Discuss multiclassing spellcasting rule

[kiwi5ucker]

So my least favorite rule for multiclassing is the rule that makes it so that you can only choose spells that a character of your level in that particular class could choose, so if youre a wizard 4/sorcerer 4, youd just have a lot of 2nd level spells making you effectively useless to a level 8 party. I understand why it is a rule, because they want to stop people from taking a single level in cleric and then getting all the best cleric spells, or taking a wizard dip and copying all your sorcerer spells into your spellbook, but to be honest I think that this rule is just limiting cool character combinations from being viable. This rule hinders a lot of full spellcaster combinations really badly, making combos like bard/sorcerer and cleric/druid just terrible beyond 1 or 2 lvl dips. As a DM I am thinking about getting rid of this rule for my players so they have a little more freedom, since almost all the players at my table like multiclassing and are good at not metagaming and using it to just make more fun characters. (One of my players is a celestial warlock, rogue mastermind multiclass gunslinger its really sick). Are there any exploits that this rule prevents that I am missing? I know it will make sorcadrings a little stronger, but if anything its giving them more of a reason to cast spells and smite less, so in my opionion that is an upside. One of my compromise rules was that you learn half the amount of spells you normally would (rounded up) once you had a second class. What do you guys think?

[ChildofLuthic]

I honestly like that it sort of encourages you to pick a "main" class to focus on. If you've got a group that doesn't optimize, then you're not going to have any problems with people taking advantage of the rule, but I would solve this problem by just encouraging the players to focus on one class and use either dips or subclasses to get that flavor they want. But like, if your players aren't going to try to break anything, then you should be fine.

[PhantomSoul]

I absolutely love that you prepare/know spells based only on that class. Getting spell slots based on combined spellcaster levels is good, but getting to steal spells of any level you can cast would devalue non-multiclassed spellcasters massively. Wizards, for instance, don't get that many features -- why would they, when their spells are the main feature? And non-full caster classes being in the mix just means a Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 8 is getting Paladins' end-game spells and more slots... at level 10. And without even using Magical Secrets.

[kiwi5ucker]

I absolutely love that you prepare/know spells based only on that class. Getting spell slots based on combined spellcaster levels is good, but getting to steal spells of any level you can cast would devalue non-multiclassed spellcasters massively. Wizards, for instance, don't get that many features -- why would they, when their spells are the main feature? And non-full caster classes being in the mix just means a Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 8 is getting Paladins' end-game spells and more slots... at level 10. And without even using Magical Secrets.

I feel like it is really strong to get high level paladin spells that early in the game but also if you used the rule i proposed where you can only prepare half your spells if you have 2 classes, then you'd only have 2 paladin spells in all and youd loose half your sorcerer spells. you'd loose almost all your versatility, and you would be behind ability wise normal characters. I think being able to prepare only half the spells balances it out really really well. being a full wizard would still be the best way to have the most spells, and multiclassing a wizard youd gain spells from other classses but loose being able to prepare half your spells. I think it works

[Man_Over_Game]

I think the problem is only a problem because upcasting is so, so bad.

If you fix the upcasting scaling, you fix a lot of problems. I think they added it in there as a means of bridging the gap, and allow them to go kinda overboard on higher level spells, but the bridge is...well, nonexistant. Besides something like Spiritual Weapon or Hex (who are only notable because they don't interfere with you doing OTHER things), I can't think of almost any scenario where upcasting is a remotely good idea.

[Galithar]

I think the problem is only a problem because upcasting is so, so bad.

If you fix the upcasting scaling, you fix a lot of problems. I think they added it in there as a means of bridging the gap, and allow them to go kinda overboard on higher level spells, but the bridge is...well, nonexistant. Besides something like Spiritual Weapon or Hex (who are only notable because they don't interfere with you doing OTHER things), I can't think of almost any scenario where upcasting is a remotely good idea.

It's good on any repeating damage spell (Shadow Blade or as you pointed out Spiritual Weapon), the extend or remove concentration spells, and on the 'target more creatures' spells. It's NOT good on instantaneous damage spells. I'd guess maybe 10% of spells or less are good candidates for upcassting though. (Completely made up number I've done no research on that)