Not smart enough to stay, not smart enough to leave

[Riftwolf]

Looking at the Multiclassing rules, it says you need a prerequisite attribute to multiclass into or out of a class. So (for instance) is a Druid with Wis 10 stuck as a Druid?
(This is RAW and I'm aware a Druid with 10 wisdom would be bad. That's... Kinda the point. I'm putting together an NPC who was raised as a Druid but wasn't good at it. Looking at the class you can still cast spells etc with 10 Wisdom but you suck at it. However the Druid can't take up another class they'd be better suited to.)

[stoutstien]

Yea the rules surrounding multiclassing are pretty much nonsense although if it's a npc then you can do what you need to do without dealing with them.

[J-H]

NPCs don't follow character creation/class rules. Do what you want.

[No brains]

It's difficult to be bad at druid-ing- there's a number of options one can take that make base stats irrelevant. Spells, wild shapes, even some proficiencies follow a flat curve.

On the other hand, 13 wisdom is still plenty low enough to be "bad" as a druid. It almost requires optimizing for failure, but subclass options, spell choices, and skill proficiencies in especially competitive situations will make someone with 13 in an ability feel like they're not actually above average.

Not to mention, disliking being a druid can be completely subjective and irrelevant to innate talent. Someone with 20 wisdom could still have a miserable life facing failures. Rotten luck and high-CR bullies can make life a nightmare even with advantages.

If you insist on sticking to player-facing rules (maybe to teach players about their options), consider making this character a druid that had 11 wisdom, who increased it by 2 at 4th level. They only stayed in long enough to learn how to get out.

[JackPhoenix]

I would argue that the multiclass ability score requirements are a minimal ability score requirements for the class in disguise. That is, someone with Wis 10 wouldn't have any druid levels in the first place, no matter how much someone tried to raise them as one. Give them appropriate background (probably Hermit, Acolyte, Outlander or Sage), maybe Magic Initiate: Druid if vuman, but not actual druid class. Not that any of that matters for an NPC.

[Riftwolf]

I would argue that the multiclass ability score requirements are a minimal ability score requirements for the class in disguise. That is, someone with Wis 10 wouldn't have any druid levels in the first place, no matter how much someone tried to raise them as one. Give them appropriate background (probably Hermit, Acolyte, Outlander or Sage), maybe Magic Initiate: Druid if vuman, but not actual druid class. Not that any of that matters for an NPC.

I'd argue that's Rules As Interpreted, not Rules as Written. It's more of a thought experiment than anything. To rephrase the question: Can a player choose a class that their stats prevent them from Multiclassing out of?

[Slipjig]

I suspect the minimum requirement was intended to impose an additional cost on dipping.
But you definitely won't break anything waiving that requirement for an NPC. Heck, with the number of ways to get Armor and Weapon proficiencies now, it probably wouldn't break anything to waive it for PCs. The dedicated minmaxxers already have plenty of broken options to choose from.

[Kish]

Like many things about 5ed, it's a callback to 1ed/2ed rules. A thief who wanted to become a cleric in 2ed would have needed either 13 or 15 (don't remember the specific number offhand) Dexterity as well as 17 Wisdom. Yes, someone can make a druid with Wisdom 10 in 5ed, and yes, that character will be a druid for life however bad they are at it.

[JackPhoenix]

Like many things about 5ed, it's a callback to 1ed/2ed rules. A thief who wanted to become a cleric in 2ed would have needed either 13 or 15 (don't remember the specific number offhand) Dexterity as well as 17 Wisdom. Yes, someone can make a druid with Wisdom 10 in 5ed, and yes, that character will be a druid for life however bad they are at it.

AD&D had minimal ability requirements for certain classes, even without multiclassing. To be able to play a paladin, you had to roll (no point buy!) well enough to have at least Str 12, Con 9, Wis 13 and Char 17.

[Kish]

Point Buy was one of the variant methods of stat generation in AD&D, just as it is in 3ed. (I don't actually know about 4ed and 5ed in that regard; it may have been promoted to the default method at some point, but I doubt it. I've dealt with people who incorrectly thought it was the default method in 3ed before.)

[Skrum]

IME the minimum stat rules end up stinging the classes without spells more. Like there's reasons to get 1 or 2 levels of rogue, but not all of those reasons are going to involve having 13 dex.

Multiclassing into a casting class, it's a lot more likely the character is going to have at least a 14 in the relevant stat.

[LudicSavant]

Looking at the Multiclassing rules, it says you need a prerequisite attribute to multiclass into or out of a class. So (for instance) is a Druid with Wis 10 stuck as a Druid?
(This is RAW and I'm aware a Druid with 10 wisdom would be bad. That's... Kinda the point. I'm putting together an NPC who was raised as a Druid but wasn't good at it. Looking at the class you can still cast spells etc with 10 Wisdom but you suck at it. However the Druid can't take up another class they'd be better suited to.)

NPCs can just ignore the PC rules.

That said, the PC rules in this case are basically nonsense (whether you look at it from a flavor, balance, immersion, complexity, or whatever other perspective) and shouldn't exist even for PCs. There's a reason BG3 tossed them out of the window.

It's basically only there as a callback to an older edition -- divorced from the original game design context that gave it a reason to exist in the first place. Now its only reason to be there is to make some people go "oh, I recognize that thing."

[Derges]

NPCs don't follow character creation/class rules. Do what you want.

This.

Character classes make bad templates for things that aren't characters.

As monsters, they have different design goals (PCs want to have fun things do in short bursts 4-5 times a day while monsters want to do everything they can in a handful of turns)

NPCs with PC classes all too easily become DMPCs which while not a bad thing can turn bad very easily.


imo you're much better off finding an appropriate entry in the monster manual and giving it a line or two that feel like the PC class. Your druid might turn into a wolf and hand out goodberries for example.


to echo the answer to the original question, the multiclassing rules keep you stuck in your level one class if you lack the reqs to mc out of it.

[Anonymouswizard]

AD&D had minimal ability requirements for certain classes, even without multiclassing. To be able to play a paladin, you had to roll (no point buy!) well enough to have at least Str 12, Con 9, Wis 13 and Char 17.

IIRC it was every class, but the basic four had just Prime Requisite 9 unlike the more specialised classes. Which I believe was meant to be a mixture of basic competence for your skillset but can theoretically lead to bizarre stat allocations for adventurers (which I believe was considered fine because characters weren't supposed to be campaign specific, so you could ignore the 9 STR 3 CON 8 everything else array and bring a different sheet).


This.

Character classes make bad templates for things that aren't characters.

As monsters, they have different design goals (PCs want to have fun things do in short bursts 4-5 times a day while monsters want to do everything they can in a handful of turns)

A.k.a. why the original spellcasting monsters suck just as much as the new model.

Although the character concept is sound even if it's based on PC rules. A person just competent enough that nobody realized they were actually bad at their job until they were fully qualified, but with too rigid a mindset to retrain. If you desperately need a druid they can sort of work it out, but they're not someone you're actively seeking out as a specialist.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

I'd argue that's Rules As Interpreted, not Rules as Written. It's more of a thought experiment than anything. To rephrase the question: Can a player choose a class that their stats prevent them from Multiclassing out of?


I suspect the minimum requirement was intended to impose an additional cost on dipping.
But you definitely won't break anything waiving that requirement for an NPC. Heck, with the number of ways to get Armor and Weapon proficiencies now, it probably wouldn't break anything to waive it for PCs. The dedicated minmaxxers already have plenty of broken options to choose from.

Yup. I figure the multiclassing out requirement is to prevent people who want to play a barbarian with 2 levels of druid for wildshape from just starting as a druid and avoiding the rule altogether. This means by RAW, a bad enough druid cannot switch. I don't think there are even official rules for retraining or losing levels, so they'll always just be a bad druid.

By "what's fun and makes sense" though? This character is not trying to game the system and use a loophole, so the rule is not for them.


Personally I don't even like the rule. I did play a barbarian with 2 levels of druid for a oneshot, and I just asked my DM if I could do it without 13 wisdom. The rule seems to be a bigger roadblock to building cool and interesting combinations than to proper multiclass abuse for the purpose of minmaxing.

...Although that bearbarian might not be the best example here. Bear Totem Barbarian3/Moon Druid2 is pretty busted. Soooooo much HP and still two attacks because bears have multiattack.

[Mastikator]

You don't need to have PC levels for your NPC. You could just pick an NPC statblock that is appropriate and add wildshape and a couple of spells.

[kazaryu]

Looking at the Multiclassing rules, it says you need a prerequisite attribute to multiclass into or out of a class. So (for instance) is a Druid with Wis 10 stuck as a Druid?
(This is RAW and I'm aware a Druid with 10 wisdom would be bad. That's... Kinda the point. I'm putting together an NPC who was raised as a Druid but wasn't good at it. Looking at the class you can still cast spells etc with 10 Wisdom but you suck at it. However the Druid can't take up another class they'd be better suited to.)

so...2 things.

1. NPC's don't follow the same rules as PC's. you are well within your rights to give a wizard PC both arcane ward (abjuration wizard) and overchannel (evoker wizard) and call them a level 5 illusionist. or cursebreaker (a subclass that doesn't exist). This isn't homebrew, or rather this isn't being done in exception to the rules. its explicitly an intended feature of being the DM. similarly you can take, for example, the archmage monster...and just slap full metamagic progression on them if you want.

2. not all people raised in druidic communities are going to be druids, the class. some won't have magic at all. some will only have limited magic. others may be able to master the nature magic, but will struggle with wildshaping. So just because the person was raised by druids, and may even generally follow druidic culture and religion. They don't *have* to be the druid class. barbarians and rangers both fit very thematically with druids. and fighters and rogues can thematically fit basically anywhere (with the exception of thieves cant in the rogues case. but you could replace that with druidic and be fine.

[Psyren]

The multiclassing ability score requirement is the lone thin reed holding multiclassing's power even somewhat in check. Do whatever you want for NPCs, of course, but I wouldn't remove this requirement for PCs.

As far as the in-universe/Watsonian justification, the book itself gives you this. PHB 163:


"Without the full training that a beginning character receives, you must be a quick study in your new class, having a natural aptitude that is reflected by higher-than-average ability scores."

That natural aptitude applies to both your source and destination class - and it makes sense, because someone who is struggling even to be a basic druid (Wis 10) probably doesn't have the capacity to take on anything else.



2. not all people raised in druidic communities are going to be druids, the class. some won't have magic at all. some will only have limited magic. others may be able to master the nature magic, but will struggle with wildshaping. So just because the person was raised by druids, and may even generally follow druidic culture and religion. They don't *have* to be the druid class. barbarians and rangers both fit very thematically with druids. and fighters and rogues can thematically fit basically anywhere (with the exception of thieves cant in the rogues case. but you could replace that with druidic and be fine.

Indeed - and you can also use the Spellcaster Sidekick class, or even something like an Expert with Magic Initiate who dabbles.

[Anonymouswizard]

The multiclassing ability score requirement is the lone thin reed holding multiclassing's power even somewhat in check. Do whatever you want for NPCs, of course, but I wouldn't remove this requirement for PCs.

As far as the in-universe/Watsonian justification, the book itself gives you this. PHB 163:


"Without the full training that a beginning character receives, you must be a quick study in your new class, having a natural aptitude that is reflected by higher-than-average ability scores."

That natural aptitude applies to both your source and destination class - and it makes sense, because someone who is struggling even to be a basic druid (Wis 10) probably doesn't have the capacity to take on anything else.

Of course if you could find a trainer (i.e. GM approval) then using Downtime activities to waive the requirements should be feasible.

[Witty Username]

The acolyte or hermit background can be a solution to that specific problem.

But yes, multiclassing requires druid to have at least a 13 in wis.

[Schwann145]

This quirk of the multiclassing rules just cements, for me, that multiclassing was barely designed, barely planned, and generally a bad idea that should not be included in the game, at least not as-is.

[Psyren]

This quirk of the multiclassing rules just cements, for me, that multiclassing was barely designed, barely planned, and generally a bad idea that should not be included in the game, at least not as-is.

It's not a "quirk," it's a fully intentional limitation. It applies in both directions to keep you from end-running around it by starting in the class you don't care about - e.g. as a 8 Wis Cleric who then becomes a wizard.


Of course if you could find a trainer (i.e. GM approval) then using Downtime activities to waive the requirements should be feasible.

If your DM is willing to let you do that, you probably don't need Downtime at all, or better yet they'll let you retrain your ability scores or something.

[Witty Username]

This quirk of the multiclassing rules just cements, for me, that multiclassing was barely designed, barely planned, and generally a bad idea that should not be included in the game, at least not as-is.

That portion is actually legacy rules, in AD&D it is similar for dual classing, except the numbers are different (need a 15+ for the class you are leaving and a 17+ for the class you are entering).

Feel free to not use it, but it does appear to be thought out some, even if it doesn't get your desired effect.

[Schwann145]

IIRC, AD&D had minimums for classes, regardless of multi/dual-classing. If that were the case in 5e, there'd be no issue.

But, as is? The game is telling my 8 Int character, "You're too stupid to become a Wizard... and also too stupid to stop being a Wizard." That just doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Psyren]

You can stop being a wizard just fine, you just can't start being anything else :smalltongue:

[Witty Username]

IIRC, AD&D had minimums for classes, regardless of multi/dual-classing. If that were the case in 5e, there'd be no issue.


Kinda, it was like 9 for wizard int. So 9 to start 15 to dual class out. You could definitely be too stupid to branch out as a wizard.
--
This is a solution looking for a problem most of the time, most players won't make a low prime stat character, and those that are are usually trying to get away with something.

If you really want, at 4th you can put some points into wis, and multiclass then your good

[InvisibleBison]

What this thread makes me wonder is why only multiclass characters have stat requirements. If the idea is that multiclassing into a class requires a certain level of natural aptitude in order to pick up the class's tricks quickly, why doesn't gaining additional levels of a single class over the timescales that a typical adventure takes also require that sort of natural proficiency?

[No brains]

What this thread makes me wonder is why only multiclass characters have stat requirements. If the idea is that multiclassing into a class requires a certain level of natural aptitude in order to pick up the class's tricks quickly, why doesn't gaining additional levels of a single class over the timescales that a typical adventure takes also require that sort of natural proficiency?

The devs were inherently invested in extreme challenge builds, such as a 1 str kobold barbarian or a 1 int orc wizard.:smalltongue:

[Witty Username]

In theory, d&d doesn't like the idea of character dictation, wizards benefit from high intelligence, but the idea that a low intelligence character can't be a wizard feels incorrect.

In practice, stat requirements don't actually change how we play much as we tend to behave like they are already there. I personally think they work well for "Hero" classes, like how AD&D did paladins, but generally don't offer alot.

[JackPhoenix]

What this thread makes me wonder is why only multiclass characters have stat requirements. If the idea is that multiclassing into a class requires a certain level of natural aptitude in order to pick up the class's tricks quickly, why doesn't gaining additional levels of a single class over the timescales that a typical adventure takes also require that sort of natural proficiency?

Multiclassing doesn't just turn you into a wizard instead of whatever you were before, and neither do you stop being a wizard when you multiclass; you maintain the capabilities of both of your classes at the same time. A single-classed character may be able to work (badly, but any PC is better than 99% of the populace who can't attain any class level at all.) in a field he has no talent for through a lot of effort. But maintaining two separate skillsets at the same time? That require at least some talent for both.

[crabwizard77]

I always read the ability score requirements as "You need this to pick this class, you don't need to have this if this is your base class"

Huh.

[Psyren]

Multiclassing doesn't just turn you into a wizard instead of whatever you were before, and neither do you stop being a wizard when you multiclass; you maintain the capabilities of both of your classes at the same time. A single-classed character may be able to work (badly, but any PC is better than 99% of the populace who can't attain any class level at all.) in a field he has no talent for through a lot of effort. But maintaining two separate skillsets at the same time? That require at least some talent for both.

Exactly.


I always read the ability score requirements as "You need this to pick this class, you don't need to have this if this is your base class"

Huh.

Well, again, you don't need it for your base class... as long as you're not trying to do your base class + something else.

[Riftwolf]

Update: Talked to my GM and he liked the idea of a Druid who became Archdruid through strength, charisma and entitlement rather than Wisdom.

[Xapi]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

[kazaryu]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

i mean, as far as im concerned there's no need to fake "druidic powers". IMO they just...dont exist. PC druids have a specific way their magic scales but, to me thats just a function of DnD being a class based game. just because PC's scale that way, doesn't mean all druids do. so whatever powers they manifest should, imo, be fine. so...in answer to your question, yes.

[Psyren]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

Sure - and you could even have them be a Warlock, where unbeknownst to them their powers are coming from a fey spirit of some kind, who eventually leads them to an Archfey, where they either willingly or unwittingly enter into a pact.

[Slipjig]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

Sure. I mean, the whole idea of a "character class" is a game-ism that bundles a bunch skills together, not something that people in-universe would be familiar with. A kid with no talent for magic who was raised by Druids could easily end up a Ranger, Barbarian, or Rogue, depending on where their skills DO lie. Or a Fey Warlock, or an Ancients Paladin, or a Dex Fighter.

Heck, if he's part of a Druidic community and participates in the religious rites, he may genuinely consider himself a Druid, albeit one whose talents are non-magical in nature.

[Riftwolf]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

From memory, there was a fake God in maybe Pathfinder with no actual clerics, just wizards who exploited loopholes to emulate divine powers (I seem to remember it saying Shadow Conjuration could replicate healing spells if the target believes in the power, which I think was errata'd out of the game). But faking Druidic powers by learning another class that you're not being taught would make the faux-druid smarter than most.
The way I think about it is a nepo child in a family business, or a stereotype jock who's parents are on the school board. Why would they transfer to another job or different school when they're getting by as a C student just fine?

[Slipjig]

If you want to make it not immediately obvious the character isn't actually a Druid, you could have them be a Cleric of a Nature god. They can be somebody who REALLY took to the religious instruction and receives power from the deity, but didn't specifically develop Druidcraft or Wildshape abilities.

[JackPhoenix]

If you want to make it God. Immediately obvious the character isn't actually a Druid, you could have them be a Cleric of a Nature god. They can be somebody who REALLY took to the religious instruction and receives power from the deity, but didn't specifically develop Druidcraft or Wildshape abilities.

How exactly does CLERIC help with the issue of a lack of Wisdom?

[Riftwolf]

How exactly does CLERIC help with the issue of a lack of Wisdom?

If only this was 3.5 where there's some kind of Bicep Cleric prestige class...

[Mastikator]

Just to give a spin on things:

Does a character who is not cut out to be a druid, but is raised and trained as one, have to actually be a druid?

Could the druid (at level 1) secretely be a cleric, rogue, paladin, favored soul, that somehow mimics or fakes Druidic powers? And then to the eyes of his trainers he is not leveling up, because he is a bad student, but he becomes better at whatever his class actually is?

Nature cleric would be able to fake druid reasonably until anyone speaks to them in druidic.