At what level should I allow multi classing?

[fetchexpert]

Hello fellow Dm's! I was hoping to get help from some experienced dm's. You see, im running my second long term campaign, and, unlike in the first one, this time, the players are very interested in multi classing, but im very troubled to decide at what level I should allow multi classing. I know there are several builds that start the multi class at second or third levels (my players are in third level currently), but im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the hell out of their characters. I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

[stoutstien]

Eh, you're better off just say yes or no to multi-classing. a single or multiclass character doesn't have any more or less RP potential. The game is pretty much a conceptual soup rather than any class having a particular role or value.

The real question is are you comfortable running a game with multi-classing?

[CheddarChampion]

How about allowing multiclassing with the caveat that your players don't Min-Max a lot?

If you like the idea, talk to your players, tell them you're "apprehensive about multiclassing but so long as they don't try to make an OP character then you'll let them multiclass."

Optionally, tell them you'll allow multiclassing after they have 5 levels/starting at level 6. Most classes get big bonuses at level 5 and I think most classes are encapsulated in those 5 levels.

[Dualswinger]

I'm someone who likes to optimise, so take my words at their value, but I'd say from level 2.

I'm not the kind of player who believes that a character should be informed too much by their class if they don't want to be, as long as they are actually playing some kind of character. A wizard who is self taught vs a wizard who comes from an academy vs a wizard who was personally mentored by the greatest archmage in the land could all be pretty similar mechanically yet have wildly different roleplay styles. As long as the character they're playing makes some modicum of sense to A. their mechanics and B. the campaign at large, I wouldn't worry too much.

Honourable Rogues exist, shy bards who don't perform exist, likable paladins exist.

If the player at the table is having fun, and the others are having fun, don't worry too hard about how they perform in combat.

[MoiMagnus]

(1) Make sure they understand that early multiclassing means delaying your level 5, which is for most martial the moment where you get multiattack, and for casters the moment where you get OP third level spells.

(2) Ask them explicitly if they're counting on some features of two classes to work together, so that you can decide now on whether you houserule the combination in or out. E.g
+ Sorcerer/Warlock might be able to convert his Warlock spell slots (which refresh at short rest) into sorcery points (which are kept until long rest). Or might not if you don't want to.
+ Monk/Paladin is not able to divine strike if the monk fight unarmed. Or might, if you want it to work.

(3) Taking only one level in a class is cheesy IMO, and two levels borderline. If they're only interested into a single thing of a class, I'd rather homebrew a feat than them taking a single level of this class. Ask them what their plan is for level 10.

(4) This is an opportunity for building RP. Don't less that slide as "they just want this technical effect".

[carrdrivesyou]

I like to keep Multiclassing to story or plot relevant reasons. For example, the infamous single level into Hexblade...what would cause a person to become a warlock? How did they meet or contact the patron?

Why the sudden interest in 2 levels of fighter? Have they been beaten up in a lot of fights and are looking to grab some armor training? Why the change in focus from sorcerer training?


One of my friends actually lets you take your first class as much as desired, but uses the optional training rules for whenever you want to take a multiclass level. Personally, I require my players to justify their character's change of interest and focus. Rarely, I will require some sort of expensive component or hidden NPC to be found to unlock the option. Make em work for it. Just a sidequest that might take a session or two.


Example: my fighter was level 2, and the only non-caster in the party. That games used GR rules, so he wanted the ability to heal folks. So he prayed and studied, and was gifted with the powers of a celestial warlock in exchange for defending the patron's chosen people from an invading nation. It was a really cool plan by the DM, and has had a really positive effect on the game as a whole.

[micahaphone]

What is your intent behind such a homebrew? Sometimes for high scale meta rules, it's better to make a "gentleman's agreement" style chat with your players, not a mechanical rule. "hey please don't make a min/max super character for this game" is a perfectly valid thing for a DM to say. Trying to check a mechanical rule for any/all loopholes is a lot harder than communicating your wishes to your players.

Or if there's a more particular multiclass that you're nervous about you could say (for example) "If you're going to multiclass warlock, you have to do more than just two levels then leave". Or "work with the DM ahead of time to set up narrative reasoning for your multiclass", so that people aren't suddenly becoming warlocks or clerics overnight without your awareness.

[Sception]

Multiclassing can be counterproductive, particularly if it delays key features like 3rd level spellcasting, extra attack, or ASIs.

I'd add my voice to those who suggest you either allow or not allow multiclassing rather than trying to micromanage it. And if your players want it, I'd be more inclined towards allowing it and just seeing how it goes.

That said, if you're concerned about mutliclasses getting unmanageable, or character concepts getting confused and muddled, then rather than making players wait for a particular level, you might try limiting them to a total number of different classes. Like, you can multiclass 2 classes, but not 3.

I don't think such a limit is necessary or even necessarily helpful from a balance perspective, but if you're not used to multiclassing as a DM it can help maintain some clarity.

...

One thing I sometimes do as a DM, particularly when running games for experienced players, is have characters start at level 3, and limit any future levels to classes that characters already have at least one level in, unless some narrative event in the game occurs for a new class to make sense. This restriction means that single classed characters all start with their subclass in place, so the characters are more distinct and have the tools they need for their basic mechanical concept. For example, sword & valor bards get to start with their combat proficiencies rather than spending two levels as a fragile back liner before suddenly shifting play style. This also means that any multiclass characters will start the game /as/ multiclass characters - not for the sake of balance, but so that you don't have to deal with the narrative dissonance when a character levels up and suddenly they're a wizard now, despite not having any magical aptitude, let alone the years of training involved, before that point.

But that only really works well with experienced players who like to plan their 'builds' out in advance. If someone's brand new then the first couple levels with streamlined ability sets learning the basics of how their class works before choosing how to specialize can be valuable, and even with more experienced players, those who like to 'discover their character as they play' rather than plan a build in advance will resent having to choose potential multiclasses in advance.

[Willie the Duck]

I'd add my voice to those who suggest you either allow or not allow multiclassing rather than trying to micromanage it. And if your players want it, I'd be more inclined towards allowing it and just seeing how it goes.

How about allowing multiclassing with the caveat that your players don't Min-Max a lot?

I'd suggest a combination of these two. Hard and fast rules about when to multiclass mask (/are a incredibly indelicate fix) to the real issue: Min-Max dips. Yes, there are a number of very very obvious dips one can do to increase a classes power or eliminate a limitation (one level cleric or fighter dip on a wizard, 1-2 level hexblade dip on other cha-based class for medium armor and shields, cha-as weapon stat, and at-will ranged cantrip on classes like bard or paladin where at-wills or ranged effects are a balancing weakness of otherwise strong class). Really what needs to happen is a group discussion about what is an acceptable level of optimization, and what is a bridge too far. Then, simply say, "This kind of thing is off limits. This is a 'we all know it when we see it' kind of situation rather than computer logic rules, so don't try and weasel word around it." and everything else is acceptable.

[Bloodcloud]

This isn't 3.5. Outside of very few builds (like coffeelock), multiclassing is quite balanced. You sometime get an early power spike, but then you miss another one and everything catches up until very high level. Like yeah, wizard 18 fighter 2 is ballers, but Fighter 2 wizard 3 is weaker than wizard 5.

[GiantOctopodes]

My default for this is to have it disallowed except with your permission, and when players come to you asking about multiclassing into X, just ask "why?"

Remind them there are often responsibilities and drawbacks which come with multiclassing. A 1 level dip in warlock might sound nice to a lot of folks, but that 1 level "dip" means you've eternally bargained away your soul and freedom for those level 1 powers, and can forever be called upon to be an executor of the will of your patron. A level of Cleric comes with a responsibility to your Diety and / or a religious organization or theological concept. A level of Paladin commits you to the completion of a holy quest. You're also Way in bounds for requiring multiclassing after level 1 to Follow, not precede, any relevant in game events which would justify it. Want a level of Druid? Cool, who did you meet and where, whom initiated you into their secret ways and taught you how to walk the path, as it were? Want a level of fighter? Where is the training in martial weapons and all of that coming from?

Open and honest conversation can let you know whether the player is seeking the mechanical benefit, or the flavor and roleplaying possibilities, and you can decide either way if you care or wish to allow it. I may allow one player to multiclass into something, and disallow another player from multiclassing into the same thing, for a number of reasons - I am concerned about relative power levels, I don't think it fits the character, I feel it would be a distraction and contribute to a player hogging the spotlight, I don't think it makes sense in the context of the overall situation in the campaign, etc etc.

That being said, I really think it's not that big of a deal either way. The relative power difference of multiclassed characters from a practical perspective are often overstated in both directions, and there are Plenty of ways to balance things in order to even out disparities in baseline player power. Even still, asking about the motivation forces players to at least think about it, which can make folks develop an in game rationalization for a mechanic they wish to utilize, and most of the time that's good enough for me. Any time you can provide fuel for additional depth and interest, regardless of their "true" motivations, and especially while increasing player fun and satisfaction, it's a win in my book.

[mistajames]

Either allow it or don't. Really, it doesn't matter - most of the time, single-classed characters (especially true of casters) are 'stronger' than multi-classed characters in this edition anyways.

Even the "strong" multiclasses probably contribute less to a party than their single-classed brethren. That Paladin 2/Sorcerer 3 ain't feeling so hot when his party members are flinging around Fireballs/Hypnotic Patterns and GWM Extra Attacks. They're also delaying stuff like twinned Haste or Polymorph, or access to Synaptic Static and Animate Objects.

[Droppeddead]

Level 2 is usually the earliest you can start multiclassing. ;)

Jokes aside, as have been mentioned, I don't think you need to worry about people multiclassing "like crazy". Few if any builds benefit from more than two classes. The only multiclass builds that I have ever wanted to play have been two classes. Too many classes and you quickly lose out on the good stuff.

From a DM's perspective, as long as the characters have a fairly justified reason to multiclass, I'd allow it. Just remember that every class comes with their in-game benefits, and drawbacks. Do you want a single level of druid for some reason? Sure, but then you can't wear metal armour. Want to make a deal with a fiend to become a warlock? Sure. But your patron will demand just as much from you no matter if you just get a single level of warlock or fifteen levels.

Just talk to your players and see what it is they really want and work it from there.

[heavyfuel]

If yourfear is that players that are multiclassing are going to become too powerful, you should probably allow multiclassing as early as level 2 because multiclass characters are - as a general rule - weaker than regular characters, not stronger.

Few builds in the game are stronger than most single classed Wizards, Druids, or Bards.

For example, do you know what's better than a Cleric 1 / Wizard 8 with Heavy Armor proficiency? A Wizard 9 with access to Wall of Force, a spell that is a complete game changer in that it can completely nullify enemies without access to teleportation abilities.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

If yourfear is that players that are multiclassing are going to become too powerful, you should probably allow multiclassing as early as level 2 because multiclass characters are - as a general rule - weaker than regular characters, not stronger.

Few builds in the game are stronger than most single classed Wizards, Druids, or Bards.

For example, do you know what's better than a Cleric 1 / Wizard 8 with Heavy Armor proficiency? A Wizard 9 with access to Wall of Force, a spell that is a complete game changer in that it can completely nullify enemies without access to teleportation abilities.

... in a 5 minute adventuring day with a single deadly encounter. Otherwise I'd take the MC.
That said I'd agree with most of the feedback that's been provided. Most MCs are not vastly superior to single classes. There are a couple that are, like the Hexblade dip which we've banned at our table. Otherwise, you can just adjust your opponents to match, so long as the players are at least somewhat at the same power level as each other.

[heavyfuel]

... in a 5 minute adventuring day with a single deadly encounter. Otherwise I'd take the MC.
That said I'd agree with most of the feedback that's been provided. Most MCs are not vastly superior to single classes. There are a couple that are, like the Hexblade dip which we've banned at our table. Otherwise, you can just adjust your opponents to match, so long as the players are at least somewhat at the same power level as each other.

I also agree that MC casters are better... in Tier 1. By Tier 2 you have more than enough slots to deal with any but the most punishing of adventure days (though even a Fighter will be running out of resources by then).

Also agree that most problematic MC characters are the ones dipping Hexblade.

[Bobthewizard]

I very rarely multi class, but I don't think there need to be any restrictions on it, either mechanically or for roleplaying.

Mechanically, there are very few multi class options that are better than just going straight class. Martial classes are an exception to this after level 5. Sometimes adding 3 levels of another class can work out well. But even then, it's not so good that it overshadows other classes. In fact, I've seen many more suboptimal characters due to multi classing than I've seen truly synergistic builds.

From a roleplaying standpoint, it's all fluff and backstory. I recommend you let the players control that for their characters. You control the rest of the world, so the least you can do is let them create their character. If they want to have a warlock who doesn't have a patron, or a cleric that doesn't worship a god, that's all fine. If they want to flavor their hexblade dip as just additional abilities from their divine soul sorcerous origin, it won't hurt anything. The key isn't in limiting their options, but in just making sure their overall character fits your world.

I made a hexblade that was a normal Joe with a magic sword, and all of his class abilities were just powers of his sword. I made straight cleric with the criminal background who was a thief that prayed after being caught and his prayers were answered. Now he has all of these cleric abilities but still doesn't really believe in the gods. I made a psionic wizard who never studied magic at all and didn't have a spellbook, but instead found a spell shard and was more of a sorcerer fluff. If someone can make these, then players shouldn't have to justify a multiclass, they just need to tell you how it fits their character.

5e is pretty well balanced even with the famous multi classing combos. Even Sorlocks and Sorcadins aren't ahead of everyone else. Those rare instances where it isn't balanced (coffelock, nuclear wizard) it's easy to stop those exploits specifically.

[samuraijaques]

Honestly multiclassing can lead to more RPing not less. Letting a player kind of mix and match the options they want from different classes and make something that is unique to their character can lead to a sense of agency that gives players a better way of expressing their intentions with their character.

I don't really subscribe to the "all bards are musicians" "all warlocks are puppets for their masters" "all clerics have a god that would be pissed if they did x y or z" etc mentality. Forcing an archetype on players based on their class is limiting and not really accurate to real life. I say let players play their paladin/sorcerer and call it a human whos been granted power by the gods because he's pretty and they like watching him kill stuff. Let your players make a college dropout that never really latched on to any one field of study and ended up as a fighter 1/cleric 1/wizard 1/bard 1/ranger 1/ rogue 1 and found out that having a diverse set of talents is actually really beneficial to the party.

Multiclassing isn't at odds with RP, nor is it inherently more powerful or more complicated. Multiclassed characters often give up on power for versatility or give up on their breadth of options to be really specifically good at one thing.

I always make it legal from level 2 and I've never had a single problem with it.

[Pex]

It's the players' characters, not yours. Let them multiclass when they want to, if you are allowing multiclassing. I can understand a DM might have a particular tolerance level for the level of power of PC can have. The DM can accept a player doing more than "I attack for 1d8 + 3 damage" but cringe at the idea of a player doing "I attack for 2d6 + 14 damage, three times, and move 60 ft, and heal for 1d4 + 8 damage, and whatever else" You need to decide for yourself what your tolerance level is, but do keep in mind players are entitled to have one of their own. They are not entitled to Win D&D, but there's nothing wrong with a player having a powerful character.

The best solution is the standard solution. Talk to your players on how they want to make their characters. Understand the result multiclassing will bring to find the power tolerance level you all can play with.

[JellyPooga]

- No Class comes with any inherent roleplaying limitations or experience.

- A character is that character and that character alone.

- Multiclassing is a means to an end, not a symptom nor a cause of bad play.

I think these tenets might help settle some misunderstandings the OP might have. If your players are min-maxers, they'll do it whether you allow multiclassing or not. There is no "getting the feel" for a Class, at least as far as roleplaying is concerned; the character is what's important and if a player wants a certain ability to play that character better, then arbitrarily delaying that feature actively harms the roleplaying of that character, rather than enhancing it. Many multiclass concepts start working from 2nd or 3rd level, even if they'd be better served (mechanically) by waiting until 6th level.

Either allow multiclassing or don't. I, at least, would feel unsatisfied and would likely have little interest in developing my character further until I had the bones of it laid out mechanically. That goes for single classed characters as much as it does multiclass ones; many Classes don't really "feel" like they're hitting their stride until 3rd to 5th level and multiclass characters have this effect doubled. Delaying MC builds only delays laying that groundwork.

[OldTrees1]

I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

If this is your goal: 2nd level

If their character concept makes sense as a multiclass, then it makes more RP sense for the multiclassing to start sooner than later. Imagine someone wanted to play an Eldritch Knight but there was no Eldritch Knight subclass. They would want to multiclass Fighter / Wizard at a 2:1 ratio. It would be nonsensical for this Eldritch Knight to walk around as a Champion 8 or a Wizard 8 due to an arbitrary rule banning starting the multiclassing until a magical level. Now luckily for Eldritch Knights, there is a subclass for that particular example. However there are more multiclass character concepts than WotC can print explicit subclasses for.

Don't force them to make absurd characters by imposing magical level limits.

However maybe you don't like dips. In that case, tell the players that. Let them know multiclassing is allowed, but if they multiclass into a class, it is expected to be more than a dip.

Or maybe you just don't trust your players. In that case, don't make any rules. Talk to the players. Have the conversations needed to build understanding and trust instead of trying to use an in game mechanic to address an out of character problem.


Also, just to repeat what others have said: WotC intentionally designed classes to work for many different characterizations. They don't have inherent "RP properties". Not all Rogues are Thieves. Some are Dungeoneers that safely guide tour groups through deadly dungeons. Not all Sorcerers are Mages. Some are very unlucky Fighters that are followed by a spell slinging curse.

[Houster]

Hello fellow Dm's! I was hoping to get help from some experienced dm's. You see, im running my second long term campaign, and, unlike in the first one, this time, the players are very interested in multi classing, but im very troubled to decide at what level I should allow multi classing. I know there are several builds that start the multi class at second or third levels (my players are in third level currently), but im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the hell out of their characters. I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

Preventing players to do stuff they want at the level you are talking about is just something I can't fully understand. If they want to min max- you can't tell them "don't min max" through a rule. You can advise that the game will go too much technical with early MC, you can say that you don't want to be a part of a group that is min maxing, but just restricting something they want out of a game they want to play-
Just sounds wrong.
Just talk with them, share your insights. If they still want to min max- let them do it. If you are right, they will quickly understand their error and will want to change direction. If they want to continue min maxing- it is probably because they are having fun. Objective obtained.

Now of course your fun is important too, and the players might differ on opinions also. Again, talk it out. If there are harsh differences, sometimes people want different things they can find in different places...

[Kane0]

Hello fellow Dm's! I was hoping to get help from some experienced dm's. You see, im running my second long term campaign, and, unlike in the first one, this time, the players are very interested in multi classing, but im very troubled to decide at what level I should allow multi classing. I know there are several builds that start the multi class at second or third levels (my players are in third level currently), but im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the hell out of their characters. I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

In terms of balance MCing isnt really a big deal. There are certain specific combos which are above the curve but even they have achilles heels and as DM for the most part you should be able to handle it without noticing much difference.

[sophontteks]

Apart from a few builds, MCing is more likely to backfire then do good. Players tend not to respect the powerspikes at certain key levels, nor appreciate what levels will occupy most of their playtime.

For you, the big level 5 powerspike is the great equalizer. Martials get a second attack, and magic users get level 3 spells. People who multiclassed at early levels will really struggle at level 5, and likely level 6 too. The payoff isn't strictly superior either, often it's just a sacrifice to make a certain concept work.

Inexperienced power gamers can really shoot themselves in the foot. This would be my concern. Are your players going to be smart about it?

[Droppeddead]

Just for fun, I took a look at what classes I would never multiclass and what classes where (at least if you know you're going to level 20) at least a single multiclass level is always a good option. Now, this list doesn't mean that you can't build viable multiclasses with the "non MC" classes or that you can't get good level 20 builds from the other. Basically it all comes down to which capstones I think are too good not to have. I realize dthat it turned into a wall of text so I put it behind a spoiler.
So, starting of with the ones that I wouldn't multiclass.

Artificer. The capstone is fantastic. Not only that but every level where you take something that isn't artificer really slows down your artificer progress.
Barbarian. Unlimited rages and +4 to your primary abilities? Yes, please.
Druid. At least if you're a Moon Druid. Spellcasting t-rex? Yes please!
Warlock. Regaining all spell slots by hiding somewhere for a minute is really good when you only have a limited number of spell slots.


On the other hand, I really see no reason why any of the following should take their 20th level. Literally anything else is better.

Bard. How about more skills from a level of Rogue or Ranger? More spellcasting from Sorcerer or Warlock? More fighting power from Fighter or Paladin?
Monk. Basically the same as for the Bard but replace the spellcasting class with Cleric or Druid.
Ranger. A small bonus to damge some enemies, once per turn? Just grab a level of fighter and choose the appropriate fighting style. Or Cleric or Druid for more spellcasting. Or Rogue for better damage potential through sneak attack.
Rogue. An autohit or a potential autosuccess once per short rest? How often would a level 20 Rogue with expertise and reliable talent actually need that? It's not bad but you can probably get more fun stuff from somewhere else.



Then we have the list of 'maybes'. They have some really good capstones but if you have something special in mind, a few levels of something else might work.
Cleric. If you have a DM that can build good Dei ex machinae, sure. But if it's just used as a almost literal god mode once a week, I'm sure you can find more funny stuff elsewhere.
Druid. At least if you're a Moon Druid. Spellcasting t-rex? Yes please!
Fighter. All of the attacks sure is good and very effective for many subckasses but I don't see them as a must take in the same way as the Artificer or Barbarian capstone.
Paladin, for certain subclasses. I find the idea of a winged vengeance dwarf a tad silly though. :P
Sorcerer. Four sorcery points are good, I guess. BUt are they *that* good? I'm honestly not a fan of sorcerers at higher levels but if you want it, take it.
Wizard. Free fireballs are fun and awesome but there are probably something you can live without if there is something you'd rather have?


Again, multiclassing is fun and cool but is it really necessary or OP? Not really. There are more classes that (IMO) shouldn't multiclass or at least you should think it over than there are classes that has a crappy capstone ability. And like I said, even some of the "never multiclass"-classes can be part of some really interesting builds. Here are a few.
Samurai 17, Bear Totem Barbarian 3. You don't need Samurai 18 if you never reach 0 hit points.
Moon Druid 12, Monk 8. You can basically be a Nature Bender. Yip yip!
Artificer 12, Ranger (or Rogue) 8. To be the best bounty hunter out there!
Paladin X, Hexblade X. Are you a vengeance paladin tired of your foe always getting away? Do you often fins yourself in a situation where you can't reach out and really touch people? Fear not, Eldritch blast with the right invocations are your friend. Huzzah!

So, thanks for sticking around. Cheers!

[Neoh]

Second level. Or not at all. I mean, a level 5 multiclassed character most likely won't be so much more powerful than a level 5 non-multiclassed character that you will notice it.

Do you allow Feats? At what level? Because I'm pretty sure a lvl 6 Fighter with Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter will be more powerful than any other multiclass. For a while.

Multiclassed characters delay their class features, ASIs/Feats, Spells and Multi attack, you won't have to worry for a bit.

[Hael]

The problem with multi classes is the variance. With a few exceptions, there will be some levels where they are much stronger than their single class counterparts and some levels where it’s vice-versa.

For instance a 1cleric/4wizard is weaker than its sc wizard counterpart(at least for 1 fight), but the next lvl it’s considerably stronger.

So DMs need to have some awareness of when their players get power spikes.
Of course there are builds out there and certain lvl ranges where mces are considerably stronger than the sc.

End of the day, the thing to watch out for is less people getting OP characters, and more the converse. If everyone mced and are all simultaneously lvl5, you might worry about certain encounters being too strong relative to the parties ability.

[Throne12]

As a DM I say at the start of the game. Let the players frankenstine there character. My players build very effective characters and I did have a player for years that was a minmaxer that would always push to play the new third party class or new UA. The rest of the party would Mc with whats in the books. They are fine to dm I havent had any trouble as a dm and my group too. It when you start using UA and third party stuff is when mc is a no no.

Here is a DM Tip: read how the encounter is going if it was mentioned to be a hard encounter but the party is blowing through it. You can decide to let it play out as is or you can add some more HP or less, more attacks or less, add or subtract a ability.

[Demonslayer666]

I wouldn't make them wait any longer. At third level, most classes gain their archetype, so they are well defined.

Explain to them that you want multiclassing to be a flavor choice, and not a way to cheese the system like a sorcadin, or coffeelock. I would recommend that you require them to get your approval before multiclassing, that way you can discuss with them why they want to go that route and you'll know what to expect.

[Ovarwa]

Hi,

Based on what you have said, I recommend Level 2. I'd recommend Level 1 if that worked!

* Your players are interested in multiclassing, so that's a big point in favor.

* You consider yourself relatively new at DMing, and your concerns about multi-classing are not based on firsthand experience as a GM. Recommendation? This is a great opportunity to get some! Open things up and see for yourself. If it doesn't work out, you'll know for your third long term game.

* You want them to "experience their initial classes" and you fear they will "min max the hell out of their characters" and pursue "absurd characters." But maybe everyone will be happier if you help them experience the characters they want to experience. Recommendation: Trust your players! And, to a lesser extent, trust the designers! But if there's a particular combination you don't like (probably involving Warlock :) ), ban it up front, because maybe it does not belong in your world.

Anyway,

Ken

[Contrast]

im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the hell out of their characters.

So...is that a problem for you?

First things first - almost all multiclassing is a downgrade or sidegrade. Even in the cases where it is an upgrade it's usually only an upgrade in a specific way or ahead at some levels and behind at others. I will give you the warning that most of the multiclass characters I've seen I think would have been more powerful as single class and that includes many people who really believed they were playing some awesome min max style build.

You say you want players to value the RP potential of their initial class but...I don't really see how multiclassing offers less RP opportunity? Different RP opportunity perhaps but it feels to me that a character multiclassing won't typically be correlated to the amount or quality of roleplay that a player is going to be capable of.

That all said, you're a player in the game too and you need to be happy as well so don't stress too much - if you'd prefer not to deal with multiclassing, don't. There's still an infinite number of viable character concepts for your players to try out without needing to multiclass.

[Yakk]

MCing only makes optimization sense as a dip in some frakenbuilds, and for martial classes after level 5 (and either go full caster, or dip other marial classes 2-4 levels deep).

Frankenbuilds that aren't useless require optimization, but aren't more optimal than single classed builds usually.

The post-5 weapon class problem is that, unlike full casters, most other classes have sad feature progression post-5 (and 5 is all about extra attack for most). Subclass features can be exciting, but slogging through 5 levels for one is iffy.

So you do a 2-4 level dip and get an exciting feature instead.

Level 11 features are sometimes tempting enough to slog through 6-10 (extra attack(3), reliable talent, improved divine smite, some ranger subclass features). But 12-19 is an even longer desert; and barbarians have a desert from 3-19 (excluding extra attack and subclass features).

Multiclassing is a shorter desert with faster features, even if they aren't as good as the 11 or 20 features you are giving up.

---

Note that short adventuring days can break this. A paladin, for example, wants to make a build that can drop as many smites/round as possible in a one fight/day campaign; the improved divine smite isn't nearly as fun then.

---

But the basic idea is that optimizing allows frankenbuilds, not the other way around.

A single classed fighter in a 20 round 2 rest adventuring day will out damage the hexpalabard ovee the day; the hexpalabard will outdamage the fighter on the boss fight.

[lall]

My only suggestion would be to agree on as much as possible up front. If I know before the first session what is allowed, what’s not allowed, when certain things will be allowed, I will have more fun as I can make more informed decisions for my build. If my character is already 3rd level, and I only then am informed of a pretty significant rule, that could lead to frustration and/or walking.

[Lokishade]

Just say you'll allow it if they come up with in-game reasons for branching out the way they do. If you find that Hexblade gets abused like no tomorrow, it's your job to design a tomorrow that comes back at them. Because fun is not something you have to preserve through restrictions. Instead, fun comes out of consequenses.

A Hexblade is a sentient weapon. Instead of holding back on those, generously give them one (powered appropriately for their level. I mean, these swords are seeking power for a reason). Make them promise something to the talking swords. It doesn't even have to be a cost but a reward. Do X for the sword and it'll power up, thus becoming a more useful tool. Neat, huh?

Barbarian wanting fighter levels? You can decide Fighter as a class is the result of formal training (contrary to the Barbarian's complete abandon to violence) and he must enroll in the military during downtime to learn the tricks of the trade. Will the player continue to serve? Did the DM plan a war to break out at that specific moment, thus making this choice matter? (I wholly encourage him to do so.)

Gaining levels of Cleric outside of the church could be done through the acquisition and study of sacred texts, but beware the church that will try and force you into their fold and brand you a heretic if you don't comply. How your players will deal with that? You won't know if you don't put them in this specific situation.

Sorcerous origins is a little tricky. Or not. A shady character offers you a vial of dragon blood in exchange for services and silence on your part. Or it could be pixie dust. In a magical setting, anything you put into your system could conceivably give you magical powers. But again, consequences. Power at a price.

If everyone want to multiclass and experiment new things, then let them work toward the Sorlockadin of their dreams. Make these frivolous builds memorable through the unique experience of roleplay. They'll say: "My [character] could do [neat trick] like no other. I had to [join, then defect the military, be an angel's herald, etc.] to gain those powers and [twist from the DM] even almost got me roped into [BBEG's evil plan], but my pals had my back and we prevailed, cuz we kick ass."

[P. G. Macer]

Just say you'll allow it if they come up with in-game reasons for branching out the way they do. If you find that Hexblade gets abused like no tomorrow, it's your job to design a tomorrow that comes back at them. Because fun is not something you have to preserve through restrictions. Instead, fun comes out of consequenses.

A Hexblade is a sentient weapon. Instead of holding back on those, generously give them one (powered appropriately for their level. I mean, these swords are seeking power for a reason). Make them promise something to the talking swords. It doesn't even have to be a cost but a reward. Do X for the sword and it'll power up, thus becoming a more useful tool. Neat, huh?



This is a common misconception, but the Hexblade Patron as-written in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything does not involve making a pact with a sentient weapon, but rather one with a maker of said weapons, who may or may not be the Raven Queen. The lore is deliberately (some might say infuriatingly) murky, as the purpose of the Hexblade is a soft-patch for Pact of the Blade first and everything else second. The Unearthed Arcana article that first previewed the Hexblade did refer to making a Pact with Blackrazor or one of its peers, which is where the misconception arises.On the general topic, I more or less agree with the general consensus as to what OP should do, though since Hexblade is such an infamous multi class dip, banning Hexblade dips but otherwise allowing multiclassing right from level two (with a warning that it’s easy to make an ineffective character if you don’t plan out multiclassing properly) might be the way to go.

[Keravath]

Personally, I have no issues with multiclassing. I don't think they are radically more powerful than other classes at the same level, even the notorious hexblade dip.

For spellcasters, the trade off for a dip multiclass is enhanced survivability vs delayed spell progression. Do you want to cast your fireballs at level 6 or even level 7 for a multiclass or do you want to cast them at level 5? Usually level progression is slow enough that this specific trade off MATTERS. Of course the character gains some benefits from the multiclass but loses some due to delayed progression in their first class.

As a result, if a DM is going to allow multiclassing then allow it at level 2.

From a "roleplaying" perspective there is no difference between a straight class character and a multiclass one. How a player chooses to role play their character rarely depends on the level splits. A good role player would play a 3 bard/2 warlock differently from their 5 bard - the reasons they have an involvement with a warlock patron would be part of the character development and likely part of the character backstory even before they actually take levels in the class. You can have good and bad role players for both single and multiclass characters. A new player MIGHT find it easier to role play a single class character because they might better fit an archetype they are familiar with ... an experienced role player can play pretty much any multiclassed character.

As far as "optimization" goes, there is very little in 5e compared to earlier editions and much of that "optimization" is more related to feats than multiclassing. SS+XBE, GWM+PAM, War Caster, Sentinel, Shield Master - these are often far more character "optimization" oriented than multiclassing since in most cases the trade off is just +2 in a primary or secondary stat which with bounded accuracy may or may not be considered that important - while multiclassing significantly slows the acquisition of higher level features.

---

So to the OP, the only real reason to ban multiclassing is because you don't like it or it offends your sensibilities for some reason. If you like your players to have enhanced back stories then perhaps ask them to include role playing reasons for why this multiclass makes sense in the context but honestly, multiclasses are not a problem from either an "optimization" perspective nor from a role playing one - the characters are usually not the problem.

[Arkhios]

Agreed with the others, either allow it or don't.

If you're considering not to allow it because you expect it's going to topple intended balance in your game, just don't allow it. Simple as that.

In our games, our DM wants us to incorporate story elements into character progression, multiclassing included.

Personally, I enforce the same principle. Seemingly arbitrary munchkin minmax for no other reason but some mechanical advantage is very likely to meet a brick wall in my table.

[MaxWilson]

Hello fellow Dm's! I was hoping to get help from some experienced dm's. You see, im running my second long term campaign, and, unlike in the first one, this time, the players are very interested in multi classing, but im very troubled to decide at what level I should allow multi classing. I know there are several builds that start the multi class at second or third levels (my players are in third level currently), but im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the - - - out of their characters. I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

I recommend disallowing multiclassing before level 2.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Hello fellow Dm's! I was hoping to get help from some experienced dm's. You see, im running my second long term campaign, and, unlike in the first one, this time, the players are very interested in multi classing, but im very troubled to decide at what level I should allow multi classing. I know there are several builds that start the multi class at second or third levels (my players are in third level currently), but im worried they might start multi classing like madmans to min max the hell out of their characters. I want them to at least experience their initial classes instead of pursuing and absurd characters, so they can value the RP properties that come with each class and their future multi classes. What should I do? From what level should I allow multi classing?

Level 2.

There's nothing intrinsically better about the "RP Properties that come with each class" than the RP properties that come with being multiclassed, so you know trust your players to know what's fun for themselves.


As for usefulness of multiclass, I wouldn't usually recommend multiclassing at level 2, unless you were taking a 1 level dip and you're switching onto your main, because well, you want to get some pieces of combat effectiveness in first so you can do something.

[OldTrees1]

As for usefulness of multiclass, I wouldn't usually recommend multiclassing at level 2, unless you were taking a 1 level dip and you're switching onto your main, because well, you want to get some pieces of combat effectiveness in first so you can do something.

On the other hand, if you are not dipping, I would recommend starting the multiclass at level 2-4 for flavor reasons. It is easy for a multiclass character to feel incomplete until they start to progress both(all) sides. This can be less effective, as LordCdrMilitant said, unless the multiclass compensates for or avoids delaying the Tier 2 bump. However I think the flavor benefits outweigh the decreased effectiveness.

One such multiclass looked like this: X 1-2 / Y 1-2 / X 3-7 / Y 3-4 / X 8-9 / Y 5 / X 10-13 / Y 6-7
By level 3 the character concept had mechanical support to represent its complete flavor rather than just part of it.
Although in that case I had access to an attack cantrip (something that hits Tier 2 based on character level)

[Pex]

This is a common misconception, but the Hexblade Patron as-written in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything does not involve making a pact with a sentient weapon, but rather one with a maker of said weapons, who may or may not be the Raven Queen. The lore is deliberately (some might say infuriatingly) murky, as the purpose of the Hexblade is a soft-patch for Pact of the Blade first and everything else second. The Unearthed Arcana article that first previewed the Hexblade did refer to making a Pact with Blackrazor or one of its peers, which is where the misconception arises.On the general topic, I more or less agree with the general consensus as to what OP should do, though since Hexblade is such an infamous multi class dip, banning Hexblade dips but otherwise allowing multiclassing right from level two (with a warning that it’s easy to make an ineffective character if you don’t plan out multiclassing properly) might be the way to go.

You don't even need the book's version. You can make up your own, for any Patron. I played a hexblade blade pact in an Orient campaign where my Pact was an ancestor lost Honor and could not get into the Spirit World. He bonded with me with the hope through my Honorable actions he would regain his Honor and enter the Spirit World with me when my time comes. I frequently casted Blur. That was the image of my ancestor overlayed on me. A previous hexblade character worshipped the Sun god, the fun god, Ra, Ra, Ra. He was the shadow's light. Furthering the Egyptian mythology. the 6th level feature of the spectre was the evil soul's payment. By serving me for one day despite previously being my foe he was guaranteed passage on Horus Ra's barge afterwards rather than having to fight his way out of Apep's domain.