Roleplaying an MC character

[Laetir]

Hello all,

I have been playing role playing games for about 20 years, all the incarnations of Dungeons and Dragons as well as Pathfinder, and a few other ones like Deadlands excetera.

I have probably played a tables where role playing is a bit more heavily weighted than any sort of dice-rolling or stats, but I have been interested in joining other games recently.

One thing I have a hard time reconciling, is the justification for a character to have a "dip." My previous games have never really considered optimization very important, but I don't want to have a bad game experience for any new group I may join, so I'd like to know how to blend in. So, without any way attacking min-maxers and Munchkins, I'm just curious how do you justify through your roleplay the little "dips" into other classes, and bizarre class combinations that power up very niche things?

For instance, an idea I have seen fairly often on this board is a lore Bard with a cleric dip. What story do you usually use in order to suggest why you're bard may have become a cleric suddenly? To me it seems somewhat unlikely, although I suppose if a person started out as a cleric, they may have changed their profession to Bard as a means to proselytize the masses. Otherwise, it's hard to picture a Carefree bard and who goes from town to town singing and generally having a good time suddenly becoming an Evangelical cleric who serves a god. This is just one example I can think of off hand, there are literally hundreds. Feel free to answer based off of any experience you have with it.

I hope this question makes sense, it is something I have been wondering ever since I started coming to this forum for class advice. Thanks everyone who takes the time to answer.

[Sigreid]

All right, this is just me talking here.

In my view, classes are a game construct, thought the names of the classes may relate to in-world organization titles. So in the bard taking a couple of levels of cleric, from his perspective he doesn't change classes to cleric. He probably just adopts a god as his cause. Starts telling stories that focus on drawing and inspiring the faithful. He begins praying regularly, and in time is rewarded with the gifts of the god. In short, the class is less about a conscious effort and more about new abilities centered around the path his life has taken.

[RazorChain]

Well Bard and Cleric go hand in hand. I've seen it on TV! They pray! They Heal! They put on a good show and make good money!

[Susano-wo]

I am also on board the "my classes were built up to mechanically represent my character concept" team. Though some classes do have a default social or occupational connotation, and that is reflected in their mechanics. And I definitely see the connotations of the classes effect character conepts when I am creating a character. For instance the Knight part of Eldritch Knight definitely played into by backstory for my 5E EK character.

But even coming from a classes represent in fiction constructs point of view, the bard could simply have a divine connection. Not as strong as a full cleric, but enough that they receive some of the benefits of such a connection. And there's always the conversion story (as well as the possibility that as a Cleric, they are also laid back and carefree. Not all religious people are evangelical--this could be especially appropriate depending on the deity). Hell I still want to play a 3e/pf rogue paladin combo who began as street criminal before being shown mercy and a better way to live by a priest. He still retains his street smarts, and has a soft spot for giving people a chance to repent, but is very much a holy warrior, and will not hesitate to confront evil.

EDIT:@Razorchain: +1 :smallbiggrin:

[An Enemy Spy]

Classes, like hit points and levels, are just mechanical representations of abstract concepts. I don't really see why you need to justify any of your character's stats. The only people who know the stats are the ones who are aware that the fantasy world is just a game, after all.

[Naanomi]

I largely agree, though I will say that some classes (Warlock mostly, but also Druid and Cleric; and a bit Paladin) are more likely to carry some flavor with them... I wouldn't even bother to 'explain' a rogue/fighter... but I might feel the need to explore just how I became a Druid/GOO-lock

[furby076]

With the exception of certain classes (paladin, warlock, cleric), to me classes are an end to a character concept. I specify the other 3 not because they cant do it, but because when a diety is involved, you need a story to justify it. I did once play a paladin, cleric, sacred exorcist of the silver flame. The cleric was to help me get into the exorcist PrC faster, and make sure the spells were on the cleric (more useful than paladin). The character saw himself as a paladin specialized in banishing undead and outsiders (this was pathfinder, and we were attacked by xoriat).

So, as a dm, i would allow a dip if its to fit a character concept. If its for pure optimization, i would be leary. Given that, i am not scared of munchkins. Cause if the player can do it, so can the dm...and the dm has way more flexibility

Tl;dr let the player have fun, unless it will break the game and ruin it for others

[JackPhoenix]

As others said, classes doesn't necessarily exist from the character's perspective.

My rogue/monk didn't spent time in monastery meditating and doing monk-y stuff. She's an assassin (without having actual assassin subclass)/spy who learned exotic combat techniques and some magic (ki abilities) to be better at her job as normal part of her training.

On the other hand, my battlemage (fighter 1/wizard) is a former soldier who studied magic (especially evocation and abjuration) later... but still, if anyone asks, his answer would be "I'm a mage who knows how to use a weapon and put on armor properly".

And the druid/madness cleric in the game I'm running is just insane. Or is she...?

[imanidiot]

One thing I have a hard time reconciling, is the justification for a character to have a "dip." My previous games have never really considered optimization very important, but I don't want to have a bad game experience for any new group I may join, so I'd like to know how to blend in. So, without any way attacking min-maxers and Munchkins, I'm just curious how do you justify through your roleplay the little "dips" into other classes, and bizarre class combinations that power up very niche things?

For instance, an idea I have seen fairly often on this board is a lore Bard with a cleric dip. What story do you usually use in order to suggest why you're bard may have become a cleric suddenly? To me it seems somewhat unlikely, although I suppose if a person started out as a cleric, they may have changed their profession to Bard as a means to proselytize the masses. Otherwise, it's hard to picture a Carefree bard and who goes from town to town singing and generally having a good time suddenly becoming an Evangelical cleric who serves a god. This is just one example I can think of off hand, there are literally hundreds. Feel free to answer based off of any experience you have with it.



I would say that among the elves Clerics with a dip in Bard or Wizard or Druid are probably more common than pure Clerics. A Cleric 1/Bard X would be fairly commonplace.

Warlock dips are even easier. The standard Warlock patrons arent picky about who they make deals with. If a powerful sorcerer wants access to Pact Magic there will be a demon prince that's willing to make a deal. 100% of the time.

My current wild magic sorcerer has a 2 level warlock dip. I explicitly told the DM that this was for Devil's Sight and Eldritch Blast and that it wasn't a major part of the character. I would rather remake the character as a full sorcerer than get into extensive roleplay over the warlock stuff. The RP justification is that he is possessed by a Great Old One several orders of magnitude more powerful than a Greater Power. If this particular GOO decides to grant you Pact Magic, you get Magic Initiate or Warlock levels, you have no say in the matter. The character in fact isn't even aware that the GOO exists as it works exclusively behind the scenes.

RP justification for MC is no more difficult than RP justification for adventuring in the first place. Suspension of disbelief is absolutely essential to tabletop gaming.

[PloxBox]

Of the few games I've been a player in, i had a fey warlock who dipped into moon druid because of his patron, and wanting too be more supportive as a party member. I originally planned on going cleric, but druid felt more natural (pun intended).

The other character i multi classed was a rogue 4 wizard 1. I played it out in character, having her go to a local magic shop and spend some down time there studying (Magic initiate feat at 4th level) before being gifted a spell book by the magic shop owner (character level 5, which was the dip).

[Finger6842]

All right, this is just me talking here.

In my view, classes are a game construct, thought the names of the classes may relate to in-world organization titles. So in the bard taking a couple of levels of cleric, from his perspective he doesn't change classes to cleric. He probably just adopts a god as his cause. Starts telling stories that focus on drawing and inspiring the faithful. He begins praying regularly, and in time is rewarded with the gifts of the god. In short, the class is less about a conscious effort and more about new abilities centered around the path his life has taken.

This!!

I would add that, just as in RL, life changing events happen. The trick to RP of the newly acquired levels and classes is the same. You describe how you have grown as a person and tie it to the world around you.

My last character was a Bard who focused on helping the Priest heal the party. The two of us spent many travel hours discussing the different ways to stop bleeding, how to acquire potions, what things were of interest to his god and mine. We found common ground and I learned the fundamental principles of priesthood. I didn't "level up" but rather learned some new skills. Later in life I placed a magical crown on my head. My understanding of events that had happened to and around me throughout my life suddenly made sense as never before. I delved into the Arcane world, studying the magic of our party sorcerer and wizard. The wizard showed me how to generate a shield and summon a familiar. Again, I didn't become a wizard but instead learned new arcane spells.

If you don't have the resource you need available in your party that's what research is for.

Want a minion? You can hire one OR you can make friends in the local tavern and pay those to help. The second one is a stronger growth experience and leads to great RP. He happens to be an out of work thief who can teach you to use thieves tools or improve your 'proficiency' at sneaking. Practice things enough and your overall knowledge increases (read as proficiency bonus). Leveling is just the mechanics.

[Laetir]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that makes a lot of sense, for the most part. I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.

Obviously, I didn't mean to apply that people shouldn't be allowed to do this, everyone should be able to enjoy their character, and do what they want to be able to. I was just looking for your normal roleplay justification for these things again most of the games I've played have been very heavily focus on role play, with stats just there to add enough Randomness to be interesting, and to provide a consistent framework with which to operate.

Thank you very much for all of your responses!

[imanidiot]

Let's look at for example the character Conan the Cimmerian. Now Conan is obviously a Barbarian. It says so right on the box. But depending on the system the same character could be portrayed mechanically as Barbarian, a Fighter for games without the Barbarian class, a combination of the two, or even a Barbarian/Fighter with a couple of Rogue levels. In a 4e game I could even see Warlord being acceptable. Oath of Vengeance/Conquest Paladin level is where we begin to change the character fundamentally, but I would still say that a Paladin dip would be situationally acceptable.

And that's 5 or 6 different builds all for the same character.

[Finger6842]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that makes a lot of sense, for the most part. I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.

Obviously, I didn't mean to apply that people shouldn't be allowed to do this, everyone should be able to enjoy their character, and do what they want to be able to. I was just looking for your normal roleplay justification for these things again most of the games I've played have been very heavily focus on role play, with stats just there to add enough Randomness to be interesting, and to provide a consistent framework with which to operate.

Thank you very much for all of your responses!

I agree with you. My DM won't let you MC into a class unless you find a source to learn from. I know a wizard becoming a fighter is odd but instead of thinking he or she now knows every weapon consider instead that he has learned the fundamentals of sword work and is now good enough with the weapon in hand that he can adapt those techniques to other similar items. He didn't necessarily get stronger but instead learned how to use the weight of the weapon to help generate momentum, effectively hitting harder (ASI) plus all that sword practice could be building actual muscle. The real feat in my mind is he combines his magic knowledge to make the blade itself more powerful (green flame blade etc.).

[Sigreid]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that makes a lot of sense, for the most part. I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.

Obviously, I didn't mean to apply that people shouldn't be allowed to do this, everyone should be able to enjoy their character, and do what they want to be able to. I was just looking for your normal roleplay justification for these things again most of the games I've played have been very heavily focus on role play, with stats just there to add enough Randomness to be interesting, and to provide a consistent framework with which to operate.

Thank you very much for all of your responses!

Actually, I think wizard to a level of fighter is one of the easier ones. He's an adventurer, travelling with some pretty talented thugs. The idea that as he begins to see how dangerous the world is he would get their help, or even just watch and learn from them so he can understand how to increase his chance of survival.

[imanidiot]

I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.


Keep in mind that for a Wizard to multiclass into Fighter they need a 13 Strength. Anyone with a 13 Strength has undertaken some form of physical training in the past.

The question here is how lomg does it take to train someone to be a level 1 Fighter? Does it take longer to train them to be a level 1 Wizard? What if they have an 18 Intelligence? These are all subjective questions that the DM of a particular game is the only one who can answer.

[Finger6842]

Keep in mind that for a Wizard to multiclass into Fighter they need a 13 Strength.

Technically incorrect, it's 13 STR OR DEX. The same argument applies though. They could have become more graceful and or quicker to respond during their trials.

[Fey]

One thing I have a hard time reconciling, is the justification for a character to have a "dip." My previous games have never really considered optimization very important, but I don't want to have a bad game experience for any new group I may join, so I'd like to know how to blend in. So, without any way attacking min-maxers and Munchkins, I'm just curious how do you justify through your roleplay the little "dips" into other classes, and bizarre class combinations that power up very niche things?

For instance, an idea I have seen fairly often on this board is a lore Bard with a cleric dip. What story do you usually use in order to suggest why you're bard may have become a cleric suddenly? To me it seems somewhat unlikely, although I suppose if a person started out as a cleric, they may have changed their profession to Bard as a means to proselytize the masses. Otherwise, it's hard to picture a Carefree bard and who goes from town to town singing and generally having a good time suddenly becoming an Evangelical cleric who serves a god. This is just one example I can think of off hand, there are literally hundreds. Feel free to answer based off of any experience you have with it.

I hope this question makes sense, it is something I have been wondering ever since I started coming to this forum for class advice. Thanks everyone who takes the time to answer.

I once played a street rat rogue who multiclassed to cleric. Rationalization was her background included some time as an orphan being raised at a temple orphanage, before she left there and lived on the streets for awhile. Later, she went through a personal crisis, got a bad case of religion, and suddenly felt the need to attend temple services and get back in touch with that discarded part of her life. This led to enough devotion that she took cleric levels, though her street rat lifestyle was still strong enough that she had a very fast and loose interpretation of the scriptures.

[JBPuffin]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that makes a lot of sense, for the most part. I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.

Not ignoring the other things said, but I do want to throw out the idea that that "history" probably wasn't full-time adventuring. High-stress situations force you to grow and adapt at a much more rapidly than tamer ones (biology, amirite?), so a level 1 wizard might get sick of not being able to contribute in melee after a particularly rough fight and says, "Hey, Eberk, would you mind showing me how you handle that hammer?" There's also a long history of fantasy characters just being more capable than any natural human, even mundane ones - heck, Bruce Wayne performs at record-breaking levels in basically every field available to him with little more than determination and a wonky sleep schedule. So having a wizard who can figure out basic martial arts (combat in general, not the other definition) isn't the craziest stretch.

Warlocks multiclass out because their Patron needs them to focus their efforts in another direction or they've gotten sick of being bossed around and take up with someone "more reasonable" (ie, a deity). Clerics, Paladins, and maybe even Barbarians/Druids/Rangers find new ways to serve or new spirits to serve them. Fighters, Monks, and Rogues learn new styles of combat, both physical and ethereal. Bards start learning and applying more bizarre lore, probably same with Wizards. Sorcerers and Mystics pick up new skills within themselves, whether because of genetic knowledge or mental gymnastics. Artificers might go either the Bard or Rogue path, honestly, but it's mostly just about expanding their repertoire one way or another. This is all, of course, on top of all sorts of character-specific methods/explanations, because not every character is so practical...

I actually had an RP complete class switch - Life Cleric serving a rather wilderness-oriented goddess decided to bless her champion differently, statistically making him an Arctic Druid and instantly triggering his first Wild Shape (and boy, did it come in handy that fight...) I mentioned my changes to the DM and he sprung the event on me, which I thought was just awesome since it meant I could start contributing...more, anyway. Vidald is still one of my least effective characters, and I love him for it :smallbiggrin:.

So yeah, multiclassing is just like any other stat justification - satisfactory explanations abound, it's just about picking the one that best fits the situation/your designs for the character (and sometimes the GMs).

EDIT: Ooh, easy way to justify multiclassing - know what you're doing ahead of time and bake things in to the starting character. My current character took Magic Initiate and plans to go Arcane Trickster, maybe even take Wizard levels, because he's obsessed with knowledge and doesn't mind breaking a bunch of rules to do it (CG, cares about lives but less about livelihoods). Vish is basically an arcane version of 4e's Ioun Avenger Librarians of Doom (sage [librarian] background), to the point where his book obsession is the entire reason the campaign had a plot hook. Always glad to make the start of a campaign easier for my local DM :).

[Pex]

No snark intended.

It is a hard lesson to learn. Ignore the flavor text of the rules. Do not let the rules tell you how a character should be played. You can play a Fiendish Warlock because you like the fire stuff. Your character is Lawful Good, and you made a pact with The Phoenix. Perhaps your family has a long history of alliance with Gold Dragons. Instead of hurling through hell your hurl opponents through heaven who take the psychic damage because of the regret they feel seeing Absolute Paradise that is denied them due to their wicked ways.

Ignore your classes. They are the game mechanics for how your character functions, your fun in playing the game. Your character's personality, desires, pursuits are whatever you make them to be. The rules are irrelevant.

[Sigreid]

Expanding on this all, militaries send their recruits to boot camp partially to teach them the basic skills they need. In boot camp you learn a lot in a very short time because stress is a fantastic motivator. Boot camp stress is nothing to a demon trying to eat your face as far as motivation to learn to fight.

For anyone MC to cleric, many a warrior on many a battle field has found the deepest and truest faith and religion...

[Knaight]

Picture a classless system - you're not fitting mechanics to "a bard" or "a cleric", you're fitting them to a specific character. There's a few ways these systems do this, but the pertinent one is where one has a big pile of points that they build their character from, and there are little packages (often at a discount) that represent a bunch of things you can get as part of a related field.

Think of class levels as like those packages of skills, talents, attribute bonuses, and whatever else in those point buy games. The character isn't "becoming a bard" or "becoming a cleric". The character already exists, and you're better representing them by buying a chunk of the bard package or cleric package.

[Naanomi]

No snark intended.

It is a hard lesson to learn. Ignore the flavor text of the rules. Do not let the rules tell you how a character should be played. You can play a Fiendish Warlock because you like the fire stuff. Your character is Lawful Good, and you made a pact with The Phoenix. Perhaps your family has a long history of alliance with Gold Dragons. Instead of hurling through hell your hurl opponents through heaven who take the psychic damage because of the regret they feel seeing Absolute Paradise that is denied them due to their wicked ways.

Ignore your classes. They are the game mechanics for how your character functions, your fun in playing the game. Your character's personality, desires, pursuits are whatever you make them to be. The rules are irrelevant.
I agree exactly to point where it doesn't necessitate a rule change... your Paladin still has oath tenants just because you want to play him as a monk-type warrior, your Druid doesn't get to wear metal armor because you say it is his lycanthrope manifestating, and I'm curious why your 'hurl through heaven' doesn't hurt fiends... mechanical changes are OK if worked out with your DM, but I'm very wary of fluff that necessitates a character is stronger or loses limitations...

Also, don't take this past the GM world-building, it is at the very least discourteous towards the GM. If they say "actually Druid circles are very important in the setting, and are going to be involved in the story; so I don't really want a 'druid' who is refluffed as a 'shapeshifter transmuter'... and it is a low magic setting so I don't think the 'monk' representing a 'magitek cyborg' is really fitting"... don't push back against it

[Tanarii]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that
If you struggle with it and still want to maintain strong archetype identification, as in classes have some sort of in-game meaning as part of the character and aren't just a 'bundle of mechanics' (which IMO is somewhat inherent in many DnD classes), there's still something to keep in mind with 5e: your character is a combination of race, class, background and personality traits.

So a Cleric is in no way required to be an evangelical from the Priesthood, not are church Acolytes required to be Clerics. Clerics (class) are receptacle of Divine power. Acolytes (background) are members of a church hierarchy.

It's also worth noting that recommended personality traits, should you choose to use them, come with Background ... not with Class. (Edit: bolded because this is the most important part. Your OP associates personality with class, not background.)

So just because 5e has strong class archetypes (and it does), doesn't mean it doesn't have plenty of room for flexibility in creating unique multi-class characters that are still thematically solid, just by choosing a 'typical' backgrounds from the planned 'dip' class listed in the PHB:
Barbarian & Ranger - Outlander
Bard - Entertainer
Cleric - Acolyte
Druid, Monk, & Sorcerer - Hermit
Fighter - Soldier
Paladin - Noble (probably Knight variant)
Rogue - Charlatan (or IMO Criminal)
Warlock - Charlatan (or IMO Sage)
Wizard - Sage

Examples: you can easily play a Bard Acolyte who is part of the church, who has personality traits in line with an acolyte, who at some point in his career takes some levels of Cleric as he is touched by his Goddess's power. Alternatively, you could start with a Cleric Entertainer, who was imbued with power from the Goddess of Luck, who then changes class completely to Bard and never looks back.

(You might also make completely unrelated concepts work, such as a Hill Dwarf Dragon Sorcerer / Infernal Warlock Sailor, but I'll leave that one to better minds than me to figure out the why of that one. :smallamused: )

[JackPhoenix]

Let's look at for example the character Conan the Cimmerian. Now Conan is obviously a Barbarian. It says so right on the box. But depending on the system the same character could be portrayed mechanically as Barbarian, a Fighter for games without the Barbarian class, a combination of the two, or even a Barbarian/Fighter with a couple of Rogue levels. In a 4e game I could even see Warlord being acceptable. Oath of Vengeance/Conquest Paladin level is where we begin to change the character fundamentally, but I would still say that a Paladin dip would be situationally acceptable.

And that's 5 or 6 different builds all for the same character.

Note that most depictions of barbarians in RPGs are terrible representation of Conan. If you do not count movies, he would be rogue/fighter. 5e is somewhat better thanks to backgrounds, but still, Conan wasn't raging brute, he was a thief and warrior, wasn't running around in a loincloth but wore the most sensible clothing and best armor he could get and which would fit the situation and area he's found himself in, he was intelligent, spoke multiple languages, and was a good leader (though these are more of a matter of roleplaying and impropably good atributes and skills, it doesn't fit the image of stereotypical barbarian).

He's the barbarian in the sense of "not from our land" not "half-naked raging savage with a huge weapon"

[smcmike]

Okay, I can kind of see where you guys are going with this. Don't think of the class so much as your character, but just a framework for your skills. And that makes a lot of sense, for the most part. I guess the part that I have the most trouble with is Wizards, who have no history of physical fitness, martial training, etc., taking a class of fighter, and suddenly being able to use all martial weapons, and wear armor while doing their normal stuff. It seems a little pat to go from a level 1 wizard to a level one wizard/level one fighter, or vice versa, and gaining all the skills that you gained, theoretically through a history of practice.

It's maybe worth pointing out just how short level one is in fifth edition. You might be talking about a single day's worth of adventuring here. If that's the case, it's probably worth just building both classes into the backstory, and ignoring the inconvenient fact that the mehanics haven't caught up for the first 24 hours of the adventure. Maybe he just didn't feel like putting his armor on that day. Maybe he'd practiced using arms and armor extensively in the past, and it was only after his first taste of tea action that it all clicked.

Also, even single classed characters can have some significant narrative explanation to do. The leveling system doesn't make a ton of sense from a narrative point of view, particularly early on, when your character's capabilities can change dramatically over the course of a week or two in game time.

[Pex]

I agree exactly to point where it doesn't necessitate a rule change... your Paladin still has oath tenants just because you want to play him as a monk-type warrior, your Druid doesn't get to wear metal armor because you say it is his lycanthrope manifestating, and I'm curious why your 'hurl through heaven' doesn't hurt fiends... mechanical changes are OK if worked out with your DM, but I'm very wary of fluff that necessitates a character is stronger or loses limitations...

Also, don't take this past the GM world-building, it is at the very least discourteous towards the GM. If they say "actually Druid circles are very important in the setting, and are going to be involved in the story; so I don't really want a 'druid' who is refluffed as a 'shapeshifter transmuter'... and it is a low magic setting so I don't think the 'monk' representing a 'magitek cyborg' is really fitting"... don't push back against it

Rule are irrelevant for the roleplay. I said nothing about ignoring rules for the game mechanics. You follow the game mechanics.

A fiend wouldn't take damage from "Hurl Through Heaven" because fiends are essence of evil lacking the ability to regret. Why would a celestial take the damage? Consequences of your evil action for why would you do such a thing as a ward of the Phoenix or Gold Gragons? You inflicted the pain yourself.




(You might also make completely unrelated concepts work, such as a Hill Dwarf Dragon Sorcerer / Infernal Warlock Sailor, but I'll leave that one to better minds than me to figure out the why of that one. :smallamused: )

Black Dragon Blooded dedicated to releasing Tiamat.

[Tanarii]

Black Dragon Blooded dedicated to releasing Tiamat.
But still, a Hill Dwarf Sailor, on top of arcane blood? I chose that one on purpose, because the dwarf 'typical / stereotype' per the PHB is they dislike boats. To me that makes it one of my favorite examples of how you can break a racial archetype, but do it while still retaining a core 'dwarvishness' by still keeping the strong stereotype of long memory / long grudges, clans and kingdom, and gods, gold and clan. Similarly, there quite a lot of class / background archetypes that allow you to break archetype in an interesting way. Especially any 'wilderness' class (Barbarian, Druid, Ranger) combined with an 'urban' Background (Charlatan, Entertainer, Guild Artisan, Urchin).

Feeding back into my original point, those last are great ways to back up a 'wilderness' archetype that has (or will have) a Bard or Rogue dip.

[Theodoxus]

It's maybe worth pointing out just how short level one is in fifth edition. You might be talking about a single day's worth of adventuring here. If that's the case, it's probably worth just building both classes into the backstory, and ignoring the inconvenient fact that the mehanics haven't caught up for the first 24 hours of the adventure. Maybe he just didn't feel like putting his armor on that day. Maybe he'd practiced using arms and armor extensively in the past, and it was only after his first taste of tea action that it all clicked.

Also, even single classed characters can have some significant narrative explanation to do. The leveling system doesn't make a ton of sense from a narrative point of view, particularly early on, when your character's capabilities can change dramatically over the course of a week or two in game time.

QFT.

There's an issue if you take the Blizzard style leveling, where you're cruising along and all of a sudden, with the death of an opponent, in the middle of a fight, you 'DING!' level up, instantly healing all wounds, gaining your new HPs, abilities, spells and whatnot, and there's no in game reason for that to happen... (and even if you don't level up in the middle of a combat (I've yet to have any DM do that), if you're leveling up in essentially the same way after the encounter (with or without the instant healing factor), it just pushes back the timing, but not the break in verisimilitude).

If you're using the training variant, it puts the onus on leveling back on the player. Sure, you have the XP to level up, but if you're not breaking from the dungeon crawl to actually go do the training, it doesn't really matter - you'll just keep accruing experience points until you have a chance to convert them into a new level.

In regards to the OPs question, it parallels the issue. If you're multiclassing and you're playing in an 'instant level up' game, it gets quite jarring, in universe, why your barbarian can suddenly backstab or cast Armor of Agathys... or why your wizard can suddenly wear medium armor, etc. etc. Training alleviates a lot of that, though in some cases, I'd rather a player work with me as a DM to make things fit a bit better. A 1st level fighter wanting to MC into Wizard, for instance, I'd rather work it out in game that the player finds an old spellbook (or defeats a low level wizard and takes his) than just suddenly 'dinging' level 2 and a spellbook mysteriously materializes in his backpack, full of exactly the spells he wants.

In my own mental universe, I follow the idea of class as concept noted above. You're not a Druid or a Cleric or a Wizard, per se, though you may be part of a druidic order or religious organization or wizarding school... You're Johan the Soldier or Alex the glassblower... who happens to have divine powers from a god, or swings a mighty greatsword with ease...

For me, backgrounds describe what a character is. The class provides mechanics on how he interacts with the world, when transitioning from glassblower to adventurer... sometimes, they don't even transition - a soldier or folk hero remains a soldier or folk hero, even if they throw firebolts, cast healing word or shoot arrows...

[Mith]

I'm curious why your 'hurl through heaven' doesn't hurt fiends... mechanical changes are OK if worked out with your DM, but I'm very wary of fluff that necessitates a character is stronger or loses limitations...

Hurl through Heaven doesn't work on grinds because they have no regrets.

[Beelzebubba]

For instance, an idea I have seen fairly often on this board is a lore Bard with a cleric dip. What story do you usually use in order to suggest why you're bard may have become a cleric suddenly?

Televangelist.

They realized the *real* money is in religion, and got enough to sell the part.

:smallbiggrin:

[Beelzebubba]

One thing I have a hard time reconciling, is the justification for a character to have a "dip." My previous games have never really considered optimization very important, but I don't want to have a bad game experience for any new group I may join, so I'd like to know how to blend in. So, without any way attacking min-maxers and Munchkins, I'm just curious how do you justify through your roleplay the little "dips" into other classes, and bizarre class combinations that power up very niche things?

Consider a 2-level Ranger dip for a Druid.

It would give you the best wilderness survival / tracking / travel / movement / magic skillset in the game bar none, pump up your archery or hand to hand a good amount, give you a new skill, and you'd barely take a hit in spellcasting.

'I may be a Druid, but embrace the world and live in it as fully as I can in the body I was born in, magic or not' makes perfect sense to me.

[Theodoxus]

Televangelist.

They realized the *real* money is in religion, and got enough to sell the part.

:smallbiggrin:

My cleric/bard MC is a worshipper of Dionysus. Just seemed a natural fit to be a partier...

[Rfkannen]

Ideas for common. Dips.

Your paladon starts to focus more on the magic part of their oath, start taking levels in wild magic sorcerer, it's still your paladon magic, you've just lost some control over it

Your path of ancients paladon starts to think more about the day they swore the oath to, and focuses in magic instead of martial anility, paladon with warlock levels.

Your bard starts singing religious music.

Your barbarian starts to think about getting that one good shot, and becomes a bit more skilled. Barbarian takes some levels in rogue.

[Naanomi]

Rule are irrelevant for the roleplay. I said nothing about ignoring rules for the game mechanics. You follow the game mechanics.

A fiend wouldn't take damage from "Hurl Through Heaven" because fiends are essence of evil lacking the ability to regret. Why would a celestial take the damage? Consequences of your evil action for why would you do such a thing as a ward of the Phoenix or Gold Gragons? You inflicted the pain yourself.
I wasn't meaning to call out your example specifically; just cite it as an example that doesn't always refluff as easily as others.

As for the dragon sorc/fiendlock: my first thought is always Ashardalon... so a dwarf whose ancestor looted Ashardalon's hoard and is now called to explore looking for the lost pieces of the treasure that tied his bloodline to the dragon and the fiend in it's heart both?

[Pex]

But still, a Hill Dwarf Sailor, on top of arcane blood? I chose that one on purpose, because the dwarf 'typical / stereotype' per the PHB is they dislike boats. To me that makes it one of my favorite examples of how you can break a racial archetype, but do it while still retaining a core 'dwarvishness' by still keeping the strong stereotype of long memory / long grudges, clans and kingdom, and gods, gold and clan. Similarly, there quite a lot of class / background archetypes that allow you to break archetype in an interesting way. Especially any 'wilderness' class (Barbarian, Druid, Ranger) combined with an 'urban' Background (Charlatan, Entertainer, Guild Artisan, Urchin).

Feeding back into my original point, those last are great ways to back up a 'wilderness' archetype that has (or will have) a Bard or Rogue dip.

You oppose everything the dwarves stand for, including their fondness of the earth.

[JBPuffin]

You oppose everything the dwarves stand for, including their fondness of the earth.
Heh, mid-century dwarves. "Mom, I'm 49 now, and I wanna go sail the high seas like Dad did!" "Your dad was a fiendish red dragon; he had other things going on in his life!" "Whatever, I'm leaving."

Or, better matching your description:

"Yeah, everyone around here just loves rocks, and Moradin, and bleeding everywhere whenever a goblin raid happens. Me? I'll burn it all from my frigate while thanking Asmodeus and cursing the forge keeper! Stupid tradition!"

Heh heh. Classic.

[ghost_warlock]

I'll never understand how people can't wrap their head around multiclassing.

Look, just because I'm formally trained as a microbiologist, that doesn't mean that I can't learn how to repair cars in my spare time. I may never be super great at car repair and I will probably never do it professionally, but I can be competent. Focusing on one thing for your profession doesn't exclude you from dabbling in other occupations. It's really that simple with multiclassing.

[CaptainSarathai]

It helps to remember that generally, multiclassed builds have a pretty good idea of how/why/where they're going with the build. I don't decide one day on a whim that I'm going to go from Fighter to Warlock, and then to Rogue. No, I spend hours sitting down and doing math, working out the part of my build that I want to push the hardest (my damage per turn) and then figure out how each different level will interact to boost that aspect. So there's no reason that my DM should be asking me, "hey, where'd that Rogue level come from? I've never seen you talking to any Rogues, or doing anything Rogue-ish" because I know that eventually, yes, I'll be taking a level of Rogue and can build up to it.

I see the "fluff" part of classes as an example of the type of character that you could build with those mechanics. I had a game where one player was running a Goliath Tempest Cleric, but they treated the character as a shaman of the storm and sky, rather than a proper, "Honest to Gods" cleric. I played in another game where I ran a Tempest Cleric mixed with a Storm Sorcerer, on a Warforged. They represented an experimental 'Van Graaf, Type-D' unit, which had been built with a powerful electromagnetic generator, and could generate massive charges and release them as bolts of lightning, peals of thunder, and strange "Philadelphia Experiment" type teleporting/flying movement. He was awesome - just shocking the bejeebuz out of people. Just because the designers suggested using the Cleric features to represent a holy man with cloth and a dusty book, doesn't mean that you are sworn and beholden to that class concept.

In another game (well, running the Fighter/Warlock/Rogue) I explained that my character was a very superstitious sailor who always just "broke lucky" when he clutched tight to a talisman hanging from his neck. Later, that pendant started manifesting stranger and stranger effects, and his Warlock Levels became more obvious. Suddenly, him "cursing you" actually inflicted a curse effect. His superstitions were founded, and real. He didn't have a patron at all, in terms of the story; instead he was just lucky and things seemed to "work out" for him. Warlock dip.