Single class casters and multiclass martials

[MikeRoxTheBoat]

I've been theory crafting a lot of builds lately, as well as asking for advice on these boards, and this seems to be the pattern that pops up the most. The most frequent advice I get for full caster multiclassing is "don't." Meanwhile, for martial classes, it tends to be "get extra attack, then go crazy."

I had a Moon Druid that I really wanted to multiclass, but couldn't bring myself to do so, due to losing spell casting progression, slowing my wildshape power, and the ever looming hope of getting to 20 for archdruid. Most people seem to think that, at most, you take 1 level of barbarian, monk, or life cleric if you don't think you'll see 20, and that's it.

Meanwhile, I have a Shadow Monk that's already multiclassed ranger, and I'm considering mixing in wizard and a little Barb, too. Level 6 is the first good stopping point, with 14 being, in general, the place that most people would say to stop.

Is this a part of the balance between martials and casters? Casters are generally good at solving both in combat and out of combat encounters, while martials for the most part do combat and assist with whatever proficiencies they happened to grab. To be optimized, it seems casters have to mostly dedicate themselves entirely to their craft, while martials seem free to mix and match after they get the specific features they want.

I don't see many people specifically advocating taking a single classed martial all the way to 20. Maybe Paladin, but their half casting helps.

I'm curious if the ability to more effortlessly multiclass is considered more a benefit of being one, or just a fix for inherent versatility problems.

[MrStabby]

The things you say are not hard rules...but a pretty good guide if you want power.

A good way to look at it is spell slots from casters. Till high levels, you generally grow your spell slots at the same rate as you go up levels. However, the growth is the higher level spell slots you have, i.e. at level 9 you are not adding level 1 spell slots. That is, the rate at which you add casting power increases. Furthermore add in that high level spells are so powerful and the spells you can know becomes really powerful.

On the flip side, there are some good reasons to multiclass caster. RP reasons... but put those aside for the moment.

Some classes add a LOT. Take cleric - a really powerful first level that gives armour but also potentially a lot more spells known and some domain features. For one level this can be very appealing to a wizard who has not dumped wisdom. Clerics and wizards to well from having a number of good spells that don't need a high casting stat so canbe dipped relatively easily. Most others are charisma casters for whom this is less painful.

Warlocks provide eldritch blast and support - 2 levels gets you something that will scale well over the whole campaign.

Sorcerers... can kind of almost get away with being taken for some metamagic... it applies to any spell so it opens some doors but I wouldn't really recommend it.



The other element is throwing some spells on a martial character. Why use that concentration unused? Maybe you want a cooler set of bonus actions or reactions? Sometimes you can build some very effective characters this way - or by taking a martial version of a casting class like a pact of the blade warlock and boosting it with fighter or rogue or whatever you want.

Personally I would say avoid caster/caster multiclass where more than 2 levels are invested in the secondary class. Avoid caster/martial multiclass with deep caster unless the caster is bringing the 2nd attack as well or the caster is just a dip.

[Man_Over_Game]

Mr Stabby has some good insight on this.

Personally, I've done a lot of work looking into multiclass relationships for my Prestige Options homebrew, and there's a lot of trends that you really want to pay attention to:


Because Martial Classes all rely on the universal Attack action, mixing and matching them is very hard to do incorrectly. You'll always be attacking, they add features that are applied when attacking, you'll always be using your new features. As long as you never have redundant features (like getting multiple Extra Attack features or being a Barbarian using Dexterity), it's almost impossible to multiclass poorly.
The power of a caster's spells are based on his individual class level, not his character level. Not only that, but the power difference from, say, a level 2 to a level 3 spell is drastic, as well as a level 8 spell to a level 9. As a caster, multiclassing into other classes means permanently having lower level than possible spells, or missing out on features that interact with those spells.
Short Rest Spell Slots are incredibly powerful for with low level spells that are effective at any level, like Absorb Elements and Shield. This ensures that the low level spell slots are always relevant, and can become a late game investment.
Sorcerer Metamagic can add a lot of power to late game spells without requiring much investment. As a result, they are a great late game investment.


See, it's all about being able to always use your new features WITH the old ones, not INSTEAD. A Rogue, for instance, can't cast spells and get Sneak Attack, and so mixing a Rogue with caster levels is generally considered a very poor idea (as you cannot be both a Rogue AND a caster at the same time).

You can multiclass casters, as long as you are making a long-term investment by doing so. A Warlock might benefit a lot from 2 levels into Sorcerer, despite getting weaker spell slots by doing so. The reverse is also true, as long as the Sorcerer has a plan for those low level spell slots (Hex, maybe, or for converting into Sorcery Points?). A Cleric dip might work for a caster to gain AC, as the AC will be relevant while you're still casting spells from your primary class.

[Ganders]

I think it's more an unintended consequence, which stems from the different ways that things scale up.

Monks already have a thing where their damage scales up -- their fists start at d4, then at a certain level it goes to d6, then eventually d8, and d10. It doesn't scale on overall level like cantrips, you have to get a certain level in monk to achieve that. Rogues also have something similar in how their backstab damage increases.

Now, imagine that all weapons worked this way, not just monk fists. Longswords do d4 damage until you get a class feature that says your longsword now does d6... then later d8, and at high level d10. This would discourage melees from multiclassing. If a triple-class melee had to put up with his longsword doing d4, while a single-classed got to do d8 with the same sword, we wouldn't be able to say that getting extra attack is the only important thing.


I believe the reason casters don't like to multiclass much is because their spells are basically set up this way. If they multiclass they miss out on the bumps in power that they're expected to get. Basically, a level 2 spell used in a level 4 slot is never nearly as powerful as a level 4 spell. That's if it scales at all -- many spells gain nothing from the higher slot.

This is in addition to the versatility gained. Spells can be rather black and white. With melee multiclassing there's a bit of a tradeoff with many things: sure you might do a little less damage in some situations but you make up for that with better AC or more diverse maneuvers -- it's a tradeoff more than a loss. But with spells it tends to be more straightforward -- ie there is no 'minor fly' spell, either you're able to fly or your not, no amount of casting level 1 and 2 spells into a level 3 slot can make up for that.

[Pex]

Because Martial Classes all rely on the universal Attack action, mixing and matching them is very hard to do incorrectly. You'll always be attacking, they add features that are applied when attacking, you'll always be using your new features. As long as you never have redundant features (like getting multiple Extra Attack features or being a Barbarian using Dexterity), it's almost impossible to multiclass poorly.


You may actually want both 6th level features from two martial classes. Double 5th level absolutely bites the big one, so it's a question of whether double 6th level is important enough to you. It's not always and forever a terrible thing to have double 6s despite the agony of double 5s.

[Man_Over_Game]

You may actually want both 6th level features from two martial classes. Double 5th level absolutely bites the big one, so it's a question of whether double 6th level is important enough to you. It's not always and forever a terrible thing to have double 6s despite the agony of double 5s.

Someone somewhere came up with the idea that redundant Extra Attacks gave you a +1 stat bonus, which is a really sleek solution to the problem.

[Pex]

I think it's more an unintended consequence, which stems from the different ways that things scale up.

Monks already have a thing where their damage scales up -- their fists start at d4, then at a certain level it goes to d6, then eventually d8, and d10. It doesn't scale on overall level like cantrips, you have to get a certain level in monk to achieve that. Rogues also have something similar in how their backstab damage increases.

Now, imagine that all weapons worked this way, not just monk fists. Longswords do d4 damage until you get a class feature that says your longsword now does d6... then later d8, and at high level d10. This would discourage melees from multiclassing. If a triple-class melee had to put up with his longsword doing d4, while a single-classed got to do d8 with the same sword, we wouldn't be able to say that getting extra attack is the only important thing.


I believe the reason casters don't like to multiclass much is because their spells are basically set up this way. If they multiclass they miss out on the bumps in power that they're expected to get. Basically, a level 2 spell used in a level 4 slot is never nearly as powerful as a level 4 spell. That's if it scales at all -- many spells gain nothing from the higher slot.

This is in addition to the versatility gained. Spells can be rather black and white. With melee multiclassing there's a bit of a tradeoff with many things: sure you might do a little less damage in some situations but you make up for that with better AC or more diverse maneuvers -- it's a tradeoff more than a loss. But with spells it tends to be more straightforward -- ie there is no 'minor fly' spell, either you're able to fly or your not, no amount of casting level 1 and 2 spells into a level 3 slot can make up for that.

But the high level spells may not be important for a player. They're cool to have, but a player might have enough fun with the lower level spells. Warrior/Spellcaster means the spells augment the warrior. Spellcaster/Spellcaster means the player craves the utility. It's good some spells scale. They may not be as powerful as a natural spell of the level, but they're decent enough for the player. A cleric/wizard for example might be thrilled to be able to Bless the entire party then Fireball his enemies and care not a whit he'll never cast Blade Barrier or Forcecage.

[Chronos]

One of the clerics in my group, when he casts a spell, it's almost always either Guiding Bolt or Spirit Guardians, from whatever slot matches the power level he's willing to spend in any given combat, plus occasionally a Healing Words, Spiritual Weapon, or Sacred Flame. All he'd have lost by multiclassing after 5th would be the occasional Control Water (a running joke in our group, after one supposed-to-be-difficult encounter that we totally crushed with use of that spell).

[OverLordOcelot]

IMO a big part of this is that most campaigns take place in T1 and T2. In tier 1, people generally aren't multiclassing martial characters because they want to get to level 5 for extra attack. In lower tier 2, all kinds of multiclassing works great because classes are pretty front-loaded. You get a whole lot of neat features layered on top of each other, and can pretty much jumble stuff together to find something that works. In higher tier 2 and tier 3, a lot of multiclass combos start to have significant weaknesses - your multiclassing cost you things like a third attack, Indominable (legendary save), additional fighting style, more sneak attack dice (+3d6/round), reliable talent, relentless criticals (extra dice), improved divine smite (+d8 on all attacks), Aura of Courage (immune to fear), Volley (attack any creature within 10' of a point), Stalker's Fury (third attack if you miss one attack), and the like. And as you go higher, you just get some of the lower abilities, not the higher ones. On the flip side, the main weakness of multiclassing spell casters starts to come up at level 3 and especially hits at 5, when they get delayed on getting their higher level spells (and possibly slots). (Most Tier 4 builds posted are purely theoretical and are just to list a bunch of neat stuff).

So I think that a lot of martial multiclassing is actually weaker than people think, but the weakness doesn't show in the levels that people play the most at. By the time your archer might wish he was all fighter or all ranger, you're wrapping up the campaign and rolling new characters. And if you're not, judging by comments online a lot of people turn to very free-form games where they're not engaging in multiple significant combats per rest, which means these weaknesses don't really get tested. I think that if people were playing more stuff at levels 9-15, you'd see martial multiclassing treated more like caster multiclassing, because you'd start to find your characters weak.