spend all my gold at Fiery Topic?

Who said anything about his life being "pain and suffering"? He brings pain and makes you suffer. He doesn't want your understanding, only that you don't get in his way (and some scantily clad groupies, preferably). He doesn't need face-paint or mass-marketed adornments; he's a hunky slab of beefcake and self-assurance; he literally oozes Charisma. He did a deal with the Devil because the Devil wanted him, not the other way around.

Snowflake he may be, but emo and lame? Far from. He's the hulking, rampaging Goth that sacked Rome, crushes his enemies and sees them driven before him (lamentation of women optional), not some weepy, vampire-wannabe writing bad poetry.

That's just the Vengeance/Fiend combo.

How about Ancients/Fey? She is the Green Knight, Chosen of the Summer Queen (or perhaps the King of Winter), Champion of the Woodlands. Where she goes, the Wild Hunt follows. The very ground upon which she walks is her ally and the elements are hers to command. When wicked sorcerers and corrupt druids threaten the sanctity of the Green Realm, she stands stalwart and true, their vile magics unable to penetrate the protections laid upon her. When ignorant city folk laugh and jeer, she gives them a mere glimpse of the powers that stand at her side, cowing them in awe or enchanting them with her glamour.

Doesn't sound too emo to me :smallwink:

[Quoxis]

I am going to throw some cents out there, while not strictly answering your question (sorry), as I have not encountered any Multiclassing shenanigans at my table, and I am not the optimizer type, so I do not figure these things out myself anyway. But, a houserule I have at my games, that makes multiclassing a bigger decision and helps to prevent dips, is that in order to multiclass, you have to, in game and in character, take steps toward developing those skills or walking that path. So, for the Paladin/Warlock example given, if you were to start as a Paladin, you would have to actually go find a source to make your pact with in order to multiclass to a Warlock. A possible adventure in its own right, with inherent risks. Or the other way, you will have to actually train and work with a church at becoming a Paladin. It is not a strict ban on multiclassing, but no one is going through the effort for just a dip, only when it really matters to their character. It gets a bit wonky with someone wanting to multiclass to a sorcerer due to the nature of their powers, but no one has wanted to do that at my table, so we'll cross that bridge when we get to it, haha.
Storm Sorc: DM makes an event including heavy storms (call lightning with random locations?), PC has to power through it and find + absorb its source.
Draconic sorc: PC has to drink/inject a dragon's blood/eat a dragon's heart or find a really powerful dragon and convince it to donate powers.
Wild sorc: PC has wild bursts without the positive features of a sorc and has to find a mentor/track their heritage/find an artifact to gain relative control over their powers.

[EvilAnagram]

Snowflake he may be, but emo and lame? Far from. He's the hulking, rampaging Goth that sacked Rome, crushes his enemies and sees them driven before him (lamentation of women optional), not some weepy, vampire-wannabe writing bad poetry.

This build reminds me of guys who drive giant pickup trucks with tiny beds and six wheels to make up for their sizeable insecurities.

EDIT: This is not a compliment.

[RickAllison]

The only MC I can think of that truly deserves banning is Life Cleric 1+Druid 1+Warlock 2. Four levels in and the PC has two level 1 slots per short rest which can each be used for 40 hp of healing, Eldritch Blast with the other goodies for great ranged damage, lots of armor (the Druid restriction has been established as a choice, not a true requirement; play a Druid of Mielikki and that disappears), and is still fairly solid for ASIs. It isn't a problem in the long run as the action economy of the healing is awful, but it would destroy your inexperienced DM in the short run and get MC banned.

Level 1: Two decent healing spells, around 10 to 20 HP per long rest
Level 2: Goodberry, 120 HP per long rest, but giving up so many options to do so.
Level 3: 40 per short rest? And now your higher Charisma is doling out damage and you have Hex for even more?
Level 4: MC is banned.

As far as your DM is concerned, he is seeing your power level double with every level. It won't register that this is the absolute max, and it will bring the hammer down.

[Garresh]

I wouldn't necessarily say don't dip, or don't multiclass. But for the love of god don't pull out the BS multiclass combos that just look OP. Like, don't get me wrong, the Life Cleric dips aren't objectively overpowered, but they can feel that way due to the massive sustain they give. Personally, I love them, because I enjoy playing support characters and a pure life cleric doesn't give me the fun I want to have. I like going Life Cleric Wizard or Life Cleric Sorc so I can buff with haste and things. Anyways.

Same thing with Sorc Paladin. It lacks the sustain of a straight melee class, and it delays casting progression handily as well. But it's absolutely brick-****ting amount of nova is enough to make any DM hate you. I used an UA sorc multiclass to come up with a build that does something like 180 damage in one turn using that combo at level 10. That's enough to drop almost anything in a turn once you factor in everyone else's damage.

So really, only multiclass something that you either really want to roleplay, or tell the DM straight up the strengths and weaknesses of the combo before you jump into it. Some fun combos that aren't broken but are interesting at Rogue dips for fighters to make for a dirty fighter who grapples via athletics expertise, or champion fighter rogues who crit often and hard. Stick to stuff like that and your DM should be okay with it.

[JellyPooga]

This build reminds me of guys who drive giant pickup trucks with tiny beds and six wheels to make up for their sizeable insecurities.

EDIT: This is not a compliment.

Eh, think what you will but all of D&D is escapism. If a little-guy likes the idea of pretending to be a big-guy, so what? If a socially inept, fumble-tongued "nerd" wants to pretend to be a charming, dashing swordsman, all power to him. If some guy can't imagine a Paladin/Warlock that isn't emo, I'll suggest one that isn't and hope that it fires some spark of imagination. There's more than one way to play any character, whatever the build.

[CursedRhubarb]

I've never been a fan of "dips". They just always feel super cheesy and the main ones I've seen have been about fighter or warlock dips of 1 or 2 levels for the sole reason of getting armor+weapon+shield prof with action surge for a fighter dip (usually for a caster) or a warlock dip entirely to get one cantrip with agonizing so they have "the best" ranged option. (2 levels for a cantrip that uses a stat they only have a +1 mod in most cases too.) Always makes me scratch my head when things like "I want to be a Wizard, so I'm going to play a Fighter"" pop up when starting a game.

I've always felt that, if you want to MC, then you should have to go at least 3 levels into it.

UA can make MC really powerful since they aren't refined to take MC options into thought. They are built as if you went into them single class so they can have a bit more oomph until they get ironed out.

A MC build I would like to try one day is a Dragonborn Draconic (red/gold) Sorcerer 10/ UL or Fey Bladelock 5/ Valor Bard 5 with the Entertainer background. Would be all about flinging fire all about and smacking things with shenanigans with Quicken Metamagic, Pack Weapon, GFB, and Misty Step. It makes a very mobile melee caster with a decent spell selection. Downsides are being very MAD so stats stay median, lower HP pool, and enemies immune to fire drop it's damage output. But stay away from demons, and red dragons and it would be fine. (Current game is at lvl 5 and have yet to come across any enemy immune or resistant to fire. Lots of humanoids, beasts, and aberrations though so poison has been very effective despite how much it gets trash talked.)

[RickAllison]

Eh, think what you will but all of D&D is escapism. If a little-guy likes the idea of pretending to be a big-guy, so what? If a socially inept, fumble-tongued "nerd" wants to pretend to be a charming, dashing swordsman, all power to him. If some guy can't imagine a Paladin/Warlock that isn't emo, I'll suggest one that isn't and hope that it fires some spark of imagination. There's more than one way to play any character, whatever the build.

Some examples of very non-emo Warladins:

Ancient Feylock: Hippy. Very, very hippy. Hippy Paladin, hippy Warlock. Super fey.
Crowned Fiend: Either he serves a fiend king (insert standard "I fight to keep my family safe" backstory), or the kingdom he serves has a fiend on retainer who blesses the chosen knights of the king with greater power. This could be a deal, an enslaved fiend, or a fiend with an inscrutable purpose.
Crowned Fey: Serves a fairy king. Back to the hippy-style! For extra points, focus on Dexterity so you can fight with a graceful, elven flourish.
Crowned GOO: You serve a wizard/sorcerer king, or are a protector of a magic institution. Using their knowledge of the planes, the mages connect their trusted warriors with an eldritch power source to keep them safe.
Devotion/Vengeance Fiend/GOO: In visions, you have seen the terror the ancient one sealed by your ancestors hath wrought. You venture across the land slaying those who would awaken the beast, strengthening your connection so as to weaken it, and receiving lessons from the ancient guardians of this pact.
Devotion Fey: Go Dexterity and be someone who revels in the joy sown by your patron, seeking to spread it with the world while dancing. Be a very different kind of Bladesinger :smallwink:

It is harder to come up other combinations of the Ancients Paladin, but you could probably come up with some. So many options.

[XmonkTad]

I can't think of a multi-class that I would forbid because it's "too good." Putting a 2 class limit under level 10 and a 3 class limit under 15 might be prudent just so you don't get ridiculous builds that dip everywhere and make no sense.

[Quoxis]

The only MC I can think of that truly deserves banning is Life Cleric 1+Druid 1+Warlock 2. Four levels in and the PC has two level 1 slots per short rest which can each be used for 40 hp of healing, Eldritch Blast with the other goodies for great ranged damage, lots of armor (the Druid restriction has been established as a choice, not a true requirement; play a Druid of Mielikki and that disappears), and is still fairly solid for ASIs. It isn't a problem in the long run as the action economy of the healing is awful, but it would destroy your inexperienced DM in the short run and get MC banned.

Level 1: Two decent healing spells, around 10 to 20 HP per long rest
Level 2: Goodberry, 120 HP per long rest, but giving up so many options to do so.
Level 3: 40 per short rest? And now your higher Charisma is doling out damage and you have Hex for even more?
Level 4: MC is banned.

As far as your DM is concerned, he is seeing your power level double with every level. It won't register that this is the absolute max, and it will bring the hammer down.

I'm currently playing a Cleric/Warlock and consider taking the magic initiate feat for some goodberry goodness (mc into Druid seems unreasonable; you're already devoted to a deity and a patron, and convincing a DM to give access to a third oath-like devotion should be difficult). I imposed some rules on him to nerf him though, for example not using invocations to make my EB better and generally playing rather defensively, mostly healing and buffing my teammates. I haven't played long enough to say if it's overpowered, but i think in my current deliberately suboptimal form it's fair.

[N810]

Yep, you should definitely Ban Paladin/Barbarian/Wizard...
way to much MAD synergy... :nale:

[StoicLeaf]

Who said anything about his life being "pain and suffering"? He brings pain and makes you suffer. He doesn't want your understanding, only that you don't get in his way (and some scantily clad groupies, preferably). He doesn't need face-paint or mass-marketed adornments; he's a hunky slab of beefcake and self-assurance; he literally oozes Charisma. He did a deal with the Devil because the Devil wanted him, not the other way around.

Snowflake he may be, but emo and lame? Far from. He's the hulking, rampaging Goth that sacked Rome, crushes his enemies and sees them driven before him (lamentation of women optional), not some weepy, vampire-wannabe writing bad poetry.

That's just the Vengeance/Fiend combo.

How about Ancients/Fey? She is the Green Knight, Chosen of the Summer Queen (or perhaps the King of Winter), Champion of the Woodlands. Where she goes, the Wild Hunt follows. The very ground upon which she walks is her ally and the elements are hers to command. When wicked sorcerers and corrupt druids threaten the sanctity of the Green Realm, she stands stalwart and true, their vile magics unable to penetrate the protections laid upon her. When ignorant city folk laugh and jeer, she gives them a mere glimpse of the powers that stand at her side, cowing them in awe or enchanting them with her glamour.

Doesn't sound too emo to me :smallwink:

I'm not saying it can't work, but if someone wants to play something ... exotic ... I want a decent background. Like kender rogue/bard/illusionist. You better have something awesome lined up for that.

[MrStabby]

I've never been a fan of "dips". They just always feel super cheesy and the main ones I've seen have been about fighter or warlock dips of 1 or 2 levels for the sole reason of getting armor+weapon+shield prof with action surge for a fighter dip (usually for a caster) or a warlock dip entirely to get one cantrip with agonizing so they have "the best" ranged option. (2 levels for a cantrip that uses a stat they only have a +1 mod in most cases too.) Always makes me scratch my head when things like "I want to be a Wizard, so I'm going to play a Fighter"" pop up when starting a game.


I dunno about this. I am currently very much enjoying playing a character with two dips. Ranger 5, Knowledge cleric 1, Rogue 1. Playing a kind of Van Helsing type character - hunter of undead, knowledgeable about arcana, religion and so on using expertise to represent knowledge in the presence of a lower intellect score than a scholar should have. I am finding this really characterful guy and very fun to play.

[Theodoxus]

My DM banned me from triple classing because he felt I'd be underpowered! He didn't want me to feel outpaced by the other players... So, the only take away I have is, people are weird.

ETA:
I dunno about this. I am currently very much enjoying playing a character with two dips. Ranger 5, Knowledge cleric 1, Rogue 1. Playing a kind of Van Helsing type character - hunter of undead, knowledgeable about arcana, religion and so on using expertise to represent knowledge in the presence of a lower intellect score than a scholar should have. I am finding this really characterful guy and very fun to play.

Man, this is exactly what I wanted to do, only with druid instead of ranger... but when I said I'd start as knowledge cleric and take rogue at 2nd (we were starting at 2nd level) and then for 3rd level, I'd start my career as a druid, he nixed the idea...

I ultimately dropped the rogue and druid and went Cleric 1/Wizard x

Not the same concept - only half the proficiency and no longer "Mr. Lore" but the DM felt better (while claiming "I want the players to have fun!" - by blowing up my concept of fun for some sake of misguided notion that I would be influenced by the other players into feeling 'lesser'... but, he's young, so I'll give him a pass.

[JellyPooga]

I dunno about this. I am currently very much enjoying playing a character with two dips. Ranger 5, Knowledge cleric 1, Rogue 1. Playing a kind of Van Helsing type character - hunter of undead, knowledgeable about arcana, religion and so on using expertise to represent knowledge in the presence of a lower intellect score than a scholar should have. I am finding this really characterful guy and very fun to play.

I suppose the inevitable question is "Why not Bard?"

Most (and I stress "most", not "all") dip-tastic builds of the fluffy kind (like this Van Helsing one) usually come down to something that either looks or feels like a Bard. Will it do exactly what you want? Perhaps not, but it saves the whole multiclassing mess and it'll get damned close!

@StoicLeaf: I totally agree that if you want to play something weird and/or wonderful then you definitely need a decent backstory for it and that there's a few multiclass combinations that can feel a bit...forced. The "Holy Paladin that's also a Deal with the Devil Warlock" is definitely in that category, but that doesn't mean all Paladin/Warlocks suffer the same conundrum; there's a ton of synergy for Ancients Pally/Fey Warlock on the fluff side, as already mentioned.

Likewise, a Bard/Rogue/Wizard(Illusionist) is not so exotic (though again, I'd ask "Why not (just) Bard?"); Lore Bard/Arcane Trickster/Illusionist has a ton of fluff synergy; Bard - Illusions and performance, Arcane Trickster - Illusions and trickery, Wizard - Illusions and, uh, more Illusions...he's an Illusions guy with a larcenous streak and a flair for the dramatic who learns his trade from whatever source he can, whether it be a song, an ancient ruin or a book. As a Kender, a Race notorious for their love of pretty things, that's a complete shoe-in.

An awkward one to justify is something like Barbarian/Wizard. Not only does it not match up mechanically (can't cast while raging, MAD, etc. etc.), but the usual fluff just doesn't fit. Intellectual guy prone to fits of rage? Big buff guy who hits the books in his spare time? I can kind of see some potential, but the mechanical failures of the Class combo don't encourage me to explore it too far.

And that's the problem...most of the "problem" multiclass builds are rolling around in that big ol' heap of Charisma. It's easy to marry up two Cha-focused mechanical builds and because of that Cha-focus, the fluff kind of follows pretty easily too; likable, strong personalities can get away with almost anything because, well, they're supposed to be likable!

[RickAllison]

I'm currently playing a Cleric/Warlock and consider taking the magic initiate feat for some goodberry goodness (mc into Druid seems unreasonable; you're already devoted to a deity and a patron, and convincing a DM to give access to a third oath-like devotion should be difficult). I imposed some rules on him to nerf him though, for example not using invocations to make my EB better and generally playing rather defensively, mostly healing and buffing my teammates. I haven't played long enough to say if it's overpowered, but i think in my current deliberately suboptimal form it's fair.

Keep in mind that Magic Initiate for Goodberry gives you only one cast per long rest. You only can use it with spell slots if it is in a class that you have levels in.

And as for the deity, I would just pick one that combined the three in some way! I think Eldath would be good for this, actually. Her domains are Life and Nature (so she works for the Cleric), has many Druids among the ranks of her faithful (so that is covered), and the patron can simply be the naiad inhabiting one of Eldath's springs that the caster established a connection with.

Of course, I am firmly against the idea that a PC has to be a Class X/Class Y/Class Z. That works for some concepts like a warrior that branched into wizardry and so associated them separately. For this theoretical Cleric/Druid/Warlock, I would describe it as a Tender of Springs 2 (Cleric and Druid)/Feylock (Naiad) 2. The patronage of the naiad(s) is separate from the service under Eldath, but the Cleric and Druid training in my mind would be from the same source and along the same path. It is not two separate classes, but one set of training that is just best represented mechanically through MCing. Just like I would incorporate an Abjurer X/Fighter 1 or 2 as a Battlemage because the martial skills were learned as part of the training of becoming the battlemage rather than as a normal soldier, or how a Monk X/Moon Druid 2 would a Magic Cricket-style Monk who was trained to incorporate the shape-changing as part of her combat style.

Treating the separate classes as hard-baked divisions when story-wise they are combined seems incredibly meta-gamey. Why should my Artist of War (Battlemaster X/Thief 3) be saddled with such a disparaging title as "thief" simply because his training as a warrior incorporated the use of items and the environment?

[Yagyujubei]

yeah im gonna agree that if your DM is worried about overpowered MC combos the two you were thinking of are prime examples of the most overpowered MCs possible so I doubt he'd let them fly lol.

As a point of curiosity are you trying to MC for MCs sake or does the back story of your character actually merit having an MC. When I DM I don't let my characters MC unless it actually makes sense to their character...if they want to MC im more than willing to help work opportunities into the story for them, but I hate when someone is like "oh well im a rogue now" it doesn't make and sense

[Quoxis]

Keep in mind that Magic Initiate for Goodberry gives you only one cast per long rest. You only can use it with spell slots if it is in a class that you have levels in.

And as for the deity, I would just pick one that combined the three in some way! I think Eldath would be good for this, actually. Her domains are Life and Nature (so she works for the Cleric), has many Druids among the ranks of her faithful (so that is covered), and the patron can simply be the naiad inhabiting one of Eldath's springs that the caster established a connection with.

Of course, I am firmly against the idea that a PC has to be a Class X/Class Y/Class Z. That works for some concepts like a warrior that branched into wizardry and so associated them separately. For this theoretical Cleric/Druid/Warlock, I would describe it as a Tender of Springs 2 (Cleric and Druid)/Feylock (Naiad) 2. The patronage of the naiad(s) is separate from the service under Eldath, but the Cleric and Druid training in my mind would be from the same source and along the same path. It is not two separate classes, but one set of training that is just best represented mechanically through MCing. Just like I would incorporate an Abjurer X/Fighter 1 or 2 as a Battlemage because the martial skills were learned as part of the training of becoming the battlemage rather than as a normal soldier, or how a Monk X/Moon Druid 2 would a Magic Cricket-style Monk who was trained to incorporate the shape-changing as part of her combat style.

Treating the separate classes as hard-baked divisions when story-wise they are combined seems incredibly meta-gamey. Why should my Artist of War (Battlemaster X/Thief 3) be saddled with such a disparaging title as "thief" simply because his training as a warrior incorporated the use of items and the environment?

Using the OP goodberry combo once per day actually plays into my restrictive playstyle. Again: it's less overpowered that way.

But yeah, my clerlock is supposed to be a worshipper of Hanali Celanil (fey goddess of love and beauty) and his warlock powers (fey, obviously) are basically just an extension - a different branch of his deity's blessings. The main benefits are the get-the-hell-out-of-combat warlock option and resetting spell slots for major healing throughout the day - as a light-hearted guy trying to see the world in all its beauty without dealing with the nastiness of war, suffering and having to hurt people (i'm the voice of reason and calmness in a group that's half murder hobo) it just seems fitting. I actually thought about going bard, but adding a lute and tights would've made my character too over-the-top homoerotic (if something like that exists... #nohomo).

[MrStabby]

I suppose the inevitable question is "Why not Bard?"

Most (and I stress "most", not "all") dip-tastic builds of the fluffy kind (like this Van Helsing one) usually come down to something that either looks or feels like a Bard. Will it do exactly what you want? Perhaps not, but it saves the whole multiclassing mess and it'll get damned close!


Mainly not bard because the stats don't match - I was after wisdom and intelligence (well using knowledge as a proxy for that). Sure I could make a low Cha Valor bard and not use the bardic inspiration and have less knowledge and not have a bonus against undead and not have the awesome anti undead turn undead ability when I level up and so on.

I am happy with my choice - I don't see it as a "multiclassing mess" but a character. I don't interpret it as a multiclass; it isn't a character that has split their focus between two skills paths but rather one character who has focused on using their knowledge and faith to augment their combat ability to hunt down undead - but who has drawn on skills from other paths to do so. To me anyway it feels as coherent a concept as an arcane trickster or eldritch knight - that the abilities that make my character are found in three classes not one doesn't really bother me.

[Arial Black]

If your DM regards dipping to be a problem, then install the houserule that MC characters cannot have the level of any class be more than 1 level greater than any other of your classes.

This means that if your two classes are the same level (say, 1/1) then when leveling up you are free to choose either class, but when uneven (say, 2/1) then the lower must be increased (say, to 2/2, because 3/1 would be illegal).

[Theodoxus]

Mainly not bard because the stats don't match - I was after wisdom and intelligence (well using knowledge as a proxy for that). Sure I could make a low Cha Valor bard and not use the bardic inspiration and have less knowledge and not have a bonus against undead and not have the awesome anti undead turn undead ability when I level up and so on.

I am happy with my choice - I don't see it as a "multiclassing mess" but a character. I don't interpret it as a multiclass; it isn't a character that has split their focus between two skills paths but rather one character who has focused on using their knowledge and faith to augment their combat ability to hunt down undead - but who has drawn on skills from other paths to do so. To me anyway it feels as coherent a concept as an arcane trickster or eldritch knight - that the abilities that make my character are found in three classes not one doesn't really bother me.

Heh - you and I are totally in sync with these two characters of ours.

I'll expand and say that another driving force for "why not bard" was we had a Paladin and Warlock in the party already. I was coming into the second session with no information on what the party dynamics were (I literally only had a list of base race and class). Only in game, did I find out that one fighter was proficient with thieve's tools from his background, so a major concern of mine (lack of roguish skills) was covered at least a bit by said fighter (who is a Str fighter, so his picking is a little lacking, but at least present).

But the party was sorely lacking in lore skills, which I was shoring up with expertise.

Honestly, I don't know why there isn't an Expertise feat - it would go a LONG way in removing the temptation to dip rogue just for the ability... it's not like my wizard is planning on shanking anyone for an extra d6, when he prefers being 60-120' and pewpewing with fire bolts and chill touches...

[Byke]

I have to agree with many others there are no broken multi-classes...just interesting character options and backgrounds :)

Whenever I see posts of broken builds it's usually based on a 20th level build focused on maximizing damage in a nova round. They never carry out the thought exerciser further than the first round of combat after they have expended all of their resources. Start that same character at level 1, put them in game/situation where the NPCs/monster use tactics and they will not be as effective as they though. If that nova round gets mitigated those "power" gaming character usually don't have the resources to recover and finish a fight.

At the table I play at the BBEG studies our tactics and after watching us wreck his lackeys comes up with tactics and traps of his own. He pumps his AC, has access to resist/counter spells and ensures that he is not easily surprised.

Bounded accuracy and the limit of 1 concentration spell per caster really limits the broken aspects of previous additions. IMO the game is balanced around a 27 pts buy and + 1 magic items. Things only get broken when casters (wizards) reach 17+ or the DMs is handing out + 3 items and belts of giant str like candy.

**Edit spelling**

[Theodoxus]

Eh, broken? Maybe if you're using RAW MM stats without likewise modifying them to your empowered party standards...

That's the thing - it's damn near impossible to actually break 5E, where someone in the party has such an insane AC as to be unhittable where another is going to get flattened by the BBEG built to hit said unhittable target. Unlike 3.5 where the tank might have an AC of 41 and 250 HP with a DR of 5 and his buddy has an AC of 17, 123 HP and no DR or magic resistance...

Once the BBEG misses the tank, he'll annihilate the buddy in annoyance.

5E, even with the highest possible static AC, is still 'swingy' when rolling to hit it (granted, buffs and Shield spells lessen that effect, but only the most dedicated in optimization will build for that - and even then, tends to overlook something)

One would hope that an DM willing to play a Monte Hall type game wouldn't just let it be a cakewalk for his OP players, but would boost the encounters; a couple more points of AC, a few dozen more HP, a little more damage... otherwise you're just playing Diablo 3 on easy mode... meh.

[JellyPooga]

Mainly not bard because the stats don't match.
I am happy with my choice - I don't see it as a "multiclassing mess" but a character.

That's fair. I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't criticising; I'm a fluff-dipper (no, wait...that sounds filthy) I like to dip for fluff reasons too and I'm totally on-board with the whole "it ain't multiclassing, it's just the progression of my abilities" thing. Classes are there to provide mechanics, not be a roleplaying straight-jacket.

I do, however, often have to take a step back when creating a character and compare it to Bard (which I now consider a bit of a "baseline" for any character that's multiclassing 3 or more Classes) and ask myself "Why not Bard?":

- From a strictly gaming point of view, straight Bard is almost always more powerful than the convoluted Cleric/Rogue/Ranger or Warlock/Fighter/Druid I might have planned.

- From a social point of view, I've met GM's that are adamant that all multiclassing is the work of the devil and is "obviously" OP; in those cases Bard is the only option if I want to play that character at all like I imagined him (instead of, say: a Fighter or Rogue)

- From a fluff point of view; well, it really doesn't matter if my Van Helsing is a Cleric/Rogue/Ranger, a Fighter/Cleric or just a Bard...the character is always going to be the same; just the abilities that might be a little different depending on which I pick.

[CaptainSarathai]

Multiclassing is fine. SCAG isn't.

If you don't use any options from the SCAG you should be OK, at least up to level 17.
What's broken from SCAG, but not from Multiclassing? The only thing I can think of, would be the very specific mix of GFB/BB and Sorc's Quicken/Twin Metamagic. Otherwise, I'd take SCAG over Multiclassing, if I had to choose one to keep.


RAW it's a bit hazy as to whether you can add charisma twice. Secondly, for GFB to outperform someone with multiple attacks, it needs to hit two targets, which isn't guaranteed. Thirdly, Fire is one of the most commonly resisted types in the game. It all sounds broken til you actually play it
1. I've never heard that it was hazy as to whether or not you can apply a mod twice. What is sometimes hazy, is whether you apply the mod to one hit or both, or if you can split multiple mods. That's the most I've ever heard.
2. GFB/BB can outperform multiattacks with Quicken, mentioned above.
3. Fire IS resisted, but you take Elemental Adept and suddenly forget all about that.



Honestly, I'd recommend that you not MC if your newish DM is afraid of it. There are plenty of good single class options for a fun game.



I struggle not to optimize, I enjoy figuring out how to mechanically make my character the best at combat (because I like fighting). If needed, I can apply that elsewhere (like breaking and entering).
This seems like the crux of the issue here: you're asking us, "how awesome can I be, before I'm too awesome."
We can't answer that. If you're optimized, you're optimized. If you play by the Sam's rules, you can still end up the best character in the party. That was my Warlock, recently for a LMoP run.
Half Elf
Dex16, Cha16
Fiend patron
Pact of Tome w/ Shillelagh and Find Familiar
EB, Hex, Darkness
Most Social Skills + Perception (Charlatan)
Armor of Shadow, Devil's Sight
PoleArm Master

Essentially, I was getting into Melee and just stomping all over people. My table thought that 1d8+1d4+2d6+6 was "a lot" of damage for a round. But that's because I was the only one (except my gf's paladin) with a 16 in my stats from the start, and I understood my class abilities and played to my strengths for the level.
You can try to share spotlight, and I did. But with a +5 to "Face" skills, I ended up as the de-facto party leader for any "serious business" we got in to. I was second only to the Rogue at "Rogue-ing," so we often worked in tandem while everyone else watched. In melee I was outshining the group most of the time.

That build was 100% PHB, single-classed. And at my table, it was "o.p"

I suggest making your character with the rest of the party. Help them make their characters better, and then balance yourself to that. If nobody else has a 16 on any stats, you certainly don't need two. Stuff like that.
Being super powerful really doesn't even matter, if you've got a good DM. Even a mediocre DM can easily fix it by dropping a percentage of your damage "behind the screen." I sometimes do this if a player is vastly overshadowing the others. Rather than give all the monsters extra HP, I just scale them to the optimizer. You do 20% more damage than "normal"? Well, that 10 damage you just rolled got written down as an 8.
Ultimately, the DM wins every arms race. Think you can kill a Terrasque in 1 round? Fine, DM brings 2 Terrasques...

[hymer]

It's all about perceptions though; while you and I might see a balanced Class combination with high nova potential, but relatively low encounter stamina, the GM just sees the character that solo'd his BBEG in one round.

Bad GM who needs to learn to design encounters for his players and not the other way around? Perhaps. Does that help the OP? Not really. As you say, the OP has the choice to simply not play the nova game, but I suspect his GM might take one look at the character sheet and "nope" it (and all MC) regardless.

I agree, but that raises the question: Why ask us? We don't know what the DM thinks is broken. All we can do is argue one way or another. It seems closer communication with the DM would be the proper way for OP to proceed.

[deathadder99]

1. I've never heard that it was hazy as to whether or not you can apply a mod twice. What is sometimes hazy, is whether you apply the mod to one hit or both, or if you can split multiple mods. That's the most I've ever heard.
2. GFB/BB can outperform multiattacks with Quicken, mentioned above.
3. Fire IS resisted, but you take Elemental Adept and suddenly forget all about that.


1. Not me, but I've heard some DMs rule that because spells with the same effect don't stack, therefore the abilities with the same effects don't stack. I would rule it stacks, but I have had some people I've played with veto.
2. Sure, but again that's using a limited resource. Joe the Fighter with Crossbow Master can do up to 5 attacks per round forever.
3. And that's a feat, which is an opportunity cost. Taking the common 2/18 pala/sorc, you pretty much need warcaster with a shield, or GWM with a 2h weapon. Ok, we're Vuman, but you also want 20 Cha and 20 str. That's already all your feats and ASIs used up. You need to sacrifice something to get Elemental Adept, which won't be consistently good.



This seems like the crux of the issue here: you're asking us, "how awesome can I be, before I'm too awesome."
We can't answer that. If you're optimized, you're optimized. If you play by the Sam's rules, you can still end up the best character in the party. That was my Warlock, recently for a LMoP run.
Half Elf
Dex16, Cha16
Fiend patron
Pact of Tome w/ Shillelagh and Find Familiar
EB, Hex, Darkness
Most Social Skills + Perception (Charlatan)
Armor of Shadow, Devil's Sight
PoleArm Master

Essentially, I was getting into Melee and just stomping all over people. My table thought that 1d8+1d4+2d6+6 was "a lot" of damage for a round. But that's because I was the only one (except my gf's paladin) with a 16 in my stats from the start, and I understood my class abilities and played to my strengths for the level.
You can try to share spotlight, and I did. But with a +5 to "Face" skills, I ended up as the de-facto party leader for any "serious business" we got in to. I was second only to the Rogue at "Rogue-ing," so we often worked in tandem while everyone else watched. In melee I was outshining the group most of the time.

That build was 100% PHB, single-classed. And at my table, it was "o.p"

I suggest making your character with the rest of the party. Help them make their characters better, and then balance yourself to that. If nobody else has a 16 on any stats, you certainly don't need two. Stuff like that.
Being super powerful really doesn't even matter, if you've got a good DM. Even a mediocre DM can easily fix it by dropping a percentage of your damage "behind the screen." I sometimes do this if a player is vastly overshadowing the others. Rather than give all the monsters extra HP, I just scale them to the optimizer. You do 20% more damage than "normal"? Well, that 10 damage you just rolled got written down as an 8.
Ultimately, the DM wins every arms race. Think you can kill a Terrasque in 1 round? Fine, DM brings 2 Terrasques...

^ +1 this is good advice.

[CaptainSarathai]

3. And that's a feat, which is an opportunity cost. Taking the common 2/18 pala/sorc, you pretty much need warcaster with a shield, or GWM with a 2h weapon. Ok, we're Vuman, but you also want 20 Cha and 20 str. That's already all your feats and ASIs used up. You need to sacrifice something to get Elemental Adept, which won't be consistently good.
Thanks for the +1. I just wanted to point out that getting Dex/Cha to 20 isn't necessarily a requirement for that. Especially for the PalaSorc, where you aren't casting as often. Even for a Warlock, getting Cha to 20 isn't always a requirement (or, if using Shillelagh, Dex20).
Getting to 20 is a +1 to hit, which is slightly less important with bounded accuracy in play. The +1 damage is easily offset: EA also lets you reroll 1s on your damage rolls, similar to GW Style. So your average damage actually goes up, theoretically. Plus the ability to overcome resistance.

[MrStabby]

Being super powerful really doesn't even matter, if you've got a good DM. Even a mediocre DM can easily fix it by dropping a percentage of your damage "behind the screen." I sometimes do this if a player is vastly overshadowing the others. Rather than give all the monsters extra HP, I just scale them to the optimizer. You do 20% more damage than "normal"? Well, that 10 damage you just rolled got written down as an 8.
Ultimately, the DM wins every arms race. Think you can kill a Terrasque in 1 round? Fine, DM brings 2 Terrasques...

Personally i don't think this is a good solution. The problem isn't some people doing less than the other players, the problem is that some players feel they are doing less than the others. I think this solution is addressing the wrong problem.

Those other players are still seeing the optimised character do more damage than they are and be more effective in combat than they are. They also just see tougher enemies as they won't see the breakdown of damage.

[StoicLeaf]

from my limited experience, nothing will fix that bar the "bad" players learning how to play more efficiently.

[deathadder99]

Thanks for the +1. I just wanted to point out that getting Dex/Cha to 20 isn't necessarily a requirement for that. Especially for the PalaSorc, where you aren't casting as often. Even for a Warlock, getting Cha to 20 isn't always a requirement (or, if using Shillelagh, Dex20).


If I'm playing an optimised munchkin SnB PalaSorc, I'm gonna start Half Elf 16/8/16/8/10/16. I can go 6/14 or 2/18 pala/sorc or some variant thereof. I get 4 ASIs no matter how I slice it. Warcaster is a feat tax, so required. I should probably get to 20 Cha, as spell save DC and possibly my aura benefits from that. From there, I can take +2Con, +2Str, Inspiring Leader, Resilient Con, all of which I'd take over EA, unless I'm really JUST facing fire elementals or something ridiculous like that. I just don't see a case in which taking Elemental Adept is an optimal choice.

A GWM build won't use GFB anyway.



EA also lets you reroll 1s on your damage rolls, similar to GW Style.

EA ups the damage from 1 to 2 if you roll a 1, rather than letting you reroll, which makes it even worse.

I'm not sure I can see a build where EA is an optimal choice, and if you're choosing then you're giving up something better (imo). Pala/Sorc is strong, but it's balanced by having few ASIs, low DPR unless you manage to activate the riders on GFB and BB or you choose Favored Soul for the Extra Attack, it takes a long time to come online, and everything only recharges on a long rest.

That said - it's arguably better than some flavors of pure paladin, but there are plenty of pure paladin builds that are equally strong (an Oathbreaker 20 is just plain nasty with PAM & Sentinel).


EDIT: Pala/Sorc is ridiculous if you roll godly stats and can go dex, but lots of things in 5e are broken if you roll stats, so I tend to only allow point buy and standard array.

[Dhuraal]

Storm Sorc: DM makes an event including heavy storms (call lightning with random locations?), PC has to power through it and find + absorb its source.
Draconic sorc: PC has to drink/inject a dragon's blood/eat a dragon's heart or find a really powerful dragon and convince it to donate powers.
Wild sorc: PC has wild bursts without the positive features of a sorc and has to find a mentor/track their heritage/find an artifact to gain relative control over their powers.

Oooo, those are good ideas

[ruy343]

As the most experienced player at the table in nearly every game I play, I recommend the following:

Don't focus on your character being the awesome one.

If you've played the game before, you know what kinds of buffs and helpful abilities you can lean on to make others shine: play a character that brings out the best in others' characters. Play a wizard that doesn't focus on direct damage dealing spells, or play a cleric or bard that focuses on helping the others do well in combat or on skill challenges.

It's tempting to make combinations or concepts that do ridiculous things on their own, but I highly recommend that you leave such theorycrafting for white rooms, and make something that benefits the new guys, until they can also theorycraft with you.

[Quoxis]

Oooo, those are good ideas
Thanks. I'm constantly thinking about new ways to refluff classes without breaking the core idea, and a class that literally gets born with powers is tempting.

[Zorku]

I've played a fair number of the common multiclass options now, mostly because of a nasty mental quirk where if I go straight down the progression of a single class I think I have to be the most stereotypical version of that class.

Since we've got a lot of multiclass advice based around burst and magic, I'm going to present the opposite. Fighter/Rogue. When I played this I went with arcane trickster and the "wrong" race for it, mostly to fit the idea I had in my head but also as my general mode of operation, since I'm trying not to min-max with this. With a look over the mechanics at play here, the thing your DM would expect to be a problem is sneak attack + extra attack. You're limited to one sneak attack per turn, so the typical damage output per round isn't crazy, but now you've got an extra chance to actually land that damage if your attacks miss. Where a rogue doesn't usually have extra attack you're relying on that one attack to hit so you can get all of your damage in via sneak attack. You can offhand a dagger to still get that second shot at it, but that competes with cunning action. (The swashbuckler UA kind of removes this competition, but only against single targets.) As you get more damage on sneak attack it starts to become clear that you don't actually care that much about your raw weapon damage- the real weight of a hit is all in that sneak attack damage.

So, the party recognized right away that my crits were almost as nuts as critical smites, and because sneak attack is per turn instead of per round we looked for all of the opportunities to nail creatures next to me with fear effects and anything that burns their reaction to make them move, but I was worse at this than a pure rogue would have been, having fewer sneak attack dice for it. It takes a lot of levels of fighter to get that extra attack, but once I had it the higher frequency of getting in the 1 attack per round I needed (roughly like +4 to hit) was bigger than the dice I lost to get it, and if I did actually land the other attack that was almost as good as 2d6 anyway, but the DM never felt like this was a weird amount of damage to deal.

The other thing I got from the fighter levels was BM maneuvers. I could do a couple of neat things to the enemy, like riposte, to more frequently get sneak attack damage off of my reaction, so I was doing a good deal more damage per round than a pure rogue (except maybe an assassin getting those autocrits,) but because it wasn't AoE and wasn't on right on the first round, it never interfered with the feel of combat and didn't look spectacular in a way that deprived anyone else of the spotlight. It should have been broken (at least relative to melee combatants,) but just wasn't.

Now, if you do this with the Champion archetype for improved critical and the assassin archetype for their eponymous ability, and rely entirely on your friends to create AoOs, then this multiclass probably does enough damage to upset the DM and make other players feel like sidekicks (if they aren't rolling around in burst damage MCs of their own design.)


The one other thing worth mentioning, is that decisions here don't necessarily have to be permanent. I've played with DMs that interacted with other players when they thought something was really outclassing the other party members, and just negotiated little nerfs to bring it back in line. With some players I could see some difficulty there, but if you buy in to the idea that the DM might change some of how your character works if it feels too strong (and give the DM the final say on that without arguing,) it doesn't have to be painful for anyone.

[Master O'Laughs]

I've played a fair number of the common multiclass options now, mostly because of a nasty mental quirk where if I go straight down the progression of a single class I think I have to be the most stereotypical version of that class.

Since we've got a lot of multiclass advice based around burst and magic, I'm going to present the opposite. Fighter/Rogue. When I played this I went with arcane trickster and the "wrong" race for it, mostly to fit the idea I had in my head but also as my general mode of operation, since I'm trying not to min-max with this. With a look over the mechanics at play here, the thing your DM would expect to be a problem is sneak attack + extra attack. You're limited to one sneak attack per turn, so the typical damage output per round isn't crazy, but now you've got an extra chance to actually land that damage if your attacks miss. Where a rogue doesn't usually have extra attack you're relying on that one attack to hit so you can get all of your damage in via sneak attack. You can offhand a dagger to still get that second shot at it, but that competes with cunning action. (The swashbuckler UA kind of removes this competition, but only against single targets.) As you get more damage on sneak attack it starts to become clear that you don't actually care that much about your raw weapon damage- the real weight of a hit is all in that sneak attack damage.

So, the party recognized right away that my crits were almost as nuts as critical smites, and because sneak attack is per turn instead of per round we looked for all of the opportunities to nail creatures next to me with fear effects and anything that burns their reaction to make them move, but I was worse at this than a pure rogue would have been, having fewer sneak attack dice for it. It takes a lot of levels of fighter to get that extra attack, but once I had it the higher frequency of getting in the 1 attack per round I needed (roughly like +4 to hit) was bigger than the dice I lost to get it, and if I did actually land the other attack that was almost as good as 2d6 anyway, but the DM never felt like this was a weird amount of damage to deal.

The other thing I got from the fighter levels was BM maneuvers. I could do a couple of neat things to the enemy, like riposte, to more frequently get sneak attack damage off of my reaction, so I was doing a good deal more damage per round than a pure rogue (except maybe an assassin getting those autocrits,) but because it wasn't AoE and wasn't on right on the first round, it never interfered with the feel of combat and didn't look spectacular in a way that deprived anyone else of the spotlight. It should have been broken (at least relative to melee combatants,) but just wasn't.

Now, if you do this with the Champion archetype for improved critical and the assassin archetype for their eponymous ability, and rely entirely on your friends to create AoOs, then this multiclass probably does enough damage to upset the DM and make other players feel like sidekicks (if they aren't rolling around in burst damage MCs of their own design.)


The one other thing worth mentioning, is that decisions here don't necessarily have to be permanent. I've played with DMs that interacted with other players when they thought something was really outclassing the other party members, and just negotiated little nerfs to bring it back in line. With some players I could see some difficulty there, but if you buy in to the idea that the DM might change some of how your character works if it feels too strong (and give the DM the final say on that without arguing,) it doesn't have to be painful for anyone.

I actually saw this idea on the forums, maybe by you, and thought it was awesome. I think a low magic character I want to make though is a shadow monk/rogue (swashbuckler or assassin).

[Zorku]

I actually saw this idea on the forums, maybe by you, and thought it was awesome. I think a low magic character I want to make though is a shadow monk/rogue (swashbuckler or assassin).

I haven't previously presented that here. I actually went with that MC because I had rolled up a similar character for an older edition but never got to play it. I looked around at the class guides I could find at the time so I'd have some idea of what synergies were available through it, then settled on a split of what would be effective and what I thought I would have fun with.

Shadow monk/rogue feels like kind of a bad combination to me, not because the concept isn't good, but because a lot of monk features overlap with rogue features. You've got a bunch of ways you can spend ki points... that just aren't going to happen because they were a weaker form of cunning action. Evasion appears on both classes, though to be fair you're only going to waste a feature if you've got 7 levels in both classes.

I generally feel like the martial classes that are good at something should be able to do it well, without magical assistance. A lot of what 5e did to casters basically agrees. As such, a lot of the shadows for sneaking is stuff you should get out of a rogue with expertise in stealth anyway, except that you don't have to think very hard about how to be sneaky. Shadow monk also feels weird to me, in that you're getting minor illusions for free, but on a sneaky character most of how I used that spell just gets bypassed by Shadow Step and CoS. It's illusion magic so you can do other stuff with it, but the utility of it shrinks enough that I'm left wondering why this archetype was designed to have it.

Multiclassing the shadow monk with things like warlock, so that you can have truesight while in darkness, have your familiar carry around the item that's got darkness cast on it, etc, just makes too much more sense to me. Without assassinate it's obviously less of a legendary ninja that way, but like I said, a pure assassin should be able to do what what they do best without usually having to cast darkness to do it.

[MeeposFire]

I would say if you really want to put forth some optimization effort but not potentially make the DM upset because the DM is not ready to deal with your level of OP (or make the other players feel inadequete) I find the best solution is to play a character that boosts the party or can be really subtle in just how effective it is. AN example of the second is effective use of things like wall spells or web and the like. When used right it can win the encounter but the other players probably won't even realize it. It also does not require mutliclassing to do it "right" so your DM would not likely be mad with it.

[CaptainSarathai]

As the most experienced player at the table in nearly every game I play, I recommend the following:

Don't focus on your character being the awesome one.

If you've played the game before, you know what kinds of buffs and helpful abilities you can lean on to make others shine: play a character that brings out the best in others' characters. Play a wizard that doesn't focus on direct damage dealing spells, or play a cleric or bard that focuses on helping the others do well in combat or on skill challenges.

It's tempting to make combinations or concepts that do ridiculous things on their own, but I highly recommend that you leave such theorycrafting for white rooms, and make something that benefits the new guys, until they can also theorycraft with you.

Suggestions on a good build for that?

[Master O'Laughs]

I would say if you really want to put forth some optimization effort but not potentially make the DM upset because the DM is not ready to deal with your level of OP (or make the other players feel inadequete) I find the best solution is to play a character that boosts the party or can be really subtle in just how effective it is. AN example of the second is effective use of things like wall spells or web and the like. When used right it can win the encounter but the other players probably won't even realize it. It also does not require mutliclassing to do it "right" so your DM would not likely be mad with it.

Well the original Sorcadin idea was to maximize AC potential to make it hard to be hit and then walk into the middle of the enemy and careful web or later careful hypnotic pattern and perform disabling effects. When I needed to I would GFB to attack and quicken another if appropriate.

Currently there will be 4 of us, maybe 5. One of the guys is dead set on a Vuman gunslinger (matthew mercer) fighter. He is either going to take the actor feat or sharpshooter at level 1. Another is thinking of going fighter to simplify things for himself but at heart wants to play a spell caster. He wont decide for sure until session 0 but he will probably be a 1/2 or 1/3rd caster eventually. The other guy simply said caster of some sort.

Because I love optimization, I will always help the other party members pick the best option and help them understand how best to fill their role in combat.

[deathadder99]

Well the original Sorcadin idea was to maximize AC potential to make it hard to be hit and then walk into the middle of the enemy and careful web or later careful hypnotic pattern and perform disabling effects. When I needed to I would GFB to attack and quicken another if appropriate.

Currently there will be 4 of us, maybe 5. One of the guys is dead set on a Vuman gunslinger (matthew mercer) fighter. He is either going to take the actor feat or sharpshooter at level 1. Another is thinking of going fighter to simplify things for himself but at heart wants to play a spell caster. He wont decide for sure until session 0 but he will probably be a 1/2 or 1/3rd caster eventually. The other guy simply said caster of some sort.

Because I love optimization, I will always help the other party members pick the best option and help them understand how best to fill their role in combat.

If you want to be OP in a way that won't overshadow anyone, play a Wizard. Single class. Focus on buffing/disabling. You are not a blaster. You'll have a tool for every situation, you scale well, you'll help your party be better at everything they do, and you'll be able to always manipulate the battlefield to your favour. If you make everyone else OP, no one will mind that you're secretly the best member of the party, as they will feel like THEY did it. Buffing and disabling is much harder to quantify than damage, so it's going to be less of "You're OP, you oneshotted the BBEG", and more of "Why did they steamroll this encounter?".

You have lots of options, it's mechanically challenging, you can use creative tactics, and no one will ever complain that you're OP because when you haste the fighter, or cast a wall of fire on top of the guy the barbarian is grappling, you're making them feel like the badasses wrecking face, even though it's secretly you.

[shuangwucanada]

Why is that? Hex & Flurry of Blows and the extra attack from war cleric? It seems quite strong early but not gamebreakingly so. The bonus action war cleric attack doesn't stack with martial arts, so you're gaining what, 2 damage average on a roll? Martial weapons don't even help the monk as it means you can't use the bigger monk dice.

Well, my DM and my party enjoy fair games, so we balance-rule most of the build with no problem. Then we found that nothing (neither RAW nor RAI) can stop a monk punching 3/4 times with dex modifier and hex/divine favor damage applied to each punch during the lower level, with just 1 level dip to another class, which outshines most of other classes before level 10 or so. That can happen twice per long rest (cleric), or once per short rest with just a 13 charisma (warlock). So we decide to go with RAF, which is banning these two combinations.

[RickAllison]

Suggestions on a good build for that?

Things like an Abjurer X/Fighter 2 who is incredibly tough to take down and can lay down double full spells once per short rest, but uses those spells to shut down enemies and buff allies. It is rather powerful, but only shows it in how the other PCs overcome challenges easier. You know that your wall dividing the enemies together with that Color Spray on the mooks has rendered them ready for evisceration by your allies without help from others, but it just looks like your friends are slaughtering the enemies while taking little-to-no damage.

I heartily recommend reading TreantMonk's God Wizard Guide. It is an excellent starting point for understanding manipulation of the battlefield so that you are the one who truly knows just how much you trivialized encounters.