For People that Only Play Multiclassed for Min/Max Power

[dmhelp]

Edited post: So I took from all this discussion that multiclassing kicks in at Tier 3-4 and is primarily used as a way to buff your non caster (aside from a splash on a caster which often weakens them until poor capstones come into play at 18+ when picking up action surge is always better). I would like to level the differences slightly between a single and multiclassed at Tier 1-2 (making multiclassing easier) and at Tier 3-4 (slight buff to single classed) without rewriting the whole level 11+ single classed progression.

I don't want to make it so people don't multiclass. The preference would be that you make characters of both kinds and all of the single classed characters are not wizards.

Multiclassed Tier 1-2 Buff
Two classed characters that would eventually gain Extra Attack gain it based on character level instead of class level if both classes are no more than 1 level apart (e.g. Sor 3/Bladesinger 3 would gain Extra Attack including the cantrip as an attack ability), but this benefit is lost if you level out of the balanced split (this allows easy "no thought" alternating level progression up to level 9-11 when you permanently get Extra Attack)

Single Classed Tier 3-4 Buffs (benefit is lost if you gain an additional class; this is to help balance single vs optimized multiclass power)
Level 14 single classed non casters may choose a second subclass and gain the first tier power(s) (or with DM approval perhaps a different tier power), but Spellcasting cannot be gained in this manner (e.g. a Berserker could pick Zealot, gaining Divine Fury & Warrior of the Gods)
Level 14 single classed Paladins' Divine Smite does an additional 1d8 base damage (e.g. a 1st level slot does 3d8 and 3rd-5th level slots do 5d8)
Level 14 single classed Rangers no longer require concentration with hunter's mark
Level 20 single classed full casters & Warlocks (in general the capstones are subpar) gain a level 8 spell slot once per long rest (Warlocks may use this to cast any of their known spells or 6th-8th level Mystic Arcanums)

[Frogreaver]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice

There's no one size fits all approach. Different combinations provide different power levels at different levels. I would suggest that multiclassing for sheer power only really has a chance for completely paying off in tier 3+. So if I wanted to do something I would do something there.

I think doing anything like an ASi at 6th is too much. Something small at 7th might be okay. Then a bigger boost at maybe 15th.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I'm not sure if the "pure power" multiclasser exists. Though I'm generally an optimizer and will make my concept as strong as possible. For most builds an ASI would be enough that combined with the unspoken message that the DM is anti-multiclassing. For other builds though I wouldn't be satisfied by anything short of replicating the utility of a multiclass is get the subclass ability I would have been dipping for like the hexblade. Though again a small bonus to single class characters would probably be enough to make me wary of your anti-multiclads bias and play a different build or not play at your table.

[NecessaryWeevil]

If I'm multiclassing, it's not with the generic goal of being "powerful." Generally one multiclasses to be good at something in particular, or a combination of somethings, that single classes can't provide. So a universal list of generic benefits is unlikely to convince me to stay single-classed unless it happens to contain the specific thing I'm looking for.

[DeAnno]

The principle issue is some single classes are just kind of bad past the early levels. A proper fix involves identifying those specific classes and buffing their later levels holistically, to let them compete with the frontloaded packages available from starting other classes.

Full casters don't need any singleclassing help. All other classes, including Warlock, seem to universally be in serious trouble to me by level 7, so I think a good start is to add an ASI/feat at that level. Level 6 in particular is strong for Paladins which is why I hesitate to hand the bonus out then, if you're trying to keep things simple. This bad stretch consistently goes through level 9-10 or so, so it'd be nice to hand out SOMETHING for level 9 as well, maybe a Skill proficiency or two. Even give them an Expertise, just to make them feel special and loved.

After the 7-9 desert a lot of these classes actually improve a bit; you usually get a level 11 ability and something decent around 13-15 as well. I think I might delay the second bonus ASI all the way until level 17 because of this, to help fight the 9th level spell powerspike. And maybe yet another ASI at level 20, to discourage dipping 3 levels at the very end because that is often quite good too.

Note that I'm doing this with a view to not picking too many nits and keeping it as a simple rule.

Summary: Add to Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlock:
7: One bonus ASI
9: Two bonus skill proficiencies (any skill or tool set) + One skill expertise (must be a class skill)
17: One bonus ASI (maybe deny Warlock this one if you want to pick nits)
20: One bonus ASI

[clash]

I think a lot of multiclassing is to realize a character concept that can't be realized otherwise. When it is just for min maxing power I would say look at each class for dead or weak levels. The paladin for example I have a really hard time multiclassing because it has strong features every level. The ranger on the other hand has a weak level 1 which hurts but then he has a few weak levels between 5 and 11 which makes you want to multiclass out. The barbarian doesn't scale well either after extra attack. Brutal critical is too unreliable to do much and only be utilizes by increasing crit range

[Edea]

I'd like to try removing the current multiclass rules, and maybe replace them with 'multiclass [feat] trees' that would gradually unlock more and more features for a character via spending ASIs on them (specifically ASIs; a VHuman would not get this any faster). Said trees would hopefully be curated so that 'problematic' combinations were less likely to show up.

You wouldn't be able to get features from these trees out-of-sequence, and you'd need the required minimum stat to even get the first ability from a given tree. Also, you would never see archetype abilities on these trees; they would only involve features/etc. from the base class chassis.

It would be preferable to substitute archetypes for multiclassing, but the levels at which classes receive their archetype features are not standardized the way ASIs are, making that idea a huge mess. Fighters and Rogues do have a slightly easier time doing this, but I find that to be a feature rather than an issue, NGL.

[Amnestic]

I think there's no one answer as it depends on (sub)class. There were a few recent threads about What capstones are worth taking? here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?616942-Rank-the-level-20-feats)and here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?618028-Which-classes-aren-t-worthwhile-to-take-to-level-20)

It's not just capstones though, since a lot of games don't hit 20, so questions like What (sub)classes are worthwhile to take to 15? and Which (sub)classes are worthwhile to take to 10? is a worthy ask too. If you know for example that your game is going to go from roughly 5-10, and your class gets very little of interest from level 9+10, then a dip in something else - get yourself some expertise or skills from rogue, or some domain stuff from cleric, or Eldritch Blast because warlock dips forever - makes a lot of sense.

I don't think there's a simple fix, accommodating all of the classes and sublasses.

That said, giving some classes a boost post 10+ to help fill some of the 'drought' in between 10 and 20 might not go amiss, but realistically if you're trying to counter dips specifically then you'll need something every level or every 2 levels.

[Nhorianscum]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice

When it's stronger than a multi, which comes up quite often. As a base pair of restrictions...

Almost no multiclass options are actually stronger than full progression before tier 3. None of the really "popular" multi's are actually stronger in tier 2.

Only very specific multiclass options are stronger in tier 1 or 4 than the base class.

[Benny89]

The paladin for example I have a really hard time multiclassing because it has strong features every level.

What? Paladins are NOTORIOUS for one of the most OP builds in 5e. Sorcadins (6 Pala/14 Sorc or 1 Hex/6 Pala/13 Sorc) are walking min-max power surges. Paladin 6/14 Hexblades or just 2 levels Paladin dips for Sword Bards, Battle Smiths etc. are great to greatly boost their melee damage for just 2 levels.

Paladins are very easy to MC, as after level 6 when they get Aura - they don't get that much vs min-maxed multiclassing. Not saying mono-paladin is weak. Not at all. But it's still super easy to multiclass it into almost unkillable smite machine.

[DrLoveMonkey]

I think there's no one answer as it depends on (sub)class. There were a few recent threads about What capstones are worth taking? here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?616942-Rank-the-level-20-feats)and here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?618028-Which-classes-aren-t-worthwhile-to-take-to-level-20)

It's not just capstones though, since a lot of games don't hit 20, so questions like What (sub)classes are worthwhile to take to 15? and Which (sub)classes are worthwhile to take to 10? is a worthy ask too. If you know for example that your game is going to go from roughly 5-10, and your class gets very little of interest from level 9+10, then a dip in something else - get yourself some expertise or skills from rogue, or some domain stuff from cleric, or Eldritch Blast because warlock dips forever - makes a lot of sense.

I don't think there's a simple fix, accommodating all of the classes and sublasses.

That said, giving some classes a boost post 10+ to help fill some of the 'drought' in between 10 and 20 might not go amiss, but realistically if you're trying to counter dips specifically then you'll need something every level or every 2 levels.

Pretty sure this is the right way to go about it. There’s a ton of classes out there that have tier 3-4 class abilities that are totally underwhelming compared to level 1-3 abilities in another class. Like Feral Senses or Foe Slayer for Ranger, or Elusive or Blindsight for Rogue. Or just kind of redundant like a warlock’s 8th invocation.

A ranger’s capstone shouldn’t be to add like +2 damage against your favoured enemies once per turn. It should be like, double your ability bonus to attack and damage rolls against favoured enemies or something like that.

[Gtdead]

I would trade multiclass for gestalt :p . Some multiclasses feel like distinct classes, especially the ones that don't have to break the progression for a couple of levels. However most of the multiclassed builds usually trade progression for some late tier specialization, which may or may not worth it (tbh most of the time it doesn't).

[Sigreid]

My experience is that the people who really, really like to multi-class often look like they're doing it just for the power but what they really enjoy is the minigame of seeing how abilities interact. What I'm saying is that there isn't a carrot that can be offered that will make up for taking that game away from them.

[clash]

What? Paladins are NOTORIOUS for one of the most OP builds in 5e. Sorcadins (6 Pala/14 Sorc or 1 Hex/6 Pala/13 Sorc) are walking min-max power surges. Paladin 6/14 Hexblades or just 2 levels Paladin dips for Sword Bards, Battle Smiths etc. are great to greatly boost their melee damage for just 2 levels.

Paladins are very easy to MC, as after level 6 when they get Aura - they don't get that much vs min-maxed multiclassing. Not saying mono-paladin is weak. Not at all. But it's still super easy to multiclass it into almost unkillable smite machine.

Level 7 is another aura ability. Ancients, devotion and conquest are all great. 8 is another asi which is hard to pass up. 9 gives iconic third level spells. 10 is a situational aura but 11 gives improved divine smite. 12 is another asi. I really wouldn't want to multiclass before 12 and I haven't played games further than that in 5e.

[Duff]

If you want to make multiclassing never be a power move, you need to add more power to higher levels (and maybe reduce early power). So you could delay some powers by a level or 2.
For best effect, you'd do this on a class by class basis, but a general "Level level 1 is just hitpoints, skills and spells, all other abilities are moved up one level" might work.
If you wanted low level characters to still have about the same power level, you could introduce class independent bonuses like maybe "starting characters get an ASI and an extra feat"
I'm not sure that the specifics would work for balance, more just using the example to illustrate the idea.

If you want a well chosen multiclass to be part of a well balanced breakfast build, but not more powerful, then you'd really need to rework each class and take into account how your games differ to others (longer/shorter days, lots of little enemies or few big ones, dungeon bashing or wide open spaces etc)

[Jerrykhor]

In general, having non-terrible features past level 5 for martials would deter multi-classing. IMO there should not be ribbons as the only feature for that level. Going from 14 to 15 as a monk is just so lame. Full casters get 8th level spells, most classes get a subclass feature, but monks... get a lame ass feature.

There should be some power gain when leveling up, because the monsters you face will most likely be stronger. If you don't get stronger, then you are essentially weaker.

[Dudu]

What draws me to multiclassing is to have some speck of build diversity in an edition that is otherwise starved of it.

That said, multiclass can be quite the trap for naive players. I'd say pretty much every single class character with the right stats work very well, but only a fraction of the multiclass options don't completely shot thenselves in the foot.

[Meichrob7]

I mean short answer is nothing.

When I’m MinMaxing with multiclassing my main goal is to maximize synergistic features, and less to get the highest raw numbers.

Anything that’d be powerful enough for me to be okay with losing all those cool extra features would be too powerful for the game to be balanced and then it’d just be ruined for everyone.

So there’s not really any overlapping point where I’d be okay with giving up my multiclassing and wouldn’t be game breakingly broken.

That does of course only apply to character where a central part of what I want to do comes from the multiclassing features.

For short dips for things like Archery fighting style id probably be fine with +2 stat and +2 to the star’s cap instead. So just a single bonus ASI.

[CTurbo]

I think the biggest problem is that most classes are front loaded, and most classes need to give more on the back end. Especially martials.

I think the "fix" is not to give so much early on, and give more and MORE on later levels. Also pretty much everything should be based strictly off of class levels and not character levels.

You're always going to have your powergamers that insist on every build having a level of Hexblade and how dare you consider Paladin without a Hexblade dip OMG lol.

I think the Paladin IS the best/strongest single class overall and I personally do see great things at pretty much every level and I DO think Paladin 20 is better/stronger than Hexblade 1/Paladin 19. But at the same time I also agree that most of the strongest most OP min-maxed builds are when you combine some Paladin with the other Cha casters.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

The best thing about multiclass is flexibility to create what you want.

Everyone of your suggestions may apply to different things.

[Copper_Dragon]

My experience is that the people who really, really like to multi-class often look like they're doing it just for the power but what they really enjoy is the minigame of seeing how abilities interact. What I'm saying is that there isn't a carrot that can be offered that will make up for taking that game away from them.

This, and also the comment about build diversity.

I wouldn't play in a game that banned multiclassing. I might reconsider if the UA feats that allow you to dip into another class's features were allowed. Hopefully those will see a Tasha's printing.

[Xervous]

If/when I’m multiclassing it’s for squeezing out power in a efficient manner to meet the expected op level for the party and leave me with lots of resources for interacting with the world and realizing the character concept. I find the aversion to multiclassing to be a bandaid approach for muzzling problem players rather than addressing the behavior in question. As a player I’d like to have a smooth play experience where the expectations set in session 0 hold for the campaign, truth in advertising, transparency etc.

[Amnestic]

When it's stronger than a multi, which comes up quite often. As a base pair of restrictions...

Almost no multiclass options are actually stronger than full progression before tier 3. None of the really "popular" multi's are actually stronger in tier 2.

Only very specific multiclass options are stronger in tier 1 or 4 than the base class.

So this has actually come up for me. One of my games we started at level 6 and are expected to reach 9, per the DM's expectations.

I'm playing a Shadow Monk, but for 7-9 I'm MCing into rogue.

To compare the two, features of straight monk 7-9:
An extra 3 ki / short rest
A buff to unarmoured movement allowing me to run on water/ceilings
Evasion
Stillness of Mind
An ASI.

Going into rogue 3 (Arcane Trickster) gives:
2d6 sneak attack
One skill, thieves tools, and expertise in two skills.
Cunning Action
2 wizard cantrips+mage hand
Mage Hand Legedermain
3 arcane trickster spells known and access to wizard spell scrolls (allowing me to get a familiar without spending a spell known)

Even if the two are comparable (and, personally, I think the rogue MC still comes out on top), there's no way that Monk 8/Rogue 1 is worse than Monk 9 - 1 ki/SR and the unarmoured movement buff vs. a skill proficiency, thieves tool, expertise in two skills and 1d6 sneak attack? Monk 9 just comes up short.

If you did want to counter dips in tier 2+, classes would need to scale more power every level rather than ups and downs. Unarmoured Movement buff is basically a ribbon, especially for shadow monk who can teleport through shadows at will as a bonus action. There's no way it compares to what Rogue 1 gives you.

And I expect there's a few (sub)classes who see 9-10 as prime 'dip' time if they know their campaign's not going much further.

[Sol0botmate]

Level 7 is another aura ability. Ancients, devotion and conquest are all great. 8 is another asi which is hard to pass up. 9 gives iconic third level spells. 10 is a situational aura but 11 gives improved divine smite. 12 is another asi. I really wouldn't want to multiclass before 12 and I haven't played games further than that in 5e.

Conquest Aura is only good if you have Fear spell and that is level 11 for Paladin. Devotion is good aura, but charm is not something that comes in every encounter and chances for your players to always been 10ft for you is slim. If you are elf or half-elf with Paladin WIS and CHA saves + Aura + advantage vs charm - devotion aura is really no needed for you. Conquest also are not that good for Sorcadin builds. Vengeance, Devotion and Ancients are best candidates.

Ancients are the only paladins I would go for level 7 aura upgrade before multiclassing because it's soooo good.

To compare level 12 Paladin vs 6/6 Paladin/Divine Soul Sorcerer as Sorcadin you get by level 12:

1. Shield + Absorb Element spells
2. Shadow Blade spell + Haste + Fireball + Counterspell + Dispel Magic + Revivify to chose from
3. Spiritual Guardians + Spiritual Weapon, which is outstanding powerspike for Paladin
4. Booming Blade + GFB. Also Cantrips like Toll the Dead and Firebolt giving you range magic attacks when you don't have any as Paladin.
5. Meta Magic: Quicken and Twin. You can Quicken Booming Blade for your 3rd attack to Nova hard in combat or make OAs with Booming Blade + WarCaster + Smite for superb damage if anyone dare to away from you + your Spirit Guardians. You can Twin Haste on youself and your Fighter/Bard friend or later Subtle Counterspell someone or Extend Death Ward your team before long rest.
6. You get WAY more slots for smites. Level 12 Paladin has 4/3/3 slots only. Level 12 Sorcadin has 4/3/3/3/1 slots. Way more for casting + smitting.

Single-class Paladin as was mentioned is really strong but Sorcadins are OP for a reason.

[Neorealist]

None of those? Single-class characters are already balanced against multi-class ones by virtue of the comparatively earlier access to higher level abilities.

If anything multi-classing is mostly a trap in 5e; unless the synergies of the two or more choices are carefully taken into account.

[Nhorianscum]

So this has actually come up for me. One of my games we started at level 6 and are expected to reach 9, per the DM's expectations.

I'm playing a Shadow Monk, but for 7-9 I'm MCing into rogue.

To compare the two, features of straight monk 7-9:
An extra 3 ki / short rest
A buff to unarmoured movement allowing me to run on water/ceilings
Evasion
Stillness of Mind
An ASI.

Going into rogue 3 (Arcane Trickster) gives:
2d6 sneak attack
One skill, thieves tools, and expertise in two skills.
Cunning Action
2 wizard cantrips+mage hand
Mage Hand Legedermain
3 arcane trickster spells known and access to wizard spell scrolls (allowing me to get a familiar without spending a spell known)

Even if the two are comparable (and, personally, I think the rogue MC still comes out on top), there's no way that Monk 8/Rogue 1 is worse than Monk 9 - 1 ki/SR and the unarmoured movement buff vs. a skill proficiency, thieves tool, expertise in two skills and 1d6 sneak attack? Monk 9 just comes up short.

If you did want to counter dips in tier 2+, classes would need to scale more power every level rather than ups and downs. Unarmoured Movement buff is basically a ribbon, especially for shadow monk who can teleport through shadows at will as a bonus action. There's no way it compares to what Rogue 1 gives you.

And I expect there's a few (sub)classes who see 9-10 as prime 'dip' time if they know their campaign's not going much further.

To be fair, I totally forgot monks existed.

[Dienekes]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice

To reiterate in my own way what others are saying.

Most minmaxers I’ve played with have a goal: Do thing X amazingly. X might be biggest burst damage, best tanking ability, coolest list of at-will actions, or sometime to recreate what some character in their favorite piece of media can do.

They will then shop around classes and features to achieve their goal, and they enjoy the mastery of knowing that they can work within the system to accomplish their goal.

So how to make people want to single class? Make it so the option to become the best at whatever X they chose is available all within a single class. While also adding the depth of choice within each class to get that sense of mastery. If the way to be the greatest warrior in the game with the highest attack and damage and survivability was to be a straight Fighter and it did not even matter which subclass you picked. Well, you’ll be able to get the half who wanted to optimize thing X, but you’ll have failed the ones who enjoy system mastery.

The issue here is this demonstration of system mastery was purposefully toned down in 5e. Which is part of why most martial make no decisions in their build after choosing a subclass and feats, and most mages only really choose spells after a certain point.

For 5e multiclassing is the dominant way to show the system mastery to make some interesting builds and combinations.

So what would it take to make people not want to multiclassing? Honestly probably a complete rework of the class system to allow the greatest output of power to be single class focused. AND to have each class be filled with options and combinations for the players to discover and explore when planning out their build. Which is a far cry from what 5e currently is at.

[noob]

It is often really good when you are a caster to not multiclass until level 17 due to the highest level spell known progression being slowed down (but not the spell slot progression interestingly unless you take non full caster levels)
And since campaigns almost never reach level 17 it makes sense to be a single classed fullcaster for all your career.

[sithlordnergal]

I don't think any of those would work very well. If you're multiclassing purely for Min/Maxing, then you're trying to mix two separate classes in a way that no single class can replicate. For example, one of the more common multiclasses is the Fighter/Wizard. By starting as a Fighter you suddenly have access to a higher base HP, which is nice at low levels, better AC, better weapon options, proficiency in Con saves, and a quick 1d10 heal. Two levels of Fighter nets you Action Surge, so you can cast two leveled spells in one round every Short Rest. And that's just from starting as a Fighter.

In order to replicate that on a pure Wizard you would need:


Resilient: Constitution
Lightly Armored
Moderately Armored
Heavily Armored
Weapon Master



That is 5 separate feats worth of abilities just by starting as a Fighter. And even if you choose to start as a Wizard, you still gain the benefits of Lightly Armored, Moderately Armored, and an improved Weapon Master. And in order to get all of that, you exchange your 20th level ability, which isn't all that great in the first place cause you're a Wizard. Sure your Spell Casting will be just a bit behind, but you make up for it with the other class features and end up just being a better Wizard.

Same goes for the Soradin. Soradin and Paladin are actually really, really hard to compare. But the Sorcerer class brings SO much to the table that its ridiculous. You have stuff like Shield, which can let your AC skyrocket into the high 30's range, Absorb Elements to gain resistance against damage, reliable and decent ranged attacks, AoE, crowd control, ect.. None of what you suggested would really be able to replicate that.

[KorvinStarmast]

My experience is that the people who really, really like to multi-class often look like they're doing it just for the power but what they really enjoy is the minigame of seeing how abilities interact. What I'm saying is that there isn't a carrot that can be offered that will make up for taking that game away from them. Agreed, and I've seen the same.

As to the OP:
Offering an epic boon at level 12 (is this player choice?) for the 'stay single' path would certainly be attractive to me. But I'm also happy to play single class characters. (Granted, one of my favorite characters was a Monk 1 / Moon Druid X ... but that was never going to get to level 20).

[Foxhound438]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice

Important question: Do I lose the thing if I multiclass later? Those all sound like pretty sweet things to pick up at those levels, but most of my character ideas are monoclass until the very very end of level progression already. However, I don't think I would ever take Monk 20, Bard 20, sorcerer 20, or Warlock 20, unless the abilities therein were somehow totally reworked, or if going for a 1 level splash of rogue or something meant I lost stats from earlier.

As a suggestion for monk, if you made it so the basic KI abilites just didn't cost KI anymore at 20th, I might take that. Maybe if you increased the size of the monk damage die again, I would take that instead, but a boost from a d10 to a d12 is probably less good than 1d6 sneak attack and expertise in stealth, so it might need to have more damage than just a d12. Another, lazy but effective, option would be to just take the barbarian capstone and apply it to dex and wisdom instead.

In terms of play at reasonable levels, I don't typically multiclass since for most classes there's good progression at least up through level 5, and always something worthwhile in the next level or three from there on.

[Pex]

To reiterate in my own way what others are saying.

Most minmaxers I’ve played with have a goal: Do thing X amazingly. X might be biggest burst damage, best tanking ability, coolest list of at-will actions, or sometime to recreate what some character in their favorite piece of media can do.

They will then shop around classes and features to achieve their goal, and they enjoy the mastery of knowing that they can work within the system to accomplish their goal.

So how to make people want to single class? Make it so the option to become the best at whatever X they chose is available all within a single class. While also adding the depth of choice within each class to get that sense of mastery. If the way to be the greatest warrior in the game with the highest attack and damage and survivability was to be a straight Fighter and it did not even matter which subclass you picked. Well, you’ll be able to get the half who wanted to optimize thing X, but you’ll have failed the ones who enjoy system mastery.

The issue here is this demonstration of system mastery was purposefully toned down in 5e. Which is part of why most martial make no decisions in their build after choosing a subclass and feats, and most mages only really choose spells after a certain point.

For 5e multiclassing is the dominant way to show the system mastery to make some interesting builds and combinations.

So what would it take to make people not want to multiclassing? Honestly probably a complete rework of the class system to allow the greatest output of power to be single class focused. AND to have each class be filled with options and combinations for the players to discover and explore when planning out their build. Which is a far cry from what 5e currently is at.

Interesting point of view. To extrapolate, it's like saying some people who multiclass enjoy complexity and create their own where 5E lacks. I'm not saying 5E lacking complexity is bad, rather these players prefer more. They want to have to make decisions on class ability choices. Maybe not for the same reason, but a complaint about Battle Master is when they get more maneuvers at higher level it's only for the options they never wanted at level three. Give classes worthy decisions of ability options at the higher levels, and you'll have more players wanting to get those levels to make the decision. "If you build it they will come."

[Dienekes]

Interesting point of view. To extrapolate, it's like saying some people who multiclass enjoy complexity and create their own where 5E lacks. I'm not saying 5E lacking complexity is bad, rather these players prefer more. They want to have to make decisions on class ability choices. Maybe not for the same reason, but a complaint about Battle Master is when they get more maneuvers at higher level it's only for the options they never wanted at level three. Give classes worthy decisions of ability options at the higher levels, and you'll have more players wanting to get those levels to make the decision. "If you build it they will come."

I'd agree, but I think there is one more step here.

It's not just the making of choices, though that is important. It's the making of choices that allow the player to show system mastery in terms of builds. Battlemaster as it currently functions is never going to show that level of system mastery that some of the more optimization focused players want. Because Battlemaster's maneuver really don't interact all that well together. They're each slotted into their own specific niche and it's the players prerogative to pick the best one for the job at hand. Which is a type of system mastery, but not in terms of build, more in terms of play. Which is a different -but related- subset of players.

But they will see an ability like Umbral Sight and immediately start figuring out how to get the most means of creating darkness around themselves to maximize that interaction. Because they've figured out that ability A + ability B is way better than either used separately.

Of course there is also the group of people who play Battlemaster, get halfway through the class and realize they have all the maneuvers they want and so look to jump ship because of course they do. I may be one of them.

[cutlery]

I'd agree, but I think there is one more step here.

It's not just the making of choices, though that is important. It's the making of choices that allow the player to show system mastery in terms of builds

I think that's right.

In some ways, pondering a multiclass in 5e is more rewarding than it was in 3/3.5, because there are so few clear winners. In 3/3.5 every new book had some new busted prestige class, and the power differential was stark.

In 5e, that's less the case, even when pondering level 20 builds. When pondering a multiclass you'll be leveling up yourself it gets even harder.

No matter how strong a dip is, it will delay features. Maybe if you dip for eldritch blast and rely on that you'll be ok, but if, for example, you were building a fighter/warlock with the plan to wade into melee you can either (1) wade into melee at character level 5 (f3/w2) and get one attack while others get two, or you can (2) sit back and blast with eldritch blast, and feel non-thematic until character level 7 or 8 whenever you pick up extra attack. That's a long time to fight in a way counter to what you planned.

[Xervous]

Past a point in restricting customization it feels like a game presents prebuilt stat blocks. The allure of multiclassing can be in the feel that you are making something your own, distinct from the prefab, normalized masses.

[Pex]

I think that's right.

In some ways, pondering a multiclass in 5e is more rewarding than it was in 3/3.5, because there are so few clear winners. In 3/3.5 every new book had some new busted prestige class, and the power differential was stark.

In 5e, that's less the case, even when pondering level 20 builds. When pondering a multiclass you'll be leveling up yourself it gets even harder.

No matter how strong a dip is, it will delay features. Maybe if you dip for eldritch blast and rely on that you'll be ok, but if, for example, you were building a fighter/warlock with the plan to wade into melee you can either (1) wade into melee at character level 5 (f3/w2) and get one attack while others get two, or you can (2) sit back and blast with eldritch blast, and feel non-thematic until character level 7 or 8 whenever you pick up extra attack. That's a long time to fight in a way counter to what you planned.

That's why you play Variant Human to take Magic Initiate Feat for Booming Blade and/or Green Flame Blade to compensate. You will eventually get Extra Attack, but the rider effects of the spells can still come in handy. Then you want to find room for War Caster, such as fighter level 4, so you can cast them on opportunity attacks. The downside is being stuck at 16s in your primes for a long while. Some people might be willing to make that trade. Get warlock 3 for Blade Pact. At 8th level you're 5 fighter/3 warlock. 9th level fighter 6 for ASI. 10th level warlock 4 for ASI and you're at 18/18. 11th level fighter 7 for feature, 12th level fighter 8 for ASI or feat. 13th level warlock 5 for an invocation.

There's also the Hexblade game, so you only need worry about CH. You only need to play 1st level as Fighter attacking with 14 DX for the HP and Con save proficiency. Not worrying about ST medium armor and shield is fine.

[cutlery]

That's why you play Variant Human to take Magic Initiate Feat for Booming Blade and/or Green Flame Blade to compensate. You will eventually get Extra Attack, but the rider effects of the spells can still come in handy. Then you want to find room for War Caster, such as fighter level 4, so you can cast them on opportunity attacks. The downside is being stuck at 16s in your primes for a long while. Some people might be willing to make that trade. Get warlock 3 for Blade Pact. At 8th level you're 5 fighter/3 warlock. 9th level fighter 6 for ASI. 10th level warlock 4 for ASI and you're at 18/18. 11th level fighter 7 for feature, 12th level fighter 8 for ASI or feat. 13th level warlock 5 for an invocation.

There's also the Hexblade game, so you only need worry about CH. You only need to play 1st level as Fighter attacking with 14 DX for the HP and Con save proficiency. Not worrying about ST medium armor and shield is fine.

If you want a SCAGtrip, you can get one at warlock 1; no need to spend a feat on it. Instead, you could be using GWM with charisma at level 2 (assuming fighter at first for con and heavy armor).

The point is you may have a few levels where you lag. BB and GFB are nice, but 65% of 2d6+mod+1d8 is lackluster compared to 65% of 4d6+2*mod. Actually, probably only 1d10+mod+1d8, as you need warlock 3 for pact of the blade to use a greatsword, if planning on Charisma.

You catch up at character level 7 or so, but your spells are behind if you compare yourself to other casters (even other warlocks) and your melee holds it’s ground only until character level 11, less if your comparison is an eldritch Knight. You can pull ahead if you can manage regular advantage, but Moil won’t be available until character level 10. You’ll have some sup die to play with, though, when they are strongest, so that might tide you over.

Point is, even for a light dip, you can set yourself up to lag in the thing you thought you were building to be great at.

[Duff]

I think the biggest problem is that most classes are front loaded, and most classes need to give more on the back end. Especially martials.

I think the "fix" is not to give so much early on, and give more and MORE on later levels. Also pretty much everything should be based strictly off of class levels and not character levels.

You're always going to have your powergamers that insist on every build having a level of Hexblade and how dare you consider Paladin without a Hexblade dip OMG lol.

I think the Paladin IS the best/strongest single class overall and I personally do see great things at pretty much every level and I DO think Paladin 20 is better/stronger than Hexblade 1/Paladin 19. But at the same time I also agree that most of the strongest most OP min-maxed builds are when you combine some Paladin with the other Cha casters.

If you wanted to make classes feel less front loaded, you could spilt the first level (or 2 or 3) into more levels. Then say 1st level in a class is "1st year apprentice" type training. 1st level characters aren't usually fully grown, they're still in training etc.
A fully trained starting adventurer is then level 3 (or more or less - go with what works for your game)

Or

You pull some features of 1st level (or, again the first few) off each class and split them up.
Each character gets to choose an upbringing, and an early training before they have training in a class.
So maybe 1 level always gives d4 hitpoints. Martial family give +3 hitpoints, a skill, and a fighter's melee weapon skills. Apprentice warrior give another 3 hitpopints, another skill and a fighter's armour abilities. Finally, fighter school teaches the rest of the fighter package

[noob]

An alternative is spreading the class features of the first two levels in 5 levels and writing "if this class is the class you have the most levels in then you have all the class features that have been spread in the two first levels"
Or decide to give enough good class features after entry in all the classes that they stop being front-loaded.

[Pex]

If you want a SCAGtrip, you can get one at warlock 1; no need to spend a feat on it. Instead, you could be using GWM with charisma at level 2 (assuming fighter at first for con and heavy armor).

The point is you may have a few levels where you lag. BB and GFB are nice, but 65% of 2d6+mod+1d8 is lackluster compared to 65% of 4d6+2*mod. Actually, probably only 1d10+mod+1d8, as you need warlock 3 for pact of the blade to use a greatsword, if planning on Charisma.

You catch up at character level 7 or so, but your spells are behind if you compare yourself to other casters (even other warlocks) and your melee holds it’s ground only until character level 11, less if your comparison is an eldritch Knight. You can pull ahead if you can manage regular advantage, but Moil won’t be available until character level 10. You’ll have some sup die to play with, though, when they are strongest, so that might tide you over.

Point is, even for a light dip, you can set yourself up to lag in the thing you thought you were building to be great at.

You need Magic Initiate if you want Eldritch Blast and Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade. If you're happy not having one of the latter two, since the whole point is to have Agonizing Eldritch Blast, then you don't need the Feat. You're taking Booming Blade/Green Flame Blade to compensate not having Extra Attack. It doesn't have to be a perfect match. It's close enough. Extra Attack will come later, so this is good enough until then. You take War Caster so that Booming Blade doesn't become a waste since you can use it on Opportunity Attacks. Comparing yourself to spellcasters is irrelevant. You're a fighter/warlock multiclass. It's not your desire to be flinging spells everywhere. You're augmenting fighting with warlock stuff. You're a warrior with some magic, not a spellcaster.

It's your choice when you want Darkness to go with Devil's Sight. The example given was fighter 3/warlock 2. You can just as easily be fighter 2/warlock 3 if it's that important to you. Warlock 3 is plenty for a while to get to Fighter 6 for subclass, War Caster, Extra Attack, and an ASI then warlock 4 for your next ASI. Moil is nice but not a must have spell. If you only get it at 10th level one can be perfectly happy with that. You've been benefiting from Darkness/Devil's Sight for a while. A little bit longer is no big deal.

Personally I'm happy with sword and shield. I'll have advantage to attack in darkness. Dueling style for a bit of extra damage. I can throw in Hex if need be and/or Hexbade Curse if I go that route. I'm not hurting for damage. Others may prefer two-handed weapons for great weapon master or pole arm master, but that's another feat delaying getting 18s. It's a trade some people are willing to make without any regret. Not my preference but we're allowed to have different preferences.

[cutlery]

You need Magic Initiate if you want Eldritch Blast and Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade. If you're happy not having one of the latter two, since the whole point is to have Agonizing Eldritch Blast, then you don't need the Feat.


Sure, but you get another cantrip at warlock 4; possibly at 3 if you happen to pick tome.





You're taking Booming Blade/Green Flame Blade to compensate not having Extra Attack. It doesn't have to be a perfect match. It's close enough. Extra Attack will come later, so this is good enough until then.


If good enough is good enough, why spent an ASI just to have both BB and GFB a few levels early?




You take War Caster so that Booming Blade doesn't become a waste since you can use it on Opportunity Attacks.


At what, warlock 4? I'd take +cha then. War caster won't be until later unfortunately.



Comparing yourself to spellcasters is irrelevant. You're a fighter/warlock multiclass. It's not your desire to be flinging spells everywhere. You're augmenting fighting with warlock stuff. You're a warrior with some magic, not a spellcaster.


You have no choice but to compare your character to other characters in the same game; and your martial abilities and spell abilities will lag a bit. There isn't any escaping that.

That's the price for con saves much earlier and better AC and action surge. I think it can be worth the cost, but the cost is real.


As I originally said: No matter how strong a dip is, it will delay features.

Your spells will lag, even behind those of another bladelock. At some points, your melee capabilities will lag, too - you've made a trade.

[kingcheesepants]

I multiclass because there are certain things that I can do as a multiclass that can't be done as a single class. Right now I'm playing a wizard with a cleric dip, because I like having access to at least some basic healing and support that wizards can't normally access, I like being able to have a respectable AC and I like the extra skills and expertise I gained from my domain. I'd be happy to play a straight wizard but if I wanted to get all the stuff I missed from that 1 level in cleric as feats I would have to take; magic initiate cleric, expertise, skilled, lightly armored, medium armored. That's 5 feats, so to answer the question of what would make me go single class, 5 extra feats that I can pick up in 1 level.

[Witty Username]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice

Being a wizard is enough for me.

[noob]

I multiclass because there are certain things that I can do as a multiclass that can't be done as a single class. Right now I'm playing a wizard with a cleric dip, because I like having access to at least some basic healing and support that wizards can't normally access, I like being able to have a respectable AC and I like the extra skills and expertise I gained from my domain. I'd be happy to play a straight wizard but if I wanted to get all the stuff I missed from that 1 level in cleric as feats I would have to take; magic initiate cleric, expertise, skilled, lightly armored, medium armored. That's 5 feats, so to answer the question of what would make me go single class, 5 extra feats that I can pick up in 1 level.

But you spent a level and get to know your higher level wizard spells one level later.
Delaying your spell known progression is a significant cost.

[XmonkTad]

But you spent a level and get to know your higher level wizard spells one level later.
Delaying your spell known progression is a significant cost.
That's the point though. If there's enough of a cost that the choice becomes non-obvious then it's balanced.

[Pex]

Sure, but you get another cantrip at warlock 4; possibly at 3 if you happen to pick tome.


Sure, that's another way to do it.



If good enough is good enough, why spent an ASI just to have both BB and GFB a few levels early?

Player choice.





At what, warlock 4? I'd take +cha then. War caster won't be until later unfortunately.


But you get Extra Attack before your next ASI. Since you'll be using that instead of Booming Blade, War Caster keeps the Cantrip relevant to use on Opportunity Attacks.


You have no choice but to compare your character to other characters in the same game; and your martial abilities and spell abilities will lag a bit. There isn't any escaping that.

That's the price for con saves much earlier and better AC and action surge. I think it can be worth the cost, but the cost is real.


As I originally said: No matter how strong a dip is, it will delay features.

Yfur spells will lag, even behind those of another bladelock. At some points, your melee capabilities will lag, too - you've made a trade.

Only compare to yourself. Are you good enough? The power of spellcasters in comparison to warriors is its own thing that goes beyond the subject of multiclassing. Of course multiclassing delays class features, but for some people it's a price willing to be paid and many consider it profit since they don't care for the higher level abilities, even if for just this particular character they're multiclassing.

[noob]

That's the point though. If there's enough of a cost that the choice becomes non-obvious then it's balanced.

Multiclassing is rather well balanced between the paladin and the casters(you can want to only have levels in a single casting class or take dip in another casting class and if wanting to act like a paladin you can only take levels in paladin or mix varying amounts of paladin with a casting class(there is quite some choice) with multiple different tipping points(you can put more or less paladin levels in the mix and have a different character that is good in their own ways))
But there is many classes that are way less interesting after the initial progression and that due to that encourages multi-classing nearly all the time.
I think all the classes should grant cool class features or spells known at a steady rate when you progress in them and both casters and paladins are good at that but many other classes are not as much good for that.

[cutlery]

Only compare to yourself. Are you good enough?

If you don't pay attention to how other characters are performing at your table how would you know if you're pulling your weight?


Once you decide to take class progression into your own hands, you owe it to the rest of the table to not suck.

[Pex]

If you don't pay attention to how other characters are performing at your table how would you know if you're pulling your weight?


Once you decide to take class progression into your own hands, you owe it to the rest of the table to not suck.

Multiclassing fighter/warlock in the way described doesn't have you be The Suck.

[cutlery]

Multiclassing fighter/warlock in the way described doesn't have you be The Suck.

Because that's multiclassing done with an eye towards not sucking. And that's assessed by comparing performance to non-multiclassed characters.

On the other hand, I could have just as easily done fighter 4 -> warlock 1 -> bard 3 -> warlock 5.

If I didn't make any comparisons, I suppose I wouldn't notice I was basically doing only un-modified cantrip damage until level 13.

[Witty Username]

With more nuance, multiclassing for power is often not simply stronger than single class options. This is less true for the martial classes as they tend to be more front loaded. Late game abilities for the fighter, barbarian, and ranger on par with their early game abilities would mitigate this problem.
This is more and issue with individual classes then general fixes allow for.

[Pex]

Because that's multiclassing done with an eye towards not sucking. And that's assessed by comparing performance to non-multiclassed characters.

On the other hand, I could have just as easily done fighter 4 -> warlock 1 -> bard 3 -> warlock 5.

If I didn't make any comparisons, I suppose I wouldn't notice I was basically doing only un-modified cantrip damage until level 13.

Yes, but the idea here is about people who multiclass for power so it's a given they won't multiclass themselves into gimp.

[cutlery]

Yes, but the idea here is about people who multiclass for power so it's a given they won't multiclass themselves into gimp.

I have seen people think they were multiclassing for power and were weak until after level 11 because of it.

They didn't have an accurate sense of how important extra attack at level 5 is. They get that by comparing their conceptual build to pure class builds that fill similar roles, and what other players at the table are doing.

You can't tell if you have improved a thing without comparing your work to the thing; and how the table plays matters.

[cutlery]

But in the fighter/wizard example you do delay spell progression so there is a trade off.

There is nearly always a trade off.

The wizard dipping fighter after 17 is giving up signature spell, an ASI, and potentially spell mastery, and they miss out on a 6th and 7th level spell slot.

Infinite use of one reaction spell (selected at each long rest) or one bonus action spell is pretty darn strong. That could be infinite shields, and an extra disintegrate and simulacrum once per day, plus an ASI.

I don't think medium armor and action surge are worth giving that up. Plus, they are already wizards with access to 9th level spells.

[Gtdead]

But in the fighter/wizard example you do delay spell progression so there is a trade off. The idea is to just level the playing field slightly so the 2 fighter splash isn't a no brainer after wizard 17. I think 2 pal 18 bard is also pretty sweet since the spells aren't delayed as much as a sorcadin.

Ok, so what about either an epic boon or increasing an ability to 22 at level 11 (locking you into single classed)? We could repeat it at level 18 if needed.

I’d prefer a simple broad fix rather than a bunch of specific monk 18 gains x, monk 20 gains y, fighter 17 gains z, etc.

I kind of hinted at a broad fix in a previous post but I don't think you'd like it. 3 lvl gestalt.
For the first 3 levels, all characters can level in 2 classes at the same time. So at lvl 3 character level, Someone can be a Paladin 3/Warlock 3.

Let general multiclass rules apply, for example you can't create a gestalt cleric/warlock without having at least 13 in both wis and cha. I think everyone will stop multiclassing instantly. Except for the guy that really wanted to make ranger work.

[Amnestic]

I kind of hinted at a broad fix in a previous post but I don't think you'd like it. 3 lvl gestalt.
For the first 3 levels, all characters can level in 2 classes at the same time. So at lvl 3 character level, Someone can be a Paladin 3/Warlock 3.

Let general multiclass rules apply, for example you can't create a gestalt cleric/warlock without having at least 13 in both wis and cha. I think everyone will stop multiclassing instantly. Except for the guy that really wanted to make ranger work.

I wonder what the most common '3' level class would be in that case. Probably fighter. Full armour/shield/weapon profs, CON save, minor healing from 2nd wind, fighting style, action surge, plus an archetype. With Str or Dex as its MC requirements pretty much everyone could nab it.

Rogue or warlock tied for second, possibly rogue slight edge because it's skills/expertise are good regardless of build and dex 13 is more likely than cha 13?

[Gtdead]

I think warlock is going to top the charts, followed by fighter, cleric and rogue.

Edit: scratch that, fighter is top due to action surge, warlock second

[Pex]

There is nearly always a trade off.

The wizard dipping fighter after 17 is giving up signature spell, an ASI, and potentially spell mastery, and they miss out on a 6th and 7th level spell slot.

Infinite use of one reaction spell (selected at each long rest) or one bonus action spell is pretty darn strong. That could be infinite shields, and an extra disintegrate and simulacrum once per day, plus an ASI.

I don't think medium armor and action surge are worth giving that up. Plus, they are already wizards with access to 9th level spells.

A 17th level wizard doesn't need to dip into fighter. It's an obvious loss of power. What a player would do is take his first level as fighter to get heavy armor (medium armor ok if ST isn't high), shield, and Con saving throws and then go into wizard. He takes two levels of fighter if he really wants Action Surge. That's when it's worth the dip to some people. A delayed spell progression is worth the price for the durability. The game might not last to 20th level so they can't miss what they'd never get. If the game does reach 20th level the character enjoyed heavy armor, shield, and Con proficiency for 19 of those levels. For one level of not having the capstone he could have is not a big deal, and the campaign is almost over anyway. For the campaign to go beyond level 20 means he's getting level 20 wizard eventually. That's how a wizard dipping into fighter works.

[cutlery]

A 17th level wizard doesn't need to dip into fighter. It's an obvious loss of power. What a player would do is take his first level as fighter to get heavy armor (medium armor ok if ST isn't high), shield, and Con saving throws and then go into wizard. He takes two levels of fighter if he really wants Action Surge. That's when it's worth the dip to some people. A delayed spell progression is worth the price for the durability. The game might not last to 20th level so they can't miss what they'd never get. If the game does reach 20th level the character enjoyed heavy armor, shield, and Con proficiency for 19 of those levels. For one level of not having the capstone he could have is not a big deal, and the campaign is almost over anyway. For the campaign to go beyond level 20 means he's getting level 20 wizard eventually. That's how a wizard dipping into fighter works.

You don’t have to convince me; OP is the one that posited a wiz17 going fighter as behavior they wanted to curb.

[Xervous]

You don’t have to convince me; OP is the one that posited a wiz17 going fighter as behavior they wanted to curb.

Have we gotten a proper answer to the juvenile “but why?” Is it a matter of performance normalization?

[Corran]

This is a question for the people that consider multiclassing to be superior to single classing (ignoring role-playing aspects).

What would make you consider playing a single classed character?
a. An extra ASI at level 6
b. An extra ASI at level 6 and 12
c. An epic boon at level 12
d. Some other suggestion
e. Some combination of things
f. Nothing short of divine smite with level 9 spell slots or extra attack with full sneak attack dice
Impossible to answer. Even if I restrict this to a certain single class (say rogue) instead of the hundreds of different mc combinations, I still dont think I could narrow it down to a single answer (sneak attack and expertise, or thieves' cant and reliable talent, is but one of the numerous dilemmas I might be forced to answer). I'd certainly bargain for as much as I could though.

Suggestion. If you dont like power gaming, avoid handing out free stuff on top of single class progression. If you dont like multiclassing, ban it (and say it's an optional rule; I dont get it, but it's a popular argument, so it must be successful enough I'd guess). If you want to discuss whether multiclassing is op, start a thread that actually discusses that. If you dont want the discussion but seek confirmation, a job well done.

[sithlordnergal]

But in the fighter/wizard example you do delay spell progression so there is a trade off. The idea is to just level the playing field slightly so the 2 fighter splash isn't a no brainer after wizard 17. I think 2 pal 18 bard is also pretty sweet since the spells aren't delayed as much as a sorcadin.

Ok, so what about either an epic boon or increasing an ability to 22 at level 11 (locking you into single classed)? We could repeat it at level 18 if needed.

I’d prefer a simple broad fix rather than a bunch of specific monk 18 gains x, monk 20 gains y, fighter 17 gains z, etc.

I mean, the issue is you're trying to give out a single ability that's equal to 5 separate feats. Yeah, you'll delay your spell progression by a single level, or two if you take two levels of Fighter, but that delay is highly worth it. But consider what you gain: You are literally the tankiest person in the party. You only have to worry about saving throws, you hardly ever have to worry about attack rolls. Without any magical items what so ever, you, the Wizard, can have an AC that ranges from 21 to 28, depending on if you have Haste and Shield. No one is going to waste their time trying to attack you.

[noob]

I mean, the issue is you're trying to give out a single ability that's equal to 5 separate feats. Yeah, you'll delay your spell progression by a single level, or two if you take two levels of Fighter, but that delay is highly worth it. But consider what you gain: You are literally the tankiest person in the party. You only have to worry about saving throws, you hardly ever have to worry about attack rolls. Without any magical items what so ever, you, the Wizard, can have an AC that ranges from 21 to 28, depending on if you have Haste and Shield. No one is going to waste their time trying to attack you.
Actually they will if the others are similarly hard to hit or harm.

[sithlordnergal]

There is nearly always a trade off.

The wizard dipping fighter after 17 is giving up signature spell, an ASI, and potentially spell mastery, and they miss out on a 6th and 7th level spell slot.

Infinite use of one reaction spell (selected at each long rest) or one bonus action spell is pretty darn strong. That could be infinite shields, and an extra disintegrate and simulacrum once per day, plus an ASI.

I don't think medium armor and action surge are worth giving that up. Plus, they are already wizards with access to 9th level spells.

You...you do get Spell Mastery though, even with two levels of Fighter. You only lose out on a last ASI, which you likely don't need because you're a Wizard and you only care about Int, and Signature Spell, which is a terrible capstone anyway so who cares. You still get an at-will 1st and 2nd level spell, along with being able to cast two leveled spells in a single roud.

As for Signature Spell, no offense but it is a terrible capstone. It really, really is, you're not losing anything by taking two levels of Fighter. You get to have two extra 3rd level spells that you can prepare and cast once per long rest, and you can only cast them at 3rd level. Its basically like taking two of those Warlock Invocations that let you cast an extra spell once per long rest.

[sithlordnergal]

Actually they will if the others are similarly hard to hit or harm.

That's true, but if your entire party is rocking an AC that makes 26 look squishy, then you really don't have much to worry about in the first place. Even if you are hit, your allies are gonna be there to help.

[noob]

You...you do get Spell Mastery though, even with two levels of Fighter. You only lose out on a last ASI, which you likely don't need because you're a Wizard and you only care about Int, and Signature Spell, which is a terrible capstone anyway so who cares. You still get an at-will 1st and 2nd level spell, along with being able to cast two leveled spells in a single roud.

As for Signature Spell, no offense but it is a terrible capstone. It really, really is, you're not losing anything by taking two levels of Fighter. You get to have two extra 3rd level spells that you can prepare and cast once per long rest, and you can only cast them at 3rd level. Its basically like taking two of those Warlock Invocations that let you cast an extra spell once per long rest.

The cost is that you cast wizard spells one level lower than what a single classed wizard would cast or alternatively you enjoy those benefits only at level 18 which might not happen in most campaigns.
For example you are in team suicide: all your allies tries to die as fast as possible and are as frail as possible.
The ability to action surge will help you a lot once per day to protect your allies but you could have one higher level spell slot a day which would allow for example to enjoy simulacrum two levels earlier(and get web and fireball earlier too and so on) and other benefits like that which would also help to keep alive your allies.

[Sception]

There are quite a few classes that I'm happy to take straight through the life of most campaigns, a few I'd even be happy to take to 20. But for the classes that I'd rather not take without multiclassing, the main thing they'd need for me to change my mind is regular flavorful abilities or improvements to existing abilities every level, with those abilities being significantly stronger than ones that came before about every two levels on average.

Right now full casters get that, and they get that before you count class features, subclass features, or feats. Some casters arguably start with a bit less out of the gate, but there is a constant feeling of progression that makes them fun to level up in the same class at least until you reach 9th level spells, and by that point all you need to encourage you to go to level 20 is a cool capstone. Which admittedly several full casters lack, making 1 to 2 level dips at either the start or the end of their progression seem attractive.

While there are some exceptions*, non casters tend to get a bunch of abilities clustered right together in the earliest levels, often more than casters get at those same levels, but as they level up significant new class abilities get further and further apart, and unlike spells which reach a new tier of power every two levels non-caster features tend to get proportionally weaker later in levels even as they also get further apart.

Barbarians get a bunch of cool strong stuff right in the first few levels, capping off at extra attack. after that, vast empty expanses peppered with "rewards" like minor increases to damage when you score a critical hit. Ie much smaller bonuses than extra attack was, available much less frequently and not even at a time of your choosing.

Fighters get 3 and then 4 attacks per round, but where their second attack doubled their damage output, their third only increases it by 50%, and the fourth only by 33%, so their big later game abilities are actually weaker than their level 5 ability was, and the spaces between those abilities are much less exciting as well, since the more interesting subclass features also showed up in the early levels and extra asi's lose a lot of their luster after you've maxed out your key stats and taken your important feats.


when you look at the next 3 levels of your class and realize you're going to get one interesting feature, where as the first 3 levels of some other class have 5 interesting features, every one of which is as strong or stronger than the one feature you're kind of interested in from your own class, then the choice to multiclass out gets kind of obvious.

...

*eg conquest paladins have a pretty compelling progression up through level 13, which means I can happily play them single classed for the entire duration of most campaigns.

[sithlordnergal]

The cost is that you cast wizard spells one level lower than what a single classed wizard would cast or alternatively you enjoy those benefits only at level 18 which might not happen in most campaigns.
For example you are in team suicide: all your allies tries to die as fast as possible and are as frail as possible.
The ability to action surge will help you a lot once per day to protect your allies but you could have one higher level spell slot a day which would allow for example to enjoy simulacrum two levels earlier(and get web and fireball earlier too and so on) and other benefits like that which would also help to keep alive your allies.

I find that lower level spells tend to work well enough in those situations. Usually, you're only one spell level behind, at least that's what I prefer. 2nd level spells still work perfectly fine at level 5. Sure, you have to wait until level 18 for Wish...but that's actually not that big of a deal. I find being a single level behind is always worth the benefits of starting out as a Fighter. Sure if you fight a pure Wizard and you both are level 17 they'll have Wish...so what? You have Anti-Magic Field, a 21 AC in Anti-Magic Field, 1d10+1 bonus action healing, and a Rapier. If that Wizard tries to ask for anything outside of an 8th level spell, they just crippled themselves.

[noob]

I find that lower level spells tend to work well enough in those situations. Usually, you're only one spell level behind, at least that's what I prefer. 2nd level spells still work perfectly fine at level 5. Sure, you have to wait until level 18 for Wish...but that's actually not that big of a deal. I find being a single level behind is always worth the benefits of starting out as a Fighter. Sure if you fight a pure Wizard and you both are level 17 they'll have Wish...so what? You have Anti-Magic Field, a 21 AC in Anti-Magic Field, 1d10+1 bonus action healing, and a Rapier. If that Wizard tries to ask for anything outside of an 8th level spell, they just crippled themselves.

It is a poor idea for a wizard fighter to cast antimagic field preemptively: they reduce their ability to intervene fast to use battlefield control and other things like that: they should do this only when opponents focus fire on them or if allies are close and benefits from it.
It looks like white room solo optimisation to cast antimagic field pre-emptively.
Also simulacrum happens way before wish(at level 14 if single classed and level 16 if having 2 fighter levels) because you are not forced to do simulacrums of casters and renew them each day: you can do a simulacrum of a non caster and then have it use its at will stuff all day long.(ex: do a simulacrum of a champion fighter)
Web and fireball and haste and fly are great spells depending on situation and you get all of them earlier if you do not start as a fighter and even if your level 3 fighter wizard is killing a mook a turn and two in a turn once a day the suicide team might have losses.
Campaigns reaching a given level are rarer the higher the level is so reaching level 9 is already not very common, level 14 is rare and higher levels are even more rare so it is true that it is not fair to talk about simulacrum due to it being in a rarely played level.

[sithlordnergal]

It is a poor idea for a wizard fighter to cast antimagic field preemptively: they reduce their ability to intervene fast to use battlefield control and other things like that: they should do this only when opponents focus fire on them or if allies are close and benefits from it.
It looks like white room solo optimisation to cast antimagic field pre-emptively.
Also simulacrum happens way before wish(at level 14 if single classed and level 16 if having 2 fighter levels) because you are not forced to do simulacrums of casters and renew them each day: you can do a simulacrum of a non caster and then have it use its at will stuff all day long.(ex: do a simulacrum of a champion fighter)
Web and fireball and haste and fly are great spells depending on situation and you get all of them earlier if you do not start as a fighter and even if your level 3 fighter wizard is killing a mook a turn and two in a turn once a day the suicide team might have losses.
Campaigns reaching a given level are rarer the higher the level is so reaching level 9 is already not very common, level 14 is rare and higher levels are even more rare so it is true that it is not fair to talk about simulacrum due to it being in a rarely played level.

I will agree that anti-magic field is generally a poor choice for a Wizard. I mostly using that as a 16 Wizard / 1 Fighter vs. 17 Wizard kind of example. In that particular case, the 17th level wizard has 9th level spells and the Fighter/Wizard won't, but the jump from 8th to 9th level spells isn't insurmountable.

As for Simulacrum, it does happen a lot earlier, and it is a huge game change, I won't deny that. But its also not so much of a game changer that delaying it by a single level will make you terrible. Same with all the other spells you mentioned:

Web is 2nd level, you have Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Grease, Fog Cloud, and Thunderwave to give you terrain stuff.

Fireball is extremely potent, but Shatter, Ice Knife, Snowball Swarm, and Web can handle AoE for a single level. Shatter in particular is a good stand in.

Fly is really the only thing you can't replicate, but even then you lose out for a single level and you become a nice tank in exchange for the lass.

[cutlery]

You...you do get Spell Mastery though,


If you get to 20 and if you aren’t temped to take a 3rd level of fighter.





As for Signature Spell, no offense but it is a terrible capstone.

Being a level 17 wizard is it’s own capstone.

[cutlery]

I have nothing against power gaming. I hand out powerful magic items early. I just want options to be balanced.

It is already the case that level by level the classes are not balanced (how could they be when they do different things?); so this would be a bandaid fix. The original problem of some classes having dead or boring levels would remain.

[dmhelp]

So I took from all this discussion that multiclassing kicks in at Tier 3-4 and is primarily used as a way to buff your non caster (aside from a splash on a caster which often weakens them until poor capstones come into play at 18+ when picking up action surge is always better). I would like to level the differences slightly between a single and multiclassed at Tier 1-2 (making multiclassing easier) and at Tier 3-4 (slight buff to single classed) without rewriting the whole level 11+ single classed progression.

I don't want to make it so people don't multiclass. The preference would be that you make characters of both kinds and all of the single classed characters are not wizards.

Multiclassed Tier 1-2 Buff
Two classed characters that would eventually gain Extra Attack gain it based on character level instead of class level if both classes are no more than 1 level apart (e.g. Sor 3/Bladesinger 3 would gain Extra Attack including the cantrip as an attack ability), but this benefit is lost if you level out of the balanced split (this allows easy "no thought" alternating level progression up to level 9-11 when you permanently get Extra Attack)

Single Classed Tier 3-4 Buffs (benefit is lost if you gain an additional class; this is to help balance single vs optimized multiclass power)
Level 14 single classed non casters may choose a second subclass and gain the first tier power(s) (or with DM approval perhaps a different tier power), but Spellcasting cannot be gained in this manner (e.g. a Berserker could pick Zealot, gaining Divine Fury & Warrior of the Gods)
Level 14 single classed Paladins' Divine Smite does an additional 1d8 base damage (e.g. a 1st level slot does 3d8 and 3rd-5th level slots do 5d8)
Level 14 single classed Rangers no longer require concentration with hunter's mark
Level 20 single classed full casters & Warlocks (in general the capstones are subpar) gain a level 8 spell slot once per long rest (Warlocks may use this to cast any of their known spells or 6th-8th level Mystic Arcanums)

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I'm a bit surprised about the opinions that MCing isn't that beneficial early game. For 1 level of fighter on a wizard or sorcerer you get extra hp, second wind, armor, a shield, and defense fighting style, which makes you WAY tougher. Casting shield spell with a base AC 21 is like playing a totally different class. The only level I played with a character like this in a recent campaign where the trade-off was arguably not worth it was level 5 with the loss of 2 third level spells and even then it depended on the challenges of the day.
My current character is a level 6 barbarian with a level of rogue. Obviously this isn't going to directly enhance combat much, but with a 1 level dip my character is a very effective scout and can effectively deal with a bunch of challenges that would otherwise either cause our group problems or use up caster resources since we don't have a full Rogue. Also, when I am able to use my stealth it is often a benefit to combat.
For me the right MC is a definite benefit from level 6 on.

[OldTrees1]

So I took from all this discussion that multiclassing kicks in at Tier 3-4 and is primarily used as a way to buff your non caster (aside from a splash on a caster which often weakens them until poor capstones come into play at 18+ when picking up action surge is always better).

Elaborating on what some of the discussion said:
I see multiclassing start much sooner, especially if the campaign is expected to reach Tier 3. Low level multiclassed non fullcasters tend to have the same level by level benefits as their single classed counterparts (except Extra Attack dead levels). So while Tier 3-4 heavily encourages them to multiclass, there is no reason the multiclass characterization might not start sooner. If the character is going to be a Rogue 6 / Barbarian 6 at 12th, they might be a Rogue 2 / Barbarian 3 at 5th and Rogue 5 / Barbarian 3 at 8th.


I would like to level the differences slightly between a single and multiclassed at Tier 1-2 (making multiclassing easier) and at Tier 3-4 (slight buff to single classed) without rewriting the whole level 11+ single classed progression.

I don't want to make it so people don't multiclass. The preference would be that you make characters of both kinds and all of the single classed characters are not wizards.

Multiclassed Tier 1-2 Buff
Two classed characters that would eventually gain Extra Attack gain it based on character level instead of class level if both classes are no more than 1 level apart (e.g. Sor 3/Bladesinger 3 would gain Extra Attack including the cantrip as an attack ability), but this benefit is lost if you level out of the balanced split (this allows easy "no thought" alternating level progression up to level 9-11 when you permanently get Extra Attack)

Let me start by appreciating your ideas before the feedback.

Consider this multiclass character.
Rog 2 / Barb 3 -> Rog 5 / Barb 3 -> Rog 6 / Barb 6.
Is the "no more than 1 level apart" restriction sensible in cases like this?
What about two classed characters that do a 2:1 ratio? A 13:7 split for example.


Single Classed Tier 3-4 Buffs (benefit is lost if you gain an additional class; this is to help balance single vs optimized multiclass power)
Level 14 single classed non casters may choose a second subclass and gain the first tier power(s) (or with DM approval perhaps a different tier power), but Spellcasting cannot be gained in this manner (e.g. a Berserker could pick Zealot, gaining Divine Fury & Warrior of the Gods)
Level 14 single classed Paladins' Divine Smite does an additional 1d8 base damage (e.g. a 1st level slot does 3d8 and 3rd-5th level slots do 5d8)
Level 14 single classed Rangers no longer require concentration with hunter's mark
Level 20 single classed full casters & Warlocks (in general the capstones are subpar) gain a level 8 spell slot once per long rest (Warlocks may use this to cast any of their known spells or 6th-8th level Mystic Arcanums)

A second subclass is going to have different impact depending on the class. A Fighter's subclass is not the same fraction of the character as a Rogue's subclass is. Expect to need additional tweaking. What about the 1/3rd casters like Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight? Additionally if the main subclass is not helping address Tier 3-4 gaps, why would 2 subclasses address it?

Paladin is well designed. I think it could still use a buff (others deserve a buff even more), but more damage in combat does not address the issues with Tier 3 - 4. I would be willing to lose Improved Divine Smite in a heartbeat if it meant features better addressing qualitative changes in out of combat adventuring at those levels (and to a lesser extend qualitative changes in combat, but Find Greater Steed covers T3 on that front).

I am not addressing Ranger (not enough personal expertise / testing) nor L20 (capstones are not relevant yet). So apologies for not providing feedback on those ideas.