PC "multiclassing" through items

[EggKookoo]

Every now and then a thread appears where folks debate the merits of multiclassing. One common support for multiclassing is that it's a great way to realize a particular character concept that can't be done with a single class. It got me wondering (because I do this) -- how often do DMs address out-of-class concepts by providing tailor-made magic items? I mean not just dropping a random item on the party, but selecting or designing something specifically to replicate one or more features of an existing class.

For example if a player wanted a fighter that could also heal allies, but didn't want to go the paladin or cleric route, their DM might have them find perhaps an amulet or ring or something that lets them cast cure wounds a certain number of times per rest. Or maybe mimics the paladin's Lay On Hands feature.

I mean it seems like a simple thing, and maybe it happens a lot out in the wild, but I seldom see it come up as a customization option in most of these conversations.

[sithlordnergal]

Well, I can't talk for other DMs, but I just allow multiclassing, I've never really thought about giving players class abilities through items. Its a curious idea for sure, and something you might wanna play with, but its also something I'd be wary of.

[Seclora]

I'd second just allowing multi-classing. It's nowhere near as powergamey as it was in 3.p, and with a few specific exceptions, doesn't really make a character unbalanced.


This said, gloves that let you lay on hands or a ring of evasion are both entirely viable as items, albeit fairly strong ones. A wand of Cure Wounds could easily let a good fighter heal a little, and you could always remove class requirements from existing items. Honestly, bringing back Use Magic Device as a skill would probably open up a lot of options.

[MikeRoxTheBoat]

I haven't had anyone specifically go the item route in game. Usually if items are tailor made, it tends to accentuate abilities and characteristics already present in someone's build.

I did have a DM that expanded the feat system to allow you to take the low level abilities of different classes as a feat. For instance, my Moon Druid was more of a nature wizard then anything else and tackled being a druid the same way a wizard did. I struggled trying to decide if multiclassing a level or two in wizard was worthwhile for the concept. Instead, I took ritual caster and for my next feat, the DM allowed me to take the War Wizard's arcane deflection. The combination made me feel like a wizard despite being completely different.

Might lead to some broken combinations, but the cost of a feat balances out somewhat. Could also stop warlock dips if you could just grab the charisma weapon ability from hexblades as a feat.

[Bjarkmundur]

Guilty as charge. Not currently, but I did a LOT of this in 4e.

[BoringInfoGuy]

I'd second just allowing multi-classing. It's nowhere near as powergamey as it was in 3.p, and with a few specific exceptions, doesn't really make a character unbalanced.


This said, gloves that let you lay on hands or a ring of evasion are both entirely viable as items, albeit fairly strong ones. A wand of Cure Wounds could easily let a good fighter heal a little, and you could always remove class requirements from existing items. Honestly, bringing back Use Magic Device as a skill would probably open up a lot of options.

There is a Staff of Healing in the DMG, but it can only be attuned by a Bard, Cleric, or Druid. Classes that naturally have access to healing magic.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I do my best when designing magic items to avoid replicating class features especially if it's a class feature from a class that is being played in that game.

Feats and Multiclassing do a good job in enabling Fighter Bob to help out Cleric Dave in healing. Fighter Bob can either dip a level in Cleric, sacrificing his Fighter progression for Cure Wounds/Healing Word and a level of Life Cleric or he can take Healer with one of his extra ASI's. I won't outright dismiss the idea if Fighter Bob wants a Wand of Cure Wounds but it's not going to be something I'd hand to him just at the request.

I'll also echo one of the posters above, If I'm designing a custom magic item the intention behind it is going to be accentuating an existing feature of the character or giving them a cool toy that they wouldn't be able to gain in another way.

[EggKookoo]

I think the reason the idea appeals to me is that it can be more easily contextualized in the narrative than can multiclassing. But I run my games where the PCs aren't aware of their own classes as classes (and certainly not levels), so it makes some sense that a character can't say (or even think) "today I want to take a level of cleric." Multiclassing within the narrative has always been kind of sticky. I mean maybe if it's presented as the player making the choice and the character just kind of realizes one day that he has an affinity for healing magic, or something along those lines.

Whereas with items, at least the character themselves can be aware of how they acquired the new functionality. Then it's just a way for me as the DM to make the item feel earned, which isn't so hard. And I can design limited functionality into the items as a kind of guard against accidentally overpowering the character. I mean it's not the end of the world if the item gets lost or destroyed. There are always more, and possibly better balanced.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I think the reason the idea appeals to me is that it can be more easily contextualized in the narrative than can multiclassing. But I run my games where the PCs aren't aware of their own classes as classes (and certainly not levels), so it makes some sense that a character can't say (or even think) "today I want to take a level of cleric." Multiclassing within the narrative has always been kind of sticky. I mean maybe if it's presented as the player making the choice and the character just kind of realizes one day that he has an affinity for healing magic, or something along those lines.

That doesn't have to be the case. When I began playing my Rogue in Dragon Heist, I made a point from the very start to say that he was very religious and made regular trips to the spires of the morning. He didn't take a level in cleric until around 7th level.

It's something you should bring up with the players at session 0, if you want for them to have narrative reason to multiclass the solution is to tell them that and have them work it out. In my example above, it could be as simple as Fighter Bob spending time with Cleric Dave in his early morning rituals, he grows to respect Dave's dedication and also believes that Dave's god is pretty rad. After a while of spending this time with Dave, Bob has an epiphany and through his newfound dedication to the aforementioned God is granted a small gift of divine power which could potentially be fostered into something greater. A bit of a tangent, Cleric is a really easy multiclass to rationalize from the DM seat. You are the Gods and the Gods choose their clerics, not the other way around.

I guess I don't really agree, in general multiclassing isn't that difficult to work into the narrative.

[EggKookoo]

If the player is up for mapping it out at session 0, it's not too bad. I don't get multiclassing requests often, and in fact the last time I dealt with it in practice was back in the 2e days when I dual-classed my fighter (into a cleric, as it happens, after a near-death experience and being saved through divine power). But dual-classing in 2e was much more of a sacrifice, and even then my DM ultimately decided against it. The campaign ended not too long afterward so I never really worked out what happened to him.

I'm not trying to argue against multiclassing. I was mainly curious how people managed magic items and if they did so to broaden character functionality.

[Chronos]

If classes don't exist within the narrative, then multiclassing presents exactly zero narrative difficulty. Dave the Fighter isn't going from a Fighter 6 to a Fighter 6/Cleric 1; he's going from being a Dave 6 to a Dave 7.

[EggKookoo]

If classes don't exist within the narrative, then multiclassing presents exactly zero narrative difficulty. Dave the Fighter isn't going from a Fighter 6 to a Fighter 6/Cleric 1; he's going from being a Dave 6 to a Dave 7.

You still have to drive it from something happening within the narrative. Dave has spent the past year or so swinging a sword around. Suddenly he can heal peoples' injuries with a wave of his hand. How did that happen?

If Dave gaining a level of cleric is driven by Dave's player up and deciding they want Dave to now have some clerical powers, that's going to happen "suddenly" in the narrative, not necessarily with any context or justification. Which could also be okay -- Dave wakes up one day and realizes he has these new abilities. But then it should be handled as such in the narrative moving forward (Dave might be driven to discover why, for example). But more likely it's just handwaved because all the players know what happened and who cares anyway? Where's the next dungeon?

If Dave gaining a level of cleric was planned from his creation (i.e. Dave's player mapped out his mutliclassing route from the start), his player and the DM can build up to that in the narrative. Such as making Dave something of a "cleric lite" from 1st level.

Either way, the narrative is impacted. At least to the degree that the players care about the narrative at all.

[Spiritchaser]

I would caution that any item with strong class features attached to it is likely to lead to considerably more power gaming than multi-classing will.

The only exceptions I make in my campaigns are for a few specific items, presented as “gifts” by potential warlock patrons... which grant the user appropriate invocations... but these always have strings attached...

Back to MC: With a very small handful of exceptions, multiclass characters give up about as much as they gain. It’s not perfectly balanced but it’s good enough for a tabletop game with a GM.

It’ll be quite interesting to see how Baldur’s gate 3 handles things.